# The purpose of why men desire sex with a spouse?



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

OK, this seems like a stupid thread, but hang in there with me...

With the prevalence of so much internet porn as well as the the topic of self exploration having become more embraced by society, I thought I would start a discussion on what drives a man to desire sex with his spouse. While the answer is so obvious to some, perhaps this is not a clear cut issue. From conversations I have had with my own wife and from reading about others, here are some answers from women about why us husbands desire them:



Male hormones have us in a constant state of arousal.
We would want to have sex with anyone, but our wife happens to be the only available vagina in the relationship.
Because we got ourselves arbitrarily aroused and now need a physical release more so than reestablishing an emotional connection.
Because porn and masturbation occasionally become boring and we need something real every once and a while.
Because some men just need a lot of sex and do not care if they have to hurt their wives to get more of it. 
We are biologically programmed to want sex every time we see a pair of tits. 

Wives are also quick to address the reasons when we do NOT want to have sex:



We have been using too much porn.
Our hormones are low and we need to go to the doctor.
We are just not attracted at that moment.
We are too stressed out. 

So for women out there that feel the above pretty much just puts it out there and tells it like it is, I want to say that you do NOT understand men!

*I personally feel a desire to have sex with my wife, because I need to feel she accepts me in the relationship. And I do mean that quite literally in saying that I need to feel she accepts my physical being (mostly represented by my penis) into her physical being (mostly represented by her vagina) as a way to feel loved. *Often this need to reaffirm feeling accepted is driven by moments of feeling disconnected from her (call that emotional distance if you will), resulting in a desire to reconnect physically. My emotions are my emotions and they become enhanced by hormones and transformed into an erection. 

The moments I do not feel a desire to have sex would be because I am preoccupied with tending to other things. She already makes me feel loved that day. Or I just feel the need for some personal space. 

Awkwardly with my personality, the times I desire her the most are when I am stressed out or angry with her. These moments coincide the most when I am emotionally and physically disconnected from her and need to reconnect. Those moments also coincide with a state of being that I think it would be very difficult for my wife to desire me, which makes it difficult for her to understand me. 

Desire needs distance to thrive
Feeling loved desires feeling accepted

Does this makes sense?

Badsanta


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

good evening
I want to have sex because it is fun. Its free, healthy, environmentally safe and more enjoyable than anything else. It is something I can share with my wife that I cannot share with anyone else. It makes me happy, it makes her happy. I see no downside to it at all, so I can never really understand why someone would not want it frequently.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

I like to have sex with my wife because I think she's hot.

I do not need to feel accepted to think she's hot. However feeling NOT accepted by her makes me not think she's hot any more, depending on what I'm not accepted about. 

Her being immature makes her not hot. Her being too needy makes her not hot. Her being irritatingly irrational makes her not hot. A lot of things can make her not hot, but for her to be hot, all she needs to do is show up and basically not do those things.

Feeling connected with her is a nice benefit of sex, but it doesn't change whether I find her hot or not.


----------



## Broken at 20 (Sep 25, 2012)

I would say my desire probably stems from the extremely poor relationships I had with my parents. After being cut-off, and disowned, I want to be held and cherished, and feel like I am actually loved. 

Granted, I fully realize that I am probably not loved by the girl I sleep with. But it's an escape that I can enjoy for a night to feel something, even if it is only a fantasy.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

marduk said:


> I like to have sex with my wife because I think she's hot.
> 
> I do not need to feel accepted to think she's hot. However feeling NOT accepted by her makes me not think she's hot any more, depending on what I'm not accepted about.
> 
> ...


Awesome post....

Hypothetically let us pretend your wife becomes disconnected and unaccepting of you because she says you are doing things that make you not hot. At the same time she is not doing all the right things, so she is super hot. Would this be a situation in which you remain confident and accuse her of being irrationally irrational so that she becomes not hot, ultimately allowing you to win at the game of playing hard to get and make HER feel the need to be accepted by you? 

hmmmm, "hot or not!" 

I like this!










Badsanta


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

badsanta said:


> Awesome post....
> 
> Hypothetically let us pretend your wife becomes disconnected and unaccepting of you because she says you are doing things that make you not hot. At the same time she is not doing all the right things, so she is super hot. Would this be a situation in which you remain confident and accuse her of being irrationally irrational so that she becomes not hot, ultimately allowing you to win at the game of playing hard to get and make HER feel the need to be accepted by you?
> 
> ...


The answer of course is boobs.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

marduk said:


> The answer of course is boobs.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


As in she will not let you see them, and that is hot! 










Which leads me back to the fact that men don't get aroused just because we see boobs! We get aroused because we *want* to see boobs. 

Badsanta


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

badsanta said:


> As in she will not let you see them, and that is hot!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If a bra falls off in the forest, and nobody's there to see the boobs, is it still sexy?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

I'm just glad I don't have to revise my conclusions that I am an interchangeable vagina that is just good for some sex if he's feeling a bit horny.

It took me so many years to finally realize this, I'm not sure I can undo it all with just one post.


----------



## MrsAldi (Apr 15, 2016)

This is a great thread. 
I'm learning so much.  


Sent from my B1-730HD using Tapatalk


----------



## Middle of Everything (Feb 19, 2012)

Cause its awesome!!

We were just supposed to answer the question right?


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> I want to have sex because it is ... *environmentally safe*


I've just come up with over 101 jokes about the best use of "hard wood"


----------



## Broken at 20 (Sep 25, 2012)

> The answer of course is boobs.


I don't think that's the answer...at least...not directly.


----------



## Sejin (May 21, 2016)

I totally agree with badsanta. But given all the benefit for both sides, some wives like mine gradually lose interest in sex. That is frustrating especially when she has no consideration for that frustration on husband's side. But that belongs to another topic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Sejin said:


> I totally agree with badsanta. But given all the benefit for both sides, some wives like mine gradually lose interest in sex. That is frustrating especially when she has no consideration for that frustration on husband's side. But that belongs to another topic.


Actually I think this topic is one and the same. I honestly think some wives loose interest in sex because they do not understand why we desire them. Some wives gradually grow over time to just feel used by their husbands, because they do not understand "what" drives us to desire them. 

For women that feel this way, it almost becomes a self fulfilling prophecy because they engage in sex thinking we are just using them. They completely disconnect during the act of sex which in turn can make it an excruciatingly lonely experience for the husband. Regardless of how the husband reacts to that experience to try anything to reconnect, she will see it as him making her feel inadequate and that his lust to continue using her is insatiable. 

So how do you turn that around? 

First you have to acknowledge that woman are ALWAYS RIGHT! ...and that is that they are always right when they tell us how they feel. Husbands may feel that his wife does NOT have the right to feel that way, but arguing that will only serve to make us look like we do NOT listen to them or care about their feelings, which in turn fuels her feelings of just being used. 

So how do husbands acknowledge that wives feel sexually used, and help her understand that us husbands simply feel the need to be physically accepted again in the relationship? Almost all options of going about this via arguing/debating about it will only serve to make us look weak which will result in her now feeling unprotected on top of all the other feelings she has about feeling used. 

So what is a man to do? Well we go and have ourselves a mid-life crisis:










We imagine this:










But in reality a mid-life crisis husband that is really disconnected from his wife looks a little more like this:


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

The way to prove to your wife that she is not an interchangeable vagina is to stop having sex with her entirely. If she comes to you complaining that you don't have sex, you have something to work with. Then you can do all the BadSanta moves to reassure her how sexy she is, and how you only desire her and no other woman. If she doesn't come to you complaining that you don't have sex, you were right to stop having sex with her. Either way, the guy wins. Don't have sex with a woman who has no interest in having sex with you. When you can't tolerate not having sex, leave her. Or at least stop complaining.


----------



## Sejin (May 21, 2016)

badsanta said:


> Actually I think this topic is one and the same. I honestly think some wives loose interest in sex because they do not understand why we desire them. Some wives gradually grow over time to just feel used by their husbands, because they do not understand "what" drives us to desire them.
> 
> For women that feel this way, it almost becomes a self fulfilling prophecy because they engage in sex thinking we are just using them. They completely disconnect during the act of sex which in turn can make it an excruciatingly lonely experience for the husband. Regardless of how the husband reacts to that experience to try anything to reconnect, she will see it as him making her feel inadequate and that his lust to continue using her is insatiable.
> 
> ...








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Sejin (May 21, 2016)

Sejin said:


> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk




A common perception is that women want intimacy and gentle touch more than men, in my case, I constantly touch my wife and enjoy it, somewhat like patting a dog, and she says stop it whereas dog would enjoy my touch. It changed over time. She used enjoy touch and also used to take initiative. 

I would love to hear women 's view on this kind of change and problem it cause to men. Well, if it a problem for husbands, it is also a problem for wives. Wives will be affected by husbands' unhappiness.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Great thread and I hope some of the ladies here will read and understand what you are trying to say here Santa. This notion that men only want a warm place to put it just means women aren't paying attention to the acceptance that men get from having sex with their spouse /significant other. Sad really


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Holdingontoit said:


> The way to prove to your wife that she is not an interchangeable vagina is to stop having sex with her entirely. If she comes to you complaining that you don't have sex, you have something to work with. Then you can do all the BadSanta moves to reassure her how sexy she is, and how you only desire her and no other woman. If she doesn't come to you complaining that you don't have sex, you were right to stop having sex with her. Either way, the guy wins. Don't have sex with a woman who has no interest in having sex with you. When you can't tolerate not having sex, leave her. Or at least stop complaining.


 @Holdingontoit given your wife's history (rape victim) it is easy to see why it is likely she would associate sex with being used. You also admit that she is still receptive for sex on occasion to please you, you choose NOT to partake in it until she admits that she will ALSO be able to enjoy it. 

What I am getting at, is in your case sex with your wife results in you feeling extremely disconnected from her, so you have chosen to abstain as a way to be closer to her. Your reason for NOT having sex is ultimately what drives men to have sex, and that is to feel connected to your wife. You do NOT want to use her, you just want to feel close to her and that dominates your sexual response in the form of just abstaining.

There is a reason you are in this thread @Holdingontoit and I think your case illustrates a somewhat rather extreme case of a man's desire to connect with his wife. 

Badsanta


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> The way to prove to your wife that she is not an interchangeable vagina is to stop having sex with her entirely. If she comes to you complaining that you don't have sex, you have something to work with. Then you can do all the BadSanta moves to reassure her how sexy she is, and how you only desire her and no other woman. If she doesn't come to you complaining that you don't have sex, you were right to stop having sex with her. Either way, the guy wins. Don't have sex with a woman who has no interest in having sex with you. When you can't tolerate not having sex, leave her. Or at least stop complaining.


And uh...just WHERE do you suppose she got the idea that she's an "interchangeable vagina" in the first place? 

(*Hint- It wasn't something she just _dreamed up _in her own head!*)


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

badsanta said:


> [MENTION=35737]"...what drives men to have sex, and that is to feel connected to your wife.


So, the "average" man feels "connected" to his wife while having sex with her...

...and at no other time OUTSIDE the bedroom?

THIS is what so many women resent and WHY many of them feel used! Seems that the ONLY WAY a man (says) he feels "connected" to his wife it through sex. No other way will do. Seems like a 'ploy' for sex. Pure manipulation, at best, if there's no other option. 

Funny how quite often HE is the one causing the "disconnect" outside the bedroom, and then wonders WHY his wife doesn't want to have sex with him!


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Sejin said:


> A common perception is that women want intimacy and gentle touch more than men, in my case, I constantly touch my wife and enjoy it, somewhat like patting a dog, and she says stop it whereas dog would enjoy my touch. It changed over time. She used enjoy touch and also used to take initiative.
> 
> I would love to hear women 's view on this kind of change and problem it cause to men. Well, if it a problem for husbands, it is also a problem for wives. Wives will be affected by husbands' unhappiness.


*OMG a woman will read what you wrote and think, "OMG HE IS COMPARING HIS WIFE TO HIS DOG!!!! NO WONDER SHE DOES NOT WANT IT ANYMORE...."*

What women fail to see in that comment is an incredibly strong bond that has made dogs into man's best friend.



*Come on ladies, google "man's best friend" and see what images pop up:*



















From the day we were born:









...and until the end:









and then there is the story of Hachi. After Hachi's best friend past away, he remained at the train station for *ten years* waiting for him to return:










https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hachikō


----------



## Sejin (May 21, 2016)

Haha


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

Vega said:


> So, the "average" man feels "connected" to his wife while having sex with her...
> 
> ...and at no other time OUTSIDE the bedroom?
> 
> ...


I can see that. I like touching and paying attention to my wife on the days we don't have sex. However, I also would like her to take the initiative SOMETIMES to touch me. Initiation is still an issue even with touching. If I do not initiate touching or kissing or whatever, she will NOT initiate. 

It goes something like this. I don't initiate touching and wait till she does. She will not initiate and then gets more and more upset and will absolutely NOT touch or kiss me until I break the ice.
The more time that goes by without my touching her, she gets a bigger and bigger chip on her shoulder which ultimately concludes with her thinking I just want sex for release, hence I am using her. Keep in mind that this rarely happens. I sometimes do it because I just want to see if she will initiate. Ain't gunna happen.

Maybe it's just me thinking she is using me for my paycheck.
And she thinks I'm using her for a hole. Then we have sex and reset.

Bottom line, I think it's a lovers game. At least we're still playing after 25 years. If there were no game, the situation would look more like Holdingontoit'. (No offense sir)


----------



## EnjoliWoman (Jul 2, 2012)

I have learned so much about men on this site. And actually appreciate them a lot more, too.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

certainly we need to protect old growth



badsanta said:


> I've just come up with over 101 jokes about the best use of "hard wood"


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Vega said:


> Funny how quite often HE is the one causing the "disconnect" outside the bedroom, and then wonders WHY his wife doesn't want to have sex with him!


Just two more years of this and I'll be able to afford that new house that the wife and I want so our kids can have a back yard...










Exhausted.










Wife feeling her husband is disconnected outside the bedroom and just comes home to use her...


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I think its a difference between "necessary" and "sufficient". 

There are a number of things I need in order to feel close to my spouse: sex, affectionate touches, affectionate words, respect, shared fun, trust, shared chores, etc.

All these are necessary. Here we tend to discuss sex and maybe that gives the impression that sex is all that matters - it isn't. I could have a fantastic sex life, but if my spouse didn't respect me (or if I couldn't respect her), I would not feel close to her.

I could hire a hooker to have sex - but I wouldn't feel close to her. (one of the many reasons prostitutes hold not temptation for me).


When I have all the above I feel close to my wife all the time. When I don't, I don't feel close. 

Sex gets discussed because for some reason it is the element that is most often missing. I have all of the other things except sex pretty much all of the time. If my wife were fcking my brains out, but didn't respect me, the lack of respect is what I would complain about.







Vega said:


> So, the "average" man feels "connected" to his wife while having sex with her...
> 
> ...and at no other time OUTSIDE the bedroom?
> 
> ...


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
what do you think would make a women (you for example) NOT think like that. Maybe all the men you have dated have thought like that (I'm sure some do), in which case you have my sympathy, and you should know that many man are not like that.



Vega said:


> And uh...just WHERE do you suppose she got the idea that she's an "interchangeable vagina" in the first place?
> 
> (*Hint- It wasn't something she just _dreamed up _in her own head!*)


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> So, the "average" man feels "connected" to his wife while having sex with her...
> 
> ...and at no other time OUTSIDE the bedroom?
> 
> ...


Men are telling you that the primary way they feel connected to their wives is via sex.

You can think that men should feel connected to their wives because she cleans the house, raises the kids, whatever. But, that's not the way it IS.

What if the wife felt "connected" to her husband when he demonstrated an interest in her life by listening to her talk about her day. 

_
Should he be thinking "and at no time IN the bedroom"? 

THIS is what so many men resent and WHY many of them feel used! Seems that the ONLY WAY a woman (says) she feels "connected" to her husband is through conversation. No other way will do. Seems like a 'ploy' for talk. Pure manipulation, at best, if there's no other option.

Funny how often SHE is the one causing the disconnect in the bedroom and then wonders why her husband doesn't want to talk with her. 
_

I would think that it would benefit people to know what their SO needs to feel connected and to be mindful of this if their goal is a good relationship.


----------



## GuyInColorado (Dec 26, 2015)

Sex is the best way to connect with your SO. But what really turns me on and makes sex better, is when she desires me. Knowing that she truly wants to please me and have me inside her is the biggest compliment. She thinks I'm #1 and only wants me. If she didn't want/desire me to f*ck her brains out, then the sex wouldn't mean anything.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> I'm just glad I don't have to revise my conclusions that I am an interchangeable vagina that is just good for some sex if he's feeling a bit horny.
> 
> It took me so many years to finally realize this, I'm not sure I can undo it all with just one post.


I see nothing here that reinforces that conclusion. Quite the opposite.

Once you realize that attraction is not love or commitment, of course.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

For me, I wanted to have sex with my wife because it was something that she desired. It was a way to enhance the connection, not to be the connection. When she rejected me or neglected me, she was basically saying to me, that this is not important enough to our relationship to bother. I wanted to be desired, sexually, because no matter how you look at it - at the absolute basic level - sex is what a marriage is all about (or should be). I don't ask a woman out because I don't want to have sex with her. Most women do not agree to go out unless they may want to have sex with a guy. They certainly don't continue to go out with a guy if they know they will not have sex with that guy. Marriage is simply a more permanent extension of this thinking. Sex with your SO is normally the one thing that you and your SO do together and with no other people. So yes my wife having sex with me was to enhance and reaffirm the bond I thought we had. Otherwise we would just be friends, except no friend would expect you to pay for the house, maintain the house and cars, pay for their kids to go to college etc etc.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
agreed, but I do want to make sure that people keep in mind that there is a LOT of variation. You can't just take sort of an "average" of what men (or women) think about sex. You have to look at all the posts and form a picture of the range of meanings it has to different people. Then of course find someone who's feelings about sex are compatible with yours.







OliviaG said:


> I think a lot of women would benefit from three things:
> 
> 1) Reading some of the threads, like this one, on TAM.
> 2) Reading up on menopause.
> ...


----------



## wantshelp (Mar 10, 2016)

Vega said:


> And uh...just WHERE do you suppose she got the idea that she's an "interchangeable vagina" in the first place?
> 
> (*Hint- It wasn't something she just _dreamed up _in her own head!*)


Wow, that comment is interesting to me. I have literally said in counseling that "I try to convince myself that a vagina is a vagina is a vagina". I try to convince myself that the vagina is interchangeable but the woman is not and that should be what matters most. It's not about her boobs, or her butt, or her vagina, but rather the collective of physical attraction and emotional bonds. In the context of the fact that I have only had sex with one person in my life... I wonder what I missed out on. What if some vaginas are better than others? I wouldn't know. But then I insist to myself that the anatomy is the same and won't make a difference. It's the person you share the experience with that makes it magic. I also used to tell myself that if you're sharing orgasms together, that's all that matters. Of course, now, I can only rarely have orgasms because of a physical injury and my mind is constantly filled with regret, but that's already covered in another thread... 

Ultimately, it feels like you're saying that guys only want a woman for her vagina and any vagina will do. I guess I am saying that the vagina IS interchangeable, but a vagina is worth little without the woman. 

Not sure if that made any sense...


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> what do you think would make a women (you for example) NOT think like that. Maybe all the men you have dated have thought like that (I'm sure some do), in which case you have my sympathy, and you should know that many man are not like that.


I know that not EVERY man is like that. At first I thought it was *me*. But after doing some research, I discovered that there are many women who experience that type of man. Doesn't seem to matter whether the man is a teenager or in his 70's. 

The problem is, that I can't always tell the "good" ones from the "not-so-good ones". It's not that I'm so naïve, but that I've learned that there are SO MANY OF THEM OUT THERE! And many of them give 'good game'. Sometimes it's even hard for the most well-educated, 'street smart' woman to tell the difference between a good guy and a cad...

...until it's too late.


----------



## C3156 (Jun 13, 2012)

This has been a wonderful thread and I hope that both men and women can gain some appreciation for their SO with it.

I have seen it written many times that men need sex to have love, where as, women need love in order to want sex. I believe that there is some truth in that simple statement. 

So I am with BS in that I desire sex with my wife in order to bond and connect with her. The physical act of sex speaks volumes to me. When it is consensual and she is an active participant, it is such a rush to be with her and I feel connected to her on such a deep level. When she is just going through the motions and "allows" me to have sex, the connection is not that deep and the act is unsatisfying. 

I have learned that in order for my wife to feel connected, she wants to emote and have me reflect back to her so that she knows I am truly listening to her. She appreciates the action I do for her but she really wants is to feel that I hear what she is saying and that I am not being critical of her. It is something that I have to work on daily in order to not slip into a typical guys way of thinking. 

There is a definite difference between us as to what makes us feel loved. Men and women both need to realize that just because you like it one way, does not mean your partner feels the same way. A little listening and reciprocity goes a long way.

To the ladies that feel like an "interchangeable vagina", I would say see it through the eyes of your SO. I would say the same thing to the guys that complain that their wife's won't have sex with them. You need to express to your SO know what is important to you in a language they can understand and give them a chance to meet your needs.


----------



## wantshelp (Mar 10, 2016)

Buddy400 said:


> Men are telling you that the primary way they feel connected to their wives is via sex.
> 
> You can think that men should feel connected to their wives because she cleans the house, raises the kids, whatever. But, that's not the way it IS.


Wow. My wife literally has said in counseling that she doesn't understand why I don't feel loved because she cooks for me, cleans the house and takes care of me and the kids. That's how she shows me love and she was genuinely stunned when I told her that none of that counts for love in my mind. To me, acts of love should be things that your partner does exclusively for you. Sex is the biggest one because it's the most exclusive in the context of a marriage, but cleaning is NOT one. Also, going to work everyday is not an act of love even though it supports the whole family. If I can legally hire a housekeeper or a nanny to do the act, that is not an act of love (no wise cracks about screwing the nanny). Those acts ARE interchangeable. In my mind acts that only your partner can do for you exclusively can be considered acts of love. I didn't marry my wife because I thought she would be the best at cooking and cleaning.


----------



## Married&Confused (Jan 19, 2011)

Buddy400 said:


> Men are telling you that the primary way they feel connected to their wives is via sex.
> 
> You can think that men should feel connected to their wives because she cleans the house, raises the kids, whatever. But, that's not the way it IS.
> 
> ...


in all fairness, you have to figure out what came first. did the non-sexual intimacy and conversation die off because there was no sex or did the sex die off due to lack of conversation and non-sexual intimacy? more than likely it's a little of both.

having said that there's a quote that sum it up pretty well:

"women need love for sex, men need sex for love"

and in reality i think it's the women who miss the point. romance has been drilled into men's heads for centuries. we know what we need to do. but sexual "cooperation" on a woman's part isn't taught on the same level as romance is to men. so, there's a gap between the two and the guy gets the bum end of the deal.

now, if i could only get my motorcycle into the bedroom...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

The way I would say it from this man's perspective is that I am attracted to a pretty wide range of women. But I choose to have sex with this particular woman, and this one only, because I love her and am committed to her.

So my sexual energy becomes rather focused on her. And this set of things may make her feel like I'm just horny and any hot woman will do.

Which is technically true if I were single. However -- just from a sexual perspective -- my particular wife fits my attraction type rather well, and knows my turn-ons quite well, and is quite GGG. So even if I wasn't committed to her, I'd probably mostly just have sex with her anyway. Because that set of features: physical type, knows what I want, and is happy to give me what I want is actually quite rare.

And that's purely just the sex/attraction talking.

And then you heap on the fact that I'm head over heels for her, and committed to her. So there's the emotional aspect and the trust aspect. And we have a rather long shared history, and mutual vulnerability, which leads to a pretty strong sense of intimacy.

So -- from a purely sexual aspect -- any hot woman will do, but I'd probably mostly choose my wife anyway.

But from an all in perspective, I will only choose my wife because I love her and because I committed to her.

So when you bake all that in, that's kind of the picture that I see.

And I bet for women it's pretty much the same.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

I had to drill that down for my wife in order for her to understand.

She needs security. But when I provide security, she begins to take me for granted. Then the rationalization starts, where she says she does x, y, and z, and that should be enough. So I asked her if I decided to take care of her lesser needs, but had her convinced that our marriage could end any day if I wanted it to, how loved would she actually feel? She seemed to get it then.

But the neglect has begun to grow again. So I guess I will have to revisit that conversation...again.



wantshelp said:


> Wow. My wife literally has said in counseling that she doesn't understand why I don't feel loved because she cooks for me, cleans the house and takes care of me and the kids. That's how she shows me love and she was genuinely stunned when I told her that none of that counts for love in my mind. To me, acts of love should be things that your partner does exclusively for you. Sex is a biggest one, but cleaning is NOT one. Also, going to work everyday is not an act of love even though it supports the whole family. If I can legally hire a housekeeper or a nanny to do the act, that is not an act of love (no wise cracks about screwing the nanny). Those acts ARE interchangeable. In my mind acts that only your partner can do for you exclusively can be considered acts of love.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I agree, there are a lot of bad men (and women) out there - and a lot of very good ones. I wonder if it would be a good discussion thread to look for patterns to help people distinguish them. 

Many of us don't have enough data points to have a good idea of how to tell. Some of us may not even know ourselves which we are (though we hope we are good). 

I think the key is to recognize the great variety and not feel that you have to tolerate bad behavior because you don't believe that better is available. 







Vega said:


> I know that not EVERY man is like that. At first I thought it was *me*. But after doing some research, I discovered that there are many women who experience that type of man. Doesn't seem to matter whether the man is a teenager or in his 70's.
> 
> The problem is, that I can't always tell the "good" ones from the "not-so-good ones". It's not that I'm so naïve, but that I've learned that there are SO MANY OF THEM OUT THERE! And many of them give 'good game'. Sometimes it's even hard for the most well-educated, 'street smart' woman to tell the difference between a good guy and a cad...
> 
> ...until it's too late.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

wantshelp said:


> Wow. My wife literally has said in counseling that she doesn't understand why I don't feel loved because she cooks for me, cleans the house and takes care of me and the kids. That's how she shows me love and she was genuinely stunned when I told her that none of that counts for love in my mind.


My wife once said the same thing to me.

My response was that I thought she was confusing her husband with one of her children. And to stop cooking and cleaning for me, and go put something sexy on.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

farsidejunky said:


> I had to drill that down for my wife in order for her to understand.
> 
> She needs security. But when I provide security, she begins to take me for granted. Then the rationalization starts, where she says she does x, y, and z, and that should be enough. So I asked her if I decided to take care of her lesser needs, but had her convinced that our marriage could end any day if I wanted it to, how loved would she actually feel? She seemed to get it then.
> 
> But the neglect has begun to grow again. So I guess I will have to revisit that conversation...again.


I think there's a strong relationship between fear and attraction. I'm not sure what it is, but it's there.

I remember that line from a Star Trek episode that went roughly "Human beings are at their best when pursuing or being pursued." I think that's true.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

OliviaG said:


> You had me until you got to your last sentence. It's not pretty much the same for most women, actually. I have to be attracted to a guy to want to have sex, but that's not nearly enough. I have to feel that he thinks I'm extremely attractive and I have to feel literally *adored* (don't laugh, I mean it and I chose that word carefully) and valued by him to enjoy sex with him.


If you were single, what would your dating life be like?

How would mr new hot guy make you feel adored?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Married&Confused said:


> sexual "cooperation" on a woman's part isn't taught on the same level as romance is to men. so, there's a gap between the two and the guy gets the bum end of the deal.


Seriously? 

I would not believe this viewpoint existed if I had not found myself on TAM . . .


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

OliviaG said:


> He would have to put in some time with me and begin to adore me; I don't see any other way.
> 
> I was never and never will be a ONS-type person. I'd hate it.


Sure; but what exactly do you mean by adored?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

OliviaG said:


> To feel that I'm extra-special to him, that nobody else could get his attention if I'm in the room. To observe him making plans that facilitate getting to know me better because nothing else much matters to him more than getting to know me better...that kind of thing.


Sure. Basic stuff.

All of that stuff becomes "love" and "commitment" when you get into an LTR.

So I guess I'm unclear on how you're any different that way than what I said above.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

wantshelp said:


> To me, acts of love should be things that your partner does *exclusively for you*.


YES!! It always surprises me when I read about men who complain that their wives aren't giving them sex and then go on to state how they clean the house, take care of the kids, mow the grass, etc. While all of those are nice gestures, it's not _PERSONAL_. 

Rubbing her feet (for more than 2 minutes without complaining about it) is PERSONAL. Buying her favorite perfume for her is PERSONAL. Putting on her favorite music during dinner is PERSONAL. Brushing her hair for her is PERSONAL. Telling her that you LOVE a certain (non-sexy) piece of clothing on her, or that the new hair color she tried makes her hair really shine. 

You get the idea. 



> I didn't marry my wife because I thought she would be the best at cooking and cleaning


Unfortunately, there are some men who DO marry a woman for these reasons. These plus thinking that she would make a good mother because she has wide hips.

Sad, huh...


----------



## wilson (Nov 5, 2012)

Women can understand how men feel about sex if they think about how they feel about having friends. Having friends is more than just the basic function of having a companion at lunch. Having friends provides a fullness and meaning to life that allows joy in all other areas. If a woman didn't have any friends, it would likely have a very depressing effect on her personality. She would likely not feel very worthy as a person and not find as much happiness in life. She would constantly wonder what was wrong with her and likely feel like a loser.

I feel the same way about sex. It is so much more than just the physical act. It makes me feel valuable as a person to the world. When I had a good sex life, I enjoyed everything so much more. Now that my marriage is sexless, I cannot find joy in anything. Even on vacation, it all just seems so dull and pointless. I feel like I'm pretending to have fun so that I don't have to think about how living sexless makes me feel like a loser.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> Men are telling you that the primary way they feel connected to their wives is via sex.
> 
> You can think that men should feel connected to their wives because she cleans the house, raises the kids, whatever. But, that's not the way it IS.
> 
> ...


This is always one of a tam favorite. When a woman tells a man how she should feel or vice versa. Lol gotta Love it :laugh:


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Married&Confused (Jan 19, 2011)

wantshelp said:


> Wow. My wife literally has said in counseling that she doesn't understand why I don't feel loved because she cooks for me, cleans the house and takes care of me and the kids.


because if she doesn't cook for you, you will cook for yourself or go out to eat. if she doesn't clean the house you can clean it yourself or hire someone to come in and do it.

but in a marriage if she doesn't want to have sex, you're not supposed to find someone else to do it in her place.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> *YES!! It always surprises me when I read about men who complain that their wives aren't giving them sex and then go on to state how they clean the house, take care of the kids, mow the grass, etc. While all of those are nice gestures, it's not PERSONAL. *
> 
> Rubbing her feet (for more than 2 minutes without complaining about it) is PERSONAL. Buying her favorite perfume for her is PERSONAL. Putting on her favorite music during dinner is PERSONAL. Brushing her hair for her is PERSONAL. Telling her that you LOVE a certain (non-sexy) piece of clothing on her, or that the new hair color she tried makes her hair really shine.
> 
> ...


however this is usaully what they are told when they are leading sexless lifestyle. If you do this I would have more time for that


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

OliviaG said:


> Because "any hot guy" *won't* do, if I'm single. I'd go without sex if I can't get the rest of the package.


I guess I didn't make myself clear.

You are attracted to men whether or not they adore you, yes? Not as in "let's jump into bed" but as in the "you're hot" checkbox gets ticked off.

And then if someone adores you, you might have sex with them. Because both the "hot" and "adores me" boxes get ticked.

So, even though you're attracted to a wide range of men, you fixate that sexuality on the one that currently adores you and you choose to sleep with.

And in that way, your man isn't just an interchangeable penis any more than my wife is an interchangeable vagina.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## staarz21 (Feb 6, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> To feel that I'm extra-special to him, that nobody else could get his attention if I'm in the room. To observe him making plans that facilitate getting to know me better because nothing else much matters to him more than getting to know me better...that kind of thing.


I have to agree with this. 

I think a lot of women want to feel like "the only one". Of course we know that you look at other women and that other woman could probably fill the same hole we've filled for you. But we want to feel like we hold your attention completely. 

Many women complain about men looking at other women. Men blow it off as "noticing" an attractive person. Ok. Fine. If you're "noticing" an attractive person in front of your spouse/partner...expect your spouse/partner to possibly feel inadequate. If we're just going to be blowing off actions as "biological" mechanics, then women "biologically" don't like competing with other women. We want to know we have your, uhm, full attention. 

Here's the thing....We know that there are other women out there who are more attractive than we are. We know there are other women out there that might be freakier in the sack than we are. We know there are other women who might be more successful than we are. We know. 

What we want to know is that those women don't matter at all to you. When you're gawking, looking, whatever at other women in front of your spouse (this does NOT apply to everyone...) It makes her feel like she probably could be replaced by that attractive woman you're staring at. 

Or another example is porn. Why do so many women feel threatened by porn? Well, it's because they feel they don't measure up to those women. Most of them are a decade or more younger than your spouse is and she could definitely feel inadequate. 

So, it's like....Men blow off these rather small situations as no big deal. However, a lot of the time, it is a big deal and maybe she won't tell you it is. This is especially true if the woman has had children and her body has changed dramatically. 

Going to throw some disclaimers in: NOT talking about everyone. There are some very secure women out there who have no issues - good for you. Majority of woman aren't like you (but probably wish they were), so I'm not including you. 

For me, I do feel inadequate now. My H obsesses over porn (to the tune of replacing me with porn on several, several occasions). He has gawked and stared at women in front of me. I certainly feel replaceable. It hasn't helped my self esteem in the slightest and after 7.5 years, has now started to affect our sex life. I have no interest in meeting his needs, as he has no interest in meeting mine. Now, we're down to sex maybe twice a month. Not my doing. It was me giving up everything I was doing. Now, he can have all the porn he wants. lol.

I guess age matters too. FTR I am 32. I am way more secure now than I was 10 years ago, but his actions definitely make me feel as though he could just go out tomorrow and bring home someone new (hell, he has done as much twice before). 

So, I guess it's security? safety? I don't know what to call it, but we want to be number one in your eyes. We don't want to have to worry about competing with every other woman out there. That's exhausting. 

Just one woman's loser opinion. I haven't experienced a man want me completely and fully including flaws. I thought my H did - I found out that wasn't true 4 years after we married. Devastated.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

wilson said:


> Women can understand how men feel about sex if they think about how they feel about having friends. Having friends is more than just the basic function of having a companion at lunch. Having friends provides a fullness and meaning to life that allows joy in all other areas. If a woman didn't have any friends, it would likely have a very depressing effect on her personality. She would likely not feel very worthy as a person and not find as much happiness in life. She would constantly wonder what was wrong with her and likely feel like a loser.
> 
> I feel the same way about sex. It is so much more than just the physical act. It makes me feel valuable as a person to the world. When I had a good sex life, I enjoyed everything so much more. Now that my marriage is sexless, I cannot find joy in anything. Even on vacation, it all just seems so dull and pointless. I feel like I'm pretending to have fun so that I don't have to think about how living sexless makes me feel like a loser.


I understand the feeling, but ultimately, the lack of sex is not the problem here.

the problem (in both scenarios you described above) is that you derive your feeling of self worth from your relationship to others.

you have an innate self worth that you can discover and that can make these other things merely nice add ons, not requirements for fulfillment.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Vega said:


> I know that not EVERY man is like that. At first I thought it was *me*. But after doing some research, I discovered that there are many women who experience that type of man. Doesn't seem to matter whether the man is a teenager or in his 70's.
> 
> The problem is, that I can't always tell the "good" ones from the "not-so-good ones". It's not that I'm so naïve, but that I've learned that there are SO MANY OF THEM OUT THERE! And many of them give 'good game'. *Sometimes it's even hard for the most well-educated, 'street smart' woman to tell the difference between a good guy and a cad...*
> 
> ...until it's too late.


OK, fair enough! I'll admit that I have been in relationships primarily fueled by lust and even I felt confused by my lack of concern for my girlfriend once I got what I wanted. Yet, I still consider myself to be a good guy. So why was I a total piece of sh!t in that situation in the pursuit of happiness?

#1 I was very attracted to these women physically.
#2 Once I got to know her, our personalities did NOT have any chemistry.
#3 We both wanted to make it work, so things got physical. 
#4 The relationship was very short lived because we could not see a future together. 
#5 Sex became unappealing for both of us.

*In my opinion, the above is just a messy part of the dating process. *

*The point of this thread is asking WHY a man would want and desire just one woman, and have that desire grow as time passes? He wants to be part of her, he respects her, he knows she is a great friend to him, he wants them to stay together and make the most out of life together!*

So to be fair, so one ever said that finding THE ONE would ever be easy. It is also hard for us guys to find the one!

If a husband desires his wife as time passes, he really loves her. He is NOT just using her....

Regards, 
Badsanta


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

it's a bonding mechanism.

it's the bridge between men and women.

without it, why not just hang out with a dude?


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

badsanta said:


> @Holdingontoit given your wife's history (rape victim) it is easy to see why it is likely she would associate sex with being used.


BadSanta: I am not complaining. My choice to stay. My choice to be sexless rather than accept her generous and gracious offer of one-way sex. 

I am quite sincere in suggesting to other men that they refrain from sex and not complain. And when they can't refrain from sex and not complain, then file for divorce. Or you can be a wimp like me who doesn't have the guts to divorce, but then you can't properly complain. Of course a guy can complain all he wants, but he has no leg to stand on if he is choosing to stay with a woman who, for whatever reason, has no interest in having sex with him.

Vega: Yes, I am quite clear that a man who continues to press for sex with a woman who has no interest in having sex with him is sending the clear message that he does not care about her feelings. Guilty as charged. Wish I were not such a slow learner. Never occurred to me during the first couple of years of our marriage that my wife was willing to marry someone she had no interest in having sex with despite my explicit statement that I was looking forward to having frequent sex after we got married. I foolishly believed that if she had no interest in having sex with me she would have declined my proposal of marriage. Bzzz, wrong, thank you for playing.

Later, during MC and SC, she claimed to enjoy sex with me. She said the reason she refrained from consenting to sex was my behavior outside the bedroom. So I worked to improve my behavior outside the bedroom. Nothing worked. Eventually the MCs and SCs would say to my wife "from where I sit, your H treats you pretty well, don't you think you could at least have some sex with him on vacation?" Nope. 

Eventually we stopped MC because the MC at that time told us she viewed it as a pointless and expensive waste of time and we realized she was correct. I realized that all those years of MC and SC, my wife was lying. To me. To the MCs and SCs. Likely to herself. Wish I could say I was a great guy at that point. I wasn't. I continued to initiate sex. I continued to pout and whine and moan. I figured my wife had intentionally mislead me all those years and married me under false pretenses and I was angry with her and basically did not care how she felt while we were having sex. She was my wife and she had promised to have sex with me "until death do us part" and I intended to stay faithful to her so I was going to hold her to the "to have and to hold" part of her vows. Not my most admirable period.

Finally (like I said - slow learner), I realized I wasn't being the person I wanted to be. We had sex infrequently and the sex we had was lousy. She got nothing out of sex and had no interest in having sex with me regardless of how I treated her. So I decided to never have sex with her again.

A person with a better self-image would have left at that point. I chose to stay. I got everything I could have asked for from staying. She is more affectionate. Our kids are doing well. Our finances are more in balance. That is why I don't complain.

But I do stand as a stark example of how easily and quickly 20 or more years can pass without any change. And where things are likely to end up if the HD just patiently waits for the LD to "get it". Where I am is pretty much the best a HD can hope for if they choose to stay with someone who has no interest in engaging in sex with them. Most healthy sane people would choose a different outcome. No one ever accused me of being mentally healthy.


----------



## wantshelp (Mar 10, 2016)

Vega said:


> YES!! It always surprises me when I read about men who complain that their wives aren't giving them sex and then go on to state how they clean the house, take care of the kids, mow the grass, etc. While all of those are nice gestures, it's not _PERSONAL_.





Wolf1974 said:


> however this is usually what they are told when they are leading sexless lifestyle. If you do this I would have more time for that


My perception is that my wife fills the "wife role" based on what she saw her parents do. Even she now agrees that he parents' marriage was not good. But, I think she saw 2 people have and raise kids together in a house. She never saw them being affectionate or heard them frequently having sex. She saw he mom doing the dishes, working, and cleaning. I believe that she never fully understood that affection and making love were a frequent and necessary part of marriage. To me, her view of marriage was like "playing house." And she was always told that men only want to take advantage of you for sex. So the dishes are done, but I was almost always rejected. So here I am, a guy with a normal sex drive (maybe HD) in a sexless marriage and masturbation no longer brings me an orgasm. I feel like I am living a nightmare. 

I guess my point to that was that for her, the acts of service were a valid substitution for being intimate and accepting affection from me. So, I feel like there is a connection between a sexless marriage and a spouse that expresses love as acts of service.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
This is meant as a legitimate question, not an argument:

Do you notice attractive men other than your husband. I don't mean do you want to really have sex with them, but in real life or in movies do you see and appreciate beautiful men?

Maybe there is a lot of variation in this. I see and appreciate attractive women. I could lie and say I didn't notice. I could pretend that I"m not attracted to them, but I am. I never ACT on that attraction but the attraction itself is not something I can simply turn off.

Maybe other people react differently?





staarz21 said:


> I have to agree with this.
> 
> I think a lot of women want to feel like "the only one". Of course we know that you look at other women and that other woman could probably fill the same hole we've filled for you. But we want to feel like we hold your attention completely.
> 
> ...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> Where I am is pretty much the best a HD can hope for if they choose to stay with someone who has no interest in engaging in sex with them. Most healthy sane people would choose a different outcome. No one ever accused me of being mentally healthy.


I agree that most people would've bailed out, but I don't think you have reached end stage "best you can hope for" status.

all the stuff you recounted sucks, but it's over. It already happened. There is no reason the present needs to be a replay of that.

how much of your choosing not to have sex now is a reaction to how you felt wronged in the past?

how much of it is a fair weighing of your present circumstances?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

wantshelp said:


> My perception is that my wife fills the "wife role" based on what she saw her parents do. Even she now agrees that he parents' marriage was not good. But, I think she saw 2 people have and raise kids together in a house. She never saw them being affectionate or heard them frequently having sex. She saw he mom doing the dishes, working, and cleaning. I believe that she never fully understood that affection and making love were a frequent and necessary part of marriage. To me, her view of marriage was like "playing house." And she was always told that men only want to take advantage of you for sex. So the dishes are done, but I was almost always rejected. So here I am, a guy with a normal sex drive (maybe HD) in a sexless marriage and masturbation no longer brings me an orgasm. I feel like I am living a nightmare.
> 
> I guess my point to that was that for her, the acts of service were a valid substitution for being intimate and accepting affection from me. So, I feel like there is a connection between a sexless marriage and a spouse that expresses love as acts of service.


bail out or accept that sex is not your #1 priority


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## staarz21 (Feb 6, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> This is meant as a legitimate question, not an argument:
> 
> Do you notice attractive men other than your husband. I don't mean do you want to really have sex with them, but in real life or in movies do you see and appreciate beautiful men?
> ...


I think this varies greatly between men and women. Men typically start to undress a woman. Women just go, "hm. He's hot." It doesn't get as far as undressing him. Normally (not always), we don't wonder what's in his pants. This also depends on the state of your relationship, I think.

For me If I saw a hot guy, I always compared them to my H. NONE of the them ever came close to attractiveness to my H. My H was always hotter....100%....that is until he started acting like a jerk. Then, all of a sudden those men did seem more attractive. I didn't want anyone but my H. He didn't show me that same courtesy. Now, the playing field is even and I do spend more time fantasizing about what those other men might look like naked. 

But before all of that, no. I never did care to look at other men. I had the man I wanted. If there were other attractive men around, I didn't notice them. Now that my marriage is in the crapper, I have plenty of time to gawk all I want at those hot guys....and you can certainly bet I do lol.

My response isn't meant on behalf of all women. Plenty of women out there to automatically undress men as well. I am just speaking in general terms...it's also probably a bit old fashioned, because I definitely notice way more hot men then I used to and sometimes...the thoughts linger. Of course never acting on it.


----------



## staarz21 (Feb 6, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> I'm not sure if Staarz will have a different opinion, but I've never cared that my husband noticed an attractive woman here and there, have always considered it normal. And I definitely notice attractive men. He's never been into porn that I'm aware of so that hasn't factored into my feelings.
> 
> But the thing is, he's always been really into me; very affectionate, always wanting sex and my attention. Him noticing the odd attractive woman under those circumstances has never phased me.
> 
> But if he were to take notice of others now, when his attention towards me has been lacking for months and his desire has been much lower towards me, I'd lose it completely, I'm pretty sure.


Yeah I agree with this. I mean, if my H was completely and totally into me and didn't make me feel like I was last resort...sure I wouldn't mind at all. I would be totally confident in him looking a little here and there. It's natural. 

But his attention isn't on me, so it does bother me that he does it.

I guess it comes down to, I don't feel loved by him. I always feel like he's judging me, and even though he says he's not, his actions tell me another story. If his actions says he loved me and I was everything to him..my advice, my story would all be different.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Holdingontoit said:


> BadSanta: I am not complaining. My choice to stay. My choice to be sexless rather than accept her generous and gracious offer of one-way sex.
> 
> I am quite sincere in suggesting to other men that they refrain from sex and not complain. And when they can't refrain from sex and not complain, then file for divorce. Or you can be a wimp like me who doesn't have the guts to divorce, but then you can't properly complain. Of course a guy can complain all he wants, but he has no leg to stand on if he is choosing to stay with a woman who, for whatever reason, has no interest in having sex with him.
> 
> ...


I do not understand any of this.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

staarz21 said:


> Yeah I agree with this. I mean, if my H was completely and totally into me and didn't make me feel like I was last resort...sure I wouldn't mind at all. I would be totally confident in him looking a little here and there. It's natural.
> 
> But his attention isn't on me, so it does bother me that he does it.
> 
> I guess it comes down to, I don't feel loved by him. I always feel like he's judging me, and even though he says he's not, his actions tell me another story. If his actions says he loved me and I was everything to him..my advice, my story would all be different.


I'm sorry about that. I'm assuming he knows it bothers you, and how you feel, and he does it anyway?

I want to ask you a question, and it's not a shot at you at all. I think there was a point in time where my wife would have somewhat have said what you just said. Where she thought I was obsessing about other woman, and one model in particular. And she probably felt insecure about that.

But there was another perspective - mine. And it is this: she felt very free to talk about other men being hot, actors being hot, the guy across the room being hot, ex's being hot. Whatever. And one of the things that attracted her to me was that I was always secure enough to not get freaked out by that.

But she was coming out of a bad LTR where she was cheated on and she was freaked out by any behaviour of mine that involved another woman. So we evolved into this weird situation where she could talk about men being hot, but I had to pretend that other women didn't exist, to protect her feelings. It went on so long that she forgot it was about me protecting her feelings and became about me not being open enough to admit that other women were hot.

So one day I did. Right after she told me some guy on TV was hot, I told her about a supermodel that I thought was totally hot. And she flipped out and that's the moment I'm talking about. I'm sure at that period she would have said roughly what you just said.

But I held fast, and told her that either she could curtail her mouth, or accept that I found other women hot, or we could just find some reasonable place in between.

And we actually talked about what is respect -- ogling vs checking out, talking about other people and having it be funny vs being disrespectful, etc.

We actually arrived at a good place. But it took me being very honest with her about my sexuality, and the fact that it included being attracted to other women. And now if a hot woman walks by, I can notice her without ogling, and if my wife asks me if she was hot, I have an honest but respectful reply. And vice versa.

Could that be a component, or an entry into a better conversation with him?


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

staarz21 said:


> *I think a lot of women want to feel like "the only one". Of course we know that you look at other women and that other woman could probably fill the same hole we've filled for you. But we want to feel like we hold your attention completely. *
> 
> For me, I do feel inadequate now. My H obsesses over porn (to the tune of replacing me with porn on several, several occasions). He has gawked and stared at women in front of me. I certainly feel replaceable. It hasn't helped my self esteem in the slightest and after 7.5 years, has now started to affect our sex life. I have no interest in meeting his needs, as he has no interest in meeting mine. Now, we're down to sex maybe twice a month. Not my doing. It was me giving up everything I was doing. Now, he can have all the porn he wants. lol.


 THANKS! staarz21

*Men, pay attention to that!* I read all kinds of stuff all over the internet and I have a curiosity to read even things I probably should not. I honestly think this has to be true in that women want to feel like they are "enough to satisfy" and make their husband's happy. 

In a blog I have read about a couple that have an open marriage that have detailed posts spanning about a decade now, even the "insatiable wife" that can never get enough sex with extra partners would much rather be monogamous and feel that she would actually be "enough to satisfy" her husband and that he would ONLY desire her, AND that he would only want her to be with him. So this is an example of a couple engaged in swinging now for over a decade, and her core desire was always monogamy. 

So for those husbands out there with problematic sex lives, what @staarz21 is saying is likely FUNDAMENTAL for what women need to feel sexually pleased in a relationship.

*Now then, that leaves a million dollar question as to WHY happily married men still feel the need to look at porn and masturbate to it....*



> Just one woman's loser opinion. I haven't experienced a man want me completely and fully including flaws. I thought my H did - I found out that wasn't true 4 years after we married. Devastated.


NOT a loser's opinion @staarz21

Not at all!

In my opinion you are the hero of the thread, as I opened it in the first line mentioning porn, yet you are the first to address what it actually does in a relationship that should otherwise be healthy. 

So why then do most married men look at porn, always want more, want to push the sexual boundaries in the marriage sometimes to uncomfortable limits, and try to send many otherwise healthy wives to the doctor to get their hormones checked when she starts having trouble getting aroused?

The wife complains about this and we blame YOUR lack of enthusiasm for making us turn to porn, then making us feel ashamed, perverting our desires through neglect, and making us feel rejected. But at the end of the day we neglect to acknowledge that our porn use was a preexisting condition of the marriage. We want you and still want to keep ALL the women on the internet too...

In my opinion a man looks at porn before he gets married because he is anxious to know what YOU will be like when he finally meets YOU. A married man look at porn because he (A) wants to learn more so he can please his wife, (B) is struggling to cope with lack of intimacy and needs to self sooth, (C) is depressed and needs an escape mechanism. Meanwhile a wife may see all of those and intemperate the need for porn to mean that she will never be enough for her husband. 

Something for all of us to work on in my opinion...

Badsanta


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> all the stuff you recounted sucks, but it's over. It already happened. There is no reason the present needs to be a replay of that.


In what way is it over? Is my wife no longer a rape victim? Does she no longer feel compelled to dissociate and pretend sexual touching is not happening when it occurs? Does she feel any pleasurable sensation from my touching any part of her body? Is she willing to experiment and see if there is any touching she would find pleasurable? Is she willing to seek professional help to deal with any of this?

Similarly, am I willing to seek professional help to deal with my anger, frustration, resentment, and self-loathing? If not, then how in the name of anything holy can I ask her to deal with her issues?

I can't. So I won't.

Which leaves aside all of the positive behavioral changes from my refusing to have sex. The higher level of Affection. The higher level of respect. The higher level of verbal affirmations of love. All of which is highly likely to disappear entirely if I were foolish enough to reopen the door to sexual interaction.

Which also leaves out the financial aspects. Back when I first insisted on MC to deal with our sex problems (just after our 5th anniversary), she began to wildly overspend. As in spent all I had saved before we got married and ran up huge credit card bills. As in continued to run up credit cards bills after I discovered the initial overspending. As in forging my name on checks to pay off credit cards she wasn't supposed to have. As in separate accounts. As in all the bills come to my office. As in I had to sleep with my wallet locked in a box with the key in my pocket so she wouldn't steal money or borrow credit cards while I was asleep. I am NOT going back there. These days she works and offers to pay some of the her's and the kids expenses from her earnings. At this point, for me, that feels better than any sex we could have.

You may think that some improvement might be possible as regards our sex life. You might be correct. I simply do not care to explore that possibility. I am not willing to risk rekindling the poor behavior. The sex we have had in the past is not worth giving up the hand holding or the hugs or the "I love you"s. It is not worth risking getting a phone call asking me how i intend to pay off $50,000 or $100,000 of debt I didn't know I had.

You may believe that improvement in our sex life is possible without rekindling the bad behavior. I do not. And I am not willing to conduct an experiment just to satisfy your curiosity. I am the one who has to live with the negative consequences should they come to pass. As I expect they would.

If she told me that she wants us to have sex because she wants to please me. She wants me to be happy. She wants me to be glad I married her rather than regretting it. I would still refuse. Because I know she lied to me and to herself before. So if she says it will make her happy to please me, I won't trust her. I will fear that she will try and fail and I'll wake up next to the woman I used to be married to. Who turns down hugs and won't hold hands and pulls away from any touching and medicates her distress by retail therapy and running up secret debt.

When she explains to me how we can make the sex good for her, pleasurable for her, enjoyable for her, something she desires - that is when I will agree to exploring our sexuality together. I do not expect that day will ever arrive. I do not even allow myself to hope it will.


----------



## staarz21 (Feb 6, 2013)

marduk said:


> I'm sorry about that. I'm assuming he knows it bothers you, and how you feel, and he does it anyway?
> 
> I want to ask you a question, and it's not a shot at you at all. I think there was a point in time where my wife would have somewhat have said what you just said. Where she thought I was obsessing about other woman, and one model in particular. And she probably felt insecure about that.
> 
> ...


It has been the topic of many conversations. I mean, in the beginning, and probably up until about 2 years ago - I didn't really mind that much unless he was being embarrassingly obvious about it.

I think, in my case, it's special because he tells me one thing and then will do another. I know he looks. We've talked about it and used to, I would even point them out. There was a time where we had a contest going on how many outlines of thongs we could see through yoga pants....I pointed out more than he did. That's when I felt comfortable in the relationship. 

When another woman notices he's starting - or his friends notice and say something, that's too far. It's embarrassing to me and it almost feels disrespectful - if I'm right there and someone notices. He's also chosen porn over me consistently, so I think this is just "him". I certainly don't apply this to all men. 

It's like once he gets comfortable, and I start feeling confident in the relationship, he puts me back down. It almost seems deliberate that he will stop having sex with me or tell me something about myself to make me feel insecure. He will claim he doesn't do that, but I swear there are timelines of him doing exactly that. Sex between us will be amazing, we will be getting along great, we will be playing, laughing, etc....then all of a sudden, he's gawking to an embarrassing point, replacing me with porn, and telling me something about my body that isn't photo shopped to perfection. 

I feel like I'm off topic, sorry. I guess if someone feels confident in their relationship, none of this really matters.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Sorry for the huge threadjack. Anon, if you want to keep at this, please take it over to my Immovable Object thread.

As to this thread, I tend to agree with the other guy posters. I desire sex with my wife to feel connected. No other activity triggers the same feeling of closeness and connection. I wish there were something else that did, because sex does NOT cause the same feelings in my wife. We would get along better if there was something else she could do that I appreciate as much as I appreciate her consenting to and enjoying sex with me. But there isn't.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> In what way is it over? Is my wife no longer a rape victim? Does she no longer feel compelled to dissociate and pretend sexual touching is not happening when it occurs? Does she feel any pleasurable sensation from my touching any part of her body? Is she willing to experiment and see if there is any touching she would find pleasurable? Is she willing to seek professional help to deal with any of this?
> 
> Similarly, am I willing to seek professional help to deal with my anger, frustration, resentment, and self-loathing? If not, then how in the name of anything holy can I ask her to deal with her issues?
> 
> ...


H-- I say this with respect, but you've got a very intricate infrastructure in place that allows you to be convinced you're paralyzed.

you have total control over yourself and you only exercise a tiny portion of that control. 

the portion you use seems 100% devoted to avoiding sadness/pain related to things that happened in the past.

you have 100% ability to view the present as a distinct, fresh start and you choose not to do that.

you would rather be bound in this prison of your own making because you are afraid to walk outside.

even that would be OK if you simply accepted it, but you really haven't.

you still long for what you don't have, but you are not willing to go after what you really want.

so it seems you live in constant conflict with yourself, which is totally pointless.

it is very easy to break out of this, you just have to decide to do that.


----------



## staarz21 (Feb 6, 2013)

badsanta said:


> THANKS! staarz21
> 
> *Men, pay attention to that!* I read all kinds of stuff all over the internet and I have a curiosity to read even things I probably should not. I honestly think this has to be true in that women want to feel like they are "enough to satisfy" and make their husband's happy.
> 
> ...


Thanks.

I'm not against porn in a good relationship. If two people can use it occasionally and respect one another about it, it's probably a nice tool to have sometimes. 

I think porn helps with fantasies (but omg not on "how to" lol). I know it's hard to keep things alive for years on end without any sort of "stimulation". I think happily married men and women use porn because variety is out of the question as far as actual sex goes. 

I think if women stop having sex with their H's they have no room to gripe about their H's using porn. My case is just reversed from that. It doesn't make me hate porn though. I hate my H's lack of self control. I was always available and ready. I could have sex every single day. I think it's fun and a wonderful form of exercise lol. 

Some people just don't know where to draw the line anymore. The cycles are:

Man watches porn, W feels inadequate, W stops having sex with H, H watches porn.

OR

W stops having sex with H, H watches porn, W finds out, W gets mad, W continues to not have sex and blames porn, H watches porn. 

My case is I knew H watched porn. I watched it with him sometimes. I wanted sex daily. H got bored. H watched porn. H came up with excuses not to have sex with me. H chose porn. 7 years later, I've had enough and I quit trying to have sex with him. Clearly he didn't like it anyway.

I read here that many men desire their wives and their wives couldn't notice at all. I'm on the other end of that. I just want someone who can love me...and who can love me knowing that I am a real woman and I will age along with the rest of them. I don't need someone living in a fantasyland making me feel like I'm less than because I have fine lines on my face.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

What blows my mind is we ask all of these questions but men and women were doing the same stuff before they even knew how to speak. 

You want it because it's natural and there's really no need to explain it. 

In the past people did it when they never bathed and getting pregant could easily mean death. They still did it. 

What's weird is not that we want it but that we would even consider we might not.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> *What blows my mind is we ask all of these questions but men and women were doing the same stuff before they even knew how to speak. *
> 
> You want it because it's natural and there's really no need to explain it.


Completely disagree. The reasons to have sex has evolved!!!!!

Before we knew how to speak, what was our life expectancy? In Classical Greece it was only 28 years. In Classical Rome it was 20-30 years. TODAY most women may not even consider starting a family until about 30 years of age, AND many now stay sexually active well passed menopause into their 60s and 70s. 

Why does a 55 year old man desire sex and is capable of enjoying it more than when he was a teenager with his 55 year old wife? In my opinion it is a celebration of growing old together and maintaining the sportsmanship to keep the spark alive. The reasons and capacity that this 55 year old man desires sex with his wife is rather extraordinarily profound compared to teenagers having a roll in the hay during the historical eras of mankind and Roman soldiers visiting brothels. 

Badsanta


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> I see nothing here that reinforces that conclusion. Quite the opposite.
> 
> Once you realize that attraction is not love or commitment, of course.


Everything you have said so far (haven't read past this post yet) reinforces this conclusion.

Most of how badsanta responded reinforces this conclusion.

If men want women to believe sex is about connection, well, sorry, ain't seeing it. It strikes me as just what is said when he feels like she says "no" too much, and then immediately switches to a bunch of jokes about doing crazy women.

But will read to the end of he thread to see if it comes up.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> So -- from a purely sexual aspect -- any hot woman will do


Exactly! The rest is just blah, blah, blah, as far as I can tell.

I mean sure, you choose to have sex with her instead of someone else. For now.

Don't get me wrong, I believe you love your wife. I'm just questioning the "sex = connection" piece.

Sex = connection when it suits. Otherwise, we'll, it's just sex.


----------



## arbitrator (Feb 13, 2012)

*Like the vast majority of us guys, sex makes me feel ever more connected to my spouse(at least whenever I'm in a married state)both emotionally and physically, and is basically the glue that truly binds a relationship ~ or at least I'd like to think that it is!

But when the woman whom you cherish decides to go "distant" and "no contact" on you, then I can't even begin to describe a better example of what isolation and loneliness is in the entire world!

If separation from God is defined as "being in hell," then distance from the woman, whom you place your undying love with, must undoubtedly be a free sample of it!*
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

badsanta said:


> In my opinion a man looks at porn before he gets married because he is anxious to know what YOU will be like when he finally meets YOU. A married man look at porn because he (A) wants to learn more so he can please his wife, (B) is struggling to cope with lack of intimacy and needs to self sooth, (C) is depressed and needs an escape mechanism. Meanwhile a wife may see all of those and intemperate the need for porn to mean that she will never be enough for her husband.


Huh. That's not how my SO describes it all...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

badsanta said:


> Completely disagree. The reasons to have sex has evolved!!!!!
> 
> Before we knew how to speak, what was our life expectancy? In Classical Greece it was only 28 years. In Classical Rome it was 20-30 years. TODAY most women may not even consider starting a family until about 30 years of age, AND many now stay sexually active well passed menopause into their 60s and 70s.
> 
> ...


this is an interesting perspective, but why are you assuming that people's motivations change as they get older?

what if it's simply inertia? we continue wanting it because we've always wanted it. why would your motivation change?

if someone in ancient Greece managed to live to 70, he wouldn't have stopped wanting it either, despite the cultural differences compared to modern life. would his motivation have changed due to getting older? if not, why would you assume yours would?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

a couple of thousand years ago there was a dude named Ananda who was one of the 10 main disciples of Buddha.

this guy was massively developed spiritually and had taken a vow of celibacy, but even he was seduced by a very foxy lady.

Buddha took pity on him because it was understood that to free oneself from sexual desire was extremely difficult, even for very advanced sages

nothing has changed since then


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> Everything you have said so far (haven't read past this post yet) reinforces this conclusion.
> 
> Most of how badsanta responded reinforces this conclusion.
> 
> ...


Sex for me is rarely about the connection. It is a nice by-product, but not usually the intended goal. Unless I'm bummed out or something.

It's usually about the sex.

Why for you does that mean you are interchangeable? I mean, everybody's replaceable, but unique. It's the way it is.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> Exactly! The rest is just blah, blah, blah, as far as I can tell.
> 
> I mean sure, you choose to have sex with her instead of someone else. For now.
> 
> ...


What's wrong with that?

I mean, she could have good sex with lots of hot guys, but she chooses to only have sex with me (I hope). For now.

This is life.


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

marduk said:


> My wife once said the same thing to me.
> 
> My response was that I thought she was confusing her husband with one of her children. And to stop cooking and cleaning for me, and go put something sexy on.


This has inspired me to have a discussion with my wife. I will ask her the question "what do I do for you that makes you feel loved?"
In return I will ask her "what do you think you do that makes me feel loved?"
Bet you a hundred bucks she will say exactly what your wife said.

I will of course reply with "stop the cooking and cleaning and put something sexy on."

Honestly, I would eat at McDonalds every single night if in return I got more sexy, sleezy, dirty sex. (or so I think)

Thanks!


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Everything you have said so far (haven't read past this post yet) reinforces this conclusion.
> 
> Most of how badsanta responded reinforces this conclusion.
> 
> ...


I think the confusion comes from the following:

Many men say that sex with their wives helps them stay emotionally connected.

Cynics point out that men will have sex with women whom they find attractive for other reasons than emotional connection. Hence, men are lying pigs who don't really care about emotionally connecting with their wives and are just using that as a way of manipulating them into sex, gaining access to their "hole" as a convenient way of "getting off" using the vagina that is closest to hand.

Most men (if they were unattached and the woman was willing) would have sex with any women they are attracted to. 

For most men, having sex with their wives increases their emotional connection with their wife.

They're both true. It's not one or the other.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

UMP said:


> Honestly, I would eat at McDonalds every single night if in return I got more sexy, sleezy, dirty sex. (or so I think)


I think McDonald's registered trademark phrase "I’m Lovin’ It®" would work well with your statement (or so I think). 

:grin2:

Badsanta


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

badsanta said:


> I think McDonald's registered trademark phrase "I’m Lovin’ It®" would work well with your statement (or so I think).
> 
> :grin2:
> 
> Badsanta


It gives a whole new meaning to:
Ronald McDonald is Lovin It when he's serving up that Big Mac with special sauce.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> Most men (if they were unattached and the woman was willing) would have sex with any women they are attracted to.
> 
> For most men, having sex with their wives increases their emotional connection with their wife.


The point of my thread is that I have had attractive women hit on me and be sexually receptive since I have been married, but at NO TIME was this appealing to me to ever desire it or act upon it in any situation. Why is that? 

Why would I then HIGHLY desire sex with my wife with whom I have already had sex with her countless times and feel it is a far superior experience than any other woman would ever be able to offer me?

For one, I had sex with many other woman when I was in college. The sex had a lot of chemistry and it was hot, but there was NO real connection that could be established in those relationships. It resulted in many night walking across campus at 1am feeling horrible and just wanting to be alone. When I met my wife and we had sex, it was a very different experience. It was emotionally fulfilling, and I knew it was an experience we shared. It was a feeling of being connected and accepted into her being, and her being was one that I admired and respected. Ever since I have never looked back, except an occasional thought to remind myself what a wonderful wife I have. 

When a man is with his wife and early in the relationship you can look into each other's eyes and talk about creating a family with ease and confidence, have it happen months later, and feel that you life has increased exponentially by this union. That is a connection I will fight to the end to maintain and nurture. That is a connection that I will feel incredible desire to be physically accepted and present in every moment. 

Badsanta


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

badsanta said:


> The point of my thread is that I have had attractive women hit on me and be sexually receptive since I have been married, but at NO TIME was this appealing to me to ever desire it or act upon it in any situation. Why is that?
> 
> Why would I then HIGHLY desire sex with my wife with whom I have already had sex with her countless times and feel it is a far superior experience than any other woman would ever be able to offer me?
> 
> ...


Someone else agrees with you:

Proverbs 5:
15 *Drink waters out of thine own cistern*, and running waters out of thine own well.

16 Let thy fountains be dispersed abroad, and rivers of waters in the streets.

17 Let them be only thine own, and not strangers' with thee.

18 *Let thy fountain be blessed: and rejoice with the wife of thy youth.

*19 Let her be as the loving hind and pleasant roe; *let her breasts satisfy thee at all times; and be thou ravished always with her love.
*
20 And why wilt thou, my son, be ravished with a strange woman, and embrace the bosom of a stranger?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> My wife once said the same thing to me.
> 
> My response was that I thought she was confusing her husband with one of her children. And to stop cooking and cleaning for me, and go put something sexy on.


The thing about love languages is that they are real. Perhaps these two wives' love languages is acts of service. You two are basically denigrating HER language with this. It is important to know about love languages not just so you can speak them to your spouse but so you can hear them when theirs is spoken to you.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> The thing about love languages is that they are real. Perhaps these two wives' love languages is acts of service. You two are basically denigrating HER language with this. It is important to know about love languages not just so you can speak them to your spouse but so you can hear them when theirs is spoken to you.


That is one of hers. I didn't denigrate her, but we did have a conversation about it. 

For example, I can express love to her through acts of service but it doesn't mean that acts of service mean the same thing to me. I can know intellectually that's what it means to her, but it doesn't carry the same connotation to me.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

UMP said:


> Someone else agrees with you:
> 
> Proverbs 5:
> 15 *Drink waters out of thine own cistern*, and running waters out of thine own well.
> ...


this type of stuff makes me think ancient people were probably smarter than we are now


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> That is one of hers. I didn't denigrate her, but we did have a conversation about it.
> 
> For example, I can express love to her through acts of service but it doesn't mean that acts of service mean the same thing to me. I can know intellectually that's what it means to her, but it doesn't carry the same connotation to me.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


do you believe one can have flexibility in his "love language" or is it unchangeable?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> do you believe one can have flexibility in his "love language" or is it unchangeable?


Don't know. 

My point is that they don't have to match, and respecting ones side means also respecting the others. 

What you can choose for sure is how you want to express it. I get her little gifts, flowers, cook, etc because she loves it. 

If she were to do that for me it wouldn't be as meaningful as me showing up from work one day and finding her in lingerie. 

It's about understanding and fine tuning your message into a channel that is well received. You can choose to be frustrated because of how you want to express yourself, or not. But I think changing how you express yourself is probably easier than choosing how you receive it.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> Don't know.
> 
> My point is that they don't have to match, and respecting ones side means also respecting the others.
> 
> ...


I agree with you and tend to value the same things (most guys do)

I guess my point is we assume this stuff is hard wired, but what if it's just a default position on the dial that can be shifted?

so if your problem is your frustrated that your wife expects you to be happy that she cleans when you really want her to be freaky, one response is to expect her to get with your program and be freaky.

but if it's possible to turn the dial, isn't another response to just turn your dial to where any demonstration of love is equivalent.

this is probably unrealistic, just slightly interesting to me.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> I agree with you and tend to value the same things (most guys do)
> 
> I guess my point is we assume this stuff is hard wired, but what if it's just a default position on the dial that can be shifted?
> 
> ...


I think people want things to be easy and just the way they think they should be. 

An example of this is when I really focused on my wife and I's relationship as friends. We both loved it. 

Until I ended up one day sitting outside the changeroom of a clothing store while she tried stuff on with her purse in my lap. 

I had become her girlfriend. 

Which is not good.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I guess each spouse has a range that is normal and authentic. Beyond that it is fake pandering. Hopefully the ranges between two spouses overlaps enough to make it workable.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

You feel connected via shared experiences. Sex is one of them. 

The last time I "connected" with my wife was nearly 2+ years ago when we stayed up nearly all night watching Jane Austen movies and talking about them. Hasn't happened since. Sex that came after that has been contrived at best, and worthless at worst. 

Much like the rest of the marriage.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

badsanta said:


> The point of my thread is that I have had attractive women hit on me and be sexually receptive since I have been married, but at NO TIME was this appealing to me to ever desire it or act upon it in any situation.


Just to clear things up...

Were the woman unappealing, or was the thought of having sex with them while you were married unappealing?


----------



## keeper63 (Mar 22, 2012)

Here is the thing...like many men on TAM, the only woman I WANT to have sex with at this point in my life is my wife. Like many others, when I was in college, I was a D1 athlete, I was in a fraternity, I was tall and sort of funny, and I got more a$$ than a toilet seat. Looking back, it was fun but not very fulfilling. I ended up feeling empty and cheap.

For many years after I was was married, I frequently thought about sex with other women. I would see attractive women in public, or I would meet them in social or business settings and I would think about what it would be like to have sex with them. I had many, many opportunities to act on my impulses, but for many reasons (too many to go into here), I didn't act. At one point I might have had an EA with a female co-worker that I spent a LOT of time with, but my wife knew her, and there wasn't anything I was telling the co-worker that my wife didn't know about, but the co-worker would introduce me to people as her "work husband" including my wife! What I never told my wife was that this relationship was as close as I think I ever got to wanting sex with another woman, but I never communicated this to anyone and never acted on it (I looked at it like Jimmy Carter saying he has lusted in his heart, but never acted). This was over 15 years ago.

All that said, I am at the point in my life now where I only want sex with my wife, and frankly I don't think I would know what to do sexually with another attractive, sexually available woman. I need to have that emotional and intellectual connection with a woman to feel true sexual desire for her, and that takes time. If my wife and I broke up, or she died, I suppose I could see myself in another LTR, but I feel like it would take time for me to develop that level of sexual attraction again. I would likely end up alone because if I dated a woman, I probably would not/could not have sex with her on a first, second, or probably third date, and I think many women my age (50's) on the dating scene would expect sex sooner rather than later.

But perhaps this has more to do with my declining T levels than anything else. At the end of the day, I want hot, wild sex with my wife and not with anyone else.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> You feel connected via shared experiences. Sex is one of them.
> 
> The last time I "connected" with my wife was nearly 2+ years ago when we stayed up nearly all night watching Jane Austen movies and talking about them. Hasn't happened since. Sex that came after that has been contrived at best, and worthless at worst.
> 
> Much like the rest of the marriage.


I don't believe you.

I mean Jane Austen? Really?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> I think the confusion comes from the following:
> 
> *Many men say that sex with their wives helps them stay emotionally connected.
> *


That's only ONE part of the confusion, Buddy. The other part --and perhaps the MAJOR part--is that these same men say that sex is the *ONLY* way for them to feel "connected" to their wives. 

It's the _ONLY_ thing that will make them happy, and NOTHING ELSE will do.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Sex = connection when it suits. Otherwise, we'll, it's just sex.


You need both.

As long as your average includes a healthy sense of connectedness you're ok. If you're starfishing it once or twice a month... not quite.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

keeper63 said:


> Here is the thing...like many men on TAM, the only woman I WANT to have sex with at this point in my life is my wife. Like many others, when I was in college, I was a D1 athlete, I was in a fraternity, I was tall and sort of funny, and I got more a$$ than a toilet seat. Looking back, it was fun but not very fulfilling. I ended up feeling empty and cheap.
> 
> For many years after I was was married, I frequently thought about sex with other women. I would see attractive women in public, or I would meet them in social or business settings and I would think about what it would be like to have sex with them. I had many, many opportunities to act on my impulses, but for many reasons (too many to go into here), I didn't act. At one point I might have had an EA with a female co-worker that I spent a LOT of time with, but my wife knew her, and there wasn't anything I was telling the co-worker that my wife didn't know about, but the co-worker would introduce me to people as her "work husband" including my wife! What I never told my wife was that this relationship was as close as I think I ever got to wanting sex with another woman, but I never communicated this to anyone and never acted on it (I looked at it like Jimmy Carter saying he has lusted in his heart, but never acted). This was over 15 years ago.
> 
> ...


this is interesting to me.

I don't mean this to be insulting, but I wonder if this is just a failure of imagination.

As in, you really can't imagine what you would do if your wife was actually gone and you had a genuinely attractive woman there in front of you who really wanted you.

Maybe you confuse your inability to really imagine this with thinking you wouldn't want it.

Again, I don't mean this to be insulting, but sometimes we become so insulated within the life we are leading that we have trouble imagining something else could be possible.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> I don't believe you.
> 
> I mean Jane Austen? Really?


yeah, that's too high a price.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> I don't believe you.
> 
> I mean Jane Austen? Really?


Yes. No kidding. And after going to bed at 5 am we didn't even have sex, but I felt better than i had in years because the person I actually married was there for these few hours.

Hasn't happened since.

When I write about most TAM folk being unable to understand what some of us go thru, it's because of such experiences, not because of anything else. 

It's the lyrics of the song "Photos of Ghosts" by Premiata Forneria Marconi:

Black roses laced with silver
By a broken moon.
Ten million stars
And the whispered harmonies of leaves.
We were these.
Beside a dried up fountain
Lie five dusty tomes
With faded pasted pictures
Of love's reverie.
Across each cover is written,
"Herein are Photos of Ghosts"
Of ghosts, of ghosts,
Of the days we ran and the days we sang.

Find the song on YouTube and listen to it, it's haunting.


----------



## keeper63 (Mar 22, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> Maybe you confuse your inability to really imagine this with thinking you wouldn't want it.


I don't think this is the case. I have actually thought about this (not being with my wife) at length during a period of time several years ago when the marriage was not going well and we were in MC.

I honestly don't think I could fvck an attractive, sexually available woman without getting to know her, having her be intelligent and likable, and developing an emotional connection with her first. I think I would be incapable of performing sexually if I was in a bar, and an attractive woman walked up to me, made small talk, and asked me if I would like to have sex with her. I just don't think I could do it.

I even discussed this with the MC, and she said that I was in the vast minority of men she knows who would look at it this way.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

keeper63 said:


> I don't think this is the case. I have actually thought about this (not being with my wife) at length during a period of time several years ago when the marriage was not going well and we were in MC.
> 
> I honestly don't think I could fvck an attractive, sexually available woman without getting to know her, having her be intelligent and likable, and developing an emotional connection with her first. I think I would be incapable of performing sexually if I was in a bar, and an attractive woman walked up to me, made small talk, and asked me if I would like to have sex with her. I just don't think I could do it.
> 
> I even discussed this with the MC, and she said that I was in the vast minority of men she knows who would look at it this way.


very interesting.

I'm probably 15ish years younger than you and I have noticed in the last year or so that my sense of selectivity about who I would be with has risen a lot.

I look at some women who a few years ago I would've said, "OK, sure" and now just think it wouldn't be worth the trouble.

I've wondered if this is some kind of temporary thing or if it's a trend that will increase as I get older.


----------



## keeper63 (Mar 22, 2012)

I used to feel the same way, I don't think it is temporary, and it will increase as you get older.

For me, I am much more willing to forego physical imperfection than I used to be, as long as the emotional and intellectual attraction is there.

Don't get me wrong, there does have to be some physical attraction to begin with, some "chemistry" if you will or the other parts will never develop. But to me, no amount of physical beauty or physical attractiveness will trump my need to be intellectually and emotionally turned on by a woman before I could fvck her. It just takes time, more than an hour or two that would precede an ONS.

See, I have actually thought about this, and have given my imagination a pretty good workout in this area. During the individual sessions of our MC, I was talking about divorce, and the MC put me through several scenarios and exercises where I had to think about what my life would be like without my wife, and out on my own.

I reckon I'm just weird that way....


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Yes. No kidding. And after going to bed at 5 am we didn't even have sex, but I felt better than i had in years because the person I actually married was there for these few hours.
> 
> Hasn't happened since.
> 
> ...


That's ****ing sad, man.


----------



## keeper63 (Mar 22, 2012)

The co-worker that I was very attracted to several years ago not only had very classical female physical beauty, but she was extremely intelligent and had a sort of goofy, nerdy way about her that was in stark contrast to her physical attractiveness. When our families were all together for a holiday party, she was telling my wife that she had been very attracted to an instructor in her karate class a few years ago. But she went on to tell my wife that she was very much in love with her H and there was no way she would "fvck up her wonderful family life" for a roll in the hay with some guy she was sexually attracted to.

The irony of that story is that I felt and continue to feel exactly the same way as she did about the whole situation. Perhaps that was yet another thing I found attractive about her (her loyalty and common sense).


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Vega said:


> That's only ONE part of the confusion, Buddy. The other part --and perhaps the MAJOR part--is that these same men say that sex is the *ONLY* way for them to feel "connected" to their wives.
> 
> It's the _ONLY_ thing that will make them happy, and NOTHING ELSE will do.


The flip side of that emotionally as a male is feeling as if your whole physical being is rejected in the relationship. To feel this way puts a huge emotional barrier onto the marriage where love should be unconditional. I think men DO need to be physically accepted in order to feel at one with their spouse. 

*Is it the ONLY thing that will make us happy once we feel this way? *Virtually yes once things are in a bad place, but there are other ways. *A wife can make it a point to still "care" for our arousal/desire for her when she is otherwise unavailable as opposed to feeling threatened/upset by it.* In my opinion this is why "JOI" is a very strong category in online porn. It is ultimately what men would 1000 times rather get from a spouse than a random hot woman online. If you have ever read a blog about a wife that enthusiastically devises a creative way to help her husband enjoy masturbating when she is temporarily not receptive or available for him, it is almost like reading a story about about an enthusiast describing a new roller coaster at a theme park. Or it could be something as simple as a back rub to help calm some of the tension. 

Badsanta


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> Just to clear things up...
> 
> Were the woman unappealing, or was the thought of having sex with them while you were married unappealing?


The women were very attractive but NOT sexually appealing, because they have NO WAY to offer me the sexual connection that my wife is able to provide in the relationship.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

keeper63 said:


> The co-worker that I was very attracted to several years ago not only had very classical female physical beauty, but she was extremely intelligent and had a sort of goofy, nerdy way about her that was in stark contrast to her physical attractiveness. When our families were all together for a holiday party, she was telling my wife that she had been very attracted to an instructor in her karate class a few years ago. But she went on to tell my wife that she was very much in love with her H and there was no way she would "fvck up her wonderful family life" for a roll in the hay with some guy she was sexually attracted to.
> 
> The irony of that story is that I felt and continue to feel exactly the same way as she did about the whole situation. Perhaps that was yet another thing I found attractive about her (her loyalty and common sense).


yeah, that is kind of ironic. what is attractive about someone is that they won't do what you kind of want them to do. 

it's sort of a virtuous feedback loop. the more she demonstrates her virtue, the more attractive she is, so she restrains herself more, and builds more attraction.

this is why, I would imagine, these types of situations sometimes explode when people's guards are down.

I'm with you though on the general concept that the type of woman who would do this sort of thing easily is not very attractive.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

keeper63 said:


> Don't get me wrong, there does have to be some physical attraction to begin with, some "chemistry" if you will or the other parts will never develop. But to me, no amount of physical beauty or physical attractiveness will trump my need to be intellectually and emotionally turned on by a woman before I could fvck her. It just takes time, more than an hour or two that would precede an ONS.


gotta say I'm still somewhat skeptical about this.

I think everyone has a "price."

Maybe you are not routinely seeing very good looking women.

I'm not saying physical beauty trumps intellectual stimulation. Just that there is a level of physical beauty that is like an overwhelming force where your brain goes on autopilot. 

I don't think that's just me.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> This is the same reason why married men can be so attractive to women. It's not because they've been vetted by other women as desirable, as some men seem to think, it's because they (if they seem attracted to you but never act on it and would never act on it) are displaying integrity and loyalty, and that's very attractive.
> 
> OTOH, married men who cheat are at the bottom of the attractiveness scale.


it's like, as long as they're a figment of the imagination, they can be both virtuous and hot at the same time, but if you act it out in real life, the fantasy bubble bursts.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

Vega said:


> That's only ONE part of the confusion, Buddy. The other part --and perhaps the MAJOR part--is that these same men say that sex is the *ONLY* way for them to feel "connected" to their wives.
> 
> It's the _ONLY_ thing that will make them happy, and NOTHING ELSE will do.


There are many things in a relationship that are just as important as sex. Trust, Loyalty, Communication, Respect, Support, etc.

But to men, when sex isn't happening, it becomes the most important. You hear these comments from men that are being rejected.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

what's kind of funny about the married man thing, the more I think about it, is that there is no real way for an unmarried man to compete with it.

the unmarried guy can't do the virtuous signaling thing at all.

the closes thing he can do is just be indifferent to the woman, which can be effective but does not create the same "if only" dynamic.

people are weird.


----------



## keeper63 (Mar 22, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> gotta say I'm still somewhat skeptical about this.
> 
> I think everyone has a "price."
> 
> ...


I beg to differ, I see and have seen very physically attractive women all the time. Most of the men I worked with would have rated my co-worker friend as an 8 or 9.

Nowadays, I admire that beauty much like I would admire an artistic masterpiece. I no longer think that I would like to have sex with her. As W.C Fields once said, "Women are like elephants. I like to look at them, but I wouldn't want to own one."

When I was in my 20's, perhaps the probability of being dumbfounded by physical beauty and completely governed by my "little head" was much higher than it was in my 40's and now. And this is coming from a guy who got a bunch of pvssy from sexy young coeds all through his college days.

Now I'm not saying there is no way I couldn't run into that one woman in several million who just completely knocks my socks off and rocks my world with just one look (like the Sting song "Saint Augustine in Hell"), but at my age and where my head is at, I just don't see it ever happening.

You mentioned that you were noticing the same change in yourself as you get older. It's a real thing...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

keeper63 said:


> I beg to differ, I see and have seen very physically attractive women all the time. Most of the men I worked with would have rated my co-worker friend as an 8 or 9.
> 
> Nowadays, I admire that beauty much like I would admire an artistic masterpiece. I no longer think that I would like to have sex with her. As W.C Fields once said, "Women are like elephants. I like to look at them, but I wouldn't want to own one."
> 
> ...


this is really interesting.

I understand what you are saying and can see this happening to myself.

it is actually pretty exciting to feel my brain breaking free from being dominated by thoughts of this stuff and to genuinely feel indifferent toward it.

it has also strangely given me more sympathy toward women in general


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> No, that's not true. There is no superficial, formulaic way, but your every interaction with a woman shows your integrity (or lack, thereof). And if she gets to see you "in your element" (i.e. interacting with your friends in a group setting or at work, or even with her friends), your every interaction with them reveals your character too. How they respond to you, it's all very revealing of your overall character. Your history is too.


I think women are much more observant of these social dynamics. 

I'm more interested in yoga pants.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> this is really interesting.
> 
> I understand what you are saying and can see this happening to myself.
> 
> ...


Why?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## keeper63 (Mar 22, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> it is actually pretty exciting to feel my brain breaking free from being dominated by thoughts of this stuff and to genuinely feel indifferent toward it.


There is a liberating sense of power knowing that you are no longer vulnerable to being completely directed by your "little head" ala Bill Clinton, Anthony Weiner, and any number of powerful men who have let their sexual urges get the better of them. It's almost like when Luke Skywalker discovers "The Force".


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> Why?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


because I now know what it's like to have higher priorities than getting laid.

getting laid is now more approaching an "add-on" instead of a "must have" on the level of water or air.

I would imagine this is just how life is for many girls.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

keeper63 said:


> There is a liberating sense of power knowing that you are no longer vulnerable to being completely directed by your "little head" ala Bill Clinton, Anthony Weiner, and any number of powerful men who have let their sexual urges get the better of them. It's almost like when Luke Skywalker discovers "The Force".


yes, exactly!

don't mean to get into a controversial area, but when I think about guys like Clinton, I'm like, are you serious? You have that little self control??

Even Kennedy with Marilyn, which is in some ways the "nuclear" level chick that could cause a brain meltdown, I'm now like, c'mon dude! Risking _everything _just for _that_?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> That right there - I just learned something important about you...


In Anon's defense, there's a lot of history.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
during the phases when the sex life in my marriage is good, I notice and appreciate attractive women but I don't desire them, I don't feel tempted by them at all. When my married sex life is bad, other women become desirable, the temptation is very strong.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> In Anon's defense, there's a lot of history.


Yup.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> during the phases when the sex life in my marriage is good, I notice and appreciate attractive women but I don't desire them, I don't feel tempted by them at all. When my married sex life is bad, other women become desirable, the temptation is very strong.


OK, but if you know you're not going after them (which I think you do know), then aren't they just like pieces in a museum, as discussed above?

I guess it's different if you're talking about a woman walking down the street who you don't know vs someone with whom you have actual interaction with. in the latter case I suppose it gets more difficult.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> In Anon's defense, there's a lot of history.


what he's referring to is that I invented yoga pants.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> What's wrong with that?
> 
> I mean, she could have good sex with lots of hot guys, but she chooses to only have sex with me (I hope). For now.
> 
> This is life.


I'm just pointing out tat your admonishments to my supposed lack of understanding were just so much hot air. You are saying it yourself: sex is about sex, not about connection. And we are all replaceable.

So why give me grief when I point this out?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> For most men, having sex with their wives increases their emotional connection with their wife.


My SO wants sex because he wants sex. He wanted sex long before he knew me, and will want sex long after I'm gone. If you were to slide me out from underneath him and replace me with another woman, it wouldn't matter; it may even be a bonus.

So where is the connection?

A long time ago, I dated this guy who asked me to marry him. And in so doing, he painted this picture of the future we would have together, a future which actually made me physically ill to contemplate. Clearly, he had absolutely zero idea of who I am (was) as a person.

Maybe the orgasms deposited some lovely dopamine and oxytocin into his brain, making him think he was "connecting" to me, but the reality is, he never even saw me and had no idea who I was or what he was "connecting" with.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> I'm just pointing out tat your admonishments to my supposed lack of understanding were just so much hot air. You are saying it yourself: sex is about sex, not about connection. And we are all replaceable.
> 
> So why give me grief when I point this out?


Because we may all be replaceable but that's a giant leap to interchangeable. 

Why do you want to think you are?

Listen, I want to only be with my wife. But if we weren't together, I'd find someone else and so would she. 

That's the way of things. It doesn't mean we don't love each other, or not care if we split up.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> That's the way of things. It doesn't mean we don't love each other, or not care if we split up.


What it means is that those whole sex=love and connection thing is mostly hot air.

What I find so interesting about this thread is seeing so many different men claiming sex=connection in one breath, but then in the next basically saying that for most of their lives the "little head" ruled, where all that mattered was hot girl + opportunity. Indeed, so many seem downright surprised that sex might have anything at all to do with connection. And ultimately keep insisting that all that matters is yoga pants, hot, tits. All interchangeable items.

The underlying contradiction there is somewhat fascinating, but does nothing to revise my initial assessments of what is going on.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

always_alone said:


> My SO wants sex because he wants sex. He wanted sex long before he knew me, and will want sex long after I'm gone. If you were to slide me out from underneath him and replace me with another woman, it wouldn't matter; it may even be a bonus.
> 
> So where is the connection?
> 
> .


Sounds like you have a $hitty SO ... I would not equate what you are experiencing in your relationship as what all others experience as well...


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
there are many people with many very different opinions on sex. You can't really combine statements from different posters or take some sort of average and expect to get anything that makes sense. 

In addition, people are trying to simplify something that is in fact very complicated. 

For me sex is complicated:

If I'm not in a relationship, then random sex with an enthusiastic partner seems like a fun thing to do - not counting the large number of serious practical issues. 

But - I am also aware from experience that I can't have random sex without becoming emotionally attached to my partner - even if that was never the plan.

When I am in a relationship, sex with that person is what I most want, and when I get it it makes me feel more emotionally connected. When I don't it makes me feel emotionally distant. When my sex life in the relationship is good, I notice other women, find them attractive, might even fantasize about them, but have little actual desire to have sex with them.

When I'm in a relationship but the sex life is bad, I not only find other women attractive, I find myself wanting to have sex with them, and it takes an active act of will to turn down an offer. 

If I leave one relationship and get into another, then the new person is the one that I find most sexually desirable. 

So partners are replaceable, but not interchangeable. If partners were interchangeable, I would never have gotten married. If partners were not replaceable, I would never have had sex after my first relationship ended.


The above is *me*. To the next guy sex will mean something different so you can't average my response and anyone else's. 







always_alone said:


> What it means is that those whole sex=love and connection thing is mostly hot air.
> 
> What I find so interesting about this thread is seeing so many different men claiming sex=connection in one breath, but then in the next basically saying that for most of their lives the "little head" ruled, where all that mattered was hot girl + opportunity. Indeed, so many seem downright surprised that sex might have anything at all to do with connection. And ultimately keep insisting that all that matters is yoga pants, hot, tits. All interchangeable items.
> 
> The underlying contradiction there is somewhat fascinating, but does nothing to revise my initial assessments of what is going on.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

EllisRedding said:


> Sounds like you have a $hitty SO ... I would not equate what you are experiencing in your relationship as what all others experience as well...


Perhaps. But every guy I've ever dated was the same.

And but for a couple of exceptions, every guy on this thread has said that in terms of sexual attraction, it's mostly the "little head" that counts.

I get that men who are in sexless relationships feel a great lack in their lives. I do. But when they also make it clear it's really just the sex, the whole "=connection" piece disappears.

Biggest issue is missing out on the lingerie, hot bods, tits. Very validating.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

EllisRedding said:


> Sounds like you have a $hitty SO ... I would not equate what you are experiencing in your relationship as what all others experience as well...


Oh, and yes, just to clarify, I do understand that other people have different experiences.

I still think that their is a very interesting underlying contradiction in the messages here.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

> Originally Posted by always_alone View Post
> 
> My SO wants sex because he wants sex. He wanted sex long before he knew me, and will want sex long after I'm gone. If you were to slide me out from underneath him and replace me with another woman, it wouldn't matter; it may even be a bonus.
> 
> So where is the connection?





OliviaG said:


> I don't know. If I have no other choice, I can eat Thanksgiving dinner in a restaurant in another city with strangers, and I can enjoy it. I have an appetite, and I need to eat something. It can even be fun meeting new people and learning a thing or two about them over dinner. But it's nothing like the emotional connection I get from sharing Thanksgiving dinner with people I love.


In Always Alone's case, it seems that her SO is more focused on _WHAT_ he's doing than _WHO_ he's doing it with. It wouldn't matter WHO he's eating Thanksgiving dinner with, as long as _he's_ getting his belly full. The only "connection" he seems to feel is toward the _food_; and NOT toward Always Alone. 

Pretty sad.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> Maybe. But she refuses to believe what the men in this thread are outright telling her about their emotional connection with their wives. She either can't or won't believe it. I don't understand why; I hoped using Thanksgiving dinner as a metaphor might help her see what they were trying to tell her; how it was possible to see food as just something you have an appetite for and also under different circumstances, something you can emotionally bond over. Sex is the same for these guys, according to what they've said.


I'm not saying that one can't bond over sex, or denied that some men do sometimes (when it suits them!) bond over sex. I'm just pointing out the mixed messages on this thread --with even the very same posters saying in one breath, oh yeah, it's about love and commitment, and the next it's hot chix and lingerie and what have you.

Or if I may use your analogy: it depends entirely on how the turkey is dressed, hot hot it is, and how salty the gravy is.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Vega said:


> In Always Alone's case, it seems that her SO is more focused on _WHAT_ he's doing than _WHO_ he's doing it with. It wouldn't matter WHO he's eating Thanksgiving dinner with, as long as _he's_ getting his belly full. The only "connection" he seems to feel is toward the _food_; and NOT toward Always Alone.
> 
> Pretty sad.


In all fairness to my SO, we do connect in a number of different ways.

But in terms of sex? He wants sex because he is horny, and I'm what's there. And anyone else would serve the same purpose, possibly better than me. 

And that's always been my experience. Someone wanting sex with me has little to do with me, and everything to do with them wanting sex and needing an outlet. Or if they did think they were bonding with me, it was because they had me all dressed up as someone else--that again had very little to do with me.

Obviously, this is just my experience, and no doubt some of the posters on this thread have very, very different experiences.


----------



## southbound (Oct 31, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> because I now know what it's like to have higher priorities than getting laid.
> 
> getting laid is now more approaching an "add-on" instead of a "must have" on the level of water or air.
> 
> I would imagine this is just how life is for many girls.


I was always able to prioritize even when i was 20, but when i was married, I couldn't think of anything more satisfying and enjoyable on a level untouched by anything else. For me, the planets didn't have to be in line, everything didn't have to be perfect, it was just extremely enjoyable to have sex with my wife.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> Funny, we read the exact same words and interpret them entirely differently. It makes me wonder if we had the exact same experiences if we'd also interpret them entirely differently.


It wouldn't be the same experience, then. 

Thing is, though, we didn't interpret the words differently. It's just that you are not at all fazed by the contradiction, but given my own experience, am compelled to unpack it. Behind it is a whole lot of conflicting stories where, ultimately, you may be connecting with sex, or you may be driving an even wider wedge.

One never really knows.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Maybe. But she refuses to believe what the men in this thread are outright telling her about their emotional connection with their wives. She either can't or won't believe it. I don't understand why; I hoped using Thanksgiving dinner as a metaphor might help her see what they were trying to tell her; how it was possible to see food as just something you have an appetite for and also under different circumstances, something you can emotionally bond over. Sex is the same for these guys, _*according to what they've said*_.


That's just it, Olivia. What many of them are _saying_ is different from what they're _doing_. Their words aren't matching their actions, and in some cases, their words TODAY aren't the same as their words TOMORROW. In one breath they talk about how sex="connection" with their wives, while in the next breath or even the next post, they say how much they want sex PERIOD. So the desire isn't for their SPOUSE so much as it's for SEX. 

Oh, I believe they feel a "connection", but the connection that they feel seems to be the connection they have with *SEX* and not so much with their PARTNER. 

Just like the example you gave of your Thanksgiving meal, you wrote that you enjoy the meal because you're with people you love. Yet, if the meal wasn't provided, would you STILL hang around? For many people, the answer is 'no'. They would go elsewhere if they didn't get the meal. And if they go elsewhere, it seems that the MEAL is more important than the relationships they have with the PEOPLE. 

If a man spends money on a woman and then suddenly stops spending money on her, AND SHE LEAVES HIM, we probably wouldn't have a problem saying that she was just using him for his money. 

Isn't it the same way with sex?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> I think the ability to go hungry rather than eat an inferior meal is directly related to the size of the appetite.
> 
> When it comes to sex, men generally have a much larger appetite to women. Same with food - how many men will wait 24 hours for a better meal? Not too many.


Of course, these men can prepare their OWN 'meals'. That way they don't have to go hungry. 

But there seems to be something about having someone else prepare the meal FOR you that's appealing.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> You can have an appetite for food, be HUNGRY and NEED TO EAT, and because fast food is the only food available you eat it. It's not that satisfying emotionally to sit and eat fast food in your car with a work acquaintance, for instance, but you have quenched your hunger for the time being. You enjoyed the taste, and your hunger was satisfied but there was no emotional component.
> 
> OTOH, you can have the same appetite and be HUNGRY and NEED TO EAT, but this time you're in a relationship with someone you love. Enjoying a meal with that person is a much more emotionally satisfying experience, even if you're eating fast food together.
> 
> What's hard to understand?


While YOU may feel the emotional connection with someone YOU love, THEY may only see you as the 'acquaintance', despite HOW OFTEN you eat together. To them, eating with YOU is better than eating ALONE. 

See the difference?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## keeper63 (Mar 22, 2012)

I'm like FrenchFry's husband in that the emotional and intellectual connection has to be there before I can have a tangible sexual connection. It didn't always used to be this way.

I did a lot of work with my MC around the idea of what it would be like if I left my wife, and how I would function as a single, sexually active adult. In terms of finding another sex partner, it was going to be difficult for me, because of those requirements. My MC told me that in the real world of middle age dating, many women expect sex early on in the process, like on the first or second date. That wouldn't work for me at all.

I do think for many people, males and females alike, that the sex itself creates an emotional bond, and I get that. But for me, some sort of emotional bond has to be there before I would have sex with a woman, no matter how beautiful, sexy, and available she might be.

And yes, I understand that sex is a basic need like food, but for me, an ONS would be equivalent to choking down a nasty meal and having it come right back up again.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Vega said:


> That's just it, Olivia. What many of them are _saying_ is different from what they're _doing_. Their words aren't matching their actions, and in some cases, their words TODAY aren't the same as their words TOMORROW. In one breath they talk about how sex="connection" with their wives, while in the next breath or even the next post, they say how much they want sex PERIOD. So the desire isn't for their SPOUSE so much as it's for SEX.
> 
> Oh, I believe they feel a "connection", but the connection that they feel seems to be the connection they have with *SEX* and not so much with their PARTNER.


Exactly! Yes, we all know that connected sex is better than unconnected sex, and that no sex at all sucks completely. But there is no evidence here that "men need sex to feel love or connection" or that men desire sex to feel connected.

We have one poster, @marduk, waggling his fingers at me for failing to understand the difference between love and attraction, yet explicitly admitting that sex for him is about hot chix.

We have another poster, will have to go back to remind myself who, bragging about how much pvssy he's had so much fun with, oh but it wasn"t so fulfilling as sex with someone he loves. Which doesn't show the need for sex for connection, but the opposite: connection for good sex.

@richardsharpe saying explicitly that sex can make him connected or disconnected depending on circumstances.

@UMP just wishing his wife was more into sex.

I can go back and pull more examples, but I see no evidence here of this idea that men desire sex because they want or need to connect. I see evidence that they want sex. That they find sex with someone they are connecting with better than sex with someone they are not, and that they really hate it when they get rejected.

And I sympathize with the last two, I really do. But to dress it up as desiring sex for the connection sounds to me like a line.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> Ack! Not a connection, interchangeable vagina talk. Sorry. I know what you are getting at but nope. We got hands and a fleshlight if that is what it comes down to. I don't think we will agree on this, but it's my perspective.
> 
> Anyhoo!
> 
> ...


I am glad this approach worked for you.

I guess where I struggle is if you swapped "intimate conversation" in place of sex, would it cause you to say the same?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

always_alone said:


> ................................
> 
> *I can go back and pull more examples, but I see no evidence here of this idea that men desire sex because they want or need to connect. *I see evidence that they want sex. That they find sex with someone they are connecting with better than sex with someone they are not, and that they really hate it when they get rejected.
> 
> And I sympathize with the last two, I really do. But to dress it up as desiring sex for the connection sounds to me like a line.


It is not fair to disregard what some of these guys are saying. I'm reading it as yes, they do desire sex with the woman that they love, their spouse because they want and need to feel connected with them. I'm struggling to see what is wrong with that.

It is accepted that women get emotional connection and bonding via sex with their partner and I truly believe that men do as well.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Holland said:


> It is not fair to disregard what some of these guys are saying. I'm reading it as yes, they do desire sex with the woman that they love, their spouse because they want and need to feel connected with them. I'm struggling to see what is wrong with that.
> 
> It is accepted that women get emotional connection and bonding via sex with their partner and I truly believe that men do as well.


It's just TAM par for the course to take your own preconvieved notion and apply it broadly to an entire gender. Their is no contradiction. Just people and people view things differently. This whole interchangeable vagina thing this laughable at best. If men only view spouses that way you wouldn't find a single thread here about a man being hurt by infidelity, emotional abuse, or trying to understand their spouse. So long as your getting sex they wouldn't care about any of that. Only threads would be by men in sexless marriages trying to fix that. Nope guess that doesn't work either cause none would tolerate it they would just move on. See how naive this is. 

It's all good though I saw that some of the ladies were getting what we were trying to say :grin2:


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Wolf1974 said:


> *It's just TAM par for the course to take your own preconvieved notion and apply it broadly to an entire gender. * Their is no contradiction. Just people and people view things differently. This whole interchangeable vagina thing this laughable at best. If men only view spouses that way you wouldn't find a single thread here about a man being hurt by infidelity, emotional abuse, or trying to understand their spouse. So long as your getting sex they wouldn't care about any of that. Only threads would be by men in sexless marriages trying to fix that. Nope guess that doesn't work either cause none would tolerate it they would just move on. See how naive this is.
> 
> It's all good though I saw that some of the ladies were getting what we were trying to say :grin2:


Oh I understand that very well. Always makes me shake my head, if such inane generalisations were true then I would walk around thinking that ALL men are LD because my ex was.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

All is talk about Thanksgiving dinner and it is not even Memorial Day lol...
@Wolf1974 put it best with his post. Honestly, this whole "interchangeable vagina" concept is laughable. It just seems like some here already have their ideas on how men work and will look for any comment, post, etc... to support their view (this means even taking comments out of context or made in jest/sarcasm and using it as justification for their stance...).

IDk, for me sex is part of the whole package with my W. I need sex as part of my connection to her. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that, and the idea that it makes her interchangeable is a joke.


----------



## keeper63 (Mar 22, 2012)

Many men stay in sexless/low sex/duty sex/vanilla sex relationships because they really do want that emotional connection. Or maybe more precisely, they hope their emotional and sexual relationships will go back to the way they once were.

Of course, there are lots of other reasons husbands stay despite the lack or absence of sex, like children, finances, security, and plain old fear of the unknown. But I think the emotional (and intellectual) connection they have or used to have with their wives is a big part of it.

For many men, it has to get really bad before they make a decision to leave their wives, like infidelity, or some other major transgression. I don't think many men leave their marriages just because of lack of sexual satisfaction. At least they don't until the kids are grown up.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> @farsidejunky
> 
> 
> I did it! I swapped "intimate conversation" with sex and found that the relationship would be best described a "**** buddies," which while I enjoyed heartily, I wouldn't have gotten married for,


Thank you for this, @FrenchFry.

I think "girlfriend" could be swapped for "**** buddy", from a husband's perspective, when talking about removing sex from the mix.

The point is that if my partner wanted to remove sex as a way to see if our relationship was truly healthy, I would find it awfully convenient for her. 

Now, if she were willing to remove security (her primary need), wouldn't that be "true love"? No promises, no need to reaffirm that I will be here tomorrow, no living for tomorrow but only for today, making a conscious choice every morning to love each other for that day? That would certainly strip away any of the other baggage, would it not? 

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

FrenchFry said:


> It sucks that @EllisRedding and @Wolf1974 can't engage this without trying to cram it as part of the TAM Gender garbage because I am honestly speaking my feelings about how I operate in my relationship. I rarely even post here anymore because it seems like we can't hae any sort of conversation that isn't towing the line without this sort of comment.


My comment wasn't directed at you ...

I wasn't going after any TAM gender garbage, I was commenting specifically on what I have seen posted by several people here (so not grouping genders ... ).


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Exactly! Yes, we all know that connected sex is better than unconnected sex, and that no sex at all sucks completely. But there is no evidence here that "men need sex to feel love or connection" or that men desire sex to feel connected.
> 
> We have one poster, @marduk, waggling his fingers at me for failing to understand the difference between love and attraction, yet explicitly admitting that sex for him is about hot chix.
> 
> ...


DING! DING!! DING!!! For the WIN!!!

Between you and French Fry, you both seem to get it! You're right...there's a HUGE disconnect between what's being _said_ and what's actually being _DONE_. 

I was actually thinking about this thread this morning while at work and I wanted to go back through it with a more analytical mind geared toward statistics. But you beat me to the punch, lol! 

Thanks to both of you for saying what I've been TRYING (in vain) to say!


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

I think this entire debate boils down to what each of us believe the foundation of our marriage to be.

Friends or lovers.

I would bet those advocating for lower emphasis on sex would see the foundation of a relationship as friends, while those who are wanting more sex see the foundation as lovers.

I know both are important, no doubt. But I would be interested to see how folks lean on this, and how it shapes their perspective.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Holland said:


> Oh I understand that very well. Always makes me shake my head, if such inane generalisations were true then I would walk around thinking that ALL men are LD because my ex was.


Yep or all women cheat because my did. Some people like their head in the sand I guess.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> @OliviaG
> I think you are actually making the point that it's not really a connection but an appetite. A thing you need, some more than others and while it's *better* with a certain person, it's at it's core a thing one needs to do. Hopefully it's best with one particular person.
> 
> It *sucks that @EllisRedding and @Wolf1974 can't engage this without trying to cram it as part of the TAM Gender garbage because I am honestly speaking my feelings about how I operate in my relationship. I rarely even post here anymore because it seems like we can't hae any sort of conversation that isn't towing the line without this sort of comment.
> ...


i wasn't speaking of you or toward you. But why can't I have a different opinion than you? I am also speaking my feelings on the matter


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> :grin2: My husband is 100% my best friend and I wouldn't have it any other way.


My wife is my best friend as well, nor would I want it any other way.

But if she weren't my lover, she would no longer be my best friend. In fact, she would be the mother of my son, and that would be about it.

The fact that she is my lover, along with her other desirable traits, is exactly why she is not a replaceable "v". 

I totally see this as how all of us view the value of a friend versus the value of a lover.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> @farsidejunky, my husband is my lover because he is my best friend. You also deserve a good answer.


Conversely, she is my best friend because she is my lover.

This distinction is exactly what I am getting at.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Holland said:


> Oh I understand that very well. Always makes me shake my head, if such inane generalisations were true then I would walk around thinking that ALL men are LD because my ex was.


It is too bad that you don't seem to get where I'm coming from at all. My point is not that my SO is like this, and therefore all other guys are. Nor am I disregarding what people are saying.

I'm saying there is a huge disconnect in the messages being conveyed here. On one hand it is "laughable" to think of women as interchangeable vaginas. But underneath that is looking at women exactly that way. It's her *job* to make sure he's sexually satisfied. 

Nothing wrong with wanting sex. Nothing wrong with wanting connection. It's just strange to say one thing, but then basically come at it from the exact opposite perspective in the very next breath.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> When always_alone talked about the guy who told her what being married would be like, I imagine this is what she was told. It's not how I feel love. It's how I feel physically satisfied and my nature easily separates the two.


Actually, his idea of being married was all white picket fences, 2.5 children, a dog, and strolling hand in hand into the sunset. The sort of thing he should have known was the exact opposite of what I wanted in life, but he assumed I'd come around. Because you know, that's what women want.

Point being that he *thought* he was bonding with me, but really, he had no clue at all what I was actually like --even though I was completely clear about it from the get go. The connection was completely one-sided and had nothing to do with me.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> I think this entire debate boils down to what each of us believe the foundation of our marriage to be.
> 
> Friends or lovers.


Yes, you may be onto something here, but I'm seeing it a bit differently. Not sure if I can articulate it or not.

There's this cliche that is repeated ad nauseum on TAM: men need sex to feel love; women need love to want sex. Applying that to your model, it would be something like men want lovers primarily, women want friends.

Personally, I think most people want both. But in this whole "men need sex to feel love" trope is even more complete disregard of what men are actually saying on this thread than even what I am being accused of.

Clearly men can feel love without sex, and can have sex without love. There may be correlation, but there is no causation. And the same is true for women.

More important is to own your sexuality, recognize it for what it is, and stop using it as a tool to manipulate others as to what their sexuality "should" be.

Does that make sense?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> But if she weren't my lover, she would no longer be my best friend. In fact, she would be the mother of my son, and that would be about it.
> 
> The fact that she is my lover, along with her other desirable traits, is exactly why she is not a replaceable "v".


It's funny, but in reading this over, the first paragraph spells out one reason why I might feel like an interchangeable vagina. And yet you seem to see it as a reason not to feel that way.

Will have to think about your friends/lovers idea a bit more..


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Hmm, this may be an important part of the disconnect in the discussion. 

Yes, men and women can masturbate and have an orgasm, but that isn't sex. If it was, people would not go to such efforts to have sex with other people.

If the point of sex was to save oneself 5 minutes of using your hand, we wouldnt' ahve these conversations.




Vega said:


> Of course, these men can prepare their OWN 'meals'. That way they don't have to go hungry.
> 
> But there seems to be something about having someone else prepare the meal FOR you that's appealing.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

It does, but the picture you are painting feels like you are saying sex is the only need for which that happens. Is it all manipulation? 

Also, to call the discussion in this thread manipulation is disengenuous. Men are expressing how they feel. You are essentially telling them what they feel is wrong, or a lie.

Do you feel sexually fulfilled when you are left with no choice but to masturbate frequently due to being turned down by your SO?

No other need relies on participation by the SO like sexual fulfillment. 

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> It does, but the picture you are painting feels like you are saying sex is the only need for which that happens. Is it all manipulation?
> 
> Also, to call the discussion in this thread manipulation is disengenuous. Men are expressing how they feel. You are essentially telling them what they feel is wrong, or a lie.
> 
> ...


It is only manipulation when you are saying one thing to get what you want, but actually doing another thing altogether. I'm not saying that this discussion is manipulation; I'm noting a disconnect in the messages. And not because it is different voices, but from the exact same posters.

Hard to put a finger on it though.

Basically, sex is an appetite, and it is totally honest to say I want, I need, I hunger. It is totally honest to say, I feel hurt that you reject me. Even it makes me like you less when you turn me down. All of these are straightforward messages. 

But to wrap that up in "really it's all about you" in order to convince someone to satiate your appetite is where the disconnect comes in.
Particularly when that message is interspersed with all sorts of other comments that show, basically, that sexual appetite comes from a whole lot of different places.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

OliviaG said:


> I'm not sure if Staarz will have a different opinion, but I've never cared that my husband noticed an attractive woman here and there, have always considered it normal. And I definitely notice attractive men. He's never been into porn that I'm aware of so that hasn't factored into my feelings.
> 
> But the thing is, he's always been really into me; very affectionate, always wanting sex and my attention. Him noticing the odd attractive woman under those circumstances has never phased me.
> 
> But if he were to take notice of others now, when his attention towards me has been lacking for months and his desire has been much lower towards me, I'd lose it completely, I'm pretty sure.


I've always felt like you AGAIN Olivia.. in fact.. if my husband didn't notice attractive women.. I'd probably rush to get his Testosterone checked.... he's never been one who gawked.. I look too.. completely & utterly normal.. he's always treated me like I was the center of his world.. very tender, affectionate, ready to roll... 

He's always enjoyed saving playboy bunnies on his laptop.. it's a hobby.. I just sorta laugh about it.. so long as he's wanting sex with me.. knowing he wants to be there.. that I still turn his buttons...I'm good with that...

This would all fall apart though immediately if I learned - he was jerking, using his energies & excitement on a computer screen while I was wanting him craving more intimacy.. I'd be devastated, crushed and ANGRY....

In this way.. women who hate porn due to men using it over them.. I completely sympathize with them all... 

I married one who values the emotional.. he wouldn't be able to perform if we were fighting.. angry sex would not work for him.. So if we fight ..and I want laid.. we have to make up .. I can live with that !


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

OliviaG said:


> This is the same reason why married men can be so attractive to women. It's not because they've been vetted by other women as desirable, as some men seem to think,* it's because they (if they seem attracted to you but never act on it and would never act on it) are displaying integrity and loyalty, and that's very attractive.
> 
> OTOH, married men who cheat are at the bottom of the attractiveness scale.*


I am picking on your posts Olivia... I seen where you need to be "adored".. you should start a thread on this.. I feel the same... as you know.. 

I also feel like this.. When I meet a man of character.. and he's good looking.. very loving/ attentive to his wife, family guy... honorable.. I mean there is this warm fuzzy feeling I get about someone LIKE THAT.. how Lucky SHE is.. and God bless her.. wish more of these types roamed the earth.. 

I greatly ADMIRE those qualities in a man.. but also in a woman...


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

What I get from this thread (primarily FrenchFry & Always_alone), is the same as I get from my wife.

According to Mr. Chapman the five love languages are Words of Affirmation, Acts of Service, Receiving Gifts, Quality Time and Physical Touch. FrenchFry and Always_alone and my wife have the opinion that physical touch is not a Love Language. That the concept of the Love Bank doesn't apply to physical touch, because it isn't a need. The person who's love language is physical touch is supposed to make deposits into their partners love bank, but it doesn't work in reverse. 

What FrenchFry and Always_alone have said is that when a person says their love language is physical touch (sex), they are really just being dishonest and trying to get more sex. They are saying their husbands love language isn't real. That it isn't as important as their own love language. 

The examples Olivia G has given are so perfect. If you believe that everyone's needs are important (and not just your own) then they make perfect sense. If someone needs to eat, and you love them, feed them. If someone needs quality time, and you love them, make time for them. If someone needs to feel good about themselves, and you love them, then tell them how great they look or how great they cook. 

But if someone needs to be touched, they are only tricking you into having more sex.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

notmyrealname4 said:


> Okay, I've read words to this effect several times now. That men wish women would understand how little cleaning and cooking (and child rearing) means to them. How the real meaning of love is sexual desire.
> 
> Not disagreeing about the sex part. But I tend to think these men would talk a different talk if their horny wife greeting them at the door in garter belt and stockings was letting the laundry pile up on the floor and was feeding him Chef Boyardee for dinner on a regular basis.
> 
> ...


This is true to a point. But to most men, a messy house and no meals would make them think their wife is lazy. 

But no sex means their wife doesn't love them. It is much more personal.

Because for the most part, the man's love language is physical touch.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

SadSamIAm said:


> What FrenchFry and Always_alone have said is that when a person says their love language is physical touch (sex), they are really just being dishonest and trying to get more sex. They are saying their husbands love language isn't real. That it isn't as important as their own love language.


Ummm, no, that is not at all what I am saying.

It's too bad it's so impossible to have this conversation.

Physical touch is extremely important to me. Probably more important to me than my SO. I get why people want it, and why they feel rejected when they don't have it.

But I also know that if I treat my SO like a masturbatory aid, he will find that a distinct turn-off. His job is not to service my sexual whims.

There was, for example, a poster here @RandomDude who left his wife because of her impossible sexual demands. He could not keep up, and she guilted and pressured him until finally he had enough and walked. She *turned him off* because she treated him like it was his job to service her. And if she had said it was about connection (don't know if she did or didn't) then she would've been lying. Because she didn't really care what he was thinking, just that he put out.

Not saying that anyone here is that extreme. But it is a similar sort f disconnect. 

It just isn't about connection if it is all about having an appetite and expecting someone to drop everything and feed you. As I have said again and again and again, there is nothing wrong with wanting sex and saying so. It is only manipulative when you are pretending it's about them when it isn't. 

Not sure why this is so hard :scratchhead:


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

always_alone said:


> Ummm, no, that is not at all what I am saying.
> 
> It's too bad it's so impossible to have this conversation.
> 
> ...


You could be my wife. I could see her saying the exact things you are saying.

How does a person that needs to feel connected through sex, make their partner realize how important it is to them? That it is not manipulation.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

always_alone said:


> .......................
> 
> It just isn't about connection if it is all about having an appetite and expecting someone to drop everything and feed you. As I have said again and again and again, there is nothing wrong with wanting sex and saying so. *It is only manipulative when you are pretending it's about them when it isn't. *
> 
> Not sure why this is so hard :scratchhead:


Will say the same as before, it is not fair to disregard what these guys are saying. You are basically calling them liars.

In a LTR I have never felt what you are suggesting here which is that all men do is use women for sex. 

A few comments about hot chicks etc really means very little, it does not mean they will swap their wife for someone else. I would not swap my partner for another man yet I have naughty thoughts about other men and check them out. 

What is manipulative is when a woman pretends to love a man, has sex with him and then asks him to spend lots of money on her whims.

There are those of both genders that manipulate, use and lie. The real question is why stay with someone like that? If you believe that someone is lying to you just to get a root then leave them.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> Funny, totally relevant.
> 
> Watching a show. Dude wants to sleep with the lady in the show, says something about making a connection to write a song. My husband goes Yeah, he wants to connect and does:
> 
> ...


Was the show about people that are in a LTR or about hooking up?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

SadSamIAm said:


> But if someone needs to be touched, they are only tricking you into having more sex.


Saying that someone's Love Language is "physical touch" is misleading. Physical touch includes:

Hugging
Kissing
Back rubs
Foot rubs
Holding hands
Cuddling
Putting your arm around your partner
Other things I haven't mentioned in this list

Yet, there have been other men who have said that they get NOTHING out of holding his wife's hand, for instance.

The ONLY physical touch they enjoy and get anything out of is *SEX*. 

Plus, the other kinds of non-sexual "touching" seems to lead them to more "sexual" physical touching...which eventually leads them to sex. 

To some men, "physical touch" means slapping his wife on the ass every time she walks by, or grabbing her boob, or going in for a passionate kiss and feeling her up or stuffing his hand down her pants.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

SadSamIAm said:


> How does a person that needs to feel connected through sex, make their partner realize how important it is to them? That it is not manipulation.


It is manipulation when you say that the ONLY way you can feel "connected" to your spouse is through sex. That NO OTHER WAY will do.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holland said:


> Was the show about people that are in a LTR or about hooking up?


If the dude SAYS he wants to make a "connection", it can be assumed that he wants to do MORE than just "hook up".

Because we know that men NEVER lie about their feelings in order to get laid.

Right...?


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Vega said:


> If the dude SAYS he wants to make a "connection", it can be assumed that he wants to do MORE than just "hook up".
> 
> Because we know that men NEVER lie about their feelings in order to get laid.
> 
> Right...?


Well what I was trying to get at is that if it were a show about simply hooking up then there is no big deal about it just being to get laid. It is not a crime to want sex for the sake of it. 
If his way to get that is by writing a song then all power to him.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Holland said:


> Will say the same as before, it is not fair to disregard what these guys are saying. You are basically calling them liars.
> 
> In a LTR I have never felt what you are suggesting here which is that all men do is use women for sex.
> 
> ...


I never said all men use women for sex, ever, and I really don'( quite understand why you keep wanting to paint me in that light. I've clarified on this point again and again and again.

Is there absolutely nothing to be learned by unpacking different people's experiences? 

Let's go back to the OP shall we? Bad Santa says basically that women fail to understand men because his wife fails to understand that when he wants sex with her when he is angry and disconnected, it is *because* he wants to connect with her.

And so what is she supposed to do with this information? Have sex with him when he is angry and disconnected because he wants to "connect"? What about her side of the connection? 

If my SO were to come after me when he was feeling angry and disconnected, I would so totally feel like I was being used for sex, and he didn't give a sh1t about how I felt. 

So, I'm really glad foe you that you have never had a bad experience and that your husband cherishes you. But why do you feel the need to shut me down for not having the same experience or thinking the same way as you?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Holland said:


> Well what I was trying to get at is that if it were a show about simply hooking up then there is no big deal about it just being to get laid. It is not a crime to want sex for the sake of it.
> If his way to get that is by writing a song then all power to him.


Of course it's not a crime to want sex for the sake of it. But it is dishonest to pretend it is a connection.

Other than the sort that FrenchFry posted the graphic of.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

Let me add my two cents...

Ever since I was 11, older boys have been trying to get me to do something sexual with them, and I was given sexual attention (i.e. - catcalls in the street). I developed early, and there were times I regretted it. So I never equate sex with love, the way a guy could prove he loved me was by waiting and getting to know me as a person. Not as someone attached to breasts, ass and a vagina.

Some people don't experience this, sex was never readily available to them, or thrown at them. So they equate sex with love. They had to work for it, and if a person showed them "the holy grail of sex" they felt love because it was rarely given. 

Society expects people to be married and only have sex with that one person. Suppose it wasn't the case, and people could experiment more and with various partners. Then there would not be this sexual burden on this one person, if one person wasn't compatible then they could move on to someone else. Then girls who want more sexual attention can get it without guilt, and ladies like me can be appreciated for more than what we look like.

Win win for everyone!


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holland said:


> Well what I was trying to get at is that if it were a show about simply hooking up then there is no big deal about it just being to get laid. .


Actually, there IS a big deal about this. If HE wants to simply "hook up", then he shouldn't say that he wants a "connection". Why doesn't he JUST say that he wants to get laid? 



> It is not a crime to want sex for the sake of it.
> If his way to get that is by writing a song then all power to him


Yes, it's not a "crime". But it IS fraudulent to say that you want something and *pretend* to want something else. How would it be if a woman had sex with you, pretending to have orgasm after orgasm only for you to later find out that all she REALLY wanted was your money?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

techmom said:


> Suppose it wasn't the case, and *people could experiment more and with various partners. Then there would not be this sexual burden on this one person, if one person wasn't compatible then they could move on to someone else. * Then girls who want more sexual attention can get it without guilt, and ladies like me can be appreciated for more than what we look like.
> 
> Win win for everyone!


Our culture does this anyway. Hence, the "Hook UP" culture we're currently in. 

But the problem is the DECEIT involved. I've read post after post from women who complain about how the person they're having sex with convinced them that their..."relationship"...was "more" than just sex. But after starting to have sex with him, he started to manage down her expectations. Before they knew it, they were in a "sex only" situation. 

This happens BEFORE marriage and also (enough times) AFTER marriage. Just because a man marries doesn't mean that he suddenly matures beyond his d*ck! 

As I was typing this I suddenly had a thought: My late husband was more than HD. When we finally went to counseling, all he complained about was the lack of sex. AT NO TIME DURING OUR 9 YEAR MARRIAGE DID HE EVER SAY THAT HE EITHER MISSED OR WANTED THE "CONNECTION" FROM SEX. 

Wow. What a revelation.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> I'm glad it wasn't directed towards me, however, I totally have identified with feeling like an interchangeable vagina so I'm going to speak out on the concept and it really does kind of blow when the whole idea is blown off instead of unpacked. *You are welcome to your opinion of course but I will also speak up on it when it strikes my fancy. *
> 
> So what does my husband to to make me feel loved? Tag ya for when you get back @OliviaG.
> 
> ...


By all means but you also quoted me and misrepresented what I was saying which wasnt appreciated. I wasn't cramming gender nonsense I was pointing out that this was a post by a man who was explaining how many men feel on the matter. I agree with him. You don't so then that's fine but some here seem to equate men as nuckle dragging barbarians. And you know what some are . What I was saying is that when you take the actions of a few and apply it to all or even many much is lost. That was my only point
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Wolf1974 said:


> What I was saying is that when you take the actions of a few and apply it to all or even many much is lost. That was my only point
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Wolf, take a look at this thread. MOST of the men who posted did NOT equate sex with a "connection". Therefore, it isn't taking the actions of a "few" and applying them to many. It is taking the actions of the MANY and applying it to many. 

The actions of the "few" are far and FEW between...


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> Wolf, take a look at this thread. MOST of the men who posted did NOT equate sex with a "connection". Therefore, it isn't taking the actions of a "few" and applying them to many. It is taking the actions of the MANY and applying it to many.
> 
> The actions of the "few" are far and FEW between...


We are interpreting things very differently here then. I'm not arguing the merits of your opinion. You are free to feel about it anyway you chose. But I know how it makes me feel connected and how many other men, here and in real life feel the same. This isn't the first time this subject has come up here and it was stated the same there as it is here. Some feel it's how true connection is developed and others don't. It's disingenuous to say men as a whole don't feel a connection when some/many/a few have stated otherwise. . You can believe it or not.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Wolf1974 said:


> It's disingenuous to say *men as a whole* don't feel a connection when some/many/a few have stated otherwise. . You can believe it or not.


I don't think that anyone said that "men as a whole" or "all" men feel that way. 

However, there ARE men who _claim_ to feel that way, when in reality, they're just using the sex=connection 'story' so women will have sex with them. 

Do I believe that SOME men feel that way? Sure. I just don't believe that the _majority_ who say they feel that way, actually DO feel that way. That's been *my* experience.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> I don't think that anyone said that "men as a whole" or "all" men feel that way.
> 
> However, there ARE men who _claim_ to feel that way, when in reality, they're just using the sex=connection 'story' so women will have sex with them.
> 
> Do I believe that SOME men feel that way? Sure. I just don't believe that the _majority_ who say they feel that way, actually DO feel that way. That's been *my* experience.


It was implied not said. 

Yes some men and some women lie, not news for sure. You have your experience and I have mine so we will have to agree to disagree on it


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> I don't know. If I have no other choice, I can eat Thanksgiving dinner in a restaurant in another city with strangers, and I can enjoy it. I have an appetite, and I need to eat something. It can even be fun meeting new people and learning a thing or two about them over dinner. But it's nothing like the emotional connection I get from sharing Thanksgiving dinner with people I love.


This is, as far as I can see, the perfect analogy.

And yet.... some will continue to insist that, since you would have Thanksgiving dinner with people you don't love under some circumstances, having Thanksgiving dinner with then can't possibly be any different and you're just trying to manipulate then into celebrating with you.

Why?

It seems like it is very important for some people to devalue your wanting to engage in this activity with them. Is this because dismissing your needs as nothing special makes it easier on them to be selfish?


----------



## Emerging Buddhist (Apr 7, 2016)

I won't lie, I didn't read through every page, but many I did.

Why do men desire sex with a spouse...? 

So many responses are realistic for who and why, so many young emotions.

It changes as the decades roll through.

All I can speak of with confidence is today, because every day is different based on the need being different.

Yesterday, both my wife and I had different needs, as was the day before, as was the day before that.

We have been intimate for near 28 years... why do I want sex with her after all those years of the same woman, the same likes, the same attractions?

I adore her. Literally without question, without doubt, without fail.

Many reasons.

In a relationship, which is what we are talking about... without connection, sex is simply and purely unsatisfying.

Go through the motions, get the orgasm (or not), feel the pit in your heart, and want for something you cannot have at that moment.

It... literally... sucks.

There is no mindful way to navigate it.

One desires sex with a spouse because when one is in a lifelong committed relationship, hot is what you work it to be.

Today, hot was coffee and breakfast together, working on a basement remodel, loving in the afternoon, tea and biscuits at 4:00, dinner and a game of scrabble, and a movie here at home.

We are mid-50's (me) and mid 60's (her).

A wee Scottish lass... and she is still hot. Passion without fail, she drives me crazy.

I love her dearly.

Man overthinks this...


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

This is a really good thread or could be if more posters would take it as an opportunity to understand why men and women feel as they do.

I've read so many times that the wives of men in sex starved marriages feel that they are being used for sex. Their husband expresses dismay. Here are women posting who have valuable information. Instead of trying to convince them that they should not feel as they do, accept that they feel that way. 

Acknowledge that their experiences have rightfully effected their view. That's how they feel. I am certain that a wife who feels used cannot be argued out of it. She might respond to a man who is willing to hear her without becoming defensive. 

If a man expect his wife to listen to him, acknowledge his feelings and to accept him, why can't his wife expect the same. This leads to further communication about sex. He may even get to the point of telling her that it hurts him to know that she was hurt but that she is very special to him and wants her to feel that. 

It's possible that he will be the only man who was secure enough to hear her out, validate her feelings and express empathy. She might actually open up to such a man and not feel used anymore. Many women say their husbands don't listen. There is a lot of not listening both ways on this thread. Listening here may be good practice for listening to a spouse even when they say anxiety provoking things. 

It might help to find out more about why these women feel as they do and try to put yourself in their shoes. Ask them what would make their past experiences fade and allow them to open to the possibility that when some men fall in love, the role of sex changes. They may have had emotionless sex before falling in love though. 

This is a great opportunity. Other women who are reading but fear being attacked may post their feelings. Or they can keep their feelings hidden because it's not acceptable to express them in the presence of a male audience. . They do express them but sadly enough, to the person who deserves it the lest, the man who loves them.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Oh, and yes, just to clarify, I do understand that other people have different experiences.
> 
> I still think that their is a very interesting underlying contradiction in the messages here.


Fred would like sex with an attractive woman he hardly knows (assuming that he isn't already attached).

Fred would like sex with his wife whom he loves. Having sex with his wife is not only as enjoyable (probably more so), but it also increases his emotional connection to his wife.

There is no contradiction.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> It is manipulation when you say that the ONLY way you can feel "connected" to your spouse is through sex. That NO OTHER WAY will do.


How do you know? Really. I would like to know how you see the truth in others "lies".

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> It absolutely would! In fact, this may be one more way to determine what the relationship is about. I tend to live my life more in this way.


There's a nifty idea! Remove everything you do for your partner that makes them feel loved to find out if it's *real* love.



FrenchFry said:


> No, no it doesn't because I can cook and jerk off myself, both very well. Someone doing it for me, I appreciate but it's not how I feel loved.


Well, if there's essentially no difference for you between masturbating and having sex with someone you love, then that might be the primary difference between us.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> How do you know? Really. I would like to know how you see the truth in others "lies".
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


I can explain this from my personal experience, when you experienced boys trying to talk you into having sex, saying things like "you would do it if you loved me" and stuff like that, it is difficult to believe men saying that they feel an emotional connection through sex. It feels as if you are being lied to.

I can't help feeling this way, because this is what I went through. I have seen girls who fell for the line get dumped as soon as the guy got what he wanted, which was not the emotional connection.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> :grin2: My husband is 100% my best friend and I wouldn't have it any other way.


Since removing sex from a partner who values that is recommended...

Since removing security from a partner who values that is recommended...

Should he stop being your best friend in order to find out if you really love him?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> It seems like it is very important for some people to devalue your wanting to engage in this activity with them. Is this because dismissing your needs as nothing special makes it easier on them to be selfish?


This is interesting. It seems perfectly o.k. to "devalue" sex BEFORE you meet your spouse and have sex with him/her. After all, it was just sex before then...right? 

I'm sorry, but if a man wants to have sex with me and nothing more, I see HIM as the one who is "selfish".


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

farsidejunky said:


> Also, to call the discussion in this thread manipulation is disengenuous. Men are expressing how they feel. You are essentially telling them what they feel is wrong, or a lie.


Apparently we're all either a$$holes or stupid.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Vega said:


> Actually, there IS a big deal about this. If HE wants to simply "hook up", then he shouldn't say that he wants a "connection". Why doesn't he JUST say that he wants to get laid?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, it's not a "crime". But it IS fraudulent to say that you want something and *pretend* to want something else. *How would it be if a woman had sex with you, pretending to have orgasm after orgasm only for you to later find out that all she REALLY wanted was your money?*


As I'm not a lesbian the whole thing would be rather odd.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> It is only manipulation when you are saying one thing to get what you want, but actually doing another thing altogether. I'm not saying that this discussion is manipulation; I'm noting a disconnect in the messages. And not because it is different voices, but from the exact same posters.
> 
> Hard to put a finger on it though.
> 
> ...


Ah ha! So that's it.

You think men are trying to con women by attributing a lofty meaning to what you think is simply a base motive.

But it's actually true that both are important. It's fairly common to try and make your best case.

When I apply for a job, I could just say that I'm after a paycheck.

Instead I say that I take pride in my work and want to help the company succeed. That's true as well. It doesn't mean that I don't care about getting paid. If they decide not to pay me and I turn down the job, it doesn't mean I was lying about the other stuff. 

I could tell my wife that I'm horny and her vagina happens to be available. That's pretty much understood, but that's not all that's there is to it.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> Saying that someone's Love Language is "physical touch" is misleading. Physical touch includes:
> 
> Hugging
> Kissing
> ...


I'm sorry Vega, but with the attitude you have about men, I think it's unlikely that you'll find yourself in a loving relationship with them.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

techmom said:


> Let me add my two cents...
> 
> Ever since I was 11, older boys have been trying to get me to do something sexual with them, and I was given sexual attention (i.e. - catcalls in the street). I developed early, and there were times I regretted it. So I never equate sex with love, the way a guy could prove he loved me was by waiting and getting to know me as a person. Not as someone attached to breasts, ass and a vagina.
> 
> Some people don't experience this, sex was never readily available to them, or thrown at them. So they equate sex with love. They had to work for it, and if a person showed them "the holy grail of sex" they felt love because it was rarely given.


Very true. People saying that sex is just sex, usually haven't had any problem getting it



techmom said:


> Society expects people to be married and only have sex with that one person. Suppose it wasn't the case, and people could experiment more and with various partners. Then there would not be this sexual burden on this one person, if one person wasn't compatible then they could move on to someone else. Then girls who want more sexual attention can get it without guilt, and ladies like me can be appreciated for more than what we look like.
> 
> Win win for everyone!


Win for all the people who can easily obtain sex.

Lose for everyone else.

I'm pretty sure that's why marriage was invented.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> I'm sorry Vega, but with the attitude you have about men, I think it's unlikely that you'll find yourself in a loving relationship with them.


For the record, I see nothing wrong with what she posted. Just because we don't experience love the same as you do doesn't mean we are not loving people.

On the other hand, I feel that some men who insist on pestering their LD wives for sex when they are clearly not in the mood are not acting in a loving way, in fact they are behaving in a way that demonstrates that all they want is to get their rocks off. How are some men able to feel emotional closeness while having sex with an unwilling partner, that baffles me.

I would think that a person like that is speaking out of both sides of their mouth...


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> Very true. People saying that sex is just sex, usually haven't had any problem getting it
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm sure marriage was not invented so some poor saps could snag a partner who would have no choice but to have sex with them, or else be pestered into doing so.

Marriage was invented so rich families could share resources and protect their bloodlines, nothing about love until death do you part. Then again, people in the past only lived until about 40 years old, and that was if you were lucky. We live longer lives today, which makes the death do you part so challenging.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

techmom said:


> I can explain this from my personal experience, when you experienced boys trying to talk you into having sex, saying things like "you would do it if you loved me" and stuff like that, it is difficult to believe men saying that they feel an emotional connection through sex. It feels as if you are being lied to.
> 
> I can't help feeling this way, because this is what I went through. I have seen girls who fell for the line get dumped as soon as the guy got what he wanted, which was not the emotional connection.


Women should only consider the possibility that a man values the emotional connection aspect of sex if they are in a committed relationship with the man. Sex only reinforces a connection that already exists.

I don't think any of us are saying that the reason men want to hook up with attractive women is because they are after the emotional connection.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

techmom said:


> For the record, I see nothing wrong with what she posted. Just because we don't experience love the same as you do doesn't mean we are not loving people.


My point was that anyone with such a negative view of the opposite gender is unlikely to have successful relationships with them.

The same for a man who thought all women were only out for money and some chump to support them.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

techmom said:


> I'm sure marriage was not invented so some poor saps could snag a partner who would have no choice but to have sex with them, or else be pestered into doing so.
> 
> Marriage was invented so rich families could share resources and protect their bloodlines, nothing about love until death do you part. Then again, people in the past only lived until about 40 years old, and that was if you were lucky. We live longer lives today, which makes the death do you part so challenging.


I should have put a :smile2: after my theory.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> Women should only consider the possibility that a man values the emotional connection aspect of sex if they are in a committed relationship with the man. Sex only reinforces a connection that already exists.
> 
> I don't think any of us are saying that the reason men want to hook up with attractive women is because they are after the emotional connection.


This is nice, but in my previous post I mentioned some men who want sex with their partner even though they are unwilling, while using the sex=love line.

I ask again, what connection can you get from that sexual experience?


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

techmom said:


> This is nice, but in my previous post I mentioned some men who want sex with their partner even though they are unwilling, while using the sex=love line.
> 
> I ask again, what connection can you get from that sexual experience?


Actually there have been many men on TAM that get to the point that they no longer want to have that connection with their wives due to the past rejection and shaming.

What is being missed here is that these men want to have that connection with their wives, this makes them good, not bad men.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

always_alone said:


> Of course it's not a crime to want sex for the sake of it. But it is dishonest to pretend it is a connection.
> 
> Other than the sort that FrenchFry posted the graphic of.


It would be dishonest if they were pretending but you have men here saying it is genuine. I don't doubt them at all, in fact I know first hand how they feel.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

techmom said:


> This is nice, but in my previous post I mentioned some men who want sex with their partner even though they are unwilling, while using the sex=love line.
> 
> I ask again, what connection can you get from that sexual experience?


Every sexual experience is not necessarily intended to make connections. You don't start out "oh I feel distant from my partner let's roll".

Starr by defining what this connection is, and walk backwards. It's about shared experiences and commonly enjoyed things, and even enjoying stuff your inner self says not to (Jane Austen😂)


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

techmom said:


> I can explain this from my personal experience, when you experienced boys trying to talk you into having sex, saying things like "you would do it if you loved me" and stuff like that, it is difficult to believe men saying that they feel an emotional connection through sex. It feels as if you are being lied to.
> 
> I can't help feeling this way, because this is what I went through. I have seen girls who fell for the line get dumped as soon as the guy got what he wanted, which was not the emotional connection.


Okay, that I totally get.

But unless in am mistaken, it appeared she was specifically referencing the men in this thread.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> This is interesting. It seems perfectly o.k. to "devalue" sex BEFORE you meet your spouse and have sex with him/her. After all, it was just sex before then...right?
> 
> I'm sorry, but if a man wants to have sex with me and nothing more, I see HIM as the one who is "selfish".


Sure. 

But what man in this thread is advocating for that?

The men have been talking about connection, and you have rather bluntly been calling b.s.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

techmom said:


> For the record, I see nothing wrong with what she posted. Just because we don't experience love the same as you do doesn't mean we are not loving people.
> 
> On the other hand, I feel that some men who insist on pestering their LD wives for sex when they are clearly not in the mood are not acting in a loving way, in fact they are behaving in a way that demonstrates that all they want is to get their rocks off. *How are some men able to feel emotional closeness while having sex with an unwilling partner, that baffles me.*
> 
> I would think that a person like that is speaking out of both sides of their mouth...


My thought would be they are desperately trying to establish a connection They only way they know how and hoping it would improve things. I am coming from a standpoint of good intentions on part of the guy.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

techmom said:


> I can explain this from my personal experience, when you experienced boys trying to talk you into having sex, saying things like "you would do it if you loved me" and stuff like that, it is difficult to believe men saying that they feel an emotional connection through sex. It feels as if you are being lied to.
> 
> I can't help feeling this way, because this is what I went through. I have seen girls who fell for the line get dumped as soon as the guy got what he wanted, which was not the emotional connection.


Again taking a pattern of a few and applying to the many. Also this was started as a thread about sex and connection Inside a committed relationship. All you are demonstrating is that some men and women lie. We all know this to be true.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

farsidejunky said:


> Sure.
> 
> But what man in this thread is advocating for that?
> 
> ...





Wolf1974 said:


> Again taking a pattern of a few and applying to the many. Also this was started as a thread about sex and connection Inside a committed relationship. All you are demonstrating is that some men and women lie. We all know this to be true.


Exactly, many of us here are talking about this from the viewpoint of a LTR, not some cheesy pickup lines in hopes of getting into a woman's pants.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

EllisRedding said:


> Exactly, many of us here are talking about this from the viewpoint of a *LTR*, not some cheesy pickup lines in hopes of getting into a woman's pants.


yep it's in the title. Desire sex with a *spouse*. But you can't skew the discussion without bringing in things unrelated like ONS or Teenage sex romps :grin2:


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

The challenge is finding middle ground. Let say the following (Note, we are talking about two people who are already committed to each other, not some randoms):

- W says she requires all the non sexual stuff to feel the emotional connection, and then that opens her up to sex. 

- H says he requires sex to feel the emotional connection, and then that opens him up to the non sexual related stuff.

So you can see the issue here, H says he needs sex to feel the emotional connection, W says she non sexual interaction to feel the emotional connection. Where you run into trouble:

1) W feels her way is the only way. H has to do XYZ first if he hopes to have any chance for a meaningful sexual relationship. This could fall under the whole "Happy W Happy Life" crap many guys hear about

2) H feels his way is the only way. W has to have sex to Hs liking in hopes to get the non sexual stuff she is looking for. This could fall under feeling like an interchangeable vagina.

In both the above cases, you could see where the one person would feel used. The H in #1 would feel used b/c the W is using his desire for sex as bribery to get everything else out of him first. The W in #2 would feel used b/c the H is using her desire for the non sexual stuff as bribery.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> Fred would like sex with an attractive woman he hardly knows (assuming that he isn't already attached).
> 
> Fred would like sex with his wife whom he loves. Having sex with his wife is not only as enjoyable (probably more so), but it also increases his emotional connection to his wife.
> 
> There is no contradiction.


I get your point: because someone has sex with person A with no connection and then has sex with person B and starts claiming connection doesn't mean they are lying. Doesn't mean they are contradicting themselves. 

I get it! 

But what if it is the same person? What if Fred is saying, I want sex to connect with my wife and then just one of the following statements:

*Well, of course I want sex with other women, if they are appealing, that's how men are wired. 
*Connection is just a nice byproduct of sex
* I think about yoga pants
*Fear drives attraction, and makes your wife want you more
*Women need to learn sexual cooperation
*Marriage is primarily for sex, otherwise, you hang out with a dude
*Men look at porn to know what his wife will be like, and how to please her
*I don't care about x, she should go put something sexy on
*Marriage is for dudes who can't get easy access to sex

Do you not see a single mixed message in all of this?


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> I get your point: because someone has sex with person A with no connection and then has sex with person B and starts claiming connection doesn't mean they are lying. Doesn't mean they are contradicting themselves.
> 
> I get it!
> 
> ...


some of it maybe but depends on context. Some are just the byproducts of attraction. When married i only loved my wife but still found others sexually attractive Zero contradiction in how I felt
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> Also, to call the discussion in this thread manipulation is disengenuous. Men are expressing how they feel. You are essentially telling them what they feel is wrong, or a lie.





Buddy400 said:


> Apparently we're all either a$$holes or stupid.


My SO does this too. Try to talk to him about something, and he slides into angry defensive mode and assumes everything I'm saying is a direct personal insult.

All I can say is that if your wife is telling you that she feels like an interchangeable vagina (and *many* poster here have reported encountering this phenomeonon), then instead of dismissing her or telling her to get with the sexual program, you might want to inquire as to why she feels this way, and what mixed messages you might be sending her.

Telling her "I just want to feel close to you" won't wash if you are also making her feel like she is just what happens to be available.


----------



## staarz21 (Feb 6, 2013)

I think the thread was meant to discuss marriages or LTRs. Which, in those cases, I do think a majority of men are trying to keep an emotional connection through sex. Even my H admits that he has started (yes, 7 years later) to feel so close to me when we have sex. I am able to pick up on his bullsh*t a mile away, but I believe him when he says that. It is in the way we have sex now. He's more caring of my needs, he's careful not to hurt me, he's able to read me better and will let me take control if I want to... Of course, we rarely have sex now - so it could just be that it's hormones making him think that. But I choose to believe he's telling the truth about that because of the way he acts during sex. It's different from sex we used to have several years ago where all he cared about was himself. 

However, I noticed that some women were discussing past relationships with men trying to talk them into having sex. I have experienced this and it certainly does make you question the motives of men as a whole. Is it right? No way. But since experience is all we have, it's kind of what we learn to do. 

To be told that you would have sex if you cared about him, or that he would be committed to you if you had sex with him, or that's you're the only one, you're beautiful, you're (insert whatever line here) - and then be dumped shortly after or find that he's with another girl, is completely heart breaking and it does have a lasting effect. So, please don't be angry at the ladies that have this opinion. It's kind of known that guys will lie to get sex earlier in life. It's like on Page 167, paragraph 3 of the secret book all ladies have about men (kidding). 

BUT, I think a lot of men grow out of this. When they find a woman that they want to marry and spend the rest of their life with, sex DOES BECOME an emotional thing. I do think that changes for them. To dedicate such a large sexual appetite to only one woman is a big thing, especially with so much temptation out there. This applies to women as well, of course. You're dedicating an intimate part of yourself for your spouse only. 

Now, it does become confusing when dissatisfaction sets into the relationship. It's also confusing to some women when (and I'm sorry for bringing this up again) a guy will turn to porn because "it's easy and quick." I'm not saying he's there all of the time, but to fill an immediate "appetite", many men say they use porn because sometimes they don't want to deal with having "sex" (clean up, getting her ready, etc). This confuses some women and makes them think that men don't need/want/develop emotional connections.

Not everyone ends up with someone that matches what they want. For example, I didn't. My H certainly does consider me an interchangeable/replaceable vagina. I think I just ended up with the wrong guy, though. There have to be good guys out there. I refuse to believe that they are all sex starving monsters that will hurt the person they supposedly "love" to get what they want.

I do also believe that even if they don't always show it or say it, they do feel closer to their spouse with sex.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> Okay, that I totally get.
> 
> But unless in am mistaken, it appeared she was specifically referencing the men in this thread.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


You are mistaken. I wasn't specifically talking about the men on this thread.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> My SO does this too. Try to talk to him about something, and he slides into angry defensive mode and assumes everything I'm saying is a direct personal insult.
> 
> All I can say is that if your wife is telling you that she feels like an interchangeable vagina (and *many* poster here have reported encountering this phenomeonon), then instead of dismissing her or telling her to get with the sexual program, you might want to inquire as to why she feels this way, and what mixed messages you might be sending her.
> 
> Telling her "I just want to feel close to you" won't wash if you are also making her feel like she is just what happens to be available.


I heard something similar when we were not doing well three years ago.

We have come a long way since then.

Validation...Interesting, that.

I think both sides are so busy looking for validation, and not getting it, that we are talking past each other.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

@staarz21 You are so right. I think many men don't understand why sex may be different for them when it is with someone they love and why it is so important in maintaining the emotional bond with that person.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> Sure.
> 
> But what man in this thread is advocating for that?
> 
> ...


I never said that the men HERE ON THIS THREAD are b.s.ing when THEY say that THEY have sex as a way of connecting with their wives. But I have noticed that some members tend to speak for ALL men/ALL women, and I've tried to point out that ALL (married) men simply do not feel that way about their spouse, from my own personal experience. 

To SOME married men, sex=connection. To OTHER married men, sex=sex. I have MOSTLY been in the company of the latter (between being married and a few LTR's). I've also read several other relationship forums throughout the years, and it seems that the missing "connection" is a HUGE complaint from _women_! 

I also said that it seems FROM WHAT I'VE READ/EXPERIENCED that me and other women have heard (from other men, married or not) that sex is the ONLY way they feel a connection with their wives/partners. Even my own late husband and 2 LTR'S told me that. 

Yet, all three of them told me BEFORE WE EVEN HAD SEX that they felt a "strong connection" toward me. 

So, let me get this straight. They have an emotional connection with me _without_ doing anything sexual _at first_, but once we start having sex, NOW they tell me that sex is the ONLY way they feel "emotionally connected" with me? If the "emotional connection" was established in the first place without sex, how is it NOW that the ONLY way the emotional connection can be felt is THROUGH sex? 

Doesn't pass the 'smell test'.

ETA: On a side note, I wonder if it ever occurred to HD men with LD wives that a reason their wife could be LD _sexually_ is because her husband is LD _emotionally_?


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

Holland said:


> Actually there have been many men on TAM that get to the point that they no longer want to have that connection with their wives due to the past rejection and shaming.
> 
> What is being missed here is that these men want to have that connection with their wives, this makes them good, not bad men.


There were many threads on TAM where a guy would post lamenting how much his wife refuses him and how he longs to connect with her again, later in the thread he reveals that there are other major issues which need to be addressed. What is telling is why he came here in the first place, there was a sexual disconnect. Never mind about all of the other major issues (financial, kids, hygiene, etc.), he wants to address the sex issue first.

This is what most of the female posters are talking about feeling like the husband doesn't care about anything else except sex, she feels like an interchangeable vagina because the major issues will still be there after having sex. Only that now the woman feels resentment while he has that blissful look post-orgasm. And her resentment builds and builds with each so-called connection. Every issue she wants to address is classified as nagging, when she finally shuts down the connection in order to be heard the husband complains of issues with their sex life and how to reignite the spark.

This is what we are addressing.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> I never said that the men HERE ON THIS THREAD are b.s.ing when THEY say that THEY have sex as a way of connecting with their wives. But I have noticed that some members tend to speak for ALL men/ALL women, and I've tried to point out that ALL (married) men simply do not feel that way about their spouse, from my own personal experience.
> 
> To SOME married men, sex=connection. To OTHER married men, sex=sex. I have MOSTLY been in the company of the latter (between being married and a few LTR's). I've also read several other relationship forums throughout the years, and it seems that the missing "connection" is a HUGE complaint from _women_!
> 
> ...


Let me add the missing piece to your analysis, and please note I am speaking for myself.

It is not the only way I feel emotionally connected with my wife. We snuggle in the hammock together, overcome obstacles together, share each others successes, and take pride in each other, and much more.

But there is not other moment as PURE as the emotional connection I share with her when we are intimate. None.

The submission from her. The sharing of her body. Raw. Unfiltered. Passionate. Completely vulnerable. And nothing compares to the intimacy of those moments. 

And without it, there is this huge hole in intimacy that none of the other acts can fill. There is no substitute.

It is the gift that we give each other that no others can give.

I hope that clarifies things.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> Let me add the missing piece to your analysis, and please note I am speaking for myself.
> 
> It is not the only way I feel emotionally connected with my wife. We snuggle in the hammock together, overcome obstacles together, share each others successes, and take pride in each other, and much more.
> 
> ...


Yes, I understand what you're talking about it. In fact, I used to CRAVE it and YEARN for it...

...and was told that it was 'unrealistic' for me to expect that; that I was 'expecting too much" from a man. Was also told that for a man to keep up that level of intimacy OUTSIDE of the bedroom would be too "exhausting" for him. 

Yet, *I* was expected to keep up a level of sexual intimacy to his liking.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> Yes, I understand what you're talking about it. In fact, I used to CRAVE it and YEARN for it...
> 
> ...and was told that it was 'unrealistic' for me to expect that; that I was 'expecting too much" from a man. Was also told that for a man to keep up that level of intimacy OUTSIDE of the bedroom would be too "exhausting" for him.
> 
> Yet, *I* was expected to keep up a level of sexual intimacy to his liking.


Shame on him.

He was missing out on something amazing.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> @farsidejunky
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I feel sorry for the women who are married to men who feel this way, and yearn to have their needs addressed. If it is not as pure as sex, then it is not as important, and it is placed on the back burner. She can go years and years bringing up her other needs, but they will never measure up to sex.

How can two people be engaged in an activity and have completely different feelings, yet it can be called "emotionally connecting"? The husband is feeling euphoric while the wife is feeling like she could crawl out of her skin. This is the stuff of the typical HD/LD matchup, and the dreaded duty sex scenario. Only sometimes the man doesn't know when it is duty sex or not if the wife can manage to put on a convincing display of passion.

May sound harsh and not lofty, but we wouldn't need TAM if every encounter was PURE.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> @farsidejunky
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree.

When that wavelength is off long enough, it seeps into other areas of life.

The longer it goes, the more it takes over, until it consumes me and begins to prevent rational thought.

And when it is because of neglect (which is fairness happens to all of us), it hurts...deeply.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

staarz21 said:


> I refuse to believe that they are all sex starving monsters that will hurt the person they supposedly "love" to get what they want.
> 
> I do also believe that even if they don't always show it or say it, they do feel closer to their spouse with sex.


I never doubted that some men feel connected from sex, at least not until I came to TAM and had bunches of them telling me I was completely naive to think a man could be satisfied with just one woman, and that men were wired to spread their seed as far and wide as possible. That my man was thinking about having sex with my sister, and best friend, and every other hot woman he came across. That monogamy was a real hardship on them, and that it was *women* who cared about emotional connections, not men.

Even then, I also knew that men would feel connected through sex at least some of the time.

The trouble is discerning when, especially when you are getting totally mixed messages. Like, as you say, when he is tripping over his tongue over other women, seemingly totally happy with a one-sided connection and as long as he orgasms, all is aokay, or satiating himself through porn, or saying things like the only time you would even care to talk to a woman is for sex, or believing that marriage is just for guys who can't get enough sex elsewhere, and all sorts of mixed messages that women see all the time.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

techmom said:


> There were many threads on TAM where a guy would post lamenting how much his wife refuses him and how he longs to connect with her again, later in the thread he reveals that there are other major issues which need to be addressed. What is telling is why he came here in the first place, there was a sexual disconnect. Never mind about all of the other major issues (financial, kids, hygiene, etc.), he wants to address the sex issue first.
> 
> This is what most of the female posters are talking about feeling like the husband doesn't care about anything else except sex, she feels like an interchangeable vagina because the major issues will still be there after having sex. Only that now the woman feels resentment while he has that blissful look post-orgasm. And her resentment builds and builds with each so-called connection. Every issue she wants to address is classified as nagging, when she finally shuts down the connection in order to be heard the husband complains of issues with their sex life and how to reignite the spark.
> 
> This is what we are addressing.


And maybe he feels like a complete loser because his wife, the woman he loves does not want him in the way that makes him feel good about himself.

If a woman is having sex with her husband while not wanting to and building resentment then that is on her to stand up and be an adult about it. How unfair to go along with having sex to then only use her building resentment as ammo against her husband.

Look I get the resentment part and trust me it can happen in a HD/HD relationship but even though I am HD I do not have sex with him if we have had a major issue that is not resolved. 

You cannot change someone else but what you have said above is that the woman in this case is actually helping to perpetuate the bad situation then sitting back and complaining. Maybe she should get a backbone.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

Holland said:


> And maybe he feels like a complete loser because his wife, the woman he loves does not want him in the way that makes him feel good about himself.
> 
> If a woman is having sex with her husband while not wanting to and building resentment then that is on her to stand up and be an adult about it. How unfair to go along with having sex to then only use her building resentment as ammo against her husband.
> 
> ...


Trying to discuss your needs is not complaining, it maybe interpreted that way by a person who is not interested in fulfilling those needs but only cares of their own. I think it takes lots of backbone to voice concerns with a person like that.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

techmom said:


> This is nice, but in my previous post I mentioned some men who want sex with their partner even though they are unwilling, while using the sex=love line.
> 
> I ask again, what connection can you get from that sexual experience?


What connection can I get from having sex with my wife if she is unwilling?

None.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Catherine602 said:


> This is a really good thread or could be if more posters would take it as an opportunity to understand why men and women feel as they do.
> 
> I've read so many times that the wives of men in sex starved marriages feel that they are being used for sex. Their husband expresses dismay. Here are women posting who have valuable information. Instead of trying to convince them that they should not feel as they do, accept that they feel that way.
> 
> ...


I understand that this would be a good opportunity to understand women's points of view. That would make for a good conversation.

But it seems like all they have to say about this is that we're lying and don't really feel what we say we do; that it's all a scam to talk women into having sex with us.

Now, if they were saying "I'll take what you're saying at face value, but here's why we have problem believing you", then we might get somewhere.

So far their argument is that since we like sex with hot women, we must not be getting an emotional connection from having sex with our SOs. I've explained that one can like sex with hot women and still feel this way with your SO (just as accepting payment for the work one does doesn't mean that the only satisfaction one gets from their present job is the paycheck). 

They're saying that we don't feel what we say we do. I'm not sure what I can learn from that. 

Don't bother telling our wives how we feel because they won't believe us?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> My SO does this too. Try to talk to him about something, and he slides into angry defensive mode and assumes everything I'm saying is a direct personal insult.
> 
> All I can say is that if your wife is telling you that she feels like an interchangeable vagina (and *many* poster here have reported encountering this phenomeonon), then instead of dismissing her or telling her to get with the sexual program, you might want to inquire as to why she feels this way, and what mixed messages you might be sending her.
> 
> Telling her "I just want to feel close to you" won't wash if you are also making her feel like she is just what happens to be available.


If my wife told me that she felt like she was just an interchangeable vagina; of course I'd listen to why she felt that way and change anything I was doing that might make her feel that way (within reason). 

Luckily, my wife has never felt that way.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> My SO does this too. Try to talk to him about something, and he slides into angry defensive mode and assumes everything I'm saying is a direct personal insult.


But you *ARE* telling us that we're wrong or lying.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> I never doubted that some men feel connected from sex, at least not until I came to TAM and had bunches of them telling me I was completely naive to think a man could be satisfied with just one woman, and that men were wired to spread their seed as far and wide as possible. That my man was thinking about having sex with my sister, and best friend, and every other hot woman he came across. That monogamy was a real hardship on them, and that it was *women* who cared about emotional connections, not men.


This is what's so weird. I've been reading a lot of TAM for over a year and I see almost none of this. I'd expect it on a Red Pill site, but I just don't see it here.

I suppose we all focus on those things that confirm our initial bias.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> What connection can I get from having sex with my wife if she is unwilling?
> 
> None.


Zero Shannon Entropy


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> This is what's so weird. I've been reading a lot of TAM for over a year and I see almost none of this. I'd expect it on a Red Pill site, but I just don't see it here.
> 
> I suppose we all focus on those things that confirm our initial bias.


Really? That's odd. I've not only noticed what Always Alone noticed on TAM, but I've seen it on other "relationship" sites as well.

Plus, in real life. 

Buddy, in all of my LTR's and marriages, I've never been told I was "beautiful". In fact, in ONE LTR (the guy who cheated on me--the reason I came to TAM in the first place) he told me, "You're not beautiful, you're not rich, you don't even have a job (I had just moved up there), you don't speak any foreign languages, but I am sooooooo in love with you!" 

Really warms a girls heart, ay?

I was in therapy with my late husband and the therapist asked him if he ever told me I was beautiful. He told the therapist he DID, and I told her that he didn't. I had known him since I was 16 years old, and NOT ONCE did he ever tell me that. 

The other day I was walking back through town to pick up my car from the repair shop. A man was walking toward me. As he approached me he flashed a big smile and said, "You are a very beautiful woman". I was stunned. I started laughing and said, "Thank you" as we breezed by each other. 

Do I REALLY believe he thinks that about me, after never hearing it before especially from men who supposedly "loved" me? 

I just recently learned that just because a man tells you that he feels a "connection" with you (before sex) does NOT mean anything more than that. He'll have sex with you, if offered. And nothing more. It doesn't mean he wants to have a _relationship_ with you. 

Had I known that before, I would have made different decisions. 

While there ARE some men who need a connection in order to have sex with a woman, it doesn't mean that ALL men feel this way. 

But if two men are telling us that they feel a connection with us, how are we to know WHO is being sincere...

...and who isn't?


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

techmom said:


> Trying to discuss your needs is not complaining, it maybe interpreted that way by a person who is not interested in fulfilling those needs but only cares of their own. I think it takes lots of backbone to voice concerns with a person like that.


Misunderstanding. What I meant in my post TM was that there is no use people coming on a forum to complain if they won't get a backbone IRL with their spouse.

I never implied that working this out, discussing it with a spouse is "complaining". In my world we spend many hours rebalancing the nuances, talking about the issues and reconfirming with each other that we are on the same page. Never have I suggested that doing this is complaining.

But you bring up the point of "what is the point" with a person who is not invested in or wants to fulfill their partners needs, to this I say "get a backbone" and "you cannot change other people" which to be blunt equals - consider divorce.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> Really? That's odd. I've not only noticed what Always Alone noticed on TAM, but I've seen it on other "relationship" sites as well.
> 
> Plus, in real life.
> 
> ...


It is a shame you were never told you were beautiful.

An honest question, @Vega:

If you can't trust someone your are in an LTR with because of what someone in your past told you, are you actually ready for that LTR?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Vega said:


> Really? That's odd. I've not only noticed what Always Alone noticed on TAM, but I've seen it on other "relationship" sites as well.
> 
> Plus, in real life.
> 
> ...


Maybe you have missed the subtlety of the info being given out by some of the men here. It is not about a connection in order to have sex with a woman (random woman) it is that they desire sex with their wives, the one they love and the one that they crave that connection with.

Feel free to correct me if this is wrong BadSanta but it is how I have been interpreting this thread.

Vega you are so absolutely worth the very best in life but I don't think you will find it until you fix what is broken in you. I say this with the utmost sincerity and concern. 
Your view of the world is skewed to the negative, it is like the guys that come on here and go on and on about how all women are this or all women are that (negative things) because they have had bad experiences when the deep and scary reality is that those men are the biggest problem in their own lives.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

The point that Vega and I are trying to make is that sex does not equal love for everyone. Also, I don't feel a deeper connection to my husband just because we had sex. I just don't, and I'm not broken or wrong for feeling the way I do.

I feel a deep connection when I'm heard and listened to, not patronized. When I'm appreciated for my intelligence and achievements in my career. This is why being a SAHM didn't suit me, I like to achieve goals in my career and being a SAHM doesn't do it for me because it is mostly a thankless job. My love language is just different I guess.

I don't believe Vega is broken, she just needs a guy who is appreciative of other things besides sex and physical affection. She needs to feel worthy. Most women were brought up to feel as if their value lies in how appealing they are to men. That marriage is the end game and if you can't attract a man then you are worthless. Thank goodness that girls nowadays don't have to grow up in fear of not being financially secure because they don't please the guys. They can just have a career and support themselves.

It may sound harsh but this is how I always felt.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

Buddy400 said:


> I understand that this would be a good opportunity to understand women's points of view. That would make for a good conversation.
> 
> But it seems like all they have to say about this is that we're lying and don't really feel what we say we do; that it's all a scam to talk women into having sex with us.
> 
> ...


You can't get what you can't give.

I take a train to work and I have had unwanted touch from men many times but never from women. It pisses me off. Should I automatically trust like an idiot or should I be cautious. Am I allowed to be pissed or should pretend it never happened so as not to upset men?

The only conclusion I can draw from my experiences is that, in general, sex is not a source of love and intimacy. It is intense pleasure. That's why men seek it so avidly. The men who touched me on the subway were not seeking an emotional connection. 

It seems to me that when men find someone they love, having sex with them is pleasure and affirms the love. They can still have sex for pleasure but they need the connected sex, sometimes. But I think the emotional attachment begins to form with a compatible woman before sex. 

Otherwise, how do they recognize the women with the potential for a deep connection upon meeting them. Why do they suffer emotionally when they are rejected by their wives. Because they still love them not for long though. 

I asked my husband if it's true, he would not answer me but when I told him what I learned, it brought tears to his eyes. He never cries so I know it's true.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Methinks some of our female posters are mixing up several varieties of "sex". These are most certainly not interchangeable.

- one way, unwelcome and undesirable. Lewd comments, crude touch, staring, and the usual dumb tricks by a small percentage of "men" intended for self gratification 

- two way, early in the process and exploratory 

- two way, intended primarily for self stress relief, pleasure, etc

- Two way, intended primarily for partner's stress relief, pleasure, etc 

- Two way mutual

Trying to classify all of the above as "sex" in the same way may not be accurate as splitting them into categories depending on intended purpose.
.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> This is what's so weird. I've been reading a lot of TAM for over a year and I see almost none of this. I'd expect it on a Red Pill site, but I just don't see it here.
> 
> I suppose we all focus on those things that confirm our initial bias.


:rofl::rofl::rofl:

Oh my, Buddy. There are a zillion red pill, alpha threads on this site, and I've seen you chime in on more than one.

Indeed, I've seen you claim outright that sex is men's number 1 priority, and that most men want sex with any minimally attractive woman. 

Right on this very thread, you said that marriage is basically a way for guys who can't get enough interest otherwise.

I believe you when you say you feel connection when you have sex with your wife. Indeed, I have never doubted this, and have said so many, many times. 

But I ask you again: Do you not see any mixed messages here?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

john117 said:


> Methinks some of our female posters are mixing up several varieties of "sex". These are most certainly not interchangeable.
> 
> - one way, unwelcome and undesirable. Lewd comments, crude touch, staring, and the usual dumb tricks by a small percentage of "men" intended for self gratification
> 
> ...


Excellent dodge, john. Sex is for the purpose of connection in all of those instances where connection is the purpose of sex. Otherwise, it has some other purpose, and therefore isn't relevant to the current conversation.

Who could possibly argue with that?

:rofl:


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

@Vega The mistake many woman make is believing that the emotional connection is formed when a man has sex. Not true. Men know within a few seconds after meeting a woman if he has a strong attraction or if he wants to pursue just sex. He tells the woman what he is interested in but indirectly. 

Most men don't want to look like the bad guys but they also don't want to spoil the possibility for sex. So they avoid being explicit. This is dishonest. If you know that getting sex is a strong motivator, you won't have any trouble reading between the lines. 

You have to decode their behavior. If you hear, "I'm not ready for a relationship right now but maybe latter", "I'm really busy so I can't see you as frequently as you want to see me", "I go out with friends on Fridays", or you don't meet his friends, then the attraction is weak. Mostly, you need a strong sense of self-respect and your value. 

If you are looking for an emotional connection, only get involved with men who show clear signs of a strong attraction. Never work to get him to feel deeply for you. It happens naturally, its there or its not. Make sure you don't settle and take someone just because they are there. It's possible that you will get the same in return. Have faith that what you want is out there. 

If a man has a strong attraction, he will move haven and earth to see you, impress you, do stuff for you, try not to disappoint you, put you first. There are men who will do these thing and not really have a strong attraction, they are the predators. 

You can tell who they are because their game is intense and moves quickly, like they don't want to waste too much time before they move on to the next one.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Excellent dodge, john. Sex is for the purpose of connection in all of those instances where connection is the purpose of sex. Otherwise, it has some other purpose, and therefore isn't relevant to the current conversation.
> 
> Who could possibly argue with that?
> 
> :rofl:


Hardly a dodge unless you count unwanted going on the subway or a mutual ONS the same as sex between two loving committed people.

Some things in life have meaning and some don't. You can't pick examples from list A to prove list B is wrong or vice versa.

Since my lab techs can't build an intrapenile / intravaginal emotional connection bandwidth meter (😂) we will have to use self reporting to assess bandwidth. Having experienced both a fulfilling and a meaningless connection with the same partner I can tell you that I, personally, can easily tell the two apart.


----------



## imtamnew (May 13, 2013)

I jump in to my add my story as it might find an echo here.

Fairly simple story. Married for over 12 years. Two kids.
Wife and I had a very delayed start of sex in the relationship. Sex in the traditional sense of the word which would imply mutually satisfying.

Maybe I am the greatest lover in the world with the most amazing equipment. But in a cruel twist of fate, time it takes my wife to Orgasm is like a min or two. For me it takes longer.

Our typical sex as of last year would be, 2 mins of foreplay, Orgasm 1 for the wife.
2 mins of intercourse Orgasm 2 and maybe a couple more for the wife.

I am still not done. Usually in 8 times out of 10, I would take a lil longer than 5 mins and that would not work for her. She would not do anything except just lie down waiting for me to finish. Like a dead rag doll.

Despite repeated attempts to tell her that this is NOT fine. She did not change.

So as of August last year, I have not had intercourse with her.
My love for her is still there as a duty. But do I yearn for sex, yes I do.
Will I have it. No Fcking way.

She has been pestering me for sex but since she does not even acknowledge the actual issue and will talk about anything except that. I am a celibate in my life.

This is WHAT happens when a man decides to stop putting his needs as important and instead takes it all off the table.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

techmom said:


> The point that Vega and I are trying to make is that sex does not equal love for everyone. Also, I don't feel a deeper connection to my husband just because we had sex. I just don't, and I'm not broken or wrong for feeling the way I do.
> 
> I feel a deep connection when I'm heard and listened to, not patronized. When I'm appreciated for my intelligence and achievements in my career. This is why being a SAHM didn't suit me, I like to achieve goals in my career and being a SAHM doesn't do it for me because it is mostly a thankless job. My love language is just different I guess.


I actually believe this fits perfect into the point some of us are making. You don't feel a deeper connection with your H through sex, it is through the non sexual stuff as you pointed out. Myself and some of the other guys here are stating the opposite, we feel a deeper connection through sex.

Who is right or wrong, neither of us, it is just a different way we process sex/non sex in a relationship. That is the challenge, as I pointed out in my other post. It can't be his way only or her way only, there has to be the ability to work together to meet in the middle. My guess, if two people are unwilling to work together on this, that is when threads start up on TAM about sexless marriages, etc...


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Buddy400 said:


> This is what's so weird. I've been reading a lot of TAM for over a year and I see almost none of this. I'd expect it on a Red Pill site, but I just don't see it here.
> 
> I suppose we all focus on those things that confirm our initial bias.


I have seen this posted by a few guys on TAM, but far and away most posts I have seen from guys here are not about spreading their seed or the hardships of monogamy b/c all we want to do is get laid. I think if that is how you believe men truly are, you will just focus on those few posters and apply as "many"


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

john117 said:


> Having experienced both a fulfilling and a meaningless connection with the same partner I can tell you that I, personally, can easily tell the two apart.


I have disconnected sex all the time, and my SO doesn't notice a thing.

Is that sex about connection?

No one is proving anything wrong here, just sharing experiences. It is too bad, though, that some don't count or have to be dismissed because they are too threatening..


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

im_tam said:


> I jump in to my add my story as it might find an echo here.
> 
> Fairly simple story. Married for over 12 years. Two kids.
> Wife and I had a very delayed start of sex in the relationship. Sex in the traditional sense of the word which would imply mutually satisfying.
> ...


How's that working for you?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I have disconnected sex all the time, and my SO doesn't notice a thing.
> 
> Is that sex about connection?
> 
> No one is proving anything wrong here, just sharing experiences. It is too bad, though, that some don't count or have to be dismissed because they are too threatening..


You're so determined to decouple the two that you use outlier cases to prove a point though .

I'm quite sure my wife sees the two as separate as well.

Now, coming from a self described"difficult to love" person such as you, do your own comments above not make you wonder a bit?

I'm not disputing what you say. Just trying to put it into perspective.


----------



## imtamnew (May 13, 2013)

jld said:


> How's that working for you?


No sex is way better than crappy sex.

I do have a lot of anger. But anger is good. It keeps my busy when I channel it into other things.

It's her loss more than mine. She is the one who ain't getting any orgasms. If she wants them, she knows what I want her to change. Her attitude towards it.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> It is a shame you were never told you were beautiful.
> 
> An honest question, @Vega:
> 
> ...


First of all, I've only had one LTR since my late husband. It was for over 4 years and ended over 4 years ago. I've only "been with" one other man since then, and THAT ended (IF it ever "started", LOL!) in October 2015. So what someone in my past told me was in the later part of my life. 

Second of all, I am NOT ready for an LTR, nor do I desire one. I have mentioned that on TAM before. 

I've been taking this "down time" to reevaluate my past relationships. I've been able to see some of what I've been doing wrong (too forgiving, for example...ignoring "red flags", etc.). Plus, I'm heading toward a career change (at 58 years old, YAAAAAAY!) which will take up a lot of my time. 

I'm not the kind of person to 'date' just for the sake of dating. I mean, if I'm not interested in a relationship, I don't want to meet someone, date them and actually LIKE me enough to want to continue to like me and possibly FALL IN LOVE...when I'm not ready/interested. To me, that would be unfair.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holland said:


> Maybe you have missed the subtlety of the info being given out by some of the men here. It is not about a connection in order to have sex with a woman (random woman) it is that they desire sex with their wives, the one they love and the one that they crave that connection with.


I would HOPE that an *un*married man has that emotional connection with his wife BEFORE he marries her! In fact, I hope it's WHY he wants to marry her! 

Apparently, a man can have sex with his wife either WITH *or* WITHOUT an emotional connection, just as he can, with a random stranger. (and please...I'm not talking about ALL men...)




> Vega you are so absolutely worth the very best in life but I don't think you will find it until you fix what is broken in you. I say this with the utmost sincerity and concern.
> Your view of the world is skewed to the negative, it is like the guys that come on here and go on and on about how all women are this or all women are that (negative things) because they have had bad experiences when the deep and scary reality is that those men are the biggest problem in their own lives


*siiiiigh* I will say this ONE. MORE. TIME. 

I DO NOT believe that ALL men are a certain way; that they're ALL selfish, greedy, sex-crazed pigs who ONLY think about sex. 

But I also don't believe that ALL men have sincere motives for having sex, _even if they're married_!


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> I would HOPE that an *un*married man has that emotional connection with his wife BEFORE he marries her! In fact, I hope it's WHY he wants to marry her!
> 
> Apparently, a man can have sex with his wife either WITH *or* WITHOUT an emotional connection, just as he can, with a random stranger. (and please...I'm not talking about ALL men...)
> 
> ...


I agree and also don't believe that all men do. While I disagree with some of what you have posted least you have been willing to discuss and not simply say nope it's not true at all. Some do this as a deliberate and Obtuse level just to argue. I genuinely believe you just haven't seen it but I hope you get to someday.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

im_tam said:


> I jump in to my add my story as it might find an echo here.
> 
> Fairly simple story. Married for over 12 years. Two kids.
> Wife and I had a very delayed start of sex in the relationship. Sex in the traditional sense of the word which would imply mutually satisfying.
> ...


And now do you have any connection to your wife or has she begun to seem like a stranger in the house? I haven't ever been in your situation and can't imagine but I know I would disconnect out of that relationship entirely overtime


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

john117 said:


> You're so determined to decouple the two that you use outlier cases to prove a point though .
> 
> I'm quite sure my wife sees the two as separate as well.
> 
> ...


Okay, I'm a week bit confused here, so please bear with me.

First off, I wasn't getting one referring to my subway or ONS experiences. I've been focused on mixed messages and disconnect within the LTR context. However, I completely understand how being treated like a piece of meat on the subway will shift your perspective towards sex, so understand how it might be relevant to this conversations.

Yes, indeedy, I am very difficult to love. No doubt about that. Are you saying that therefore my disconnect is irrelevant? Or that maybe I have just failed to find that "right guy" who does connect? Not sure I see what you're getting at. :scratchhead:

It's funny how this thread has morphed. Several guys have said explicitly that sex is just sex, and done for fun. Others have said explicitly that they want the connection *before* sex takes place.

But some how all of it shows that any women who doesn't immediately accept that all men must have sex so that they can feel some connection (a) doesn't understand what sex is; (b) is calling men liars; or (c) so hopelessly broken that her experiences count for squat.

I have been involved in so many conversations on this site, with guys insisting that sex (that's sex, not connection) is their number one priority, that emotional connection is what women need, that men are wired differently and on and on.

I look forward to future threads where I get told that really, connection is the number 1 priority for men, and that really, sex is just a means, not an end. And that all those women chasing the alphas who get all the sex, are really getting all the meaningful connection they desire, and those poor betas who desperately just want to deeply connect with a woman can't because she is only interested in connecting with someone who treats her like dirt.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

john117 said:


> Methinks some of our female posters are mixing up several varieties of "sex". These are most certainly not interchangeable.
> 
> - one way, unwelcome and undesirable. Lewd comments, crude touch, staring, and the usual dumb tricks by a *small percentage *of "men" intended for self gratification
> .


That "percentage" isn't as small as you think! 

What I'm noticing is that some of the men who have posted on this thread seem to see the rest of the male population as THEY are; not as IT is. In other words, if YOU, John, are a man and are a 'good guy' who values his wife and has sex with her because he wants a "connection" with her, then IN *YOUR* EYES, at least MOST (married) guys are like _you_. 

Meanwhile, being a woman who has been married several times and had several LTR's (and dated in between), I can tell you that MOST of *MY* experiences have NOT been with 'good guys' such as yourself. They've been quite the opposite. 

Now does that mean that *I* believe that ALL men are insensitive assh*les? Hardly. 

But I also believe that there a lot more assh*les out there than you may think! Just take a look at some of the profiles on places like Match.com and see what I mean!


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Wolf1974 said:


> I agree and also don't believe that all men do. While I disagree with some of what you have posted least you have been willing to discuss and not simply say nope it's not true at all. Some do this as a deliberate and Obtuse level just to argue. I genuinely believe you just haven't seen it but I hope you get to someday.


Are you referring to me?

I ask because I cannot imagine what other posted you are capturing with thus net, and so assume it must be.

Even though I have said again and again and again and again that I totally believe that men feel connected through sex. Indeed have never doubted it

Yet somehow it is impossible to question something without generating a whole sh1tload of defensive reactions that as far as I can tell entirely miss the point of everything I've said. 

I appreciate, BTW, the way you directly addressed my question about mixed messages. Its disappointing though (to me) that I'll just be called a few more names in this thread, and then in the next one where I argue that men also need connection (which I have done before), I'll be called a few more names (which has happened before as well)


----------



## imtamnew (May 13, 2013)

Wolf1974 said:


> And now do you have any connection to your wife or has she begun to seem like a stranger in the house? I haven't ever been in your situation and can't imagine but I know I would disconnect out of that relationship entirely overtime


We do a lot of things together. We take care of our kids, cook and eat together. In fact last month went on a nice vacation as well.

But any situation of close intimacy makes me nauseous.

She always complains that I no longer stroke her hair at night like I used to do till last year. It always helped her sleep.
Eleven years later I don't do it at all.

I don't sleep next to her as it's summer and we share the bed with our kids in the room with air conditioning.

Summer is almost over. So I will move back to another room. My wife knows she can sleep on the same bed as me. But she also knows that there is no cuddling on offer.
If she can't sleep.... It's not my problem anymore.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> What it means is that those whole sex=love and connection thing is mostly hot air.
> 
> What I find so interesting about this thread is seeing so many different men claiming sex=connection in one breath, but then in the next basically saying that for most of their lives the "little head" ruled, where all that mattered was hot girl + opportunity. Indeed, so many seem downright surprised that sex might have anything at all to do with connection. And ultimately keep insisting that all that matters is yoga pants, hot, tits. All interchangeable items.
> 
> The underlying contradiction there is somewhat fascinating, but does nothing to revise my initial assessments of what is going on.


I'll try to offer a more complete answer, that took a whole lot of introspection a few years ago to sort out.

I really like that intimate emotional connection with my wife. And it used to drive my desire to have sex with her. But it became this emotionally needy thing that actually turned her off.

Then, when I really thought about what I wanted from my sex life, it wasn't that at all. I don't actually connect that much during sex -- I actually connect in a physically intimate way before sex, and mostly after sex. 

And what that physical connection really was about was paying attention to her, being connected with her and paying attention to her body, and doing the whole naked snuggling thing.

So what I did is to start to do those things more outside of sex. Untangling it. So now I can get that intimate physical connection without sex pretty much any time I want -- because my wife knows that it doesn't need to lead to sex. 

But sex is for sex. It's for expressing my sexuality, not necessarily a ton of emotional intimacy on top of that. Sometimes it happens, but it's not my goal, and I try to not let that stuff get in the way of great sex.

Does that makes sense?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

In both of the above posts there's a lot of self selection. So, if you're married 3x and dated 7x the chance of "diversification" in the pool is not big. 

The same, generalized concept applies to our surroundings and how they impact our interactions. AA mentioned the subway. There aren't many places in the USA that have subways in anything other than dense urban environments which tend to distort gender relations a bit (for example, the chances of getting cat calls in Padukah vs Chicago😂).

By the time one is an LTR sex is more or less expected so at that point the connection becomes the, ehem, variable of interest. 

I feel we are trying to look at this in a simple way when it is considerably more complicated depending on so many variables that we can't generalize. 

Maybe I'm an outlier too. The best emotional connection I ever had was with someone we never did much physical activity with - but could spend a day discussing our most inner feelings. Even after 35 years together I feel my own personal understanding of my wife is good partially because of my skills and experience in the human mind and not necessarily just because of an incredible amount of connection in 35 years.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> That "percentage" isn't as small as you think!
> 
> What I'm noticing is that some of the men who have posted on this thread seem to see the rest of the male population as THEY are; not as IT is. In other words, if YOU, John, are a man and are a 'good guy' who values his wife and has sex with her because he wants a "connection" with her, then IN *YOUR* EYES, at least MOST (married) guys are like _you_.
> 
> ...


I am curious, based on your post you seem to think that your perception is somehow more correct then John's, that is how your post reads. Everyone here has their own experience that they bring to the table, so not saying one person is right or wrong. Just a shame when someone uses their experiences as a way to say they are more right then someone who has different experiences. 

I am sorry you seem to have had bad experiences with guys. I am not one of those guys, and I know MANY men who are in good marriages and are not like how you perceive. Does that mean that all men are "good", no. Does that mean that all men are a$$holes, no. Does your experience somehow negate or supersede mine, no.

Maybe to clarify, there are BOTH men and women who manipulate to get sex, or use sex as a tool to get what they want. There may be different approaches, but it happens with both genders.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> Exactly! Yes, we all know that connected sex is better than unconnected sex, and that no sex at all sucks completely. But there is no evidence here that "men need sex to feel love or connection" or that men desire sex to feel connected.
> 
> We have one poster, @marduk, waggling his fingers at me for failing to understand the difference between love and attraction, yet explicitly admitting that sex for him is about hot chix.


Finger wagging aside... I see no contradiction between the two.

I've loved women and not been attracted to them. I'm pretty sure I've been loved by women who weren't attracted to me.

I've been attracted to women I didn't love. And I know there's been women attracted to me yet didn't love me.

A marriage should have both. And I'm sure they're related at some level -- for example if someone betrays your love, then you may not be attracted to them any more. Or if they no longer are attractive, maybe you don't love them any more.

The way I think about it is 'love' is caring, connection, affection, all that. And 'attraction' is being physically attracted to them for whatever reason. And for me 'being in love' is maybe when you have both? 

But to me it's like a car's fuel mileage and handling. The two aren't really related except that cars have both characteristics to a greater or lesser extent. But you want 'enough' of both to want to drive the car.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> I am curious, based on your post you seem to think that your perception is somehow more correct then John's, that is how your post reads. Everyone here has their own experience that they bring to the table, so not saying one person is right or wrong. Just a shame when someone uses their experiences as a way to say they are more right then someone who has different experiences.


My perception isn't right or wrong. John's perception isn't right or wrong. 

Both of our perceptions are _different_. Our experiences will also be different.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Are you referring to me?
> 
> I ask because I cannot imagine what other posted you are capturing with thus net, and so assume it must be.
> 
> ...


Huh? I quoted vega and not you. How you personally put yourself in that not sure. And I haven't called you any names..... Who here has did I miss that post? I do think you're projecting your own bad/limited experience an casting it out as a large net to the TAM populace. This post would be an example as I was quoting vega and not you. 

Also I'm not defensive about this in the least. I just happen to agree with Santa and his premise. I know what is true for my own life and experience and won't argue that with anyone. Anyone is free to feel I am wrong when I say I need sex to have a connection with a significant other but them saying it doesn't change the truth at all so I wouldn't get defensive about that 

I am sincerly Sorry you have been called names here. That's not right. I have been as well and reported it and never had anything done about it. Wish that was enforced more here for all our sakes.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

EllisRedding said:


> I have seen this posted by a few guys on TAM, but far and away most posts I have seen from guys here are not about spreading their seed or the hardships of monogamy b/c all we want to do is get laid. I think if that is how you believe men truly are, you will just focus on those few posters and apply as "many"


There are some male posters who consistently post things from Married Man Sex Life (MMSL), which is nothing more than taking pick-up artist techniques and applying them to your wife so you can be "laid like tile", and other sources which perpetuate this view of "men only want one thing".

If you have been shown examples of this all your life, then you continue to hear it from men who are married, what do you expect us to think? In the "MGTOW" thread, the view that men get married so they could have sex consistently was posted numerous times, and why would they get married just to lose all they have after being denied sex by their wives. Hearing things like this, then being told that men connect emotionally through sex and only sex, what are we supposed to think?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Wolf1974 said:


> Huh? I quoted vega and not you. How you personally put yourself in that not sure. And I haven't called you any names..... Who here has did I miss that post? I do think you're projecting your own bad/limited experience an casting it out as a large net to the TAM populace. This post would be an example as I was quoting vega and not you.


Sorry, my bad. You were indeed quoting Vega, but seemed to be appreciating her for listening, and so exempting her as one that was being deliberately obtuse. And so I was wondering who exactly was being obtuse, because I'm not seeing it.

And don't get me wrong: I was *thanking* you for addressing my question directly. The rest was not aimed at you, just my general feeling as to how threads here often unfold.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

techmom said:


> There are some male posters who consistently post things from Married Man Sex Life (MMSL), which is nothing more than taking pick-up artist techniques and applying them to your wife so you can be "laid like tile", and other sources which perpetuate this view of "men only want one thing".
> 
> If you have been shown examples of this all your life, then you continue to hear it from men who are married, what do you expect us to think? In the "MGTOW" thread, the view that men get married so they could have sex consistently was posted numerous times, and why would they get married just to lose all they have after being denied sex by their wives. Hearing things like this, then being told that men connect emotionally through sex and only sex, what are we supposed to think?


Mmm... Not quite. I mean, I get what you're getting at, but it does miss the mark a bit on my experience of how men think about that stuff.

The MMSLP is basically predicated on the idea that men have been sold a lie, and it uses the matrix as a metaphor. The lie is proposed to be roughly this: women say they want a nice guy, but what they want is a bad boy who is also secondarily a nice guy.

It's proposed that this lie can sometimes be purposeful (women say they want a nice guy so that they and their children get provided for, but they want to have sex with the bad boy not the nice guy). Or the lie can be unintentional (nice girls should want nice guys so why am I not sexually attracted to my nice guy husband? Maybe if he would be even more nice, then I'd be attracted to him -- which starts a whole cycle of guy working hard to turn his wife on which doesn't work, so he works harder).

Now, I believe there is some aspect of truth to this in that the stereotypical 'nice guy' is really a passive aggressive not so nice guy, and that guy is probably not so great to have sex with.

And I believe there can be some aspect of 'nice girl' thinking where social conventions don't allow some women to actually articulate or even accept what they want -- for example, my wife kept swearing that my gut wasn't the reason we weren't having as much sex. I'm sure she wanted to spare my feelings, and I'm sure she didn't want to feel shallow.

I got really angry when I thought I was being lied to. And then I realized that I wasn't actually being lied to at all -- that everyone was ultimately trapped by passive-aggressive or non-honest thinking, including me.

And that's basically where any kind of red pill stuff stops being effective, and where it just goes off the deep end.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

marduk said:


> Mmm... Not quite. I mean, I get what you're getting at, but it does miss the mark a bit on my experience of how men think about that stuff.
> 
> The MMSLP is basically predicated on the idea that men have been sold a lie, and it uses the matrix as a metaphor. The lie is proposed to be roughly this: women say they want a nice guy, but what they want is a bad boy who is also secondarily a nice guy.
> 
> ...


What main ingredient would make men feel like they were lied to? The book states that bad boys get more sex than nice guys, so don't be the nice guy, be more like the bad boy. Not to get more love, because I am sure that the women in these relationships feel love towards their husbands. They bear children, they work, they cook and clean and spend quality time with their husbands. I know this, because I read the forums on these sites, the men feel cheated even if they get all of these things. They are pinning for more sex, more variety, more desire from their wives.

Not that there is anything wrong with that, but don't try to dress it up as "emotional closeness/connection", call it what it is, you want more sex. The woman can express love in so many ways, but if they don't get passionate sex more than once a week they feel cheated and they think they are losing out on life.

Post after post on numerous sites describe "horror stories" of their wives caring for their homes, being the best moms to their children, being their best friend, but lacking in the sex department. "Horror stories" of marrying the perfect virgin bride only to find out that after years of marriage they weren't able to turn her into a sex vixen by the sheer force of their manhood. Damn he needs to stop being a nice guy, because she would be different if he was more alpha/bad boy/etc.

Don't think that those forums are closed off from women to read. We read those sites to see the inner workings of men's minds, because we have been lied to for so long. And this "emotional closeness by way of sex" seems to be a lie because all other evidence shows otherwise.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

techmom said:


> What main ingredient would make men feel like they were lied to?


I believe MMSLP essentially posits that society itself is lying to men. That we're given some kind of raw deal that equates to "be nice and you'll get married to a great woman and she will reward you with sex" as a premise that is really "be nice, and accept whatever breadcrumbs go your way as long as you stay on that nice treadmill working harder and harder every day for less."

Which is itself a lie, of course. Or at least a distortion. Nobody asked me to get on that treadmill. Although I did have my mother tell me about being nice to women in all kinds of ways while not expecting anything in return.



> The book states that bad boys get more sex than nice guys, so don't be the nice guy, be more like the bad boy. Not to get more love, because I am sure that the women in these relationships feel love towards their husbands. They bear children, they work, they cook and clean and spend quality time with their husbands. I know this, because I read the forums on these sites, the men feel cheated even if they get all of these things. They are pinning for more sex, more variety, more desire from their wives.


I don't think it's wrong to desire those things, but I don't think they're always cheated out of them. I think it does take some introspection and honesty though to get at it, because I don't think people are usually cheated out of anything.

Except when they cheat themselves out of what they want by not being willing to walk away from something that's not working out of fear.



> Not that there is anything wrong with that, but don't try to dress it up as "emotional closeness/connection", call it what it is, you want more sex. The woman can express love in so many ways, but if they don't get passionate sex more than once a week they feel cheated and they think they are losing out on life.


Sure.



> Post after post on numerous sites describe "horror stories" of their wives caring for their homes, being the best moms to their children, being their best friend, but lacking in the sex department. "Horror stories" of marrying the perfect virgin bride only to find out that after years of marriage they weren't able to turn her into a sex vixen by the sheer force of their manhood. Damn he needs to stop being a nice guy, because she would be different if he was more alpha/bad boy/etc.


100% agree. 

The weird part is, and I'm treading on some seriously dicey ground here because I don't agree with it...

Is that it works. I know it works because I've done it. I've done it unconsciously while dating, and I've done it consciously while married... And damn but it does get you laid. Almost all of it.

If your goal is more sex, it can work. At the price of emotional intimacy, and maybe your soul for what it's worth.

Because some of the red pills stuff, while it got me laid, did so at the expense of all the non-sex stuff that made me want to marry her in the first place.



> Don't think that those forums are closed off from women to read. We read those sites to see the inner workings of men's minds, because we have been lied to for so long. And this "emotional closeness by way of sex" seems to be a lie because all other evidence shows otherwise.


I think some men get that connection through sex. Maybe they ONLY know how to do it through sex.

I know I've gotten it through sex. But I know that I've gotten benefit of disentangling it FROM sex.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

In addition to my post above, these sites tend to attract men who wanted to live out fantasies of being that guy who attracted all of the hot chicks in high school and /or college. That guy who oozed manliness (whatever that really means) and always had that sh!t eating grin. Wherever these husbands were lacking in being that alpha guy, they carry into their marriages and then their wives have to bear the burden of validating their manhood by having continuous, passionate sex. However, the husband's insecurities existed before he even met his wife, he utilizes he to boost his self image.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

marduk said:


> I believe MMSLP essentially posits that society itself is lying to men. That we're given some kind of raw deal that equates to "be nice and you'll get married to a great woman and she will reward you with sex" as a premise that is really "be nice, and accept whatever breadcrumbs go your way as long as you stay on that nice treadmill working harder and harder every day for less."
> 
> Which is itself a lie, of course. Or at least a distortion. Nobody asked me to get on that treadmill. Although I did have my mother tell me about being nice to women in all kinds of ways while not expecting anything in return.
> 
> ...


Funny thing about me is that, I encountered numerous alpha males/bad guys, etc in my life, and I never felt compelled to chase them or have sex with them. None of them, because I found them to be braggarts and insensitive. I was a virgin when I married my husband at 20 years old, and he was never a jock type or anything like that, but he had numerous sex partners throughout his life. So I find this demonization of the good guy to be disingenuous. 

Women, on the most part, want men to be good to them, not a milquetoast character but not a brute either. Good men who treat us well and has a backbone at the same time. The women who are insecure in themselves want a certain type of man described on those forums. An alpha male, to take charge and show her what to do and how to do it. This maybe who your wife is Marduk, maybe that is why you had to change with her.

I find it curious that plenty of us women post on TAM stating this same thing but the guys always fall back on, "what you mean is that you want an alpha guy, but you won't admit it".

Well, I'm saying that, all of the effort men make in relationships is towards getting more sex, not emotional closeness, but you won't admit it either.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Vega said:


> My perception isn't right or wrong. John's perception isn't right or wrong.
> 
> Both of our perceptions are _different_. Our experiences will also be different.


As long as we are cognizant of the circumstances involving those perceptions and the self selecting nature of it all.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Once again...

Sex does not increase emotional connection bandwidth - it's merely a sign that there is a very decent chance the emotional connection has been made and is currently active.

Without sex, it's all words and intentions. Judging from the percentage of EA's that turn to PA's....


----------



## katiecrna (Jan 29, 2016)

When couples have sex it releases hormones that make them feel happy and help bond them. Yes sex can make you feel more connected to your spouse. (So can other things). But the reason why men want to have sex with their wife has nothing to do with the desire to feel connection, that is just an added bonus of sex. If this were true, men wouldn't masterbate or watch porn, as these things do nothing to feel connected to your wife. 

Let's be real men. You want to have sex because it feels good, and Bc your horney (or maybe not). It feels good physically, and it's a great release. It also feels good mentally, it makes you feel like a man, it makes you feel attractive, it helps boost your ego.(This is why so many men complain that their wives don't initiate. Even if their wife never refuses sex, that isn't enough. When a wife initiates it makes you feel way better, like a sexy desired man whose wife wants it bad.) Men want to have sex because it feels good to orgasm, but almost more importantly how it makes them feel about themselves. 

A man needs to feel like a man. And sex is a big part of feeling like a man. If a man feels emasculated by his wife (for whatever reason) this can really f*ck with their heads, and may drive them to use porn, drive them to cheat, drive them to depression, or drive them to absolutely resent their wife. 

Women and men are very similar, but In very different ways. We are both very sensitive. Women need to feel loved and desired and adored. Often men want to roll their eyes at this notion but they don't understand its importance. BUT similarly men need to feel like a man. I have never seen anything as sensitive as a mans ego. And again, some women don't understand the importance. The problem is when there is resentment and hurt built up. Nobody makes the first move and we wait for the other person to change. A women isn't going to initiate and have dirty sex if she doesn't feel loved and secure. A man isn't going to woo his wife Bc he feels rejected. A lot of times we don't want to put ourselves out there Bc of the fear of how it will make us feel if we get rejected.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

Another point I want to address is this notion of men being lied to as boys about how to get a girl to have sex with them, that they were told to be a nice guy. Well, this notion works with the assumption that all the boy wants is sex first, not emotional closeness, and that he will play whatever part he was told to play in order to get it. He may be friend zoned, which is another way of saying that a guy would pretend to be friends with a girl in order to be rewarded with sex. He may be a white knight, saving a girl from whatever ails her so he can be rewarded with sex. 

Then this guy gets married, and expects frequent sex as a reward for granting his wife the status of being married. He figures his job is done, and he lays back to be rewarded with sex for bringing home a paycheck (even if she works as well), and being a decent human being. After a while when her desire wanes, he finds himself questioning what to do, enter MMSL. Be the bad boy, the site states, you will be laid like tile. He follows this book, not for the emotional closeness, because it is not what the book or site promises. It promises to get laid.

So, throughout a man's life he is looking primarily for sex from women, everything else is secondary. Men base their identity and masculinity on how much sex they are granted, and this is being stated as emotional closeness in this thread.

Reclaiming Manhood: Detoxifying Toxic Masculinity - Paging Dr. NerdLove


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

techmom said:


> In addition to my post above, these sites tend to attract men who wanted to live out fantasies of being that guy who attracted all of the hot chicks in high school and /or college. That guy who oozed manliness (whatever that really means) and always had that sh!t eating grin. Wherever these husbands were lacking in being that alpha guy, they carry into their marriages and then their wives have to bear the burden of validating their manhood by having continuous, passionate sex. However, the husband's insecurities existed before he even met his wife, he utilizes he to boost his self image.


Maybe I'm the anomaly, but I was that guy and had no idea why I was successful with women in high school and university.

It actually allowed me to rethink why that was.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

katiecrna said:


> When couples have sex it releases hormones that make them feel happy and help bond them. Yes sex can make you feel more connected to your spouse. (So can other things). But the reason why men want to have sex with their wife has nothing to do with the desire to feel connection, that is just an added bonus of sex. If this were true, men wouldn't masterbate or watch porn, as these things do nothing to feel connected to your wife.


I masturbate to get off. I make love to my wife to feel the connection. When I have sex with my wife and I get off, but there is no real connection, it is terrible. I end up wishing I had just masturbated instead.

I agree with the rest of what you wrote.



> Let's be real men. You want to have sex because it feels good, and Bc your horney (or maybe not). It feels good physically, and it's a great release. It also feels good mentally, it makes you feel like a man, it makes you feel attractive, it helps boost your ego.(This is why so many men complain that their wives don't initiate. Even if their wife never refuses sex, that isn't enough. When a wife initiates it makes you feel way better, like a sexy desired man whose wife wants it bad.) Men want to have sex because it feels good to orgasm, but almost more importantly how it makes them feel about themselves.
> 
> A man needs to feel like a man. And sex is a big part of feeling like a man. If a man feels emasculated by his wife (for whatever reason) this can really f*ck with their heads, and may drive them to use porn, drive them to cheat, drive them to depression, or drive them to absolutely resent their wife.
> 
> Women and men are very similar, but In very different ways. We are both very sensitive. Women need to feel loved and desired and adored. Often men want to roll their eyes at this notion but they don't understand its importance. BUT similarly men need to feel like a man. I have never seen anything as sensitive as a mans ego. And again, some women don't understand the importance. The problem is when there is resentment and hurt built up. Nobody makes the first move and we wait for the other person to change. A women isn't going to initiate and have dirty sex if she doesn't feel loved and secure. A man isn't going to woo his wife Bc he feels rejected. A lot of times we don't want to put ourselves out there Bc of the fear of how it will make us feel if we get rejected.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

techmom said:


> Funny thing about me is that, I encountered numerous alpha males/bad guys, etc in my life, and I never felt compelled to chase them or have sex with them. None of them, because I found them to be braggarts and insensitive. I was a virgin when I married my husband at 20 years old, and he was never a jock type or anything like that, but he had numerous sex partners throughout his life. So I find this demonization of the good guy to be disingenuous.
> 
> Women, on the most part, want men to be good to them, not a milquetoast character but not a brute either. Good men who treat us well and has a backbone at the same time. The women who are insecure in themselves want a certain type of man described on those forums. An alpha male, to take charge and show her what to do and how to do it. This maybe who your wife is Marduk, maybe that is why you had to change with her.
> 
> ...


I've come to a place where I think at the end of the day, what most men and women want is similar.

Someone who's assertive without being inflexible. Decisive but open. Playful but not locked in. Passionate but not ruled by passion. Able to access the mammalian and lizard brain but able to govern it with the neocortex.

In other words, not passive aggressive, not boring, but not an impulsive ********* either.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Once again...
> 
> Sex does not increase emotional connection bandwidth - it's merely a sign that there is a very decent chance the emotional connection has been made and is currently active.
> 
> Without sex, it's all words and intentions. Judging from the percentage of EA's that turn to PA's....


Keep going.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

techmom said:


> Another point I want to address is this notion of men being lied to as boys about how to get a girl to have sex with them, that they were told to be a nice guy.


What AK told me directly is that women are not vending machines that you put kindness coins into and get sex out of.

Which is a good description of what some guys try to do... 'Nice' a girl into sex as a covert contract. You hear the classic tale of the girl who is moving, and a nice guy helps her move -- which means doing it all for her. And then, exhausted, he hopes for sex, only to get a 'thank you' and some pizza and then she takes off to the bar to find a hot guy.



> Well, this notion works with the assumption that all the boy wants is sex first, not emotional closeness, and that he will play whatever part he was told to play in order to get it.


The way I look at it is that I have plenty of friends. There was a time where I had way, way too many friends. So of course what I was looking for was sex first, because I had tons of emotional closeness.

That was me, anyway.



> He may be friend zoned, which is another way of saying that a guy would pretend to be friends with a girl in order to be rewarded with sex. He may be a white knight, saving a girl from whatever ails her so he can be rewarded with sex.


Exactly.



> Then this guy gets married, and expects frequent sex as a reward for granting his wife the status of being married. He figures his job is done, and he lays back to be rewarded with sex for bringing home a paycheck (even if she works as well), and being a decent human being. After a while when her desire wanes, he finds himself questioning what to do, enter MMSL. Be the bad boy, the site states, you will be laid like tile. He follows this book, not for the emotional closeness, because it is not what the book or site promises. It promises to get laid.


For many guys I think they have the emotional connection -- it's like they are their wive's girlfriends.

So they get the talk, they get the snuggling, but what they don't get is sex or passion. MMSLP asserts this is because they've become a beta. I assert it's because they've become passive-aggressive and are not actually doing the work it takes to maintain a passionate relationship.



> So, throughout a man's life he is looking primarily for sex from women, everything else is secondary. Men base their identity and masculinity on how much sex they are granted, and this is being stated as emotional closeness in this thread.


I think you're onto something.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

techmom said:


> There are some male posters who consistently post things from Married Man Sex Life (MMSL), which is nothing more than taking pick-up artist techniques and applying them to your wife so you can be "laid like tile", and other sources which perpetuate this view of "men only want one thing".
> 
> If you have been shown examples of this all your life, then you continue to hear it from men who are married, what do you expect us to think? In the "MGTOW" thread, the view that men get married so they could have sex consistently was posted numerous times, and why would they get married just to lose all they have after being denied sex by their wives. Hearing things like this, then being told that men connect emotionally through sex and only sex, what are we supposed to think?


Taking the other side, growing up I was fed the whole "Happy Wife Happy Life" line, which for a guy means your happiness / needs come second (not exactly a positive message). Likewise I have heard countless stories of women taking guys to cleaners in divorces, using sex merely to a means to an end, etc... So I could arguably just use that for the basis of my view on women, and latch on to threads here that help support that. I however choose not to.

I am not in any way saying your experience or others don't matter as everything we experience in life helps to shape who we are. I also believe that you will more likely align yourself with threads/posters who support your viewpoint, so you may read the MGTOW thread, think "Here we go again" with these guys, and ignore the many other posts from guys here who don't speak anything close to this. And really, this could be about any topic, only using the one you brought up.

Also, I don't really look at TAM as the definitive "This is how men and women are" place, as most people come here b/c of issues/trouble, not because they just want to share their positive experiences. 

There is no right or wrong, different POVs which of course is the point of this discussion (a good discussion IMO).


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

EllisRedding said:


> Taking the other side, growing up I was fed the whole "Happy Wife Happy Life" line, which for a guy means your happiness / needs come second (not exactly a positive message). Likewise I have heard countless stories of women taking guys to cleaners in divorces, using sex merely to a means to an end, etc... So I could arguably just use that for the basis of my view on women, and latch on to threads here that help support that. I however choose not to.
> 
> I am not in any way saying your experience or others don't matter as everything we experience in life helps to shape who we are. I also believe that you will more likely align yourself with threads/posters who support your viewpoint, so you may read the MGTOW thread, think "Here we go again" with these guys, and ignore the many other posts from guys here who don't speak anything close to this. And really, this could be about any topic, only using the one you brought up.
> 
> ...


Good point. I think there are also some cultural norms which are quite suspect.

Such as man spending a ton of dough to give girl an engagement ring as part of the deal to get married (which used to be the beginning of the sexual relationship).

So I think men giving shiny things to women with sex as a result is kind of hard coded in western society. Or at least used to be.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

EllisRedding said:


> Taking the other side, growing up I was fed the whole "Happy Wife Happy Life" line, which for a guy means your happiness / needs come second (not exactly a positive message). Likewise I have heard countless stories of women taking guys to cleaners in divorces, using sex merely to a means to an end, etc... So I could arguably just use that for the basis of my view on women, and latch on to threads here that help support that. I however choose not to.
> 
> I am not in any way saying your experience or others don't matter as everything we experience in life helps to shape who we are. I also believe that you will more likely align yourself with threads/posters who support your viewpoint, so you may read the MGTOW thread, think "Here we go again" with these guys, and ignore the many other posts from guys here who don't speak anything close to this. And really, this could be about any topic, only using the one you brought up.
> 
> ...


Many women felt compelled to keep their marriages together by using sex, not in a deceitful way, but because they really believed their husbands who stated that this would save the marriage. They end up divorcing not because of hoping for the big payoff after divorce, but because of their own needs still being neglected by a husband who dismissed her concerns as nagging and was happy just as long as he was getting sex. 

Women placed themselves in these predicaments by placing their careers on hold to raise children, in agreement with the husband in most cases. So husbands need to understand, there are consequences for making this decision. It is not an excuse to demonize wives for getting their due financial support after the divorce.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

techmom said:


> Many women felt compelled to keep their marriages together by using sex, not in a deceitful way, but because they really believed their husbands who stated that this would save the marriage. They end up divorcing not because of hoping for the big payoff after divorce, but because of their own needs still being neglected by a husband who dismissed her concerns as nagging and was happy just as long as he was getting sex.
> 
> Women placed themselves in these predicaments by placing their careers on hold to raise children, in agreement with the husband in most cases. So husbands need to understand, there are consequences for making this decision. It is not an excuse to demonize wives for getting their due financial support after the divorce.


Others have a different opinion, I am just taking the other side of the argument and stating stuff that as a guy I hear constantly that may or may not be true (same as how you say you hear all this stuff about guys which may or may not be true as well). 

In terms of using sex, I was thinking more along the lines of a woman using sex to get a guy into marriage, obtain a lifestyle, etc... It does happen. How often, I don't really know, but if I went just purely on what I heard growing up or what I read online I would probably form a very different opinion of women.


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

EnjoliWoman said:


> I have learned so much about men on this site. And actually appreciate them a lot more, too.


Is that good!?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

techmom said:


> Many women felt compelled to keep their marriages together by using sex, not in a deceitful way, but because they really believed their husbands who stated that this would save the marriage. They end up divorcing not because of hoping for the big payoff after divorce, but because of their own needs still being neglected by a husband who dismissed her concerns as nagging and was happy just as long as he was getting sex.
> 
> Women placed themselves in these predicaments by placing their careers on hold to raise children, in agreement with the husband in most cases. So husbands need to understand, there are consequences for making this decision. It is not an excuse to demonize wives for getting their due financial support after the divorce.


_Exactly._

And this is why the "red pill lie" isn't a lie at all, or if it is it's a lie that traps both sides in a relationship model that doesn't work.

Scaring a woman into having sex with you under the threat of divorce or being cheated on might lead her to pick up her game and realize your sex life might need attention. But it also can lead to her feeling worthless, exhausted, and like a show pony that needs to perform.

It can work in a sexless marriage when the wife doesn't care about the lack of sex... Temporarily. As a wake up call and last resort when you actually are headed for divorce because of a lack of sex.

But as a relationship model it's totally ****ty.

And the financial part of divorce I totally get. When I was thinking of divorcing my wife my plan was to give her more than half... But at the very least half. Not just because she had a right to it, but because I wanted my kids to remain in a comfortable lifestyle when they were with her.


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

My wife swears that I only want her for her body. But she is venting. She has cautioned me to not overthink her actions and statements and that has helped me be who I am and not dramatize. 

Nonetheless, I think it is odd that a woman would even go there to suggest all a husband wants is sex when he provides for her, helps her raise a family, helps her get through school, supports her in her goals, helps her family when they need an assist. 

In short, kind of passes me off. I live sex and since I am married you you that means I want sex with YOU. That should be a good thing.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

EllisRedding said:


> Others have a different opinion, I am just taking the other side of the argument and stating stuff that as a guy I hear constantly that may or may not be true (same as how you say you hear all this stuff about guys which may or may not be true as well).
> 
> In terms of using sex, I was thinking more along the lines of a woman using sex to get a guy into marriage, obtain a lifestyle, etc... It does happen. How often, I don't really know, but if I went just purely on what I heard growing up or what I read online I would probably form a very different opinion of women.


As women gain independence through their careers, we will depend less and less on snagging a guy with sex, as a matter of fact that practice is becoming outdated as we speak.

Thanks to feminism, women will not rely on men for financial support which will change the dynamic of sexual relationships. Women will choose a man because she desires him more so than his money.

This may mean, however, that men will have to bring more to the table than just nice guy tactics and a paycheck. They will have to engage us emotionally and really do the work to understand us, not just how much sex we can give out.

Hooray for feminism!!!


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

techmom said:


> As women gain independence through their careers, we will depend less and less on snagging a guy with sex, as a matter of fact that practice is becoming outdated as we speak.
> 
> Thanks to feminism, women will not rely on men for financial support which will change the dynamic of sexual relationships. Women will choose a man because she desires him more so than his money.
> 
> ...


Conversely, it will also mean a lot less guilt and shame for a husband walking away from his sexless marriage because society tells him to stay put and provide whether he's getting his needs met or not.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> The weird part is, and I'm treading on some seriously dicey ground here because I don't agree with it...
> 
> Is that it works. I know it works because I've done it. I've done it unconsciously while dating, and I've done it consciously while married... And damn but it does get you laid. Almost all of it.
> 
> ...


Exactly the point, IMHO! The number one bible advocated here for men to improve their marriage basically advocates using fear and insecurity to leverage sex. And does so at the cost of emotional intimacy and connection.

But all of a sudden, now it's just a few random outliers that think that way, and really it's all about building connection? :scratchhead:


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> Exactly the point, IMHO! The number one bible advocated here for men to improve their marriage basically advocates using fear and insecurity to leverage sex. And does so at the cost of emotional intimacy and connection.
> 
> But all of a sudden, now it's just a few random outliers that think that way, and really it's all about building connection? :scratchhead:


Lol. I agree with you.

Different guys have different feelings and goals with sex, and it can change within their lifetime quite a bit.

Just like women, right?

Listen, A_A. I'll let you in on a little secret.

We men are just as baffled by what we want with sex, how to get it, and why as women are. Hell, maybe more.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

marduk said:


> Conversely, it will also mean a lot less guilt and shame for a husband walking away from his sexless marriage because society tells him to stay put and provide whether he's getting his needs met or not.


Exactly.

Also, I feel that a lot less women will opt to stay home with the kids, and more men will take on that role, because more women are in higher paying careers and can afford to do so. I know lots of dads who work from home and telecommuting is becoming huge where I work.

So the narrative of the man working while the wife stays at home and being supported will be a thing of the past. Sexless marriages might be a thing of the past as well, couples will opt to split instead of doing all of the hand-wringing.

Hopefully.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

techmom said:


> As women gain independence through their careers, we will depend less and less on snagging a guy with sex, as a matter of fact that practice is becoming outdated as we speak.
> 
> Thanks to feminism, women will not rely on men for financial support which will change the dynamic of sexual relationships. Women will choose a man because she desires him more so than his money.
> 
> ...


I am not arguing for or against feminism so I am not sure where you are going with this lol. I was simply responding to your original post about being brought up with certain views and then reading MGTOW, and I was simply pointing out that just like you or other women, men are also brought up hearing certain views, etc...


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

As opposed to splitting it , here is one hoping that they just start talking and caring enough about each other to work the issues in love. 

Caveat. I fully believe that sometimes there are irreconcilable differences and ending the relationship would be necessary but hopefully that stuff can be mitigated by healthy dialog before the marriage.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

EllisRedding said:


> I am not arguing for or against feminism so I am not sure where you are going with this lol. I was simply responding to your original post about being brought up with certain views and then reading MGTOW, and I was simply pointing out that just like you or other women, men are also brought up hearing certain views, etc...


When male posters stop going with the scenario of the hard working hubby supporting the SAHM, then using that as the basis for all of these other outdated narratives, then I will be reassured that the men on TAM are actually living in 2016 instead of 1956. 

Then we can let go of the frigid, unappreciative wifey who makes the poor hard working husband go months without the sex he so deserves.

Then we can let go of the hubby being taken to the cleaners by the scheming wife who uses the child support money to get her nails done.

All of those fictious scenarios dreamed up on some MRA sites is the reason why I advocate for my feminism. And I will continue to do so.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

techmom said:


> When male posters stop going with the scenario of the hard working hubby supporting the SAHM, then using that as the basis for all of these other outdated narratives, then I will be reassured that the men on TAM are actually living in 2016 instead of 1956.
> 
> Then we can let go of the frigid, unappreciative wifey who makes the poor hard working husband go months without the sex he so deserves.
> 
> ...


OK, this is going nowhere. So basically, the stuff you grew up hearing and read on a few threads about men is legit. I simply draw a parallel stating things men hear and read about, and that is all wrong, you are correct, I got it lol. 

Once again, my only point was that we all hear things (both genders) and have experiences that shape who we are. If you want to take that and use it as a platform for a completely different discussion, um, ok


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

techmom said:


> When male posters stop going with the scenario of the hard working hubby supporting the SAHM, then using that as the basis for all of these other outdated narratives, then I will be reassured that the men on TAM are actually living in 2016 instead of 1956.


I'm with you!



> Then we can let go of the frigid, unappreciative wifey who makes the poor hard working husband go months without the sex he so deserves.


Ok, now you lost me. I lived exactly that in two marriages. I did the whole "be honest with me, why don't you want to have sex with me" thing and neither wife answered honestly. 

(I get the irony that I'm the central feature in both of those marriages.)

But I was the poor hard working husband going without sex. I was also trying to be constructive and open and and work hard and that resulted in... Even less sex.

So that narrative does happen. I've lived it, twice.



> Then we can let go of the hubby being taken to the cleaners by the scheming wife who uses the child support money to get her nails done.


I think that this happens a lot less often than people thing (women still end off economically worse off on average after a divorce) however it does still happen.

And for a guy who ends up divorced after being in a sexless marriage and losing half his stuff or more... It can sure feel like you just got doubly victimized.



> All of those fictious scenarios dreamed up on some MRA sites is the reason why I advocate for my feminism. And I will continue to do so.


How do you reconcile when those things actually do happen?


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

techmom said:


> When male posters stop going with the scenario of the hard working hubby supporting the SAHM, then using that as the basis for all of these other outdated narratives, then I will be reassured that the men on TAM are actually living in 2016 instead of 1956.
> 
> Then we can let go of the frigid, unappreciative wifey who makes the poor hard working husband go months without the sex he so deserves.
> *
> ...


This pretty much describes exactly what my SAHM ex wife did, and does to a tee. In fairness, she is NPD, so not normal, but never the less, I am living proof that this can and does happen right here in the good old present day.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

marduk said:


> Conversely, it will also mean a lot less guilt and shame for a husband walking away from his sexless marriage because society tells him to stay put and provide whether he's getting his needs met or not.


Ironically, it is society who tells him how much sex he "should" be getting, and he buys into that. Men can feel just as much pressure to conform (perform?) to societies 'standards' and if it's less than average, there's something 'wrong' with him (and/or _her_).

When a man talks about getting his 'needs' met through sex, he isn't just talking about his _physical needs_ whether he realizes it or not. Men are not sexual robots any more than women are. There's a whole psychological aspect to WHY some men feel such a strong sense of rejection when their wives refuse their advances and such a strong sense of 'winning' when a man finally gets to bed down a woman. 

I think that some of the female posters have come close to delving into that psychology here on this thread.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

techmom said:


> As women gain independence through their careers, we will depend less and less on snagging a guy with sex, as a matter of fact that practice is becoming outdated as we speak.
> 
> Thanks to feminism, women will not rely on men for financial support which will change the dynamic of sexual relationships. Women will choose a man because she desires him more so than his money.
> 
> ...


But this isn't a new trend. I am almost 50 and was raised by a Feminist mum and am very much a Feminist myself.

I was always told that we are equal and that all of us should pitch in together.
Never looked for a man to soley support me and always worked hard.

Make me wonder why some men are scared of Feminism when in reality it brings a much better lifestyle for all.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Holland said:


> But this isn't a new trend. I am almost 50 and was raised by a Feminist mum and am very much a Feminist myself.
> 
> I was always told that we are equal and that all of us should pitch in together.
> Never looked for a man to soley support me and always worked hard.
> ...


Because there are women like this that call themselves feminists who specifically threaten men:

Leading Feminist Author: All Men Should Be Rounded-Up and Put Into Camps | The PolitiStick

Feminism has been spectacularly successful over the last 50 years.

And proven to be spectacularly bad at policing itself.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Sorry, my bad. You were indeed quoting Vega, but seemed to be appreciating her for listening, and so exempting her as one that was being deliberately obtuse. And so I was wondering who exactly was being obtuse, because I'm not seeing it.
> 
> And don't get me wrong: I was *thanking* you for addressing my question directly. The rest was not aimed at you, just my general feeling as to how threads here often unfold.


I see anyone on tam as obtuse when they take their personal experiences and apply it to all of a gender. I have seen men, women, and mods do this. I call it deliberately obtuse when they do it just to further an argument instead of just accepting that opinions differ, but I wasn't necessarily referring to anyone here unless that's what they are stating...all men do this all men do that. This is more of a general TAM statement about the gender nonsense here. Remember this was a thread by a guy sharing his opinion. Agree or not it is still his, and well my opinion on it. We are not wrong on our opinion cause we never said all guys feel this way.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

I posted my story numerous times on these forums, suffice it to say, I don't get it when men complain about not getting sex when they support their wife, because I make double what my husband makes, it doesn't make me bitter about not getting sex.

I'll tell you one thing though, he still wishes I was the domestic goddess, still complains of no sex even though I told him what my needs are to feel loved, I still don't feel loved. I'm LD because I am unfulfilled in this relationship, he thinks I'm frigid.

I'll bet that if we decide to divorce, he will find a domestic oriented woman who makes less, but will complain about not having money. He will complain about the frigid, angry wife who hated him. And I'm not, and I don't hate him.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

EllisRedding said:


> Taking the other side, growing up I was fed the whole "*Happy Wife Happy Life" line, which for a guy means your happiness / needs come second *(not exactly a positive message). Likewise I have heard countless stories of women taking guys to cleaners in divorces, using sex merely to a means to an end, etc... So I could arguably just use that for the basis of my view on women, and latch on to threads here that help support that. I however choose not to.
> 
> I am not in any way saying your experience or others don't matter as everything we experience in life helps to shape who we are. I also believe that you will more likely align yourself with threads/posters who support your viewpoint, so you may read the MGTOW thread, think "Here we go again" with these guys, and ignore the many other posts from guys here who don't speak anything close to this. And really, this could be about any topic, only using the one you brought up.
> 
> ...


out of curiosity were you raised in the Midwest? Born and raised in MN and in my town this was the common definitive advice passed from father to son on how to be in relationships. It was a great disservice because it produced a lot of "nice guys"


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

techmom said:


> There are some male posters who consistently post things from Married Man Sex Life (MMSL), which is nothing more than taking pick-up artist techniques and applying them to your wife so you can be "laid like tile", and other sources which perpetuate this view of "men only want one thing".
> 
> If you have been shown examples of this all your life, then you continue to hear it from men who are married, what do you expect us to think? In the "MGTOW" thread, the view that men get married so they could have sex consistently was posted numerous times, and why would they get married just to lose all they have after being denied sex by their wives. Hearing things like this, then being told that men connect emotionally through sex and only sex, what are we supposed to think?


Have to agree with you on this point. Honestly I think they are a bunch of xxxxxxx so tend to not take any of it seriously. Please don't think this type of man is all that is out there.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

techmom said:


> As women gain independence through their careers, we will depend less and less on snagging a guy with sex, as a matter of fact that practice is becoming outdated as we speak.
> 
> Thanks to feminism, women will not rely on men for financial support which will change the dynamic of sexual relationships. Women will choose a man because she desires him more so than his money.
> 
> ...


Sounds good to me I want and expect an equal partner and for someone to bring to the table as much as I do!


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Wolf1974 said:


> out of curiosity were you raised in the Midwest? Born and raised in MN and in my town this was the common definitive advice passed from father to son on how to be in relationships. It was a great disservice because it produced a lot of "nice guys"


Nope, Northeast.

Also, this was definitely not something passed on from my Dad lol, but something I would always hear, not just around friends, but also in social media, etc... Just seemed like a phrase commonly thrown around, even if it is a bunch of bs


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

marduk said:


> Because there are women like this that call themselves feminists who specifically threaten men:
> 
> Leading Feminist Author: All Men Should Be Rounded-Up and Put Into Camps | The PolitiStick
> 
> ...


It can't police itself as it is not a Political party etc. Just like all groups there are the fanatical fringe, Religions have them all sorts of groups have them.

If people are being anti male then they are not Feminists and therefore should get themselves a new banner.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

techmom said:


> I posted my story numerous times on these forums, suffice it to say, I don't get it when men complain about not getting sex when they support their wife, because I make double what my husband makes, it doesn't make me bitter about not getting sex.


You're not a man.

Part of the deal that many men have bought into starting from boyhood is "you provide for a wife, give her shiny things, and she gives you sex."

And this is the problem. Getting angry with men that believe it isn't going to help you. Demonstrating how the premise is false helped me.



> I'll tell you one thing though, he still wishes I was the domestic goddess, still complains of no sex even though I told him what my needs are to feel loved, I still don't feel loved. I'm LD because I am unfulfilled in this relationship, he thinks I'm frigid.


My wife once asked me why we don't act all lovey dovey like when we were dating.

And I thought about that and asked her why we don't have sex multiple times a day like when we were dating.

And she said if I were to be more lovey dovey I'd get more sex. 

And I said if I got more sex I'd be more lovey dovey.

And that could have been a stalemate, except that we both agreed to go half way. Because that's the way it works -- it's a cycle.



> I'll bet that if we decide to divorce, he will find a domestic oriented woman who makes less, but will complain about not having money. He will complain about the frigid, angry wife who hated him. And I'm not, and I don't hate him.


What exactly do you want?

What exactly does he want?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Holland said:


> It can't police itself as it is not a Political party etc. Just like all groups there are the fanatical fringe, Religions have them all sorts of groups have them.
> 
> If people are being anti male then they are not Feminists and therefore should get themselves a new banner.


Or, you know, feminist leaders could call out this BS.

Which is pretty rare to see.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

marduk said:


> Or, you know, feminist leaders could call out this BS.
> 
> Which is pretty rare to see.


Also rare to see are men calling out the MRA groups and how they spew falsehoods against women to further their agendas.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

techmom said:


> Also rare to see are men calling out the MRA groups and how they spew falsehoods against women to further their agendas.


Totally agree.

Let's start.

I think AK and the whole MMSL thing is a pile of crap and anti-marriage and anti-woman. I wouldn't recommend his stuff to anybody. And to pay attention to how he dumped helping men to chase his paying female 'coaching' customers. 

MGTOW is spectacularly hilarious. I actually support it, because it means quality women don't have to worry about the kind of guy that feels so victimized by women that he falls for it.

Who else? Oh, Trump. How any woman could vote for that guy after his "any guy can do anything as long as he has a hot piece of ass by his side" comment, I just don't get.

Did I miss anyone?


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

marduk said:


> You're not a man.
> 
> Part of the deal that many men have bought into starting from boyhood is "you provide for a wife, give her shiny things, and she gives you sex."
> 
> ...


What I want:

To be listened to, and have my feelings validated even if he doesn't agree with it
To have less arguments
To be able to be emotionally vulnerable without having it used against me, for starters

What I (assume) he wants:

Frequent sex
To have me initiate frequently, and sexually validate him
A domestic goddess, while making the big money

These things do not agree.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

marduk said:


> Totally agree.
> 
> Let's start.
> 
> ...


You are the only one, everywhere else I'm hearing crickets, especially from men who are leaders in the men's rights movement who are moderates, they want to change the laws regarding child custody, fathers rights, etc.

I personally do advocate for fathers rights, I have a son and a brother with a son, and numerous cousins who have kids.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

techmom said:


> What I want:
> 
> To be listened to, and have my feelings validated even if he doesn't agree with it
> To have less arguments
> ...


Fascinating that you have to assume what he wants, yet you want to be listened to.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Catherine602 said:


> @staarz21 ...* I think many men don't understand why sex may be different for them when it is with someone they love and why it is so important in maintaining the emotional bond with that person.*


 @Catherine and @staarz21* this is EXACTLY the issue I was getting at. *I understood it from *the moment I met my wife and she was the very first person I SHARED a very strong bond with both emotionally and physically. *

From that point on once a man experiences that and _hopefully_ understands it, the desire for sex changes. At least it did for me. When my wife and I become distant, my desire for sex is to help reset our emotional and physical bond with one another so that the relationship can continue to thrive. 

Now getting to what many of the woman in this thread say, can a man even in a LTR of a 10-20+ year marriage still desire sex just for the sake of sex with any woman at any time? In my strong opinion, once he has experienced enough raw sex in the context of not having a connection it becomes repulsive and something that he will no longer be interested in having in any way. At least that was my experience from all the woman I dated and was active with in college. Perhaps I was a very unlucky guy and all my early partners were just horrible at sex or something, but in my opinion there was no real emotional connection in the earlier relationships, it was driven simply by lust. 

So once you have a great friendship with someone that also is physically compatible for sex, isn't sex still just sex? I would have to argue no, otherwise I would not understand how it would be possible for sex to be exponentially better and more satisfying with my wife after more than 20 years of being intimate with her and that it still continues to get better. If something happened to the relationship and I had to start all over, I feel like it would likely take another 20 years to achieve emotionally and physically with what I have with my wife right now. 

My problems with intimacy in my marriage I believe stem from the fact that my wife occasionally allows low self esteem to get the better of her, and this causes her to withdraw from intimacy. Once we do have it, some super serious sparks fly. But getting there can often be rather turbulent and those are things I try to work on in my marriage. 

As for my teenage lust and desire that just has to have sex for the sake of sex, that part of me is still there. Somewhat like the "dark passenger" for those that are fans of Dexter. But he knows to stay quiet and just help me plan my next plot to please my wife, because sex with her is the ultimate best. Ironically, this is the part of my personality that my wife enjoys to toy with the most over the years and she knows how to drive me to become so full of lust for her that I loose control and have to have it. But for me, her accepting this part of my youthful sexuality and understanding how to communicate with it is what makes some sincere sparks of connection fly in our bedroom. 

Badsanta


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

marduk said:


> Or, you know, feminist leaders could call out this BS.
> 
> Which is pretty rare to see.


Feminism is not a Political party or a Religion, there are no "leaders" as such. Plenty of true Feminist decry some the rubbish that the fanatical fringe spew forth as it is not true Feminism.

And yep men could do a far better job of calling out the rubbish that the RPers et al spew forth about women.

That is all the energy I will expend on the topic of radicals that have an intent to hurt not an agenda to actually see good, healthy people.

My original point was that I was raised by a true Feminist, I am a true Feminist and I seem to have great men around me and a very healthy attitude to sex and equality. If men want that in their lives then they should stop being so anti Feminist because it is counter intuitive.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

marduk said:


> You're not a man.
> 
> Part of the deal that many men have bought into starting from boyhood is "you provide for a wife, give her shiny things, and she gives you sex."
> 
> And this is the problem. Getting angry with men that believe it isn't going to help you. Demonstrating how the premise is false helped me.


Women are taught as girls to be pure virgins until marriage, because that is where your value is, once you give up the sex your value drops, and you will be shamed forever. We are also taught that we should look for a man to support us, and that we should serve the needs of others despite the fact that we have our own needs. Don't request anything, don't advocate for yourself, and for heavens sakes don't do unladylike things like disagree with a man and argue, because you will never find a husband to support you.

We were also warned against boys giving us shiny things for sex, lol, because they won't commit to you if you give it up so easily, so I guess that contradicted what the boys were told.

No wonder why we have these opposing viewpoints...


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

techmom said:


> Women are taught as girls to be pure virgins until marriage, because that is where your value is, once you give up the sex your value drops, and you will be shamed forever. We are also taught that we should look for a man to support us, and that we should serve the needs of others despite the fact that we have our own needs. Don't request anything, don't advocate for yourself, and for heavens sakes don't do unladylike things like disagree with a man and argue, because you will never find a husband to support you.
> 
> We were also warned against boys giving us shiny things for sex, lol, because they won't commit to you if you give it up so easily, so I guess that contradicted what the boys were told.
> 
> No wonder why we have these opposing viewpoints...


Well I hope this sort of stuff is not still being instilled in kids.

This was so far from how I was raised and in no way how my kids are being raised. For them it is about respect, self respect and equality.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

techmom said:


> What I want:
> 
> To be listened to, and have my feelings validated even if he doesn't agree with it
> To have less arguments
> ...


Interesting that you want to be listened to and have your feelings validated even if he doesn't agree with it.

Seems that is exactly what many men are asking of women in regards to our feeling of connection through sex.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

marduk said:


> My wife once asked me why we don't act all lovey dovey like when we were dating.
> 
> And I thought about that and asked her why we don't have sex multiple times a day like when we were dating.
> 
> ...


I asked my late husband the same question, but he was already getting plenty of sex. 

He told me that "A guy can't keep up that 'charade' forever". 

Yet, he still expected the same level of sex that we had always been having, if not MORE so. 

My LTR after him said something similar; that it was "too exhausting" to keep up the same level of emotional investment "forever". Yet, he also expected the same level of sex. 

One lesson I have learned in my own personal journey is to not give a man any more than he gives to me, and if he hands me those excuses, then he was never really all that invested in the first place.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Vega said:


> I asked my late husband the same question, but he was already getting plenty of sex.
> 
> He told me that "A guy can't keep up that 'charade' forever".
> 
> ...


So look for the best man you can find and don't get caught up with the rubbish ones. Honestly I still consider my ex to be a good man just not compatible with me. Don't waste time on men like the ones you mentioned. 
High EQ is one of the best attributes you can find in a man, paired with high IQ. 

It is also important to know that you are worth the investment from them which means you also have the same obligation to them.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> @techmom, the assumption is strong! Have you tried doing this as an experiment?
> 
> @badsanta, Guys with Fries made my entire day. I did not realize my life's purpose until I saw that site.


Let's not make the assumption that this was never done, I used to be a SAHM, it drove me crazy, after 10 years I had to go back to work.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

always_alone said:


> And I sympathize with the last two, I really do. But to dress it up as desiring sex for the connection sounds to me t a line.


Your sympathizing is self-serving, and certainly not helpful to me. You invalidate people who are hurting, yet claim you are sympathetic. It makes me frustrated and sad, as I have read enough of your words to know you are a kind and thoughtful person, capable of careful reasoning. I wonder if you have a vested interest in "men" being a certain way, on this issue, and if you've ever considered that possibility.

Fwiw, I did have sex with my wife this weekend, seeking a connection I had resented myself for wanting. That is just the second time after managing to end a nearly three years of rejection by her of me. There was considerable emotional relief, as it went relatively well, and I feel like maybe I could continue the marriage awhile longer, and that is extremely important for other reasons I won't go into right now. She left with the kids for a weekend away and I felt connection and mild hopefulness as she left, rather than frustration, disappointment, and sadness. I suppose I could have looked online after she left and found someone else for connectionless sex, but that notion is repulsive to me, not attractive. Believe what you will.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

PieceOfSky said:


> Your sympathizing is self-serving, and certainly not helpful to me. You invalidate people who are hurting, yet claim you are sympathetic. It makes me frustrated and sad, as I have read enough of your words to know you are a kind and thoughtful person, capable of careful reasoning. I wonder if you have a vested interest in "men" being a certain way, on this issue, and if you've ever considered that possibility.
> 
> Fwiw, I did have sex with my wife this weekend, seeking a connection I had resented myself for wanting. That is just the second time after managing to end a nearly three years of rejection by her of me. There was considerable emotional relief, as it went relatively well, and I feel like maybe I could continue the marriage awhile longer, and that is extremely important for other reasons I won't go into right now. She left with the kids for a weekend away and I felt connection and mild hopefulness as she left, rather than frustration, disappointment, and sadness. I suppose I could have looked online after she left and found someone else for connectionless sex, but that notion is repulsive to me, not attractive. Believe what you will.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Your post gave me pause to think about something. 

I wonder why it is that so many men seem to tie up their feelings of self-worth into one 'package' that we call SEX? 

To me, it's kind of like putting all your eggs in one basket. If you're not getting sex, you feel worthless, rejected, out of step with the rest of the world, frustrated, resentful, angry, bitter, suffering from LOWERED self-esteem. 

Why IS that?


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

badsanta said:


> @Catherine and @staarz21* this is EXACTLY the issue I was getting at. *I understood it from *the moment I met my wife and she was the very first person I SHARED a very strong bond with both emotionally and physically. *
> 
> From that point on once a man experiences that and _hopefully_ understands it, the desire for sex changes. At least it did for me. When my wife and I become distant, my desire for sex is to help reset our emotional and physical bond with one another so that the relationship can continue to thrive.
> 
> ...


This is a great and honest post. I do believe that guys do bond emotionally with sex, however for me I am trying to understand why it is just through sex. Everyone, before becoming sexually active, emotionally bonded in other ways, why did it change?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

PieceOfSky said:


> Your sympathizing is self-serving, and certainly not helpful to me. You invalidate people who are hurting, yet claim you are sympathetic. It makes me frustrated and sad, as I have read enough of your words to know you are a kind and thoughtful person, capable of careful reasoning. I wonder if you have a vested interest in "men" being a certain way, on this issue, and if you've ever considered that possibility.
> 
> Fwiw, I did have sex with my wife this weekend, seeking a connection I had resented myself for wanting. That is just the second time after managing to end a nearly three years of rejection by her of me. There was considerable emotional relief, as it went relatively well, and I feel like maybe I could continue the marriage awhile longer, and that is extremely important for other reasons I won't go into right now. She left with the kids for a weekend away and I felt connection and mild hopefulness as she left, rather than frustration, disappointment, and sadness. I suppose I could have looked online after she left and found someone else for connectionless sex, but that notion is repulsive to me, not attractive. Believe what you will.


Thank you for posting, Piece of Sky. You really should post more often, you always have wise things to say.

I'm sorry if what I said was invalidating to you. I was trying so hard to find a balance between acknowledging that yes, sex is connecting, while also getting so caught up in communicating the underlying disconnects that ended up railroading perspectives like yours.

And, it turns out, I just needed to STFU and let FrenchFry, Vega and techmom take over, because they so much better understood how to communicate this.

And, I know, my apology won't fix anything, and may even seem as self-serving as my sympathy. But let me just say that, if anything, I always appreciate your posts, and really do not want to add to your frustrations or sadness.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

Vega said:


> Your post gave me pause to think about something.
> 
> I wonder why it is that so many men seem to tie up their feelings of self-worth into one 'package' that we call SEX?
> 
> ...


It's not all my eggs. It's not entirely how I feel "all" the time.

Sex is not so much the the problem, it is the rejection, the indifference to my needs, the real or imagined factors that make the one who is "supposed to" love you say or do anything to avoid closing the intimacy gap. It's saddness that the person you married and the relationship you had is gone. Re-read john117's post above. Did you catch the part where he caught a glimpse of the woman he married?

Like SomebodySpecial said above, LoveLanguages are real. Imagine how you'd feel if your SO said, emphatically, I'd rather stick an ice pick in my eye than do __________ (fill in the blank, the one thing you want most in order to feel close to him and loved by him). When that message is sent over and over (usually more subtly) it's kind of hard to not experience a bit of lowering of your self-esteem after awhile, IME. Does that make it easier to imagine?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

PieceOfSky said:


> It's not all my eggs. It's not entirely how I feel "all" the time.
> 
> Sex is not so much the the problem, it is the rejection, the indifference to my needs, the real or imagined factors that make the one who is "supposed to" love you say or do anything to avoid closing the intimacy gap. It's saddness that the person you married and the relationship you had is gone. Re-read john117's post above. Did you catch the part where he caught a glimpse of the woman he married?
> 
> ...


I think a lot of what you wrote just "depends". For example: If my husband told me that he wanted me to have sex with another man while he watched, I just might respond with, "I'd rather stick an ice pick in my eye than do that!" Now, is he going to try to convince me that I don't "love" him and that I'm not "meeting his 'needs'" _unless I do that_? I wouldn't feel bad about _myself_; but I WOULD feel bad about _HIM_! 

And, if ANY man every suggested that to me, he'd be looking at divorce papers on the kitchen table in a matter of hours.

"Needs" be _damned_!


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

techmom said:


> This is a great and honest post. I do believe that guys do bond emotionally with sex, *however for me I am trying to understand why it is just through sex*. Everyone, before becoming sexually active, emotionally bonded in other ways, why did it change?


I've been saying the same thing all through this thread, techmom, and was accused of making assumptions, even though some of the men have CLEARLY said this was the case. 

I can't WAIT to see the responses...


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Thank you for posting, Piece of Sky. You really should post more often, you always have wise things to say.
> 
> I'm sorry if what I said was invalidating to you. I was trying so hard to find a balance between acknowledging that yes, sex is connecting, while also getting so caught up in communicating the underlying disconnects that ended up railroading perspectives like yours.
> 
> ...


No apology is necessary, but thanks.

I don't think you should STFU. I think you should carefully listen to what it is you are saying. I misspoke when I said your sympathy is self-serving. Self-deceiving white-washing is closer to what I was thinking. (I hasten to add this is all just speculation...I have no idea what is in anyone's head!). What I mean is, on this one particular issue -- what it is that men might want when seeking sex, or what sex means sometimes for a man -- you seem to give lip service to the notion that what some say is true for them might be true, yet simultaneously and solidly hold on to the belief it's a line and men want sex, effectively always, for reasons that (best I can imagine) would leave you feeling interchangeable, deceived, Unchosen, unwanted, unworthy, not preferred, used, and always alone. 

We have had this discussion before. I certainly could be wrong, but I wonder if you have a blind spot here, perhaps adaptive at the time, but long since turned harmful to your interests. If that is the case, that is what makes me sad...because you deserve better for yourself.

Apologies if I'm way off the mark.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

Maybe this is too simple but I like sex because it feels pretty good.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Tortdog said:


> Maybe this is too simple but I like sex because it feels pretty good.


You don't say . . .


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

Vega said:


> I've been saying the same thing all through this thread, techmom, and was accused of making assumptions, even though some of the men have CLEARLY said this was the case.
> 
> I can't WAIT to see the responses...





techmom said:


> This is a great and honest post. I do believe that guys do bond emotionally with sex, however for me I am trying to understand why it is just through sex. Everyone, before becoming sexually active, emotionally bonded in other ways, why did it change?



Bonding for "men" isn't possible exclusively through sex. Where did you get the idea it was? John's point about bonding through shared experiences rung true to me, fwiw.

Likewise, a partner can reject another in many ways, some related to sexuality some not. I suspect if one sort of rejection or transgression occurs, then it is exactly "that one" that must be addressed before the distance can begin to close. The issue became an issue because it mattered to someone, and good things elsewhere in the relationship aren't likely to make it everything ok. 

Maybe sexual issues are easier to see because the exclusivity most of us expect in our relationships? Maybe sexual rejection is pretty easy to come by when other things are going wrong, and the last thing to be fixed?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

PieceOfSky said:


> Bonding for "men" isn't possible exclusively through sex. _*Where did you get the idea it was*_?


From what I've read on TAM
From what I've read on other forums
From what other men have TOLD me
From what my own late HUSBAND has told me
From what several male friends have told me
From what several female friends have told me about men.
From various articles I've read on the internet and in magazines throughout the years.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

Vega said:


> I think a lot of what you wrote just "depends". For example: If my husband told me that he wanted me to have sex with another man while he watched, I just might respond with, "I'd rather stick an ice pick in my eye than do that!" Now, is he going to try to convince me that I don't "love" him and that I'm not "meeting his 'needs'" _unless I do that_? I wouldn't feel bad about _myself_; but I WOULD feel bad about _HIM_!
> 
> And, if ANY man every suggested that to me, he'd be looking at divorce papers on the kitchen table in a matter of hours.
> 
> "Needs" be _damned_!


That is imaging how justified you'd feel in rejecting him harshly for a request you deemed b.s., deceptive, out of bounds.

I was asking how you'd feel if he rejected you in a harsh way for something you truly needed to feel loved. 


If that doesn't make the connection to stress and unhappiness seem clear, imagine now it was something that he seemingly enjoyed doing with you before marriage and kids, and you together wrote it into your wedding vows. And now, it's clear, he really does not enjoy it, hates it in fact, says its your fault he does want to do it anymore, says he never really connected with you while doing it in the way he had connected with the ones before you, and no one would want to do it with you if you left. After awhile, you either learn to own what is yours and address it, or bear more than you should and implode.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

> *The purpose of why men desire sex with a spouse?*


I can't speak for all men and won't pretend to either, that said as far as I'm concerned I desire sex with my wife because; I am very sexual, I am attracted to her, I enjoy it immensely, it’s a lot of fun and I want to share that enjoyment and fun with her.

I also don't think sex is the font of love, or some sort of sacred act either. For me sex is just something that feels really good. In fact if it didn't feel good, I can't imagine consciously wanting any sex at all. At the same time, my desire to have sex has never revolved around wanting to have children either.

My desire to have sex is simply a powerful urge to satiate my want to enjoy the pleasure of it, with someone that I am attracted to. Coincident with that more primal desire, I also consciously want to share the pleasure that sex brings me, with someone who wants to consensually share having sex with me.

Having said that, sex certainly isn't the primary way that I connect to my wife.

As it stands my connection with my wife is a sum of various critically important, like with like connections.

For example I feel connected to my wife emotionally, because we share our emotions together. Just as I feel connected to her physically, because we touch each other. I also feel connected to her socially, because we invest in each other socially. Just as I also feel a sexual connection with her, because we share sex together.

That said in order for those above mentioned connections to collectively thrive they require a coincident and mutual investment in; effective communication, time, self worth, self respect, self awareness, patience, empathy, respect, admiration and desire.

I connect with my wife primarily by spending a lot of time talking to her, all of our other connections seem to grow and flow from that.

Coming back to sex my wife and I (as we have talked about this) both share the same perspective. We both have had no problems having sex with others (or each other when we started dating) without being in love. To the point that for us love in and of itself has little bearing on how good or bad sex can be.

Regardless of love we have both enjoyed terrific sex with accomplished sexual partners plus awful sex with sub-par sexual partners. In our experience an absence of love doesn't preclude one from sharing sex that leaves all participants feeling deeply fulfilled. Just like being in love doesn't preclude one from sharing sex that leaves one or both partners deeply disappointed.

On its own my wife and I don't need love to desire sex, have it and or enjoy it. Likewise on its own my wife and I don't have sex to feel specifically loved either, that said we do both enjoy having sex with people we are in love with just as long as they click with us sexually and are accomplished lovers.

So for us connecting sexually is exactly that, nothing more nothing less! It is simply another part of the greater whole that we share.

In my experience there are plenty of women (and men) who have no problems at all having sex with someone they don't love. Just like there are plenty of men (and women) who have no problem loving people they don't have sex with.

So the idea that "women need love for sex and men need sex for love" is nothing but utter poppyc0ck!



always_alone said:


> I'm just glad I don't have to revise my conclusions that I am an interchangeable vagina that is just good for some sex if he's feeling a bit horny.


I don't know about vaginas being interchangeable. That said since men and women can both have sex with or without being in love, and over time can have different sexual partners consecutively and or coincidentally. It is fair to say that whatever our genitalia, all of us are evidently replaceable!



> _And I know I'll never lose affection
> For people and things that went before_
> 
> Lennon–McCartney


It took a previous divorce for me to be okay with that, how about you?


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

notmyrealname4 said:


> But I tend to think these men would talk a different talk if their horny wife greeting them at the door in garter belt and stockings was letting the laundry pile up on the floor and was feeding him Chef Boyardee for dinner on a regular basis.


Sorry. Not true. I lived alone in a pig sty before I married my wife. I ate mostly fast food. While married my wife rarely cooked dinner for me because I typically got home late and either had already eaten or heated up leftovers from what I cooked for her and the kids on Sunday. Would have been thrilled if my wife had ever greeted me in lingerie and had sex with me, and would never have even noticed if the house was messy. Heck, if my wife were mostly horny I never would have made it past the master bedroom and bathroom to even notice what the other rooms look like.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> Your post gave me pause to think about something.
> 
> I wonder why it is that so many men seem to tie up their feelings of self-worth into one 'package' that we call SEX?
> 
> ...


Why do you think we have any control over what makes us feel connected any more than a woman does? I mean do you control how you feel connected? I know I don't


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

techmom said:


> This is a great and honest post. I do believe that guys do bond emotionally with sex, however for me I am trying to understand why it is just through sex. Everyone, before becoming sexually active, emotionally bonded in other ways, why did it change?


For me it isn't just sex but sex with someone I am in love with. Big difference between the two, least for me 


I can have sex and feel no love or connection. I can't however maintain a connection or love indefinitely without sex


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

techmom said:


> On the other hand, I feel that some men who insist on pestering their LD wives for sex when they are clearly not in the mood are not acting in a loving way, in fact they are behaving in a way that demonstrates that all they want is to get their rocks off. How are some men able to feel emotional closeness while having sex with an unwilling partner, that baffles me.


OK, I'll bite.

If my wife were willing to consent despite not being in the mood, I would feel very loved. The sex in that situation would create a huge emotional connection for me because I would feel that my wife loves me enough to have sex with me despite her not being in the mood.

Now, after a long time of my wife never being in the mood, I realized she does not enjoy having sex with me. I realized that her granting consent is not a sign of her love for me, but simply her desire to avoid my negative reaction to our not having sex. So I stopped having sex with her. I now find sex with my unwilling partner precisely as unappealing as I should have from the beginning.

Sex was never and is not about "getting my rocks off". If it were, then masturbation would be a good substitute, which it absolutely is NOT. Sex is about my wife granting consent to engage in a very intimate activity. Sex is about my wife communicating that she values our relationship enough to literally allow me into her inner world. Sex is how my wife shows me she loves me. Sex is how I feel loved.

Look, I wish there were some other way for my wife to express her love for me that had as much impact on me as our having sex. I wish there was something else she could do for me that was less of a burden for her. I wish she could communicate her love my talking intimately and spending time together and cooking and cleaning and caring for the kids. We would be much more compatible if I felt loved when she did those things. But I don't.

As techmom said, people who find it very difficult to find a sex partner who is willing to grant consent tend to place a very high value on obtaining consent. It makes us feel special to receive consent precisely because consent is so difficult to obtain. We develop a strong emotional bond to someone who shows themselves willing to consent on a regular basis. Getting isolated consent from a stranger is not the same. 

Having consent denied by someone to whom we have a strong emotional bond is incredibly painful. "Pestering" an unwilling spouse to have sex is partly an effort to end the incredible pain of being denied repeatedly by someone we care about deeply. Perhaps not a wise strategy. But quite understandable. 

Just as women tend to nag when men do not do their "honey do" list. Is that really the best way to get him to do his "chores"? Do you really want to impose your demands on an unwilling participant? Shouldn't the man being nagged feel like a pile of "interchangeable appendages"? Isn't the woman just "using" the man to get her chores done? Why can't the woman simply do all the chores herself? Wouldn't she feel the same love from her husband whether he does the chores or not?


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

always_alone said:


> I have disconnected sex all the time, and my SO doesn't notice a thing.
> 
> Is that sex about connection?


Yes, it may well be. Why are you assuming that you not enjoying the sex or feeling a connection to him through sex means that he does not feel a connection to YOU from sex? Why does the connection have to be mutual?

My wife feels loved through Acts of Service. So I do Acts of Service for her. I do not enjoy them. I do not feel closer to her or more connected by doing them. But SHE feels love and connection when I do them. So I do them.

Same with gifts. She loves gifts. She feels more connected by getting me gifts. So I get her gifts. Problem comes when she tries to get me gifts. I don't care about gifts. I would rather she save the money. I try to be gracious when she gets me gifts, but it does nothing to help me feel more connected to her. So when she gets me gifts, it is like I am the one having starfish gifting.

Our marriage would work well if I gave her lots of gifts and performed many Acts of Service and she consented to lots of sex. None of those activities would be mutual but we would both feel very loved.


----------



## Duguesclin (Jan 18, 2014)

Tortdog said:


> Maybe this is too simple but I like sex because it feels pretty good.


Me too.

I can't believe there are so many posts to discuss something so simple.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> OK, I'll bite.
> 
> Look, I wish there were some other way for my wife to express her love for me that had as much impact on me as our having sex. I wish there was something else she could do for me that was less of a burden for her. I wish she could communicate her love my talking intimately and spending time together and cooking and cleaning and caring for the kids. We would be much more compatible if I felt loved when she did those things. But I don't.


Are you saying that they ONLY way you feel "loved" by her is when she has sex with you, even if she doesn't want to?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> :rofl::rofl::rofl:
> 
> Oh my, Buddy. There are a zillion red pill, alpha threads on this site, and I've seen you chime in on more than one.
> 
> Indeed, I've seen you claim outright that sex is men's number 1 priority, and that most men want sex with any minimally attractive woman.


I'd probably agree that sex (physical touch love language) is men's number one need. I don't how that makes it impossible for men to feel an emotional connection via sex with their wives. In fact, I'd think it reinforces the notion. 



always_alone said:


> Right on this very thread, you said that marriage is basically a way for guys who can't get enough interest otherwise.


That was a response to someone proposing (what seemed to me) that we all just get rid of marriage and bonk whom we please. I replied that probably wouldn't work out for the less attractive people. Then I said that this was probably why marriage was invented. Then, after being taken too seriously, I subsequently noted that I should have added a smiley face after that.

If that's misogyny, you've got an over active imagination.



always_alone said:


> But I ask you again: Do you not see any mixed messages here?


Nope


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

techmom said:


> "Horror stories" of marrying the perfect virgin bride only to find out that after years of marriage they weren't able to turn her into a sex vixen by the sheer force of their manhood. Damn he needs to stop being a nice guy, because she would be different if he was more alpha/bad boy/etc.


The only time I've heard about someone marrying a virgin with the expectation that she would turn into a sex vixen was when you described it happening in your marriage.

I've never heard anyone else describe a man having such unlikely expectations.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> Our marriage would work well if I gave her lots of gifts and performed many Acts of Service and she consented to lots of sex. None of those activities would be mutual but we would both feel very loved.


Are you SURE about that?

How about if your wife told you that the ONLY way she could feel "love" by you was by you spending money on her, and that NO OTHER WAY would do?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

It would be nice if these threads ever developed into something that help the genders gain a better understand each other and improve relationships.

But they always seem to result in me thinking "women just aren't worth it" (and I'm sure women saying "men just aren't worth it").

And now I have to go through the exercise of not letting this built up bitterness affect my real life.

Time for a TAM break.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

@alwaysalone said:


> It just isn't about connection if it is all about having an appetite and expecting someone to drop everything and feed you. *As I have said again and again and again, there is nothing wrong with wanting sex and saying so. It is only manipulative when you are pretending it's about them when it isn't.*
> 
> Not sure why this is so hard:scratchhead:





Holland said:


> Will say the same as before, it is not fair to disregard what these guys are saying. You are basically calling them liars.
> 
> *In a LTR I have never felt what you are suggesting here which is that all men do is use women for sex. *
> 
> ...


Here are my thoughts on this.. .whatever our previous experiences have been, has shaped & molded our beliefs in this area.. 

I have gotten mad at my husband for NOT coming on to me more heavily in our past -when he WANTED more







(to him , it's never sex, it's always "making love".. his words)..... when I brought this up a few times.. he made it very clear to me WHY he didn't push.. 

He said he Never wanted me *to THINK *it was "just about sex" because it never was.. it meant THAT MUCH To him, that he put himself down -just so I wouldn't THINK THAT... that kinda blew my mind ...then I argued .. "well so what you were in the mood, you wanted me ...come after me.. it's all good.. I was your wife darn [email protected]@# 

The thing is.. he thinks very lowly of men who *use* women like that. he could never be that sort of man..... he's obviously well aware men are DOGS.. he hears them go on at work often enough.. 

It's easy for me to say "I wouldn't mind some DOG- bring it on!"...as it's just a mind play for me what that might be like.. I think HOT SEX/ eroticism / Steamy Lust / the man TAKING you when he's in need..and I don't add to it.. he may just want to get off , any woman will do.. (that part does not appeal to me at all -but what if that's how they really feel!)...

So yeah.. there will be differences of opinion on this.. when I speak about it personally I DO go on how we can hurt our men if we don't show our love physically, through Touch, initiation, desire...that there is some emotional NEED for a man.. but that's cause I married this sort of man. I very much appreciate how BadSanta explained his opening post.. that resonated with me.. all of this...



badsanta said:


> So for women out there that feel the above pretty much just puts it out there and tells it like it is, I want to say that you do NOT understand men!
> 
> *I personally feel a desire to have sex with my wife, because I need to feel she accepts me in the relationship. And I do mean that quite literally in saying that I need to feel she accepts my physical being (mostly represented by my penis) into her physical being (mostly represented by her vagina) as a way to feel loved. *Often this need to reaffirm feeling accepted is driven by moments of feeling disconnected from her (call that emotional distance if you will), resulting in a desire to reconnect physically. My emotions are my emotions and they become enhanced by hormones and transformed into an erection.


 I'd say my husband is HIGH on the bar in the "emotional" over the average men.. he wouldn't even enjoy the act if I wasn't into it.. there are many men who wouldn't care about that.. so long as they "get theirs"...then they'll just get up & go about their business.. 

Talking to a friend recently about this very subject..... she has never experienced a man who FELT LIKE THAT.. in her world/ experiences.. so long as they "got theirs"- they were happy, even her own husband, she'd say he's a good man, she loves him ... she doesn't mind this ... so understanding Men LIKE MY HUSBAND was foreign to her.. I think we were both a little "WOWed" by that.. Like "[email protected]#"

Now...If I was with that sort of guy.. that would pi$$ me off...I'd question if he really loved me!.. so yeah.. I can see how a woman could resent that.. she has to be more of a Pleaser by her very nature ...which would explain why it didn't matter so much to her...she was just happy to please him.. I would think this might get old.. I don't know.. I want pleased.. I want to Please.. I want to feel all those emotions wrapped up into each other..

For BadSanta.. I found this on the net, used it in one of my threads.. how deeply this can go for some men.. (again I see my own husband here)...



> *2*.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

techmom said:


> I posted my story numerous times on these forums, suffice it to say, I don't get it when men complain about not getting sex when they support their wife, because I make double what my husband makes, it doesn't make me bitter about not getting sex.
> 
> I'll tell you one thing though, he still wishes I was the domestic goddess, still complains of no sex even though I told him what my needs are to feel loved, I still don't feel loved. I'm LD because I am unfulfilled in this relationship, he thinks I'm frigid.
> 
> I'll bet that if we decide to divorce, he will find a domestic oriented woman who makes less, but will complain about not having money. He will complain about the frigid, angry wife who hated him. And I'm not, and I don't hate him.


"Feel loved" is a bit too broad a concept. Like "world peace" etc. Have you tried a basic break down of the ways you feel loved. More KPI than 5LL...

Could the income disparity impact your perception of love?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Holland said:


> High EQ is one of the best attributes you can find in a man, paired with high IQ..


A lot of good my high IQ and even higher EQ have done me 😂


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

techmom said:


> This is a great and honest post. I do believe that guys do bond emotionally with sex, however for me I am trying to understand why it is just through sex. Everyone, before becoming sexually active, emotionally bonded in other ways, why did it change?


Because we can get everything else we need.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

john117 said:


> A lot of good my high IQ and even higher EQ have done me &#55357;&#56834;


Ok this is going to sound really bad but are you sure you have a high EQ John?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Holland said:


> Ok this is going to sound really bad but are you sure you have a high EQ John?


Yep.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

john117 said:


> Because we can get everything else we need.


What like man love, otherwise who needs women?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Personal said:


> What like man love, otherwise who needs women?


Half-seriously. . Kinda. Man bonding and so on.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Vega said:


> Your post gave me pause to think about something.
> 
> I wonder why it is that so many men seem to tie up their feelings of self-worth into one 'package' that we call SEX?
> 
> ...


I think a large part of it is that sex, and feeling attractive to, and desired by a particular person is one of the very few thing that simply can not be self validated. There is no objective measure for it...it is completely subjective and in the hands of the other person.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

john117 said:


> Because we can get everything else we need.


This is a sentiment that I am grateful that my DH does not share. I am not just a female to him, an object of sexuality that would be unnecessary except for the femininity. I am a PERSON. I have thoughts. I can share conversation. I have a sense of humor. I am fun to do things with. That sharing makes me cherish him in all ways, including sexually.

This is contrasted with my ex who would have said something very similar to that. He is now an ex.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> It would be nice if these threads ever developed into something that help the genders gain a better understand each other and improve relationships.
> 
> But they always seem to result in me thinking "women just aren't worth it" (and I'm sure women saying "men just aren't worth it").


Women aren't worth it? Why Buddy400? You always claim that your sex life is rocking, your wife is very happy with you, and you love her dearly.

Surely she is your model of what's worth it, not TAM?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

samyeagar said:


> I think a large part of it is that sex, and feeling attractive to, and desired by a particular person is one of the very few thing that simply can not be self validated. There is no objective measure for it...it is completely subjective and in the hands of the other person.


One of the things that strikes me is that my DH can feel positively WITH sex, but no one has the power to wreck him without it. That is very attractive.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

PieceOfSky said:


> No apology is necessary, but thanks.
> 
> I don't think you should STFU. I think you should carefully listen to what it is you are saying. I misspoke when I said your sympathy is self-serving. Self-deceiving white-washing is closer to what I was thinking. (I hasten to add this is all just speculation...I have no idea what is in anyone's head!). What I mean is, on this one particular issue -- what it is that men might want when seeking sex, or what sex means sometimes for a man -- you seem to give lip service to the notion that what some say is true for them might be true, yet simultaneously and solidly hold on to the belief it's a line and men want sex, effectively always, for reasons that (best I can imagine) would leave you feeling interchangeable, deceived, Unchosen, unwanted, unworthy, not preferred, used, and always alone.
> 
> ...


You may very well be right! 

I mean, from my perspective, I see the mixed messages all the time here on TAM, and I actually think they provide a useful clue to some of the problems of sexlessness that many men are facing. I think to myself: "If some random Internet stranger like me can be so utterly turned off by these attitudes to women, then what must their wives be feeling?"

At the same time, I also realize that this is but one diagnosis and certainly does not apply across the board. And trust, me, I know something about rejection and how it feels. I am sympathetic because I have been there. It isn't an abstract issue that someone else suffers, it is the story of my life.

The only guys who ever wanted anything to do with me just wanted some sex and to throw me back on the scrap heap. Otherwise I was completely invisible. "Meh", as they say. 

And then I came to TAM, and saw the chart that keeps getting circulated around here that supposedly captures how men feel about women, the hot/crazy matrix, and this is where I learned that I fall squarely in the category of "good to use for sex, but no good for LTR". It was eye-opening, it explained so much, but also was so depressing.

At any rate, TAM both confirmed and explained a lot of things for me. And I still see women treated as objects, interchangeable vaginas, good for a release and no more. I know I'm not imagining this. 

But I also know that because of a long history with this, I find it very hard to trust that it can be different. That part is abstract for me. Other people seem to find it, but it doesn't work that way for me.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> One of the things that strikes me is that my DH can feel positively WITH sex, but *no one has the power to wreck him without it*. That is very attractive.


This is important. How one deals with a lack of validation. For myself, I don't feel or get all whiny, begging, or even angry or upset. What happens to me without the validation is that I start to lose desire.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Vega said:


> Are you saying that they ONLY way you feel "loved" by her is when she has sex with you, even if she doesn't want to?


Not exactly. Here is Hold's theory of "marriage math".

Every marriage involves daily friction. Little annoyances or disappointments that reduce one spouse's love for the other. When things in the marriage are going well, this daily loss is maybe 5 or 10 love units. When things are going poorly, the daily loss might be 20 or 30 love units.

For many men, having sex with their wife deposits something like 75 love units. Most other activities a wife can do for her husband deposit low single digits of love units. It is not that he doesn't care at all. But he doesn't care all that much.

When things are going well in the marriage, maybe a wife can get away with not having sex and her daily shows of love in other ways can outweigh the relatively small drag of friction. But when things are going poorly, if she doesn't have sex with him once or twice during the week, there is basically no way she can "earn" enough love units to offset the higher level of friction. That helps explain why some men are oblivious to a wife withdrawing all the other little signs of love but notices immediately when the sex stops.

It also explains why many men seem to care "only" about sex. it isn't that other actions don't deposit love units. It is just that those actions are valued so much less than sex, and are relatively small in connection to the drag of daily friction, that sex is basically the sole activity that makes a difference in whether the total number of love units being deposited is above or below daily drag. The presence or absence of sex is thus outcome determinative.

So while I like the other things my wife does for me. And they do add to my love for her. Without sex, she is basically fighting a losing battle. It is a war of attrition, and she can't offset her losses.

I am confident that marriage math works basically the same way for many women, except that the values are different. Many women do not place such an outsized positive value on sex. So for women, feeling loved is more about lots of little things her husband does that add up to enough to offset the daily drag. But no one item is outcome determinative.

And I think it is also a factor explaining why couples are choosing not to get married even if they have kids. And why men are bewildered about what exactly is their role in marriage. A couple of generations ago, a man going out and earning money and bringing it home to his wife probably was worth far more love units than that behavior is worth today. So "back in the day", a man providing for his wife might well have been enough to offset daily drag and for the woman to feel loved. Now it isn't enough.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Vega said:


> Are you SURE about that?
> 
> How about if your wife told you that the ONLY way she could feel "love" by you was by you spending money on her, and that NO OTHER WAY would do?


Yes, quite sure. Which part of "gift giving" did you think was not about me spending money?

So if she said "dump the Acts of Service and just focus on the gift giving" that would not be a major change in our marriage or my analysis. In some sense it would be easier for me because I would have only one category to fulfill instead of two.

Now, if you are saying "but what if you don't earn enough to spend enough to satisfy her?", well, then she wouldn't be happy. But what makes you think that does not happen all the time? Are you suggesting that there aren't hordes of women who judge men on their wealth and earning power and dump men who don't appear to "measure up" on the money scale? Not suggesting all women are like that but there are plenty of examples. As many as men who focus solely on sex? Maybe not.

If I did not earn enough to support my wife in the style she wanted to live, she would be unhappy. Just as if she is not capable of having sex at a minimally acceptable level of frequency and enthusiasm, I am not happy.

There were plenty of years in which I did not earn enough to keep her happy and there was plenty of stress on both sides. Which part of "spent all my savings and ran up huge credit card debts" did not make that clear? I changed jobs and moved our family 1000 miles so I could earn more and try to bring the "marriage math" more into balance. I don't like other aspects of living here as much as I liked living there. But I make enough here to keep things balanced so I stay.

If you are suggesting that my wife ought to be happy with me regardless of how much I earn or how much we can afford for her to spend, sorry, it simply does not work that way. For us. If it works that way for you, I think that is a blessing for you and for any man fortunate enough to be in a relationship with you.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

notmyrealname4 said:


> And I'd say you're rare; if you really _would_ be happy getting loads of sex, but with a sloppy house and eating out of cans. It's too bad you couldn't have ended up with a woman who had that type of personality; because she would be grateful that you didn't nag her about cooking and cleaning, when what she does best is have sex.


Problem is that I am ugly, underendowed and lousy in bed. So any woman who was good in bed and enjoyed it wouldn't want to be with me. A wiser man would have hit the gym, gotten a better body and focused on learning how to please a woman sexually. I just spent more hours at work trying to earn more money. 

Very clear in hindsight that this decision pretty much guaranteed I would end up where I am. Any woman claiming to be willing to have sex with ME on a regular basis must not be all that into sex. Which means once she habituates to my earning power, verbal affirmations, help with the kids, etc., she is going to stop consenting to have sex. Because she never really wanted to in the first place.

Which is why fixing the problem would require so much work on my part. To become fit. To learn how to please a woman with no willing partner available. To divorce my wife and find a woman who actually enjoys sex. And wants to have that sex with me. Despite my being short and small (albeit in this alternate universe muscular and fit). That would be a HUGE undertaking.

I'd rather just continue posting as a warning to other men not to follow in my footsteps. I am tired and sore today because I spent the weekend acquiring the components and building a huge wardrobe for my wife so she has more room for her clothes. She feels very loved because I expended much time, energy and money on Gift Giving and Acts of Service. If I get tired screwing nuts and bolts into Ikea furniture, imagine how exhausted I would be if I tried to have sex!!!!!


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

john117 said:


> Because we can get everything else we need.


Actually, I think in today's society it is women who can get everything they want and need by themselves. It is women who don't need men. Not the other way around.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> Not exactly. Here is Hold's theory of "marriage math".
> 
> Every marriage involves daily friction. Little annoyances or disappointments that reduce one spouse's love for the other. When things in the marriage are going well, this daily loss is maybe 5 or 10 love units. When things are going poorly, the daily loss might be 20 or 30 love units.
> 
> ...


I can sort of understand what you're saying, although I don't necessarily agree with it. Especially the last paragraph, but we'll get to that in a minute.

A man can do little things for the woman all day long. It doesn't mean she wants to have _sex_ at the end of that day. She may feel emotionally close to him, but in a non-sexual way.

For now. 

Now, there are SOME women who might feel guilty if her husband was tending to her non-sexual needs all day long and "reward" him with some form of sex. And still there are OTHER women who wouldn't even notice the little things he did for her all day long; she's just horney and she wants her orgasm. NOW! 

Now I'll make it even more complicated for you. All three of those situations can be wrapped up in the _same woman_! What 'works' today, may not work tomorrow.

I can understand that when she has sex with you, she deposits so many "units" into the "account". You may SAY that after those units are deposited that you're more inclined to deposit units into HER account. But here's the thing: Many times, the woman doesn't feel like she's getting the proper return on her investment. It also occurs to me as I'm typing this, that if a man is doing things BECAUSE he expects to get sex, it won't take long for her to figure it out.

And become turned off to it. 

As for your last paragraph, we can't forget that back in "the day", women didn't have the means to leave an otherwise bad marriage. While some women may have had sex with their husband's out of GRATITUDE for "providing" for them, they realized how one-sided the relationship was. The husband was pretty much catered to (proverbial greeting at the door handing him a martini and a newspaper). He may have believed that providing a paycheck was "enough", and he otherwise really wasn't involved with married life. If his wife had 'needs', she didn't _dare_ 'burden' him with HERS. Being a divorced man brought sympathy from others, but being a divorced _woman_ brought much more negativity ("can't you KEEP a man?)

And yes, there still ARE men out there who think their paycheck should be "enough". If I had a complaint about something (usually his drinking 2 six packs of beer every night and not being plugged into his family), my ex would say, "Don't I provide a roof over your head and food in your stomach?" 

*siiiiiiigh*


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> Actually, I think in today's society it is women who can get everything they want and need by themselves. It is women who don't need men. Not the other way around.


I agree, at least *for me*. 

I can make my own money, so I don't need a man for money.
I never had really intimacy with a man outside of the bedroom, so I'm not really missing that.
I can give myself my own orgasms, usually FASTER and STRONGER than with a man. 
I have several platonic male friends, so I can get a male perspective when I want. 
If I feel unsafe, I can always carry a handgun and get a dog.

And the next relationship I get into with a man won't be because I "need" a man; it'll be because I WANT one.

Maybe this way is better. Instead of taking advantage of each other (because we "need" each other), perhaps we can learn to be _grateful_ to the other for what they're giving us.

Including being _grateful_ for the sex we get!


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> I agree, at least *for me*.
> 
> I can make my own money, so I don't need a man for money.
> I never had really intimacy with a man outside of the bedroom, so I'm not really missing that.
> ...


Really then, men and women don't need each other, except maybe to procreate lol.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> Actually, I think in today's society it is women who can get everything they want and need by themselves. It is women who don't need men. Not the other way around.


I don't need a man for financial reasons. So I don't need to exchange sex for income. I do need MY man for his TLC.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Vega: Not saying a woman is ever obliged to have sex with a man. Even if he is her husband. She doesn't OWE him sex. Even if he meets all of her needs.

I AM saying that I, and many other men, need regular sex in order to be happy in our marriages. Does not mean that our wife is obliged to consent to sex. Does mean that if she doesn't, we won't be happy. Maybe that means we divorce her. Maybe that means we stay married and are miserable. What we choose to do to deal with the absence of sex is our problem.

I am totally in agreement that my wife is allowed to say "no" whenever she feels like saying no. Why the heck do you think we have had so little sex in our marriage? I always took no for an answer.

Was I HAPPY to have to take no for an answer so often? No. Did I try to do whatever I could to motivate her to want to say "yes" more often? Yes, I did. Were some of my efforts misguided? Yes, they were. Am I proud of everything I did to try to motivate her? No.

The good news is that I have finally (again, slow learner) caught on that the proper reaction to my partner's lack of desire for me is for me to stop trying to have sex with her. That the proper reaction to my partner showing a willingness to have unwanted sex is for me to decline the unwanted sex. At this point, I don't try to have sex with her. And she doesn't try to have sex with me. Which indicates that my choice to refrain was the correct one.

Am I as happy to be married to her as I would be if she exhibited a desire to have sex with me? No. Do I expect to ever love her as much as I would if we had an active and mutually satisfying sex life? No. 

Do I think that obliges her to consent to sex with me? No. Of course not.

What I can't figure out is why she wants to stay married to me. Do I tell her daily she is beautiful? Yes, because she is. Do I tell her daily that she is amazingly competent and that every employer she ever worked for has thought she was excellent? Yes, because she is and they do. Do I tell her daily that she brought me the 2 best kids in the world and that I will cherish her forever for that? Yes, because she did and I will. But do I tell her that she makes me happy and that I am glad I married her? No. I tell her I would be lost without her, because I would be. That is different.

By now she must realize how I feel. Why doesn't she leave? Not that I want her to. The financial hit to me would be horrendous and the kids would not be happy. I am content to remain married to her forever despite the complete absence of sex. Apparently, she wishes to pretend that things are different than they are. As Rick said to Victor in Casablanca "that was over long ago. She wanted to pretend it wasn't, and I let her pretend."


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> This is a sentiment that I am grateful that my DH does not share. I am not just a female to him, an object of sexuality that would be unnecessary except for the femininity. I am a PERSON. I have thoughts. I can share conversation. I have a sense of humor. I am fun to do things with. That sharing makes me cherish him in all ways, including sexually.
> 
> This is contrasted with my ex who would have said something very similar to that. He is now an ex.


I do agree but sex generally makes the difference between a friendship and a relationship. 

I have plenty of friends, male or female, that I can share conversation, laugh, and do fun things with. Heck, I'm also the unofficial intern relationship advisor 😂...

There's lots of things I used to enjoy with my wife and those, much like intimacy, have gone the way of the dodo bird.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> Actually, I think in today's society it is women who can get everything they want and need by themselves. It is women who don't need men. Not the other way around.


It's a matter of degree. 

Women have it easier, definitely, but self sufficient, emotionally strong, and financially accomplished men such as myself need what exactly from anyone, male or female?


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> I don't need a man for financial reasons. So I don't need to exchange sex for income. I do need MY man for his TLC.


The basic problem is that in terms of populations (as opposed to individuals), men tend to desire sex more than women do. Maybe it is testosterone. Maybe it is social conditioning of women to be uncomfortable with their own sexuality. Whatever it is, men in general and on average have stronger desire for more sex than do an analogous population of women.

That means that the typical man is going to have to trade SOMETHING to get the sex he wants. Because his partner probably would be happy with less than he desires. If she doesn't want to trade for financial reasons, that what DOES she want to trade? And how much does she value each instance of those other things? In many cases, it takes so many little signs of love and affection for a man to "earn" some sex that he can never catch up to his desire.

Which is why I feel so many mismatches are doomed. Dude, she is just not that hot for you. Deal with it. Yes, in some cases the guy has an annoying habit that is blocking the woman's expression of her more than sufficient desire for him. if he ditches the bad habit and pays attention to her Love Languages then maybe he can get to a mutually fulfilling sex life. But in many cases there is simply nothing the guy can do to get his wife's level of desire for him up to where his is for her.

I believe I am one of those cases.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

john117 said:


> I do agree but sex generally makes the difference between a friendship and a relationship.
> 
> I have plenty of friends, male or female, that I can share conversation, laugh, and do fun things with. Heck, I'm also the unofficial intern relationship advisor 😂...
> 
> There's lots of things I used to enjoy with my wife and those, much like intimacy, have gone the way of the dodo bird.


That is a pretty shallow relationship. I like a relationship with intimacy, trust and love.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> That is a pretty shallow relationship. I like a relationship with intimacy, trust and love.


No disagreement - but the three are related. As in, three sides of the same triangle. One side may be smaller or larger than the others but still a triangle. 

So, it's not just sex that men want after all 😂

Q.E.D.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

Vega said:


> Are you SURE about that?
> 
> How about if your wife told you that the ONLY way she could feel "love" by you was by you spending money on her, and that NO OTHER WAY would do?


I have no problem with this. My wife has never said this, but I know that this is one of the ways she feels loved. She is a SAHM and was an interior decorator. Our home was bought primarily for her. The furniture and decorating is all her. I know she loves doing these things and is proud of the house. Doesn't do much for me. But we spend a ton of money on these things because it is important to her.

All I ask is that she put effort into what is important to me.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Women aren't worth it? Why Buddy400? You always claim that your sex life is rocking, your wife is very happy with you, and you love her dearly.
> 
> Surely she is your model of what's worth it, not TAM?


That's the perverse thing about this.

My life is fine, I'm just getting discouraged on principle.

Which is stupid.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> This is a sentiment that I am grateful that my DH does not share. I am not just a female to him, an object of sexuality that would be unnecessary except for the femininity. I am a PERSON. I have thoughts. I can share conversation. I have a sense of humor. I am fun to do things with. That sharing makes me cherish him in all ways, including sexually.
> 
> This is contrasted with my ex who would have said something very similar to that. He is now an ex.


I think John's point was that you can get all the other non-sexual things you described from having close friends.

What's the one thing that separates a spouse from a very close friend?

Sex.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> But I also know that because of a long history with this, I find it very hard to trust that it can be different. That part is abstract for me. Other people seem to find it, but it doesn't work that way for me.


The real question is, do you want it to be different? Or do you want to become more entrenched in your current position, with a false label of "safety" assigned to it?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> Really then, men and women don't need each other, except maybe to procreate lol.


Yup! And we don't even need to have sex to do THAT anymore!


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> Yup! And we don't even need to have sex to do THAT anymore!


Even better, we don't even need TAM :wink2:


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> I think John's point was that you can get all the other non-sexual things you described from having close friends.
> 
> What's the one thing that separates a spouse from a very close friend?
> 
> Sex.


Trust. Intimacy. Love. Commitment.If all I got from my husband that distinguished him from anyone else, I would not have as much interest in the commitment.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> The good news is that I have finally (again, slow learner) caught on that the *proper reaction to my partner's lack of desire for me is for me to stop trying to have sex with her*. That the proper reaction to my partner showing a willingness to have unwanted sex is for me to decline the unwanted sex. At this point, I don't try to have sex with her. And she doesn't try to have sex with me. Which indicates that my choice to refrain was the correct one.
> "


YES! You've got HALF of the problem solved right there! 

The other half is to learn how to become _intimate_ with her in non-sexual ways.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> That means that the typical man is going to have to trade SOMETHING to get the sex he wants. Because his partner probably would be happy with less than he desires. If she doesn't want to trade for financial reasons, that what DOES she want to trade? And how much does she value each instance of those other things? In many cases, it takes so many little signs of love and affection for a man to "earn" some sex that he can never catch up to his desire.


Instead of trying to "get more", why not try to learn how to want it less?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

marduk said:


> I think John's point was that you can get all the other non-sexual things you described from having close friends.
> 
> What's the one thing that separates a spouse from a very close friend?
> 
> Sex.


But how MUCH sex?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Holdingontoit said:


> And I think it is also a factor explaining why couples are choosing not to get married even if they have kids. And why men are bewildered about what exactly is their role in marriage. A couple of generations ago, a man going out and earning money and bringing it home to his wife probably was worth far more love units than that behavior is worth today. So "back in the day", a man providing for his wife might well have been enough to offset daily drag and for the woman to feel loved. Now it isn't enough.


There's a truth here that's uncomfortable to deal with.

The old social compact of marriage was that men got sex and women got support and security. I'm not saying this is the way it should be, but it was.

Now women don't need men for support and security (and few young men want their wives to be SAHMs).

If the need for security and support is no longer a reason to desire men, women are going to need to find some other reason to want them.

I think most men are willing to do whatever it is that women decide they want (although they probably shouldn't be).

I'm not at all sure that most women have figured out what to replace the traditional need for security and support with.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> Trust. Intimacy. Love. Commitment.If all I got from my husband that distinguished him from anyone else, I would not have as much interest in the commitment.


Trust, commitment, and (manly) love - 😂 - are also words I would use to describe a couple of my male friends I've known for decades.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Vega said:


> But how MUCH sex?


Ah, that's where it gets ugly.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

Vega said:


> I can sort of understand what you're saying, although I don't necessarily agree with it. Especially the last paragraph, but we'll get to that in a minute.
> 
> A man can do little things for the woman all day long. It doesn't mean she wants to have _sex_ at the end of that day. She may feel emotionally close to him, but in a non-sexual way.
> 
> ...


Yes, sadly, the only way this works is if you are married to someone that loves you, cares about your needs, and believes they actually exist. Without that, it doesn't matter how many love units get deposited.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> I don't need a man for financial reasons. So I don't need to exchange sex for income. I do need MY man for his TLC.


How selfish!

That is exactly like me saying, "I don't need a woman for friendship because of I have tons of friends. So I don't need to exchange TLC for sex. I do need MY woman for SEX."


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

SadSamIAm said:


> How selfish!
> 
> That is exactly like me saying, "I don't need a woman for friendship because of I have tons of friends. So I don't need to exchange TLC for sex. I do need MY woman for SEX."


Thats backassward. TLC includes sex.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> I think that at some point a wife should realize that her husband just has a larger appetite than she does, and she should *feed him*. Just like at dinner, she gives him the biggest portion of meat and potatoes and saves him an extra large slice of pie, while she might eat a sliver of it, if that. He has a bigger appetite - it's not a character flaw.


this is solid.

it should go the other way too. the husband can at a certain point realize his wife has a different appetite than him and not blame her for that.

neither way is a character flaw.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

john117 said:


> Ah, that's where it gets ugly.


Yes, but did it occur to anyone that maybe we don't really NEED as much sex as we think? Maybe we just WANT it? 

I was thinking about this the other day. I wondered what would happen if *we* removed all forms of artificial stimulation from our lives. 

If we did that, would HD's STILL be HD's? Or would their libido become a bit more...tame?


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

Vega said:


> Yes, but did it occur to anyone that maybe we don't really NEED as much sex as we think? Maybe we just WANT it?
> 
> I was thinking about this the other day. I wondered what would happen if *we* removed all forms of artificial stimulation from our lives.
> 
> If we did that, would HD's STILL be HD's? Or would their libido become a bit more...tame?


This is where you need to think of more than just yourself. 

It is rather selfish to talk about what others should need or not need.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

SadSamIAm said:


> This is where you need to think of more than just yourself.
> 
> It is rather selfish to talk about what others should need or not need.


I guess we got into quid pro quo land which is dumb. If you married someone selfish then you married someone selfish.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> Trust. Intimacy. Love. Commitment.If all I got from my husband that distinguished him from anyone else, I would not have as much interest in the commitment.


I've had trust, emotional intimacy, and commitment from good friends. 

That kind of relationship + sex is different.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

The thing that makes no sense to me is the thinking of someone else thing. If I am doing something nice FOR my husband, don't tell me it is about emotional connection. Emotional connection is shared. Makes it sound like a panzy nicening up just to get laid,


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

SadSamIAm;15791297
It is rather selfish to talk about what others should need or not need.[/QUOTE said:


> "Selfish"? Really??
> 
> Hmm...
> 
> ...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> I've had trust, emotional intimacy, and commitment from good friends.
> 
> That kind of relationship + sex is different.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Not me. It is the degree of trust, intimacy. And you left off love.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Vega, if you want to know the answer to this question, convince your doctor to give you a prescription for testosterone cream to bring your levels up to the high-normal range. Commit yourself to a month of treatment and, in addition, celibacy during that month. Then come back and tell us about the experience.


Don't need to. Just ask a few HD's-- who went to prison for a few years-- what THEY experienced. (and no, they didn't become someone's "b*tch")


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

Vega said:


> "Selfish"? Really??
> 
> Hmm...
> 
> ...


Do you need an expert to tell you what your needs are?

Either do men.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> The thing that makes no sense to me is the thinking of someone else thing. If I am doing something nice FOR my husband, don't tell me it is about emotional connection. Emotional connection is shared. Makes it sound like a panzy nicening up just to get laid,


Yes, emotional connection is shared. 

If the nice thing that you are doing for your husband is sex, and you aren't feeling an emotional connection from it, then don't do it. Most men can get sex without emotional connection by paying for it. That kind of sex isn't what we are talking about.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I need shelter to keep me dry and within survivable temperatures. I need food and water. Medical care when I am sick. 

Pretty much everything else is a "want". 

I want love, a purpose to life, a fulfilling job, friends, comfort. tasty food, comfortable clothes, the admiration and respect of others, equality, art, music, a wide variety of things noble and ignoble. 

I also want sex. Sex just happens to be nearly unique because it is considered immoral for me to seek it outside of my marriage. Romantic love (which is closely related to sex) is really the only other thing in that category.




Vega said:


> Yes, but did it occur to anyone that maybe we don't really NEED as much sex as we think? Maybe we just WANT it?
> 
> I was thinking about this the other day. I wondered what would happen if *we* removed all forms of artificial stimulation from our lives.
> 
> If we did that, would HD's STILL be HD's? Or would their libido become a bit more...tame?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

SadSamIAm said:


> Yes, emotional connection is shared.
> 
> If the nice thing that you are doing for your husband is sex,* and you aren't feeling an emotional connection from it, then don't do it.* Most men can get sex without emotional connection by paying for it. That kind of sex isn't what we are talking about.


Why not? I know for a fact that my husband does not always get "an emotional connection" from sex.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

Vega said:


> Don't need to. Just ask a few HD's-- who went to prison for a few years-- what THEY experienced. (and no, they didn't become someone's "b*tch")


Or ask a few HD's who feel like they are in prison (married to a low HD that doesn't care about their needs).

I believe it is much easier to do without sex when in prison than it is to do without it when you are sleeping beside a woman that you love, are attracted to and care about deeply.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
shouldn't sex be something you do WITH your husband, not FOR him?

Sure, there are times when it is nice to provide sexual favors for the person you love. There is still a connection - same one was you get when you bring flowers, or do any other service that makes them happy.



NobodySpecial said:


> The thing that makes no sense to me is the thinking of someone else thing. If I am doing something nice FOR my husband, don't tell me it is about emotional connection. Emotional connection is shared. Makes it sound like a panzy nicening up just to get laid,


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
from your posts I think you may be assuming that sex is the only intimacy that men want. In many cases that is far from true.

My wife and I have a LOT of non-sexual intimacy. It is only the sexual intimacy that is missing.

I'm sure that isn't true for everyone, certainly there are men who only care about sex, but it is true for many




Vega said:


> YES! You've got HALF of the problem solved right there!
> 
> The other half is to learn how to become _intimate_ with her in non-sexual ways.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> Why not? I know for a fact that my husband does not always get "an emotional connection" from sex.


There is always an emotional connection with sex. Sometimes it is stronger than other times. 

If sex is just a want and there is no emotional connection, then why can't people just have sex with whoever they want? 

Is that what you are saying? Sex is just a want. It isn't personal. If you want it, go get it from someone else? Is that the way or marriage is?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> shouldn't sex be something you do WITH your husband, not FOR him?


Yah most of the time.



> Sure, there are times when it is nice to provide sexual favors for the person you love. There is still a connection - same one was you get when you bring flowers, or do any other service that makes them happy.


Please tell me where a connection comes from when I am gifting? Or hell a bj. I would bet my last eyeball that the ONLY guys who are saying this are the guys who are not getting any at home. 
And that it is PART of the whine that they use to try to get some.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

SadSamIAm said:


> There is always an emotional connection with sex. Sometimes it is stronger than other times.


So you are saying that my DH is a liar? Or that I am for that matter? Because I can tell you that this just is not so.



> If sex is just a want and there is no emotional connection, then why can't people just have sex with whoever they want?


They can? And do. What is the relationship between the two?




> Is that what you are saying? Sex is just a want. It isn't personal. If you want it, go get it from someone else? Is that the way or marriage is?


Sex is not ALWAYS personal. And has nothing to do with categorizing it as a need. And I would say that it has no more connective power than LOTS of shared experiences.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I think you have sadly ended up with a poor set of men. Those men exist, and there are lots of them, but others exist as well. Maybe its random - women date until they either find a good guy whom they marry, or eventually decide that all men are bad. As time goes on the good men are more likely to be married - though some to bad women.

I've been in two serious relationships. One was just about sex - but it was HER choice. I was happy about it, but the entire point of the relationship was sex - we were both completely open about it and when she fond someone that met her long term interests we split up, no hard feelings, are still friends.

The other woman I married. We dated for months before we we physically intimate. She cheated on / dumped me - and I took her back when she realized her mistake. I've love her and cared for her for 35 years no. Though our sex life has almost always been bad, I've never left her. 

I have other male friends who are similar. And I've known men (but not wanted them as friends) who just used women for sex. 

Some players are very good at pretending to be in love and pretending to care. For many women its difficult to distinguish that from real love. 







always_alone said:


> You may very well be right!
> 
> I mean, from my perspective, I see the mixed messages all the time here on TAM, and I actually think they provide a useful clue to some of the problems of sexlessness that many men are facing. I think to myself: "If some random Internet stranger like me can be so utterly turned off by these attitudes to women, then what must their wives be feeling?"
> 
> ...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> Not me. It is the degree of trust, intimacy. And you left off love.


Sorry, I meant love, too. Have you ever loved a friend?

I guess for me the difference between platonic love and romantic love is a desire for sex.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

techmom said:


> In addition to my post above, these sites tend to attract men who wanted to live out fantasies of being that guy who attracted all of the hot chicks in high school and /or college. That guy who oozed manliness (whatever that really means) and always had that sh!t eating grin. Wherever these husbands were lacking in being that alpha guy, they carry into their marriages and then their wives have to bear the burden of validating their manhood by having continuous, passionate sex. However, the husband's insecurities existed before he even met his wife, he utilizes he to boost his self image.


there's probably some truth to this.

there is also a contingent who maybe at one time (when they met their wives) really were attractive and at some point lost that, whether due to laziness or an attempt to meet some domestic ideal of a dutiful husband, which it turns out is not super hot, but more of a bland father figure with no discernably independent identity.

where people go off the rails is, in trying to get their "mojo" back, they adopt some persona which is inauthentic, rather than reconnecting with their true selves .


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> The real question is, do you want it to be different? Or do you want to become more entrenched in your current position, with a false label of "safety" assigned to it?


Different? Ha ha, you're funny. Safety has nothing to do with it; it's not one of my needs. Quite the contrary.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> Sorry, I meant love, too. Have you ever loved a friend?


Not like I love my husband. It is a matter of DEGREE not type.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

OliviaG said:


> Is this just a war of words or are people striving to understand each other?
> 
> One thing that I don't get: @Vega you've been involved in a couple of threads where you've made your views and your reasons for them known; you've very effectively expressed them - so effectively that many of the men who began not understanding you realized how your experiences with men have shaped your insecurities and confusions in interpreting the intentions of men and your difficulties protecting your heart because of those experiences. The men were able to understand your position.
> 
> ...


Yes it is a war on words. 

Trying to get Vega (and others) to see our point that not all men are pigs and just use women for sex. Some love their wives and want them to be happy. 

When I am happiest is when I have been intimate with my wife a couple of times a week. It is when I crave to spend more time with my wife. To talk to her about things in our lives. To just be near her. Not to have sex, but just to be close.

But if we haven't had sex for a week or two. And I have shown interest and been rejected, then I feel distant. 

It isn't about using my wife for sex. It is all about the connection that the sex gives us.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Last night I gave my wife a long massage. It made her happy and relaxed. I get nothing physical out if it, its a lot of work, my hands get tired. Still, I think she felt a connection from my providing her pleasure. 

You are right in some sense - the men complaining here are the ones not getting any at home. If they were, they probably wouldn't be posting here. It is men like me stuck with a choice of a near-sexless life, or leaving the woman that they love. If sex were the only thing, this would be an easy choice, but it isn't, but it is one of many things that are necessary for happiness.






NobodySpecial said:


> Yah most of the time.
> 
> 
> Please tell me where a connection comes from when I am gifting? Or hell a bj. I would bet my last eyeball that the ONLY guys who are saying this are the guys who are not getting any at home.
> And that it is PART of the whine that they use to try to get some.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> For many guys I think they have the emotional connection -- it's like they are their wive's girlfriends.
> 
> So they get the talk, they get the snuggling, but what they don't get is sex or passion.


I'm sure this won't be a popular view, but I think the whole message that "me and wife are best friends" is the source of this.

If she was a guy, would she really be your best friend? If not, then she's not your best friend.

You shouldn't expect her to be.

If you put being "her best friend" as your #1 relationship goal, she may very well end up treating you like her girlfriend, instead of boyfriend.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Sex is not only about the pleasure one derives during, but the feeling of being fulfilled afterwards. 

I knew my marriage was toast when this feeling started to diminish and ultimately disappeared altogether.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Is this just a war of words or are people striving to understand each other?


For my part, I am pretty consistent in the idea that men mean/are/think this and women are/think that are wholly useless. Let's say, even if this was resoundingly true, is that going to make my knees weak with desire? Nope. The guys on here like to make out that their wives are big fat meanies. And maybe some of them are. But poster after poster after poster who talk about what is wrong with their wives is not attractive, loving or kind. Boo hoo my wife does not care about me is not ATTRACTIVE. And I am associating THEIR ATTITUDE as a source of the problem which is changeable BY THEM. They don't though.

The subtext of this being that if SHE recognized blah blah then she would take pity on me regardless of her feelings. Yuck.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

techmom said:


> What I want:
> 
> To be listened to, and have my feelings validated even if he doesn't agree with it
> To have less arguments
> ...


you have different values.

it's neither of your fault that you value different things.

somehow you ended up together. somehow life emerged on Earth. lots of weird stuff happens.

it doesn't mean that it's somebody's fault.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Vega said:


> YES! You've got HALF of the problem solved right there!
> 
> The other half is to learn how to become _intimate_ with her in non-sexual ways.


Vega: You misunderstand my situation. Kinds like Anon111 does. You keep thinking there is something I could do to get my wife to desire to have mutually satisfying sex with me. There is no such thing.

You see, my wife is an unrecovered rape victim. She does not enjoy sex. She gets no pleasure from it. According to her, not with me and not with anyone else. She just lies there silent and unmoving, and waits for the man to finish while she tries to ignore what is happening to her body.

No matter how emotionally _intimate_ we are, she is never going to desire mutually satisfying sex. Not unless she does some hard and painful work to deal with understandable PSTD. Work which she steadfastly maintains is not necessary and will never be considered.

Look, she has spent the past year fighting breast cancer. You can ask her and she will say I have been an incredibly supportive husband. From all outward appearances, she is more in love with me than she has ever been. She is more complimentary and openly expresses her appreciation for all the Acts of Service I do for her. She is more open to affection. She smiles when I compliment her (she used to frown because she thought compliments were just lies meant to get into her pants). We talk about all her hopes and dreams for the future (travel, retirement, where we will live, how we will treat our kids and grandkids). She says she is thrilled to be married to me because I am such a good husband and father. And yet she shows zero interest in sex.

Many of our friends have gotten divorced recently. The nest empties and a couple with nothing in common except the kids realizes that they no longer wish to remain together. My wife has made it clear that she enjoys being married to me, enjoys spending time with me, and that she hopes I do not intend to divorce her.

I do not have half the problem solved. I have the entirety of the solvable problem solved. At least if I stay with my wife. As I have said many times, the only way to solve the other half of the problem would be to divorce her and find someone else. That I will never do.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> So you are saying that my DH is a liar? Or that I am for that matter? Because I can tell you that this just is not so.
> 
> 
> They can? And do. What is the relationship between the two?
> ...


The thread is about why men desire sex with a SPOUSE. It wasn't about hooking up with random people or having multiple partners. 

Sex with my wife is always personal and always includes an emotional connection. I am sorry your marriage isn't the same.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Vega said:


> Your post gave me pause to think about something.
> 
> I wonder why it is that so many men seem to tie up their feelings of self-worth into one 'package' that we call SEX?
> 
> ...


it's a natural urge-- no one intends to develop this. 

do you think men choose to be this way?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> Different? Ha ha, you're funny. Safety has nothing to do with it; it's not one of my needs. Quite the contrary.


What is it, then?

Listen. You seem like a really cool woman. Smart, strong, driven. 

And yet you seem convinced that all of manhood finds you of little value except as a plaything. Which makes it easy to keep men at arms length and trying to continually prove you wrong, maybe?

What is it that keeps you fixated?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

SadSamIAm said:


> The thread is about why men desire sex with a SPOUSE. It wasn't about hooking up with random people or having multiple partners.


I know. And I stand by my assertion that sex with one's spouse it not always particularly personal.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> I'm sure this won't be a popular view, but I think the whole message that "me and wife are best friends" is the source of this.
> 
> If she was a guy, would she really be your best friend? If not, then she's not your best friend.
> 
> ...


Agree about the best friend as in buddy thing. 

But you should be friends right?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

PieceOfSky said:


> That is imaging how justified you'd feel in rejecting him harshly for a request you deemed b.s., deceptive, out of bounds.
> 
> I was asking how you'd feel if he rejected you in a harsh way for something you truly needed to feel loved.
> 
> ...


I say this in all seriousness, dude, it is not you.

repeat that to yourself until you really get it.

it is possible for her to not want it and for it to not be your problem.

I know it feels like it is your problem, but it does not have to be.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> The thing that makes no sense to me is the thinking of someone else thing. If I am doing something nice FOR my husband, don't tell me it is about emotional connection. Emotional connection is shared. Makes it sound like a panzy nicening up just to get laid,


Why does each and every "emotional connection" have to be mutual? Why can't you do something FOR your husband that enhances HIS emotional connection to you? Do you imagine there is NOTHING that your husband does to please you without regard to his own enjoyment? You think everything he does that you enjoy is equally enjoyable for him?

If that is true, kudos and congratulations to you both. But my advice is: don't as him if it is true. You seem to very much enjoy thinking that it is, and I would hate for you to put him in a position where he either has to lie or burst your bubble.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> I know. And I stand by my assertion that sex with one's spouse it not always particularly personal.


I agree with you. It may not always be particularly personal. 

I hope you don't view a marriage where sex in not personal as a good marriage.

My assertion is that in a good marriage, each spouse attends to each others needs. Whatever they are. They don't do it to get something in return. They do it because they love and care for their spouse. 

Like others have said. Sex to many men is very important. It provides an emotional connection to their spouse. If my wife gave me sex, but there was never an emotional connection, I would not want it from her. I would fall out of love with her.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

samyeagar said:


> I think a large part of it is that sex, and feeling attractive to, and desired by a particular person is one of the very few thing that simply can not be self validated. There is no objective measure for it...it is completely subjective and in the hands of the other person.


or you can become super bad like james brown and kiss yourself


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> Sex is not ALWAYS personal. And has nothing to do with categorizing it as a need. And I would say that it has no more connective power than LOTS of shared experiences.


For you. For me, sex is far and away the most connective activity I can do with a woman. That probably makes me even more unattractive to most healthy women. Ah, the irony. My desire itself is a turnoff for most women. They can literally smell it a mile away. Or at least across a train car.

I have noticed something interesting. I often take the train when I work in NY. Generally I get up very early and sleep on the train so that the 2 hour trip does not interfere with working hours. I get on the 2nd stop so I am often asleep before anyone else sits down next to me. Back when I was desperate for sex with my wife, I would wake up in NY and it was invariably a man sitting next to me. Recently (since I entirely stopped trying to have sex with my wife) several times I have woken up in NY only to find, to my surprise, that an attractive young woman has been sitting next to me. Maybe anecdotal but I am thinking that I give off a different vibe now that I am turned off to sex. Again, the irony. Now that I no longer find the pursuit of sex worth the bother, it would likely be easier to obtain. But as soon as I decided to chase after it, the "magic" would be gone.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> Actually, I think in today's society it is women who can get everything they want and need by themselves. It is women who don't need men. Not the other way around.


on the one hand, I know what you mean. On the other hand, this is so lame.

Do you think Hemingway and his pals sat around on the fishing boat and lamented the absence of women?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

john117 said:


> Sex is not only about the pleasure one derives during, but the feeling of being fulfilled afterwards.
> 
> I knew my marriage was toast when this feeling started to diminish and ultimately disappeared altogether.


what if, instead, you treated this development as a springboard toward just accepting things as they are, without the cross-current of dashed expectations and resentment?

in other words, you've somehow acclimated to the fact that she does not rock your world any longer. this is now matter of fact.

yet, she manages to upset you in lots of other ways. why is all of that other stuff not matter of fact now too?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> Agree about the best friend as in buddy thing.
> 
> But you should be friends right?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I'm not sure. I think it depends on the relationship. 

I could see some relationships working where you're not really friends. Like, you don't have anything in common except 1 thing, but that 1 thing is enough. There are some relationships like this that are actually pretty good as long as both people give each other enough space.

I think it's just a different kind of relationship than a friendship. I think the idea of it being a friendship is pretty recent.

I'm not saying you shouldn't be friends, just that I'm not sure it's really necessary.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> it's a natural urge-- no one intends to develop this.
> 
> do you think men choose to be this way?


Then why do some men choose NOT to be this way?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Vega said:


> Then why do some men choose NOT to be this way?


I don't think anyone chooses not to be this way.

Some people are one way and others are another way.

Why is someone straight or gay? that's not a choice either.

now, some people are put into certain circumstances, such as prison, where constant desire really has no productive purpose.

men in such situations may employ methods to try to reduce their desire. 

they might even have some success, but even if they do, it does not mean their base level was a choice. 

it's like you can be born left handed and learn to write with your right hand, but it does not mean you are really right handed.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> I'm not sure. I think it depends on the relationship.
> 
> I could see some relationships working where you're not really friends. Like, you don't have anything in common except 1 thing, but that 1 thing is enough. There are some relationships like this that are actually pretty good as long as both people give each other enough space.
> 
> ...


So the relationship solely combines a mutual financial interest and sex.

I guess it could work. I just don't know why you'd want it.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> So the relationship solely combines a mutual financial interest and sex.
> 
> I guess it could work. I just don't know why you'd want it.


I'm thinking more along different lines.

Like let's say the husband was a banker and his wife was an artist.

they have basically nothing in common. they lead pretty much separate lives, separate friends, maybe even live apart much of the time. 

but they share something inexpressible together that they can't get in any other part of their lives. they fill a hole for each other. it's not a friendship. they don't do "friend" things like go to the movies.

I've definitely met a few couples like this who seemed to have very good relationships


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

SadSamIAm said:


> The thread is about why men desire sex with a SPOUSE. It wasn't about hooking up with random people or having multiple partners.


Honestly I am not even sure what this thread is about anymore lol. It was originally about Mens' sex desires w/ their spouse. From there it went to disbelief that guys look at sex as a way to connect with their spouse, somehow feminism got pulled into this (still no clue where that one came from), and then ultimately today's woman don't need no stinkin man :scratchhead:


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> I'm thinking more along different lines.
> 
> Like let's say the husband was a banker and his wife was an artist.
> 
> ...


My very best friends are ones that I have nothing in common with.

I was once friends with a flaming gay bartender who was an escort and heroin junky on the side. I'm not gay, a bartender, or an escort, and I've never done heroin.

Another friend of mine ended up living in some kind of artist commune on Vancouver island. I'm pretty pro-capitalist and while I've done some writing and painting in my day, I'm no artiste.

These are people I've had pretty close friendships with (the bartender and I split ways when he started doing heroin). Some of the best people in my life are ones I have little in common with.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

OliviaG: Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. That is it, exactly. Thank you for writing that down.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> what if, instead, you treated this development as a springboard toward just accepting things as they are, without the cross-current of dashed expectations and resentment?
> 
> in other words, you've somehow acclimated to the fact that she does not rock your world any longer. this is now matter of fact.
> 
> yet, she manages to upset you in lots of other ways. why is all of that other stuff not matter of fact now too?


I have zero expectations from her, other than not doing stupid things. I'm simply counting the clock for under 12 months.

I'm past the point of getting upset with her antics. Irritated yes but that's it.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening @OliviaG post is perfectly on target. She has done a better job than many others of describing what it feels like. I think part of what goes on in these threads is the HD people (more often men but not always) struggling to figure out how to explain how important this is. The all too frequent responses suggest that the desire for sex is some trivial selfish thing - my wife has said "you are just like a kid who complains when he doesn't get dessert". 

Sadly I don't think words can convey it to someone who hasn't experienced it. 

I'm sure that similarly words cannot convey how it feels to be pressured for sex that you don't want - despite there being nothing "wrong".


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

SadSamIAm said:


> Yes it is a war on words.
> 
> Trying to get Vega (and others) to see our point that not all men are pigs and just use women for sex. Some love their wives and want them to be happy.
> 
> ...


For me, have a good conversation with my wife, no distractions, no interruptions, no arguing, is the single biggest thing that makes me want to be physically intimate with her. I find her extraordinarily attractive, but that is simply not enough to make me want to sleep with her, nor has it ever been with any other woman I have known.

I can look at her lips if she's on her phone and think they are amazing in every way, but if, instead of her being on her phone, she is looking at me and we are talking, I look at them and think they are the most kissable lips I have ever seen.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> But even though I didn't desire sex for the purpose of achieving an emotional connection, it resulted in a very deep bonding and emotional connection between us. Extreme tenderness and appreciation on my part. I saw him in a whole new light, appreciated him on a whole new level and loved him more than ever.
> .


Great post OG, just thought I would comment on this one part. When my W and I do get into good sex streaks there is a noticeable carryover outside the bedroom in how we interact together. I think you hit it in the nail, it is not like we are saying to our SO "OH man, I need me some emotional connection, get nekked and let's party!" . The desire could be driven by being horny, could be driven by a desire to feel close physically with your SO, could be driven by a desire to please your SO, etc... The end result though is a strengthening of the emotional bond / connection, in part through sex.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

@OliviaG gets it.

the thing about her story that she captures so well is that it was super tough for her EVEN THOUGH she knew that her husband was a good guy and even though he was actively engaged in trying to bridge the gap with her.

imagine if instead her husband questioned her motives, tried to say she was some kind of sex fiend or sent her on an endless quest of "if only you did XYZ, I would be more interested..." as often seems to be the case in these situations.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

SadSamIAm said:


> I agree with you. It may not always be particularly personal.
> 
> I hope you don't view a marriage where sex in not personal as a good marriage.


I view my marriage as a very good marriage. In my marriage sex is not always personal. Therefore, I assert that a marriage in which sex is not always personal can be a very good marriage.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

john117 said:


> I have zero expectations from her, other than not doing stupid things. I'm simply counting the clock for under 12 months.
> 
> I'm past the point of getting upset with her antics. Irritated yes but that's it.


let her down easy man.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> My very best friends are ones that I have nothing in common with.
> 
> I was once friends with a flaming gay bartender who was an escort and heroin junky on the side. I'm not gay, a bartender, or an escort, and I've never done heroin.
> 
> ...


I'm with you on the friend thing, but I'm saying a man/woman relationship is on some level kind of inexplicable.

there are some women who are not objectively the prettiest who just get me going and I can't really explain it.

sometimes that "thing" is so powerful it drives an entire relationship, even for a lifetime. 

it's not a security blanket, hold hands, friendship kind of deal.

I do believe this type of thing happens. These relationships aren't friendships and usually eventually crash and burn but sometimes they just burn.

Edit: I realize this sounds cheesy when you read it, but when it happens in real life it's not cheesy.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> Then why do some men choose NOT to be this way?


The subtext behind this being that all men are a certain way?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> The subtext behind this being that all men are a certain way?


Geez luuuEEEZ. What part of "SOME men" wasn't clear?

I swear...are SOME of you looking for reasons to be offended?

Un. Friggin. Believable.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Vega said:


> Geez luuuEEEZ. What part of "SOME men" wasn't clear?
> 
> I swear...are SOME of you looking for reasons to be offended?
> 
> Un. Friggin. Believable.


Whoosh. See that thing flying right over your head?

That was Far's point.

About looking at underlying assumptions that may be holding you back, or causing you discomfort.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> Geez luuuEEEZ. What part of "SOME men" wasn't clear?
> 
> I swear...are SOME of you looking for reasons to be offended?
> 
> Un. Friggin. Believable.


No, on the contrary, not offended but genuinely baffled. The underlying premise of your question was that some men were able to stifle it. I would present that some men don't need to stifle anything because they are not HD. 

Interesting that after being as transparent as possible in this thread, you still see my questions as trying to find something to be offended about.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

marduk said:


> Whoosh. See that thing flying right over your head?
> 
> That was Far's point.
> 
> About looking at underlying assumptions that may be holding you back, or causing you discomfort.


LOL! I suggest you re-read my posts on this thread again. I'm not the one making assumptions.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

EllisRedding said:


> Really then, men and women don't need each other, except maybe to procreate lol.


Sad isn't it.. it's these attitudes...from both genders... .that Independence is the ultimate goal in life, it's really become our new God to worship....this hooked up with how EASY it is to get sex these days.. 

Intimacy, romance and commitment (there goes marriage) be damned.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> No, on the contrary, not offended but genuinely baffled. The underlying premise of your question was that some men were able to stifle it. I would present that some men don't need to stifle anything because they are not HD.
> 
> Interesting that after being as transparent as possible in this thread, you still see my questions as trying to find something to be offended about.


Well, if you read my posts on this thread, you'd see that I'm not making assumptions about "all" men. 

As for whether or not SOME men having the ability to stifle it, yes, I DO believe that some men DO possess that ability and desire. Plus, they are successful. And HAPPY. 

And no, it's not because they're not HD to begin with.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

SimplyAmorous said:


> Sad isn't it.. it's these attitudes...from both genders... .that Independence is the ultimate goal in life, it's really become our new God to worship....this hooked up with how EASY it is to get sex these days..
> 
> Intimacy, romance and commitment (there goes marriage) be damned.


I think independence is the other side of the coin of "men and women are the same"

if men and women are the same, then neither really needs the other. 

on the other hand, if men and women are different, then they bring something unique to one another that cannot be replaced with other relationships.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Vega said:


> Well, if you read my posts on this thread, you'd see that I'm not making assumptions about "all" men.
> 
> As for whether or not SOME men having the ability to stifle it, yes, I DO believe that some men DO possess that ability and desire. Plus, they are successful. And HAPPY.
> 
> And no, it's not because they're not HD to begin with.


I think stifle is the wrong word.

I think a better way to describe it is to let it go.

some people may find this unbearably hippie-ish, but I think it works and is not artificial (as stifling it would be).

it's still there, but you don't fight it. you recognize it, but, like an itch, you realize it's in your power to scratch it or not. And, if you wait, it will pass, just like any itch. and when it passes, you don't have to dwell on the fact that you were once very itchy, because it's over.

over time, this can feel natural and once you begin to acclimate to it, you feel a new sense of freedom.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> I think stifle is the wrong word.
> 
> I think a better way to describe it is to let it go.
> 
> ...


Yes, I agree. Of what I've read from the men who have done this (the ones who have practiced "letting go"), they also described that very sense of freedom. One even wrote that he no longer felt like a "slave" to his own genitals.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

So much easier to hate and to polish the pearl of one's own resentment.

I imagine that the women who let go of their fear and believe that most men are decent and caring are happier and more successful in relationships than hyper-vigilant women who feel most men are sexual predators. Why don't all women choose to feel that way?

Agree that it would be better to choose to let go. But if it were easy, everyone would do it.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Vega said:


> Yes, I agree. Of what I've read from the men who have done this (the ones who have practiced "letting go"), they also described that very sense of freedom. One even wrote that he no longer felt like a "slave" to his own genitals.


I should say that no one really has to do this. 

it would never even occur to most people that this could be an option or that there would ever be a good reason to pursue this. 

I would never say that anyone "should" do this or that a man who would not do this somehow has a problem.

desiring women, and especially desiring one's wife, is perfectly natural and nothing to be ashamed of.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Isn't it possible that a definition of HD si someone who is not able to stifle their sexual desires? I'm not saying HDs can live without sex, many of us do, but I think that HDs (almost by definition) cannot be happy without a good sex life. 








Vega said:


> Well, if you read my posts on this thread, you'd see that I'm not making assumptions about "all" men.
> 
> As for whether or not SOME men having the ability to stifle it, yes, I DO believe that some men DO possess that ability and desire. Plus, they are successful. And HAPPY.
> 
> And no, it's not because they're not HD to begin with.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> So much easier to hate and to polish the pearl of one's own resentment.
> 
> I imagine that the women who let go of their fear and believe that most men are decent and caring are happier and more successful in relationships than hyper-vigilant women who feel most men are sexual predators. Why don't all women choose to feel that way?
> 
> Agree that it would be better to choose to let go. But if it were easy, everyone would do it.


it is easier to dwell in resentment initially, just like it is easier initially to scratch an itch.

but if you can't let it go, you will scratch and scratch until you bleed and then you can create a much bigger problem.

eventually, you must let it go. the only question is whether you do it sooner or later.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I've noticed the same.
When our sex life is good, the rest of our relationship is good. We are BOTH happier. We walk holding hands, steal kisses in elevators, act, well like two people in love. 

When our sex life is minimal, the rest of our time together is bland. Life becomes a series of chores, then we each go off and read, or go on social media. We do things together, but its almost as if we feel we *should* do things together, its not particularly fun.





EllisRedding said:


> Great post OG, just thought I would comment on this one part. When my W and I do get into good sex streaks there is a noticeable carryover outside the bedroom in how we interact together. I think you hit it in the nail, it is not like we are saying to our SO "OH man, I need me some emotional connection, get nekked and let's party!" . The desire could be driven by being horny, could be driven by a desire to feel close physically with your SO, could be driven by a desire to please your SO, etc... The end result though is a strengthening of the emotional bond / connection, in part through sex.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Isn't it possible that a definition of HD si someone who is not able to stifle their sexual desires? I'm not saying HDs can live without sex, many of us do, but I think that HDs (almost by definition) cannot be happy without a good sex life.


I don't mean to threadjack, but this is relevant to the whole experience.

I think one of the keys is to stop expecting happiness to come in the uptick "spikes".

instead, realizing there can be as much happiness in ordinary moments.

the smell of your wife's hair, for example. why can't you get as much satisfaction from this as full on intimacy?

there are thousands of moments like this every day that pass by as you pine for this one "spike" of fulfillment that eludes you.

so it is not so much learning to "stifle" seeking this spike as it is learning to see all of the other stuff that is happening while you are busy imagining/hoping for this spike


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
it is not conscious. I don't think "we haven't had sex in 3 weeks, so I don't like running my fingers through her hair". When our sex life is active, I enjoy being with her, I feel like I'm in love. When its not good, I don't feel like I'm in love.

Imagine if your partner suddenly changed gender. It would be the same person, but would you still enjoy casual kisses, holding hands etc? Yet the gender change really affects nothing except sexual interactions.


Also for me, sex is a natural extension / continuation of other forms of physical intimacy. Intimacy without any sex is l like sitting down to a fine romantic dinner, but not eating anything. Having dish after dish set down, then taken away again untouched. The candles, the view, your partner are all still there, yet the experience is lacking. OTOH if you took that same food and sat on a park bench eating it off a paper plate it would not be the same experience as the fine dinner either. 




Anon1111 said:


> I don't mean to threadjack, but this is relevant to the whole experience.
> 
> I think one of the keys is to stop expecting happiness to come in the uptick "spikes".
> 
> ...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> @OliviaG gets it.
> 
> the thing about her story that she captures so well is that it was super tough for her EVEN THOUGH she knew that her husband was a good guy and even though he was actively engaged in trying to bridge the gap with her.
> 
> imagine if instead her husband questioned her motives, tried to say she was some kind of sex fiend or sent her on an endless quest of "if only you did XYZ, I would be more interested..." as often seems to be the case in these situations.


The way it played out for me, it did not start this way. We had a great sex life. I am wicked HD. But it does not exist in a vacuum. We had fun. Everything was great. But after a while, I just could not say no. By accepting that this was his (he always said our despite the fact that I told him I did not feel the same way) emotional connection, it became evidence to him that ANY time I was not good to go meant I did not care about him, did not love him anymore. He used it to nag and bludgeon me into more, more more. Freakier deakier. I definitely do freaky deaky. But it was definitely more of a chore this way and a lot less fun for me.

Some of the things I read on here maybe aren't intended in the same context. But the whole notion of the well if we aren't having sex, I would just hang out with guys was finally the straw that broke the camel's back. When he said that to me, I said, ok go do that. Cheers.

It was very hard not to believe that I was a sex toy to him no matter how much he told me with words he loved me.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Isn't it possible that a definition of HD si someone who is not able to stifle their sexual desires? I'm not saying HDs can live without sex, many of us do, but I think that HDs (almost by definition) cannot be happy without a good sex life.


I can stifle my desire for sex.

I just don't want to, nor do I think I should have to.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> The way it played out for me, it did not start this way. We had a great sex life. I am wicked HD. But it does not exist in a vacuum. We had fun. Everything was great. But after a while, I just could not say no. By accepting that this was his (he always said our despite the fact that I told him I did not feel the same way) emotional connection, it became evidence to him that ANY time I was not good to go meant I did not care about him, did not love him anymore. He used it to nag and bludgeon me into more, more more. Freakier deakier. I definitely do freaky deaky. But it was definitely more of a chore this way and a lot less fun for me.
> 
> Some of the things I read on here maybe aren't intended in the same context. But the whole notion of the well if we aren't having sex, I would just hang out with guys was finally the straw that broke the camel's back. When he said that to me, I said, ok go do that. Cheers.
> 
> It was very hard not to believe that I was a sex toy to him no matter how much he told me with words he loved me.


that's too bad.

maybe he really wanted to connect with you and you couldn't help feeling like a toy anyway.

sometimes the same thing means two different things to two different people.

or maybe he really was a dud.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> it is not conscious. I don't think "we haven't had sex in 3 weeks, so I don't like running my fingers through her hair". When our sex life is active, I enjoy being with her, I feel like I'm in love. When its not good, I don't feel like I'm in love.
> 
> Imagine if your partner suddenly changed gender. It would be the same person, but would you still enjoy casual kisses, holding hands etc? Yet the gender change really affects nothing except sexual interactions.
> ...


I think that is really sad. Some of the most intimate moments we have shared have been over snack bar food or hot tea on the top of a mountain recognizing the beauty of our world, the awesomeness of our kids, grieving over a lost relative. It is too bad you miss this. Life does not have to get bland. You CAN share other stuff.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> that's too bad.
> 
> maybe he really wanted to connect with you and you couldn't help feeling like a toy anyway.
> 
> ...


If he won't hear another side, then I am voting dud. The point was I was actually trying to hear him. Sunk me like a boat with a hole.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> it is not conscious. I don't think "we haven't had sex in 3 weeks, so I don't like running my fingers through her hair". When our sex life is active, I enjoy being with her, I feel like I'm in love. When its not good, I don't feel like I'm in love.


I'm totally with you. I feel the same way. 

you are never going to feel the burning automatic drive to be close to her without that. That is just who you are.

But that is not the only part of you. You can enjoy the lulls too.

some days when there a no waves, I just paddle out on my board just to be in the ocean. Is it _as _exciting? No. Is it unpleasant? _No._ 

If I could choose to have perfect waves every day, I would, but I can't so I will enjoy the lulls too.

From what I've read of you, I think you already do this.



richardsharpe said:


> Imagine if your partner suddenly changed gender. It would be the same person, but would you still enjoy casual kisses, holding hands etc? Yet the gender change really affects nothing except sexual interactions.


Not a great analogy for me, since it would be a totally different relationship. Do you ever really think of your wife as a man? I don't.



richardsharpe said:


> Also for me, sex is a natural extension / continuation of other forms of physical intimacy. Intimacy without any sex is l like sitting down to a fine romantic dinner, but not eating anything. Having dish after dish set down, then taken away again untouched. The candles, the view, your partner are all still there, yet the experience is lacking. OTOH if you took that same food and sat on a park bench eating it off a paper plate it would not be the same experience as the fine dinner either.


same for me. that is my natural predisposition.

for a long time, cuddling would just make me frustrated when we hadn't gone further in a while.

now, I am doing much better just enjoying what's in front of me.

so it is possible to adapt. 

no one should pretend you must adapt. But I believe you can.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

SimplyAmorous said:


> Sad isn't it.. it's these attitudes...from both genders... .that Independence is the ultimate goal in life, it's really become our new God to worship....this hooked up with how EASY it is to get sex these days..
> 
> Intimacy, romance and commitment (there goes marriage) be damned.


I disagree completely. Marriage used to be a contract that was exercised as a financial and social arrangement where each party was denied access to the things they wanted (say financial security or sexual regularity) unless they entered into it. Now we can choose to be married because we genuinely love our partners and want to build a life together. I'll take it!


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> I can stifle my desire for sex.
> 
> I just don't want to, nor do I think I should have to.


I think there is another level between wanting to and feeling like you have to.


----------



## JamesTKirk (Sep 8, 2015)

EllisRedding said:


> Great post OG, just thought I would comment on this one part. When my W and I do get into good sex streaks there is a noticeable carryover outside the bedroom in how we interact together. I think you hit it in the nail, it is not like we are saying to our SO "OH man, I need me some emotional connection, get nekked and let's party!" . The desire could be driven by being horny, could be driven by a desire to feel close physically with your SO, could be driven by a desire to please your SO, etc... The end result though is a strengthening of the emotional bond / connection, in part through sex.


At the risk of sounding totally clinical, there is a very biological thing happening here. When we have an orgasm with someone we have a flood of oxytocin, which is the hormone that makes us feel emotionally bonded to one another (aka the "love" hormone which is a bit of a misnomer) and theoretically the person you're with at the time. So if it's with your spouse, that oxytocin is going to reinforce that closeness at some level. Not only that, but the dopamine release during orgasms makes you happy.

So when you're having good sex streaks, you're getting two releases of hormones that make you happy and want to be together and it drives your brains to want to do it again for more of that same feeling. It's addicting. It literally strengthens that emotional bond in a good close relationship (I can't tell you what it does in a bad one.) On top of that, we're more likely to overlook the casual personal annoyances and focus on the things we like about each other. In general, the couple should be happier.

In the absence of that, it can feel depressing and distant, particularly when you're used to having it regularly or when you haven't had it in a very long time you might see it.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> The other woman I married. We dated for months before we we physically intimate. She cheated on / dumped me - and I took her back when she realized her mistake. I've love her and cared for her for 35 years no. Though our sex life has almost always been bad, I've never left her.


Considering the fact that your sex life has almost always been bad, she dumped you, cheated on you and also made you wait for months to share sexual intimacy with her in the first place. I honestly can't understand why you married her and following that have remained with her through 35 years.

Why on earth did you marry her when she was a banner parade of "she really isn't into you"?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> I think that is really sad. Some of the most intimate moments we have shared have been over snack bar food or hot tea on the top of a mountain recognizing the beauty of our world, the awesomeness of our kids, grieving over a lost relative. It is too bad you miss this. Life does not have to get bland. You CAN share other stuff.


My late husband described sex as like being at an amusement park and riding on the most thrilling ride there: The 110 Story Roller Coaster. That ride is the ONLY ride that gives him that 'high'. There might be other things to do at the park, but nothing compares to that ride. So, why wouldn't EVERYONE want that high and want it as much as possible?

Because some other people want to do other things that give them just as much of a 'thrill'. Not to my late husband. The Coaster is a '10', and either everything else is a '5' and below or, the next best thing could be a '9', but with a very wide gap between '9' and '10'. 

As soon as he gets off the ride, he's already planning and plotting to get back on. 

Is this 'normal'?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> *Isn't it possible that a definition of HD si someone who is not able to stifle their sexual desires*? I'm not saying HDs can live without sex, many of us do, but I think that HDs (almost by definition) cannot be happy without a good sex life.


I dunno, Richard. The way HD is described on TAM sometimes, it seems like sex is almost either a clinical obsession or an addiction.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

JamesTKirk said:


> So when you're having good sex streaks, you're getting two releases of hormones that make you happy and want to be together and it drives your brains to want to do it again for more of that same feeling. *It's addicting*.
> 
> In the absence of that, it can feel depressing and distant, particularly when you're used to having it regularly or when you haven't had it in a very long time you might see it.


I just saw this post right after I posted. In my post I mentioned that it almost sounded like it was an addiction or at least an obsession. Now you've described it as such. 

I think I'm finally starting to see the problem....


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Vega said:


> My late husband described sex as like being at an amusement park and riding on the most thrilling ride there: The 110 Story Roller Coaster. That ride is the ONLY ride that gives him that 'high'. There might be other things to do at the park, but nothing compares to that ride. So, why wouldn't EVERYONE want that high and want it as much as possible?
> 
> Because some other people want to do other things that give them just as much of a 'thrill'. Not to my late husband. The Coaster is a '10', and either everything else is a '5' and below or, the next best thing could be a '9', but with a very wide gap between '9' and '10'.
> 
> ...


Was it thrilling like this for him?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

badsanta said:


> Was it thrilling like this for him?


Lol! I dunno. Probably. He DID talk about wanting to "free fall", bungee jump, etc. 

And, he wanted to have one last BIG orgasm before dying in my arms.

Didn't happen.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Vega said:


> My late husband described sex as like being at an amusement park and riding on the most thrilling ride there: The 110 Story Roller Coaster. That ride is the ONLY ride that gives him that 'high'. There might be other things to do at the park, but nothing compares to that ride. So, why wouldn't EVERYONE want that high and want it as much as possible?
> 
> Because some other people want to do other things that give them just as much of a 'thrill'. Not to my late husband. The Coaster is a '10', and either everything else is a '5' and below or, the next best thing could be a '9', but with a very wide gap between '9' and '10'.
> 
> ...


Normal shmormal. I wound't choose it.

My son is a self proclaimed geek. He does not care about the social pecking order. He is also very tall and trained in martial arts. He came home with a story of protecting a very small kid from a bully. He did not raise a hand, though he could have. He took the bully down with two words. If my husband, partner, lover and parent to my children did not feel pride in that, I would have a hard time being close to him. Instead we just looked at each other, fist bumped and said yah baby.

I remember when my uncle, who was very close to us, died. DH was close to him too. We were left a little money. He said, yeah well I would still rather have Uncle X back.

When my daughter ceased breathing in a scary medical emergency, he collapsed after the action part was over with relief that his baby girl was ok. 

When it is July 4th, he brings the metric ass load of fireworks for everyone to enjoy and grills the yummy food that everyone eats. (He is a way better cook than our friends.)

When we go hiking, he brings pepperoni and cheese.

Why do I love sex with my husband? This is why. He is a wonderful man. I don't know. If you (gents who are bummed) who say yah well I do all that too. Maybe your wives are just raging *****es. Don't know. There a couple of posters I wonder, what they heck do you expect? She was never actually into you. 

But sex does not live in a space by itself. I think some of this is social conditioning. But am not sure.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> I think there is another level between wanting to and feeling like you have to.


I control my sexuality, it does not control me.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> I think that is really sad. Some of the most intimate moments we have shared have been over snack bar food or hot tea on the top of a mountain recognizing the beauty of our world, the awesomeness of our kids, grieving over a lost relative. It is too bad you miss this. Life does not have to get bland. You CAN share other stuff.


Four years ago we were in Alaska on a cruise ship. Midnight, drinks on Deck 17.... soft music and a blue haze straight out of a fairy tale. We were there for nearly two hours, I tried to engage her in basic conversation, she did not say a word. Not because she was overwhelmed with the scenery, but because she did not want to. Punt.

A couple months later we were in our favorite Indian restaurant and she spent an hour and a half enthusiastically talking about her Indian coworkers visa issues.

Without physical intimacy in either case I might as well have been talking to the waiter or bartender... which would have yielded more meaningful conversation😉

Remember what I said about sex being a semaphore of current things rather than an information source of its own. The information density of sex is nil. But the status information it conveys is invaluable.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> One of the things that strikes me is that my DH can feel positively WITH sex, but no one has the power to wreck him without it. That is very attractive.


Every situation is different. I suspect you have a different "without it" scenario in mind than the one some of us live with (and, iirc, you lived with before him). In any case, I hope neither of you experience anything close to that, SS.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

john117 said:


> Four years ago we were in Alaska on a cruise ship. Midnight, drinks on Deck 17.... soft music and a blue haze straight out of a fairy tale. We were there for nearly two hours, I tried to engage her in basic conversation, she did not say a word. Not because she was overwhelmed with the scenery, but because she did not want to. Punt.
> 
> A couple months later we were in our favorite Indian restaurant and she spent an hour and a half enthusiastically talking about her Indian coworkers visa issues.
> 
> ...


Does she like you at all?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Personal said:


> I don't know about vaginas being interchangeable. That said since men and women can both have sex with or without being in love, and over time can have different sexual partners consecutively and or coincidentally. It is fair to say that whatever our genitalia, all of us are evidently replaceable!
> 
> It took a previous divorce for me to be okay with that, how about you?


I've always known I'm replaceable, Personal. My SO had other LTR's before me, and is still good friends with most of them. I've never been anything other than replaceable. 

I think what gets me is the imbalance. I'm easily substituted, but without my SO, I am just a crazy cat lady. And I don't even have cats, so am in really big trouble.

I do look forward to shaking my fist at the squirrels in the park in my retirement years, but, well, I don't know how to say it. I also feel like I missed out on something important and meaningful.

ETA: I also know that the whole "interchangeable genetalia" sensibility is *not* gender specific, and has very much to do with the role of sex in the relationship. @OliviaG posted a long story about how her husband simply found ways to provide for her needs, and @SimplyAmorous has told similar stories. But I have also been on the HD side of the fence, and my SO responded to it by feeling pressured, turned off, and feeling like he was supposed to be a performing seal rather than a human being.


----------



## JamesTKirk (Sep 8, 2015)

Vega said:


> I just saw this post right after I posted. In my post I mentioned that it almost sounded like it was an addiction or at least an obsession. Now you've described it as such.
> 
> I think I'm finally starting to see the problem....


There is a certain biochemical aspect. Addiction is seeking a dopamine release again and again. Before you hit the next low, you get that next fix. To break the addiction is literally depressing because you have to go through withdrawls.
That's the one thing that makes us happy and drives us as animals to do things for our survival. Eating high calorie foods and orgasm do this for obvious reasons.

It doesn't mean that everyone is addicted to sex. The point is that it is very powerful and we always seek it. You like having your favorite treat once in a while because you'll get a dopamine release from eating it. Same thing. Of course some people may be addicted to it, and when going without, you can get quite depressed or irritable. It's not just whining about not getting it, it's literally a biochemical brain thing making us unhappy.
When we do it, we're happy together and feel close because in part because of these releases.

Funny thing, try going 21-30 days without any orgasm whatsoever. You hit a point where you just don't care about sex anymore until you have a sexual trigger and it sets you off. I mean you still have (in the case of guys) that testosterone waking you up at 3am, but it's not a do or die situation anymore.

That being said, I don't like that. You mentioned guys that choose to be free from their genitals, well this sort of that state. But I don't see how it's freeing or why any man would choose this unless they have low testosterone. Even if I'm in that state I want to have sex with my wife because she's a beautiful woman that I live with, I have to see her attractive body every day, I like it, and I want to have sex with her because I'm in a sexual relationship with her and love her. Without sex, she's just my best friend and roomate. It's annoying because I have to see her attractive feminine form dress and undress without having sexual intimacy. I don't see the point in being married without any sex at that point. (It's different if you just can't have sex for medical reasons.)


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> Does she like you at all?


No.

But she doesn't like anyone in general. 

Remember the movie G-Force where a hamster had a cage mate for a while and was p!ssed off. When the cage mate left the hamster was so happy it was doing snow angels in the cage bedding. I was watching the movie with my girls and they both said "that's Mom" 😂😂


----------



## JamesTKirk (Sep 8, 2015)

john117 said:


> No.
> 
> But she doesn't like anyone in general.
> 
> Remember the movie G-Force where a hamster had a cage mate for a while and was p!ssed off. When the cage mate left the hamster was so happy it was doing snow angels in the cage bedding. I was watching the movie with my girls and they both said "that's Mom" 😂😂


Why did she marry you? Money, security?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

john117 said:


> No.
> 
> But she doesn't like anyone in general.
> 
> Remember the movie G-Force where a hamster had a cage mate for a while and was p!ssed off. When the cage mate left the hamster was so happy it was doing snow angels in the cage bedding. I was watching the movie with my girls and they both said "that's Mom" 😂😂


I have a hard time understanding your participation in sex threads. You seem to be lamenting the lack. But you are not even really married.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I think what gets me is the imbalance. I'm easily substituted, but without my SO, I am just a crazy cat lady. And I don't even have cats, so am in really big trouble.
> 
> I do look forward to shaking my fist at the squirrels in the park in my retirement years, but, well, I don't know how to say it. I also feel like I missed out on something important and meaningful..


Crazy cat guy thinks we could have a great relationship... take our cats to hunt squirrels in the park 😂😂










Seriously, AA, this sounds like you don't give enough credit to yourself.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

JamesTKirk said:


> There is a certain biochemical aspect. Addiction is seeking a dopamine release again and again. Before you hit the next low, you get that next fix. To break the addiction is literally depressing because you have to go through withdrawls.
> That's the one thing that makes us happy and drives us as animals to do things for our survival. Eating high calorie foods and orgasm do this for obvious reasons.
> 
> .


I hear you. I lived with a cocaine addict for about 2.5 years. He was also (intriguingly) highly sexed. Hmmm....wonder if the two are related (Yes, they are!)



> It doesn't mean that everyone is addicted to sex. The point is that it is very powerful and we always seek it. You like having your favorite treat once in a while because you'll get a dopamine release from eating it. Same thing. Of course some people may be addicted to it, and when going without, you can get quite depressed or irritable. It's not just whining about not getting it, it's literally a biochemical brain thing making us unhappy.
> When we do it, we're happy together and feel close because in part because of these releases


.

Yes, I know that everyone isn't addicted to sex just because they want sex. But I DO think there's a difference between wanting it and feeling like you absolutely NEED it. I mean, if to some people, sex is about the orgasm, they don't really need another person in order to 'give' them an orgasm. At least, not _physically_. Maybe psychologically....?



> Funny thing, try going 21-30 days without any orgasm whatsoever. You hit a point where you just don't care about sex anymore until you have a sexual trigger and it sets you off. I mean you still have (in the case of guys) that testosterone waking you up at 3am, but it's not a do or die situation anymore.


LOL! That's so weird that you brought this up, today of ALL day! I actually m*bated today for the first time in over 2 months! Then again, I've been celibate since October so it's getting to be longer and longer between wanting a release. 



> Without sex, she's just my best friend and roomate and annoying so because I have to see her attractive feminine form dress and undress without having sexual intimacy. I don't see the point in being married at that point


Wow. You say that she's JUST your best friend, like that doesn't really mean much of anything. Can't you see her as your best friend _AND_ your lover?

Secondly, there's nothing written in stone by any world-wide recognized authority about how much sex we're "supposed" to have once we're married. (or, at all for that matter). The so-called 'experts' tell us that if we have sex less than 10 times a year, we're in a 'sexless' marriage. Yet I'm sure there are happily married couples who have sex 5-6 times a _year_. Then again, some people find that having sex 5-6 times a _*DAY*_ isn't 'enough'. 

It's funny how there's a 'cap' on how little sex we 'should' be getting inside of marriage (less than 10 times a year). But there's no numerical cap on how much is 'too much'.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Vega said:


> My late husband described sex as like being at an amusement park and riding on the most thrilling ride there: The 110 Story Roller Coaster. That ride is the ONLY ride that gives him that 'high'. There might be other things to do at the park, but nothing compares to that ride. So, why wouldn't EVERYONE want that high and want it as much as possible?
> 
> Because some other people want to do other things that give them just as much of a 'thrill'. Not to my late husband. The Coaster is a '10', and either everything else is a '5' and below or, the next best thing could be a '9', but with a very wide gap between '9' and '10'.
> 
> ...


Lol it is for me. Except my next meal is in the plotting process as well. So Like your late husband sex is my 10 my next meal is in the distance but it's my nine :grin2:


----------



## JamesTKirk (Sep 8, 2015)

Vega said:


> Yes, I know that everyone isn't addicted to sex just because they want sex. But I DO think there's a difference between wanting it and feeling like you absolutely NEED it. I mean, if to some people, sex is about the orgasm, they don't really need another person in order to 'give' them an orgasm. At least, not _physically_. Maybe psychologically....?


I agree want vs need. As for other people, I know for me having sex with a person isn't even the same thing as getting off (M*). For me it's more about enjoying the sex than it is the orgasm. I've even enjoyed sex without orgasm and been happy. But the orgasm when having sex is totally different than m-bating. The two activities are in different universes. Half of it's just about the feel of her body and her giving herself to me and vis versa.


> Wow. You say that she's JUST your best friend, like that doesn't really mean much of anything. Can't you see her as your best friend _AND_ your lover?


Wait, what? Yes, I thought that's what I was saying that I do see her as BOTH. Why wouldn't her being my best friend mean much of anything. Of course it does. But why would you be married to your best friend that isn't also you lover? Without both, I don't think it's a true marriage.
I mean, people marry for different reasons, but to me those two things are pretty much a marriage.



> Secondly, there's nothing written in stone by any world-wide recognized authority about how much sex we're "supposed" to have once we're married. (or, at all for that matter). The so-called 'experts' tell us that if we have sex less than 10 times a year, we're in a 'sexless' marriage. Yet I'm sure there are happily married couples who have sex 5-6 times a _year_. Then again, some people find that having sex 5-6 times a _*DAY*_ isn't 'enough'.
> 
> It's funny how there's a 'cap' on how little sex we 'should' be getting inside of marriage (less than 10 times a year). But there's no numerical cap on how much is 'too much'.


As for the "supposed to" should be decided BEFORE you get married. I never looked to experts. I looked to her for sexual compatibility. If we weren't sexually compatible, then I sure didn't want to enter a life-long commitment to monogamy with her and generally I don't think most couples should (again people marry for different reasons, but I'm talking about the classic idea here.)

The problem is, that apparently changes over time. When I met my wife we were very sexually compatible and were very much alike in our desire for frequency and lifestyle of sex. I believe she wanted even more than me (but I was happy to oblige.) Every morning in the shower for a few years, even at her desire. Somewhere in her late 30's after having a kid, her libido shut off. The only time we had sex when was I worked at it. We discussed it and found a solution. But in her mind it wouldn't be fair to me that I not have any sex just because her desire disappeared when my frequency of desire hadn't changed. Sure I'm able to compromise (maybe a bit less often, or find more creative ways to increase her interest) but would it be fair to me to be celebate? Would it be fair to her if I did that to her?

At some point, before we got married, we (rather she) said our policy was "never say no to each other for sex, it's our duty to be each other's sexual partner." That was our contract (so to speak.) She (we both) are living up to that. Don't feel bad for her, once we get going she has a heck of a great time and loves the sex, it's just a matter of getting her in the mood if she's not already otherwise she could go a week probably never thinking about sex until I mention it. Maybe her desire has returned a bit or something because now she makes more of an effort to initiate or be available.

What's the ONE thing you're not allowed to do outside your marriage? Have sex. She knows that if I'm not having sex with her I may want to do it with someone else some day and that goes both way. It doesn't justify cheating, hell no, but we're both aware keeping each other sexually gratified will prevent that temptation from ever becoming the issue.

I'm not complaining at all. On the contrary, I'm very very happily married and I'm happy with my sex life. I'm just sharing my challenges and how I think it applies to this the universal how much we're 'supposed' to have. The answer is, you're supposed to have as much a sex as you both agree to. For unhappy couples they either go in hoping it'll get better and it doesn't, don't figure it out before marriage, or it changes at some point.

I've seen surveys which are self-reported and the typical married couple 10 years has sex about once ever 1-2 weeks average. Going back to biochemical when orgasm from sex your dopamine drops, plolactin rises, and it doesn't return to normal for about 2 weeks. So it makes sense that people get randy around ever 7-10 days.

As for no one says we have to have sex "at all for that matter" well I can certainly say that you're not supposed to have sex with someone else at all. So if you're not having it in your marriage, then you're not having it. Unless you're both into a life of celibacy, I don't see this as a real marriage. The exception is when you're elderly and/or health dictates otherwise.
The term "consumate a marriage" kind of proves that.

What I find most interesting is that you seem to find all the reasons you can for why people shouldn't have sex in a marriage when IMO it's a component of a happy marriage.
EDIT: ^ I didn't mean for the above sentence to be mean or anything. I realize after writing it it may come across that way.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
you may have been a "sex toy" for him. That's really unfortunate and I understand your being unhappy.

Of course the whole idea of what is "reasonable" varies a LOT. I'm convinced my wife thinks that we have a more than usually active sex life because we have sex every week - except when we are busy with other things (about half the time). She may well feel pressured because I like more variety than she does - but its hard t tell. (She has a difficult time saying what she does and doesn't like in bed, and always leaves it to me to initiate).


Nagging though is always bad (assuming we are using the same definition of "nagging"). It would be so interesting to hear both sides of one of these situations. It so difficult to tell from only one side.



NobodySpecial said:


> The way it played out for me, it did not start this way. We had a great sex life. I am wicked HD. But it does not exist in a vacuum. We had fun. Everything was great. But after a while, I just could not say no. By accepting that this was his (he always said our despite the fact that I told him I did not feel the same way) emotional connection, it became evidence to him that ANY time I was not good to go meant I did not care about him, did not love him anymore. He used it to nag and bludgeon me into more, more more. Freakier deakier. I definitely do freaky deaky. But it was definitely more of a chore this way and a lot less fun for me.
> 
> Some of the things I read on here maybe aren't intended in the same context. But the whole notion of the well if we aren't having sex, I would just hang out with guys was finally the straw that broke the camel's back. When he said that to me, I said, ok go do that. Cheers.
> 
> It was very hard not to believe that I was a sex toy to him no matter how much he told me with words he loved me.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> you may have been a "sex toy" for him. That's really unfortunate and I understand your being unhappy.
> 
> Of course the whole idea of what is "reasonable" varies a LOT. I'm convinced my wife thinks that we have a more than usually active sex life because we have sex every week - except when we are busy with other things (about half the time). She may well feel pressured because I like more variety than she does - but its hard t tell. (She has a difficult time saying what she does and doesn't like in bed, and always leaves it to me to initiate).
> ...


Nagging looked like my wanting to get sleep after being awoken AGAIN and being told in a child like voice that I don't love him anymore.

He certainly shared his side of the story with me. Sex = love. Period.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
We do share many of those things - but too often it feels like spending time with a friend, not a lover. I enjoy my time with friends, but its different without passion and romance.

Walking through the dark streets of Venice during a rare snowfall is terribly romantic. So is canoeing down a jungle river covered with floating flowers, or seeing clouds, turned red as flame by sunset steaming off a high mountain peak. We've slept in the bedroom of a roman emperor, watched new year's fireworks from our hotel room, wandered through ice-city fantasy lands. 

All these are wonderful things - but the are romantic things, not just things for friendship.




NobodySpecial said:


> I think that is really sad. Some of the most intimate moments we have shared have been over snack bar food or hot tea on the top of a mountain recognizing the beauty of our world, the awesomeness of our kids, grieving over a lost relative. It is too bad you miss this. Life does not have to get bland. You CAN share other stuff.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
yes, that sounds like completely unreasonable nagging.

There is so much range here. My wife feels nagged if after spending the day wandering the streets of St Petersburg, and a fantastic dinner at an ethnic restaurant, we get back to the converted palace that is our hotel and I suggest sex. (well start kissing the back of her neck). 

This may be another issue with these discussions: people base their statements on their own experiences - which an vary tremendously from person to person.




NobodySpecial said:


> Nagging looked like my wanting to get sleep after being awoken AGAIN and being told in a child like voice that I don't love him anymore.
> 
> He certainly shared his side of the story with me. Sex = love. Period.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> We do share many of those things - but too often it feels like spending time with a friend, not a lover. I enjoy my time with friends, but its different without passion and romance.
> 
> Walking through the dark streets of Venice during a rare snowfall is terribly romantic. So is canoeing down a jungle river covered with floating flowers, or seeing clouds, turned red as flame by sunset steaming off a high mountain peak. We've slept in the bedroom of a roman emperor, watched new year's fireworks from our hotel room, wandered through ice-city fantasy lands.
> ...


Meh maybe I am just easy. I can find eating a clam boat with our last $5 romantic when done with him.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Vega said:


> Is this 'normal'?


Yes. As in many men feel this way. Many men don't. I suggest you find a man who doesn't. Save both of you the heartache.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

I have read opinions where sex is defined as an emotional need, not a want.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Actually I agree with you. All the fancy "romantic" stuff means nothing without real romance. Mostly its a sad attempt to compensate for what I'm missing.




NobodySpecial said:


> Meh maybe I am just easy. I can find eating a clam boat with our last $5 romantic when done with him.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> . On top of that, my natural proclivity is not to try to get my partner to meet this need but to figure out how I can either live without it or let them go.


I just do without. Figure out how to keep my own self happy.

One poster here (forget who) has asked whether it is important for the connection to go both ways. To my mind it is meaningless if it doesn't. Sure bask away in your own endorphins. But it isn't connection unless it is shared.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

john117 said:


> Crazy cat guy thinks we could have a great relationship... take our cats to hunt squirrels in the park 😂😂


The squirrels mostly win. They're smarter.

Thanks for kind words.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I just do without. Figure out how to keep my own self happy.
> 
> One poster here (forget who) has asked whether it is important for the connection to go both ways. To my mind it is meaningless if it doesn't. Sure bask away in your own endorphins. But *it isn't connection unless it is shared*.


I agree. Why would I want to have sex with someone I feel like I have a connection with if he doesn't have the same connection with ME? 

That's the stuff that unfair, lopsided, selfish "relationships" are made of.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

NobodySpecial said:


> I disagree completely. Marriage used to be a contract that was exercised as a financial and social arrangement where each party was denied access to the things they wanted (say financial security or sexual regularity) unless they entered into it. Now we can choose to be married because we genuinely love our partners and want to build a life together. I'll take it!


I very much realize others will not care for when I speak like this.. as I have gleamed a lot of love, caring & devotion from marriages I have seen of old... I feel this is a disconnect with me & others on this forum.. as many here have seen only BAD, mean overbearing husbands, wives stuck.. Far more of the examples I have seen were GOOD , healthy.. happy marriages.

So I look through my own personal "ideal" to what I see happening so often in our world today..

I have never looked upon marriage in a light of a "contract" sounds so cold & impersonal... It was more a quest to devote myself to someone .. to a life shared.. Call me Pollyanna on this one.... if I had the attitude that I never needed my husband for anything, like why bother... my "independence" to myself was more important...Let me tell you.. I wouldn't be all that damn appealing to [email protected]#... I doubt we'd be together even... we've talked about it a number of times, just reading some of the attitudes I come across on this forum.. ....

And it's not that we are sorry lonely saps who are stuck with each other.. We deeply *wanted* each other too. 

Yet in the same breath.. I don't have any issues at all saying I* need* a man.. I love being with a man ... 

It just puts a sour taste in my mouth how others boast about their independence from the opposite sex, they have no need of each other...it completely sucks the Life blood out of what intimacy is meant to be, commitment, cherishing each other, working as a team for the better of each other.. valuing the ideal of marriage/ family. 

I literally have a shallow hope for our own children to find the love of their lives one day due to the cultural changes in society, unless they marry someone of Faith/ belief who still hold on to some of those older fashioned ideals...

It makes all the sense in the world why MGTOW has multiplied -they are lashing back at radical loud mouth feminists.. yet they are also feeding these lousy men with all that free sex.. so now.. we have men getting all the milk for free.. and thinking all women are nothing more than cows... and women wanting the sausage but kicking the Pig out.. 

These attitudes are very very ugly.. I just see how we got here.. who is more to blame is a worthless pursuit in my opinion. 

You may feel everything is a GAIN in modern society.. but I feel with the gains.. many beautiful things have been lost ... 

We'll do one of these >









What I see is Marriage & commitment is slowly being replaced by casual sex and independence.. I have a new job... I am working with 3 co-workers knocked up -not married.. may not even get married.. that's our common today.. is this our "Better" ? 

We can go into the whole song & dance .. trying to separate - WANT vs NEED all we want ... I've used a song to illustrate an attitude about those 2 words.. of course it's a love song.. the word "Need" does not offend me, in relation to my husband.. it's just another perspective is all.


----------



## Palodyne (Mar 3, 2016)

Ok, this is the vision of a naïve, unmarried person. Maybe it will give you more experienced posters a good laugh.

I do desire to one day have a spouse, although I have come to terms with the reality that it may never come to pass. But the reason I would desire sex with my spouse would be to bond, physically, and emotionally with her. I would desire sex with my spouse to build a bond of intimacy, trust, love, and fidelity. I would want to build a sense of exclusive devotion between us. And the openness to feel free to discuss matters of life and children, which I welcome, moving forward. To understand her feelings and needs, and feel she understands mine.

This is what I aspire to. I realize it may be a dream, which I feel is a shame. I would make a great husband, and communicator. But life is what it is.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

Vega said:


> I agree. Why would I want to have sex with someone I feel like I have a connection with if he doesn't have the same connection with ME?
> 
> That's the stuff that unfair, lopsided, selfish "relationships" are made of.



Maybe because it hasn't sunk in yet he finds you repulsive, and he'd rather stick an ice pick in his eyes. Once it sinks in, and you abandon false hope, then yeah, you would probably not be so interested in going through those motions.


If you are in a situation that, despite the best efforts you can come up with, is starkly different than what you had and had hoped would last forever -- and, because of where you are at in your growth as a human being and acquiring wisdom to live happily, and because acceptance of a sh1tty reality takes a long time sometimes and requires first you can see fairly clearly the harsh reality, then I hope you can give yourself a break if it turns out you want a contradiction, that you want someone to treat you how they used to treat you even if their heart is not in it, and when he gives in even impatiently you somehow find yourself hoping and feeling maybe everything is going to be all right.

Its not about selfishness at all. It's about wishful thinking and a mistaken assessment of what is broken. It's fools gold.

It would have been nice if sex had just been leave it or take it for her, and somehow she was willing to be slightly generous with her time and body because she loved me and would be intimate once a month. I would have gladly accepted it and been relatively happy, or so I think. I don't think that is selfish of me to have wanted it. Regardless, she receives much love and time from me even though that has never happened.

After awhile, though, it becomes clearer what a burden sex is for the other. And, the letting oneself crave sex from the other, or accepting it if offered, becomes yet another source of sadness and possibly self contempt. Because you start feeling the lies you are both telling to you about what is happening.

My point is, if you think people here living this have the attitude that their partner should just do it even though they hate it, and will have that attitude indefinitely, I suppose you might be right about a small minority. But for most, and the only ones worth spending time talking about, then I think you have grossly oversimplified something I truly hope you haven't experienced yourself year after year.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> I have a hard time understanding your participation in sex threads. You seem to be lamenting the lack. But you are not even really married.


I have a hard time understanding this comment and the motive behind it.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

PieceOfSky said:


> I have a hard time understanding this comment and the motive behind it.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Understanding.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

PieceOfSky said:


> After awhile, though, it becomes clearer what a burden sex is for the other. And, the letting oneself crave sex from the other, or accepting it if offered, becomes yet another source of sadness and possibly self contempt. Because you start feeling the lies you are both telling to you about what is happening.
> 
> My point is, if you think people here living this have the attitude that their partner should just do it even though they hate it, and will have that attitude indefinitely, I suppose you might be right about a small minority. But for most, and the only ones worth spending time talking about, then I think you have grossly oversimplified something I truly hope you haven't experienced yourself year after year.


Sky, do you know why your wife is so averse to sex? It sounds pretty extreme, like past sexual trauma, or super strict religious faith. Is it? Has she ever shared that with you?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

SimplyAmorous said:


> Yet in the same breath.. I don't have any issues at all saying I* need* a man.. I love being with a man ...
> 
> It just puts a sour taste in my mouth how others boast about their independence from the opposite sex, they have no need of each other...it completely sucks the Life blood out of what intimacy is meant to be, commitment, cherishing each other, working as a team for the better of each other.. valuing the ideal of marriage/ family.


All I can say is that is good for me that I am independent. If I had needed a man to live, I'd be dead. What you might want doesn't always make itself available to you.

I know you realize you were uncommonly lucky in this regard.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Actually I agree with you. All the fancy "romantic" stuff means nothing without real romance. Mostly its a sad attempt to compensate for what I'm missing.


I know for myself I would be very empty, very not connected if these moments were just him sitting there waiting to get me home to stick his thing in me.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

always_alone said:


> All I can say is that is good for me that I am independent. If I had needed a man to live, I'd be dead. What you might want doesn't always make itself available to you.
> 
> I know you realize you were uncommonly lucky in this regard.


There is absolutely nothing wrong with families choosing whatever they want within their loving marriage. That was not my point. Once upon a time a woman COULDN'T CHOOSE how she wanted her marriage or lack of one. And within a marriage, happy or not, a man had the right to enforce sex. I am glad that I don't *have *to live under those constraints. But I don't think that our social expectation has entirely caught up. I don't think a lot of women know HOW to be loving within the context of being independent. Nor men be loving within the context of new sexual freedom.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

always_alone said:


> Sky, do you know why your wife is so averse to sex? It sounds pretty extreme, like past sexual trauma, or super strict religious faith. Is it? Has she ever shared that with you?


I think PoSky's post was beautiful and profound.

The important questions are not whether PoSky knows. What matters more is whether PoSky's wife knows, and whether she is willing to do anything about it. If she doesn't know, or won't admit it to herself, or won't do anything about it, then PoSky knowing is either irrelevant or a negative.

With so many people, especially women, having been raped or otherwise abused, either as children or adults or both, it would be great if this could be more openly accepted as a topic of conversation. If there were less stigma and more sources of help and support for recovery. And if victims (of either gender) could feel free to admit their pasts and their attitude toward sex before marriage. I get the impression that many of them suspect (perhaps correctly) that their partner might not want to marry them if the partner knew of the abuse. Especially if their attitude toward sex is "I don't get anything out of it, but don't worry - I'll always be here for you".

But that is where it gets very sticky. Because anyone who thinks it is in their interest to "trick" a person into marrying them by hiding their sexual past is likely to find that it isn't as wonderful to be the deceiver as they imagined. That it doesn't provide the complete control over one's sexuality they expected. That having to "perform" like a "trained seal" over and over again is more difficult to maintain than it may seem. That being the LD spouse in a LD/HD dynamic is not as enjoyable as they figured. That it often doesn't lead to the "happily ever after" of their fantasy. And that having kids and then getting divorced is typically no fun at all.

So the bottom line message here is: if you were raped or abused, that is awful. Get help to reclaim your sexuality. But if for some reason you are not interested in reclaiming your sexuality, then for gosh sakes tell your fiancé the truth before you guys get married and for darn sure before you have kids together. Otherwise, while you may think you have pulled off the "perfect crime" and gotten away with it as you walk away from the altar, it often turns out that payback is, well, we all know how that goes.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> What is it, then?
> 
> Listen. You seem like a really cool woman. Smart, strong, driven.
> 
> ...


Ha, not too many people IRL would describe me as driven. But I will admit to a low threshold for boredom. Curiosity killed the cat and all..

Let me clarify: I don't think all of manhood views me as a plaything. Most are completely indifferent. I have also had many male friends throughout my life, that didn't see me that way at all.

It is only when it comes to sexual relationships. And trust me, the message has been clear and consistent through time. My SO is the only one I've known who actually liked me and has sexual interest. That's why he's the lucky (??!!?) one who has me.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> I know for myself I would be very empty, very not connected if these moments were just him sitting there waiting to get me home to stick his thing in me.


And this is where experiences color reactions. Because this dynamic does not usually play out as you describe it. 

It isn't that he only cares about "sticking his thing in you". It is that you spend fun time together. Maybe even romantic time together. And when he spends fun and romantic time with you, he desires to have sex. And if sometimes you do and sometimes you don't, that is OK. The disappointment over the times you don't is quite tolerable and nothing worth mentioning and does not affect how he feels about you or spending time with you.

But when fun and romantic times never or almost never end up in having sex, then the dynamic changes. Because then the coming disappointment looms over everything. The fun and the romance are tainted. Because the guy knows that if he allows himself to be open to the fun and romance, then the desire will arrive. And the desire is going to be rejected. And the day or evening will end in pain. And at that point, the guy will likely close the door to enjoying the fun and romance. Not because he is a jerk or because he doesn't love his wife. Quite the opposite. Because he DOES love his wife and that love triggers desire that is being continually squashed. He closes the door to enjoying time with her to PROTECT the love he feels. To prevent his wife from landing blows that will weaken his love for her. And thus the downward spiral commences.

It is OK to say no. it is OK if every fun and romantic episode does not end in sex. But if fun and romantic times almost never end in sex, and your spouse has a high desire for sex, then the fun and romance are going to eventually be tainted. Not because the high desire spouse is a cretin. But because that is how it works when you train someone that every enjoyable bit of time they spend with you will end in pain.

Telling them "just stop feeling pain when I reject you" is not helpful. They might take the advice. But in all likelihood the only way they can turn off the pain is to turn off their love as well.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> And this is where experiences color reactions. Because this dynamic does not usually play out as you describe it.
> 
> It isn't that he only cares about "sticking his thing in you". It is that you spend fun time together. Maybe even romantic time together.


Except that is not what he said. At all.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> I control my sexuality, it does not control me.


this made me think for a minute.

I read something this morning that reminded me of this. 

"Not falling, not ignoring:

Odd and even are on one die."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_fox_koan


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

Palodyne said:


> Ok, this is the vision of a naïve, unmarried person. Maybe it will give you more experienced posters a good laugh.
> 
> I do desire to one day have a spouse, although I have come to terms with the reality that it may never come to pass. But the reason I would desire sex with my spouse would be to bond, physically, and emotionally with her. I would desire sex with my spouse to build a bond of intimacy, trust, love, and fidelity. I would want to build a sense of exclusive devotion between us. And the openness to feel free to discuss matters of life and children, which I welcome, moving forward. To understand her feelings and needs, and feel she understands mine.
> 
> This is what I aspire to. I realize it may be a dream, which I feel is a shame. I would make a great husband, and communicator. But life is what it is.


I love your post -sharing this.. the fact you feel others may just laugh , feeling you are completely naive is very telling though... you just know this is not the norm anymore...it's a reflection of modern american values infiltrating everything around us....you feel more of an outcast to even speak like this.. but it was beautiful..and it's supposed to work just as you spoke.. 

You sound like a wonderful man and I dear hope you do find a woman who would cherish that one day.. and you bring each other much happiness.. It's men like you that give women who still want to marry some HOPE. 



always_alone said:


> All I can say is that is good for me that I am independent. If I had needed a man to live, I'd be dead. What you might want doesn't always make itself available to you.
> 
> I know you realize you were uncommonly lucky in this regard.


 Even those who are fulfilled in their marriages seem to speak how they don't need their spouses though... it's so much more than just speaking about the financial part of it .... don't we need each other in other ways.. comfort, affection, someone having our back?.. 

In my opinion,  is like one of the best marriage books ever written.. even the author calls them "*Emotional Needs*"... . yet so many say they don't NEED.. 

Is it just a play on words.. why the aversion to this word for many? 
I don't see it a needing or we'd physically die or be living in the streets.. but more a "needing' for our happiness.. a shared happiness.. if that makes sense.. 

For the record, you have never come to mind as one who gives some attitude here.. if anything.. you've been more than OK going above & beyond to care for your husband, when he probably doesn't even deserve it..yet you've never went on how you can just dump him to the curb.. you seem to really care about the man... you even speak of how thankful you are that he accepts you the way you are, you seem to feel others never would.. this I do not understand.. you are a fine communicator, always self aware, how many have that going for them? 

Was I uncommonly lucky.... Who is to say.. I opened myself to the Guy most women never notice.. that was a good move...

If there is anything to learn from me...Gawd I hope my own daughter listens !!....Women.. stop sucking up to Bad boys.. I don't care how good looking they are.. if a guy doesn't treat you right.. let him be rejected and left.. these guys are far too entitled and it just breeds more lousy behaviors, they grow more narcissistic, they don't value women or their feelings, they find us all interchangeable.. 

Care about character when you are single.. Of course physical attraction is important too, but there is so much more to a person.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Vega said:


> My late husband described sex as like being at an amusement park and riding on the most thrilling ride there: The 110 Story Roller Coaster. That ride is the ONLY ride that gives him that 'high'. There might be other things to do at the park, but nothing compares to that ride. So, why wouldn't EVERYONE want that high and want it as much as possible?
> 
> Because some other people want to do other things that give them just as much of a 'thrill'. Not to my late husband. The Coaster is a '10', and either everything else is a '5' and below or, the next best thing could be a '9', but with a very wide gap between '9' and '10'.
> 
> ...


for a lot of people it is totally normal.

there's nothing wrong with it either.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Vega said:


> I dunno, Richard. The way HD is described on TAM sometimes, it seems like sex is almost either a clinical obsession or an addiction.


is being hungry an addiction?


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> I just do without. Figure out how to keep my own self happy.
> 
> One poster here (forget who) has asked whether it is important for the connection to go both ways. To my mind it is meaningless if it doesn't. Sure bask away in your own endorphins. But it isn't connection unless it is shared.


I agree 100%. If I ever had a woman say to me that she felt like she was interchangeable or sex didn't matter to her that would have to get fixed quick or bottom line we aren't compatable. I wouldn't chase someone trying to connect with them on a level they don't want to connect with me on. Probably why I personally have such a hard time understanding anyone who stays in a sexless marriage, that wouldn't work for me at all.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

marduk said:


> I control my sexuality, it does not control me.


OK, this one gets to me a little bit... As a guy I am willing to admit that sexuality is a fundamental part of who I am. In that sense it does not feel like there is a battle of who controls who, my sexuality is free to do what it wants and I am always delighted that it acts to serve to bring me closer to my wife and help create a strong bond to raise our family together. 

I would say that it is simply best to be true and honest with one's sexuality as opposed to trying to control it. 

If one tries to control and pervert his or her sexuality you could probably empathize with a priest that said the following in a sermon to PROVE to himself that he was in control: "I checked myself into a hotel room and forced myself to masturbate and climax five times in a row, even though I had NO DESIRE to do it. This is how I proved to my sexuality that I was the one in control!" 

Badsanta


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Holdingontoit said:


> And this is where experiences color reactions. Because this dynamic does not usually play out as you describe it.
> 
> It isn't that he only cares about "sticking his thing in you". It is that you spend fun time together. Maybe even romantic time together. And when he spends fun and romantic time with you, he desires to have sex. And if sometimes you do and sometimes you don't, that is OK. The disappointment over the times you don't is quite tolerable and nothing worth mentioning and does not affect how he feels about you or spending time with you.
> 
> ...


This is the second amazing post you have made in this thread, brother.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Palodyne said:


> Ok, this is the vision of a naïve, unmarried person. Maybe it will give you more experienced posters a good laugh.
> 
> I do desire to one day have a spouse, although I have come to terms with the reality that it may never come to pass. But the reason I would desire sex with my spouse would be to bond, physically, and emotionally with her. I would desire sex with my spouse to build a bond of intimacy, trust, love, and fidelity. I would want to build a sense of exclusive devotion between us. And the openness to feel free to discuss matters of life and children, which I welcome, moving forward. To understand her feelings and needs, and feel she understands mine.
> 
> This is what I aspire to. I realize it may be a dream, which I feel is a shame. I would make a great husband, and communicator. But life is what it is.


Hope you get the chance. Wonderful when you get to that place. Best sex ever


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> this made me think for a minute.
> 
> I read something this morning that reminded me of this.
> 
> ...


Have you read ten Bulls?
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Holdingontoit said:


> I think PoSky's post was beautiful and profound.
> 
> The important questions are not whether PoSky knows. What matters more is whether PoSky's wife knows, and whether she is willing to do anything about it. If she doesn't know, or won't admit it to herself, or won't do anything about it, then PoSky knowing is either irrelevant or a negative.


Knowledge can help with understanding, which can also help with moving forward.

I'm sorry your wife has no willingness to deal with her past trauma. I'm sure, though, that she was not being deliberately deceitful about it, that she really did think it would not affect her this deeply and for so long. I imagine that is small consolation for you, but at the same time hopefully there's less need to add to the list of resentments. These sorts of traumas have a way of embedding themselves into you, and can be hard to shake.

Piece of Sky's posts are often beautiful and profound. He speaks from his heart.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

badsanta said:


> OK, this one gets to me a little bit... As a guy I am willing to admit that sexuality is a fundamental part of who I am. In that sense it does not feel like there is a battle of who controls who, my sexuality is free to do what it wants and I am always delighted that it acts to serve to bring me closer to my wife and help create a strong bond to raise our family together.
> 
> I would say that it is simply best to be true and honest with one's sexuality as opposed to trying to control it.
> 
> ...


I had a different path to that. 

I was always horny. It's always been there, very easy to access. 

But I never knew what actually drove me, or why. So I took a few months and thought about why I like the things I like. Early sexual experiences, and formative stuff. 

And then I started to piece together the foundations of my sexuality. And then I thought about what I wanted to get out of it. 

And then, after a while, it became this whole other thing. Still this raging river that was fun to ride, but with a map. Place to go, sights to see. And a few bridges I could cross instead of having to fight my way across the river when it wasn't time to go down it. 

And, based on martial arts, there's two kinds of freedom of expression: formed and unformed. Unformed is just random, like a child will paint. Forms can provide structure and a deeper form of expression, like impressionists found.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> Experience is stronger than words, unfortunately.


Those six words are a pretty good summary of this entire thread.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> And this is where experiences color reactions. Because this dynamic does not usually play out as you describe it.
> 
> It isn't that he only cares about "sticking his thing in you". It is that you spend fun time together. Maybe even romantic time together. And when he spends fun and romantic time with you, he desires to have sex. And if sometimes you do and sometimes you don't, that is OK. The disappointment over the times you don't is quite tolerable and nothing worth mentioning and does not affect how he feels about you or spending time with you.
> 
> ...


this is dead on.

the only answer in this scenario is to drift apart

it is like a table that has a leg removed-- you must move a lot of weight to the other side if it is to remain balanced


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

@SimplyAmorous I'm not laughing. That said does Palodyne who is a 48 year old man who remains a virgin by choice in part because of his anger towards women, offer that much hope to those who want to marry?

Sad though it is, he really does have a lot of red flags.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> Have you read ten Bulls?
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


yes, but I can't claim to fully understand it


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

SimplyAmorous said:


> Even those who are fulfilled in their marriages seem to speak how they don't need their spouses though... it's so much more than just speaking about the financial part of it .... don't we need each other in other ways.. comfort, affection, someone having our back?..


Hmmm, ya know, I was thinking about this. I would be one person who would say I don't "need" someone in my life. Now don't get me wrong, I absolutely love/adore my W and would never do things differently. However, my personality has always been one where I am perfectly content being alone, doing my own thing. I don't feel like I "need" anyone to lean on. I would be content, not as happy as I am with my W, but I definitely wouldn't be miserable. My only requirement would be a dog (and probably a large porn collection lol). Trust me, I feel guilty even saying this b/c it almost comes out as a negative with my W, but the reality is this is just part of who I am and my personality.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> yes, but I can't claim to fully understand it


For me, it was like that.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

badsanta said:


> OK, this one gets to me a little bit... As a guy I am willing to admit that sexuality is a fundamental part of who I am. In that sense it does not feel like there is a battle of who controls who, my sexuality is free to do what it wants and I am always delighted that it acts to serve to bring me closer to my wife and help create a strong bond to raise our family together.
> 
> I would say that it is simply best to be true and honest with one's sexuality as opposed to trying to control it.


IME, this is a privilege available to men, but much less so for women.

As a woman, I not only have responsibility for my sexuality, but that of the men around me. Like @techmom, I have been treated as a sexual object from a very young age. Since I was but 9, I've had men of all ages put me in charge of their sexuality.

Because of this, I was not allowed to experience my own freely. I had to keep careful guard of it, to downplay, to hide, to quash. 

It would've been nice if I could've been given the space to have my own positive relationship with my sexuality, but it was not to be. Not until much later in life, like now, when I am just ugly and invisible and not of interest.


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

Anon1111 said:


> is being hungry an addiction?


That's why I'm not full in on sex addiction. It is generally not healthy to give up sex, but it is to give up alcohol or drugs. 

I get the parallels but don't think that it is quite that simple.


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

@Simplyamarous Thanks for the book suggestion. Also picked up the book by the same author but geared to parents.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> This is the second amazing post you have made in this thread, brother.


Just posting a transcript of my life. Wish I did not have the life experience that made writing it so easy.



always_alone said:


> I'm sorry your wife has no willingness to deal with her past trauma. I'm sure, though, that she was not being deliberately deceitful about it, that she really did think it would not affect her this deeply and for so long.


She knew darn well that she dissociates during sex. Sometimes I used to laugh and ask her where her mind went during sex when I thought she was merely distracted. Now I realize the mechanism at work. She could not have been unaware. She thought she could white knuckle through and consent despite how she feels. That is a major omission.

You are correct, she did not realize that marrying me would make it harder for her to just lie there and endure the discomfort. Apparently she found it hard to reconcile that someone who loved her would want to put her through that again and again.



always_alone said:


> I imagine that is small consolation for you, but at the same time hopefully there's less need to add to the list of resentments. These sorts of traumas have a way of embedding themselves into you, and can be hard to shake.


Intellectually I understand how we got here. Not much consolation. I have not found it in myself to forgive either of us.

Don't worry, there is no need to add to the list of resentments. I already have enough anger, frustration and resentment to fuel the fire for the rest of my life. 

See, you probably meant that the trauma of the rapes are deeply embedded in my wife and hard for her to shake. I agree. They are both. But please realize that the trauma of being lied to and rejected are deeply embedded in me, too. I was often rejected as a single person and counted on my spouse to heal the old wounds. I told her about that before we got married. That she jumped on top of the pile just drove the dagger deeper into my heart. It is now very deeply embedded and I have no intention of trying to remove it or heal the wound.

I don't ask or expect her to heal herself. Not fair to ask for that which I refuse to do. Best outcome (given our mutual refusal to heal) is for us to remain married and not foist ourselves on some unsuspecting third party. I do my best to keep her satisfied with our marriage so she is never tempted to leave me and allow either of us to recreate this dynamic with another victim.



always_alone said:


> Piece of Sky's posts are often beautiful and profound. He speaks from his heart.


I wish him peace and healing. I hope the next time he feels his heart bursting it is from joy and not sadness.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

Personal said:


> @SimplyAmorous I'm not laughing. That said does Palodyne who is a 48 year old man who remains a virgin by choice in part because of his anger towards women, offer that much hope to those who want to marry?
> 
> Sad though it is, he really does have a lot of red flags.


I am not familiar with his story... he certainly doesn't sound angry in that post ...I just assumed he was younger, like in his 20's.. maybe some of the posts here brought out some vulnerability in him.. instead of the anger he's been holding on to...

It would be hard to admit those things, under these circumstances, feeling life & love has passed one by... very hard.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

always_alone said:


> IME, this is a privilege available to men, but much less so for women.
> 
> As a woman, I not only have responsibility for my sexuality, but that of the men around me. Like @techmom, I have been treated as a sexual object from a very young age. Since I was but 9, I've had men of all ages put me in charge of their sexuality.
> 
> ...


Sorry to hear that. Being responsible with one's sexuality I think equates to being respectful to your sexuality, and this is also a form of being true and honest with yourself. I would also argue that women can just as easily use men since some have little control over their sexuality. 

I also found that TAM's censorship protocols to prevent people from saying foul things failed to work with your message when you described yourself, so I went back and censored it. If you go back and read it now, you come across as a little mysterious and free spirited! 



Looks so much better! 

Badsanta


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> For me, it was like that.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I think I know what you mean


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> I think I know what you mean


Let me give you an example of what I mean. 

This weekend my wife and I were having a few drinks and laughs and I threw fast times at ridgemont high on, she had never seen it. 

And we laughed and I told her that was basically my high school experience - imagine spicoli as a drunk jock who got straight a's and chased girls, and that was me. 

And when we got to the phoebe cates topless scene, my wife was like "I bet that was what your high school life, right?" And I said more or less. 

But then I took a chance because I had thought about it a while back. And I paused the video and said that I saw this movie when it first came out in 1982 when I was 11. And that very scene made a huge impression on me. I've always been into brunettes, and girls in bikinis, and topless girls... And that very movie and scene is part of why. It hit me at just the right formative time and kind of 'locked in' part of my fantasy life. That and other movies, girls, etc, too. 

And because I had done the work remembering and figuring it out, making it conscious, I could understand it and communicate it (gently).
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Anon1111, what you describe is so typical of what we read about here in the male(HD)/female(LD) scenarios. It makes me sad for the men, and really in awe of their emotional reserves. I mean it amazes me that so many men can withstand this sort of thing for so long. It would wear me out. It would be soul-sucking.
> 
> If the LD women only understood what their men felt, things would be so much better (assuming an unhealthy relationship isn't the *cause* of her reluctance to have sex with him).


I think one pathway through is the realization that the LD spouse actually can't understand.

This leads to the realization that she is not "doing this to you." It is just her nature.

So then one's emotion regarding this topic is strictly an internal fire.

You can let it burn to the ground and clear an empty field.

This is of course if you have a compelling reason to allow this to play out.

If you don't, there is no good reason to put yourself through this.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

EllisRedding said:


> Hmmm, ya know, I was thinking about this. I would be one person who would say I don't "need" someone in my life. Now don't get me wrong, I absolutely love/adore my W and would never do things differently. However, my personality has always been one where I am perfectly content being alone, doing my own thing. I don't feel like I "need" anyone to lean on. I would be content, not as happy as I am with my W, but I definitely wouldn't be miserable. My only requirement would be a dog (and probably a large porn collection lol). Trust me, I feel guilty even saying this b/c it almost comes out as a negative with my W, but the reality is this is just part of who I am and my personality.


 Yes Ellis..... I am sure this IS a personalty thing.. I remember you sharing this on another thread -after one of my posts.....there is another poster here that is similar...Southbound... he has shared it every which way how he doesn't mind at all being alone.. 

To be honest... the way he has expressed himself here - I've always found a great turn off... even though we have so many other things in common...that I really like the guy! 

I guess I LIKE to be needed, wanted around.. I was an only child.. I hated that.. I want to be there for someone .. if I was married to a man who could take me or leave me.. I'd not like that at all.. it would seriously bother me...if his actions showed it, like ho hum.. I'd grow BORED with him.. that's just being honest..

I think my husband is somewhat of an enigma in this regard.. he's a content guy, goes with the flow.. I could see him being fine ALONE.. more so over me for sure!.... 

Yet... he's never been one who wanted his space, he always wants to be near...his personality type even says he has a NEED to be needed.. (the ISFJ)... I don't even know if that makes sense.. as he's a through & through introvert.....sometimes he even says "I hate people".. he'd take working alone many times over some of his co-workers -not all though... but when it comes to family.. that's just turned on its head... I so love this about him though...


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> is being hungry an addiction?


People die from not eating.

People DON'T die from not having sex. 

And yes, sometimes being hungry IS an addiction.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
the communication gap seems impossible to bridge. If you took what I wrote as meaning that I was putting up with all the romantic stuff just to get sex, then I've failed to communicate.

Would you rather skip through a mystery novel and read the last page to find out who done it? That would miss the entire point. Yet if someone tore the last few pages out of every mystery you read you would probably not be happy.

Leaving sex out of a romantic day is like leaving the last few notes of of a symphony - you are left hanging with out the natural desirable conclusion. That doesn't mean that you just want to hear the last notes.








NobodySpecial said:


> I know for myself I would be very empty, very not connected if these moments were just him sitting there waiting to get me home to stick his thing in me.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> Yes, me too. On top of that, my natural proclivity is not to try to get my partner to meet this need but to figure out how I can either live without it or let them go.
> 
> My inclination is to let them go to be happier elsewhere. I do not like accepting these type of gifts.


I have a basic fear of being vulnerable.

I coped with a bad childhood by deciding that I would never let people know that they succeeded in hurting me.

Taking that attitude into adulthood severely limited my ability to have worthwhile relationships. The need to maintain my emotional armor meant that I couldn't be vulnerable enough to freely accept love. I could give gifts to others, but they couldn't give them to me. It led to some pretty emotionally stunted relationships.

In the past, I would also have decided to live without either the gift or the person. But this wouldn't have been for their benefit, it would have been for mine.

I actively work on having the courage to let myself be vulnerable. I've learned that accepting the gifts from my wife makes her happy since doing nice things for me brings her joy.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I am not a great word-smith, so it will always be possible to read my posts as meaning something I didn't intend.






NobodySpecial said:


> Except that is not what he said. At all.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> Let me give you an example of what I mean.
> 
> This weekend my wife and I were having a few drinks and laughs and I threw fast times at ridgemont high on, she had never seen it.
> 
> ...


so is your point that you went back to try to untangle why your desire is what it is, and in doing that you achieved greater mastery of it and comfort with it?

spicoli was pretty zen in retrospect

"since I'm here, and you're here, isn't it our time?"


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> so is your point that you went back to try to untangle why your desire is what it is, and in doing that you achieved greater mastery of it and comfort with it?
> 
> spicoli was pretty zen in retrospect
> 
> "since I'm here, and you're here, isn't it our time?"


Exactly. It stopped being this thing I just assumed or took for granted to be true, and then I understood why it was. And the power it had over me, because my sexuality formed around it, and it became kind of encrusted in.

But now that I know more about what drives me, it drives me far less. And I can still access it -- more directly and powerfully, in fact.

We have this giant gift in our sexuality. And most of us hunt around in the darkness trying to fulfill our LD-ness or HD-ness or our fetishes or whatever, without turning the lights on to see what's really in the room.

For example, when you're horny, have you ever stopped to consider why you're horny? And what is it really that you want?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> The thing is that he was not trying to meet *your* emotional needs and was content to have you meet *his* at the expense of your own. That never works. That's selfish and unloving.
> 
> What works is for each partner to recognize and meet the other's needs *to the very best of his/her ability* and for each partner to have *reasonable expectations*. Otherwise you just have a recipe for resentment and a downward spiral.


sometimes though admitting that you can at best only meet a fraction of each other's needs is best.

as in @Holdingontoit 's post.

she doesn't meet your needs at all, so in that context, you can only give so much without driving yourself crazy.

it's better to admit that and lay off than to drive yourself crazy.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Vega said:


> People die from not eating.
> 
> People DON'T die from not having sex.
> 
> And yes, sometimes being hungry IS an addiction.


I don't think this is right.

Many massive wars have been started by hard up dudes.

LOTS of men die from lack of sex in lots of different ways.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I think people are wired in fundamentally different ways. I can't tell if its a continuum or bimodal, but its clear that its different. Maybe I'm wrong, but this is what I seem to be hearing: 

Some people view sex as both natural and necessary for happiness. Frequent passionate sex seems intimately tied to a romantic relationship - the idea of loving someone but not desiring sex with them seems incomprehensible. A romance lacking sex is not a real romance, just a friendship. A good sex life is essential to their happiness.

Some people view sex as an activity that they engage in but not deeply tied to romance. They could imagine a romantic relationship that didn't include sex. They may enjoy sex now and them, but it is no more important to them than eating dessert or watching a movie. 


Both will claim to physical enjoy sex - but I wonder if the experience is actually at all the same.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Yes, some of our most intimate moments are similar - simple things. But if I was starving (for either food or sex) I would have a very compromised ability to appreciate the beauty of these things; my focus would be on the hunger I felt. I could try and try, but if the hunger was extreme, nothing I could do would allow me to ignore it. OTOH, when I don't have any pressing unfulfilled physical appetites, I am relaxed and happy and appreciate all the beauty around me.


what is interesting is that when you get used to going without, when it happens, you learn to _not _dwell on the fact that it just happened because you must immediately acclimate to it not happening again

so eventually you lose the bonding aspect of it too


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

OliviaG said:


> I think the reality is that HD men have a lot of other positive attributes that come with the HD in a package. Every woman wants the guy with lots of energy who works hard and is decisive and makes all the good things happen. It comes with a healthy appetite for sex though. So if you don't want the sex, stay away from the driven, highly ambitious men - leave them for the HD women to find!


I'm glad you mentioned that.

When my wife realized that, it was a revelation.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> the communication gap seems impossible to bridge. If you took what I wrote as meaning that I was putting up with all the romantic stuff just to get sex, then I've failed to communicate.


No. You said that they would be meaningless dressing without it.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Yes, occasional sex can end up just being frustrating. Just causes you to become aware again of what you are missing.

This morning my wife hinted that we might spend time in bed tonight. Its been a month now. She's hinted a few times before, but changed her mind each time. Yet, idiot that I am, the hints and flirting get my hopes up. 






Anon1111 said:


> what is interesting is that when you get used to going without, when it happens, you learn to _not _dwell on the fact that it just happened because you must immediately acclimate to it not happening again
> 
> so eventually you lose the bonding aspect of it too


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> For example, when you're horny, have you ever stopped to consider why you're horny? And what is it really that you want?


I have, but I could probably stand to reflect on it further.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Yes, occasional sex can end up just being frustrating. Just causes you to become aware again of what you are missing.
> 
> This morning my wife hinted that we might spend time in bed tonight. Its been a month now. She's hinted a few times before, but changed her mind each time. Yet, idiot that I am, the hints and flirting get my hopes up.


It's easiest just to assume it will never happen, then when it does, it is just a nice surprise.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> the communication gap seems impossible to bridge. If you took what I wrote as meaning that I was putting up with all the romantic stuff just to get sex, then I've failed to communicate.
> 
> Would you rather skip through a mystery novel and read the last page to find out who done it? That would miss the entire point. Yet if someone tore the last few pages out of every mystery you read you would probably not be happy.
> ...


So I repeat. If my DH felt this way, as if the experience we shared was unimportant in the absence of sex, I would feel very empty. And about 1,000 less likely to want it. Furthermore would put him in the category of quid pro quo for sex ... and not very nice. And not being as awesome about "meeting my needs" as he thinks he is.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Which makes me wonder. Have you asked HER is she shares your view of the role of sex in intimacy? Or do you just expect her to accept yours?

Or what increases her sense of closeness? Does she really say rubbing her feet?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Yes, occasional sex can end up just being frustrating. Just causes you to become aware again of what you are missing.
> 
> This morning my wife hinted that we might spend time in bed tonight. Its been a month now. She's hinted a few times before, but changed her mind each time. Yet, idiot that I am, the hints and flirting get my hopes up.


Why tolerate that?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Vega said:


> People die from not eating.
> 
> People DON'T die from not having sex.


Yes they do. They die on the inside. Their souls die. It is worse than death. You aren't dead but you wish you were. It is literally like being undead. All you do is pray for peace. You pray for death to come and free you from the burning.

My sex drive is a curse. I wish I never felt any desire whatsoever. I live my life to minimize my desire and my capacity to express whatever desire leaks through. You may tell me I am crazy. I won't argue with you.

But I can assure you that I am already dead. You may tell me I am wrong. You would be incorrect.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
If asked, she will say that it is something she really enjoys and wishes we could do more often. On any particular occasion though there is almost always a reason not to have sex. 

She says that she is very happy in our relationship.






NobodySpecial said:


> Which makes me wonder. Have you asked HER is she shares your view of the role of sex in intimacy? Or do you just expect her to accept yours?
> 
> Or what increases her sense of closeness? Does she really say rubbing her feet?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Sex is many, many things. Obviously, it's necessary for reproduction, but I've read that only 1 in 500 copulations results in pregnancy. Clearly, there is more to it, and humans have evolved as social and sexual beings who bond and pair for many reasons, both physical and psychological (but the fundamental evolutionary imperative is so that a pair will remain together long enough to bring children to some level of independence). That would include creating a bond with a partner, creating feelings of well-being, contentment, and a shared experience. It also has proven health-enhancing effects. And the lack of sex is known to create tension, frustration, distancing, and stress in relationships, can slowly destroy an existing bond, and eventually destroy a relationship. With someone I love, sex is bonding and affirming, a proof of reciprocated caring, interest, and love. It can also just be plain old fun for both! It doesn't always have to have deeper meaning than that. It can occasionally be just a physical release for either sex - as long as that's not the only reason most of the time, it really doesn't matter that you accommodate each other occasionally. Besides, you'll probably enjoy it if the relationship is generally good, because you want to do nice things for each other.

When a sexual mismatch comes to exist in a previously reasonably well-matched relationship, it is usually a sign of deeper problems. It's time to question the reasons, and the health of the relationship. Often, it's also time to move on if it's more than a temporary issue.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
yes, its difficult to describe (obviously). A romantic day that doesn't end in sex can be fine, but I can't enjoy a romantic relationship that doesn't include sex.

The trappings or romance (fancy hotels, romantic locations etc), seem hollow to me without actual romance, and to me romance has to include sex. 



NobodySpecial said:


> No. You said that they would be meaningless dressing without it.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> @Buddy400
> 
> I do not want gifts that are a burden for the gift giver, however that may be determined. One of your favorite examples is if you took away the need for conversation or companionship. If I honestly felt as if my husband had a far less need for conversation and companionship than I did and it was a stretch of his personality to talk to me, I wouldn't stay with him even if he was doing so nicely. It's the simple reality that he would be better suited for someone who didn't need to talk and it is not fair of me to pin him in in order to fill my own need for conversation.
> 
> I am most vulnerable in a relationship when I am most free to be myself. I am less vulnerable in a relationship where I am a burden, however nicely accepted.


I've decided that it's up to the gift giver to determine if it's a burden. My job is to say "thank you". 

It seems like I'd be doing them a favor to relieve them of a burden. Actually, I'm being selfish and choosing to protect myself at their expense.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> yes, its difficult to describe (obviously). A romantic day that doesn't end in sex can be fine, but I can't enjoy a romantic relationship that doesn't include sex.
> 
> The trappings or romance (fancy hotels, romantic locations etc), seem hollow to me without actual romance, and to me romance has to include sex.


It is not that it is so much difficult to describe. I don't think you are describing what you think you are. You think you are describing romance and emotional connection. My guess is that that is because your wife seems to have no romantic or emotional connection to at all. So otherwise it is just doing stuff. And the two way connection has NEVER been there.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Yes, occasional sex can end up just being frustrating. Just causes you to become aware again of what you are missing.
> 
> This morning my wife hinted that we might spend time in bed tonight. Its been a month now. She's hinted a few times before, but changed her mind each time. Yet, idiot that I am, the hints and flirting get my hopes up.


Ask her if you live in a hot dry climate is it ok to water the lawn once a month only?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Because sex is not the only important thing. Because I don't want to give up an otherwise very happy marriage because the sex is bad.



Tortdog said:


> Why tolerate that?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> That's something that thankfully I have not experienced. I'm sad to hear that though, and I can understand it.


not to beat a dead horse, but it cascades from there.

you learn not to expect it, you learn not to get hung up on it when it doesn't happen, you learn not to get excited when it does

then, because you've generally acclimated to sex not really being a key part of your relationship, you start to see your spouse in a physically more objective way too-- without a sexual veil


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> not to beat a dead horse, but it cascades from there.
> 
> you learn not to expect it, you learn not to get hung up on it when it doesn't happen, you learn not to get excited when it does


And you TEACH that this is a cycle you are willing to live with.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
sadly, that may well be true. She will claim to love me and to enjoy our romantic relationship. She claims to be very happy. Maybe she never has, or is incapable of experiencing romance the way that I do.






NobodySpecial said:


> It is not that it is so much difficult to describe. I don't think you are describing what you think you are. You think you are describing romance and emotional connection. My guess is that that is because your wife seems to have no romantic or emotional connection to at all. So otherwise it is just doing stuff. And the two way connection has NEVER been there.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Holdingontoit said:


> Yes they do. They die on the inside. Their souls die. It is worse than death. You aren't dead but you wish you were. It is literally like being undead. All you do is pray for peace. You pray for death to come and free you from the burning.
> 
> My sex drive is a curse. I wish I never felt any desire whatsoever. I live my life to minimize my desire and my capacity to express whatever desire leaks through. You may tell me I am crazy. I won't argue with you.
> 
> But I can assure you that I am already dead. You may tell me I am wrong. You would be incorrect.


Why would you choose that life?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

richardsharpe said:


> Because sex is not the only important thing. Because I don't want to give up an otherwise very happy marriage because the sex is bad.


Sex is a requirement.

So there is no good marriage without good sex. 

This is like saying "it's a fantastic car, it just doesn't have wheels that work. I can't find any that fit the car, so I'm just going to try to enjoy it while it sits on my driveway."

Instead of finding new wheels that do work, or a new car with wheels that do work.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> Why would you choose that life?


I don't get it either. It seems tantamount to letting someone kill you.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> Many massive wars have been started by hard up dudes.
> 
> .


WHAT war, for instance?



> LOTS of men die from lack of sex in lots of different ways


How so?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

marduk said:


> Sex is a requirement.
> 
> .


Sure. But HOW MUCH is the requirement and, by what world-wide accepted authority is it a requirement?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> yes, its difficult to describe (obviously). A romantic day that doesn't end in sex can be fine, but I can't enjoy a romantic relationship that doesn't include sex.
> 
> The trappings or romance (fancy hotels, romantic locations etc), seem hollow to me without actual romance, and to me romance has to include sex.


yeah, I would skip out on the romance if I were you.

sorry, that is a package deal in my book.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Vega said:


> Sure. But HOW MUCH is the requirement?


This is why we had lots of sex before we got serious. Lots and lots and lots.

I expected it to slow down as we have kids, age, and get a bit lazy.

So going from multiple times per day to multiple times per week is OK.

But if you start with multiple times per week, you're going to end up with maybe multiple times a month. Or less.

I'm not a once per week and I'm happy kind of guy. I've always been honest about that. But I also had to realize that I still had to work for it even after married -- just like when we were dating.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> And you TEACH that this is a cycle you are willing to live with.


sure, that's true. I don't really advocate living with it, but if you determine that the cost for bailing out is too high, then this is one way to deal with it that may minimize frustration.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

I will never get the how many times per period thing. Some days/weeks we can't get our hands off each other for a couple of hours. Then a family member dies and man takes the wind out of our sails for a few. Focusing on good (not good enough that she does not complain but toe curling good), the frequenct comes.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> Yes they do. They die on the inside. Their souls die. It is worse than death. You aren't dead but you wish you were. It is literally like being undead. All you do is pray for peace. You pray for death to come and free you from the burning.
> 
> My sex drive is a curse. I wish I never felt any desire whatsoever. I live my life to minimize my desire and my capacity to express whatever desire leaks through. You may tell me I am crazy. I won't argue with you.
> 
> But I can assure you that I am already dead. You may tell me I am wrong. You would be incorrect.


you may think this is cheesy, but at least think about it:

when a forest burns down, something new can grow in the charred remains.

you can try to fight the fire or just let it burn the whole f_cker down and watch the shoots come up after


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Vega said:


> WHAT war, for instance?
> 
> 
> 
> How so?


sorry, I honestly think you will be argumentative no matter what I write, so I'm not going to explain it to you.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Vega said:


> Sure. But HOW MUCH is the requirement and, by what world-wide accepted authority is it a requirement?


Ew? Did you just say requirement? Yuck.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> Yes they do. *They die on the inside. Their souls die. It is worse than death. You aren't dead but you wish you were. It is literally like being undead. All you do is pray for peace. You pray for death to come and free you from the burning.
> *
> My sex drive is a curse. I wish I never felt any desire whatsoever. I live my life to minimize my desire and my capacity to express whatever desire leaks through. You may tell me I am crazy. I won't argue with you.
> 
> But I can assure you that I am already dead. You may tell me I am wrong. You would be incorrect.


I won't tell you that you're crazy.

Having said that, I hope you and others can now see the reason WHY some women believe that their husbands are ONLY or MOSTLY after sex with them. It's not that you desire her for who _she_ is, but for what SEX is to you. She is just a means to an end. 

Kinda reminds me of giving an alcoholic a drink. The alcoholic doesn't care NEARLY as much about WHO is giving him the drink as (s)he does the drink itself. 

Notice in your post that when you were describing how you felt when you weren't getting sex that you didn't mention your wife at all?

To me, that's very telling.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> Ew? Did you just say requirement? Yuck.


Marduk used the word "requirement". I mearly repeated his use of the word.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Vega said:


> How so?


Regarding LOTS of men dying due to lack of sex. 

While grown men do not die from lack of sex in a marriage, one could argue that it can have the same effect on the next generation of his children. 

Badsanta


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> sorry, I honestly think you will be argumentative no matter what I write, so I'm not going to explain it to you.


I will argue a point that is obviously untrue, doesn't make sense or is questionable. I'm trying to discover the TRUTH about all of this, and if my deeper questions cause you too much discomfort to respond, all I can say is I'm sorry.

I deal with facts. I deal with evidence. I deal with proof and if I don't know what those are, I SEARCH for them. 

You were the one who made the statement. All I'm asking for is for you to back it up with facts.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> sure, that's true. I don't really advocate living with it, but if you determine that the cost for bailing out is too high, then this is one way to deal with it that may minimize frustration.


I will never understand why people trade their limited life for fear of losing money, which you can always make more of.

You're not going to be able to save up and buy another life.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

badsanta said:


> Regarding LOTS of men dying due to lack of sex.
> 
> While grown men do not die from lack of sex in a marriage, one could argue that it can have the same effect on the next generation of his children.
> 
> Badsanta


Not sure I understand what you're saying, badsanta. Could you please elaborate?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> Ew? Did you just say requirement? Yuck.


I require sex to stay married. I don't think that's a bad thing.

My wife says the same thing.

It does not mean that if something medical were to happen, we wouldn't try to make other accommodations. But just deciding to make this part of our life not a priority or to take it away, would be taking the marriage away just as much as it would take the marriage away if I refused to share my paychecks or be kind to her.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> I will never understand why people trade their limited life for fear of losing money, which you can always make more of.
> 
> You're not going to be able to save up and buy another life.


I thought A had disabled kids in the mix? That would do it for me.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I've certainly thought about it. A long term close female friend of mine is about to divorce her useless abusive husband. She has always been attracted to me. Recently commented that a man she was starting to date (she is in an open relationship at her husbands's request) was so attractive to her because he reminded her of me.

She is in a relationship where she is a near sex-slave to her husband, doing whatever he wants because she thinks its her "duty". 

Should I leave my wife of 30 years for this woman?

No- I am bound by both love and honor to my wife. So I complain here to relieve my frustrations, but do evrerything I can to make her happy. I actually enjoy my marriage, it would be fantastic, save for this one critical problem. 

The car has wheels, it just doesn't have AC and I live in the desert. 






marduk said:


> Sex is a requirement.
> 
> So there is no good marriage without good sex.
> 
> ...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Vega said:


> WHAT war, for instance?
> 
> 
> 
> How so?


I once read an article, which I can't find or fully remember so it's just my opinion, that one of the facets of fanatical thinking in men was a lack of sexual access to women.

It related how the caliphate would have vast harems, and leave many men without wives, which they would send off to war to die -- promising if they returned successful, they'd get a wife.

And if I remember right, it said similar things of the crusades. 

Or Vikings raping and pillaging.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I've certainly thought about it. A long term close female friend of mine is about to divorce her useless abusive husband. She has always been attracted to me. Recently commented that a man she was starting to date (she is in an open relationship at her husbands's request) was so attractive to her because he reminded her of me.
> 
> She is in a relationship where she is a near sex-slave to her husband, doing whatever he wants because she thinks its her "duty".
> ...



Um? Now I really wonder about you. You think there is some advantage and desirability to the point of it EVEN CROSSING YOUR MIND to be with that woman because she is her husband's sex slave? You are hopeless.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I've certainly thought about it. A long term close female friend of mine is about to divorce her useless abusive husband. She has always been attracted to me. Recently commented that a man she was starting to date (she is in an open relationship at her husbands's request) was so attractive to her because he reminded her of me.
> 
> She is in a relationship where she is a near sex-slave to her husband, doing whatever he wants because she thinks its her "duty".
> ...


No. She has problems of her own.



> No- I am bound by both love and honor to my wife. So I complain here to relieve my frustrations, but do evrerything I can to make her happy. I actually enjoy my marriage, it would be fantastic, save for this one critical problem.
> 
> The car has wheels, it just doesn't have AC and I live in the desert.


If your sex life isn't good, then you need to be honest about that. And you can either work together to make it good, or break up to find happiness.

Not make 'meh' a lifestyle.

Life is for living. Find someone that wants to join you in your life because that's what she want's, too... Not someone that makes you live their life.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> I thought A had disabled kids in the mix? That would do it for me.


Why?

It would make me be more accommodating within reason, but not make me eat a **** sandwich every day.

I would understand if disabled kids made her really tired and made it really hard to get alone time that included sex.

I would not understand if she didn't want to help find ways to not be tired and get alone time that included sex.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> Why?
> 
> It would make me be more accommodating within reason, but not make me eat a **** sandwich every day.
> 
> ...


I meant in terms of leaving as it relates to practical matters. I mean, the best I think I could manage was to "stay" ... not exactly married but not gone either if I thought a divorce would very severely impact my kids' access to medical and educational care.

**** sandwiches just taste bad. Not a fan.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> I meant in terms of leaving as it relates to practical matters. I mean, the best I think I could manage was to "stay" ... not exactly married but not gone either if I thought a divorce would very severely impact my kids' access to medical and educational care.
> 
> **** sandwiches just taste bad. Not a fan.


My options would be:

A. fix the sex life along with the rest of the marriage and stay happily married.

B. Have an open marriage for the sake of the kids.

C. divorce amicably and try to make it as easy on the kids welfare as possible.

not 

D. Accept a **** life out of obligation when the other side isn't living up to their end of the deal


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> My options would be:
> 
> A. fix the sex life along with the rest of the marriage and stay happily married.
> 
> ...


I'm picking B. So yah I agree with you.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> I'm picking B. So yah I agree with you.


As long as it's entered into honestly and everybody plays by the rules...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> I will never understand why people trade their limited life for fear of losing money, which you can always make more of.
> 
> You're not going to be able to save up and buy another life.


it's not about money in my case


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> sure, that's true. I don't really advocate living with it, but if you determine that the cost for bailing out is too high, then this is one way to deal with it that may minimize frustration.


What's your wife's reaction to your having achieved a zen-like state?

I'm guessing that she's unimpressed?

Which would be cool, since you're doing it for yourself, not her.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Palodyne (Mar 3, 2016)

Personal said:


> @SimplyAmorous I'm not laughing. That said does Palodyne who is a 48 year old man who remains a virgin by choice in part because of his anger towards women, offer that much hope to those who want to marry?
> 
> Sad though it is, he really does have a lot of red flags.


 Red Flags? 

Your description of me is correct, that's who I am, except for the anger. I have been working for a few years now on letting all that go. I went to therapy for over a year, and still regularly talk to my minister. I joined SI and talked some of my problems through with them.

Although I have become comfortable in my current lifestyle, and could continue on this way if necessary. I have become very aware of what I have deprived myself of, the intimacy and companionship. I hope to get the opportunity to experience all that someday, and hope everyone else experiences it too.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> Life is for living. Find someone that wants to join you in your life because that's what she want's, too... Not someone that makes you live their life.


no one can make you live her life though

we're all put into circumstances and must deal with things we'd rather not deal with.

you can deal with it and not let "it" become "you"


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> no one can make you live her life though
> 
> we're all put into circumstances and must deal with things we'd rather not deal with.
> 
> you can deal with it and not let "it" become "you"


Victim speak.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> Why?
> 
> It would make me be more accommodating within reason, but not make me eat a **** sandwich every day.
> 
> ...


I don't want to get into my whole deal again, but I'll just say that my wife and I will be caring for our kids until we die, and we'll need to figure out how to set them up beyond that, so I try to put my unmet needs in perspective


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> Victim speak.


I actually don't feel like a victim anymore, but I appreciate that you are trying to help me.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> I actually don't feel like a victim anymore, but I appreciate that you are trying to help me.


Are you _that_ Anon, Anon?


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

richardsharpe said:


> Because sex is not the only important thing. Because I don't want to give up an otherwise very happy marriage because the sex is bad.


It doesn't have to be one or the other. 

I found myself in that situation but we changed it.


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

Vega said:


> WHAT war, for instance?
> 
> 
> 
> How so?


All of them.


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

Anon1111 said:


> sure, that's true. I don't really advocate living with it, but if you determine that the cost for bailing out is too high, then this is one way to deal with it that may minimize frustration.


Totally not there.


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

I've spent about 3 hours over the past several days reading this entire thread. Every.Single.Post.
Wow! Thanks to all who have contributed.


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

Yes. It is like pre-abortion...





badsanta said:


> While grown men do not die from lack of sex in a marriage, one could argue that it can have the same effect on the next generation of his children.
> 
> Badsanta


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> Victim speak.


He has a different set of priorities than you do AND disabled kids who are going to require the kind of care kids don't normally requiring. I am never going to knock someone for prioritizing the kids. I mean unless he is still playing house with his wife.


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

richardsharpe said:


> She is in a relationship where she is a near sex-slave to her husband, doing whatever he wants because she thinks its her "duty".


Um, does she give lessons? 




> The car has wheels, it just doesn't have AC and I live in the desert.


It lacks the engine.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> Are you _that_ Anon, Anon?


maybe


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> He has a different set of priorities than you do AND disabled kids who are going to require the kind of care kids don't normally requiring. I am never going to knock someone for prioritizing the kids. I mean unless he is still playing house with his wife.


This is a false dichotomy.

Mommy could live in the home Mon-Thurs and Daddy could live there Fri-Sun or whatever arrangement works. 

This is just an extension of "want to stay for the kids" deal with is a total fallacy.

Or they could open their marriage. Or they could, you know, fix it. But if he's the person I think he is, there are a host of other issues.

None of which means that either one is handcuffed to anything, except parenting their kids. Which they are both smart enough and happy to do.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> maybe


I missed you, man. I hope things are good. I retract my victim comment and insert it with "I hope you someday change your strategy."


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> This is a false dichotomy.
> 
> Mommy could live in the home Mon-Thurs and Daddy could live there Fri-Sun or whatever arrangement works.


Your budget looks way different than ours does. And we are by no means broke.



> This is just an extension of "want to stay for the kids" deal with is a total fallacy.
> 
> Or they could open their marriage. Or they could, you know, fix it. But if he's the person I think he is, there are a host of other issues.


I don't know the rest of the story, so I take it he hasn't done either of these. Oh well.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> This is a false dichotomy.
> 
> Mommy could live in the home Mon-Thurs and Daddy could live there Fri-Sun or whatever arrangement works.
> 
> ...


yeah, there are a lot of other theoretically possible arrangements, but in reality, anything you described above would be a total disaster.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> yeah, there are a lot of other theoretically possible arrangements, but in reality, anything you described above would be a total disaster.
> 
> the reality is that neither of us can do what needs to be done alone, even for a few days a week. our situation is intense.
> 
> ...


Bah, we've been through this. I love you brother. I hope you find some happiness. Nothing but the best, man.

Glad to hear from you again.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

You just realized this was the same guy?

Caffeine, stat...

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> You just realized this was the same guy?
> 
> Caffeine, stat...
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


it's like when evil Spock had the goatee


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

farsidejunky said:


> You just realized this was the same guy?
> 
> Caffeine, stat...
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


I've suspected for some time, but know the rules about fight club.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

marduk said:


> I've suspected for some time, but know the rules about fight club.


Yeah, but you didn't just know him from fight club. You knew him from work, too, didn't you?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

farsidejunky said:


> Yeah, but you didn't just know him from fight club. You knew him from work, too, didn't you?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


Huh? I don't remember that.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Olivia: Thanks, but you don't have to defend me. Vega is essentially correct. I wanted sex with my wife because of what it did for me. Because of how it made me feel. Because of how I felt when it was absent. Not because of how it made my wife feel. I ignored how it made my wife feel for far too long. I finally accepted how it made her feel and now I do not desire any sexual contact with her.

I was at fault for continuing to desire sex with her after it became clear she gets absolutely nothing from it. If I had accepted that reality sooner, I would have felt compelled to divorce my wife. Which in some sense would have proved Vega's argument. Of course, my wife tried her best to hide that reality from me (pretending to enjoy it and making excuses as to why she refused sex or failed to enjoy sex on specific occasions instead of admitting that she never enjoyed it at all) because she feared (correctly) that I would not have married her if I knew. In the end, it took so long for me to accept the reality that I now am old and tired and no longer desire to have sex with anyone. So I no longer feel compelled to divorce my wife over the complete absence of sex.

I agree with Marduk and NS. This is no way to live. I am an idiot to have chosen this path, and to continue to pursue it. I have literally thrown my life away. Like I keep saying, I am a living (or perhaps unliving) testament to what not to do.

Then again, the masochist / martyr / victim in me revels in it. So don't cry for me. I am getting the payoff I pursue. My kids are doing well. The lilac bush is in bloom and smells heavenly. Soon the raspberries will ripen and I will make jam.

I am warped and broken. Pieces are missing. Do you think I would ever trust my heart to another woman? Do you think I would share my hopes and dreams with another woman? Share my sexuality with her? Rely on her to satisfy my desires? All of that would make me vulnerable to her. I will NEVER do that. And if I am not going to do that, then I might as well stay with the mother of my children. We get along on the surface. We like the same food. We enjoy hikes together. We can spend our later years chatting about the kids and God willing grandkids. It will be pleasant. Empty at the core. But any relationship I have going forward would be empty because I would never again allow anyone near my core. If all I am ever going to share with anyone is my surface, then I might as well share my surface with my wife.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## JamesTKirk (Sep 8, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> Exactly! If you really don't need much sex or if you don't want it at all, you should find a mate with the same sort of desire level as yours. I really wish that LD women, particularly LD women over 50 would leave the HD guys in that age bracket alone. Many men slow down sexually after 50 so there should be plenty of LD men in that age bracket to choose from if that level of sex is compatible to you.
> 
> I think the reality is that HD men have a lot of other positive attributes that come with the HD in a package. Every woman wants the guy with lots of energy who works hard and is decisive and makes all the good things happen. It comes with a healthy appetite for sex though. So if you don't want the sex, stay away from the driven, highly ambitious men - leave them for the HD women to find!


One thing that I've finally realized is that men or women can slow down after a while for a variety of (biological) reasons and when that happens, there's a mismatch between two married people that didn't exist earlier in the relationship (when you might have been matching.) Or, sometimes one can even go HD making it worse. So that can leave one spouse frustrated and the other annoyed. One want sex and the other is like "What's your problem? Why are you so obsessed with sex?" and the other is like "What's your problem, why don't you want sex with me anymore?" (or something like that.)
I think that's often a significant factor in couples that eventually divorce after 20 years and a few kids, the mistmatch in sexual desire which can lead to a whole chain of issues that makes things fall apart. After a while both may decide "it's not worth it anymore when there are other people out there I'll be happier with" which I can understand.

But, if both people in that marriage really want to stay together you are genuinely interested in each other's sexual satisfaction and based on my experience, that tends to up the interest a bit for the LD one anyway. After reading your story, it sounds like your husband does just that (bravo.)


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

sigh, you can read my posts how you want.

One of the primary reasons she is leaving is that her husband treats her as a sex slave.

I would consider marrying her because she have been one of my closest friends for decades and we enjoy each other's company.



NobodySpecial said:


> Um? Now I really wonder about you. You think there is some advantage and desirability to the point of it EVEN CROSSING YOUR MIND to be with that woman because she is her husband's sex slave? You are hopeless.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

badsanta said:


> Regarding LOTS of men dying due to lack of sex.
> 
> While grown men do not die from lack of sex in a marriage, one could argue that it can have the same effect on the next generation of his children.
> 
> Badsanta





Vega said:


> Not sure I understand what you're saying, badsanta. Could you please elaborate?


Say you are in a healthy marriage and the male has a strong desire for sex with his wife, so strong that he almost feels he may die if he does not get any. While that is an easy statement to laugh at, because obviously the man will not die, but it is a little more profound to think that the next generation may not be procreated. 

Not ever being born ≠ dying, but it seems rather synonymous. 

At the end of the day let us say hypothetically the wife never wants to have enough sex to procreate because she believes all the marketing on TV that tells her she is overweight and is ashamed of herself. Meanwhile her husband finds her very attractive.

Now tell me in that scenario that not getting any is perhaps a little deadly?










There is no child hiding behind that tree! It is just the wind...










There is only Mr. Nice Guy in the kitchen trying to cook a super healthy meal for his 38 year old wife to cheer her up because she can not seem to look like as healthy as Agnes who is way older than she is:










Badsanta


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
how did you change it?

I do in fact listen to people's descriptions of what they have done to improve things - and have tried many things myself, but none have ever resulted in a long lasting change.


I'm open to new ideas, but so far I don't see a way to remain married to my wife and to have a good sex life. So given the choice, I pick an (otherwise) good marriage over a good sex life. 




Tortdog said:


> It doesn't have to be one or the other.
> 
> I found myself in that situation but we changed it.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

JamesTKirk said:


> . One want sex and the other is like "What's your problem? Why are you so obsessed with sex?" and the other is like "What's your problem, why don't you want sex with me anymore?" (or something like that.)


The trick is to be married to someone who doesn't respond with "What's your problem?"

Forget looking for sexual compatibility in the beginning and assuming that it will never change.

This is what you need to look for; someone who is genuinely interested in your happiness.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> You can trust again, you can give your heart again, even if you've temporarily lost the ability to envision yourself doing it. It would require actively working on overcoming your previous experience, just like what would be required of your wife if she were to want to be able to enjoy sex again.


Agreed. I have written that many times. Almost everyone marries someone at an equal level of craziness as themselves. Those who don't tend to divorce quickly. Remember,if you are willing to tolerate being mistreated for an extended period of time, you have issues too!

I am just as messed up as my wife. I am no more willing to address my issues than she is to address hers. I am not going to ask her to address hers if I won't address mine. That is part of why I think we are both best off staying together. We have acclimated to each other's problem areas.

I have never asserted that my wife is the problem and I am blameless. I have never said that she should change even if I won't. I have said I don't expect either of us to ever do so. Our last MC "fired" us for precisely this reason. After 2 years of working with her (which were years 7 and 8 of actively working on our marriage with several different MCs and STs), she could detect zero change in either of us. She said if neither of us were willing to change, then we were wasting our time and money talking to her. So we stopped. That was 11 years ago.

I made the first real change in our marriage about a year ago. I told my wife I would never have sex with her again. That has changed everything for the better. Even the sex. Zero sex is easier to tolerate than few, far between and lousy (mostly my fault on that last part).

Don't be like Anon, continually and fruitlessly urging me to address my issues. I never will. That is why my wife and I are so well matched. I knew there had to be a reason such a beautiful and accomplished woman was willing to marry me. I thought I understood why. I was wrong. I am paying for my mistake and for not inquiring further. She thought I was merely being modest when I told her how messed up I am. She is paying for her mistake and for not inquiring further. We belong together. I intend to see that we stay that way.



FrenchFry said:


> The trauma she experienced is heartbreaking. I'm really sorry she was not able to overcome it and transferred the profundity of her pain to you.
> 
> This concept of filling your spouses needs sexually is insanely hard when that choice has been taken away from you.


Agreed. Thanks for the warm thoughts toward both of us. We are fine. We have only First World problems. Kids are doing well. She has gotten through her cancer treatment. If the only thing I lack is sex than I am well and truly blessed. If I choose not to enjoy this life, which is filled with such joy and abundance, that is my failing.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> how did you change it?
> 
> I do in fact listen to people's descriptions of what they have done to improve things - and have tried many things myself, but none have ever resulted in a long lasting change.
> ...


In my opinion, the first step is to accept there is no solution.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> sigh, you can read my posts how you want.
> 
> One of the primary reasons she is leaving is that her husband treats her as a sex slave.
> 
> I would consider marrying her because she have been one of my closest friends for decades and we enjoy each other's company.


You write what you mean and backpedal when it looks bad. You ignore anything that anyone says that does not satisfy your need to whine. You are not worth any time.


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> how did you change it?
> 
> I do in fact listen to people's descriptions of what they have done to improve things - and have tried many things myself, but none have ever resulted in a long lasting change.
> ...


I owe it to the Community to discuss it. I will lay it out once I have a real computer and can do it justice.


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

Here is my response to the original question "what drives a man to desire sex with his spouse". It is actually quite simple really: 

1. I have a normal human sex drive. I take no credit, God saw fit to bake this into my DNA.
2. I am sexually attracted to my wife. Not sure if this was a choice, or if we were "meant to be".
3. I've pledged to "forsake all others" - which means there would be no purpose in me desiring anybody other than my spouse. This is my choice.

So there you have it!


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> In my opinion, the first step is to accept there is no solution.


Kobiyashi Maru.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)




----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

marduk said:


> Huh? I don't remember that.


From the regular boards, Mister Cryptic Speak...

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> how did you change it?
> 
> I do in fact listen to people's descriptions of what they have done to improve things - and have tried many things myself, but none have ever resulted in a long lasting change.
> ...


If I remember correctly, you've done everything but destabilization.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> The trauma she experienced is heartbreaking. I'm really sorry she was not able to overcome it and transferred the profundity of her pain to you.
> 
> This concept of filling your spouses needs sexually is insanely hard when that choice has been taken away from you.


You mean when somebody allows it to be taken away from them, right?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> In my opinion, the first step is to accept there is no solution.


There is always a solution. 

Some are just less desirable than others.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> There is always a solution.
> 
> Some are just less desirable than others.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


I guess it's a little bit of a jedi mind trick.

you give up on the idea of there being a solution. 

this is a means of accepting the present reality.

once you really accept the present reality you can be OK with it.

Once you are really OK with it there is no pressure for anything to happen.

Maybe you have a spouse who exploits this or maybe you have a spouse who feels free to do something better because there is no more judgment.

either way you're still fine.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Sky, do you know why your wife is so averse to sex? It sounds pretty extreme, like past sexual trauma, or super strict religious faith. Is it? Has she ever shared that with you?


I appreciate you asking, and I'll make my answer brief so as to not disrupt the thread more than I have.

IMHO, the "why" has varied over time. She's not been a reliable source of information. I don't mean that in a disparaging way, but I think it has been quite difficult for her to spend much time thinking about it let alone be willing to express it directly to me. So, to a large extent I'm left to speculate.

In recent years, it's because I've put on weight (250 lb, 5'10, mostly visceral fat), she's been unhappy, held onto an extreme amount of resentment. I don't believe I have done anything worth hardly any of that resentment, and have tried to show her time and time again my willingness work through things. She has been cold to that. I finally told her I thought she had that extreme resentment and was damn determined never to "forgive", and that she sabotaged any attempts I made to reconcile. I told her I didn't know what it was all about, but it very clearly was the root blocker, and I was powerless to address it. I also told her I thought she though I viewed her in a negative light, that was far from the complete truth. I had my theories about what the resentment was, and tried to help her see she could either let go of it or lose me. I think she felt I was truly leaving, and her heart softened. She has been open to sex, and less resentful. We are not healed. Sexually, we've been together twice since that supposed turning point. A lot has happened we could not predict with someone else in the family (one of our kids), and we certainly have turned towards each other to get through that together peacefully. I don't have my hopes up for further reconciliation, but it is something I don't experience like I used to. I understand it's not "just me", or a true reflection of my worth. To some degree, I view her as having done what she was equipped to do, even though it was a painful experience. I don't think so much about the future with her, nor much about the present. We're just getting along, for now, because we always could have, and because, for now, it's really important.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> No. I don't think there is an allow in rape.


Not the rape. But what about what happens every day after the altercation in your life beyond that?

And for the record, I speak from experience, so please don't assume that I am somehow insensitive to it.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I've lost track of what "destabilization" means in this context. If by that you mean make her think that I might not always be there for her, then I haven't tried that. Being someone she can rely on no matter what is important to me. 




farsidejunky said:


> If I remember correctly, you've done everything but destabilization.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
just to clarify, its a very strange sort of abuse. They got into BDSM many years ago. Consensual - she enjoyed some of it. But it became the only thing her husband wanted. She feels that as his loyal wife she should do whatever it takes to make him happy.

They play with a safe-word, so technically there is "consent", but she feels like she *should* go along with whatever he wants, while he doesn't do at all the same for her. 

Not sure what started this. I know she cheated on him ~25 years ago (no, not with me in case anyone wonders) and has always felt guilty about it. I have some thought that she feels she needs to put up with whatever he wants to make up for this.

I have no problem at all with truly consenting BDSM, but based on what I've seen from her, sometimes consent is not nearly as clear as it might seem. (maybe an interesting separate thread)

He is a rather poor husband in other ways as well. (doesn't work, doesn't do housework etc). He also believes in an "open" relationship - which is to say he has sex with other women, but she does not. 

She is physically, and financially capable of leaving any time she wants. She just feels that it is her *duty* to stay.

I and several friends have been trying to convince her otherwise.


I really just brought her up to try to make explicit the idea of "not putting up with it". That there is something specific and immediate that I could do. That there is a woman I like very much, know very well, and who is attracted to me if I wised to leave my marriage.

OliviaG makes a very good point about issues with someone who has been sexually abused in the past. My impression is that she doesn't feel "abused", but just in a very unbalanced sexual relationship. She flirts with me a bit I think just to feel that someone can have a romantic desire for her, not just want to use her. 

I have no intention at all of pursuing this, just using it as an example. I've know her for 30 years, nothing has ever happened between us and nothing will. 


(sorry for the threadjack).




OliviaG said:


> When I read Richard's post, I thought the reason this woman crossed his mind was because she told him that she is *attracted* to him, not because she's been abused by her husband. I would think taking on a woman who has been sexually abused by her husband would be quite a risk for Richard, and I'm betting it's a risk that he's not unaware of.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I've lost track of what "destabilization" means in this context. If by that you mean make her think that I might not always be there for her, then I haven't tried that. Being someone she can rely on no matter what is important to me.


It could be that, or other things that are important to her within your marriage that you do just for her.

I was kind of okay with your situation until you told me she promises sex regularly, and then doesn't deliver.

There is something incredibly wrong with that, epecially if she understands how important sex is to you.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
She doesn't "promise", just hints / suggests. Apologizes later when it doesn't happen (which is most of the time).

I'm completely unable to make her realize that sex matters to me. It should be clear from this thread that people for whom sex isn't important really can't imagine it being important to others. 

The reverse is true as well - I honestly can't imagine not wanting to have sex with someone I loved (assuming that they are generous lovers). I hear and believe when people say that, but I can't internalize thinking that way. 





farsidejunky said:


> It could be that, or other things that are important to her within your marriage that you do just for her.
> 
> I was kind of okay with your situation until you told me she promises sex regularly, and then doesn't deliver.
> 
> ...


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Sometimes indifference is worse than cruelty...

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

badsanta said:


> Sorry to hear that. Being responsible with one's sexuality I think equates to being respectful to your sexuality, and this is also a form of being true and honest with yourself. I would also argue that women can just as easily use men since some have little control over their sexuality.
> 
> I also found that TAM's censorship protocols to prevent people from saying foul things failed to work with your message when you described yourself, so I went back and censored it. If you go back and read it now, you come across as a little mysterious and free spirited!
> 
> ...


I think maybe you don't quite understand what it means to have to take responsibility for someone else's sexuality. Yes, women also use men. No doubt. But men are never required to take responsibility for women's sexuality. Mostly, they don't even have to take responsibility for their own. It's women's job to make sure that nothing untoward happens.

That's why they keep calling the women gatekeepers in these here parts.

And thanks for the asterisks. The thought was nice, but the truth of course will out itself.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> How did his attitude make you feel, AA?


What difference does it make? He's entitled to his own feelings, and it is not his job to service my sexual whims.

I don't care what the "need" is, if it feels like a burden to him, then I'm not interested in nagging him or pressing him. I can look after myself.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

> Exactly! If you really don't need much sex or if you don't want it at all, you should find a mate with the same sort of desire level as yours. I really wish that LD women, particularly LD women over 50 would leave the HD guys in that age bracket alone. Many men slow down sexually after 50 so there should be plenty of LD men in that age bracket to choose from if that level of sex is compatible to you.
> 
> I think the reality is that HD men have a lot of other positive attributes that come with the HD in a package. Every woman wants the guy with lots of energy who works hard and is decisive and makes all the good things happen. It comes with a healthy appetite for sex though. So if you don't want the sex, stay away from the driven, highly ambitious men - leave them for the HD women to find!


Well, there are plenty of HD guys who still believe that they can turn us LDs around, as a matter of fact some guys egos rest on being THE ONE who was the BEST SHE EVER HAD. They love that, and they still have the outdated notion that the HD women have been around the block too many times.

What do I say to this? HD guys please stick to the HD women. This also has to take into account the very bitter truth of the LD wife turning HD after divorce, not being tied to the same man for years and years has an effect on the libido for women as well.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> I once read an article, which I can't find or fully remember so it's just my opinion, that one of the facets of fanatical thinking in men was a lack of sexual access to women.
> 
> It related how the caliphate would have vast harems, and leave many men without wives, which they would send off to war to die -- promising if they returned successful, they'd get a wife.
> 
> ...



The people who *start* the wars are the ones with the harems. Yes, military strategy is often to channel sex drive into killing for the foot soldiers, to the point even where they are trained to associate their guns with their ****s.

But again, these folks don't start the wars; they just have the "privilege" of dying for someone else's cause.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> I once read an article, which I can't find or fully remember so it's just my opinion, that one of the facets of fanatical thinking in men was a lack of sexual access to women.
> 
> It related how the caliphate would have vast harems, and leave many men without wives, which they would send off to war to die -- promising if they returned successful, they'd get a wife.
> 
> ...



The people who *start* the wars are the ones with the harems. Yes, military strategy is often to channel sex drive into killing for the foot soldiers, to the point even where they are trained to associate their guns with their ****s.

But again, these soldiers don't start the wars; they just have the "privilege" of dying for someone else's cause.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

PieceOfSky said:


> I had my theories about what the resentment was, and tried to help her see she could either let go of it or lose me. I think she felt I was truly leaving, and her heart softened. She has been open to sex, and less resentful. We are not healed.


I'm sorry to hear that she is unwilling to share with you. Obviously I don't know the truth, but I get the sense that there is something behind it, as both her aversion and need for secrecy seem very very high.

I hope you both find a way to heal.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

Palodyne said:


> Red Flags?
> 
> Your description of me is correct, that's who I am, except for the anger. I have been working for a few years now on letting all that go. I went to therapy for over a year, and still regularly talk to my minister. I joined SI and talked some of my problems through with them.
> 
> Although I have become comfortable in my current lifestyle, and could continue on this way if necessary. I have become very aware of what I have deprived myself of, the intimacy and companionship. I hope to get the opportunity to experience all that someday, and hope everyone else experiences it too.


Yes red flags!

Although I wish you well it is foolish to pretend that the bitterness that you once nurtured for a long time does not come without some significant and very harmful baggage.

An experienced woman would know to avoid the minefield that you present from the moment she sees the mine tape. While a niave woman who ignored the mine tape, would simply add anti lifting booby traps to the mines you have already sown.

As healed as you think you are, I hope you appreciate the fact that willfully avoiding any kind of sexual relationship with women and condemning their gender for circa 20/25 years before you got over yourself. All because two women who you weren't married to left you for other men. Should give all but the ones that like to risk self harm significant cause for pause.

Your inability to cope with what happens to many people in romantic relationships, and your over the top response to what happened to you. Points to a significant lack of resilience, anger issues, overblown self entitlement, issues with fear and a significant disconnect from reality as well.

Then there's the fact you have if I recall correctly, chosen to remain a virgin until marriage to the point, all you have ever done romantically is maybe hold a woman's hand, hugged and or kissed one on the lips three decades (or close to it) ago. Presuming you are a sexual person, the pent up frustration, fear, self loathing, embarrassment, shame, rage and lack of any experience at your age which points to a lack of drive and desire. Means it is highly likely you would bring considerable misery to anyone niave enough to buy your baggage and marry you.

So although you may claim to have now gotten over yourself, until you can prove that you can cope with, get over and get on after experiencing relationship failure/s anew, you will never know if you really have.

At the end of the day and at any age, finding marital partners and or long term sexual relationship partners is a competitive activity. If you lack the drive to compete and or lack the resilience to weather the knocks and failures you aren't fit to win and nor should you.

It's one thing to think you are a tender, caring chap and would make a fine sexual relationship partner, it is another thing to actually be a tender, caring chap in a sexual relationship, when facing the usual day to day plus the challenges that adversity bring.

For all of us, it is the living that proves who we are.

Do or do not.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

techmom said:


> Well, there are plenty of HD guys who still believe that they can turn us LDs around, as a matter of fact some guys egos rest on being THE ONE who was the BEST SHE EVER HAD. They love that, and they still have the outdated notion that the HD women have been around the block too many times.
> 
> What do I say to this? HD guys please stick to the HD women. This also has to take into account the very bitter truth of the LD wife turning HD after divorce, not being tied to the same man for years and years has an effect on the libido for women as well.


I don't understand what supposed thoughts in anyone not engaging here are worth thinking about. There are lots of people full of sh1tty ideas. Doesn't get us anywhere, best I can tell, and for me tends to distract from things I can change. Ymmv.

The premise of my seeking a turn around is not that there is some wrong with her sexually. It is that our relationship is broken, and we are to various degrees from from well adjusted psychologically, and that I am an insensitive typical as$hole husband that just can't see what he is doing wrong. I seek health and redemption, not so that she will become something she isn't and never was. But so we can resume a happy life together rather than run this into the ground.

I don't consider myself HD. I imagine she would describe herself as not naturally LD, but just LD or 0-D for me. If we parted, I'd be happy if she got her groove back. Life is precious and short.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

techmom said:


> Well, there are plenty of HD guys who still believe that they can turn us LDs around, as a matter of fact some guys egos rest on being THE ONE who was the BEST SHE EVER HAD. They love that, and they still have the outdated notion that the HD women have been around the block too many times.
> 
> What do I say to this? HD guys please stick to the HD women. This also has to take into account the very bitter truth of the LD wife turning HD after divorce, not being tied to the same man for years and years has an effect on the libido for women as well.


How does the above fatwa cover cases of bait and switch, misrepresentation, unjustified resentment, FOO or culture issues, unreported mental health issues and a myriad of other issues that, who would have thunk, make life complicated.

Do you really think LD's have a big sign on their foreheads telling the rest of humanity of their preferences?


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> You write what you mean and backpedal when it looks bad. You ignore anything that anyone says that does not satisfy your need to whine. You are not worth any time.


I understood exactly what he meant the first time he said it. He wasn't back pedaling. He was just trying to explain that you misunderstood him. 

Based on your closed mind on this topic, it is understandable that you jumped to the conclusion you did.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> What difference does it make? He's entitled to his own feelings, and it is not his job to service my sexual whims.
> 
> I don't care what the "need" is, if it feels like a burden to him, then I'm not interested in nagging him or pressing him. I can look after myself.


Servicing your sexual whims might make him feel good about himself. Putting oneself out in order to please someone else feels good. You know that, why do you think it would be any different for him. Asking nothing from someone can be interpreted by them as thinking that there is nothing they can offer you, That's not a good feeling to have.

Sure, by not asking you can feel good about yourself. By not asking you don't have to worry about feeling rejected. If you don't ask anything of your partner, but you do what they ask, then you're the good guy. Right? 

Maybe not. Consider giving other people the capability of making you happy. It's worth the risk that they won't.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> What difference does it make? That's a strange way to answer my question. I was asking so as to try to understand how you feel and think about it. I was assuming that you'd like to be understood.


Well, that post described pretty much how I feel about it. Perhaps also with a small bit of surprise.

IOW, my observation was really about him, understanding him, and has very little to do with me, except maybe as a cue to the effect I was having.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

john117 said:


> How does the above fatwa cover cases of bait and switch, misrepresentation, unjustified resentment, FOO or culture issues, unreported mental health issues and a myriad of other issues that, who would have thunk, make life complicated.
> 
> Do you really think LD's have a big sign on their foreheads telling the rest of humanity of their preferences?


Wasn't her response directed at posts that basically said that LD women should get their hands off HD men?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> Servicing your sexual whims might make him feel good about himself. Putting oneself out in order to please someone else feels good. You know that, why do you think it would be any different for him. Asking nothing from someone can be interpreted by them as thinking that there is nothing they can offer you, That's not a good feeling to have.
> 
> Sure, by not asking you can feel good about yourself. By not asking you don't have to worry about feeling rejected. If you don't ask anything of your partner, but you do what they ask, then you're the good guy. Right?
> 
> Maybe not. Consider giving other people the capability of making you happy. It's worth the risk that they won't.


Oh dear, Buddy400. I think this might just be you. Or, maybe not, but it definitely doesn't apply here.

I can assure you that it does *not* make my SO feel good to feel pressured into servicing me. It makes him feel that I am selfish, and self-centred, and just generally unattractive.

And TBH, I still find it a little bit strange to insist that one should "let" people cater to one's whims because it is supposedly a favour to them. I'm inclined to think it is up to *them* to decide what makes them feel good to deliver. And if it feels good to them, they will do it without pressure from me.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> You mean you feel indifferent to the fact that he has no wish to help keep you satisfied when your drive is higher than his? It doesn't disappoint you, or hurt you or make you feel resentful or frustrate you or make you mad? You are able to accept it with no ill feeling at all?


Let me clairfy: him not desiring me or finding me attractive generally speaking makes me feel sad and ugly. Him not desiring me or finding me attractive when I am being demanding or selfish seems pretty normal to me.

It's lovely what your husband did for you, but I wouldn't expect it, or demand it, or feel like it was my right, particularly if my SO is not into it.

Have you ever had duty sex? Where he's rolling his eyes and dragging his feet? Much better just to take care of myself, IMhO


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

Personal said:


> Yes red flags!
> 
> Although I wish you well it is foolish to pretend that the bitterness that you once nurtured for a long time does not come without some significant and very harmful baggage.
> 
> ...


Yoda?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

SadSamIAm said:


> I understood exactly what he meant the first time he said it. He wasn't back pedaling. He was just trying to explain that you misunderstood him.
> 
> Based on your closed mind on this topic, it is understandable that you jumped to the conclusion you did.


Interesting assertion from 2 people who consistently don't answer specific questions asking for clarifications on matters of the attractiveness of whining, the unattractiveness of complaining, the holding onto of N.U.T.s. You think these things are so unimportant as to not warrant a reply? I disagree. Makes me closed minded I guess.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> You mean you feel indifferent to the fact that he has no wish to help keep you satisfied when your drive is higher than his? It doesn't disappoint you, or hurt you or make you feel resentful or frustrate you or make you mad? You are able to accept it with no ill feeling at all?


For ME when that has happened in the past, it makes me feel unhappy, unattractive and unloved. The difference is one of response. It is inherently unattractive (and detrimental to my desire to FEEL attractive) to complain about feeling unloved. How does that make him actually feel more loving toward me? It is inherently unattractive to get MAD at his feelings. More effective is to GET and BE more attractive in HIS eyes.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

always_alone said:


> I think maybe you don't quite understand what it means to have to take responsibility for someone else's sexuality. Yes, women also use men. No doubt. * But men are never required to take responsibility for women's sexuality. * Mostly, they don't even have to take responsibility for their own. It's women's job to make sure that nothing untoward happens.
> 
> That's why they keep calling the women gatekeepers in these here parts.
> 
> And thanks for the asterisks. The thought was nice, but the truth of course will out itself.


Well I do not know how you grew up, but generally speaking men take full responsibility where I come from. 










I remember dating a girl in HS when I was immature and full of hormones. You better believe her dad was very much a part of the dating scene and made damn sure I respected his daughter!

I now have a teenage daughter in my house and I when we have had the "talk," I have told her that it is my job as a father to make sure she is safe and healthy. I explained to her that boys try to learn about sex from the internet, but that the porn sites they likely visit are only concerned about profitability. I also explained that all the gossip in the about sex in school hallways is likely misinformation. She asked me why do some girls carry condoms with them (we are talking 8th grade), and I explained that it was rather unfortunate situation where some girls likely feel the need for extra attention from boys so they can feel loved and protected, but that boys her age are capable of anything but that. 

So I would argue that the "gatekeepers" are fathers, and that responsibility is later passed onto to her husband upon receiving her father's blessings to get married. During marriage their is really no gatekeeper between a husband and wife, and if there is I would argue that there are some serious problems in the marriage.

Even though sex is problematic sometimes in my marriage, my wife has told me that I can have her whenever I really need her. I choose to allow my sexual frustrations to be set aside when I know she is unsettled and she needs me to care for her. 

Sorry you have not experienced this and/or may disagree with it. 

Regards, 
Badsanta


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> For ME when that has happened in the past, it makes me feel unhappy, unattractive and unloved. The difference is one of response. It is inherently unattractive (and detrimental to my desire to FEEL attractive) to complain about feeling unloved. How does that make him actually feel more loving toward me? It is inherently unattractive to get MAD at his feelings. More effective is to GET and BE more attractive in HIS eyes.


for someone who is having the experience of feeling unloved, this can be a hard message to receive.

you may want your spouse to rescue you from this feeling, but I think this is the wrong response.

your spouse will either love you or not. if you need to _ask _her to love you, you are unlikely to get what you are looking for. 

just think about it: if she does not love you already, do you really think the _asking_ (which will almost always be perceived as whining) will make the difference?

But let's say you ask/demand to be loved "better." If you get anything at all from this, it will be pity. Which will not be satisfying at all.

Do you then get mad about the pity? If you do, you would not be unusual, but is this reasonable? Take an objective view: you asked for more love from someone who was disinclined to give it of her own accord, she responded with pity to the request (which is at least objectively altruistic) and you got mad about that.

That is not _her_ issue. It's your issue. 

You can be disappointed that she doesn't love you how you wish but to get mad at her in this scenario is really letting your emotions drive your thought process.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Pity is not the only response.

Last week my wife pulled the same thing Richards wife does, indicating she wanted to fool around and then finding an excuse or just simply forgetting. She did it three nights in a row.
For clarification, she has done this maybe one to two times in the past year prior to the last week.

So needless to say, three times in a week hurt. I started to get mad, and then reminded myself to look at why. I ultimately felt neglected and taken for granted.

So I explained that to her the next morning. Not with anger, but with hurt. Not in a whiny way, but matter of fact. Then explained to her that if I were to do that with the acts of service that make her feel loved, would she also feel neglected? She was sincerely sorry, and apologized. 

After work that night, she asked if we could talk. 

Her, enthusiastically: I want to fool around with you tonight.

I must have gotten a skeptical look on my face.

Her, gently: Far, stop. Don't look at me that way, just listen. Next time I say I want to fool around earlier in the day, and I start to get crabby or forgetful, don't say anything to me. Just carry me into the bedroom and have your way with me.

The last part she said with a smile. 


Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

farsidejunky said:


> Pity is not the only response.
> 
> Last week my wife pulled the same thing Richards wife does, indicating she wanted to fool around and then finding an excuse or just simply forgetting. She did it three nights in a row.
> For clarification, she has done this maybe one to two times in the past year prior to the last week.
> ...


I wonder if sometimes just by saying you want to fool around earlier in the day, that makes you feel like you tried/had good intentions, which then makes it easier to not follow through on?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> for someone who is having the experience of feeling unloved, this can be a hard message to receive.


Oh hells yes. Thank you Doug Anderson of Usenet of 20 years ago.

But if you CAN receive it, everyone is better off. Again for ME, it was also a personal growth opportunity. I could choose to wail that he is not meeting my needs, being needier and needier, which is actually the largest part of what was turning him off. Or I could choose to be vulnerable where I *had* to be and bullet proof everywhere else. Turns out, I *had* to be needy a lot less than I thought I did.




> you may want your spouse to rescue you from this feeling, but I think this is the wrong response.
> 
> your spouse will either love you or not. if you need to _ask _her to love you, you are unlikely to get what you are looking for.
> 
> ...


It can be anyone's issue, I suppose. The only one who can choose to pick it up for you (rhetorical) is you.


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

There have been a couple posts on here from wives who have felt sexually used by their husband. I would *really* love to hear more about these situations, because I struggle to see how this is possible. Of course I am not a wife, and I've never felt "used" sexually so this is a foreign concept and I would appreciate further explanation as it seems like a key juncture in this thread topic.

I will assume the following about the relationship:
1) you were having sex before marriage
2) the pre-marriage sex (both frequency, variety, intensity, etc) was "good" for you both
3) you were sexually compatible before marriage (otherwise, why marry?) and definitely NOT feeling "used"
4) there was not some dramatic shift in the sexlife after walking down the isle
5) some time later in the marriage, you developed feelings that he was sexually using you

So then: what exactly happened? 
Did your husband move the sexual goalposts? For example, if early in the marriage you had sex 3X per week did he now start wanting sex every day? 
Or did his sexual behavior change, like he reveals some outrageous kink that turn you off?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

^^ I was not married to him. But I was with him for many years. It went something like at first everything was ducky. He was actually quite sweet. As time passed, and he felt he had paid his "dues" and was entitled, he just stopped caring about pretty much anything else. We were together. We had said the word forever. So he gets sex. Going anywhere, doing anything. Not important. Because the way "we" connected was through sex.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> Pity is not the only response.
> 
> Last week my wife pulled the same thing Richards wife does, indicating she wanted to fool around and then finding an excuse or just simply forgetting. She did it three nights in a row.
> For clarification, she has done this maybe one to two times in the past year prior to the last week.
> ...


I think that is awesome how this worked out, but I wonder how often you can go back to this well.

Do you think if this happened again next week the same approach would work?

I don't think it should really be this way, but at some point, don't the admissions of hurt add up to a picture of whining? Especially if the person on the receiving end is already looking for excuses


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> The people who *start* the wars are the ones with the harems. Yes, military strategy is often to channel sex drive into killing for the foot soldiers, to the point even where they are trained to associate their guns with their ****s.
> 
> But again, these folks don't start the wars; they just have the "privilege" of dying for someone else's cause.


I think the thrust of the article is that the wars get started so you don't have a revolution at home -- from young, horny guys.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> I think the thrust of the article is that the wars get started so you don't have a revolution at home -- from young, horny guys.


Gate to Women's Country is a good read.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> I think the thrust of the article is that the wars get started so you don't have a revolution at home -- from young, horny guys.


yeah, I think it is pretty basic.

guys who are shut out from the mating pool in their local area will expand the scope of their territory in the search for mating opportunities.

it is not an accident that basically all wars throughout history have involved seizure of occupied territory's women.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> And TBH, I still find it a little bit strange to insist that one should "let" people cater to one's whims because it is supposedly a favour to them. I'm inclined to think it is up to *them* to decide what makes them feel good to deliver.


To be clear, you should allow people to do you favors if *they want to*. In order to find out if they want to, you have to provide an opportunity.



always_alone said:


> And if it feels good to them, they will do it without pressure from me.


It's not about "if it feels good to them". It's "if they care enough about your happiness to do something that they might not otherwise do". If they do, then they need to know what you'd like.

Have you ever done anything for your SO that you wouldn't have done just for your own sake?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> What you felt was natural, of course. What difference in response are you referring to?


Difference to many of the posters you see on this thread and on this sub-forum in general who complain, whine, beg, nag. Get needier. And not manier. Pretend that sexuality is part of their N.U.T.s but then demonstrate by their actions that it isn't. And then repeat the cycle of wait generating seething resentment and hurt, then complain and get angry. Get pity sex which then makes her feel she has done her duty for a little while. Rinse. Repeat.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> Not sure what you're getting at; Marduk said exactly that.


The point that marduk and the poster was making, and that you affirmed, was that it is sexual frustratiin that leads men to *start* wars.

My point is that the people who are *starting* the wars have all the sex they want and then some They may try to deprive their foot soldiers, but more usually, they train them to associate their guns with their ****s and give them free rein to rape the enemy's women.

The idea that sexual frustration is the cause of wars is ridiculous, IMHO.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

farsidejunky said:


> Last week my wife pulled the same thing Richards wife does, indicating she wanted to fool around and then finding an excuse or just simply forgetting. She did it three nights in a row.
> For clarification, she has done this maybe one to two times in the past year prior to the last week.
> 
> So needless to say, three times in a week hurt. I started to get mad, and then reminded myself to look at why. I ultimately felt neglected and taken for granted.
> ...


I also hate having to address negative conversations about sex in my marriage, so generally speaking I back off and allow some time to cool down. I do draw the line for moments that after sleeping and waking up with the same unsettling feelings that I AM GOING TO ADDRESS IT, and rather directly with my wife. Not in an angry fashion, but in a way to say we are hurting one another when we instead should be caring for one another. 

My wife always gets very defensive and says you can NOT force me to be aroused and want sex.

I stay engaged in those arguments and say that if she needs personal space that she should NOT just physically and verbally push me away in a very *cold* way when I want to be close with her. I explain to her that I understand that sometimes desire needs distance and that I can respect her need for personal space as long as she can also be caring and nurturing of my desire for her in a way that allows that needed distance to bring us closer. 

Push me away and I am going to be hurt. Communicate with me that you need some personal space and give me a playful reason to miss being with you until a better moment that suits us both will send me away happy.

And as always if I really need her, she would just want me to take her, and she has expressed this.

Badsanta


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Personal said:


> At the end of the day and at any age, finding marital partners and or long term sexual relationship partners is a competitive activity. If you lack the drive to compete and or lack the resilience to weather the knocks and failures you aren't fit to win and nor should you.


This part of your post really stood out for me. I really can't see it this way at all, and refuse to compete. If he likes someone better or finds her more attractive he should go get her, IMHO. I will not compete with other women for any man.

I guess that means I don't deserve one? :scratchhead:


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> I think the thrust of the article is that the wars get started so you don't have a revolution at home -- from young, horny guys.


slightly off topic-- my theory is that recent phenomenon of mass shootings by lonely dudes is another manifestation of the same phenomenon.

in the stone age, groups of these men might have banded together and marauded a neighboring tribe

now there is greater social isolation and lonely individuals lash out in this different way


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> I'm asking how you feel about him not caring when you've expressed to him that you are hungry (for sex) and he does not respond with an attitude of wanting to "feed" you?


And I am trying very hard to answer your question. 

I get it that he doesn't want to feed me. And yes, sometimes I feel sad and ugly that he doesn't seem to find me attractive and desirable. But I don't feel entitled to being fed.

What more are you looking for?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

I happen to agree with NS. If your partner doesn't find you attractive, up your game. If they still don't find you attractive, dump them and find someone else who does. Much easier to say than to do. But produces the best outcomes. It is precisely because I refuse to up my game and refuse to leave that I believe I fully deserve a marriage that does not fulfill my needs.

I also agree with Vega. I continued to press for sex with my wife long after I knew she was an unrecovered rape victim. That makes me lower than pond scum. I may not have been consciously aware, but that was me being willfully blind. My repulsive behavior is yet another reason I deserve to feel the way I feel.

I agree with Anon. Disappointing not to be loved by the one you love. But not THEIR fault they don't love you as much as you wish they did. Hard to accept but the truth. Asking for them to love you more or better is counter-productive. Explaining HOW you wish them to express their love is helpful. Reacting negatively when they fail to behave in that manner is not.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> I think that is awesome how this worked out, but I wonder how often you can go back to this well.
> 
> Do you think if this happened again next week the same approach would work?
> 
> I don't think it should really be this way, but at some point, don't the admissions of hurt add up to a picture of whining? Especially if the person on the receiving end is already looking for excuses


I have had this talk with her, on average, about every 6-9 months. 

If going back to it does not work, then I will simply lower my effort level towards her.

A lot of people see this as tit-for-tat. I don't.

In Awareness, DeMello lays out three types of things we do for people:

1. Things we do for ourselves that give us pleasure.

2. Things we do selflessly for others that have no expectation of reciprocation.

3. Things we do for others, that we don't really want to do or causes us to feel worse about ourselves. These typically have expectation of reciprocation, or have emotional baggage attached to them.

Here is the thing. When she begins to neglect my needs in a relationship, I have to look at what is going on. Is she overwhelmed? Sick? Is there really a reason for things to be this way?

If so, I shut up and wait it out.

If not, I bring it to her attention.

If she still neglects, I begin to feel used. Yes, used. Why? Because I still do number 3's for her. If I don't, she feels like I don't love her. Helping her with this helps her manage her anxiety and the feeling of being overwhelmed.

Case in point: I help her with the animals we have. We; actually she has. One of the cats is considered mine. None of the dogs. I still feed them most mornings. The last time things came to a head was in the middle of 2015. I informed her what was about to happen, and simply stopped doing it. A week later, she exploded because she felt overwhelmed. Sorry, but her added, unnecessary responsibities are not my obligation. I do them because she needs me to. Not because I want to.

I then focus that energy on things that are more productive for me, such as kickboxing, BJJ, or taking my son for a dudes day.

I see no logical way out of this conundrum because neither of us is willing to forego these needs.

I am sure this post makes our relationship sound shallow. It is actually far from that. I do not get duty sex. In fact, I have turned her down when her enthusiasm has been less than stellar. 

We are good to great most days. Sometimes we BOTH need to be reminded that our needs matter.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

always_alone said:


> The idea that sexual frustration is the cause of wars is ridiculous, IMHO.


But it is not ridiculous to say that part of the willingness of populations to approve of wars and of young men to fight in wars is the presence of large numbers of young men who are horny and not getting much or any sex, which leads to several consequences, among them:

the young horny men are willing to fight and risk dying because if they don't die, they might get some sex;
the young horny men would rather die than continue to live and not get much or any sex, and
the population is happy to see the young horny men shipped off somewhere far away where they won't cause trouble and rape the local women

Young horny men are willing to take enormous risks if it provides a discernible increase in their chance of getting some sex. Going off to war was historically a very popular choice. Remember, it is only in the past 150 years or so that most wars are fought by national armies. Historically, mercenaries were far more prevalent.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

badsanta said:


> So I would argue that the "gatekeepers" are fathers, and that responsibility is later passed onto to her husband upon receiving her father's blessings to get married.


That is very sweet, badsanta, but you can't always be there to protect her. Or your wife.

And I totally noticed that you did not make the boys or the men responsible for their sexuality. Just the fathers and husbands.

Now imagine what it is like to be someone who is dependent on having a protector around to save you from someone else's sexuality.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
that is a fantastic response from her.


When I try to explain to my wife about this sort of teasing I just get "In the morning I felt like it, but I was feeling badly this afternoon, I'm sorry, I've just been so tired lately....."

That would be completely fine if it didn't happen 3/4 of the time.

The great majority of the time I don't say anything. The last half dozen times she's hinted at something she hasn't followed through so I just ignore the hints now. 

Her rejections are invariably based on her feeling poorly, so really isn't much of a possible response. "yes I know you are feellng sick but lets have sex anyway???". I don't think she is lying about feeling poorly - I think for her everything needs to be perfect for her to want sex and that is very rare.




farsidejunky said:


> snip
> Her, gently: Far, stop. Don't look at me that way, just listen. Next time I say I want to fool around earlier in the day, and I start to get crabby or forgetful, don't say anything to me. Just carry me into the bedroom and have your way with me.
> 
> The last part she said with a smile.
> ...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> I have had this talk with her, on average, about every 6-9 months.
> 
> If going back to it does not work, then I will simply lower my effort level towards her.
> 
> ...



this is really sensible. I can see how this is effective if you only need to remind her a couple of times per year.

I also agree with backing off on selfless acts if the relationship starts to appear too one sided.

I think the problem becomes when you reach a point that you realize there is no permanent solution and so you permanently drop off from the selfless acts.

If you get this point, you are essentially admitting that you were really keeping the relationship afloat.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

always_alone said:


> That is very sweet, badsanta, but you can't always be there to protect her. Or your wife.


Not only can a "responsible" man be there to "protect" her, we should be teaching our boys and young men that girls and women are not theirs to take when "unprotected". Sorry if my context is incorrect. Could not find BS's original post.



> And I totally noticed that you did not make the boys or the men responsible for their sexuality. Just the fathers and husbands.
> 
> Now imagine what it is like to be someone who is dependent on having a protector around to save you from someone else's sexuality.


(Yes I am the mother of both a son and a daughter.) Almost as bad is a young man who never learns a much more healthy view of sexuality.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> Difference to many of the posters you see on this thread and on this sub-forum in general who complain, whine, beg, nag. Get needier. And not manier. Pretend that sexuality is part of their N.U.T.s but then demonstrate by their actions that it isn't. And then repeat the cycle of wait generating seething resentment and hurt, then complain and get angry. Get pity sex which then makes her feel she has done her duty for a little while. Rinse. Repeat.


Spouses don't come with a sexual expiration date warning label... nor is there a sexual sunset clause in the marriage vows.

It happens slowly and steadily over a period of time and all of a sudden it's once a month and time for lawyers or counselors or books or TAM in no particular order.

Men complaining about sex is not cool, bit women complaining about everything else isn't cool either. 

But then, the whole premise of my opinion of TAM is based on the idea that those in healthy marriages aren't even remotely in the ballpark when it comes to recognizing, let alone being able to suggest fixes for, not so healthy marriages. 

A SAHM could find herself busy with PTO and kids and the such without ever having the time to listen to her "whining" husband but if he withholds, say, grocery money, they'll be moaning worse than Republicans about to nominate Trump.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> I think it's mostly men who compete for women. In a minority of cases you will see women competing for men, but almost always men compete for women. It comes with the territory, I think, with men being *generally* the initiator of relationships, and women being the ones who either accept or reject dates or proposals or sex.


Oh. Really? It's up to men to do all the chasing? And this means they have to compete with each other, like some Mr. Universe beauty pageant?

Hmmm. Interesting concept. Never had a man compete for me, nor do I think I'd want him to. 

Indeed, I think I'd lose respect for him. I don't much go for the type that needs to be better than everyone else.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> .
> 
> I also agree with Vega. I continued to press for sex with my wife long after I knew she was an unrecovered rape victim. That makes me lower than pond scum. I may not have been consciously aware, but that was me being willfully blind. My repulsive behavior is yet another reason I deserve to feel the way I feel.
> .


Did your wife disclose this BEFORE getting married or AFTER??


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Yep. I totally acknowledge that. Our relationship has many aspects of father/daughter.

I manage finances.

I set our direction.

Decision making authority on nearly everything rests with me.

All of this is with consulting with her, and we often proceed with her ideas.

But she has shown herself to not be responsible in most of those areas. Now, in fairness, she has grown tremendously. I have praised the heck out of her growth. 

But some things she is simply not capable of. Money management will never happen. She knows that.

I acknowledge that I keep the relationship afloat in most areas. Note I said "most", because she has her strengths as well. But if I don't tend to our relationship, it dwindles.


Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I completely agree with this early in a relationship. Later though its not so clear. 

I was brought up with the belief that all women desired sex with their husbands and that once they became comfortable in the relationship and if he was patient with them, their sex life would improve. I was too inexperience to realize that a lack of sexual interest early on (despite a very strong romantic attachment) was a sign of future disaster. I didn't realize that it was possible for her to love me, respect me, and be physically attracted to me - but have the physical attraction be abstract - she finds me attractive, likes to look at me, touch me, kiss me. It is not a lack of interest in me, but a lack of interest in sex that is the problem. 

It was only many years later that I learned that libido varies dramatically with different people. My "patience" had let my relationship become too permanent. 

The occasional periods of very good sex left me always hopeful that they could continue. There have been periods of several months when our sex life was fantastic. 

So I can "whine" - tell her how unhappy I am. She will be upset for a week, then sex will be good for 3 weeks, then decline gradually over the next few months (done this several times now).

OR I can become withdrawn. She will eventually ask what is wrong. I'll tell her. She will get upset, say that she has been feeling poorly, then nothing will change. 

OR I can remain silent, continue to show her love, show that I'm not "needy". She will live quite happily that way enjoying sex once every month or two. This is generally what I do because I *can* live without sex, I just very much prefer not to.

OR I can say I will leave. She will honestly claim to not understand. She will immediately have frequent sex - but I don't want sex under threat of my leaving. I unintentionally did this once - I started to ask for a divorce, she realized where I was going with the conversation and immediately wanted to make things better. They were - for months we had frequent excellent sex -which she seemed to enjoy as well. But as always it vanished after a while.

OR I can just leave. I've certainly thought about it - started to do so 5 years ago. But in the end life with her and without sex is still very good and I'm not willing to give up everything else.


So I whine and complain here (hopefully anonymously) and give the impression that I probably do so at home as well. I understand that - the personality I show here is not what I show in real life. No one in the real world sees me like this. 











Holdingontoit said:


> I happen to agree with NS. If your partner doesn't find you attractive, up your game. If they still don't find you attractive, dump them and find someone else who does. Much easier to say than to do. But produces the best outcomes. It is precisely because I refuse to up my game and refuse to leave that I believe I fully deserve a marriage that does not fulfill my needs.
> snip
> .


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> I'm asking how you feel if he doesn't care to "feed you" when you are "hungry".


Like I said, I don't expect him to. I guess you could say I am still hungry, at least until I feed myself.

How am I supposed to feel?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> For ME when that has happened in the past, it makes me feel unhappy, unattractive and unloved. The difference is one of response. It is inherently unattractive (and detrimental to my desire to FEEL attractive) to complain about feeling unloved. How does that make him actually feel more loving toward me? It is inherently unattractive to get MAD at his feelings. More effective is to GET and BE more attractive in HIS eyes.


If it's YOUR job to get your partner to what you want to do as much as you want to do it or you can't have it, I think this is a very unbalanced relationship.

The chances of both partners wanting to do the exact same thing at the exact same time seems impossible. One partner is going to have to compromise all the time.

I struggle with finding a way to explain this. The best I can do is with an analogy.

My wife usually likes to spend an hour or so at the end of the day in bed watching TV. It doesn't even really matter what she's watching (she'll turn on an old Law & Order 10 minutes into the show and want to go to bed 10 minutes before it's over). It helps her wind down at the end of the day. She really likes having me with her while she does this (apparently it's a Quality Time thing).

I don't watch much TV, but when the TV's on I get somewhat interested (I can't ignore it and read a book instead). I like being with her but I'd rather be reading or watching something that actually interests me.

So, as far as this activity goes, she's HD and I'm LD.

Should she give up this activity that's important to her because it isn't what I really want to do?

She could turn off the TV and do something else (which would allow me to read)? But, the mindlessness of the TV is exactly what she's after.

Should she just do this without me?

Should she find things on TV that I want to watch even if it's not something she cares about?

Should I be passive aggressive, do whatever she wants and build up resentment?

Should I refuse to watch with her since she doesn't care about my needs?

Should I just sit there next to her, roll my eyes and complain all the time to let her know that I'm only doing this for her?

Here's how it works out (after a good deal of fine-tuning over the years).

I love my wife and it gives me pleasure to see her happy. I am more than willing to spend some time doing something that I feel "meh" about if it's important to her. However, spending more than an hour a night or an hour a night every single night watching TV shows that I feel "meh" about is more than I can do without feeling resentful.

So, I let her know which shows I actively dislike so that she can choose to watch those by herself. I put a limit of 1 hour on watching 20/20 reruns. Once or twice a week I'll suggest watching something that primarily interests me. We look for shows that we both like equally. And if we are watching yet another 20/20 rerun, I make an effort to "be there" and I don't complain. 

We compromise. Why? Because we are genuinely interested in each other's happiness.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

john117 said:


> Spouses don't come with a sexual expiration date warning label... nor is there a sexual sunset clause in the marriage vows.


OK, but it's pretty obvious when the milk spoils. No one really wants to have a sh-tty marriage so don't you think this sucks for both people?



john117 said:


> It happens slowly and steadily over a period of time and all of a sudden it's once a month and time for lawyers or counselors or books or TAM in no particular order.


nothing stays the same. maybe the error is expecting that it should.



john117 said:


> Men complaining about sex is not cool, bit women complaining about everything else isn't cool either..


stop complaining and ignore complainers.



john117 said:


> But then, the whole premise of my opinion of TAM is based on the idea that those in healthy marriages aren't even remotely in the ballpark when it comes to recognizing, let alone being able to suggest fixes for, not so healthy marriages.


I agree that it is difficult to imagine a situation if you haven't lived it.



john117 said:


> A SAHM could find herself busy with PTO and kids and the such without ever having the time to listen to her "whining" husband but if he withholds, say, grocery money, they'll be moaning worse than Republicans about to nominate Trump.


intent matters. there's a difference between falling out of love with someone and intentionally trying to hurt someone.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Like I said, I don't expect him to. I guess you could say I am still hungry, at least until I feed myself.
> 
> How am I supposed to feel?


I'd feel like he didn't care about my happiness.

That would make me sad.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Should he pretend to be attracted to me when he isn't? Who gets to say what someone else "should" do? I sure can't tell him what he "should" do. All I can do is decide what I am willing to do.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> I'd feel like he didn't care about my happiness.
> 
> That would make me sad.


And I would feel like you were to needy to make your own sandwich.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> Have you ever done anything for your SO that you wouldn't have done just for your own sake?


I do things for his sake all the time. If and when I can. And he does things for me.

But I'm certainly not going to pressure him to do anything for my sake. I ask, and if he can't or won't, I do it myself. Or nor at all.

This isn't really complicated for me.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> And I would feel like you were to needy to make your own sandwich.


I hear resentment.

Help me understand how making a comparison with such an exaggeration is either collaborative or constructive.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

farsidejunky said:


> I have had this talk with her, on average, about every 6-9 months.
> 
> If going back to it does not work, then I will simply lower my effort level towards her.
> 
> ...


Seek to minimize or elimate #3 at all. Fill in the gaps with #1s and #2s.

Even when things are good.

A stupid example of #3s I used to do was go shopping with her, and spend endless time waiting outside the change room with her purse.

It made me feel bored, used, and emasculated.

So I don't do much of that at all any more, unless it's something I want to buy for her because #1 or #2.

I know that's a trite example, but loving someone should never make you feel bad about yourself or fundamentally be something you don't want to do.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> You think competing involves an organized competition like a Mr. Universe pageant? I don't think you do; I think you're just feeling generally hostile towards me and therefore refuse to understand what I'm saying. Which is fine: message received.


Huh? I don't see feel hostile to you at all. I often like what you say.

But sometimes I don't get where you're coming from, and this is one of those occasions.

I really don't see this as a competition. Manipulating guys to fight each other to get the girl is something high school girls do because it pumps their egos.

Flexing muscles, flashing cash, driving exotic cars, etc., is what men choose to do to get lots of validation from women, but doesn't interest me in the slightest.

Also, I'm a bit amused by the idea of men being the only ones competing for attention given just how much effort women put into being noticed and validated. It's just a game that I really cannot relate to.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

marduk said:


> Seek to minimize or elimate #3 at all. Fill in the gaps with #1s and #2s.
> 
> Even when things are good.
> 
> ...


For the most part I have.

The animals are really the last remaining piece off the top of my head.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

farsidejunky said:


> For the most part I have.
> 
> The animals are really the last remaining piece off the top of my head.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


I've heard a rumour that animals are made of meat.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> So you feel hungry, but generally indifferent to it, is that what you're saying? You have no negative feelings at all?
> 
> 
> 
> I don't understand your question. Is that a genuine question or are you trying to imply something by posing it?


I am just wondering what you are angling at because none of my answers seem to satisfy your. Yes, I feel sad and ugly when he is not attracted to me or doesn't desire me. But that he doesn't want to feed me every time I'm hungry is not something that affects me. I get it.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> I'd feel like he didn't care about my happiness.
> 
> That would make me sad.


Because he doesn't drop trou every time I snap my fingers?

I dunno, as far as I can tell, he's his own person with his own likes and dislikes, feelings and thoughts. He's just as entitled to his as I am to mine.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
not disagreeing, but maybe lost in the analogies. If we are talking about sex, how are you "going to eat of course"?

Possibly this is an important issue (or not...), but to some of us sex is not at all the same as orgasm. We can take care of ourselves but that doesn't in any way fill the gap left by a lack of sex. This may not be true for everyone or even the majority of people. 






FrenchFry said:


> Can I answer?
> 
> The negative feelings are more towards that I have forced my partner to eat when they aren't full. I feel like a ****ty person for trying to give a person food when they clearly don't want it AND I can feed myself so it's extra ****ty that I am forcing them to eat when it's not a necessity.
> 
> I'm still hungry, so I'm going to eat of course.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> Here's another example where you are purposefully dodging my question.
> 
> I did *not* ask how you feel when he doesn't want to feed you *every* time you are hungry.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry, Olivia, but no I'm not accusing you of nefarious motives. I just honestly do not understand why my answers are not sufficient. I have answered several times as honestly as I can, and it still isn't enough. I get the sense that you want me to feel a certain way about this, and am failing to deliver.

Basically, it makes me sad and feel ugly when he doesn't desire me. And I get it that he doesn't want sex as much as I do.

What else is there?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Not only can a "responsible" man be there to "protect" her, we should be teaching our boys and young men that girls and women are not theirs to take when "unprotected".


Nobody had to "teach" me or my sons about this.

It's kind of obvious to any decent human being.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

marduk said:


> I've heard a rumour that animals are made of meat.


http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z0O_VYcsIk8

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> I hear resentment.
> 
> Help me understand how making a comparison with such an exaggeration is either collaborative or constructive.
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


Huh? Whose resentment toward whom? Who is exaggerating? I was dead serious that it is JUST as unkind and unloving to dump ones needs on ones spouse as it is to ignore it. If I expected DH to feed me every time I was hungry, then he would feel I was being needy and clingy. And He'd Be Right. And I would be engendering the exact opposite of the caring I sought.

If he NEVER cared that I was hungry, I would have to ask myself I wonder why? 

But until each partner owns up to as much strength to care for their own needs does the other partner feel genuinely invested in caring for them and finding the common place of happiness where they can enjoy the mutual care. Expecting someone ELSE to own your needs instead of discovering how to share each others' just does not work in a relationship.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> The guy competes by getting your attention, making you laugh more than the other guy, finding out what interests you and then taking an interest in it himself, etc., etc..
> 
> It's a lot more subtle most of the time than flashing cash and fighting over women. Good grief.
> 
> But you're right, women do compete in a more passive way, by trying to be attractive to men. To outcompete other women passively by being as attractive as we can, in every way. We don't think of what we're doing as competing, but we are.


I see all of this stuff very differently than you. I don't see some guy talking to me as competing, unless he is posturing, and as soon as he does that, I've lost interest. Doesn't matter how flashy or subtle he is about it. I especially hate it when they fake interest in things I like just to pretend to have common ground.

Similarly with women, and I think many are very conscious of their competition. Others couldn't care less.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> Nobody had to "teach" me or my sons about this.
> 
> It's kind of obvious to any decent human being.


Somebody taught you how to be a decent human being. And someone clearly failed to teach other people how to be a decent human being as is much evidenced by the news. And my own experience as a younger lady.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> I don't think it's usually actively taught so much as lived. Most of what our kids learn, they learn through example.


What else is actively teaching? Having the science teacher lecture about it at school?


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

IDK, maybe there is some confusion here. I don't think anyone is saying to force your SO to do anything. I think the point is, in a committed relationship each person will have a different set of needs (or varying degrees of the same need). You would hope that your SO, knowing that a need is important to you, would want to make the extra effort to help meet this need (maybe not completely as that may be unrealistic, but try to at least meet in the middle).


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> If that is the answer to my questions, I will draw a conclusion and you can tell me if I'm right or if I'm wrong. I feel able to draw the conclusion because I could not have been any more crystal clear about what I was asking.
> 
> The way you have chosen to answer forces me to conclude that if your husband does not show a willingness to want to "feed" you when your appetite is greater than his, that you feel that he doesn't desire you.
> 
> Correct? Incorrect?


Partly yes. There are other things that feed my sense that he does not desire me, in particular his porn habit, and the way he approaches sex with me sometimes, not to mention certain attitudes towards and friendships with other women.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Should he pretend to be attracted to me when he isn't? Who gets to say what someone else "should" do? I sure can't tell him what he "should" do. All I can do is decide what I am willing to do.


You get to tell him what he "should" do if he wants to improves the relationship.

Or you can just sit back and hope that he spontaneously does it for reasons that don't include you wanting him to. This seems unlikely to happen very often. Then you only have the choice of living with it or walking away.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I see all of this stuff very differently than you. I don't see some guy talking to me as competing, unless he is posturing, and as soon as he does that, I've lost interest. Doesn't matter how flashy or subtle he is about it. I especially hate it when they fake interest in things I like just to pretend to have common ground.
> 
> Similarly with women, and I think many are very conscious of their competition. Others couldn't care less.


The thing that finally bugged me about the "competition" thing was his disinterest except that that guy over there was interested. No thanks.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> I do things for his sake all the time. If and when I can. And he does things for me.
> 
> But I'm certainly not going to pressure him to do anything for my sake. I ask, and if he can't or won't, I do it myself. Or nor at all.
> 
> This isn't really complicated for me.


I'm not sure how I came to be identified with "pressuring" anybody to do anything.

I'm in favor of asking for what you want.

I'm in favor of graciously accepting things from people who say they want to give them to me.

I have interpreted you (and NS, and FF) as thinking that even asking is too much; because then they would only be doing something to please you and that's not good enough; they have to do it because they innately WANT to do it.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> Seek to minimize or elimate #3 at all. Fill in the gaps with #1s and #2s.
> 
> Even when things are good.
> 
> ...


I like this. Trying to drill down on it more.

How far are you willing to go with this?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> Every time a guy talks to you it's not a competition. Only when he's got a romantic interest in you is it a competition.


I don't understand. Why is it a competition just because there is romantic interest?

My SO was interested in me, he asked me out. We did some stuff together, talked, whatnot. Where is the competition?

And no, I'm not assuming that all guys have bad motives. I'm saying you can tell when someone is genuinely interested in something, and when they are playing chameleon to impress you.

In general, I am not impressed by people who are trying to impress me. I'm impressed by people who are true to themselves.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> I like this. Trying to drill down on it more.
> 
> How far are you willing to go with this?
> 
> ...


Anon, your dynamic is really off. If I stopped giving my wife a birthday gift, it would crush her.

Some things simply mystify me about your wife.

Yet I understand why you do what you do.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> You get to tell him what he "should" do if he wants to improves the relationship.
> 
> Or you can just sit back and hope that he spontaneously does it for reasons that don't include you wanting him to. This seems unlikely to happen very often. Then you only have the choice of living with it or walking away.


If I don't do this with understanding of HIS motivations, I will fail. And lest you failed to read the thread, which it seems you did, I said exactly the opposite of sitting back and hoping. I said instead of the complaining, do the things that are likely to engender the actual desire again. 

WHY does he not want to feed me? Well for one thing, because I am 30 lbs over weight. And for another, he is resentful that every time I get hungry, I expect HIM to feed me. What is wrong with my feet? And hands? Or that I am making massive withdrawals from the love bank in some other way... Or he is a ****, and I need to leave. 

WHY does she not want sex with you? (And here is the sticky thing that some guys just don't want to know. She may NEVER have been sexually into him. She may have wanted a provider, a good father for her children... Sorry dude. This is the best you are ever going to get.) But if it is because he approaches her in an unamanly fashion, he can DO something about it.

People think that communicating means talking. But that is not often the most effective method. Actions in the hopes of the desired reaction can be very effective.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Actively teaching is sitting the son down and talking about how to treat women, for example.


Ok if that is how you do it. That is not what I meant, although there is nothing wrong with talking about relationships with ones' kids. Not a bad idea. We do it.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

> I think it's fine but my lingering nice guy tendencies still gnaw at me a bit over it because aren't you supposed to buy your wife a gift for birthday, etc?


On Aug 22 it's my 30th wedding anniversary. Ask me what I'm buying for her 😂


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> If I don't do this with understanding of HIS motivations, I will fail. And lest you failed to read the thread, which it seems you did, I said exactly the opposite of sitting back and hoping. I said instead of the complaining, do the things that are likely to engender the actual desire again.
> 
> WHY does he not want to feed me? Well for one thing, because I am 30 lbs over weight. And for another, he is resentful that every time I get hungry, I expect HIM to feed me. What is wrong with my feet? And hands? Or that I am making massive withdrawals from the love bank in some other way... Or he is a ****, and I need to leave.
> 
> ...


The last two paragraphs of this are really important.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> Anon, your dynamic is really off. If I stopped giving my wife a birthday gift, it would crush her.
> 
> Some things simply mystify me about your wife.
> 
> ...


that is pretty normal!

I guess my point is there is a theoretical concept of balance and there is the real world.

We all do a lot of stuff that shouldn't be theoretically necessary but it's expected. Like men mow the lawn and women fold laundry (I know there are exceptions, but you know what I mean).

when you consciously "balance out" things like this, do you take into account these conventions or is it just a free for all in your little microcosm?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> I like this. Trying to drill down on it more.
> 
> How far are you willing to go with this?
> 
> ...


My wife likes to play the "if you loved me, you'd buy me shiny things" game. 

How this plays out now is a running funny game where she tries to convince me or tempt me into it... Even though she has her own money now. 

And I don't play into it, except when I want to play into it. If I'm very happy with her, or I just feel like it, or it's an occasion or something. 

Otherwise, it's a shrug and a no and maybe a comment about how I've played this game with her before. 

If she expects it and is acting bratty, it's nothing. 

If she doesn't expect it or really deserves a treat or a congratulatory gesture, it's something nice.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> that is pretty normal!
> 
> I guess my point is there is a theoretical concept of balance and there is the real world.
> 
> ...


Both I think.

Joint agreement.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

john117 said:


> On Aug 22 it's my 30th wedding anniversary. Ask me what I'm buying for her 😂


a one way plane ticket to anywhere?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Somebody taught you how to be a decent human being. And someone clearly failed to teach other people how to be a decent human being as is much evidenced by the news. And my own experience as a younger lady.


Ah, if you said that parents should teach their children to be decent human beings, I'd heartily agree.

It just that if someone said that boys should be taught not to torture helpless animals, it sounds like they expect boys to do that if not explicitly told not to; as if it was their nature to do things like that.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> So yes, the situation makes you feel undesired, in the context of your relationship?


It's actually the porn habit that gets me the most. It makes me feel undesirable and like an interchangeable vagina, all at the same time.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> My wife likes to play the "if you loved me, you'd buy me shiny things" game.
> 
> How this plays out now is a running funny game where she tries to convince me or tempt me into it... Even though she has her own money now.
> 
> ...


I like this approach.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

john117 said:


> Did your wife disclose this BEFORE getting married or AFTER??


Seven years into the marriage. Two years into MC. But then, you already knew that, right? The point is, even after she admitted it, and even after a couple of years of fruitless MC, I did not stop paying attention to her words and start paying attention to her behavior. I refused to accept the underlying truth. Because I did not like that truth. And it was more convenient for me to ignore it then to deal with it. Because dealing with it would mean I either divorcing my wife, or stop having sex with her completely. And I was not prepared to do either. So I ignored all the signs and let her continue to pretend. That is on me.



> I was brought up with the belief that all women desired sex with their husbands and that once they became comfortable in the relationship and if he was patient with them, their sex life would improve. I was too inexperience to realize that a lack of sexual interest early on (despite a very strong romantic attachment) was a sign of future disaster. I didn't realize that it was possible for her to love me, respect me, and be physically attracted to me - but have the physical attraction be abstract - she finds me attractive, likes to look at me, touch me, kiss me. It is not a lack of interest in me, but a lack of interest in sex that is the problem.
> 
> It was only many years later that I learned that libido varies dramatically with different people. My "patience" had let my relationship become too permanent.


Preach it brother. Same thing happened to me. My fault for accepting less than I needed and for not acting ruthlessly when the truth became apparent. Should have been more selfish and less compassionate.



> The negative feelings are more towards that I have forced my partner to eat when they aren't full. I feel like a ****ty person for trying to give a person food when they clearly don't want it AND I can feed myself so it's extra ****ty that I am forcing them to eat when it's not a necessity.
> 
> I'm still hungry, so I'm going to eat of course.


This assumes that masturbation is the same as partner sex (feeds the hunger). Which for me is NOT the case. Or that the couple has agreed to an open marriage. Which for me is not the case. So in my marriage, the unavoidable problem is that I can't "feed myself" while I remain married to my wife. For me to get fed, I have to have partner sex (masturbation is not the same and does not assuage the hunger). And my wife for understandable reasons is opposed to me having partner sex with anyone else. So when I am hungry and she is not, either we both eat or I go hungry. Which is why, when the appetites are too far apart and unwanted sex is very uncomfortable for the lower desire partner, that the problem proves intractable if they choose to stay together.



> WHY does she not want sex with you? (And here is the sticky thing that some guys just don't want to know. She may NEVER have been sexually into him. She may have wanted a provider, a good father for her children... Sorry dude. This is the best you are ever going to get.) But if it is because he approaches her in an unamanly fashion, he can DO something about it.


Agreed. I feel this is often the case.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> It's actually the porn habit that gets me the most. It makes me feel undesirable and like an interchangeable vagina, all at the same time.


I know I have said this before, but that pisses me off for you.

I could stomach it if he was more into you.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> Seven years into the marriage. Two years into MC. But then, you alreayd knew that, right?


In that case, and assuming that the courtship years were unsuspecting, I would be figuring out how to bail out with the maximum possible collateral damage. Not sit there feeling like pond scum.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> Ah, if you said that parents should teach their children to be decent human beings, I'd heartily agree.


Well interestingly enough, the parents of the young man convicted near here DID think that they were raising a decent human beings but that boys will be boys. So there is some confusion on that point. So as far as I am concerned, parents talking to their young people about relationships probably is not a bad idea. But one could easily guess that there were gender relation modelling somewhere for this boy to get this idea. I find that too bad. I wish it were not the case.



> It just that if someone said that boys should be taught not to torture helpless animals, it sounds like they expect boys to do that if not explicitly told not to; as if it was their nature to do things like that.



Kids should be taught not to torture helpless animals! I presume that you are nice to the pets in your home? When you have to get rid of a pest in the yard that you do it humanely? If you wanted to be crazy about it, maybe you give to the animal shelter. Where do you think people learn TO torture helpless animals? By people who torture helpless animals.

I mean, I do hope people are somewhat thoughtful about what they teach their kids! I don't see that as a bad thing.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> Maybe you fail to see the competition aspect of it because you feel that you're not worthy of competing over?
> 
> I guess you feel that it's a lofty thing to not be impressed by someone trying to impress you. That to be impressed would be shallow?
> 
> ...


We are very different people, Olivia. I do not want to be impressed, I want to relate. And if we can't relate, then I can't take his interest seriously. It just seems like a performance to me.

This neither makes me lofty nor does it make me insecure or unworthy.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> If I don't do this with understanding of HIS motivations, I will fail. And lest you failed to read the thread, which it seems you did, I said exactly the opposite of sitting back and hoping. I said instead of the complaining, do the things that are likely to engender the actual desire again.
> 
> WHY does he not want to feed me? Well for one thing, because I am 30 lbs over weight. And for another, he is resentful that every time I get hungry, I expect HIM to feed me. What is wrong with my feet? And hands? Or that I am making massive withdrawals from the love bank in some other way... Or he is a ****, and I need to leave.
> 
> ...


I agree that actions are more important than words and that talking rarely accomplishes anything. But.....

If my wife really wanted to have me sit with her and watch 20/20 for an hour each night, what actions could she have taken that would result in my doing that on her own?

None.

It would never have occurred to me that something like that was important to anybody.

She made her desires known and it turns out that, with some conditions, I'm perfectly happy to do that for her.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
This may just be semantics. I try to be a decent human being. I can't exactly say why, its not like my parents ever sat down and specifically taught me this, nor was there an obvious example, but somehow I learned that it was important. 




NobodySpecial said:


> Somebody taught you how to be a decent human being. And someone clearly failed to teach other people how to be a decent human being as is much evidenced by the news. And my own experience as a younger lady.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> I agree that actions are more important than words and that talking rarely accomplishes anything. But.....
> 
> If my wife really wanted to have me sit with her and watch 20/20 for an hour each night, what actions could she have taken that would result in my doing that on her own?
> 
> ...


Was it? I mean, that strikes me as a pretty stupid example compared to like starving to death and completely sexless marriages. In fact, it strikes me as an example of being unfair to meet such a need as a form of neediness.



> She made her desires known and it turns out that, with some conditions, I'm perfectly happy to do that for her.


Oh, so you do quid pro quo. Ok, if that works for you, rock it.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

always_alone said:


> It's actually the porn habit that gets me the most. It makes me feel undesirable and like an interchangeable vagina, all at the same time.


Picture if you will, a group of college freshmen boys all talking in a dormitory. I was describing how my girlfriend actually liked to watch porn and there was a wholehearted and unanimous response from everyone!: "OMG you are so lucky and have to do whatever it takes to keep her as your girlfriend, because that is extremely rare!"

Why would a group of college freshmen boys find a girl that likes porn so valuable and extremely rare? Please note that "extremely rare" and "interchangeable vagina" are definitely NOT synonymous with one another. 

...let's just say that the idea of a woman that is confident about her sexuality enough to know what she likes and gets her turned on is something that most college boys know that the chance of finding that is extremely rare. 

Meanwhile in reality I actually felt threatened by it during this short-lived relationship. She really liked girl on girl porn and was attracted to my long hair. After that relationship ended I have had a short and clean cut look to my hair ever since.

I do not know what the moral of that story is, but I think it is about girls being honest about their sexuality up front so that men can understand if that is something to build a LTR/Marriage on or not. While her sexuality might work great for some men, she was not the right one for me. 

Regards,
Badsanta


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Oh, so you do quid pro quo. Ok, if that works for you, rock it.


I said "She made her desires known and it turns out that, with some conditions, I'm perfectly happy to do that for her".

It took me a while to figure out where you could have come up with that response.

I think I figured out that you interpreted "with some conditions' as being something like "as long as you blow me during the commercials" or something.

No. The "with some conditions" meant "no shows that I actively dislike", "no more than an hour", etc.

It's always surprising how people don't give the benefit of the doubt to those that disagree with them.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> I said "She made her desires known and it turns out that, with some conditions, I'm perfectly happy to do that for her".
> 
> It took me a while to figure out where you could have come up with that response.
> 
> ...


I don't actually disagree with you on much. I just think you are talking about something completely different than I am.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Let's face it, everybody does some form of quid pro quo. If you're getting none of your needs met, you are not going to be feeling too motivated to meet his needs.


Jesus god. That is the OPPOSITE of quid pro quo. 

"Quid pro quo ("something for something" or "this for that" in Latin) means an exchange of goods or services, where one transfer is contingent upon the other."


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I think this is part of the (many) disconnects in these discussions. 

To some people, providing a sexual gift is just another nice thing you can do for the person you love. Just like buying flowers, cooking a nice dinner, giving a massage, cuddling on the sofa with them to watch a movie that they enjoy but you don't. Its not something you personally enjoy, but you can enjoy making them happy - not out of some sense of obligation, or tit for tat, but because you honestly enjoy seeing them happy.

To others, sex is in an entirely different category. If you don't want it, it is very negative (degrading? disgusting?). The idea of your partner wanting sex when you don't diminishes them in you eyes. 

The second seems (I think) somewhat correlated with people who view orgasm as the most important part of sex. They can't understand why their partner doesn't just "take care of themselves", rather then expect such a sacrifice. 


So if my wife asks for a long back rub she gets it. If I asked for one, I'm sure she would be happy to do it. But if I asked for a HJ, she would find the request offensive and turn it down. Similarly she has never asked me to provide her stand-alone sexual pleasure though I've made it clear I'd be happy to do so. Sex is off the table as a gift / favor. 








OliviaG said:


> I can't stand obligation sex. It's insulting an demeaning and not loving. Sex given lovingly as a gift, with no sense of obligation is what I was talking about. It's not demanded; it's hoped for, but not demanded. Demanding it ruins the opportunity for it to be given as a gift.
> 
> Same way as if I demand an anniversary present and I get one, what does it mean to me? What does it do to my relationship?
> 
> If my husband offers me a gift out of love and a desire to please me, what does it mean to me? What does it do to my relationship?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> Again, you are reading things into what I said, that I didn't say.
> 
> I'm really not a fan of playing this game, so I'll bow out now.


But Oivia, you flat out suggested that I feel the way I do because I see myself as unworthy or too lofty.

How am I supposed to read that?

TAM has made me realize that as a woman, I am seemingly supposed to make a man jump through hoops to demonstrate how into me he was.

This is something I never really understood, and still don't. It simply isn't how I relate to people.

I get the sense you were very popular, and so had all sorts of men vying for your attention. That was never the case with me. There never was any competition.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> To some people, providing a sexual gift is just another nice thing you can do for the person you love. Just like buying flowers, cooking a nice dinner, giving a massage, cuddling on the sofa with them to watch a movie that they enjoy but you don't. Its not something you personally enjoy, but you can enjoy making them happy - not out of some sense of obligation, or tit for tat, but because you honestly enjoy seeing them happy.
> 
> To others, sex is in an entirely different category. If you don't want it, it is very negative (degrading? disgusting?). The idea of your partner wanting sex when you don't diminishes them in you eyes.


And then there's people like me, who can see them in the same category, and yet still feel that it isn't reasonable to pressure their spouse into it. If my SO doesn't want to give me a massage, then he doesn't want to give me a massage. If he doesn't want to cook for me or take out the garbage, he doesn't do that either. If he doesn't want to buy me a present for my birthday, I don't get one.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I get the sense you were very popular, and so had all sorts of men vying for your attention. That was never the case with me. There never was any competition.


I did. I did not like it. It was never about actually getting to KNOW me, just GETTING me.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> No, I didn't.


You did. You said pretty much exactly that.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> Maybe you fail to see the competition aspect of it because you feel that you're not worthy of competing over?
> 
> I guess you feel that it's a lofty thing to not be impressed by someone trying to impress you. That to be impressed would be shallow?


Still confused. But okay, we can drop it.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> I did. I did not like it. It was never about actually getting to KNOW me, just GETTING me.


Yuck. That sounds frustrating.

I had a friend with a similar experience. She didn't like it either.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Let's face it, everybody does some form of quid pro quo. If you're getting none of your needs met, you are not going to be feeling too motivated to meet his needs.



I think it's best to avoid engineering explicit quid pro quo arrangements

I also think it's good to be aware of when you may be covertly setting up a quid pro quo situation. It takes some work to recognize this.

But at some level, you expect something out of a relationship. If you get nothing, you will eventually pull back. It's just a natural reaction.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Yuck. That sounds frustrating.
> 
> I had a friend with a similar experience. She didn't like it either.


The confident, healthy guys went away without much fuss. But the Nice Guy syndrome does not happen just in marriage. It lives large in dating land. Having "given" me all this (unwanted) attention, I owed them... whatever thing they were after. Ugh.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> @OliviaG,
> 
> Love and please could be fine. Love and please seems to be co-mingled with:
> 
> ...





OliviaG said:


> Love and please are commingled with those things the same way they are commingled with massaging sore muscles of your spouse, looking after him when he's sick, running interference for him when he needs some time alone, buying his favourite foods (the *ones you really don't care for*) and cooking them for him, going to the car/boat/outdoor living show with him when it's something *you really don't care about*, learning how to ski/play golf/play tennis or whatever it is he likes to do, just because he'd love to play with you and it would be good for the relationship.
> 
> *My life is filled with these things. Why should sex be put in a different category?*


 @OliviaG If I were married to you and this is how you felt, OMG it would make me feel like a total piece of crap. 

I wholeheartedly agree with @FrenchFry that you have to do things that make YOU happy. If your husband is not supportive you doing such things as a way to search for things that are mutually enjoyable for both of you, then I would be utterly confused. Things that you each enjoy but are not appreciated by the other, while those things can be shared somewhat, those things are best left to enjoy with one's personal space in the relationship.

Badsanta


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> I think it's best to avoid engineering explicit quid pro quo arrangements
> 
> I also think it's good to be aware of when you may be covertly setting up a quid pro quo situation. It takes some work to recognize this.
> 
> But at some level, you expect something out of a relationship. If you get nothing, you will eventually pull back. It's just a natural reaction.


The term quid pro quo MEANS one for one. (In retrospect, what Buddy describes isn't at all.) I give you a bj, you clean the kitchen. I GAVE you the one to GET the other and for no other reason. It is not about making a happy life that we both enjoy together. It is a destructive frame of mind. It happens to me one that many Nice Guys and Gals use to justify their behavior.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> The confident, healthy guys went away without much fuss. But the Nice Guy syndrome does not happen just in marriage. It lives large in dating land. Having "given" me all this (unwanted) attention, I owed them... whatever thing they were after. Ugh.


serious question:

if you didn't really want what you new _they _wanted, why would you accept all of the precursor "nice guy" stuff?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening 
fair enough. But assuming everything else was great, but your partner never wanted sex, would you stay or leave? 



always_alone said:


> And then there's people like me, who can see them in the same category, and yet still feel that it isn't reasonable to pressure their spouse into it. If my SO doesn't want to give me a massage, then he doesn't want to give me a massage. If he doesn't want to cook for me or take out the garbage, he doesn't do that either. If he doesn't want to buy me a present for my birthday, I don't get one.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> The term quid pro quo MEANS one for one. (In retrospect, what Buddy describes isn't at all.) I give you a bj, you clean the kitchen. I GAVE you the one to GET the other and for no other reason. It is not about making a happy life that we both enjoy together. It is a destructive frame of mind. It happens to me one that many Nice Guys and Gals use to justify their behavior.


I know what it means.

there are gray areas though. marriage isn't literal prostitution


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> serious question:
> 
> if you didn't really want what you new _they _wanted, why would you accept all of the precursor "nice guy" stuff?


What stuff did I accept? Their visiting me at my job while I was working? Their asking me to dance at the party (and my saying no)? They thought their attention was enough to warrant this debt because they were *showing me how into me they were*. Conversation of this nature actually took place when they finally accepted the No. What stuff did I accept?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> I know what it means.
> 
> there are gray areas though. marriage isn't literal prostitution


No the point I am making is that some people don't see that they are, in fact, making their marriages into quid pro quo arrangements to attempt to get what they want.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> I think it's best to avoid engineering explicit quid pro quo arrangements
> 
> I also think it's good to be aware of when you may be covertly setting up a quid pro quo situation. It takes some work to recognize this.
> 
> But at some level, you expect something out of a relationship. If you get nothing, you will eventually pull back. It's just a natural reaction.


All relationships are quid pro quo on some level.

The difference between transactional relationships and non-transactional ones is roughly analagous to living pay check to paycheck or not.

You still put money into the bank and pull it out, you just don't have to watch each penny so much because you know there's a positive balance there.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I agree - and I would never feel comfortable asking for stand-alone sex because I know it is something she wouldn't enjoy. Yet I'd be happy to receive such a request because I would enjoy doing it.

At the heart of this is the combination making sex both exclusive and yet something that people can feel comfortable turning down indefinitely. 


The ultimate conclusion (which I've known for a long time) is that either I live without sex, or I divorce the woman I love. Yes its *my* choice but its a wretched choice. 

Though I complain here, I've stopped asking her for sex - and she is very happy with our marriage, thinks its wonderful.




FrenchFry said:


> :grin2: Oh my god, you wonder why so many marriages fail.
> 
> 
> 
> I think you are onto something here @richardsharpe. It's not offensive, but it is off-putting because sexual pleasure, imo, is strongly correlated to sharing physical pleasure where backrubs and whatnot is servicing your partner. It's off-putting because you are basically taking an activity where we should both get a physical, tangible response and making it the same as how nice it feels to get a sandwich.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> What stuff did I accept? Their visiting me at my job while I was working? Their asking me to dance at the party (and my saying no)? They thought their attention was enough to warrant this debt because they were *showing me how into me they were*. Conversation of this nature actually took place when they finally accepted the No. What stuff did I accept?


I didn't know all of the details of your life, mang.

It was more of a conceptual question.

Like, you're on a date, the guy is a dud, you know what he wants, you know you're not going to give it to him, do you let him take you out for ice cream or do you just bail?

I think from your answer, you would just bail, which seems like the fair response to me.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> No the point I am making is that some people don't see that they are, in fact, making their marriages into quid pro quo arrangements to attempt to get what they want.


OK, that's fair. For some people it does take some work to open one's eyes and see this situation for what it is. It doesn't help that some women actually encourage this too.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> I didn't know all of the details of your life, mang.


What does mang mean? You learn something new every day!



> It was more of a conceptual question.
> 
> Like, you're on a date, the guy is a dud, you know what he wants, you know you're not going to give it to him, do you let him take you out for ice cream or do you just bail?
> 
> I think from your answer, you would just bail, which seems like the fair response to me.


Oh yah. I am not talking about people I dated. I was talking about pursuers chasing to date me. Never understood get stuff off of guys thing.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> OK, that's fair. For some people it does take some work to open one's eyes and see this situation for what it is. It doesn't help that some women actually encourage this too.


I don't think this is gender specific. I just think it is something young people think about.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> This is how most of my relationships went! Threatened by my sexuality. I feel very fortunate to have found someone who isn't.
> I actually took away the opposite moral however--don't be upfront because you will ultimately scare away your partners.


FF: The following is not meant as a slam. It is posted sincerely and with respect.

What you describe above is how mismatches begin. With dishonesty.

See, I interpret your last clause to mean that you felt "scaring away your partners" would be a bad thing. But I would think that scaring away potential partners who are intimidated by your sexuality would be a GOOD thing. And the sooner done, the better. Why waste time with someone who is not compatible? Why scare them away later, after you have feelings for each other and the breakup will be more painful on both sides? Isn't it better to be up front and let them know "hey, I really like girl on girl porn - so if that doesn't work for you then we might as well stop now before either of us gets our feelings hurt"? 

What is boggling to me is that so many people think it is in their interest to develop a romantic relationship with (and eventually marry) someone who has a very different sex drive or sexual proclivity or level of attraction. It almost always ends badly. Just as often for the person who thinks they are making a sacrifice as for the person who can't believe how lucky they are that such a hot person finds them attractive. 

The idea that a person is going to live "happily ever after" with someone they don't find sexually attractive is nonsense. Well, unless you marry someone MUCH older so you can reasonably hope for them to die in the near future. But what if they don't have the good sense to die soon enough? If you marry someone for their money, in most cases, you will EARN it.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I agree - and I would never feel comfortable asking for stand-alone sex because I know it is something she wouldn't enjoy. Yet I'd be happy to receive such a request because I would enjoy doing it.
> 
> At the heart of this is the combination making sex both exclusive and yet something that people can feel comfortable turning down indefinitely.
> ...


do you feel she is more important than you are?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> What does mang mean? You learn something new every day!
> .


"mang" means "man" but it sounds cooler.


----------



## 2020hindsight (Nov 3, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> Very true. But sometimes it is a different scenario. The reason for one spouse rejecting another can be simply that the two have different appetites and that they do not understand this about each other. Therefore they read into the other's behaviour all kinds of things that are not true, which hurts the relationship.


I can't help but wonder about the assumed unresolved rape PTSD in this case (holdingontoit). Does his wife tell him that she has unresolved issues regarding the rape? What does she actually say about the effect of the unreported rape on her life?

In the absence of the wife's own description of her predicament, could the husband in this case be reading into his wife's behavior all kinds of things that are not true? Such as trauma from unreported rape?

What if she does not enjoy sex, and she never really did, and the problem is simple incompatibility?


----------



## Phil Anders (Jun 24, 2015)

badsanta said:


> @OliviaG If I were married to you and this is how you felt, OMG it would make me feel like a total piece of crap.
> 
> I wholeheartedly agree with @FrenchFry that you have to do things that make YOU happy. If your husband is not supportive you doing such things as a way to search for things that are mutually enjoyable for both of you, then I would be utterly confused. Things that you each enjoy but are not appreciated by the other, while those things can be shared somewhat, those things are best left to enjoy with one's personal space in the relationship.


What's consistently left out of this kind of analysis is that some of us derive pleasure and enjoyment from seeing our partners' pleasure and enjoyment. Thus, an activity toward which we are _a priori_ indifferent (or even one involving minor inconvenience) is transformed in the act of giving into something mutually rewarding. 

It would be quite different if there were outright demands, score-keeping, or a pervasive sense of entitlement & obligation--but simply being told occasionally what things are on the other's "wish-list" doesn't constitute such.

Richard has a good handle on this:


richardsharpe said:


> I think this is part of the (many) disconnects in these discussions.
> 
> To some people, providing a sexual gift is just another nice thing you can do for the person you love. Just like buying flowers, cooking a nice dinner, giving a massage, cuddling on the sofa with them to watch a movie that they enjoy but you don't. Its not something you personally enjoy, but you can enjoy making them happy - not out of some sense of obligation, or tit for tat, but because you honestly enjoy seeing them happy.
> 
> ...


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> Well then, if we're ever both single at the same time, best we steer clear of each other... I'll take you off my list.


To be fair, my wife will occasionally do things for me sexually that might be something she is not really in the mood to enjoy. BUT she is usually open to experiencing pleasure and tries to. While it does not always happen, most of the time it does and the majority of sex is mutually enjoyable. 

I enjoy going to the lake, but she hates it. So lake time is now "me time!" 

I enjoy taking the kids bowling, but she has no desire for it. So bowling time is now "Father/daughter time or boys night out time!"

She enjoys taking the kids shopping for cloths (she really does!), but for me this is "The Walking Dead Time."



FrenchFry said:


> And if this is sex, GTFO!


 @FrenchFry In a tribute to your favorite website guyswithfries, if we dated and after two weeks you asked me to shave up a six pack on my belly to please you sexually, one of us would have to stay sober in order to manscape things realistically. I do think I shave way better while I am drunk, but I would need you to help tell me to stop after six. Otherwise it would go really bad and you would end up telling me to GFTO!!!


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

2020hindsight said:


> I can't help but wonder about the assumed unresolved rape PTSD in this case (holdingontoit). Does his wife tell him that she has unresolved issues regarding the rape? What does she actually say about the effect of the unreported rape on her life?
> 
> In the absence of the wife's own description of her predicament, could the husband in this case be reading into his wife's behavior all kinds of things that are not true? Such as trauma from unreported rape?
> 
> What if she does not enjoy sex, and she never really did, and the problem is simple incompatibility?


2020: It may well be the case that she simply does not find me attractive, never enjoyed sex with me, and at some point felt that hiding behind a fictional rape story was more compassionate (or less likely to cause me to file for divorce) than telling me the truth.

She doesn't say much about sex and nothing about the rapes. Trying to get her to talk about them is a non-starter. We went to several different licensed Sex Therapists and she never did any of the "homework". Not even hugs with clothes on, massages, looking at each other naked without touching. Nothing. So eventually we stopped doing ST.

The main factors supporting the idea that she has PTSD is her behavior during sex. Lies there silent and unmoving. She gets a glassy look in her eyes. If something move in the room or causes a noise she does not react, whereas usually she is very twitchy and will get startled at any sudden noise or movement. Many times in the early year during sex I can remember looking at her and saying "Hello? Anyone in there? Earth to H2? Please come back from Planet X and stay here with me." I am now very ashamed at my behavior.

At this point, we aren't having sex so it doesn't really matter why she doesn't enjoy sex with me. Maybe she is just playing me and telling me whatever she feels is most likely to get me to stay with her. In that case, she "wins". I am never leaving. On the other hand, given what a pathetic mess I am, is getting me to stay really a "win" for her?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> What does mang mean? You learn something new every day!


From urban dictionary:
This is how Tony Montana says MAN, but in a comradery/get outta my face way.
ju tink I a communiss, Mang....uh? 

ju tink I wanna live ing some ****ing caige, mang....uh? 

who da **** u tink put dis togetta, uh? 
ME, dass who, mang !!

Plain and simple, this was started by the Mexicans. It's their way of saying "Man".. This is due to the Mexican accent converted to English. Now people say 'mang' because it's (1) different and (2) humorous.
"What's up, mang?"

made popular by Al Pacino in Scarface, "mang" is the term for "man", but skewed into sounding like "mang" when said with the cuban accent of "Tony Montana"
"fuuhck you mang!" 

"It helps me sleep go at night mang."

Friend; pal; buddy; bro
Yo, what up mang?

Hey mang!

Slang for "man".
"Hey mang, whassup wit' you?

A fun way to say "man" usually when talking lightheartedly with your buds (mangs). in certain social situations "mang" can be quite addictive to use but it seems impossible to overuse it. Also made famous in the muddy waters song "mannish boy".

Andy: hey mang! 
Stefan: oh hi mang! 
Andy: ju got any butter mang? 
Stefan: nah mang. 

Muddy Waters: I'm a MAAAANG! I'm a full grown Mang. I'm a Hoochie coochie Mang! (and so forth. great song)

Spanish pronunciation for "man".
Florida Tourist : "Excuse me sir, but could you please direct me to the nearest hotel?" 
Cuban : "*shows off snake* I got a snake mang!"


Etc.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> made popular by Al Pacino in Scarface, "mang" is the term for "man",


THAT is what he was saying?? Holy cow I feel dumb.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> I know that play very well. I've experienced that sort of attempt at manipulation. It's just that *this is not the type of thing we were talking about*. That's why I couldn't understand why it was being interjected into the conversation.


It sounds exactly like what a lot of people on this thread are talking about.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Really? I guess it does if you can't imagine wanting to do something like that for someone else without feeling resentment about it or being coerced into it, but just because you know they need it and it gives you pleasure to meet their need.


So just because you cannot imagine THAT gift being difficult for someone, that is not what these women are feeling?

For you it is whoever wants sex wants the damned sex so the person who doesn't should STFU with whatever their "issue" is and put out.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> And then there's people like me, who can see them in the same category, and yet still feel that it isn't reasonable to *pressure their spouse into * it. If my SO doesn't want to give me a massage, then he doesn't want to give me a massage. If he doesn't want to cook for me or take out the garbage, he doesn't do that either. If he doesn't want to buy me a present for my birthday, I don't get one.


If you replaced the bolded with "ask their spouse for", does this change anything?


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> You asked about pressure? So this is how this plays out with incompatible people
> 
> Hey, I need this sex that you have. I want it and you should enjoy giving it because it's nice to give things away and I know I feel good when I give gifts.
> 
> ...


This issue being compatable is so important in marriage because both are correct. You shouldn't feel cohersed into doing something you don't want to do nor should you have to beg to get what you need in a marriage either. These people wouldn't be compatable but I wouldn't describe either as wrong.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> If you replaced the bolded with "ask their spouse for", does this change anything?


Here's the interesting thing. How does it FEEL to the listener? My DH can ask me anything. Someone who has been on for years about sex? Who is to say what the listener would hear?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

Deleted


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> @OliviaG, I think it is!
> 
> I'm not trying to put words in ANYONE'S mouth, let me be clear but this is what I'm reading between the lines:
> 
> ...



That is how it felt back when I did not want it with DH. So maybe the words are mine.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> 100% agree! What sucks on the board, but probably way more in marriage is when you have a person who does get this pleasure and one person who feels like this is an obligation.


What strikes me is that the people who get this pleasure get told over and over how wrong/selfish/unloving they are. The one feels like it is an obligation should just get over it. Obligations that are foisted on me make me resentful.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

badsanta said:


> @OliviaG If I were married to you and this is how you felt, OMG it would make me feel like a total piece of crap.
> 
> I wholeheartedly agree with @FrenchFry that you have to do things that make YOU happy. If your husband is not supportive you doing such things as a way to search for things that are mutually enjoyable for both of you, then I would be utterly confused. Things that you each enjoy but are not appreciated by the other, while those things can be shared somewhat, those things are best left to enjoy with one's personal space in the relationship.
> 
> Badsanta


If @OliviaG and I were available at the same time, I'd be on her like white on rice:smile2: 

A_A, FF, NS; we'd be miserable.

It's said that your DNA largely determines if you're a Democrat or a Republican.

There's a clear divide here that can't be bridged.

We've got to identify how to tell the difference between the two and keep them away from each other.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> I'm not sure what you thought I meant then.


If we were married and you went to the lake with me just for the sake of the marriage even though you do not enjoy going to the lake, this would make me feel like crap. 

If you purchased me foods that you do not like and cooked them for me, that would make me feel selfish. Now my wife is a coffee drinker and I am not, but I do not mind hitting the button for her on our keurig, nor does our son when he is eager to please. BUT occasionally I actually do enjoy drinking a coffee with her. Just like she now occasionally enjoys a tea (which she hated when we met). My point being is I have a very clear understanding of the things she dislikes!

When you learn to ski with your husband, is he aware of that being something that you dislike, and did you give him a chance to consider other options?


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> Right now, my drive is straight up lower than my husbands. I want it once every other day. He wants it three times a day.
> 
> Am I selfish because I say no two times a day? Seriously honest question.


Depends on HOW you say no. Do you encourage him to "enjoy" waiting until you are ready?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> I think you are onto something here @richardsharpe. It's not offensive, but it is off-putting because sexual pleasure, imo, is strongly correlated to sharing physical pleasure where backrubs and whatnot is servicing your partner. It's off-putting because you are basically taking an activity where we should both get a physical, tangible response and making it the same as how nice it feels to get a sandwich.


 @richardsharpe and others have suggested many times that a possibility is that some people think sex is completely different than anything else. 

It seems that you would agree that it is completely different. Which is refreshing.

This saves us the trouble making up analogies, since there are none. 

But, thinking that it isn't different doesn't necessarily lead to bad marriages. I suspect that the opposite would be more likely.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> Right now, my drive is straight up lower than my husbands. I want it once every other day. He wants it three times a day.
> 
> Am I selfish because I say no two times a day? Seriously honest question.


In my view, no, you are not. You are compromising and being generous. Selfish would be to say yes every other day, just as you want it.

And FWIW, I think OliviaG is being too generous to the men who don't get as much sex as they wish they did. I think in most cases it plays out more like NS and FF are describing that how OG is describing. And frankly, I think it almost inevitably feels that way to the LD spouse if the mismatch continues for a long time, no matter the words or the tone used by the HD spouse. Which is why it is usually best if the HD's reaction to rejection is to up their game, and if that doesn't work fairly quickly, that the couple splits before the mismatch continues long enough for the LD to feel like an interchangeable orifice / appendage.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

FrenchFry said:


> Right now, my drive is straight up lower than my husbands. I want it once every other day. He wants it three times a day.
> 
> Am I selfish because I say no two times a day? Seriously honest question.


Every other day is more than reasonable.

Dan Savage has a way of putting it... I think he calls it "a fetish too far."

Meaning, GGG is great -- but it doesn't mean that you have to do anything unreasonable. Sex 3-4 times a week is very reasonable. Sex 21 times a week over decades is pretty unreasonable.

I'm HD and I'm pretty happy with once every other day, as long as it's good.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> 100% agree! What sucks on the board, but probably way more in marriage is when you have a person who does get this pleasure and one person who feels like this is an obligation.


Ding! Ding! Ding!

We have a winner!


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Buddy400 said:


> Ding! Ding! Ding!
> 
> We have a winner!


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> If you replaced the bolded with "ask their spouse for", does this change anything?


No harm in asking. It's just the expectations part I bump up against.

As in "you should want to do this because it makes me happy" or "I do all of these wonderful things to make you happy, where's mine?".


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> I know that play very well. I've experienced that sort of attempt at manipulation. It's just that *this is not the type of thing we were talking about*. That's why I couldn't understand why it was being interjected into the conversation.


It's as if they perceive no difference between meeting the needs of their partner, who loves them and would do anything for them and some stranger on the street saying the same thing.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> This is exactly it, you nailed it Phil. If it's not mutually rewarding, then nobody wants it. If you can't give your partner a gift, one that you don't want for yourself, and enjoy giving it, then what does that say about you?


at the risk of being overly generous, there are some people who simply have tunnel vision and are a certain way.

they did not set out to be this way, they just are.

they may have _some_ capacity to change, but they can't totally change their personality.

on some level you have to decide whether you accept these people as they are.

it's probably not always right to describe this type of personality as selfishness, because that implies that they have an option of another way to be when maybe they really don't


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> @OliviaG, I think it is!
> 
> I'm not trying to put words in ANYONE'S mouth, let me be clear but this is what I'm reading between the lines:
> 
> ...


This pretty much confirms what I've been thinking.

You, and others, simply don't believe that we mean what we say.

It's as if, were you to believe that we were genuine, it might turn out that you're selfish. And you don't want to think that about yourself. So, you HAVE to assume that we don't mean what we say. It's the only way to protect your feeling of self worth.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> Right now, my drive is straight up lower than my husbands. I want it once every other day. He wants it three times a day.
> 
> Am I selfish because I say no two times a day? Seriously honest question.


No. As @OliviaG said, you are trying to meet his needs to the best of your ability. 

He can rightly expect no more than that.

Now, are you resentful?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
no, but I'm faced with a choice between her being happy and my being fairly unhappy and one where she is miserable and I a fairly unhappy (for different reasons).

She is not interchangeable to me - I am not happy to trade her in on a newer model that will have sex with me. (I know you aren't suggesting that). 




Anon1111 said:


> do you feel she is more important than you are?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> Not exactly. You may not be selfish. You may not understand what such a gift would mean to him, and you should strive to understand it.
> 
> If you understand that sex is a 10/10 need for him, and the relationship is very very good, with no lingering resentments, and you don't have sexual baggage to contend with, then you will make an attempt to meet his needs in that area *unless* you are selfish.
> 
> That doesn't mean that you will be able to meet *all* his needs necessarily. But you will to the best of your ability, without feeling resentful about it.


this is a very nice thought, but I think the problem with it is it sets the highest possible expectation as the only acceptable expectation.

not everyone is going to be an A+ student. Does that mean that anyone who is less than A+ is selfish?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> no, but I'm faced with a choice between her being happy and my being fairly unhappy and one where she is miserable and I a fairly unhappy (for different reasons).
> 
> She is not interchangeable to me - I am not happy to trade her in on a newer model that will have sex with me. (I know you aren't suggesting that).


OK, so then you are getting what YOU want.

I understand that the situation is not what you'd choose in a perfect world but you don't live in a perfect world.

I guess you understand that too in real life.

Work on forgetting the idea of a perfect world.


----------



## Blondilocks (Jul 4, 2013)

@badsanta,

"If we were married and you went to the lake with me just for the sake of the marriage even though you do not enjoy going to the lake, this would make me feel like crap.

If you purchased me foods that you do not like and cooked them for me, that would make me feel selfish."

Lighten up on yourself. If she really hated going to the lake, wild alligators couldn't drag her. Just appreciate her effort to make you happy (a little nuzzle on the neck, a kiss and a thank you should do it). 

Cooking you food that she does not like is an act of love. Acknowledge and appreciate it. 

Spouses are entitled to expect their SO to not be totally selfish in the marriage.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Blondilocks said:


> @badsanta,
> 
> "If we were married and you went to the lake with me just for the sake of the marriage even though you do not enjoy going to the lake, this would make me feel like crap.
> 
> ...


COMPLETELY AGREE!

My point earlier (that I may have not communicated well) is that a spouse needs to be AWARE of when his/her partner is making concessions so that it can be appreciated.

If you went digging around your house and found a secret diary from you husband and read that he despised something that you thought the two of you sincerely enjoyed together, odds are that would be something difficult for you to realize.

On the other hand if you knew he hated competitive barn quilting with a passion, but he still _playfully_ helped you hang the blasted things out for neighbors to see because he respected that it is part of your heritage, then you would likely appreciate his efforts and feel emboldened by the experience.










What does this have to do with sex and the OP? Let me ask him... Oh yes, something about feeling "accepted!"

Cheers, 
Badsanta


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> I actually don't mind being thought of as selfish. What gets to me though is that if you attach "emotional need" it's not selfish when you know, it kind of is.



Both people are, of course, being selfish. They both want what they want. The question is how do they each react to the reality that their partner's desired outcome differs from their own desired outcome.

Generous people work together to compromise and try to obtain an outcome where both people end up with a tolerable outcome. Selfish people insult their partner, suggest that the partner's needs are not legitimate, and attempt to reach a solution where their own needs are met without regard to the impact on their partner.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> @Buddy400
> 
> 
> Husband--3 times a day
> ...


The relevant question is, do you think you are?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> It's as if they perceive no difference between meeting the needs of their partner, who loves them and would do anything for them and some stranger on the street saying the same thing.


I do lots and lots of things for my SO that I wouldn't do for a random on the street. And he does for me.

But, well, he doesn't do everything I might need him to. So I do it myself. Ditto for him.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> Devil's advocate--No I'm not because there are BJs and HJs and what not that I could do without it being an issue.
> 
> Could, but don't.
> 
> Does my husband have a right to feel resentful?


If you didn't have a problem doing these things but just didn't feel like it, he might.

If you've got some deep seated problems with BJs & HJs, then no.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

badsanta said:


> .................................
> 
> On the other hand if you knew he hated *competitive barn quilting* with a passion, but he still _playfully_ helped you hang the blasted things out for neighbors to see because he respected that it is part of your heritage, then you would likely appreciate his efforts and feel emboldened by the experience.
> 
> ...



PMSL competitive barn quilting. This is a real thing? There would be NO sex in this house if he started quilting on the side of it.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

And to think we have THIS in our fair state of Kentucky...

http://quiltmuseum.org/

Explains my sex life 😂😂


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

In this thread "Nice-With Expectations? Ticket to emotional hell" from the Men's Clubhouse, this post resonated with me...



> Racer said:
> 
> 
> > Ok, my thoughts on expectations:
> ...


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
as I see it I am getting the best of the available options, but that doesn't meant it is what I want. 

What I want I know isn't possible. Its just frustrating because it feels like what I want isn't at all unreasonable. I do however understand reality.



Anon1111 said:


> OK, so then you are getting what YOU want.
> 
> I understand that the situation is not what you'd choose in a perfect world but you don't live in a perfect world.
> 
> ...


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Personal said:
> 
> 
> > At the end of the day and at any age, finding marital partners and or long term sexual relationship partners is a competitive activity. If you lack the drive to compete and or lack the resilience to weather the knocks and failures you aren't fit to win and nor should you.
> ...


You've been with other men, yet you married your husband. Just as your husband has been with other women, yet he married you.

On some level or several levels you found him more appealing in a variety of ways over some or all of the men you have dated and or have known. Therefore he must have been competitive against others.

Likewise on some level or several levels he found you more appealing in a variety of ways over some or all of the women he has dated and or has known. Therefore you must have been competitive against others.

If you really weren't/aren't competitive you would not have (chosen to); had sex with a man, dated a man, been in a long term relationship with a man or have married a man. Let's not pretend any of those actions don't usually limit another persons opportunities to access the same with whomever you have chosen.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

john117 said:


> On Aug 22 it's my 30th wedding anniversary. Ask me what I'm buying for her 😂


I'm pages behind so apologies if you have already answered this, anyway what are you buying her?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

I'm down to two gifts:

http://www.prankplace.com/Countdown-Timer--Divorce-Is-Final-18174-0X.aspx

And/or 

http://www.wayfair.com/Breville-Smart-Convection-Toaster-Oven-BOV800XL-VIL1028.html

I am hoping she will forget it tho.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

john117 said:


> I'm down to two gifts:
> 
> Countdown Timer Divorce Is Final | VIPs Save 10% & Free Shipping - PrankPlace.com
> 
> ...


 Definitely "and" rather than "or"...


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> I will stop mixing metaphors and talk strictly sexually.
> 
> It seems like, when you want sex and your partner does not you feel as though they are impinging upon your ability to feel happy sexually and that they should make every maneuver to stop doing so and that this is how a relationship should be.
> 
> ...



It never occurred to me anyone had in mind a scenario where one partner wants sex NOW and gets bent out of shape if the other partner does not supply then and there regardless of anything and everything else but their partner's demands. Yeah, if that's what happens and there is any sort of pattern (say, happens a second time), then you are with a self-centered brat and should leave for good.

But if your partner had at one point made a commitment with you to be your exlusive partner, and your partner has lost interest in sharing a sex life like what he or she seemed happy to provide before, that's a different situation, with much complexity and ambiguity to be addressed before having a chance to really solve.

There are probably dozens of other situations.

Seems we try to talk here about one often not realizing others are pondering something completely different.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I completely agree with this early in a relationship. Later though its not so clear.
> 
> I was brought up with the belief that all women desired sex with their husbands and that once they became comfortable in the relationship and if he was patient with them, their sex life would improve. I was too inexperience to realize that a lack of sexual interest early on (despite a very strong romantic attachment) was a sign of future disaster. I didn't realize that it was possible for her to love me, respect me, and be physically attracted to me - but have the physical attraction be abstract - she finds me attractive, likes to look at me, touch me, kiss me. It is not a lack of interest in me, but a lack of interest in sex that is the problem.
> ...


Several things seem clear to me from your various posts. Your wife really does love you, as you really love her. You have a solid marriage in all ways except in the bedroom. Your wife is not ANTI sex, meaning sex (thankfully!) causes her no distress and she genuinely seems to "enjoy" it, albeit with very low frequency. Lastly, she seems to value you enough to "step it up" after one of your talks, but then lapses back into her natural low frequency.

Under those circumstances, with 2 loving partners, I honestly believe you can permanently FIX this. Here is my advice. Talk to her (outside the bedroom) and ask her if she would commit to regular sex twice per week (you pick a number) and explain how this would make you the happiest man in the world and would greatly improve the marriage for her. Negotiate towards a specific frequency that you both can commit to. Discuss the best days/times when she would be most receptive to sex. Discuss the best ways she would like you to initiate sex. Consider "scheduled" sex at this frequency, like every Wednesday and Saturday. This let's her mentally prepare for the event and also (sad to say this) it lets her more fully "relax" on the other days.

Now going forward, it is *your* job to initiate sex according to the agreed "protocol". Be prepared to gently, lovingly "push through" her initial and natural resistance, but of course she can always say NO if it's really not a good day/time for her. When that happens, let her know it is OK and that you will (literally) look forward to even better sex tomorrow. Then tomorrow, you initiate again.

Bottom line is that I think your issue comes down to the mechanics of initiating sex: she never will initiate, and your initiations are insufficient to get her over the hump. Totally solvable.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

tommyr said:


> Several things seem clear to me from your various posts. Your wife really does love you, as you really love her. You have a solid marriage in all ways except in the bedroom. Your wife is not ANTI sex, meaning sex (thankfully!) causes her no distress and she genuinely seems to "enjoy" it, albeit with very low frequency. Lastly, she seems to value you enough to "step it up" after one of your talks, but then lapses back into her natural low frequency.
> 
> Under those circumstances, with 2 loving partners, I honestly believe you can permanently FIX this. Here is my advice. Talk to her (outside the bedroom) and ask her if she would commit to regular sex twice per week (you pick a number) and explain how this would make you the happiest man in the world and would greatly improve the marriage for her. Negotiate towards a specific frequency that you both can commit to. Discuss the best days/times when she would be most receptive to sex. Discuss the best ways she would like you to initiate sex. Consider "scheduled" sex at this frequency, like every Wednesday and Saturday. This let's her mentally prepare for the event and also (sad to say this) it lets her more fully "relax" on the other days.
> 
> ...


That won't work...


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> I will stop mixing metaphors and talk strictly sexually.
> 
> *It seems like, when you want sex and your partner does not you feel as though they are impinging upon your ability to feel happy sexually and that they should make every maneuver to stop doing so and that this is how a relationship should be.*
> 
> ...





PieceOfSky said:


> It never occurred to me anyone had in mind a scenario where one partner wants sex NOW and gets bent out of shape if the other partner does not supply then and there regardless of anything and everything else but their partner's demands. Yeah, if that's what happens and there is any sort of pattern (say, happens a second time), then you are with a self-centered brat and should leave for good.
> 
> But if your partner had at one point made a commitment with you to be your exlusive partner, and your partner has lost interest in sharing a sex life like what he or she seemed happy to provide before, that's a different situation, with much complexity and ambiguity to be addressed before having a chance to really solve.
> 
> ...


Agreed, but of the two scenarios Frenchfry mentions:

*A) It seems like, when you (male) want sex and your partner does not you feel as though they are impinging upon your ability to feel happy sexually and that they should make every maneuver to stop doing so and that this is how a relationship should be.*

*B) When I (female) want sex and my partner does not, I feel as though I am impinging upon his ability to feel happy sexually and I should make every maneuver to stop doing so and this is how I operate in my own relationships.*

My wife says she needs (A) from me. When (B) happens it is played out through (A) in the form of me her "preemptively" making me think it will not happen that day before I ever initiate but I am busy with work/other. She teases me to the point I loose control and become aggressive which is what she REALLY likes. Then she will sometimes say,"OMG you are so easy for me to take advantage of you!" ...So the next time (A) happens for real and she needs me to back off, it gets me really aroused. I initiate sex because I need to feel close to her, but then we end up in a really frustrating place as I back off.

Perhaps (B) should be my way to initiate sex with her?

Badsanta


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Personal said:


> That won't work...


Alas I was cringing when I read it. His intentions are very good. But if there was ever any desire in her, that would kill it. I am thinking of it.

To Do
Wednesday
breakfast for kids
make lunches
ride to school
work
pick up dry cleaning
dinner
clean kitchen
laundry
have sex with husband

Thursday
breakfast for kids
make lunches
ride to school
work
groceries
dinner
clean kitchen
laundry
thank god I don't have to have sex with husband


----------



## Tortdog (May 2, 2016)

marduk said:


> I've heard a rumour that animals are made of meat.


And God made animals so God does not want us to be vegetarians.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> I did. I did not like it. It was never about actually getting to KNOW me, just GETTING me.


I wonder if that sets you (rhetorical) up for being closed off to someone who both wants to KNOW you and also wants to GET you?

And, then, once someone KNOWS you more and more deeply, his attraction and desire to GET you (be physically intimate) increases precisely because he loves what he KNOWS, and he would choose no one else. As that happens, is it difficult to not remain closed off?

And once a lifetime commitment has been made, and your partner presents with an interest in sex that is not matched by you at the moment, it can pretty easily feel like he is one of those who only wants to GET you? And maybe the problem isn't his motives, or maybe there are times you'd have strong unreciprocated desire for motives similar to him and not feel it diminishes you or him or your relationship. But his strong desire presenting simultaneously with your disinterest feels like those past situations where someone just tried to use you, and so it starts to look like yet another case of that, and it becomes harder and harder to believe it's not. And any gesture or kindness or use of your love languages is going to be a reason to turn further away.

If that were to happen, sad for you and him. It has nothing to do with you and him, and instead the as$holes that came before.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Personal said:


> If you really weren't/aren't competitive you would not have (chosen to); had sex with a man, dated a man, been in a long term relationship with a man or have married a man. Let's not pretend any of those actions don't usually limit another persons opportunities to access the same with whomever you have chosen.


For me, it's really just an experiment that went on longer than expected, not a competition.

I still find looking at mating and dating as a competition weird. I can wrap my head around seeing jealousy and possessive-ness as competitive feelings, and perhaps the whole "plenty of fish in the sea" attitude does give the sense that we are all interchangeable and therefore competing with each other to get caught by those picky fishers who might just throw us back.

But ultimately, I don't want to feel jealousy, and would much rather he just go with whoever it is he finds more appealing. And I simply cannot embrace the "plenty of fish" sentiment. 

Maybe some people see it that way, but I cannot.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

PieceOfSky said:


> I wonder if that sets you (rhetorical) up for being closed off to someone who both wants to KNOW you and also wants to GET you?


Sets one up for being closed off? lol. Wanting to GET me before KNOWING me. 



> And, then, once someone KNOWS you more and more deeply, his attraction and desire to GET you (be physically intimate) increases precisely because he loves what he KNOWS, and he would choose no one else. As that happens, is it difficult to not remain closed off?


What does closed off mean to you?



> And once a lifetime commitment has been made, and your partner presents with an interest in sex that is not matched by you at the moment, it can pretty easily feel like he is one of those who only wants to GET you?


I am pretty sure the comment you replied to was related to a dating scenario. If I am mixing up my replies, I apologize.

None of my comments here, or anywhere, relates to any individual moment except as feelings have developed over all. It is possible to establish an over all feeling that ALL that is desired is to get sexually when the conversations are all around how much more sex you need. When, often benignly, your partner needs to be hit with a clue-by-four to hear you. They THINK that they are meeting your needs. My ex, to this day, would tell you that he was meeting my needs. After all, we cuddled and rubbed. When he would finally listen to my words, he would act on them for a short period of time, then regress because he could not fundamentally understand? care? What I wanted?

I suspect it is not much different than the way the wives feel. They act on the words for a little bit. But since their own desire is not actually being raised, it is easy to slip back into complacency. The difference is, it is hard for most people to say to raise my desire do x,y,z. So they substitute other "needs" thinking it will raise desire. I never actually lacked desire for my ex. Just respect. For the people posting here, I think there is a difference.



> And maybe the problem isn't his motives, or maybe there are times you'd have strong unreciprocated desire for motives similar to him and not feel it diminishes you or him or your relationship. But his strong desire presenting simultaneously with your disinterest feels like those past situations where someone just tried to use you, and so it starts to look like yet another case of that, and it becomes harder and harder to believe it's not. And any gesture or kindness or use of your love languages is going to be a reason to turn further away.
> 
> If that were to happen, sad for you and him. It has nothing to do with you and him, and instead the as$holes that came before.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



I suppose maybe. But then why would I not feel the same way about my husband?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

PieceOfSky said:


> It never occurred to me anyone had in mind a scenario where one partner wants sex NOW and gets bent out of shape if the other partner does not supply then and there regardless of anything and everything else but their partner's demands. Yeah, if that's what happens and there is any sort of pattern (say, happens a second time), then you are with a self-centered brat and should leave for good.


But this is so often how it plays out. A wants B, B rebuffs A, and A pouts, or feels rejected, or adds a token to the resentment pile.

I think you are absolutely right that there are all sorts of complexities around this, and different situations are different. But the patterns consist of moments that accumulate.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

always_alone said:


> But this is so often how it plays out. A wants B, B rebuffs A, and A pouts, or feels rejected, or adds a token to the resentment pile.
> 
> I think you are absolutely right that there are all sorts of complexities around this, and different situations are different. But the patterns consist of moments that *accumulate*.


This.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

All well and good for us to understand this. Now let us try to translate the understanding into action for both sides.

For the HD, the message is fairly simple. If your partner is not consenting often or enthusiastically enough for your taste, up your game. If your partner does not respond to the new and improved you with higher frequency and enthusiasm, quickly and ruthlessly dump them and move on to someone who will.

For the LD, we would advise being brutally honest. No, I am not that into you. In order for me to be more interested in sex with you, you would need to accomplish the following. If you can't or won't do that, don't expect the sex to get better or more frequent.

But think about how this plays out over time from the LD side. They are going to feel even more pressure to perform. They are going to feel even more that the relationship is all about sex and that they are an interchangeable orifice / appendage. After getting dumped a few times, they are going to be even more hesitant to admit to low interest in sex.

I am not sure how we resolve this across populations. Telling LDs "don't marry someone with a high need for sex if you aren't that into them, it usually ends ugly" is good advice. Might reduce the marriage rates. Given the current divorce rates, maybe that is a good thing?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> All well and good for us to understand this. Now let us try to translate the understanding into action for both sides.
> 
> For the HD, the message is fairly simple. If your partner is not consenting often or enthusiastically enough for your taste, up your game.


I agree with this. Although the word "game" has so much built in connotation, a lot of which I would leave alone... I will assume we mean the same thing. 


> If your partner does not respond to the new and improved you with higher frequency and enthusiasm, quickly and ruthlessly dump them and move on to someone who will.


I disagree with this. There IS room for conversation. Just not the why won't you have sex with me? When can we have sex? But sex is how I connect to you? If you loved me, you'd have sex with me. But the Hold on to Your N.U.T.s variety that states, as fact not as punishment, I will not be in a marriage that does not involve a healthy sex life. What constitutes a healthy sex life can be defined by us. But what it is not is contractual, only for me. If you are not interested in a healthy sex life that involves both of us mutually enjoying each other, then perhaps we are incompatible. But I love you. I want to be with you. I want the healthy sex life to be with YOU. But make no mistake, I will not live into my old age in a marriage without a healthy sex life. 



> For the LD, we would advise being brutally honest. No, I am not that into you. In order for me to be more interested in sex with you, you would need to accomplish the following. If you can't or won't do that, don't expect the sex to get better or more frequent.


For the record, the talk on this board about drive does not resonate with me. I think the issue is more about feelings. That said, for the "HD" the advice would be, you may not know what would make you more interested. I ask that you be willing to explore that with me. I would do that with a copy of Passionate Marriage in hand.



> But think about how this plays out over time from the LD side. They are going to feel even more pressure to perform.


The pressure comes off of performance and onto exploration. In Passionate Marriage, IIRC been some time, he talks about intentional hugging. Slowly opening up to safe contact. The motivation should be about exploring, not performing.



> They are going to feel even more that the relationship is all about sex and that they are an interchangeable orifice / appendage. After getting dumped a few times, they are going to be even more hesitant to admit to low interest in sex.
> 
> I am not sure how we resolve this across populations. Telling LDs "don't marry someone with a high need for sex if you aren't that into them, it usually ends ugly" is good advice. Might reduce the marriage rates. Given the current divorce rates, maybe that is a good thing?


So if my assumption is correct that the issue is not so much one of drive as upbringing, expectations going into marriage, what it means to be a "wife" or whatever forms the feelings... Then I don't think it has to be this way. When I was a young lady, I had an image of what a wife was. A wife does not like sex. (Can we say Catholic, much? Even though I clearly liked sex before marriage, I was being Wrong Wrong Wrong... Sinful even.) A wife gives her husband sex. But for her it is about babies. A wife makes a husband into a husband. And a husband has a bunch of attributes. He provides. He manages money. He... does a bunch of stuff that is completely irrelevant to being in a relationship. My job is to make him into a husband. Yes, there was a time that I believed that. I suspect that I am not alone.

That is just one example. But the issue is to find a way to throw away the baggage and get back to the two people. The "HD" has as their mission to both assure their "LD" that they do want THEM. But they won't take an unsatisfactory life forever to get them. This is not dread game. This is about wanting to form a marriage that can be lived happily in forever more.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Alas I was cringing when I read it. His intentions are very good. But if there was ever any desire in her, that would kill it. I am thinking of it.
> 
> To Do
> Wednesday
> ...


What if instead of scheduling sex that he instead scheduled days of nonsexual intimacy with the hopes that sex could occur naturally outside of that? Then perhaps it may turn into:

To Do
Wednesday
breakfast for kids
make lunches
ride to school
work
pick up dry cleaning
dinner
clean kitchen
laundry
Husband will spend time with me but we CAN'T have sex

Thursday
breakfast for kids
make lunches
ride to school
work
groceries
dinner
clean kitchen
laundry
Husband will spend time with me but we CAN'T have sex

Friday
breakfast for kids
make lunches
ride to school
work
groceries
dinner
clean kitchen
laundry
??????????

Badsanta


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

badsanta said:


> What if instead of scheduling sex that he instead scheduled days of nonsexual intimacy with the hopes that sex could occur naturally outside of that? Then perhaps it may turn into:
> 
> To Do
> Wednesday
> ...


Honestly, this makes no sense to me. For ME, non sexual closeness is just non sexual closeness. It would not naturally lead me to feel more sexual. Sexuality makes me feel more sexual. Openness to sexuality is where I needed to be lead, not to more time together, chores done, kids diapered. For ME the journey was, are you a sexual being? Where are you? Can we find it? If it exists? Oh me, oh my, it does! With safety and grace on the part of my husband, we were able to find it.

I LOOKED sexual before marriage. But sex never offered any risk to me before marriage. It was just sex. Being sexual is very different than having sex. HAVING sex is easy. Unless it isn't, of course. Sorry I know that is hard to parse. Which is sort of why having a husband both willing to unravel me and unwilling to not was so helpful to me.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Tortdog said:


> And God made animals so God does not want us to be vegetarians.


Dude. Bacon. Need I say more?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Let me formalize the scheduling suggestions into computer code, esp for LD's :

True LD case:

while(1) {
Sex.avoid();
}

Typical LD case:

while(1) {
If (rnd() > 0.95) {
Sex.sex();
} else {
Sex.avoid();
}
}

(Substitute 95% rejection rate with yours)

And so on... 😂


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> as I see it I am getting the best of the available options, but that doesn't meant it is what I want.
> 
> What I want I know isn't possible. Its just frustrating because it feels like what I want isn't at all unreasonable. I do however understand reality.


sorry, man, I think you are fooling yourself.

you are getting what you want because you do have other options which you do not choose. you choose THIS, when many other paths are available. so it IS what you want.

your conflict is not owning your choice.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Honestly, this makes no sense to me. For ME, non sexual closeness is just non sexual closeness. It would not naturally lead me to feel more sexual. Sexuality makes me feel more sexual. Openness to sexuality is where I needed to be lead, not to more time together, chores done, kids diapered. *For ME the journey was, are you a sexual being? Where are you? Can we find it? If it exists? Oh me, oh my, it does! With safety and grace on the part of my husband, we were able to find it.*
> 
> I LOOKED sexual before marriage. But sex never offered any risk to me before marriage. It was just sex. Being sexual is very different than having sex. HAVING sex is easy. Unless it isn't, of course. Sorry I know that is hard to parse. Which is sort of why having a husband both willing to unravel me and unwilling to not was so helpful to me.


OMG *THIS* is what I have been trying to do with my wife. When she allows me to explore, I usually find it! BUT she often resists me trying to try because I think she feels pressured to perform even though I have no expectations.

Can you please elaborate the context in which your husband helped you? I think my wife is open to it, but realistically she seems rather limited in the frequency at which she will be open to me exploring. If we have sex, many times she just wants to have sex WITHOUT me trying anything new and if she responds she responds. She says it is nice sometimes for things just to be simple. It is only about once or twice a month that she is open to me exploring some which might include toys, extended foreplay, or varied forms of sexual touching.

Thanks for your feedback, this response is already helpful!

Badsanta


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

john117 said:


> Let me formalize the scheduling suggestions into computer code, esp for LD's :
> 
> True LD case:
> 
> ...


Nah. It is much simpler than that, though your code is ok. I would like to know what Sex.sex() looks like. A single method? Geesh. 

But the truth is, for this person

if (true)
{
var shallWe = Sex.Imintoyou;
}

It equals false.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> Alas I was cringing when I read it. His intentions are very good. But if there was ever any desire in her, that would kill it. I am thinking of it.
> 
> To Do
> Wednesday
> ...


and this is why all of the strategies ultimately fail.

there's no secret key. either the door is wide open or it's shut.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

PieceOfSky said:


> And once a lifetime commitment has been made, and your partner presents with an interest in sex that is not matched by you at the moment, it can pretty easily feel like he is one of those who only wants to GET you? _Posted via Mobile Device_


the commitment already happened so it is just the atmosphere. it has no bearing on anything once it has been given.

does a fish say, well, I am underwater, so I guess I should swim?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

badsanta said:


> OMG *THIS* is what I have been trying to do with my wife. When she allows me to explore, I usually find it! BUT she often resists me trying to try because I think she feels pressured to perform even though I have no expectations.


Have you read Passionate Marriage? My recollection is that it is a good book. I think my impression comes from this book. Exploration is not points in time. It is a decision made to improve the sexuality of the marriage. It provides the safe zone to NOT have to perform. To be accepted while opening up to the idea of sexuality. It is a longer term thing than one experience. It is a therapeutic decision for marital improvement.



> Can you please elaborate the context in which your husband helped you? I think my wife is open to it, but realistically she seems rather limited in the frequency at which she will be open to me exploring.


So this might be less than helpful to you. Maybe the book would help. I can't say how it played in ways that would be super helpful. I am struggling anyway. The context, as I mentioned, was his unwillingness to live in a marriage without a healthy sexual element. We were a good deal younger than you are. IIRC the exploration started with me admitting that I was not feeling sexual. That sex was a thing that carried weight for me. I could DO it with no attachment, as a result of my youthful experiences and lack of healthy understanding. I just could not FEEL it well. So exploration started with little things like him giving me a bath. The point was for me to be safe being naked in front of him. I had been naked in front of him a zillion times without feeling ... like ... threatened. But it was to feel like I could be me without him jumping on me. He could touch me without making demands on me. And that it could feel good. Not necessarily sexual, just good. I could accept his touch as good. 

We always kissed hello and good bye, like everyone. But one of the things he did was raise my chin with his finger and look me in the eyes to kiss me. His eyes said, you are mine and I am yours. And then he would smile and let me go.

He allowed me to touch him without expectation. He allowed me to say with my eyes I want you and wait to see if I felt safe and right with it. I never exactly lead. Because that is not me. But his body said, this is a journey. This is not about right now. Come to me when you are ready.

He asked me to touch myself. Bearing in mind that we were openly trying to make a sexual connection, not just driving by, it was like ... my next step in a self help program. I was terrified. He is going to WATCH me do that?? Again, no expectation. Just do you want to. Do you know what that feels like? He offered to leave. But I asked him to stay. When I said that I did not know how and asked him to help, he said no. He would give me tips. Lick your finger. Do you feel this? Takes my hand and shows me. Do you see how that feels? And I found I could do it. 

But the most important thing for ME was that he was there without expectation helping me to understand me. From that I was able to feel safe and experience him. From there I could feel him. And appreciate him. And love the way he made me feel. There are probably some steps missing. Sorry.



> If we have sex, many times she just wants to have sex WITHOUT me trying anything new and if she responds she responds. She says it is nice sometimes for things just to be simple. It is only about once or twice a month that she is open to me exploring some which might include toys, extended foreplay, or varied forms of sexual touching.


Oh. We did not go into the bedroom exploration until well into my feeling safe being a sexual person by means of my feelings. By then, if wanted to try something new, which for us was still fairly vanilla then, he would go for it. If I moved a little teeny bit away, he backed off. We saved it for another day. To this day, he will not do anything that makes me feel uncomfortable. That I might have just done it last week does not play into it at all. If I am uncomfortable, full stop. I am rarely uncomfortable anymore. And I say rarely because never say never.


> Thanks for your feedback, this response is already helpful!
> 
> Badsanta


Well I went right out there. Feeling a bit exposed. May the criticism begin!


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Very good advice, but sadly something I tried some time ago. I did ask for her to try to have sex twice a week. She basically said that she would try, but too much and she would feel pressured and resentful. We did have sex twice a week for about 3 weeks, then once a week for a few months, then less than once a week, now its been a month. As with all the other tries, it works very briefly, but she just can't / won't keep it up.

I can't remember the last time she went along with sex when I initiated. It only happens when she initiates. She never gives an ambivalent "no", its always of the form "I'm sorry I'm feeling really badly today". "pushing through" is not an option when your partner claims poor health. (she does have insomnia but it never stops her from doing things she actually wants to do).

I think she just naturally wants sex about once a month, and always drifts back to that. She feels badly about it, and any reminders just make her upset - and I presume the more frequent sex after those reminders is just her feeling guilty - not what I want. 







tommyr said:


> Several things seem clear to me from your various posts. Your wife really does love you, as you really love her. You have a solid marriage in all ways except in the bedroom. Your wife is not ANTI sex, meaning sex (thankfully!) causes her no distress and she genuinely seems to "enjoy" it, albeit with very low frequency. Lastly, she seems to value you enough to "step it up" after one of your talks, but then lapses back into her natural low frequency.
> 
> Under those circumstances, with 2 loving partners, I honestly believe you can permanently FIX this. Here is my advice. Talk to her (outside the bedroom) and ask her if she would commit to regular sex twice per week (you pick a number) and explain how this would make you the happiest man in the world and would greatly improve the marriage for her. Negotiate towards a specific frequency that you both can commit to. Discuss the best days/times when she would be most receptive to sex. Discuss the best ways she would like you to initiate sex. Consider "scheduled" sex at this frequency, like every Wednesday and Saturday. This let's her mentally prepare for the event and also (sad to say this) it lets her more fully "relax" on the other days.
> 
> ...


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I think there are two different scenarios that people are thinking about:

1). Person A asks for sex NOW, person B says no. Person A feels rejected. 

2). Person A asks for an active sex life in general. Person B says no. Person A feels rejected.

To me these are quite different. Its easy to understand someone not wanting sex at some particular time - not in the mood, busy, feeling poorly, etc. What is more difficult for a HD person to understand (though I believe it) is someone who doesn't want sex in general. (assuming everything else is OK in the relationship). 




always_alone said:


> But this is so often how it plays out. A wants B, B rebuffs A, and A pouts, or feels rejected, or adds a token to the resentment pile.
> 
> I think you are absolutely right that there are all sorts of complexities around this, and different situations are different. But the patterns consist of moments that accumulate.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I think the most important take-away from all this is how essential sexual compatibility is to a long term relationship. It is of no help to those already committed - but to anyone not in a LTR, please understand just how important this is.

A corollary to this is that if you are HD, don't get into a LTR with someone who wants to wait for sex. The risk is just too high.

It also shows that bait / switch behavior is a recipe for disaster. 



Holdingontoit said:


> All well and good for us to understand this. Now let us try to translate the understanding into action for both sides.
> 
> For the HD, the message is fairly simple. If your partner is not consenting often or enthusiastically enough for your taste, up your game. If your partner does not respond to the new and improved you with higher frequency and enthusiasm, quickly and ruthlessly dump them and move on to someone who will.
> 
> ...


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Bacon is the Devil's tool. But hey, hell isn't really all that bad is it :grin2:




NobodySpecial said:


> Dude. Bacon. Need I say more?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
absolutely no criticism, that sounds wonderful and I am glad you have found a way to be happy with your husband. 

A question though - what got you to the point where you decided that you wanted to be a sexual being? You said it started with your feeling that you were not feeling sexual - what caused you to realize that the way you had felt about sex was how everyone (or at least all women) felt about it? 

At the root of my disconnect with my wife is that she believes that women wanting sex maybe once a month or two is completely normal. That its sort of cute and endearing that I'm so physically attracted to her after all these years, but that having sex more than once a week is completely unreasonable. 




NobodySpecial said:


> Have you read Passionate Marriage? My recollection is that it is a good book. I think my impression comes from this book. Exploration is not points in time. It is a decision made to improve the sexuality of the marriage. It provides the safe zone to NOT have to perform. To be accepted while opening up to the idea of sexuality. It is a longer term thing than one experience. It is a therapeutic decision for marital improvement.
> 
> 
> So this might be less than helpful to you. Maybe the book would help. I can't say how it played in ways that would be super helpful. I am struggling anyway. The context, as I mentioned, was his unwillingness to live in a marriage without a healthy sexual element. We were a good deal younger than you are. IIRC the exploration started with me admitting that I was not feeling sexual. That sex was a thing that carried weight for me. I could DO it with no attachment, as a result of my youthful experiences and lack of healthy understanding. I just could not FEEL it well. So exploration started with little things like him giving me a bath. The point was for me to be safe being naked in front of him. I had been naked in front of him a zillion times without feeling ... like ... threatened. But it was to feel like I could be me without him jumping on me. He could touch me without making demands on me. And that it could feel good. Not necessarily sexual, just good. I could accept his touch as good.
> ...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> absolutely no criticism, that sounds wonderful and I am glad you have found a way to be happy with your husband.
> 
> A question though - what got you to the point where you decided that you wanted to be a sexual being?


My husband, whom I loved, stated that he would not live the rest of his life in a sexually unfulfilling marriage. Does that make me an *******? Maybe. Does that make me selfish? I don't know. The love that formerly was not threatened was now threatened. I am just grateful that he laid it out.



> You said it started with your feeling that you were not feeling sexual - what caused you to realize that the way you had felt about sex was how everyone (or at least all women) felt about it?


I never cared about how everyone or some women felt about it. I was like... 25. I knew how I felt. I felt as though sexuality was something that my husband wanted in marriage. I did not have it. I wanted him to have it.



> At the root of my disconnect with my wife is that she believes that women wanting sex maybe once a month or two is completely normal. That its sort of cute and endearing that I'm so physically attracted to her after all these years, but that having sex more than once a week is completely unreasonable.


Oh Richard. I have a former friend that I was having a conversation with. I told her of my surgery (years and years after this discussion I was mentioning above) that did not allow us to have sex for 8 weeks. She said, oh what a relief for you not to have sex for all that time. Yes, we wives are taught that this is normal. I wanted to send the husband a bunch of books on the spot. 

I have no help for you. Just sympathy, though I give you grief for your complaining.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Bacon is the Devil's tool. But hey, hell isn't really all that bad is it :grin2:


Hell fire? Over cooked bacon.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> Nah. It is much simpler than that, though your code is ok. I would like to know what Sex.sex() looks like. A single method? Geesh.
> 
> But the truth is, for this person
> 
> ...


For an LD it's a single function - but for HD folk it can use polymorphism: 

Sex.sex(orifice, {orifice}) or 
Sex.sex(implement) or 
Sex.sex(appendage)

😂😂😂


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

john117 said:


> For an LD it's a single function - but for HD folk it can use polymorphism:
> 
> Sex.sex(orifice, {orifice}) or
> Sex.sex(implement) or
> ...


Man. I understood that.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Alas I was cringing when I read it. His intentions are very good. But if there was ever any desire in her, that would kill it. I am thinking of it.
> 
> To Do
> Wednesday
> ...


Finding some way to make his wife want to have sex with him on her own would be nice.

But, it's never going to happen.

If she has responsive desire (which it seems she does), this really shouldn't be a problem.

It's like the difference between going to the gym on a schedule or just going when you feel in the mood. If you feel good after going to the gym but have a hard time getting there, a schedule helps.

It's either this or divorce.

The "change things so that she is overwhelmed by spontaneous desire idea" sounds nice, but it ain't ever gonna happen in this case.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Very good advice, but sadly something I tried some time ago. I did ask for her to try to have sex twice a week. She basically said that she would try, but too much and she would feel pressured and resentful. We did have sex twice a week for about 3 weeks, then once a week for a few months, then less than once a week, now its been a month. As with all the other tries, it works very briefly, but she just can't / won't keep it up.
> 
> I can't remember the last time she went along with sex when I initiated. It only happens when she initiates. She never gives an ambivalent "no", its always of the form "I'm sorry I'm feeling really badly today". "pushing through" is not an option when your partner claims poor health. (she does have insomnia but it never stops her from doing things she actually wants to do).
> ...


I really don't want to beat you up. I'm honestly trying to help you.

Here is what I see.

You're her teddy bear. Super dependable, always there, never saying "no."

No one lusts after a teddy bear.

Once a month or so, she gets super horny and you're there. So she uses you for that. Like she would a pillow. It's just her natural female cycle. If it wasn't you, it would be someone or something else. In other words, it has nothing to do with YOU.

Then you go right back to just being her best friend.

That's your role. 

It has some upsides to you because you value the friendship.

But that's really what you are.

The question is-- can you accept that you're just friends?

Can you give up on the idea that very occasional sex has anything to do with you? That it is in no way related to any sense she has of you as an object of her desire?

This is clearly not a fun thing to come to terms with, but if you can, you might end up happier with things.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> A question though - what got you to the point where you decided that you wanted to be a sexual being? You said it started with your feeling that you were not feeling sexual - what caused you to realize that the way you had felt about sex was how everyone (or at least all women) felt about it?





NobodySpecial said:


> My husband, whom I loved, stated that he would not live the rest of his life in a sexually unfulfilling marriage.


There's your answer.

It's the same answer that you always get.

Destabilize the relationship.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> There's your answer.
> 
> It's the same answer that you always get.
> 
> Destabilize the relationship.


Nobodyspecial is a special case though.

How many "destabilization" attempts really work?

At best in most cases, you get a temporary bounce.

Can you keep it destabilized forever? The longer you stay the more empty the "destabilization" seems


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

does this count as destabilization?

you just stop investing in a relationship that doesn't meet your needs.

there's no ulterior purpose. it's just like saying: a turkey sandwich isn't worth $50.

you interact to the extent you feel good about it. if you don't feel good about it, you don't do it.

then everyone can decide if it's worth it.


----------



## tornado (Jan 10, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> richardsharpe said:
> 
> 
> > Good evening
> ...



Probably one of the best post I've ever seen. Very insightful and I believe very accurate.


----------



## tornado (Jan 10, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> Buddy400 said:
> 
> 
> > There's your answer.
> ...


Exactly! Short term fix. Threats only go so far. Eventually the LD gets numb to the destabilization.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> does this count as destabilization?
> 
> you just stop investing in a relationship that doesn't meet your needs.
> 
> ...


Cost / benefit analysis... where do I remember seeing this 😂


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

john117 said:


> For an LD it's a single function - but for HD folk it can use polymorphism:
> 
> Sex.sex(orifice, {orifice}) or
> Sex.sex(implement) or
> ...


Technically, that's not an example of *polymorphism,* but of *function overloading*


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Your are right - it does work, but its very temporary. I do something that upsets her, worries her that I might leave etc. Sex gets frequent for a while then dwindles. The first time this happened I thought that she was happy with the new situation, that she finally realized how important it was for sex to be part of our relationship. Now though the only interpretation is that she was not happy, she was just pretending in order to keep me. 

I absolutely do not want sex because she is afraid that I'll leave. I do not want sex at a tit for tat - that without sex she doesn't get nice treatment from me.

I only want sex if she wants it, and she doesn't (except occasionally). So I'm not going to get sex on the terms that I want, I'm not ever going to be desired because she has no desire - I really do realize that.






Buddy400 said:


> There's your answer.
> 
> It's the same answer that you always get.
> 
> Destabilize the relationship.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> Nobodyspecial is a special case though.
> 
> How many "destabilization" attempts really work?
> 
> ...


Wow. I am really unhappy I shared. Won't make that mistake again.


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Alas I was cringing when I read it. His intentions are very good. But if there was ever any desire in her, that would kill it. I am thinking of it.
> 
> To Do
> Wednesday
> ...


I've read alot of (women) experts saying how having regular sex *increases* desire in women.

Also, do you really think her current schedule is actually better for her than what I proposed?
Everyday
breakfast for kids
make lunches
ride to school
work
groceries
dinner
clean kitchen
laundry
endlessly wonder if he will initiate sex today, practice my list of excuses, avoid all physical contact, defer going to bed with him lest he perceive this as an invitation


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

tommyr said:


> Technically, that's not an example of *polymorphism,* but of *function overloading*


Good thing I let the software guys deal with it 😃. I stand corrected!


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Your are right - it does work, but its very temporary. I do something that upsets her, worries her that I might leave etc. Sex gets frequent for a while then dwindles. The first time this happened I thought that she was happy with the new situation, that she finally realized how important it was for sex to be part of our relationship. Now though the only interpretation is that she was not happy, she was just pretending in order to keep me.
> 
> I absolutely do not want sex because she is afraid that I'll leave. I do not want sex at a tit for tat - that without sex she doesn't get nice treatment from me.
> ...


I think there is another aspect to the destabilization other than fear.

There's also relief when it turns out you're not actually leaving.

That reconciliation brings with it a temporary high from crisis averted.

Soon though the memory of the crisis fades and you are back to normal.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> Wow. I am really unhappy I shared. Won't make that mistake again.


not sure why you would say that.

I am saying you are exceptional. most people don't react as positively as you did.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

tommyr said:


> I've read alot of (women) experts saying how having regular sex *increases* desire in women.
> 
> Also, do you really think her current schedule is actually better for her than what I proposed?
> Everyday
> ...


I think if the woman can take a long term view, she might be able to see how a positive cycle will eventually result that is superior to the present.

but to get there, she has to upend her usual routine and do things that do not feel natural.

that is contrary to the whole sexy vibe. sexy is supposed to be natural.

she has to basically take it on faith that eventually she'll get over that gross feeling. there is no clear end point to this.

it's probably quite daunting and easy to give up on.

sort of like someone who is approaching losing a massive amount of weight.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> not sure why you would say that.


Because I was seriously misunderstood.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> Because I was seriously misunderstood.


that happens a lot here!


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

So you initiate sex, and she says she is feeling badly today. That is perfectly fine and reasonable..... or is it?
Does she really feel too bad (physically poor health) for any kind of intimacy for like 5 or 6 days in a row?
I'm not calling your wife a liar. I am just saying that would be very unusual.
Also, on days that she's rejected your initiation, claiming to feel badly, what other activities is she doing on those days?
Again, not calling her a liar, but if she's living a normal looking life, doing various activities, how is it that she is feeling well enough for those things, but not for intimacy?

What does she say when you (calmly) point out the inconsistency in her words and actions?
She *says* that she would try for sex twice per week, but she *acts* about once per month.
She *says* she feels poorly, but she *acts* like a normal person doing all other life activities.




richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Very good advice, but sadly something I tried some time ago. I did ask for her to try to have sex twice a week. She basically said that she would try, but too much and she would feel pressured and resentful. We did have sex twice a week for about 3 weeks, then once a week for a few months, then less than once a week, now its been a month. As with all the other tries, it works very briefly, but she just can't / won't keep it up.
> 
> I can't remember the last time she went along with sex when I initiated. It only happens when she initiates. She never gives an ambivalent "no", its always of the form "I'm sorry I'm feeling really badly today". "pushing through" is not an option when your partner claims poor health. (she does have insomnia but it never stops her from doing things she actually wants to do).
> ...


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

tommyr said:


> I've read alot of *(women) experts* saying how having regular sex *increases* desire in women.


OMG, I would so much want to believe that....

Unfortunately that likely would come across as if my wife quoted a passage from material written by male experts on sexuality that says that refraining from regular sex will boost your testosterone and give you crazy amounts of positive energy!


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

tommyr said:


> if she's living a normal looking life, doing various activities, how is it that she is feeling well enough for those things, but not for intimacy?
> 
> What does she say when you (calmly) point out the inconsistency in her words and actions?
> She *says* that she would try for sex twice per week, but she *acts* about once per month.
> She *says* she feels poorly, but she *acts* like a normal person doing all other life activities.


Don't ask her the question, she will just deflect. If you have already had the conversation several times, you know that you cannot trust her words and can only trust her behavior. Tell her directly you have concluded from her behavior that either she isn't into sex or she isn't unto you (or both). So you will make it easy on her and stop having sex entirely.

Or you could go with upping your game and seeing if that makes a difference. No point in talking - change your behavior. See how she reacts. That is very telling. My wife seems perfectly content to never have sex. I think that confirms my decision to stop was correct. YMMV.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> Don't ask her the question, she will just deflect. If you have already had the conversation several times, you know that you cannot trust her words and can only trust her behavior. Tell her directly you have concluded from her behavior that either she isn't into sex or she isn't unto you (or both). So you will make it easy on her and stop having sex entirely.
> 
> Or you could go with upping your game and seeing if that makes a difference. No point in talking - change your behavior.


I definitely agree that words are meaningless in these scenarios. she'll say whatever she needs to avoid the issue. actions reflect the truth. 

in fairness, she may even believe what she says when she says it, but her body calls the shots ultimately.

by the same token, I don't think it even matters if you announce to her you don't believe her words. it doesn't change anything and really can only result in conflict if she believes she's sincere.

As for how to react, yes you can try to increase attraction. I think you should be doing this anyway just if you care about yourself. It's not really about her. So if you're doing things right, you really shouldn't need to add anything just for her benefit.

You can just cut it off completely and that might be necessary to preserve your sanity.

The other approach is just to realize that every once in a while you will find a dollar on the ground. You can just pick up the dollar and not fret about finding another dollar or putting yourself in the best possible position to find dollars.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
The best I understand it is that she is feeling to badly FOR SEX. She is almost never feeling too badly for other activities. I don't think this is a lie as such. I think that when the idea of sex is brought up she immediately feels she doesn't want it. She may not really even understand why because she knows intellectually that she enjoys sex -- but doesn't want it NOW. In thinking about why she feels that way she finds something wrong in how she is feeling - tired, upset stomach, headache, stressed, whatever. She really is feeling that way, but might never have noticed if she hadn't been trying to understand her lack of interest in sex. 

On the very rare occasion when I point out that she had done other much more energetic things (eg. too tired for sex, but not for hiking 5 miles in rough terrain in a rainstorm) she gets upset. I don't think its intentional. Again I think she just knows she doesn't feel like sex but doesn't know why.

I think that when she hints that we should have sex later in the day she isn't intentionally teasing / disappointing me, she really means it, but can't bring herself to actually do it. 


But I could be wrong. Her actions are also consistent with a manipulative selfish woman who couldn't care less about how I feel as long as she gets what she wants. I live with the knowledge that I've spent most of my life with someone who may be blatantly using me. At this point probably better that I never find out for sure. 







tommyr said:


> So you initiate sex, and she says she is feeling badly today. That is perfectly fine and reasonable..... or is it?
> Does she really feel too bad (physically poor health) for any kind of intimacy for like 5 or 6 days in a row?
> I'm not calling your wife a liar. I am just saying that would be very unusual.
> Also, on days that she's rejected your initiation, claiming to feel badly, what other activities is she doing on those days?
> ...


----------



## tornado (Jan 10, 2014)

I think most couples, be married or dating, love each other. Problem is they don't love each other to make a consistent concerted effort to change parts of themselves strictly for their spouse. It's not for themselves, it's uncomfortable, inconvenient, and they won't do it long term for any reason.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

I think Anon is correct that for some people, they are able to simply decide to lower the importance / priority of sex in their life. I think some people are able to decide they are not going to feel frustrated and resentful that their perfectly healthy spouse chooses not to have sex with them - for whatever reason. I think that is an excellent strategy for those people who can accomplish it. I think every high drive person should try or at least contemplate whether they can learn to enjoy life with sex as only an occasional "treat". I agree with Anon that it is a worthwhile exercise to search within yourself to decide why sex is such an important drive / need and see if there is something else that can satisfy that need.

But I don't think there is anything wrong with concluding that yes you have a high desire for sex and no you can't feasibly decide to reduce its importance in your life or find an acceptable substitute. Except that it might force you to face some unpleasant choices.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Holdingontoit said:


> I think Anon is correct that for some people, they are able to simply decide to lower the importance / priority of sex in their life. I think some people are able to decide they are not going to feel frustrated and resentful that their perfectly healthy spouse chooses not to have sex with them - for whatever reason. I think that is an excellent strategy for those people who can accomplish it. I think every high drive person should try or at least contemplate whether they can learn to enjoy life with sex as only an occasional "treat". I agree with Anon that it is a worthwhile exercise to search within yourself to decide why sex is such an important drive / need and see if there is something else that can satisfy that need.
> 
> *But I don't think there is anything wrong with concluding that yes you have a high desire for sex and no you can't feasibly decide to reduce its importance in your life or find an acceptable substitute. Except that it might force you to face some unpleasant choices.*


When I got to that point it was no longer about sex, it was about understanding that no, I was not that important to my spouse. Yes he loved me but no he did not/was not able to participate in the way I needed i.e he was selfish and/or unable to face his own demons so the easier option was to shut me out. Nett result is that I ended the marriage.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> I think Anon is correct that for some people, they are able to simply decide to lower the importance / priority of sex in their life. I think some people are able to decide they are not going to feel frustrated and resentful that their perfectly healthy spouse chooses not to have sex with them - for whatever reason. I think that is an excellent strategy for those people who can accomplish it. I think every high drive person should try or at least contemplate whether they can learn to enjoy life with sex as only an occasional "treat". I agree with Anon that it is a worthwhile exercise to search within yourself to decide why sex is such an important drive / need and see if there is something else that can satisfy that need.
> 
> But I don't think there is anything wrong with concluding that yes you have a high desire for sex and no you can't feasibly decide to reduce its importance in your life or find an acceptable substitute. Except that it might force you to face some unpleasant choices.


I don't think it's so much about finding a substitute, although if you find one, please let me know!

for me there really is no substitute, but it's also not the only thing in my life that is important to me.

so the importance of sex to me isn't reduced. it's still there. 

what's different is the realization that the more I invest in the losing battle of trying to have more sex, the more I compromise the other important things in my life.

I find that the least possible investment in sex is to treat it like found dollars on the ground. I am not looking for it, but I will pick it up when it is there. Importantly, I am also not avoiding it, which also takes effort.

Neither looking nor avoiding is a very tricky balance to attain. 

However, like physical balance (e.g., riding a bike), it is very difficult at first and then can actually snap into place where it becomes automatic.

you acclimate to the sense that to stay on the path, this is really the only way to ride. in that way, it ceases to be a conflict (either with your spouse or yourself).


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> Nobodyspecial is a special case though.
> 
> How many "destabilization" attempts really work?
> 
> ...


That's a potential problem.

There was a very long thread here where the answer basically was, don't be yourself, stay on your toes, keep the relationship unstable and she'll have sex with you.

That sucks and I wouldn't think it was worth it.

It's best stated exactly as Nobody Special described it.

It's a wake up call. It may not work and, if does work the improvement may only be short term, but it's just about the only thing that has a chance.

I had a co-worker whose wife's behavior towards him was just abhorrent. At my suggestion he told her that there was no way in the world that he intended to put up with it forever. Things got significantly better. Not perfect; but better.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> does this count as destabilization?
> 
> you just stop investing in a relationship that doesn't meet your needs.
> 
> ...


Not really.

But it's exactly what I'd do if, for whatever reason, I decided wasn't willing to leave.

You made the right choice.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> not sure why you would say that.
> 
> I am saying you are exceptional. most people don't react as positively as you did.


Destabilization was not what he was doing. He was not playing games. He was being honest. Most of you are just playing games.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> Destabilization was not what he was doing. He was not playing games. He was being honest. Most of you are just playing games.


hard to know where the line is between serious and a game.

I think most guys who are in this situation are pretty desperate and it doesn't feel like a game to them.

if you're sliding down a cliff, you will grab onto almost anything.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> hard to know where the line is between serious and a game.
> 
> I think most guys who are in this situation are pretty desperate and it doesn't feel like a game to them.
> 
> if you're sliding down a cliff, you will grab onto almost anything.


Nope. He was not desperate. He has never had to be.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> Wow. I am really unhappy I shared. Won't make that mistake again.


It was a generous post, NS. Don't feel bad that some people didn't understand it. For those that did, it has value!


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

always_alone said:


> It was a generous post, NS. Don't feel bad that some people didn't understand it. For those that did, it has value!


Still do!


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I think there are two different scenarios that people are thinking about:
> 
> 1). Person A asks for sex NOW, person B says no. Person A feels rejected.
> ...


I get what you are saying, richard, but there aren't that many people who actually vote for #2. Your wife, for example, says, and probably means, at least on some level, that she wants a healthy sex life with you.

But in the moment, she doesn't deliver. And it's the accumulated moments that lead to #2, not a direct conscious decision. 

KWIM?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> There's your answer.
> 
> It's the same answer that you always get.
> 
> Destabilize the relationship.


I hope you always ignore it, richard.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

jld said:


> I hope you always ignore it, richard.


Why?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Holland said:


> Why?


I think destabilization is a terrible idea.

Drawing closer is the way to go.

Have you read _Hold Me Tight_, Holland? The author explains it well.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

jld said:


> I think destabilization is a terrible idea.
> 
> Drawing closer is the way to go.
> 
> Have you read _Hold Me Tight_, Holland? The author explains it well.


No have not read that book.

I don't disagree that drawing someone closer is a good way to go however I also don't think that shaking things up is a bad thing either. The twisted type of destabilising ie red pill stuff is not what I'm talking about, to me that is nasty and counter intuitive.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

I guess what confuses me is that Anon clearly intended to compliment NS and yet NS took it as an insult. I wish I understood why NS objects to being seen as exceptionally willing to do what is necessary to keep her marriage strong. She clearly has an exceptionally good husband, she wants to keep him around, and she is ready willing and able to do what is required to make that happen. In what way is that a bad thing?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> Nope. He was not desperate. He has never had to be.


I wasn't trying to draw a comparison to your situation. Just a general comment. It's cool that your husband or boyfriend or whatever is so together. Some people have to put in work to get there, others are just naturally that way.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> Destabilization was not what he was doing. He was not playing games. He was being honest. Most of you are just playing games.


What astounds me is that we just had this huge long conversation about feeling like interchangeable parts, pressure to perform, and the impact of making having sex another chore to add to the list.

And where are we? Right back to advocating destabilization as a means to emotional connection. 

What ever happened to OPs idea that sex is about emotional connection? Wasn't that supposed to be what men wanted?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening 
it is rather fuzzy. My wife is a very smart person, at some intellectual level she must be aware that I want a better sex life, and I think that she does as well. In each specific case though, something stops her. 

I've never complained about our lack of sex at any particular time, the few discussions I've had have always been about the general pattern. 

One hint of what is going on is that once she has decided on sex or not, she never wants to change. If she wants sex that evening, even if there is some minor disaster (in one case a minor house fire!), it won't stop her. OTOH, if she has decided no, she rejects any attempt to convince her. 

More strangeness: Once on a vacation to a tropical island she decided she wanted sex every day. It was wonderful - I think for her as well. Moonlit walks on tropical beeches, followed by passionate sex back in the room. But its never happened before or since on trips that provided every bit as much opportunity for romance. 

She likes the idea that I am sexually attracted to her. She likes to flirt, wears sexy lingerie around the house, likes passionate kisses etc. There is just this sharp line for her between general physical intimacy (which she usually enjoys) and "sex" (eg, anything involving either person's genitals) which she rarely wants - but sometimes does want very much. weird. 





always_alone said:


> I get what you are saying, richard, but there aren't that many people who actually vote for #2. Your wife, for example, says, and probably means, at least on some level, that she wants a healthy sex life with you.
> 
> But in the moment, she doesn't deliver. And it's the accumulated moments that lead to #2, not a direct conscious decision.
> 
> KWIM?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> it is rather fuzzy. My wife is a very smart person, at some intellectual level she must be aware that I want a better sex life, and I think that she does as well. In each specific case though, something stops her.
> 
> I've never complained about our lack of sex at any particular time, the few discussions I've had have always been about the general pattern.
> ...


solipsism.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Holland said:


> No have not read that book.
> 
> I don't disagree that drawing someone closer is a good way to go however I also don't think that shaking things up is a bad thing either. *The twisted type of destabilising ie red pill stuff is not what I'm talking about, to me that is nasty and counter intuitive*.


Totally agree!


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Holdingontoit said:


> I guess what confuses me is that Anon clearly intended to compliment NS and yet NS took it as an insult. I wish I understood why NS objects to being seen as exceptionally willing to do what is necessary to keep her marriage strong. She clearly has an exceptionally good husband, she wants to keep him around, and she is ready willing and able to do what is required to make that happen. In what way is that a bad thing?


She doesn't object to being called exceptional. She's unhappy because she completely put herself out there, exposed deep parts of herself in order to provide some insight, and it went whooosh over everyone's head, and it's now being held up as proof positive that men should destabilize their relationships.

When what she put out there was exactly the *opposite* message.

(Sorry, NS, I know you are capable of speaking for yourself, but I couldn't sit on it.)


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I suspect different people want different things. Attempts to generalize will just be confusing. 

Some want an emotional connection with the person that they love. Others want someone, anyone to fck. Some are feeding what is essentially an addiction. Some honestly don't know what it is that they want, just that they want it. 




always_alone said:


> snip
> What ever happened to OPs idea that sex is about emotional connection? Wasn't that supposed to be what men wanted?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> One hint of what is going on is that once she has decided on sex or not, she never wants to change. If she wants sex that evening, even if there is some minor disaster (in one case a minor house fire!), it won't stop her. OTOH, if she has decided no, she rejects any attempt to convince her.


It sounds to me like she has issues around personal autonomy and independence.

Of course, I'm just speculating here. But what you describe is consistent in that she seems to want to call her own shots, and not have someone else treading on that, if you know what I mean.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I suspect different people want different things. Attempts to generalize will just be confusing.
> 
> Some want an emotional connection with the person that they love. Others want someone, anyone to fck. Some are feeding what is essentially an addiction. Some honestly don't know what it is that they want, just that they want it.


Yes, I know, richard, but these same people just spent some 50 pages telling me I have no understanding men, and that yes, sex is all about emotional connection, and no they never give mixed messages. And my failure to get that was the fault of my biases against them.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I think the same actions described can be viewed in different ways.

Is the message "I love you but I don't want to live in a nearly sexless relationship" destabilizing? It is suggesting that you are planning to leave a stable relationship - so I guess by definition it is destabilizing. OTOH, it is (for the sake of argument) a true statement of intent, not any sort of mind game. It is at threat of "have sex with me or I'll leave"? It it a whine "you aren't making me happy because we aren't having sex". Is it a simple honest statement of how one feels? 

I think people assign different meanings to words like "destabilize" and that makes conversations seem much more confrontational than they really are. 

NS KNOWS how her interaction with her husband went, but based on her words, I suspect different people are mapping this onto their own very different experiences. 

Its clear from these discussions that NS feels that how I have behaved is very different from how her husband behaved. That is likely true. But since she hasn't seen my interactions with my wife, and I haven't see hers with her husband, there will always be a communication gap as we each imagine the other's situation. 

BTW - I think only a small percentage of posters are suggesting destabilization. I don't think I am - thought the definition is so fuzzy that its tough to be sure.




always_alone said:


> She doesn't object to being called exceptional. She's unhappy because she completely put herself out there, exposed deep parts of herself in order to provide some insight, and it went whooosh over everyone's head, and it's now being held up as proof positive that men should destabilize their relationships.
> 
> When what she put out there was exactly the *opposite* message.
> 
> (Sorry, NS, I know you are capable of speaking for yourself, but I couldn't sit on it.)


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
some did, some didn't. This is a very charged discussion for many people, and I think people here have wildly different experiences. 

I may not agree with you on a number of points, but I don't believe you are biased or unreasonable and I appreciate your comments. 



always_alone said:


> Yes, I know, richard, but these same people just spent some 50 pages telling me I have no understanding men, and that yes, sex is all about emotional connection, and no they never give mixed messages. And my failure to get that was the fault of my biases against them.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

always_alone said:


> What astounds me is that we just had this huge long conversation about feeling like interchangeable parts, pressure to perform, and the impact of making having sex another chore to add to the list.
> 
> And where are we? Right back to advocating destabilization as a means to emotional connection.
> 
> *What ever happened to OPs idea that sex is about emotional connection? Wasn't that supposed to be what men wanted?*


Maybe they are just trying to work out how to get what it is they want. What is wrong with that?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> I may not agree with you on a number of points, but I don't believe you are biased or unreasonable and I appreciate your comments.


Ditto!


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Holland said:


> Maybe they are just trying to work out how to get what it is they want. What is wrong with that?


They are fighting fire with fire. They say they want emotional connection, but all of their efforts to get it are about driving an emotional wedge, or wielding an emotional hammer.

This is why I was saying the messages were mixed earlier in this thread. The words are "connection" but the acts and strategies are "sex at the expense of connection"


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> BTW - I think only a small percentage of posters are suggesting destabilization. I don't think I am - thought the definition is so fuzzy that its tough to be sure.


I don't think you are either, and I have never seen you advocate for destabilization. Quite the opposite.

That said, have you tried some of the strategies that NS outlined in her post? Bathing your wife, for example? 

I have no idea if NS is at all similar to your wife, but I think she put forward an interesting approach.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

always_alone said:


> She doesn't object to being called exceptional. She's unhappy because she completely put herself out there, exposed deep parts of herself in order to provide some insight, and it went whooosh over everyone's head, and it's now being held up as proof positive that men should destabilize their relationships.
> 
> When what she put out there was exactly the *opposite* message.
> 
> (Sorry, NS, I know you are capable of speaking for yourself, but I couldn't sit on it.)


I actually appreciate your representing me so well. I went out to dinner with my family and had a lovely time. Bur more, I am discouraged that my message was so widely misunderstood.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

always_alone said:


> They are fighting fire with fire. They say they want emotional connection, but all of their efforts to get it are about driving an emotional wedge, or wielding an emotional hammer.
> 
> This is why I was saying the messages were mixed earlier in this thread. The words are "connection" but the acts and strategies are "sex at the expense of connection"


I don't disagree with most of what you say but only if view through the lens of ALL they ever did was to use subterfuge to get sex. Maybe I have some empathy for them due to being in their shoes. 

If from day one in the marriage these guys were only about sex regardless of everything else then I would not bother posting but these are grown men that have stated that they love their wives and want both sex and a sexual connection. 

Have you ever been in their shoes? Felt the anguish of loving someone that rejects you or makes you jump through hoops to meet their needs only to have your own needs ignored?

I don't doubt that many men crave the emotion or feeling of connection with the woman they love. Sure many have been battered and bruised along the way, they have been put at the bottom of the list but they still keep going. Maybe the way they go about it could use some tweaking but none of us know for sure what anothers life is like. 

Too many variables in this for one solution but I say all power to the man that keeps trying even when faced with a partner that is too stubborn, too selfish, too hurt, too whatever to step up and meet them half way. They are a far better person than I am because I gave up when it was clear that there was never going to be a good result for me and some may say "it is just sex" but I am worth it, worth having my needs met and my guess is that many of these guys are worth it as well.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> solipsism.


SLA's actually.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
yes, we have lots of good physical but non sexual intimacy. I wash her hair in the shower. We actually have a game where when she closes her eyes to rinse her hair and I kiss her on some random part of her body. We cuddle up next to each other watching TV. I wash her back in the tub. I give her everything from quick back / neck / foot rubs to long massages. 

Its part of the mystery - she loves physical intimacy (as do I) but just not sex (where "sex" is anything involving genitals). To me physical intimacy and sex smoothly blend into each other. 



always_alone said:


> snip
> 
> That said, have you tried some of the strategies that NS outlined in her post? Bathing your wife, for example?
> 
> I have no idea if NS is at all similar to your wife, but I think she put forward an interesting approach.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Is the message "I love you but I don't want to live in a nearly sexless relationship" destabilizing? It is suggesting that you are planning to leave a stable relationship - so I guess by definition it is destabilizing..


The standard LD response to the above is...

Let's have sex and we will talk about it afterwards.

Sex occurs.

When you talk about it the LD says "but we are having sex, once a XXX". Therefore you're not in a sexless marriage. 

At that point it feels less like loving talk and more like price haggling. 

Destabilizing helps by avoiding the haggling process. It doesn't work everyplace but in simpler cases it should be fine.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> the commitment already happened so it is just the atmosphere. it has no bearing on anything once it has been given.
> 
> does a fish say, well, I am underwater, so I guess I should swim?


The commitment I have in mind is the one I made for exclusivity, to be partners, to raise a family. My life is tightly intertwined with many things that grew from that commitment called marriage. My point is for many it is hard to walk away feeling merely indifferent. There is work and emotional cost to dissolution, and some fear it.

A fish hates to see a leak in the tank. (Bit of a stretch, but I tried.)
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Richard:

There are some posters on here who strongly advocate for friction, and that through said friction, lies the mystery of attraction.

I am not convinced that it is a sole component, but it is certainly a component of some form.

What friction do you have? The impression I am left with from your description is little to none, but I could be misreading that.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Holland said:


> Have you ever been in their shoes? Felt the anguish of loving someone that rejects you or makes you jump through hoops to meet their needs only to have your own needs ignored?
> 
> I don't doubt that many men crave the emotion or feeling of connection with the woman they love. Sure many have been battered and bruised along the way, they have been put at the bottom of the list but they still keep going. Maybe the way they go about it could use some tweaking but none of us know for sure what anothers life is like.


I sometimes think my experience is analogous, but maybe I am deluding myself. I have, after all, not married, not taken vows, and likely have much lower tolerance than any of you.

I too believe people when they say they love their wives, and are feeling at the end of the tether. At the same time, while I completely agree that withdrawing from a relationship is sometimes exactly the right solution, I think it needs to be seen for what it is: withdrawal. And you won't make a disconnected relationship more connected by withdrawing. At most you will incite some desperation or fear that may or may not encourage your partner to temporarily modify their behaviour to appease you.

Fighting fire with fire is actually one way of ensuring the problem remains intractable. And then responding to that intractability with yet more fire? As they say, doing the same things over again will likely yield the same results.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> Sets one up for being closed off? lol. Wanting to GET me before KNOWING me.


I was a 25-ish year old virgin when I met my wife, and we dated a few months before I initiated more than kissing with her. My interest back then, despite or maybe because of the very little dating experience I had, was finding someone to be in love with and be loved by, and, simultaneously, to eventually enjoy that precious part of human experience called sex.


A desire to "get" her was present continuously, but it was not at all a desire that was detached from the values I had, or the idealized view of romantic love I was carrying with me at the time.

What is not clear to me from your posts is under what terms you think it is ok for a man to desire sex, and take action he hopes eventually will lead to having it. You seemed to come down harshly on richardsharp for having hopes he might have sex with his wife as an end to a nice evening out. Maybe I misunderstood you, but it felt to me you were thinking "How dare someone put effort into creating a pleasant dare night out and have any sort of hopeful expectation there'd be sex before nights end!" 

If that's an accurate reflection of what your gut feel was, then I'm honestly confused as to how a loving relationship filled with desire would be possible. Instead, it husbands would be in a double bind should their wives feel that way.





> What does closed off mean to you?


Being uncomfortable, suspicious, perhaps looking at any behavior automatically in the worst light, at risk for projecting motives onto him with less than adequate facts.



> I am pretty sure the comment you replied to was related to a dating scenario. If I am mixing up my replies, I apologize.


If folks have been talking about dating I missed that. Entirely possible. I'm interested in people stuck in difficult marriage situations, only. 


> None of my comments here, or anywhere, relates to any individual moment except as feelings have developed over all. It is possible to establish an over all feeling that ALL that is desired is to get sexually when the conversations are all around how much more sex you need.


The people here under stress seem to go from months to years without sex, and at least one expects to never have it again. Maybe I just tune out those who want it eight times a week but are only getting it three, and then don't count anything but intercourse.




> When, often benignly, your partner needs to be hit with a clue-by-four to hear you. They THINK that they are meeting your needs. My ex, to this day, would tell you that he was meeting my needs. After all, we cuddled and rubbed. When he would finally listen to my words, he would act on them for a short period of time, then regress because he could not fundamentally understand? care? What I wanted?
> 
> I suspect it is not much different than the way the wives feel. They act on the words for a little bit. But since their own desire is not actually being raised, it is easy to slip back into complacency. The difference is, it is hard for most people to say to raise my desire do x,y,z. So they substitute other "needs" thinking it will raise desire. I never actually lacked desire for my ex. Just respect. For the people posting here, I think there is a difference.


It does seem unlikely one can raise another's desire. At best, we can learn to stop doing the things that might be subverting the desire. And we can help increase awareness of where the downward spiral is leading. But if there is something else blocking the desire -- say resentment from long ago, trauma unrelated to their partner, medical issues including mental health issues -- at the end of the day, if the other doesn't even want to feel desire again -- nothing will change.

Not addressing this to you at all (really), but it comes to mind thinking about what changes one can effect or not.... One hardest things about participating on threads about sex is often the vibe I feel being dropped on folks is "Well, you obviously must not be giving your partner what she needs." The alleged failures to supply can range from Confirming to or deviating from the stereotypical gender roles from the 1920s, to appearing too hurt and needy and affected by her disinterest and rejections, to being selfishly demanding and coldly indifferent to her lack of desire, to wanting "it" from for reasons that are presumed despicable. IME, it seems wise to pay attention to the possibility any of that is relevant. But, sometimes the other simply doesn't want desire to return, and will find something to justify its absence not matter how straight a line his or her partner tries to walk. (Even trying to walk that line can be seen as a "reason" desire is gone.)



> I suppose maybe. But then why would I not feel the same way about my husband?


Because you have desire for him, you meet each other's needs, your love bank balance is positive, your not afraid to look at and own your own behavior, your willing to be vulnerable, you are able to feel generous towards him when it would make a difference in his experience in some particular moments and even across a span of time, he's a great guy, you know he wants to be with you, you don't fear abandonment, you don't fear engulfment?

What I didn't understand is why your take on richardsharp seemed to be presumptuously negative. Maybe the scenarios that came up there resonated with the bad apples from the past. Dunno. Just speculating/curious.

I was also hoping always_alone would consider whether past bad apples have skewed her current partnered experience and view of the common man. I wish that were the case, and she would discover she's been loved and desired more than Che realized. Or she realized. Damn autocorrect.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

always_alone said:


> I sometimes think my experience is analogous, but maybe I am deluding myself. I have, after all, not married, not taken vows, and likely have much lower tolerance than any of you.
> 
> I too believe people when they say they love their wives, and are feeling at the end of the tether. At the same time, while I completely agree that withdrawing from a relationship is sometimes exactly the right solution, I think it needs to be seen for what it is: withdrawal. And you won't make a disconnected relationship more connected by withdrawing. At most you will incite some desperation or fear that may or may not encourage your partner to temporarily modify their behaviour to appease you.
> 
> Fighting fire with fire is actually one way of ensuring the problem remains intractable. And then responding to that intractability with yet more fire? As they say, doing the same things over again will likely yield the same results.


Withdrawing would have the opposite impact here too AA. When I think of shaking things up it is more of a "stand up for yourself man" type of thought. Nothing underhanded, nothing nasty, nothing that is designed to make the other respond due to fear.

Personally I much prefer to be stood up to that ignored or be the at the end of some childish game strategy. Tell me what it is that you need, what is going on and have a civil, grown up discussion.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> Richard:
> 
> There are some posters on here who strongly advocate for friction, and that through said friction, lies the mystery of attraction.
> 
> ...


Reminds me of some of Esther Perel's book, Mating in Captivity. Good book.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

Holland said:


> Withdrawing would have the opposite impact here too AA. When I think of shaking things up it is more of a "stand up for yourself man" type of thought. Nothing underhanded, nothing nasty, nothing that is designed to make the other respond due to fear.
> 
> Personally I much prefer to be stood up to that ignored or be the at the end of some childish game strategy. Tell me what it is that you need, what is going on and have a civil, grown up discussion.


It has seemed helpful in my case try to directly, unambiguously, and convincingly communicate the truth: I am unwilling and unable to continue this much longer; I think there is a part of you that is determined to keep us from healing our relationship, I don't understand why though I have a guess or two; whatever it is, I'm clueless and powerless to change it; I am close to the point of not being willing or able to try to fix this myself; my concern about divorce being hard on the kids is nearly overshadowed by what staying is costing you and me and collaterally them. If you care to fix it, this is the last chance we'll have. I'm not coming back once I leave. I'm only leaving once.


Point is, when truth has been evaded, not honestly talked about, downplayed, feared -- then stating the truth starkly might shake something free.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

Holland said:


> PMSL competitive barn quilting. This is a real thing? There would be NO sex in this house if he started quilting on the side of it.


Just tell him he didn't hear it right, it's not competitive barn quilting you'd like to see around the house, it is competitive tart'n kilting:

_The Kilted Mile Race has a tradition dating to the reign of King Malcolm III. He decreed that a foot race be held, beginning at the current site of Braemar Castle, and finishing at the top of grim and forbidding Creag Choinnich.

According to tradition, young MacGregor was late starting the race, but sped like a deer and climbed the crag without a stumble. As he overtook the leaders, his elder brother tried to hold him back by grabbing his kilt. Knowing his brother's strength, and being himself uninhibited, he slipped of his kilt, and so gained the victory.

- See more at: Kilted Mile - Portland Highland Games Association
_
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

PieceOfSky said:


> I was a 25-ish year old virgin when I met my wife, and we dated a few months before I initiated more than kissing with her. My interest back then, despite or maybe because of the very little dating experience I had, was finding someone to be in love with and be loved by, and, simultaneously, to eventually enjoy that precious part of human experience called sex.
> 
> 
> A desire to "get" her was present continuously, but it was not at all a desire that was detached from the values I had, or the idealized view of romantic love I was carrying with me at the time.
> ...


What I give him a hard time about is continually choosing to be ineffective. Choosing instead to complain. As to the rest of your post, yes, you have misunderstood me. Almost as if you had not read the posts.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> yes, we have lots of good physical but non sexual intimacy. I wash her hair in the shower. We actually have a game where when she closes her eyes to rinse her hair and I kiss her on some random part of her body. We cuddle up next to each other watching TV. I wash her back in the tub. I give her everything from quick back / neck / foot rubs to long massages.
> 
> Its part of the mystery - she loves physical intimacy (as do I) but just not sex (where "sex" is anything involving genitals). To me physical intimacy and sex smoothly blend into each other.


Do you know why?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

PieceOfSky said:


> It has seemed helpful in my case try to directly, unambiguously, and convincingly communicate the truth: I am unwilling and unable to continue this much longer; I think there is a part of you that is determined to keep us from healing our relationship, I don't understand why though I have a guess or two; whatever it is, I'm clueless and powerless to change it; I am close to the point of not being willing or able to try to fix this myself; my concern about divorce being hard on the kids is nearly overshadowed by what staying is costing you and me and collaterally them. If you care to fix it, this is the last chance we'll have. I'm not coming back once I leave. I'm only leaving once.
> 
> 
> Point is, when truth has been evaded, not honestly talked about, downplayed, feared -- then stating the truth starkly might shake something free.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Piece, iirc, you said a year ago that you are 100 lbs. overweight. Has your wife ever mentioned your weight as a factor in her lack of sexual attraction to you? Do you think she would feel comfortable telling you if it did bother her?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> Its part of the mystery - she loves physical intimacy (as do I) but just not sex (where "sex" is anything involving genitals). To me physical intimacy and sex smoothly blend into each other.


That one's mysterious to me too, unless she has some specific hangups about her private parts and/or the act of sex itself.

I do think that men have a tendency to underestimate the impact of growing up in a world where you are basically taught that you are a piece of meat. Imagine if you will, random strangers thinking they have the right to grope at you, or walking into your workplace and seeing your almost all female co-workers comparing pin-up boys, or not being able to walk down the street, or surf to a page on the internet, or open a newspaper or magazine without being confronted with a series of artfully seductive half-naked men staring back at you --all in a culture where no one really cares about anything but how pretty you are.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

PieceOfSky said:


> I was also hoping always_alone would consider whether past bad apples have skewed her current partnered experience and view of the common man. I wish that were the case, and she would discover she's been loved and desired more than Che realized. Or she realized. Damn autocorrect.


Given geography and time frame, I can assure you that I've been lots of things that Che never realized.,

(Thanks, Piece of Sky!)


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

I have some experience with *destabilizing* my marriage with possitive results. It was no Red-Pill game of brinkmanship for me. It was me finally being totally honest with my wife, that I was very unhappy in our low sex marriage, and I could not continue like that. It would be dead wrong to call this an ultimatum. I did not demand sex "or else" I would leave. Having tried all known ways to restore a normal sexlife and exhausted all other options, I was genuinely ready to pull the plug.

But *before* acting on that fateful decision, it seemed only fair that I let her know my intention. Maybe she loved me, perhaps that might have some impact on her? Sure enough, she had a profound "tail lights in the driveway" moment. She saw that I was a good husband, I'd remained faithful, I stayed fit and attractive, I was meeting her needs, I was pulling my weight, I was successful in my job, I had alot of friend, I was liked and trusted in the community, and all I wanted was a perfectly reasonable/loving thing: a normal sexlife with my wife.

In my case, *destabilization* was exactly the right solution to our low sex marriage. That was over 8 years ago and we are still going strong.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

tommyr said:


> I have some experience with *destabilizing* my marriage with possitive results. It was no Red-Pill game of brinkmanship for me. It was me finally being totally honest with my wife, that I was very unhappy in our low sex marriage, and I could not continue like that. It would be dead wrong to call this an ultimatum. I did not demand sex "or else" I would leave. Having tried all known ways to restore a normal sexlife and exhausted all other options, I was genuinely ready to pull the plug.
> 
> But *before* acting on that fateful decision, it seemed only fair that I let her know my intention. Maybe she loved me, perhaps that might have some impact on her? Sure enough, she had a profound "tail lights in the driveway" moment. She saw that I was a good husband, I'd remained faithful, I stayed fit and attractive, I was meeting her needs, I was pulling my weight, I was successful in my job, I had alot of friend, I was liked and trusted in the community, and all I wanted was a perfectly reasonable/loving thing: a normal sexlife with my wife.
> 
> In my case, *destabilization* was exactly the right solution to our low sex marriage. That was over 8 years ago and we are still going strong.


Our paths are similar, brother, except that my situation was largely my doing.

I was a turd. We both were.

And I did lay out an ultimatum, smack dab in the middle of fixing myself. 

We are much better, with periodic gentle reminders.

But I will forever believe in destabilization as a tool. And it really is quite simple:

"Both of our needs matter. If we can't reach a point where both of us make consistent effort to meet those needs, we are no longer compatible."

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

And herein lies the fallacy of destabilizing. It works in some cases (mild ones) but not quite as well in more stubborn cases.

Such cases welcome the lack of attention or interest. It's not always due to mental health issues , far from it. Most is FOO or culture or unresolved skeletons.

I can't help but wonder if the oversexed portrayal of relationships in the media is simply tuning those hardcore LD people out sexually. Sex everywhere, therefore we are Sodom and Gomorrah as it is, therefore sex bad...


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

john117 said:


> I can't help but wonder if the oversexed portrayal of relationships in the media is simply tuning those hardcore LD people out sexually. Sex everywhere, therefore we are Sodom and Gomorrah as it is, therefore sex bad...


It also reinforces the frustration for the HD partnered with a LD.

I remember being knee deep during the time when whether we would remain together was really questionable, and we were watching the series Dexter, right when he was fooling around with his AA sponsor. 

Sex every episode. And no sex at home. Overall, it was pretty lousy for me. And likely, I was not the only one who felt that way.



Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

john117 said:


> And herein lies the fallacy of destabilizing. It works in some cases (mild ones) but not quite as well in more stubborn cases.
> 
> Such cases welcome the lack of attention or interest. It's not always due to mental health issues , far from it. Most is FOO or culture or unresolved skeletons.
> 
> I can't help but wonder if the oversexed portrayal of relationships in the media is simply tuning those hardcore LD people out sexually. Sex everywhere, therefore we are Sodom and Gomorrah as it is, therefore sex bad...


I don't agree. If done properly, destabilization has a 100% success rate. Either the marriage gets fixed to meet both partner's needs, or the marriage ends, allowing both partners to find a compatible mate.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

tommyr said:


> I don't agree. If done properly, destabilization has a 100% success rate. Either the marriage gets fixed to meet both partner's needs, or the marriage ends, allowing both partners to find a compatible mate.


QFT.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

tommyr said:


> I don't agree. If done properly, destabilization has a 100% success rate. Either the marriage gets fixed to meet both partner's needs, or the marriage ends, allowing both partners to find a compatible mate.


That's not how success is counted. After all one can walk out without any action and it's still 100% success.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> It also reinforces the frustration for the HD partnered with a LD.
> 
> I remember being knee deep during the time when whether we would remain together was really questionable, and we were watching the series Dexter, right when he was fooling around with his AA sponsor.
> 
> ...


Exactly. I have noticed that romantic Lifetime Movie Network has been banished from wife's TV watching.. wonder why...


----------



## CuddleBug (Nov 26, 2012)

badsanta said:


> OK, this seems like a stupid thread, but hang in there with me...
> 
> With the prevalence of so much internet porn as well as the the topic of self exploration having become more embraced by society, I thought I would start a discussion on what drives a man to desire sex with his spouse. While the answer is so obvious to some, perhaps this is not a clear cut issue. From conversations I have had with my own wife and from reading about others, here are some answers from women about why us husbands desire them:
> 
> ...



Reasons I like to have sex with my wife or another woman if that was the case:

- its the oneness and connection
- emotional and physical bond
- connects me to her
- being vulnerable and safe together
- the best stress reliever
- I have energy and feel great later / next day
- more my test levels increase the better I feel


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Destabilization was not what he was doing. He was not playing games. He was being honest. Most of you are just playing games.


I don't see destabilization as playing games. I see it as being honest.

I'd have to keep playing games forever and I wouldn't do that.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

jld said:


> Piece, iirc, you said a year ago that you are 100 lbs. overweight. Has your wife ever mentioned your weight as a factor in her lack of sexual attraction to you? Do you think she would feel comfortable telling you if it did bother her?


I'm 250lbs, 5'10". When sex surfaced as a symptom or issue, I was 194 lbs, as I recall. When we met, I was 165, and quite thin. 

She has mentioned the weight, multiple times. Usually from an emotionally charged state with a contemptuous tone. Sometimes she would add "And I'm holding back telling you even worse things about your self", but would always refuse to tell me then or later what it is.

I don't believe it is close to being the most significant issue, or that me losing weight would make a difference. I'm done thinking about changes that might make me more attractive; her opinions about me aren't helpful or healthy for me to think about. I don't see us healing.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

PieceOfSky said:


> I'm 250lbs, 5'10". When sex surfaced as a symptom or issue, I was 194 lbs, as I recall. When we met, I was 165, and quite thin.
> 
> She has mentioned the weight, multiple times. Usually from an emotionally charged state with a contemptuous tone. Sometimes she would add "And I'm holding back telling you even worse things about your self", but would always refuse to tell me then or later what it is.
> 
> ...


It would be healthy for you, though, Piece. Obesity can predispose you to some pretty serious illnesses.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

jld said:


> It would be healthy for you, though, Piece. Obesity can predispose you to some pretty serious illnesses.


Of course. It has nothing to do with her disapproval, though. And it is easier to do something healthy for myself the more disconnected my motivation is from her.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

PieceOfSky said:


> Of course. It has nothing to do with her disapproval, though. And it is easier to do something healthy for myself the more disconnected my motivation is from her.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


It might help anyway. 

At any rate, please take care of yourself. You have children. They want you to be healthy as you age. And I am sure you do, too. I hear grandchildren are lots of fun!


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> I actually appreciate your representing me so well. I went out to dinner with my family and had a lovely time. Bur more, I am discouraged that my message was so widely misunderstood.


I think the issue here is the word "destabilization".

I suspect that it's some kind of red pill word that means playing push/pull games to build attraction.

I (and others , I think) use it to mean that if you're unhappy with some element of the relationship and nothing else has worked; then it's possible that your partner just hasn't felt that your issues were really that important (after all, none of your actions actually changed when things didn't improve). In this case, your partner either does care and, somehow, really hasn't gotten the message or they just don't care.

Something along the lines of "I love you but I am not willing to spend my life in a marriage where......." can work. It can resolve the issue one way or another.

In your case, you had some sexual hang-ups that you were unlikely to be able to surmount without a good deal of motivation. You were willing to give it a try and so your husband's approach was exactly the right thing to do.

Other possibilities might have been 1) you were motivated to change but found out that you didn't want to or were incapable of it or 2) you had no interest in changing. Those reactions would have been fine as well.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Yes, I know, richard, but these same people just spent some 50 pages telling me I have no understanding men, and that yes, sex is all about emotional connection, and no they never give mixed messages. And my failure to get that was the fault of my biases against them.


These same people haven't been saying that all men want sex with their wives in large part because of the emotional connection they get.

They've been saying that THEY (and probably many other men) feel this way.

You've been telling them that they don't.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> .
> 
> BTW - I think only a small percentage of posters are suggesting *destabilization*. I don't think I am - thought *the definition is so fuzzy* that its tough to be sure.


Apparently


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Holdingontoit said:


> I guess what confuses me is that Anon clearly intended to compliment NS and yet NS took it as an insult. I wish I understood why NS objects to being seen as exceptionally willing to do what is necessary to keep her marriage strong. She clearly has an exceptionally good husband, she wants to keep him around, and she is ready willing and able to do what is required to make that happen. In what way is that a bad thing?


She wasn't exceptionally willing to do what was necessary, she was willing to consider trying to meet her husband's needs when they were presented to her honestly in a way that she could no longer ignore and when they were expressed in a non-needy manner.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> That one's mysterious to me too, unless she has some specific hangups about her private parts and/or the act of sex itself.
> 
> I do think that men have a tendency to underestimate the impact of growing up in a world where you are basically taught that you are a piece of meat. Imagine if you will, random strangers thinking they have the right to grope at you, or walking into your workplace and seeing your almost all female co-workers comparing pin-up boys, or not being able to walk down the street, or surf to a page on the internet, or open a newspaper or magazine without being confronted with a series of artfully seductive half-naked men staring back at you --all in a culture where no one really cares about anything but how pretty you are.


If a man were not to underestimate this; what should his proper response be? Only want to have sex with his wife when she says she wants it and just deal with it and keep quiet if she rarely (or never) does?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
This one I have never figured out. I do understand the negative response to being treated as an object, but I don't think that has had a particularly strong effect on my wife (at least not more so than for an average woman).

She likes to dressy in sexy lingerie for me. Obviously it is done for my benefit, but I get the strong impression that she enjoys the attention. She has bought herself (and me :smile2 a vast array of lingerie. I assume that if she felt very objectified she wouldn't volunteer to do that. (I've often told her that I appreciate the lingerie, but that all she really has to wear for me is a smile).

She doesn't seem to have hangups about private parts - when we do have sex she is pretty open to anything that feels good to her.

She just has this strange barrier about starting actual "sex". 

A few times we've been lying in bed talking and the subject has drifted in the direction of something sexual. She has actually told me to stop talking about it because she doesn't want to get all aroused and not sleep. Very strange since I've always made it clear that I'm happy to give her a quick O, anytime she likes, no reciprocation expected, and if we just want it to be quick I can get her off in just a couple of minutes with a vibrator and fingers. 

When I ask, it is always some variant of being too tired and worrying about not sleeping. Fair enough except that she never avoids other activities for the same reason. 




always_alone said:


> That one's mysterious to me too, unless she has some specific hangups about her private parts and/or the act of sex itself.
> 
> I do think that men have a tendency to underestimate the impact of growing up in a world where you are basically taught that you are a piece of meat. Imagine if you will, random strangers thinking they have the right to grope at you, or walking into your workplace and seeing your almost all female co-workers comparing pin-up boys, or not being able to walk down the street, or surf to a page on the internet, or open a newspaper or magazine without being confronted with a series of artfully seductive half-naked men staring back at you --all in a culture where no one really cares about anything but how pretty you are.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
No, it can be time dependent. I was honestly about to leave, told my wife I wasn't happy with things. Sex got very good - but just for a few months, then gradually declined. Another talk, again an improvement (though less so), then gradual decline.

I am certain that if I told her now that I wasn't willing to stay in the relationship it would happen again. 

That may sound good, but the only conclusion that I can draw is that she is having sex with me to keep me from leaving. I really don't want sex under a threat like that. Or, I could say that I'm leaving even if she agrees to, and does improve things. 




tommyr said:


> I don't agree. If done properly, destabilization has a 100% success rate. Either the marriage gets fixed to meet both partner's needs, or the marriage ends, allowing both partners to find a compatible mate.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> This one I have never figured out. I do understand the negative response to being treated as an object, but I don't think that has had a particularly strong effect on my wife (at least not more so than for an average woman).
> 
> She likes to dressy in sexy lingerie for me. Obviously it is done for my benefit, but I get the strong impression that she enjoys the attention. She has bought herself (and me :smile2 a vast array of lingerie. I assume that if she felt very objectified she wouldn't volunteer to do that. (I've often told her that I appreciate the lingerie, but that all she really has to wear for me is a smile).
> ...


Unless you work this one out nothing will improve. There must be something that she either not telling you or is not sure about herself.

A woman that enjoys lingerie and feeling sexy but is not into sex, sorry that does not compute. 

Are you a passive man? Are you able to have an actual conversation about your life and sex life with her?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I'm not passive.

She has a terrible time talking about sex. Will find any excuse to avoid it, so I can't have anything resembling a normal conversation with her about our sex life. 

While we can't talk about our sex life, we can talk about some specifics. We use sex toys and she has no trouble discussing which ones to bring on trips for example. 

SO variations (simplified). 
Me: shall we have sex
Her: sorry, I'm really tired tonight, I know its been a long time.

Me: We've gone back to only having sex very rarely
Her: I'm sorry, I've just been so tired, I only slept 5 hours last night..[starting to get upset]

Me: I really enjoyed our trip to Bora Bora, it was romantic, and we got to spend a lot of time in bed together.
Her: yes, that was really nice, we need to do that more often. Lets try to have time for more [sex] when we go to Italy next month.

(in Italy)
Me: (after exploring venice, and a lovely lunch). Shall we spend the afternoon in bed
Her: (a bit annoyed), no, I really want to see XYZ, this afternoon and I"m really tired.


No clue what is going on in her head. 





Holland said:


> Unless you work this one out nothing will improve. There must be something that she either not telling you or is not sure about herself.
> 
> A woman that enjoys lingerie and feeling sexy but is not into sex, sorry that does not compute.
> 
> Are you a passive man? Are you able to have an actual conversation about your life and sex life with her?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> No, it can be time dependent. I was honestly about to leave, told my wife I wasn't happy with things. Sex got very good - but just for a few months, then gradually declined. Another talk, again an improvement (though less so), then gradual decline.
> 
> I am certain that if I told her now that I wasn't willing to stay in the relationship it would happen again.
> ...


What I've bolded may be VERY true. Women have a few fears about NOT giving her husband sex:

He'll have an affair...
He'll become controlling and cut he off financially while still married to her...
He'll become violent...
He'll divorce her...
She'll become pregnant, even if she's using birth control...

To name a few.

I wonder how many men are aware of these threats, yet will have sex with their wives _anyway_?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

No clue? 

Who's bankrolling this lavish lifestyle?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I earn about 40% more than she does, but she just inherited the equivalent of about 20 years pay. I was much poorer than her when we married.

She isn't staying with me for the money. 




john117 said:


> No clue?
> 
> Who's bankrolling this lavish lifestyle?


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I earn about 40% more than she does, but she just inherited the equivalent of about 20 years pay. I was much poorer than her when we married.
> 
> She isn't staying with me for the money.


The way you talk about your wife and your marriage is usually in very loving terms especially considering you are not enjoying the sex life you want. I doubt she is staying put for any intentionally untoward reason.

The not being able to talk about sex is not a good, she is not free for some reason.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> I think the issue here is the word "destabilization".


Yes I think that as well. I misunderstood how you and others were using it. Thanks for clearing that up.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> These same people haven't been saying that all men want sex with their wives in large part because of the emotional connection they get.
> 
> They've been saying that THEY (and probably many other men) feel this way.
> 
> You've been telling them that they don't.


I know you are replying to AA. But I have said not that I am saying that they don't but that I don't understand it. I don't understand how a connection, which is a shared thing, can be achieved with an activity that is undesirable and something to be avoided by one of the participants.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

tommyr said:


> I don't agree. If done properly, destabilization has a 100% success rate. Either the marriage gets fixed to meet both partner's needs, or the marriage ends, allowing both partners to find a compatible mate.


I think this is like blind people describing an elephant. Everyone is correct, just touching a different part of the animal. This is a complex problem with no one solution.

A_A is correct that connection is the better route to connection. Try that first. NS is correct that games are worthless and the man has to be "manly" if he wants his wife to respond sexually. Whining and pretending you would leave is unattractive. But tommyr is correct that, after repeated and sincere attempts to connect have failed, then destabilization "works" as a last resort. Because it either leads to an acceptable sex life or it leads to divorce. But only if it is NOT a game. Only if the man is truly willing to leave if the couple are too mismatched to make it work for both of them together. In that case, the only way it "works" is if they go their separate ways.

And somewhere in there fits Vega's notion that the only morally acceptable outcome is to find a woman who desires sex with you without having to resort to threats of destabilization so there isn't a mismatch in the first place. Which isn't possible for every couple. Which means that following this principle would likely lead to either far fewer marriages or even more divorces. Which doesn't mean I disagree with Vega. I agree with her. That is why I no longer have sex with my wife.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I earn about 40% more than she does, but she just inherited the equivalent of about 20 years pay. I was much poorer than her when we married.
> 
> She isn't staying with me for the money.


That sounds suspiciously like my marriage 😂... there's a huge financial benefit to staying together. But it's not workable long term.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> These same people haven't been saying that all men want sex with their wives in large part because of the emotional connection they get.
> 
> They've been saying that THEY (and probably many other men) feel this way.
> 
> You've been telling them that they don't.


No, I have not. I have been telling them they are sending mixed messages on the subject.

You seem to be a big fan of recommending destabilization, for example. Indeed, I've seen you tout red pill in other threads, and I have never seen you advise improving the emotional connection or discussing any advantage that might have. Now of course, I haven't read all of your posts, so maybe I missed it. But the message that I get from you, loud and clear, is that women basically need to be "taught" that sex is their obligation and men need to use whatever tactics they need to in order to drive the point home. Or leave. And the only time I've seen you even use the word "connection" is on a thread like this.

How you can think these are *not* totally mixed messages is beyond me.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> If a man were not to underestimate this; what should his proper response be? *Only want to have sex with his wife when she says she wants it and just deal with it and keep quiet if she rarely (or never) does?*


Interesting. This is similar to the complaint about many women for centuries: To have sex WHENEVER he wants, just deal with it and keep quiet about it! 

Do you think there just might be a better solution?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Holdingontoit said:


> And somewhere in there fits Vega's notion that the only morally acceptable outcome is to find a woman who desires sex with you without having to resort to threats of destabilization so there isn't a mismatch in the first place. Which isn't possible for every couple. *Which means that following this principle would likely lead to either far fewer marriages or even more divorces*. Which doesn't mean I disagree with Vega. I agree with her. That is why I no longer have sex with my wife.


If it leads to fewer marriages, I'm all for it! 

My own philosophy is that too many people get married who SHOULDN'T be married in the first place. Too often either one or the other or BOTH husband and wife are too immature to be married. In fact, a number of them are too immature to even realize how immature they are! 

Dang. There's GOT to be a better way and we just haven't found it yet.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Have you read Passionate Marriage? My recollection is that it is a good book. I think my impression comes from this book. Exploration is not points in time. It is a decision made to improve the sexuality of the marriage. It provides the safe zone to NOT have to perform. To be accepted while opening up to the idea of sexuality. It is a longer term thing than one experience. It is a therapeutic decision for marital improvement.


I wanted to thank @NobodySpecial for the feedback. I purchased the Passionate Marriage and while I have not read the whole book yet, I put a few things into practice based on the first few chapters I read online while waiting for my printed copy. I'll share the process here of me observing my feelings.

Yesterday I desired sex with my wife. NOT because I was aroused, and if anything I noticed a lack of arousal. I wanted to be with my wife for the primary reason I started this thread, and that was to feel physically accepted by her and more connected in our relationship.

Normally at this point early in the day, I will mention to my wife that I am in the mood for some intimate time. She will mention that she will try for later in the evening, and then I begin to allow my thoughts to run wild and get extremely aroused. This time I did NONE of that, and at NO time did I make any requests for intimacy or sexual time together. While it was difficult for me, I decided it would just have to happen naturally IF it happened. 

So in the evening I asked if she would get naked and we could just spend time laying together nude. At this point I was still not aroused and we just spend a great deal of time together. I wanted to initiate sex, but I noted inside I was actually terrified of her rejecting me or being unable to respond to my touches in a way that she usually pushes me away. We have also argued that if I touch her, that she needs to trust me that I will back off if the moment is not going to happen, and if at that time I still need something, she can just give me a hand job or something. 

So I decided to go for it and started being rather passionate with her. I could see her glaring eyes with raised eyebrows wanting to see how I would behave. She seemed very open to allowing me to touch her in any way I wanted. Because we had NOT yet agreed to have sex, I found this form of touching to be extremely difficult for me, because I had to anticipate at anytime she would withdraw, push me away, and claim she had tried and that it was not happening. I remained confident, but my anxiety was killing my own arousal, but I still had a very strong desire to connect with her, so I proceeded. ...and finally she responded. Once that happened my arousal skyrocketed and I focused just on her as we were still in the stages of foreplay. I continued with foreplay, as I just wanted that moment to last as long as possible and finally begin to tease her a little as this is what I enjoy. She responded by teasing me back and requesting more out of what we were doing with foreplay. 

I'll end by saying the evening went really well, and better than expected. So I'll note here are some things that may have help me:

1) I did not ask for sex, nor request that we schedule intimate time.
2) I've had a long debate with my wife that if I want to try that she needs to allow me to and trust that I will back off if I can sense it is not going to happen for her.
3) I requested we spend our time to wind down in the nude. This allowed us to hold each other, and made her available to touch without having to ask her to take her cloths off once she knew I wanted to have sex. This allowed me to gradually transition from winding down and rubbing her back, to gently transitioning into touches that were more sexual by nature. 
4) Once I started touching her sexually, I did not immediately push for more, I gently allowed her to respond and enjoy taking her time to respond. I also allowed her to be the one to ask for more instead of arbitrarily giving it to her before she had the chance. 

My whole point in this post is to note that my desire for sex was one that came from a desire to be close with her emotionally and physically, NOT just wanting a place to put my penis. Even though I consider myself a confident guy, approaching sex this way I described above requires a great deal of patience when the sexual relationship has been riddled with emotional volatility when sex is initiated.

Regards,
Badsanta


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

Badsanta, you asked for physical touch and then kept it up so it ended in sex. Have you ever tried this touching thing WITHOUT taking it to sex? If so, it becomes more believable that you wanted to connect rather than using this as another tactic to maybe "get her to have sex." 

To me, what you wrote sounded like another way to ease her into sex, rather than truly wanting to connect through non-sexual physical touch, which is how you pitched it to her...yet still "pushed" until it became sexual. It's a mixed message to me.


----------



## CuddleBug (Nov 26, 2012)

I remember being about 162.5 lbs with a 30 inch waist. I'm 6 ft 2 inches......imagine how sick and thin I looked. I could eat 4000+ calories every day and just fart it all away, actually lose weight.

I started weight training and eating for my blood type. The blood type diet.

I slowly got bigger and stronger.

Now today, I don't eat as much anymore and I don't hardcore weight train either. I changed when I went from 39 to 40 to 41.

Even today, leaner, not as big and bulky, I'm still strong and 225 lbs. My natural body weight is 225 lbs now. I guess my body's norm today is 225 lbs.

My energy levels went down when I went from 39 to 40 to 41. I read that when us guys turn around 40, that's when we really finally start to age.

I still eat right and do maintenance weight training and my sex drive hasn't changed.....:grin2:

If I went on steroids today, my body would really benefit because I am now older.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

norajane said:


> Badsanta, you asked for physical touch and then kept it up so it ended in sex. Have you ever tried this touching thing WITHOUT taking it to sex? If so, it becomes more believable that you wanted to connect rather than using this as another tactic to maybe "get her to have sex."
> 
> To me, what you wrote sounded like another way to ease her into sex, rather than truly wanting to connect through non-sexual physical touch, which is how you pitched it to her...yet still "pushed" until it became sexual. It's a mixed message to me.


^^^^THIS^^^^

I'm sorry to say this, but I agree with norajane. It DOES sound like just another 'ploy' to 'get' your wife to have sex with you. Doesn't matter how 'gentle' you thought you were, the end result was that you got what you wanted; sex! 

Badsanta, at first you wrote that you wanted a _physical_ connection with your wife, yet you weren't aroused. To me, that's kind of like wanting to eat even though you're not hungry. 

And why does the "connection" _have_ to be _PHYSICAL_ and through sex? As norajane asked, couldn't you have physically touched her WITHOUT wanting it to end up in sex? 

Couldn't you make an emotional connection with her besides through sex?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> I know you are replying to AA. But I have said not that I am saying that they don't but that I don't understand it.* I don't understand how a connection, which is a shared thing, can be achieved with an activity that is undesirable and something to be avoided by one of the participants*.


It can't.

I (and others, I think) are referring to a reason why we want to have sex with our wives, if they are willingly participating.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> No, I have not. I have been telling them they are sending mixed messages on the subject.
> 
> *You seem to be a big fan of recommending destabilization, for example. Indeed, I've seen you tout red pill in other threads, and I have never seen you advise improving the emotional connection or discussing any advantage that might have. Now of course, I haven't read all of your posts, so maybe I missed it. But the message that I get from you, loud and clear, is that women basically need to be "taught" that sex is their obligation and men need to use whatever tactics they need to in order to drive the point home. Or leave. And the only time I've seen you even use the word "connection" is on a thread like this.*
> 
> How you can think these are *not* totally mixed messages is beyond me.


Ouch! I'd hate to think that I've ever meant what you've been hearing!

This is a major communication problem on one or both of our parts.

If you find yourself with time on your hands, I'd appreciate links to where I've given these impressions so that can see if I need to modify my message.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> Interesting. This is similar to the complaint about many women for centuries: To have sex WHENEVER he wants, just deal with it and keep quiet about it!
> 
> Do you think there just might be a better solution?


I hope so!


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> If it leads to fewer marriages, I'm all for it!
> 
> My own philosophy is that too many people get married who SHOULDN'T be married in the first place. Too often either one or the other or BOTH husband and wife are too immature to be married. In fact, a number of them are too immature to even realize how immature they are!
> 
> Dang. There's GOT to be a better way and we just haven't found it yet.


I can't think of a better way to raise children.

I think that if we'd approach marriage as something worth working on instead of just being a means of getting our needs met without putting ourselves out, the institution could be salvaged.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

norajane said:


> Badsanta, you asked for physical touch and then kept it up so it ended in sex. Have you ever tried this touching thing WITHOUT taking it to sex? If so, it becomes more believable that you wanted to connect rather than using this as another tactic to maybe "get her to have sex."
> 
> To me, what you wrote sounded like another way to ease her into sex, rather than truly wanting to connect through non-sexual physical touch, which is how you pitched it to her...yet still "pushed" until it became sexual. It's a mixed message to me.





Vega said:


> ^^^^THIS^^^^
> 
> I'm sorry to say this, but I agree with norajane. It DOES sound like just another 'ploy' to 'get' your wife to have sex with you. Doesn't matter how 'gentle' you thought you were, the end result was that you got what you wanted; sex!
> 
> ...



Fair enough... Many nights we hug, rub each others back and it does not lead to sex. BUT I also do not initiate at these times. My problem is initiating and being physically pushed away before it starts. I'd rather initiate, allow some time to try and if there is no response I'll back off. 

Badsanta


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> This one I have never figured out. I do understand the negative response to being treated as an object, but I don't think that has had a particularly strong effect on my wife (at least not more so than for an average woman).
> 
> She likes to dressy in sexy lingerie for me. Obviously it is done for my benefit, but I get the strong impression that she enjoys the attention. She has bought herself (and me :smile2 a vast array of lingerie. I assume that if she felt very objectified she wouldn't volunteer to do that. (I've often told her that I appreciate the lingerie, but that all she really has to wear for me is a smile).
> ...


This really sounds like the issue is simple mechanics of initiating sex. Your wife sounds conceptually interested in sex, but when the moment comes, her "default" posture is always NO, and you guys have not worked out a way to get over that hill, resulting in far less sex than what you have already "agreed" to. This is why I definitely think your problem can actually be solved.

It will take another discussion to affirm her commitment to a regular sex life. You should agree on a specific frequency that works for you both (for example "twice per week") and discuss the best way she wants to be approached, the best days/times when she would be most receptive. I definitely suggest scheduling this, it would really help her avoid going right to her default NO. And your job will be to initiate with passion, let her see your strong desire for her, it is contagious.

On the scheduled day, in the morning when you kiss before leaving, tell her you are looking forward to tonight and you hope she saves some energy for later!


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

badsanta said:


> Fair enough... Many nights we hug, rub each others back and it does not lead to sex. BUT I also do not initiate at these times. *My problem is initiating and being physically pushed away before it starts. I'd rather initiate, allow some time to try and if there is no response I'll back off*.
> 
> Badsanta


How long are you going to "try" before you finally back off? 

This scenario reminds me of a used car salesman trying to talk the housewife into buying a vacuum. She already KNOWS that she doesn't want to buy what he's selling, but he's insisting on going through his whole sales 'pitch'. Then, if he 'observes' that she's not interested, THEN he'll go away. 

Why should anyone have to go through all of that?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

tommyr said:


> It will take another discussion to affirm her commitment to a regular sex life.


Excuse me but a "regular" sex life? That would _BORE_ me to pieces! 

I want sex to be _spontaneous_. Maybe we have it TODAY...and TOMORROW...and then maybe not again for 4 days...then maybe we have it once....then perhaps we have it 3 days in a row, and twice during one of those days....then...not for 10 days...then have it every day for a week...

I'm sure you get the picture.

Some of you make sex to be so "routine" that the whole idea of sex become boring to an LD!


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> Excuse me but a "regular" sex life? That would _BORE_ me to pieces!
> 
> I want sex to be _spontaneous_. Maybe we have TODAY...and TOMORROW...and then maybe not again for 4 days...then maybe we have it once....then perhaps we have it 3 days in a row, and twice during one of those days....then...not for 10 days...then have it every day for a week...
> 
> I'm sure you get the picture.


Spontaneous sex sounds great, but that is not always the reality, especially when you factor in family life, etc...


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> Spontaneous sex sounds great, but that is not always the reality, especially when you factor in family life, etc...


I would rather have QUALITY sex WHEN we have sex instead of mediocre sex on a set "schedule". I know it's not as easy when you have a family, but so _what_? 

That's the difference between wanting sex and _needing_ sex. If you want sex, you don't feel so 'bad' about yourself OR your spouse if you don't get it.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> I would rather have QUALITY sex WHEN we have sex instead of mediocre sex on a set "schedule". I know it's not as easy when you have a family, but so _what_?
> 
> That's the difference between wanting sex and _needing_ sex. If you want sex, you don't feel so 'bad' about yourself OR your spouse if you don't get it.


You are completely missing my point. All I stated was the spontaneous sex sounds great, but is not always practical. 

As far as the family, b/c you have to actually plan out your days most of your times around the kids (especially young ones), so setting a schedule may be the best way to make sure you have time together. It is funny also that you somehow assume that scheduled sex is mediocre :scratchhead:


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Scheduling sex seems strange to me, too, Vega. It ought to be a natural reaching out to each other.


----------



## MrsAldi (Apr 15, 2016)

Vega said:


> I would rather have QUALITY sex WHEN we have sex instead of mediocre sex on a set "schedule". I know it's not as easy when you have a family, but so _what_?
> 
> That's the difference between wanting sex and _needing_ sex. If you want sex, you don't feel so 'bad' about yourself OR your spouse if you don't get it.


I beg to differ, we have a lot more quality sex when we schedule it on our days off. It's fun because we've been wanting & needing during busy days.

Sent from my B1-730HD using Tapatalk


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

We don't schedule sex (although we sometimes schedule date nights), yet manage to have great sex spontaneously every day - sometimes two or three times in a day. Frequent sex IS compatible with quality sex.


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

Vega said:


> Excuse me but a "regular" sex life? That would _BORE_ me to pieces!
> 
> I want sex to be _spontaneous_. Maybe we have it TODAY...and TOMORROW...and then maybe not again for 4 days...then maybe we have it once....then perhaps we have it 3 days in a row, and twice during one of those days....then...not for 10 days...then have it every day for a week...
> 
> ...


I agree that spontaneous sex is far more exciting. And what you proposed sounds like (on average) it could work out fine. But the poster I was responding to, richardsharpe, is in a very different situation that requires a different approach.

If somebody is always too tired for sex, then scheduling makes perfect sense: allows an LD to properly "pace" his/her day's activities thereby ensuring enough energy for fun at bedtime.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

tommyr said:


> I agree that spontaneous sex is far more exciting. And what you proposed sounds like (on average) it could work out fine. But the poster I was responding to, richardsharpe, is in a very different situation that requires a different approach.
> 
> If somebody is always too tired for sex, then scheduling makes perfect sense: allows an LD to properly "pace" his/her day's activities thereby ensuring enough energy for fun at bedtime.


I don't know that an LD is too tired. My guess is they are uninspired.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Vega said:


> How long are you going to "try" before you finally back off?
> 
> This scenario reminds me of a used car salesman trying to talk the housewife into buying a vacuum. She already KNOWS that she doesn't want to buy what he's selling, but he's insisting on going through his whole sales 'pitch'. Then, if he 'observes' that she's not interested, THEN he'll go away.
> 
> *Why should anyone have to go through all of that?*


Very good question, AND I have been a salesperson before in my career so I can answer this very well. 

#1 My wife has a responsive desire and she admits that she never has any innate arousal that motivates her for sex. (now I realize that could be in response to my bad behavior sometimes) So nothing ever happens unless I try. 

#2 With the analogy of a salesman/customer in a marital context, that means she is my ONLY customer. I do not require her to buy what I am selling, but I do expect an open ear and some feedback after I am given a fair chance. 

#3 As long as I can get a foot in the door, this opens a channel of physical communication so that I can better understand my wife. So if she says she is not in the mood, it is a very valuable experience for me to associate her body language of not being in the mood. (AND YES, there is a big perceived disconnect from when she is receptive and not receptive that I have not really been allowed to gain more experience with touch regarding her body language)

So even if she does not want sex, it is still an invaluable experience for me to try and see if she responds. If she is willing to allow me to try before just arbitrarily pushing me away, to me that can be almost as good of an experience as sex because I sincerely appreciate her patience. 

...so with this new chapter, we laid in bed last night hugging and talking. While I was aroused I did not initiate because I know she needs some space (sexually speaking) before I initiate again. So I respect that. In talking I asked her what part of my sexuality is the most problematic for her, and how can I help with that? Her answer.... that I get upset when too much time passes since the last time we have had sex! In my opinion, yes I do get upset but it is not for the lack of sex, it is because she arbitrarily pushed me away before I even had a chance to hug her.

We are working on things, but I still feel my primary drive for sex is not raw arousal, it is a desire to connect with her. Last night I was highly aroused, but knew it was not a good time for sex based on the fact that she really feels pushed if I need it the day after. Now there were moment in which she behaved really receptive, but I backed off to give her some space, and I could tell she appreciated that. 

Badsanta


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> That one's mysterious to me too, unless she has some specific hangups about her private parts and/or the act of sex itself.
> 
> I do think that men have a tendency to underestimate the impact of growing up in a world where you are basically taught that you are a piece of meat. Imagine if you will, random strangers thinking they have the right to grope at you, or walking into your workplace and seeing your almost all female co-workers comparing pin-up boys, or not being able to walk down the street, or surf to a page on the internet, or open a newspaper or magazine without being confronted with a series of artfully seductive half-naked men staring back at you --all in a culture where no one really cares about anything but how pretty you are.


I don't think we underestimate it. I know for me I have daughters and things like this are on my mind as well which is why I always teach them confidence and how to deal with various situations.

When you are a man you also get used/judged but in other ways. You are often only valued for your paycheck and what you can bring home. The car you drive, the career you have. The one area I think my gender does have an advantage is as we age these things that we are valued for increase where as women who are valued for beauty decrease. But each of us are judged and yes unfairly. For both genders we also have our time.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> I don't know that an LD is too tired. My guess is they are uninspired.


You mean depressed.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

MrsAldi said:


> I beg to differ, we have a lot more quality sex when we schedule it on our days off. It's fun because we've been wanting & needing during busy days.
> 
> Sent from my B1-730HD using Tapatalk


I think scheduling can be helpful, but I'll admit I am now only using it as a last resort. I think my wife rather things happen naturally and spontaneously. While it may be that way for her, in my mind I have set aside times when I know it would be good to try, but I just NOT going to tell her about them.

Badsanta


----------



## MrsAldi (Apr 15, 2016)

@badsanta we still have spontaneous sex, it's fun but it doesn't last as long, it's a quickie really. The other times I put in a real effort cos I have the time to seduce him properly, he loves it. It's all about the tease. 

Sent from my B1-730HD using Tapatalk


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

badsanta said:


> Normally at this point early in the day, I will mention to my wife that I am in the mood for some intimate time. She will mention that she will try for later in the evening,


This is normal for you? You request sex like... what? A favor? And she will "try"? Not terribly sexy or romantic. I mean. How do you know at 6 in the morning that you are going to be in the mood for "intimate time" at 9 that night? 



> and then I begin to allow my thoughts to run wild and get extremely aroused. This time I did NONE of that, and at NO time did I make any requests for intimacy or sexual time together. While it was difficult for me, I decided it would just have to happen naturally IF it happened.


Make a request for intimacy? I am trying to wrap my head around this. You ASK her for "intimacy"? A day in advance? Like... Mommy can I please go over to Timmy's tonight? 

How can that NOT feel like a task/chore to her? 

I do hope the book helps you find a more natural and organic way to think of this stuff. You have such a head full of sex, the way you think about it is just So Large and Overpowering. Keep reading and remind me if he says to take a breather. Just Back the F off sex for a while. Cuz it seems to me you think so hard about it that the thinking itself has taken on some kind of power.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> You mean depressed.


I have been depressed many times, John, and still wanted to have sex with Dug. Being close to him is a comfort to me.

If a woman does not want to be close to a man in that way, seems to me there is a good chance she is uninspired.

Honestly, I don't know how women can even stand staying with men they do not actively want sex with. That is a complete mystery to me.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Doesn't sound very depressed to me, since depression does a number on desire. 

As for the last paragraph, consider yourself lucky. But you knew that already.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> This is normal for you? You request sex like... what? A favor? And she will "try"? Not terribly sexy or romantic. I mean. How do you know at 6 in the morning that you are going to be in the mood for "intimate time" at 9 that night?
> 
> 
> Make a request for intimacy? I am trying to wrap my head around this. You ASK her for "intimacy"? A day in advance? Like... Mommy can I please go over to Timmy's tonight?
> ...


I see a bit of myself and my wife in what badsanta said here.

She is LD, bordering on ND lately, and the only way successful sex happens in my life is if I go through this same process of 1) announcing my interest in advance, 2) finding a compromise for a time later on.

Physical intimacy does not simply happen naturally for some people (mainly because they are not putting any effort into it, IMHO) and it requires some planning.

I dislike it immensely, but then again, if you back off from an LD most people know that leads to no sex, not more sex.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> Doesn't sound very depressed to me, since depression does a number on desire.
> 
> As for the last paragraph, consider yourself lucky. But you knew that already.


I think depression has different effects on different people. 

I still desired my husband because he nurtured me. Why would a woman not want to be close to someone who nurtures her?

And why would she want to be close to someone who does not?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Tried that. I don't like the idea of scheduled sex but we gave it a try - every sunday afternoon . Worked for a couple of months. Then things started getting in the way. Traveling: too tired. Had a jazz concert: not enough time. Yesterday we went to visit friends who had new kittens - somehow that used up the time allotment for sex.

Its been 4 weeks now. For a while many mornings she would hint that we would have sex that evening, but then was tired. Now she just tells me every morning that she slept really badly - eg she doesn't want me to suggest sex, so I don't. 

She *does* have moderate insomnia, but never enough to stop her from doing things she wants to do. 

She doesn't want sex. She likes the idea of sex, but in each instance doesn't want it. 

I'm not asking or hinting anymore. Just going on with life. 




tommyr said:


> This really sounds like the issue is simple mechanics of initiating sex. Your wife sounds conceptually interested in sex, but when the moment comes, her "default" posture is always NO, and you guys have not worked out a way to get over that hill, resulting in far less sex than what you have already "agreed" to. This is why I definitely think your problem can actually be solved.
> 
> It will take another discussion to affirm her commitment to a regular sex life. You should agree on a specific frequency that works for you both (for example "twice per week") and discuss the best way she wants to be approached, the best days/times when she would be most receptive. I definitely suggest scheduling this, it would really help her avoid going right to her default NO. And your job will be to initiate with passion, let her see your strong desire for her, it is contagious.
> 
> On the scheduled day, in the morning when you kiss before leaving, tell her you are looking forward to tonight and you hope she saves some energy for later!


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
On this we completely agree! Sex should be fun and spontaneous and varied. 

The problem for us is that if it isn't scheduled, it pretty much never happens. Less than once a month on average, and seems to decline even after that. Got down to once every 3 months before the last time I talked with her.

Yes, I know, she just isn't into me. Live without sex or divorce, I understand my options.

I'd have given up long ago if it weren't for the brief periods of time where we had a great sex life and it honestly seemed to me that she was enjoying it as much as I was. It seemed that we were once again a couple in love. Probably though she was just pretending - not just about sex but about being happy in general. 






Vega said:


> Excuse me but a "regular" sex life? That would _BORE_ me to pieces!
> 
> I want sex to be _spontaneous_. Maybe we have it TODAY...and TOMORROW...and then maybe not again for 4 days...then maybe we have it once....then perhaps we have it 3 days in a row, and twice during one of those days....then...not for 10 days...then have it every day for a week...
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> I think depression has different effects on different people.
> 
> I still desired my husband because he nurtured me. Why would a woman not want to be close to someone who nurtures her?
> 
> And why would she want to be close to someone who does not?


Because she's not impacted by depression. 

Stress is not depression. 

Stress is two toddlers and preparing for your dissertation defense while working 20-30 hrs a week. Great sex despite 4 hours of sleep a day. 

Depression is doing nothing or almost nothing with your head full of emptiness. Feeling sad. Powerless. Not coping.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
either that, or the desire just isn't there. 

Well after 30 years I haven't figured out how to inspire her, so pretty much giving up at this point. 



jld said:


> I don't know that an LD is too tired. My guess is they are uninspired.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

richardsharpe said:


> I'm not asking or hinting anymore. Just going on with life.


And this is what I now absolutely refuse to do.

I decided some time ago that I will not sacrifice a healthy and satisfying sex life, that I deserve and will find a way to have one instead.

I have had some missteps but overall I have decided that I will find a way and that, while I would prefer I had that intimate life with my wife, I am reconciled with the notion that it does not have to be with her in the end.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Vega said:


> I want sex to be _spontaneous_. Maybe we have it TODAY...and TOMORROW...and then maybe not again for 4 days...then maybe we have it once....then perhaps we have it 3 days in a row, and twice during one of those days....then...not for 10 days...then have it every day for a week...


I assume that when having only "spontaneous" sex both partners have to be spontaneously in the mood.

What happens if this doesn't line up exactly right? If one partner "feels it" on Monday, Wednesday & Friday and the other is in the mood Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday, I'm guessing that the couple just doesn't have sex?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I think that is the key to "natural" LDs. They don't have a strong sex drive, it simply isn't important to them. Lack of sexual interest in a spouse is a trivial issue, in fact they may not have a sexual interest in anyone.

My wife would no more want to divorce me for lack of sexual attraction than I would divorce her because we liked different music. Sure its nice to listen to music together, but its not a critical part of a relationship. 



jld said:


> snip
> 
> Honestly, I don't know how women can even stand staying with men they do not actively want sex with. That is a complete mystery to me.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> Because she's not impacted by depression.
> 
> Stress is not depression.
> 
> ...


I am well aware of what depression is, john. 

Dug was nurturing and inspiring. Enough so that even when I have been depressed, we were still not sexless. I wanted to be close to him in that way.

Could he have done more to help me during those times? I think so. It did not occur to either of us for me to go to counseling. Sounds crazy now that such a basic idea did not cross our minds.

I was overwhelmed by small children. That was pretty much the long and short of it. My relationship with my husband was a refuge from that. He was always positive, always believed in me and what I was doing. It is pretty hard not to want to be close to someone like that.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

StilltheStudent said:


> I see a bit of myself and my wife in what badsanta said here.
> 
> She is LD, bordering on ND lately, and the only way successful sex happens in my life is if I go through this same process of 1) announcing my interest in advance, 2) finding a compromise for a time later on.
> 
> ...


The problem here is that people assume that what works for them works for everyone else.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

StilltheStudent said:


> I have decided that I will find a way and that, while I would prefer I had that intimate life with my wife, I am reconciled with the notion that it does not have to be with her in the end.


Is she aware of this?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> On this we completely agree! Sex should be fun and spontaneous and varied.
> 
> The problem for us is that if it isn't scheduled, it pretty much never happens. Less than once a month on average, and seems to decline even after that. Got down to once every 3 months before the last time I talked with her.
> ...


This random internet stranger really doesn't want to see her get away with it.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> This random internet stranger really doesn't want to see her get away with it.


Get away with what? Getting any and all sense of desire killed by the passive, un sexy stuff that goes on with sex contract marriages? I feel so badly for her I want to give her a hug.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Yes, it feels completely unfair. The sense that I do everything she wants, but she won't do this for me. 

But that isn't the point. I expect that if I told her I wanted sex twice a week or I would divorce her, she would do it. I'd have to constantly remind her, occasionally start packing my bags etc, but she would probably do it. 

That completely misses the point though. What I want is for her to desire me, and desire to please me - as I do for her. I need to really understand that sex is completely different for her than it is for me. 

She simply cannot provide what I want. 

It would be as if she wanted me to sit next to her and listen to an hour of Jazz every night (I hate jazz - drive me batty). I could do it, but I couldn't *enjoy* doing it with her. 

She is also not getting what she wants - which is a loving affectionate marriage. I can (and do) go through the motions, but I cannot feel romance and passion without a sex life. That is just the way that I am wired. 








Buddy400 said:


> This random internet stranger really doesn't want to see her get away with it.


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Tried that. I don't like the idea of scheduled sex but we gave it a try - every sunday afternoon . Worked for a couple of months. Then things started getting in the way. Traveling: too tired. Had a jazz concert: not enough time. Yesterday we went to visit friends who had new kittens - somehow that used up the time allotment for sex.
> 
> Its been 4 weeks now. For a while many mornings she would hint that we would have sex that evening, but then was tired. Now she just tells me every morning that she slept really badly - eg she doesn't want me to suggest sex, so I don't.
> ...


Stop going to jaz concerts. Stop visiting friends. If her energy is so low, sounds like you need to just spend the day at home. Call her out. Every. Single. Time. If she does something that takes energy, tell her to stop doing it. Have her sit down and bring her a cool drink, advise her to save energy for bed later. Seriously. I do not understand why you are willing to keep going with her program, for a month or more. 

The problem seems to be you. You are not honest with her, the way you are honest with random strangers on TAM.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jld


> I don't know that an LD is too tired. My guess is they are uninspired.





john117 said:


> You mean depressed.


I agree with jld. Sounds more like uninspired than depressed. Question is whether they are uninspired by their husband or sex or maybe both.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

MrsAldi said:


> @badsanta we still have spontaneous sex, it's fun but it doesn't last as long, it's a quickie really. The other times I put in a real effort cos I have the time to seduce him properly, he loves it. It's all about the tease.
> 
> Sent from my B1-730HD using Tapatalk


Exactly, it is not like we are saying you open up a calendar and plan out your sex life for the entire year. You can still easily have spontaneous sex and scheduled sex...

My W and I get very little alone time, so one thing I have done is I will take a day off from work here and there while the kids are all at school. This is set as sex and lunch day. Probably some of the best sex we have had has been during this. We can completely relax since we have the house to ourselves along with the anticipation.

It is funny, this is no different then scheduling a date night (for us these are both opportunities for us to get alone time and bond), but I don't hear anyone saying "OMG, scheduling a date night out sounds so boring, you should just spontaneously get up and walk out the house" lol. 

I also think @Buddy400 put it well with this:



> I assume that when having only "spontaneous" sex both partners have to be spontaneously in the mood.
> 
> What happens if this doesn't line up exactly right? If one partner "feels it" on Monday, Wednesday & Friday and the other is in the mood Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday, I'm guessing that the couple just doesn't have sex?


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Get away with what?


Getting her needs met in the marriage, knowing that her husband is unhappy and not doing anything about it.

She should either seriously try to meet his needs or be straight with him; tell him that she simply isn't attracted to him, does not want to have sex with him and has no intention of putting any effort into doing anything about it.

If she's so unhappy, then she should initiate the divorce.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

> Since I like cooking, and it really isn't all that much trouble to cook a good dinner most nights, I happily make the effort. Why wouldn't I?


Because people with LD are unhappy and uncomfortable and don't like cooking more than once a month (or whatever). You are taking the LD part out of this equation - their feelings on how much sex they want. More is not just as easy as less for LD's no matter how happy it makes their partner. More is force-feeding an already full stomach.

I think the analogy fails because sex is personal in a way that cooking is not. LD's need to open up the most intimate parts of their minds and bodies in order to have sex. Cooking does not require that level of giving.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> Getting her needs met in the marriage, knowing that her husband is unhappy and not doing anything about it.
> 
> She should either seriously try to meet his needs or be straight with him; tell him that she simply isn't attracted to him, does not want to have sex with him and has no intention of putting any effort into doing anything about it.
> 
> If she's so unhappy, then she should initiate the divorce.


Could YOU be attracted to someone who would whine "not fair" in any way shape or form?


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

OliviaG, we will have to agree to disagree. I expect a LD to eventually develop resentment over time if they feel they have to perform solely for their partner. And starting to feel used for sex. Hence, this whole thread about "connecting."


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> What I'm about to write only applies to happily married couples; marriages where the LD spouse is not filled with resentment and where the LD spouse feels that his/her needs are mostly being met by his/her spouse (and happily met). It only applies to couples where there are no issues with past sexual abuse or psychological hangups around sex, where sex is pleasurable to both parties and the only issue is frequency. I think that's what this thread was trying to address. So if you have an unhappy marriage, are being mistreated, and/or neglected in your marriage, then this will not apply:


I'm going to have to put that in my signature line (if I can figure out how).

EDIT: Drat! Too long


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> She should either seriously try to meet his needs or be straight with him; tell him that she simply isn't attracted to him, does not want to have sex with him and has no intention of putting any effort into doing anything about it.


In most of these cases the LD partner already has been straight with the HD partner. It has been years that the HD has expressed a desire for more sex, and it hasn't happened. The LD doesn't have to say the words to send the message. The person who is in denial here isn't the LD partner. If the HD partner were actually willing to leave over this issue, it would already have occurred.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Could YOU be attracted to someone who would whine "not fair" in any way shape or form?


The problem isn't that she won't have sex with him.

It's that she completely dismisses his needs.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Holdingontoit said:


> In most of these cases the LD partner already has been straight with the HD partner. It has been years that the HD has expressed a desire for more sex, and it hasn't happened. *The LD doesn't have to say the words to send the message*. The person who is in denial here isn't the LD partner. If the HD partner were actually willing to leave over this issue, it would already have occurred.


If their partner isn't getting it then, yes, they need to say the words.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> I assume that when having only "spontaneous" sex both partners have to be spontaneously in the mood.
> 
> What happens if this doesn't line up exactly right? If one partner "feels it" on Monday, Wednesday & Friday and the other is in the mood Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday, I'm guessing that the couple just doesn't have sex?


Your assumption is totally incorrect - at least for us. Only one of us has to be in the mood - the other quickly and easily gets in the mood, because we know how much fun it will be once we get started. Much of the time, we're both in the mood, of course.

And so your guess would also be wrong. Both of us initiate, about equally, and as I said above, the other responds (except in very rare cases). We each often have desire, and we each have responsive desire the rest of the time. Since we're both HD, that means lots of sex.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

norajane said:


> Because people with LD are unhappy and uncomfortable and don't like cooking more than once a month (or whatever). You are taking the LD part out of this equation - their feelings on how much sex they want. More is not just as easy as less for LD's no matter how happy it makes their partner. More is force-feeding an already full stomach.
> 
> I think the analogy fails because sex is personal in a way that cooking is not. LD's need to open up the most intimate parts of their minds and bodies in order to have sex. Cooking does not require that level of giving.


This is a vote for A) Sex is completely different.

Maybe the best thing one could do before getting married would be to ask the following questions......

"Should a spouse make their best effort to meet their partner's needs
"
And then,

"Does this apply to sex?"


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Married but Happy said:


> Your assumption is totally incorrect - at least for us. Only one of us has to be in the mood - the other quickly and easily gets in the mood, because we know how much fun it will be once we get started. Much of the time, we're both in the mood, of course.
> 
> And so your guess would also be wrong. Both of us initiate, about equally, and as I said above, the other responds (except in very rare cases). We each often have desire, and we each have responsive desire the rest of the time. Since we're both HD, that means lots of sex.


We need to clear up the meaning of "spontaneous sex". I interpret it as "both partners independently wanting sex at the same time".

What you describe is one partner having spontaneous desire and the other, who has responsive desire at that time, is willing to work with that knowing that good sex is likely.

richardsharpe has spontaneous desire; but this almost never results in spontaneous sex.


----------



## Luvher4life (Jan 15, 2016)

Reading some of the posts on this thread, I can't help but think about how truly blessed I am. I hate to see people feeling deprived, or being deprived, of one of life's finest pleasures.

As to the original question in this forum, I'd say the real reason I want sex with my spouse is because it keeps us bonded physically, emotionally, and spiritually. It's something that we only share with each other, not to mention it is extremely pleasurable and releases tension from everyday life stresses. Free expression of love through sex in a marriage is what God intended, and for one spouse to withhold that expression (unless there are health reasons) goes against His will.

I am truly blessed with a wonderful wife who understands this. She doesn't reject me and I don't reject her. We have similar drives, although my drive is probably a little higher. We still enjoy sex even if one of us didn't really "want" to have it initially. Once we get going, though, any of the "I don't really want to" goes out the window. It is always good.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> This is a vote for A) Sex is completely different.


If nothing else except sex will do for someone who wants sex - no amount of cooking, kissing, affection, talking, cleaning, dancing, spinning on their heads...then I'd say yes, sex IS different from everything else. 

This whole thread has been about how sex is required in order to connect with a spouse and nothing, _nothing_, else will do, so yep, sex is different.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> We need to clear up the meaning of "spontaneous sex". I interpret it as "both partners independently wanting sex at the same time".
> 
> What you describe is one partner having spontaneous desire and the other, who has responsive desire at that time, is willing to work with that knowing that good sex is likely.
> 
> richardsharpe has spontaneous desire; but this almost never results in spontaneous sex.


I would say spontaneous sex is any sex that occurs when one partner wants it and the other goes along with it. If there is a lengthy persuasion process, it's not spontaneous, but responsive desire is often spontaneous.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

norajane said:


> If nothing else except sex will do for someone who wants sex - no amount of cooking, kissing, affection, talking, cleaning, dancing, spinning on their heads...then I'd say yes, sex IS different from everything else.
> 
> This whole thread has been about how sex is required in order to connect with a spouse and nothing, _nothing_, else will do, so yep, sex is different.


You said:



norajane said:


> I think the analogy fails because sex is personal in a way that cooking is not. LD's need to open up the most intimate parts of their minds and bodies in order to have sex. Cooking does not require that level of giving.


Which is what I was addressing. That sex is often seen as being different from everything else when it comes to what should be expected when trying to make your partner happy.

I'm not judging; just pointing out that this difference is critical. We can stop with all the analogies if it IS seen as being completely different.


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

norajane said:


> Because people with LD are unhappy and uncomfortable and don't like cooking more than once a month (or whatever). You are taking the LD part out of this equation - their feelings on how much sex they want. More is not just as easy as less for LD's no matter how happy it makes their partner. More is force-feeding an already full stomach.
> 
> I think the analogy fails because sex is personal in a way that cooking is not. LD's need to open up the most intimate parts of their minds and bodies in order to have sex. Cooking does not require that level of giving.


I would be very empathetic towards the LD part of the equation *if* they were upfront (ie, while dating) about their feelings on how much sex they want. Most of this thread is about married couples who previously had a great sex life, which is a different story entirely.

Sex is "too personal" even for one's committed spouse? Why would I want to be married to somebody who opened up intimacy of mind and body on a monthly basis? Why would I be giving to somebody who was not giving towards me?

With marriage, I am "All In" and I insist on being with a like minded partner. Fortunately, I am.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> This is normal for you? You request sex like... what? A favor? And she will "try"? Not terribly sexy or romantic. I mean. How do you know at 6 in the morning that you are going to be in the mood for "intimate time" at 9 that night?
> 
> 
> Make a request for intimacy? I am trying to wrap my head around this. You ASK her for "intimacy"? A day in advance? Like... Mommy can I please go over to Timmy's tonight?
> ...


These are very good points! In our intimate life my wife COMPLAINED to me that I would be initiating sex ALL DAY LONG until it I would finally get my way. In reality I was just being playful with her throughout the day. She asked me to stop with the relentless initiations, and I replaced that NOT with asking her, but instead of informing her what my actual state of arousal is. In reality this actually functioned as asking or queuing her in on the fact that I was desiring to be with her. This has proven problematic, so I am not going to do it anymore.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

I'm not saying anyone has to stay married to a LD spouse. I'm saying an LD spouse is not going to be happy or comfortable giving and giving and giving for years on end when they aren't really into it. Just like a HD isn't gong to be happy or comfortable not having sex as frequently as they want for years and years on end.

As to LD's being upfront, a lot of them don't know they are LD's until they are some years into a marriage and the "new relationship hormones" die down and reality sets in. That's why I believe people shouldn't rush into marriage when they are "in luv" and should wait some years and live with the people they think they want to spend the rest of their lives with. Romance and luv make people f*ck like bunnies. Real life, over time, makes people show who they are.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

norajane said:


> OliviaG, we will have to agree to disagree. I expect a LD to eventually develop resentment over time if they feel they have to perform solely for their partner. And starting to feel used for sex. Hence, this whole thread about "connecting."


I always have a hard time understanding the "used" thing.

After about 9 pm, my wife loses all her energy. Ideally she spends this time watching TV or reading in bed.

If there was a $100 bill floating through the living room downstairs, I very much doubt she go to the effort to get out of bed to pick it up.

I have plenty of energy. If I have any desire to go get something downstairs, I do. 

So, she asks me to bring her stuff (mostly tea). I go get it for her. she's very appreciative. It makes me happy to do things for her (within reason).

It would never occur to me that I might be getting "used" for tea.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> In addition to what Buddy400 said, sex is *not* the only thing that fosters connection, but when sex is absent or very infrequent, it is the *only* thing that works, since its *absence* causes a deep *disconnect*.


The flip side of this is that being nagged, cajoled and petitioned for unwanted sex can cause deep disconnect and resentment. 

I am not saying that people who want sex/more sex should do nothing. Just disagreeing with the manner in which men often try to solve this problem.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> In addition to what Buddy400 said, sex is *not* the only thing that fosters connection, but when sex is absent or very infrequent, it is the *only* thing that works, since its *absence* causes a deep *disconnect*.


I don't get what you and Buddy are parsing here. I'm saying sex is not like anything else (yes, Buddy, I'm voting that sex is completely different). Neither the giving nor the getting of anything else is like sex.

It seems we are in violent agreement here.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I think that in a good marriage this is exactly right:iagree:

Each person puts in a real effort to make their partner happy. Both feel happy and valued. 

Sadly many marriages are broken in various ways. One partner or both is unable / unwilling to do what the the other wants / needs. The difference between unable and unwilling is much less clear than it might seem. 




OliviaG said:


> I think I've caught up with all the posts now, but may have missed something along the way. Just thought I'd amalgamate my thoughts here because I was thinking about this some more while I was away.
> 
> What I'm about to write only applies to happily married couples; marriages where the LD spouse is not filled with resentment and where the LD spouse feels that his/her needs are mostly being met by his/her spouse (and happily met). It only applies to couples where there are no issues with past sexual abuse or psychological hangups around sex, where sex is pleasurable to both parties and the only issue is frequency. I think that's what this thread was trying to address. So if you have an unhappy marriage, are being mistreated, and/or neglected in your marriage, then this will not apply:
> 
> ...


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> I always have a hard time understanding the "used" thing.


When an LD person has sex more often than they want solely in order to please their spouse, over time, that LD can start to feel like their minds don't matter, just their bodies and the giving of their bodies for sex to their spouse. They can feel used for sex because their mind isn't part of it, just their body, and they may not even be getting much pleasure out of it since their minds are struggling to do it for their partner's sake.  If their partner just accepts this from the LD as their due without being sensitive to the LD's feelings, the LD can feel like their partner doesn't give a sh*t how they actually feel. Just like a HD feels like their LD partner doesn't give sh*t how they feel.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

Buddy400 said:


> Is she aware of this?


You know, I am never quite sure. She should be.

We had a massive argument two months back where I made the point; that was not an overall positive experience.

There was a r/DB post a while back where a HD husband described the issue as this: _"she knew that we had a deadroom problem and thought that I could live with it."_

Well, I think my wife has been similar to that for the last three years. I am now making it clear, both in statement and action, that the status quo is no longer acceptable to me.

We have not had the "F-me or F-You" talk yet, and I think there is still time before that becomes a necessity.

But I have now accepted that the talk might be necessary and have decided I am alright with it if the answer is F-You.

It will be interesting to see how this summer turns out.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> I always have a hard time understanding the "used" thing.
> 
> After about 9 pm, my wife loses all her energy. Ideally she spends this time watching TV or reading in bed.
> 
> ...


What about when it exceeds "within reason"?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> I thought you were saying that this thread was making the point that sex is the only thing that fosters connection. It is *not* saying that. I may have misunderstood you?


It's not saying that? What else will foster that connection if there isn't sex? Cooking? Talking? Non-sexual touch? 

Badsanta, who started this thread, would be able to connect without sex? How?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

tommyr said:


> I would be very empathetic towards the LD part of the equation *if* they were upfront (ie, while dating) about their feelings on how much sex they want. Most of this thread is about married couples who previously had a great sex life, which is a different story entirely.
> 
> Sex is "too personal" even for one's committed spouse? Why would I want to be married to somebody who opened up intimacy of mind and body on a monthly basis? Why would I be giving to somebody who was not giving towards me?
> 
> With marriage, I am "All In" and I insist on being with a like minded partner. Fortunately, I am.


Sh!t happens. Even if a previously HD partner suddenly changed to LD due to hormones, stress, childbirth, whatever, I'd be very empathetic *as long as they realized the negative impact on the relationship and worked hard to fix the issue or reach a mutually satisfactory compromise*. Heck, I'd be empathetic if they tried, whether they succeeded or not.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> That's true, if the LD is not doing it happily and willingly. The question is what would stop the LD from doing it happily and willingly?


Time. Over time, it becomes more and more difficult to give sex happily and willingly when you have to do it more often than you want for years on end.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
At one point I did tell her very clearly what I needed to be happy. That worked for a couple of months then declined again. I have been completely honest with her. 

I don't want to have to constantly pester her for sex, that isn't the point.

Yes, I could insist that we don nothing else if she has been too tired for sex, but I'm fully aware that the real issue is not tiredness but lack of interest (even if she can't bring herself to say (or maybe think) it).

The other honest thing is that I'm not going to leave her for a lack of sex. I've carefully considered that and decided not to. That doesn't mean that I'm happy with how things are, just that this is the better of the available alternatives. 




tommyr said:


> Stop going to jaz concerts. Stop visiting friends. If her energy is so low, sounds like you need to just spend the day at home. Call her out. Every. Single. Time. If she does something that takes energy, tell her to stop doing it. Have her sit down and bring her a cool drink, advise her to save energy for bed later. Seriously. I do not understand why you are willing to keep going with her program, for a month or more.
> 
> The problem seems to be you. You are not honest with her, the way you are honest with random strangers on TAM.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> I agree; absolutely true. It should be offered to the HD with love, just like any other thing you do to make your spouse happy should be.


I think also that the other partner should offer the removal of nagging, whining and cajoling lovingly as well.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

norajane said:


> yes, Buddy, I'm voting that sex is completely different.


I'm not saying that they're right, but many HDs will probably think that this is a very convenient place to draw the line.


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

norajane said:


> I'm not saying anyone has to stay married to a LD spouse. I'm saying an LD spouse is not going to be happy or comfortable giving and giving and giving for years on end when they aren't really into it. Just like a HD isn't gong to be happy or comfortable not having sex as frequently as they want for years and years on end.
> 
> As to LD's being upfront, a lot of them don't know they are LD's until they are some years into a marriage and the "new relationship hormones" die down and reality sets in. That's why I believe people shouldn't rush into marriage when they are "in luv" and should wait some years and live with the people they think they want to spend the rest of their lives with. Romance and luv make people f*ck like bunnies. Real life, over time, makes people show who they are.


I do not have the sense that most of the guys on here rushed into marriage. I don't understand the concept of having a mutually satisfying sex life throughout a reasonable period of courtship, dating, engagement, and even a few years into marriage. But then, after several years of relationship investment (house, kids, 401K, etc), then *boom* suddenly LD. And not just Low Desire (meaning they don't get sexual urges) but also rigidly unwilling to make much effort.

Agreed that if true sexual incompatibility is discovered down the road, it is best to end the marriage. I had that exact conversation with my wife. It seems she values our marriage enough to prioritize a sexlife despite the loss of "new relationship hormones".


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> How, exactly should they solve the problem, in your opinion? Please be specific rather than say something like "they should encourage openness with their wives", which would be hard to interpret.


I have written the equivalent of a book on this subject O.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

norajane said:


> When an LD person has sex more often than they want solely in order to please their spouse, over time, that LD can start to feel like their minds don't matter, just their bodies and the giving of their bodies for sex to their spouse. They can feel used for sex because their mind isn't part of it, just their body, and they may not even be getting much pleasure out of it since their minds are struggling to do it for their partner's sake. *If their partner just accepts this from the LD as their due without being sensitive to the LD's feelings*, the LD can feel like their partner doesn't give a sh*t how they actually feel. Just like a HD feels like their LD partner doesn't give sh*t how they feel.


How about if they don't do the bolded? What if the are sensitive to the LDs feelings? Does that change anything?


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> I'm not saying that they're right, but many HDs will probably think that this is a very convenient place to draw the line.


It's only "convenient" when they want to bludgeon the LD with it. An LD might say how it's so "convenient" that the HD draws that line in the exact same place and won't be satisfied with anything other than sex, in that case. 

That attitude is full of resentment, on both sides, and probably took some years to get there.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> How about if they don't do the bolded? What if the are sensitive to the LDs feelings? Does that change anything?


It can. Depends on the couple. Maybe I'm a pessimist, but I don't believe a HD/LD mismatch truly works out in the long run no matter what, but sensitivity and kindness might make a mildly mismatched couple be able to work through their mismatch.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I used to think that way but the only explanation that makes sense to me is that for some LDs it is extremely difficult to provide more. The DO know what their partners want, and simply find themselves unable to do it. (not talking about intercourse or anything potentially physically uncomfortable).

The only other explanation is that some people are both LD and selfish. 



OliviaG said:


> snip
> 
> I think it comes down to understanding the need; most LD women don't understand the extent of their husband's hunger for sex. If they did, they wouldn't find it hard to provide more - maybe not as much as their husbands would like, but they would provide more than their own desire level dictates. It doesn't have to be intercourse, remember. It just has to be a feeling of wanting to do as much for them as they can, with love.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

farsidejunky said:


> What about when it exceeds "within reason"?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


I say "no" and explain why.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> I say "no" and explain why.


Okay. But more specifically, I was taking the approach of trying to figure out if you feel used if she goes beyond "within reason"?

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
think of "connection" as a chain. There a several links - from loving words to shared interests. For some people, one of those links is sex. If that link is gone, strengthening the other doesn't help.




norajane said:


> It's not saying that? What else will foster that connection if there isn't sex? Cooking? Talking? Non-sexual touch?
> 
> Badsanta, who started this thread, would be able to connect without sex? How?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

OliviaG said:


> No, you haven't. At least not in this thread. We don't need a book anyway. If you are going to say they're doing it wrong, why don't you want to provide an explanation of what would be doing it right?


I have. Go back. Re-read.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
is there a single post you can link to that is a summary? Clearly many of us are not understanding what you are suggesting. 



NobodySpecial said:


> I have. Go back. Re-read.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> I understand this, but the question is why? I think I know the answer, and it's because you think of sex differently than say, making dinner when you don't feel like it for years on end.
> 
> We are brought up thinking we have to guard ourselves against men taking advantage of us sexually. There's something very negative about their sexual attention to us in our early years and it has to do with being taken advantage of, used and then discarded.
> 
> ...


Spot on!

I was just trying to figure out how to make the same point. You said it better anyway.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

I think my views on LD have hardened, significantly, over the last 6-9 months, due mainly to reading multiple forums and my lingering and oft-refreshed resentments.

In the rare case in which an LD individual was upfront about their sexual behaviors at the onset of a relationship and did not lie about it (that includes engaging in more frequent and varied sex than they normally would in order to secure the relationship), then I would shift the issue to the HD partner's stubbornness to accept reality.

However, what seems to me most often to be true is that the LD person ramped up the effort during courtship and the early years of the LTR in order to secure those items they wanted most (marriage, home, family) and then once they were relatively sure they had things under control, they shifted back into their dysfunctional sexual behavior.

They feel as though they "sacrificed" something to get where they are, which, I think, is why a great many LD partners see no problem with the HD partner "dealing with it" because, well, it's their turn now.

And yes, LD is sexual dysfunction. I am tired of the permissive "No one gets judged, there is no such thing as normal, you are a special snow flake and should never change" attitude adopted to protect the LD partners in these situations.

Healthy adults have sex drives and sex while in adult relationships.

If they lack a sex drive there is something _wrong_.

A good LD partner will accept that a lack of sexual desire is not normal and negatively effects their relationship and will work on finding a workable medium with their partner.

A bad LD partner will stubbornly declare "This is me," and demand the partner with a normal, healthy, sex drive should meet them in dysfunction to continue the relationship.

In my mind the resentment of a HD/LD split comes from the refusal of the LD to recognize the issue as serious and engage with it with as much effort as they (often) put in during the early days of the relationship.

Of course at a certain point the partner with the normal, healthy, drive, needs to recognize reality and make a conscious decision whether to stay or go, and then stick with the consequences of that decision.

Sorry, end rant/


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> is there a single post you can link to that is a summary? Clearly many of us are not understanding what you are suggesting.


No. It is scattered throughout the thread. Start with Passionate Marriage. And Hold onto to your N.U.T.s. I am unwilling to repeat the whole thing.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
At least in some cases there is minimal nagging, whining and cajoling.

Its been 2 weeks since I have in any way hinted at my wife that sex would be good. In the past I've gone at least a year without any pressure whatsoever. We have sex every month or so, when she feels like it, and doing what she happens to want. During that time she assumes that I'm completely happy because I haven't said anything.






NobodySpecial said:


> I think also that the other partner should offer the removal of nagging, whining and cajoling lovingly as well.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

where is "passionate marriage"? Is it a thread here? Link?



NobodySpecial said:


> No. It is scattered throughout the thread. Start with Passionate Marriage. And Hold onto to your N.U.T.s. I am unwilling to repeat the whole thing.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> At least in some cases there is minimal nagging, whining and cajoling.


IMO there should be ZERO. It is really unattractive, unmanly, woosey, childish and gross. It is a direct withdrawal from the attraction bank EVERY SINGLE TIME. 

You want to have some minimum limit that you imagine you are allowed to complain or cajole without it being a withdrawal from the attraction bank. There ISN'T. Nobody is sexually attracted to their children. When you act like a child, you are making a direct withdrawal from the attraction bank.



> Its been 2 weeks since I have in any way hinted at my wife that sex would be good. In the past I've gone at least a year without any pressure whatsoever. We have sex every month or so, when she feels like it, and doing what she happens to want. During that time she assumes that I'm completely happy because I haven't said anything.


You won't say what you have to say. Instead you whine and cajole. You won't stand on your man feet and say I am NOT happy.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> I understand this, but the question is why? I think I know the answer, and it's because you think of sex differently than say, making dinner when you don't feel like it for years on end.
> 
> We are brought up thinking we have to guard ourselves against men taking advantage of us sexually. There's something very negative about their sexual attention to us in our early years and it has to do with being taken advantage of, used and then discarded.
> 
> ...


Nope, not in the least. I think of sex as being very different from making dinner because it is very _personal _and intimate and requires my _mind _and body to be engaged. If my mind is not engaged, then I'm just giving my body. If my partner thinks that's a-ok to have sex that way frequently, we would have a huge disconnect in terms of sex and I would start to feel used. 

I am not LD, nor do I have this issue in my (decades in the making) relationship. But I know how strongly I feel about sex being mutually satisfying and engaging and fun instead of being something my fiance "gets from" me even if I don't want to have sex.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

norajane said:


> Nope, not in the least. I think of sex as being very different from making dinner because it is very _personal _and intimate and requires my _mind _and body to be engaged. If my mind is not engaged, then I'm just giving my body. If my partner thinks that's a-ok to have sex that way frequently, we would have a huge disconnect in terms of sex and I would start to feel used.
> 
> I am not LD, nor do I have this issue in my (decades in the making) relationship. But I know how strongly I feel about sex being mutually satisfying and engaging and fun instead of being something my fiance "gets from" me even if I don't want to have sex.



Oh forgot another contributing issue. Baggage. Whatever preconceived notions we carry into marriage about what marriage and sex mean, what it means to be our gender...

I think the LD/HD thing is a total red herring that distracts from what is really going on. I think that the VAST majority of cases has nothing to do with biological drive but is about the failure to deposit in the attraction and love banks and repeated withdrawals from the attraction and love banks.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> IMO there should be ZERO. It is really unattractive, unmanly, woosey, childish and gross. It is a direct withdrawal from the attraction bank EVERY SINGLE TIME.


So a man needs to be stoic and in control 100% of the time and has no room for emotional outbursts without hurting his wife's attraction to him.

Something something confirmed...



NobodySpecial said:


> You won't say what you have to say. Instead you whine and cajole. You won't stand on your man feet and say I am NOT happy.


Yeah, because that conversation will totally work, this time.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

StilltheStudent said:


> So a man needs to be stoic and in control 100% of the time and has no room for emotional outbursts without hurting his wife's attraction to him.
> 
> Something something confirmed...


Nope. My husband is very sensitive. I am specifically talking about whining and cajoling about sex.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> I think the LD/HD thing is a total red herring that distracts from what is really going on. I think that the VAST majority of cases has nothing to do with biological drive but is about the failure to deposit in the attraction and love banks and repeated withdrawals from the attraction and love banks.


I agree that nothing happens in a vacuum. Sexual problems are often symptoms of other issues. 

But sometimes, there is a drive mismatch and it can put a relatively good relationship into a self-defeating cycle of resentment.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> Nope. My husband is very sensitive. I am specifically talking about whining and cajoling about sex.


So, how do you have a conversation about a lack of sexual intimacy in a marriage without it being whining or cajoling?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I think that is the key to "natural" LDs. They don't have a strong sex drive, it simply isn't important to them. Lack of sexual interest in a spouse is a trivial issue, in fact they may not have a sexual interest in anyone.
> 
> .


It's not that sex isn't important to an LD; it's that it's not *THE* most important part of a relationship. It's the relationship _OUTSIDE_ of the bedroom that matters the most. It's not a life-or-death situation. 



> My wife would no more want to divorce me for lack of sexual attraction than I would divorce her because we liked different music. Sure its nice to listen to music together, but its not a critical part of a relationship.


Exactly! There's nothing that says that *we* _MUST_ have sex "often" or "frequently". 

To an LD, having sex "often" is like putting gas in the tank when you've only driven the car 10 miles. It's as if the HD is panicking unless they put more gas in the tank.

Or, in Badsanta's case, it's like eating even though you're not hungry, because you don't know when you're going to get you next meal.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Just read this so.... *JOKE OF THE DAY FOR THIS THREAD:*

A father noticed his teenage son seemed to be reaching an awkward age, so he decided to have "the talk" about how to be responsible when dating girls. The son upon mention of this topic took off screaming and upset. The father chased him down to where he had sat down outside and was crying. The father asks, "so why are you so upset, I have not even talked to you yet about anything that has to do with girls."

The son said the following, "when I was young, I have gradually been finding out everything in life is a lie. At first there was no easter bunny, then there was no tooth fairy, I was so traumatized to find out there was no santa, so go ahead... go ahead and just say it!"

"Say what? asked the father.

"That there really is no sex once you grow up!" exclaimed the son.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

Vega said:


> It's not that sex isn't important to an LD; it's that it's not *THE* most important part of a relationship. It's the relationship _OUTSIDE_ of the bedroom that matters the most. It's not a life-or-death situation.


This is the charitable view, the one that pretends the LD spouse "really cares about sex," but just does not think about it that much. In reality I find that this is complete garbage.

For the LD sex is the _last item on the priority list_, right behind taking out the garbage and checking the cat for ticks.

It is functionally indistinguishable from not important at all.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I did say. About a year or so back I told her what I wanted / needed. Sex got better for a while, then went back to near zero. What should I have done next?



NobodySpecial said:


> IMO there should be ZERO. It is really unattractive, unmanly, woosey, childish and gross. It is a direct withdrawal from the attraction bank EVERY SINGLE TIME.
> 
> You want to have some minimum limit that you imagine you are allowed to complain or cajole without it being a withdrawal from the attraction bank. There ISN'T. Nobody is sexually attracted to their children. When you act like a child, you are making a direct withdrawal from the attraction bank.
> 
> ...


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

tommyr said:


> Have her sit down and bring her a cool drink, advise her to save energy for bed *later*.


Don't know about you, but at the end of the day, I'm TIRED. I want to go to sleep.

Sex (if done the 'right' way, and you're not being a 'starfish') is a form of exercise, and exercise wakes me up! 

When I work out, whether it's cardio or weight lifting, I can NOT do it within 3 hours of going to sleep, otherwise, I'll be wide awake for a few hours. 

Maybe part of the problem for some is the _timing_?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> Nobodyspecial is a special case though.
> 
> How many "destabilization" attempts really work?
> 
> ...


The destabilization is part of a strategy where you win either way.

Either your marriage gets better and you win, or you divorce to find someone better suited and you win.

If you're not going to put divorce on the table, then destabilization is just theatrics. And theatrics are weak.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I completely understand. Its just that for us the timing is almost NEVER right.

Last sunday, our usual day for sex. Previous day she hinted that she wanted it sunday. I've been providing no pressure.

Morning - chores, shopping. etc.

Then, finds out friends have new kittens - lets get lunch with them. 

Stay with friends until about 3pm. Then need to pick up somthing on the way home. Its 4. 

She has to look at guidebooks for our next trip. 

Its 5:30. getting hungry. I make dinner (usually she does). 

OK 6:30 get ready for bed.

7: She is tired. so sorry we can't have sex (i haven't asked BTW), but lets lie in bed and watch a movie. so we do.

9: time to get ready to sleep, she is sleeping by 9:30.


Every step made sense, the problem is that this pattern repeats constantly. Previous weekend it was a jazz concert. Before that we were jetlagged from travel (not of course to jetlagged for anything else). 

This morning she told me she slept badly, so I'm sure there will be no sex tonight (I haven't asked or suggested in weeks btw). In a few days she will start hinting about how much she wants sex next sunday. Come sunday I suspect that something will come up that makes it impossible.










Vega said:


> Don't know about you, but at the end of the day, I'm TIRED. I want to go to sleep.
> 
> Sex (if done the 'right' way, and you're not being a 'starfish') is a form of exercise, and exercise wakes me up!
> 
> ...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I completely understand. Its just that for us the timing is almost NEVER right.
> 
> Last sunday, our usual day for sex. Previous day she hinted that she wanted it sunday. I've been providing no pressure.
> ...


I don't want to have sex with my buddy, either.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

Richard….man.

It is time to make a change. I started mine with detaching, hitting the gym to improve my physical fitness level, and spending more time on my hobbies and my friends and letting her fend for herself.

You have a roommate, not a wife.

Treat her like one.

Either she hates it and you can set the qualifications for an intimate marriage or she will like it and you will have your answer, without question.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> The happier I make him the happier he seems to want to make me and the more he loves and appreciates me. I don't understand why, when married to a good man, any woman would not want to maximize her husband's happiness in any way that does not diminish her own. I also don't see why a man should have to jump through a lot of hoops to have his wife feel this way about him. *Wanting to take care of the needs of the other is what married love looks like! It's what both spouses signed up for when they married in the first place.*


This is what I don't understand either. Now, keep in mind, this is just from a guy's perspective, but it appears based on several posters that the guy is expected to jump through hoops, do every little thing possible, in hopes that it is eventually enough that his W wants to have sex with him more than once a year (Happy Wife Happy Life). Once again, we are talking about a committed and relatively happy marriage where both people you would hope would have a strong desire to make each other happy. Looking at my marriage, I should not be required to do XYZ for my W first before she considers having sex with me. Likewise, my W should not be required to have sex with me first in hopes that leads me to do XYZ. What should happen is that we should both understand what it takes to make each other happy, and to the best of our abilities work towards that. If that means at times my W initiating sex when maybe she isn't in the mood or me doing something non-sexual for her when I would rather sit and watch TV, well, that is called working to make the marriage work.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

EllisRedding said:


> This is what I don't understand either. Now, keep in mind, this is just from a guy's perspective, but it appears based on several posters that the guy is expected to jump through hoops, do everything little thing possible, in hopes that it is eventually enough that his W wants to have sex with him more than once a year (Happy Wife Happy Life). Once again, we are talking about a committed and relatively happy marriage where both people you would hope would have a strong desire to make each other happy. Looking at my marriage, I should not be required to do XYZ for my W first before she considers having sex with me. Likewise, my W should not be required to have sex with me first in hopes that leads me to do XYZ. What should happen is that we should both understand what it takes to make each other happy, and to the best of our abilities work towards that. If that means at times my W initiating sex when maybe she isn't in the mood or me doing something non-sexual for her when I would rather sit and watch TV, well, that is called working to make the marriage work.


And this is my problem with TAM in a nutshell.

The advice all seems to focus on how the HD (usually the man) needs to _earn_ sex from the LD partner.

It is all about a contractual exchange in which the HD partner exerts maximum effort addressing all aspects of a relationship (financial, social, parenting, non-sexual intimacy, sexual intimacy) while the LD partner relents and offers up maintenance sex as a reward.

Spending a few years lurking and posting on this forum has pushed me ever more towards one basic dictum as a universal truth:

You cannot negotiate desire.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

StilltheStudent said:


> And this is my problem with TAM in a nutshell.
> 
> The advice all seems to focus on how the HD (usually the man) needs to _earn_ sex from the LD partner.
> 
> ...


This brings up an important question. Once again, we assume a committed relationship, why is it that, just as you point out, it appears that the LD takes priority over the HD? What ever happened to both working together to find some middle ground


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

EllisRedding said:


> This brings up an important question. Once again, we assume a committed relationship, why is it that, just as you point out, it appears that the LD takes priority over the HD? What ever happened to both working together to find some middle ground


It has something to do with the ideological tilt of this place.

The one feeling I have always received while here is that the posters will bend over backwards to defend the LD-partner as "normal" or "vindicated" in their sexual dysfunction. The point always seems to be that the partner with a normal drive, categorized as HD in order to eliminate the stigma from the person with the dysfunction, is the one with the problem.

The charitable posters tend to be the ones that offer the classic answers of destabilization into ultimatum into final decision of leave or live with it.

Perhaps I get this feeling due to a small group of vocal posters that hit me the wrong way, but thread after thread, it is always the same.

I would be interested to see how this place would change if the culture changed from classifying these things as HD versus LD and instead cast things as Healthy Libido and Dysfunction.

Because, at the end of the day, that is what most of these come down to.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

StilltheStudent said:


> And this is my problem with TAM in a nutshell.
> 
> The advice all seems to focus on how the HD (usually the man) needs to _earn_ sex from the LD partner.
> 
> It is all about a contractual exchange in which the HD partner exerts maximum effort addressing all aspects of a relationship (financial, social, parenting, non-sexual intimacy, sexual intimacy) while the LD partner relents and offers up maintenance sex as a reward.


That is certainly not my perspective. My perspective is that the person who wants to change can affect change by action with the hopes of a positive re-action. Inertia happens in relationships not just physics. If you want to break down barriers of ... whatever the root cause of the issue is, sometimes you have to shake things up.

Non sexual example. When we first married, my DH did NO housework. He thought he did. He would do it once upon my complaint. Then forget about it again. I became a nag. Sad to say. Onto usenet I go to get my head handed to me. I whined. He SHOULD be helping with housework. Finally someone got through to me.

I told him that I loved him but I was not living the rest of my life as the primary breadwinner and exclusive housekeeper, grocery shopper, bill payer... I was not going to nag him. I was going to stop trying to micromanage his time. But I also was not cleaning up after him. I was not going to be a douche. If I was cooking for me, I would cook for him too. But I was not cleaning up after him. I put his laundry aside. If he left **** around that was in my way, I stuffed it in the closet. I put money in a separate account for him (he was way over spending too since he had no concept of a budget) and took away his access to the bill account.

At first he was pissed. But over time he started to really SEE what his lifetime of having someone do for him caused his inability to really grasp what goes on in a house. He started doing his share. He appreciated my lack of nagging and enjoyed his free time, so that resentment faded....





> Spending a few years lurking and posting on this forum has pushed me ever more towards one basic dictum as a universal truth:
> 
> You cannot negotiate desire.


No, you are right. You can't. But you can affect it. The one thing that posters do on saying that they want desire from their wives is require higher quantity of sex. That does not affect desire in the slightest. Just scheduling.

I remember when my husband stopped getting butt hurt when I "rejected" him, and I became free to say no without wrecking his world. This was a part of a series of conversations where he made it clear that he was not living in a sexless marriage and that he did not just want duty sex from me. He was explaining what porn meant to him and asked me to accept that what it meant to him was not what it meant to me (cheating, replacing, measuring). Ok I can figure out a way to accept that. But at the same time, I asked him to accept that my saying no was not a rejection of HIM. He backed all the way off and allowed me to say no. He also stopped ***** footing around the idea that he wanted to have sex with me. He let me see his desire right out there.

When he was able to not get all hurt from "rejection", he started being able to be more light hearted and fun. And I could respond without feeling pressured for sex as in.... he is being nice to me now I have to give him sex. We did a number of exercises from the book, but I cannot remember now what they were. Because I loved him and wanted him in my life and NEW that my old habits/expectations/baggage of what married life "meant" was going to mean the end for my marriage, I decided to go out there and really try. I remember by what then I thought of as lingerie. (It was like a cute little nighty.) I was so scared. I put it on. He loved it! Not because he gives a pattootie about lingerie but because *I* had acted. We did not have sex that night. I found I was disappointed. I had relied on him to do all the heavy lifting in the sex department. Relied on it. I think we had sex 3 times a day for the rest of the week. In the 20 something years since, he has never ever ever pressured me to do anything. If I was not full in, full stop. Period. It allowed me to open. I know the flower metaphor is corny. But it is all that comes to mind.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
agreed, but you don't wear sexy cloths for your buddy and expect appreciative comments either. You don't like to line in bed naked next to your buddy and watch movies. You don't ask your buddy for a foot rub and expect a good night kiss.

All those things suggest to me that I'm not her "buddy", but that she just doesn't want sex. 



marduk said:


> I don't want to have sex with my buddy, either.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> I don't want to have sex with my buddy, either.


"Sunday is our usual day for sex" was bordering on chilling. I'd be tired too by 7:00pm. Oh Richard, since I have not entirely pissed you off (not that I am trying too... you seem to actually kind of get me) WHY is your wife so tired all the time? It sounds like she sleeps badly. But you guys are not super old. There is no reason to be tired all the time.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> agreed, but you don't wear sexy cloths for your buddy and expect appreciative comments either. You don't like to line in bed naked next to your buddy and watch movies. You don't ask your buddy for a foot rub and expect a good night kiss.
> 
> All those things suggest to me that I'm not her "buddy", but that she just doesn't want sex.


All things that girls do.

With their girlfriends.

Trust me on this, man. Stop being her girlfriend.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> That is certainly not my perspective. My perspective is that the person who wants to change can affect change by action with the hopes of a positive re-action. Inertia happens in relationships not just physics. If you want to break down barriers of ... whatever the root cause of the issue is, sometimes you have to shake things up.


You guys did not simply shake things up, you both issued ultimatums that, if they were not met, clearly indicated the end of your marriage.

Interesting.



NobodySpecial said:


> I remember when my husband stopped getting butt hurt when I "rejected" him, and I became free to say no without wrecking his world. This was a part of a series of conversations where he made it clear that he was not living in a sexless marriage and that he did not just want duty sex from me.


This is another interesting part of your post.

You made it clear that you need to be allowed to say no, which of course he agreed with.

And all of this operated with the understanding that if you failed to work your way into a sexually fulfilling marriage that you would have no marriage.

If I had to guess, he was comfortable with those rejections because he was, by that point, contemplating a life without you in it.

He literally threw down the "F*** Me, or F*** You," ultimatum at your feet.

In my experience it takes a man willing to end his relationship, on the spot, to have that conversation.

Getting to that point is painful and, for me at least, destroys a part of the original sense of Love I had.

The only reason you guys found your way to where you are now is because your husband forced you to chose.

Fortunately for you guys it sounds like you put the work in on your sex life the same way he did with his finances and work around the house.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I did say. About a year or so back I told her what I wanted / needed. Sex got better for a while, then went back to near zero. What should I have done next?


Better for whom? Increased frequency for you? When you told her what you wanted / needed, what did you specify? The reason I ask is because there were 2 key things that were helpful from m husband way back when:

- Frequency was not in the discussion at all. My "giving" was very much, decidedly NOT the point. The point was a loving, spontaneous, engaged sex LIFE, not a plea for x times per week. I would not have been able to sustain just giving action over the course of the decades. Eventually inertia would have set in. My guess is right here is the first ooops. My guess is you asked for increased frequency.

- Started opening demonstrating desire for me instead of hiding it like some kind of bad thing. 

But he also refused to engage without my engagement. That a start?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

StilltheStudent said:


> You guys did not simply shake things up, you both issued ultimatums that, if they were not met, clearly indicated the end of your marriage.


Absof'inglutely. Not because we were being jerks. But because it was true. Effective limit setting means not settling for that which is not to be settled for.




> Interesting.
> 
> 
> This is another interesting part of your post.
> ...


Meh I guess I would agree with that if that was ALL he did.



> In my experience it takes a man willing to end his relationship, on the spot, to have that conversation.


He was not ready on the spot. He was very clear, as I have stated earlier in this thread, that his desire was to make that happy sex life with ME because he loved ME. But at some point, he knew that no sex was going to be untenable to him. He then proceeded to help ME find MY way.



> Getting to that point is painful and, for me at least, destroys a part of the original sense of Love I had.
> 
> The only reason you guys found your way to where you are now is because your husband forced you to chose.


What he did was give me enough motivation to break through the baggage of what I thought marriage should be and instead of focusing on this thing called marriage focus on marriage with HIM.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
the sex on sunday is her idea not mine. She has responded to any of my initiations for sex a long time (probably years), unless I initiate at a time when it is already clear she was planning on it. When she initiates its sunday afternoons 95% of the time.

She does sleep badly - but not that badly. I think she is often low on sleep but it almost never prevents her from doing what she wants to do (including very tiring things). (more than once she has been too "tired" for sex, then wanted to go for a multi-mile hike in the mountains. Its not "tired" in the usual sense).

I think that she honestly doesn't understand why she doesn't feel lie sex. She knows intellectually that she enjoys it (or at least she always claims that she does). I think that when for whatever reason she doesn't desire it she identifies the feeling as being "tired". 

A contributing factor is that she usually sleeps badly after sex - neither of us has any idea why.

When I've tried to talk about her being too tired for sex but not for anything else she gets very upset - again I think it is because she knows she isn't reacting reasonably but she doesn't know why.

Sadly though there is a layer around all that where she thinks she is typical and I'm abnormal in wanting sex once a week or more. She feels like it would be nice to do nice things for me if she were not so tired, but that my expectations a fundamentally unreasonable. 






NobodySpecial said:


> "Sunday is our usual day for sex" was bordering on chilling. I'd be tired too by 7:00pm. Oh Richard, since I have not entirely pissed you off (not that I am trying too... you seem to actually kind of get me) WHY is your wife so tired all the time? It sounds like she sleeps badly. But you guys are not super old. There is no reason to be tired all the time.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> What he did was give me enough motivation to break through the baggage of what I thought marriage should be and instead of focusing on this thing called marriage focus on marriage with HIM.


Let's not mince words: the motivation was a simple equation.

Fail at this and I am done. Period.

The problem, NobodySpecial, is that The Talk(TM) carries with it the same basic content. 

The spurned spouse expresses their need for sexual intimacy and offers to help their partner find a way to get to it.

The problem of course is that The Talk(TM) has a failure rate approaching 100%.

Without the threat of your marriage coming crashing down around you and you losing the love of your life, I doubt those conversations would have led to the same point.

*Your husband literally had to get to a point where he told you, to your face, that he loved you, but could finally see a point in which you were no longer part of his life.*

That is the important piece.


EDIT: I am thinking about the cost of having that conversation, from the husband's standpoint...JFC


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

richardsharpe said:


> *When I've tried to talk about her being too tired for sex but not for anything else she gets very upset - again I think it is because she knows she isn't reacting reasonably but she doesn't know why.
> *
> Sadly though there is a layer around all that where she thinks she is typical and I'm abnormal in wanting sex once a week or more. She feels like it would be nice to do nice things for me if she were not so tired, but that my expectations a fundamentally unreasonable.


Bingo, Red Flag.

Richard, I think you are being too nice.

You are letting her get away with what are, and you know this, completely childish excuses.

Stop being the Nice Guy.
Stop accepting the status quo.

If she really thinks of you and your happiness as a priority this is something she can manage to do (reconnect with her sexuality and desire for you).

I think the problem here is that you refuse to think badly of her, you want her to "want you" but it is an easier out to think "she really is tired," instead of "she knows she can get away with it."


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening 
it *seemed* better for both of us. Sex was better, she initiated more often and seemed to enjoy it more, and enjoy more variety. We both seemed more affectionate all the. She'd make jokes about how we didn't behave like normal "old married couples". She'd send loving or flirtatious emails at work. 

Over 30 years we've had several discussions. The first was a very general "I love you and I desire you and I don't want to live in a nearly sexless marriage". Short term improvement, then decline. Later (2 years?) similar, simlar effect. Most recently I tried being specific about what I thought was a good sex life because it seemed she didn't understand. Same effect.

You have to realize that in general she agrees that it would be great to have sex more often. It just doesn't happen.


So right now things are declining (its been a month). What would you suggest? So far I've been acting normally, not asking or pressuring at all. I'm not as physically affectionate as usual because it is just to frustrating. So she gets backrubs and casual kisses but much less naked cuddling and passionate kissing.





NobodySpecial said:


> Better for whom? Increased frequency for you? When you told her what you wanted / needed, what did you specify? The reason I ask is because there were 2 key things that were helpful from m husband way back when:
> 
> - Frequency was not in the discussion at all. My "giving" was very much, decidedly NOT the point. The point was a loving, spontaneous, engaged sex LIFE, not a plea for x times per week. I would not have been able to sustain just giving action over the course of the decades. Eventually inertia would have set in. My guess is right here is the first ooops. My guess is you asked for increased frequency.
> 
> ...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

StilltheStudent said:


> The problem, NobodySpecial, is that The Talk(TM) carries with it the same basic content.
> 
> The spurned spouse expresses their need for sexual intimacy and offers to help their partner find a way to get to it.
> 
> ...


What is a limit? Is it a thing that is so important that it must be? We are very good at setting them with our kids. I remember taking 4 not super old kids to the lake, 2 not mine. Not a quarter of the way down the driveway, the smart ass takes off his seat belt. I just stop. I look at him and tell him that I am not watching 4 small children in water who have no regard for safety. He puts his belt on. A little bit down the driveway, he takes it off again. Stop the car. Look I don't want to go to the lake, particularly. And I don't need to take you. You either get on board with this whole basic safety thing or we call the whole thing off. My son yells <friend> SHE MEANS IT. That is a limit. It means this is what is. This is what I will take. 

I use a kid example. But the truth is it happens in every human relationship. Or should.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> the sex on sunday is her idea not mine. She has responded to any of my initiations for sex a long time (probably years), unless I initiate at a time when it is already clear she was planning on it. When she initiates its sunday afternoons 95% of the time.


this is either:
A) making sure that we get some sex because I forget/get over scheduled/don't prioritize sex with my husband
Or
B) don't like having sex with my husband so I constrain it to one day a week so I can relax the rest of the time

Which is it?



> She does sleep badly - but not that badly. I think she is often low on sleep but it almost never prevents her from doing what she wants to do (including very tiring things). (more than once she has been too "tired" for sex, then wanted to go for a multi-mile hike in the mountains. Its not "tired" in the usual sense).


Funny. When my wife was an elite athlete, she could workout 5 hours a day. And then be exhausted at night. Or even say no to me, and then go on a 3 hour run. Because she was tired.

Hmm, or it could be that she just didn't want to have sex with me.



> I think that she honestly doesn't understand why she doesn't feel lie sex. She knows intellectually that she enjoys it (or at least she always claims that she does). I think that when for whatever reason she doesn't desire it she identifies the feeling as being "tired".


What was it like when you were dating?



> A contributing factor is that she usually sleeps badly after sex - neither of us has any idea why.


Can't sleep after a giant O?

Or after sex that's just for you?



> When I've tried to talk about her being too tired for sex but not for anything else she gets very upset - again I think it is because she knows she isn't reacting reasonably but she doesn't know why.


She either can't admit it, won't admit it to herself, or doesn't like her go-to excuse being questioned.

Because she doesn't have an answer for it.



> Sadly though there is a layer around all that where she thinks she is typical and I'm abnormal in wanting sex once a week or more. She feels like it would be nice to do nice things for me if she were not so tired, but that my expectations a fundamentally unreasonable.


Just got a full physical. My doctor, who is female, told me that I should aim to be having sex 3-4 times per week. If I can manage it, and my wife is OK with it. That it's healthy, normal, and although it's not average -- that if we prioritize it that a whole host of health issues improve or be mitigated.

You're not unreasonable. You're being sold the lie that you're being unreasonable so that you will accept her being unreasonable.

When you're holding the winning hand in poker, you call the bluff. 

So, call her bluff.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> I got married to my husband because there is very little I need to take care of for him. *I was attracted to him for that very reason-he didn't really need me in his life at all to be happy, healthy and successful. He still doesn't need me, but I am currently an asset to his life; same with him.
> *
> When I think of why I am married to my husband it isn't because he takes care of my needs, it because together we are extremely successful at achieving our goals and fulfilling our desires--we do it better together than apart. I also married my husband because without the needs, I am far more free to express myself freely and that is what I was personally searching for.
> 
> So, in addition to figuring out your drives and your personality and N.U.T.S, it helps to be aligned in your vision of marriage as well, I think.


Oh, FrenchFry! Now ^^^^THIS^^^^^ is what I call _healthy_! Thriving together, but not 'glued' together. Happy together, but not _*UN*_happy if you're not together. 

What you're describing is _exactly_ what I'll be looking for in the future. 

Thank you. :smile2:


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> The happier I make him the happier he seems to want to make me and the more he loves and appreciates me.* I don't understand why, when married to a good man, any woman would not want to maximize her husband's happiness in any way that does not diminish her own. I also don't see why a man should have to jump through a lot of hoops to have his wife feel this way about him. Wanting to take care of the needs of the other is what married love looks like! It's what both spouses signed up for when they married in the first place.
> *


*

Olivia, serious question......do you believe it's the wife's responsibility to maintain a sexually fullfilling marriage? 

Memory jog - I am the HD struggling with a conditional LD husband (he's suffering from ED that he is not taking action to resolve). Your advice to me when I explained my husband's lack of interest in meeting my needs was to "dial it down, reassure him that you love him and that this is just a bump in the road that will sort itself out", "he knows it's important to you, now give him some space to work it out on his own", "buy some toys, look after yourself for now", "wait it out. Be loving and patient. He needs that." 

That's not the advice you're giving the HD men here posting about their LD wives. Your posts seem to point LD wives to meet their HD husband's sexual demands; and HD wives to 'back off' from making demands of their LD husbands.*


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

farsidejunky said:


> Okay. But more specifically, I was taking the approach of trying to figure out if you feel used if she goes beyond "within reason"?
> 
> Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


No, because I wouldn't do it if I thought it wasn't within reason.

In the past, in similar situations, I might have been too lax in what I considered reasonable.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Vega said:


> Oh, FrenchFry! Now ^^^^THIS^^^^^ is what I call _healthy_! Thriving together, but not 'glued' together. Happy together, but not _*UN*_happy if you're not together.
> 
> What you're describing is _exactly_ what I'll be looking for in the future.
> 
> Thank you. :smile2:


Yes.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

FrenchFry said:


> This is not why I got married, nor is it what married love looks like for me. (So important to know this before you take the plunge, eh?)
> 
> I got married to my husband because there is very little I need to take care of for him. I was attracted to him for that very reason-*he didn't really need me in his life at all to be happy, healthy and successful. *He still doesn't need me, but I am currently an asset to his life; same with him.
> 
> ...


Saying you want to take care of SOs needs does not in any way imply that you are glued to them or you couldn't have a life without them  I had posted before, and I believe @OliviaG posted similar, we love our spouses but at the same time could have had a life without them, still been happy, successful, etc... I fail to see a correlation between caring about the needs of your spouse and whether or not your spouse could have a life without you, at least in my case and a few others here.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> No. It is scattered throughout the thread. Start with Passionate Marriage. And Hold onto to your N.U.T.s. I am unwilling to repeat the whole thing.


I tried to read a summary of "Passionate Marriage" but couldn't get much insight (I'll keep looking).

But, it does seem to need the involvement of both partners, correct?

If so, what should be done if one partner doesn't want to participate? How would one get them to be willing to give it a try?

And, yes, one should always hold on to one's nuts, but I suspect that doesn't always trigger desire in one's partner. It may well leave to one's having the self-respect to leave.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> Oh forgot another contributing issue. Baggage. Whatever preconceived notions we carry into marriage about what marriage and sex mean, what it means to be our gender...
> 
> I think the LD/HD thing is a total red herring that distracts from what is really going on. I think that the VAST majority of cases has nothing to do with biological drive but is about the failure to deposit in the attraction and love banks and repeated withdrawals from the attraction and love banks.


I think that's there's bound to be plenty of biological, given hormones and all. What about men who lose their libido as the age and have less testosterone and women who experience a surge or drop off with menopause?


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> I tried to read a summary of "Passionate Marriage" but couldn't get much insight (I'll keep looking).
> 
> But, it does seem to need the involvement of both partners, correct?
> [/quote
> ...


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> What should I have done next?


Leave


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

marduk said:


> Just got a full physical. My doctor, who is female, told me that I should aim to be having sex 3-4 times per week. If I can manage it, and my wife is OK with it. That it's healthy, normal, and although it's not average -- that if we prioritize it that a whole host of health issues improve or be mitigated.


Can you elaborate on this? I've never heard of a doctor recommending a specific number of times a week couples should have sex for optimal medical purposes. What is this host of health issues that are mitigated only by having sex with your spouse exactly 3-4 times a week?

Are single people doomed to having a host of health issues since they don't have spouses to accommodate this medical need?

I'm not being sarcastic. Genuinely confused on this point.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> What is a limit? Is it a thing that is so important that it must be? ...
> 
> I use a kid example. But the truth is it happens in every human relationship. Or should.


The part I find unfathomable is that the LD partner thinks that a satisfying sexual relationship with their spouse is one of those items they can ignore and that their spouse should just deal with it.

The more I lurk and talk with people the more I am convinced, there is really only one solution:
1) Fix your stuff (Work, Home, Kids, Fitness, Finance)
2) Set Clear Expectations and Clear Consequences of Ending the Marriage
3) Follow Through

Anything else is a pointless waste of time while the HD spouse tries to convince themselves that things are bearable or will fix themselves.

Hate to use you as an example, but Richard, that is what is going on with you.

I think you know what it will take to address you issue, but it is easier to be the Nice Guy and let your wife get away with the childish excuses which amount to little more than blatant lies.

Getting yourself to the point where you are literally able to handle both the concept of loving someone and wanting them in your life forever and immediately jettisoning them from your life and replacing them, and being able to reconcile those feelings in a single conversation, is hard.

Not sure I can personally ever love my wife as fully any more now that I am there.

Even if she eventually comes around puts in the effort, I will always remember that I had to literally threaten to nuke the entire relationship to get her to pay attention.

…

And why have I not had that conversation yet?

Easier to push it off a few weeks and hope things change for the better…

Of course they never do.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> @Lila, that post I wrote about what my husband has done for me is on page 34 of this thread.


I read your story and it looks like your husband actually came through for you? He listened to your needs and took action. Would you have "dialed it down" or been of the opinion that "he knows it's important to you, now give him some space to work it out on his own". Would you have bought some toys and looked after yourself for the time being had he not taken your concerns seriously? Most of us don't have spouses like your husband.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> What he did was give me enough motivation to break through the baggage of what I thought marriage should be and instead of focusing on this thing called marriage focus on marriage with HIM.


Exactly. 

The idea behind "I don't intend to spend the rest of my life in a marriage where......." isn't that you expect your partner to immediately change.

You hope that this provides the motivation for your partner to consider changing one last time. 

One problem is that you might be too far gone to care if they're motivated or not.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

norajane said:


> Are single people doomed to having a host of health issues since they don't have spouses to accommodate this medical need?


I was JUST wondering the same thing, norajane! How do HD single people deal with their "needs" , if they're not in an LTR or married?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> This is not why I got married, nor is it what married love looks like for me. (So important to know this before you take the plunge, eh?)
> 
> I got married to my husband because there is very little I need to take care of for him. I was attracted to him for that very reason-he didn't really need me in his life at all to be happy, healthy and successful. He still doesn't need me, but I am currently an asset to his life; same with him.
> 
> ...


That's a much colder view of marriage then I have.

Good to know indeed.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> I don't even know how to respond, our misunderstanding of what I'm saying is so vast that *I have to wonder if we are speaking different languages*


We are.

Our brains are wired so differently that we really can't communicate.

I should stop trying as well.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> Exactly.
> 
> The idea behind "I don't intend to spend the rest of my life in a marriage where......." isn't that you expect your partner to immediately change.
> 
> ...


Honestly I don't think that was his motivation at the time. He was just being completely honest. Huh. I wonder what his hope was.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

StilltheStudent said:


> The more I lurk and talk with people the more I am convinced, there is really only one solution:
> 1) Fix your stuff (Work, Home, Kids, Fitness, Finance)
> 2) Set Clear Expectations and Clear Consequences of Ending the Marriage
> 3) Follow Through


There is one more thing. Make it step 1b) Make absolutely certain that you have communicated your needs clearly. It is very easy for people to not hear what they don't want to hear.

Otherwise, yep, that's the solution.



StilltheStudent said:


> Not sure I can personally ever love my wife as fully any more now that I am there.
> 
> Even if she eventually comes around puts in the effort, I will always remember that I had to literally threaten to nuke the entire relationship to get her to pay attention.


That's the downside of it having come to this point.



StilltheStudent said:


> And why have I not had that conversation yet?
> 
> Easier to push it off a few weeks and hope things change for the better…
> 
> Of course they never do.


Get to it!


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Lila said:


> I read your story and it looks like your husband actually came through for you? He listened to your needs and took action. Would you have "dialed it down" or been of the opinion that "he knows it's important to you, now give him some space to work it out on his own". Would you have bought some toys and looked after yourself for the time being had he not taken your concerns seriously? Most of us don't have spouses like your husband.


Sorry to butt in, but I thought the "dial it down" was a response to PA being caused by pressure to perform, not because you're a woman.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

norajane said:


> Can you elaborate on this? I've never heard of a doctor recommending a specific number of times a week couples should have sex for optimal medical purposes. What is this host of health issues that are mitigated only by having sex with your spouse exactly 3-4 times a week?
> 
> Are single people doomed to having a host of health issues since they don't have spouses to accommodate this medical need?
> 
> I'm not being sarcastic. Genuinely confused on this point.


She had this conversation with me specifically around prostate health, blood pressure, and a generalized state of well being and stress management.

Oh, and some kind of comment about ED being a sign of heart health somehow, but I forgot exactly what.

She wasn't citing this as a 'prescription for sex' or a means to force sex -- it was a sense of prioritizing it as part of a healthy lifestyle.

Oh, and she said something about a study citing reduced prostate cancer risk at that kind of frequency. I think that was where she cited the number from.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

marduk said:


> Oh, and she said something about a study citing reduced prostate cancer risk at that kind of frequency. I think that was where she cited the number from.


It is not "sex" that supposedly reduces prostate cancer, it is ORGASMS...

...and we all know that we don't need sex (that is, with a partner) in order to have an orgasm.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> Sorry to butt in, but I thought the "dial it down" was a response to PA being caused by pressure to perform, not because you're a woman.


It was regarding holding my h to his end of the scheduled sex agreement.....which he kept avoiding.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Vega said:


> It is not "sex" that supposedly reduces prostate cancer, it is ORGASMS...
> 
> ...and we all know that we don't need sex (that is, with a partner) in order to have an orgasm.


Hey, I'm no doctor, but I do know the volume of ejaculate and it's composition is different from masturbation vs sex.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

This seemed to be kinda in the direction of what she was talking about:
10 Surprising Health Benefits of Sex

But then, she did have her finger in my ass a few minutes before that, and I was feeling a little off-put and not paying as much attention as I could have.


----------



## 2020hindsight (Nov 3, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> I understand this, but the question is why? I think I know the answer, and it's because you think of sex differently than say, making dinner when you don't feel like it for years on end.
> 
> We are brought up thinking we have to guard ourselves against men taking advantage of us sexually. There's something very negative about their sexual attention to us in our early years and it has to do with being taken advantage of, used and then discarded.
> 
> ...


There is also the newly discovered fact that female sexual arousal overrides the disgust reaction to certain odors, tastes, sights, and textures that would ordinarily repel many individuals. When you think about it, it's a neat trick on nature's part to be able to tamp down disgust so a person can enjoy a range of sexual acts.

Unfortunately, over time, if LD women participate repeatedly in sex without arousal, disgust is not warded off, and certain unpleasant, unconscious associations can arise in regard to sex and be reinforced. A person can even develop an aversion to sex. This phenomenon is quite separate from any issues of autonomy, sacrifice, and obligation in regard to providing sex without experiencing sexual pleasure.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

marduk said:


> She had this conversation with me specifically around prostate health, blood pressure, and a generalized state of well being and stress management.
> 
> Oh, and some kind of comment about ED being a sign of heart health somehow, but I forgot exactly what.
> 
> ...


Sorry, that's a lot too vague, and sounds nothing like the way you phrased it originally. 

I'm going to guess the kernel of truth is that men might need to ejaculate somewhat regularly to reduce prostate cancer risk by some undefined percentage in that study. That's it. Exercise can help with the stress management and blood pressure. Maybe the exercise part of sex helps with that? 

Anyway, that's not medical advice that people should have sex with spouses 3-4 times a week or risk a whole host of medical issues, which is how you said it.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

norajane said:


> Sorry, that's a lot too vague, and sounds nothing like the way you phrased it originally.
> 
> I'm going to guess the kernel of truth is that men might need to ejaculate somewhat regularly to reduce prostate cancer risk by some undefined percentage in that study. That's it. Exercise can help with the stress management and blood pressure. Maybe the exercise part of sex helps with that?
> 
> Anyway, that's not medical advice that people should have sex with spouses 3-4 times a week or risk a whole host of medical issues, which is how you said it.


What I meant to say is that my doctor seemed to be saying that you can mitigate a whole host of health risks by having a decent amount of sex. It happened right after my prostate exam, and a little while after talking about blood pressure, stress, and that kind of thing.

I don't think a lack of sex is going to cause physical illness. 

I think however that a decent sex life can reduce stress, decrease the risk of prostate cancer, lower your blood pressure, that kind of thing.


----------



## 2020hindsight (Nov 3, 2015)

StilltheStudent said:


> It has something to do with the ideological tilt of this place.
> 
> The one feeling I have always received while here is that the posters will bend over backwards to defend the LD-partner as "normal" or "vindicated" in their sexual dysfunction. The point always seems to be that the partner with a normal drive, categorized as HD in order to eliminate the stigma from the person with the dysfunction, is the one with the problem.
> 
> ...


That is not the case. A person can be perfectly healthy and still have no libido to speak of. Sexual desire is a continuum from people who can take sex or leave it to people who crave it and think about it all the time. They are all healthy, but different. 

There are plenty of people who have had full medical workups at different points in their lives, and years of counseling, only to be told by the medical professionals that they're not dysfunctional at all--they just have a very low level of sexual desire. I know that isn't what you want to believe, but it's an inconvenient truth.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> Hey, I'm no doctor, but I do know the volume of ejaculate and it's composition is different from masturbation vs sex.


How do you know this? Do I want to know?


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> I don't understand why, when married to a good man, any woman would not want to maximize her husband's happiness in any way that does not diminish her own.


But for so many women (and some men), having sex does diminish their happiness. And having unwanted sex diminishes their happiness in a major way. So they can't maximize their spouse's happiness without reducing their own.

Maybe it is rape or abuse. Maybe it is society or religion telling them "good girls don't". Maybe their partner is lousy in bed and doesn't know how to make it good for their partner. Maybe years and years of unwanted sex have eroded their capacity to be generous and caring toward their partner. For whatever reason, some (many? most?) LDs do not have the ability to be sexually giving. Not their fault they don't. Only their fault if they knew and didn't admit the truth until after the HD was well and truly entangled by children, mixed assets, etc.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

NobodySpecial said:


> How do you know this? Do I want to know?


A buddy of mine who's wife had difficulty conceiving. And needed medical help to do so.

Somewhere I actually read an anthropological study that demonstrated that men have a significantly higher volume and amount of sperm when having sex with an affair partner -- and the women have a higher liklihood of becoming pregnant.

There seems to be a biological strategy in place that knows they might only get one shot at getting pregnant, so make it a good one.

I don't have it on hand, sorry. So it's just anecdotal evidence.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

2020hindsight said:


> That is not the case. A person can be perfectly healthy and still have no libido to speak of. Sexual desire is a continuum from people who can take sex or leave it to people who crave it and think about it all the time. They are all healthy, but different.
> 
> There are plenty of people who have had full medical workups at different points in their lives, and years of counseling, only to be told by the medical professionals that they're not dysfunctional at all--they just have a very low level of sexual desire. I know that isn't what you want to believe, but it's an inconvenient truth.


It is possible, but my doctor specifically asked me about my libedo as a measure of my general health. As in, is it diminishing?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

marduk said:


> I think however that *a decent sex life can reduce stress, decrease the risk of prostate cancer, lower your blood pressure, that kind of thing*.


So can jogging on a treadmill and eating a healthy diet. You can get the same kind of health benefits from ANY form of exercise as long as it's performed properly.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

marduk said:


> A buddy of mine who's wife had difficulty conceiving. And needed medical help to do so.
> 
> Somewhere I actually read an anthropological study that demonstrated that men have a significantly higher volume and amount of sperm when having sex with an affair partner -- and the women have a higher liklihood of becoming pregnant.
> 
> ...


Is it bad that I thought the answer was going to be different than this?


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

marduk said:


> It is possible, but my doctor specifically asked me about my libedo as a measure of my general health. As in, is it diminishing?


For a person whose libido is steadily low and always has been, the same question applies. Is it diminishing? If it's the same it's always been, even though it's low, they are not unhealthy as far as libido goes. The change is the concern, not the original level.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Vega said:


> So can jogging on a treadmill and eating a healthy diet. You can get the same kind of health benefits from ANY form of exercise as long as it's performed properly.


Not really. 

It's a good proxy for a great many things. 

Reproduction can be one of the first systems a body shuts down when it's breaking down. Or aging prematurely. Or under stress. 

Hell, I remember reading something about nitrogen levels in your blood being off can cause ED as a precursor to a heart attack or some such thing. 

I'd do it in conjunction with everything else.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Oh, I remembered something else. 

She checked me for testicular cancer and showed me how to check for lumps. And then said it's usually the case that the wife discovers them while having sex, so have her check them out. 

Same goes for breast lumps. Often apparently it's the husband that finds them. 

Your basically getting a systems check and body exam.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Lila said:


> It was regarding holding my h to his end of the scheduled sex agreement.....which he kept avoiding.


I'm on your side with this


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

norajane said:


> For a person whose libido is steadily low and always has been, the same question applies. Is it diminishing? If it's the same it's always been, even though it's low, they are not unhealthy as far as libido goes. The change is the concern, not the original level.


Or it could be a chronic condition.

I don't think a low libedo is a general indicator of good health. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

marduk said:


> Or it could be a chronic condition.
> 
> I don't think a low libedo is a general indicator of good health.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Neither is a HIGH libido. My late husband had a high libido and he passed away at 57 years old. He was about 100 lbs. overweight, had diabetes, high triglycerides, high cholesterol and several other health issues. AND, he used to pump iron to the size of a 52" chest when he was younger. 

He was also addicted to porn, would masturbate regularly in addition to us having sex about 10 times a week. And for as many orgasms as he was having, it STILL wasn't enough for him.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
It shouldn't be a case of her needing a "way out" from sex, or "getting away" without sex. It should be something she actively enjoys. If not that it should at least be something she enjoys doing for me. 

If sex is so horrible for her that she doesn't want to do it to make me happy, I don't want to pressure her into it. 




StilltheStudent said:


> Bingo, Red Flag.
> 
> Richard, I think you are being too nice.
> 
> ...


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I understand that I have choices:

Live in a marriage with a very limited sex life.

Threaten to leave (nicely). Get sex out of fear. For me, being desired is critical, my ego can't accept that.

Leave - get into a LTR with someone else, have an active sex life. Workable, but I'm unlikely to find someone that I am as happy with in other ways as I am with my wife. (who else has a wife that wants to talk over dinner about whether or not fuel-air explosions can be approximated as isentropic - because she has a project at work....)






Buddy400 said:


> Leave


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

pplwatching said:


> Yes, intentionally.
> 
> I would appreciate it if you would kindly remove the text from your post. I have decided to delete that post.
> 
> Thank you


Deleted! :smile2:


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> "Sunday is our usual day for sex" was bordering on chilling. I'd be tired too by 7:00pm. Oh Richard, since I have not entirely pissed you off (not that I am trying too... you seem to actually kind of get me) WHY is your wife so tired all the time? It sounds like she sleeps badly. But you guys are not super old. There is no reason to be tired all the time.


Too tired by 7 pm? May I ask what minerals does the mine you work at during the day produce? Coal or salt?

I'm 56 years old and sleep 6 hours a day (1-7 am). I am about 20 lb overweight and have been since highschool. I work a desk job. 

But I don't tire easily. After 8 hours work I get in my bike and do 10-20 miles depending on mood and weather. By 9, 10 at best my wife is "tired" too. I'm up till 1.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

StilltheStudent said:


> The more I lurk and talk with people the more I am convinced, there is really only one solution:
> 1) Fix your stuff (Work, Home, Kids, Fitness, Finance)
> 2) Set Clear Expectations and Clear Consequences of Ending the Marriage
> 3) Follow Through
> ...


You may be unaware of the wonderful psychology concept of conditioning... 

A lot of couples early on create those elaborate rituals that signify sex is coming. Then, as time goes by, the rituals happen less frequently, slowly reducing, until the universal LD constant is met. Or worse. But because of conditioning and the fact that frequency went down slowly, you don't notice early on. Then all of a sudden it's oh krap time.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Vega said:


> I was JUST wondering the same thing, norajane! How do HD single people deal with their "needs" , if they're not in an LTR or married?


My college roommate got a job with a tech company in Oregon and frequented the Rajneesh free love commune in the 1980's .

While in college he dated students, staff, and moms / mature women, the latter being his most popular group. He got more sex his 25 years in the USA than anyone I know.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

john117 said:


> My college roommate got a job with a tech company in Oregon and frequented the Rajneesh free love commune in the 1980's .
> 
> While in college he dated students, staff, and moms / mature women, the latter being his most popular group. He got more sex his 25 years in the USA than anyone I know.


It's also entirely possible that they just aren't getting those needs met. 

A person who's unable to find a long term relationship can still be HD. Doesn't mean they're getting their needs met. In fact, they might not ever. They just grow old and die unhappy.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

badsanta said:


> These are very good points! In our intimate life my wife COMPLAINED to me that I would be initiating sex ALL DAY LONG until it I would finally get my way. In reality I was just being playful with her throughout the day. She asked me to stop with the relentless initiations, and I replaced that NOT with asking her, but instead of informing her what my actual state of arousal is. In reality this actually functioned as asking or queuing her in on the fact that I was desiring to be with her. This has proven problematic, so I am not going to do it anymore.


So your before and after is just doing variations of the same?


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Badsanta said:


> These are very good points! In our intimate life my wife COMPLAINED to me that I would be initiating sex ALL DAY LONG until it I would finally get my way. In reality I was just being playful with her throughout the day. She asked me to stop with the relentless initiations, and I replaced that NOT with asking her, but instead of informing her what my actual state of arousal is. In reality this actually functioned as asking or queuing her in on the fact that I was desiring to be with her. This has proven problematic, so I am not going to do it anymore.





Personal said:


> So your before and after is just doing variations of the same?


I'm not quite sure about what you mean by before or after. Not too long ago I would always hug my wife, grab her passionately (put my hands in her pants to grab her butt), and often try to kiss her if she would let me. This would just be me trying to be playful, but that behavior stressed her out because she thought I was trying to initiate sex all the time. 

So I stopped that and would just give her a simple hug and kiss and if I was starting to get build up a desire to be with her, I would keep her informed of where I was and my ability to manage it. This proved not to work well, because it was like scheduling sex. But I do think it was a valuable experience because it demonstrated to my wife that I was NOT always desiring sex (as she ALWAYS accused me of being). In reality my desire would return about two days after sex, and become unrelenting if more than a week went by. I can deal with unrelenting desire, BUT at that point I communicated very clearly to my wife to not just push me away, that I would need a back rub or a little something (HJ or a small tease) to help prevent me from feeling disconnected or irritable. 

NOW, in the past two weeks I have changed. I do NOT advise her of my arousal, and I make it a point to be emotionally connected (while respecting her personal space and mine) and keep physical contact rather simple as in a hug, simple kiss, or holding hands while we watch TV or something. I also do NOT discuss my desire NOR do I volunteer any information regarding my masturbation (I will if she needs to ask, and yesterday she did). What I AM doing that I do not think I have done before, is just paying attention to her body language. I have noticed a STRONG disconnect is what she tells me and her body language.

Yesterday we were BOTH exhausted! If there were ever a time when I thought sex would not happen due to physical exhaustion, this would have been a day. My wife and I had worked really hard on some projects around the house, to the point were we had trouble getting up to walk as our bodies ached. So we are lying in bed after the kids went to bed and talking, hugging and rubbing each others backs. At some point we started talking about sex, and for the first time (since I can remember) it was a rather non-confrontational conversation and we were even joking about it. Then she started kissing my neck and sending me physical queues that she was very receptive, but at the same time her verbal queues were the opposite as she would tell me, "not tonight as I don't think it can happen!" I honestly thought nothing was going to happen, but I allowed our bodies to continue responding to one another. 

...half a jar of Nutella and coconut oil later things got crazy. So much so to the point that I had trouble keeping up with my wife...

Afterwards I looked at my wife and asked her as we were out of breath and our bodies ached, "was that the Nutella?" ...and we both died laughing!

I am not bragging about this post, but I am want to make it a point that it is rather difficult for me to withhold playful affection throughout the day to give my wife some space. It is also difficult for me to be told it is not going to happen and proceed while it is very obvious her body is responding. At the end of the day, it takes a great deal of self confidence and patience to adjust my behavior this way, but I am learning a lot about myself and what my wife needs from me to feel loved.

While my case is likely unlike others, my wife's primary need from me at the moment in our relationship is for me to NOT make her feel like I am getting inpatient or upset with her when sex sometimes just does not happen naturally. AND for me to back off a day or two right after it happens.

Badsanta


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Vega said:


> Neither is a HIGH libido. My late husband had a high libido and he passed away at 57 years old. He was about 100 lbs. overweight, had diabetes, high triglycerides, high cholesterol and several other health issues. AND, he used to pump iron to the size of a 52" chest when he was younger.
> 
> He was also addicted to porn, would masturbate regularly in addition to us having sex about 10 times a week. And for as many orgasms as he was having, it STILL wasn't enough for him.


Totally agree.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I understand that I have choices:
> 
> Live in a marriage with a very limited sex life.
> ...


The idea is not to get sex out of fear.

There is a chance (albeit a small chance) that your wife REALLY doesn't understand what this means to you. Since you haven't left, she might think that means that it really isn't as big a problem as you've claimed. I was in a related situation where I was certain that she understood what I wanted but, after finally "getting it", she insisted that she hadn't known (and I believe her).

Also, it's possible that your wife enjoys sex with you and simply has some hangup (like NobodySpecial did) that is preventing her from doing it or prioritizing it. With enough motivation, she might be able to overcome her issues.

If nothing else has been able to get through to her how serious you are or motivate her to work on the situation, saying that you intend to leave if nothing changes MAY work (probably not) as long as you're actually willing to leave. 

This is the only chance that remains of having a meaningful sex life with your wife.

If you're not willing to do this, then just accept a sexless life and focus on whatever else you enjoy about the marriage.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

2020hindsight said:


> That is not the case. A person can be perfectly healthy and still have no libido to speak of. Sexual desire is a continuum from people who can take sex or leave it to people who crave it and think about it all the time. They are all healthy, but different.


Sorry, but no.

If you are a mammal with a properly functioning limbic system and a healthy hormonal balance then you will have a sex drive.

Sex drives exist on a range, yes, and there is no single frequency that is specifically normal, however, there is a range of normalcy that the vast majority of the population falls into depending on age and other health status.

This drive to pretend that it is normal for a sexually reproducing mammal to not have a sex drive is nothing more than politically correct garbage designed to protect people who do not want to be identified with "having issues."



2020hindsight said:


> There are plenty of people who have had full medical workups at different points in their lives, and years of counseling, only to be told by the medical professionals that they're not dysfunctional at all--they just have a very low level of sexual desire. I know that isn't what you want to believe, but it's an inconvenient truth.


No, it is not.

Hypoactive Sexual Desire is a clinical disorder which requires only two contingencies: a lack of sexual interest and distress caused by that lack of interest.

It is not referred to as a disorder only when the person involved, statistically a woman, does not mind their lack of drive.

The moment the lack of desire causes distress, which normally occurs within a relationship, it becomes a clinically classifiable disorder.

HSDD is common; apparently it is a continuous problem for a much as 15% of the female population (about half as many men) and as many as 40% will suffer from it as some point in their lives.

HSDD is common but it is not healthy.

Sexually reproducing mammals, when healthy, have sex drives. Period.

The lack of a drive is dysfunctional, by definition.

The only people who want to pretend HSDD is "normal" and "healthy" are the people who want to provide excuses for not dealing with it.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

This is a good resource I was looking at about HSDD: HSDD | SexHealthMatters.org

It focuses specifically on women because apparently, while men suffer from HSDD, it affects more women more often.


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

StS: Yes and no. Maybe if the LD is always and everywhere low drive with all partners.

But more typically, the LD is LD in the context of a long term relationship with their current partner, based on their partner's current behavior, level of fitness, etc. Which is why the first level of advice to HDs is always "up your game".


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
5 years ago I did that and things got much better - for a while. The thing is, back then I really was willing to leave. In fact the conversation was not "we need more sex or I will leave", but "I am leaving". I just never got to saying that before she said that she would change everything, and for a while she did. 

Right now though, everything considered, I am not going to leave. I would be dishonest for me to tell her that I will leave if the sex doesn't improve, because I won't actually do it. Even if I was willing to leave, it would feel like a threat -and I don't want sex under threat. 






Buddy400 said:


> The idea is not to get sex out of fear.
> 
> There is a chance (albeit a small chance) that your wife REALLY doesn't understand what this means to you. Since you haven't left, she might think that means that it really isn't as big a problem as you've claimed. I was in a related situation where I was certain that she understood what I wanted but, after finally "getting it", she insisted that she hadn't known (and I believe her).
> 
> ...


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> 5 years ago I did that and things got much better - for a while. The thing is, back then I really was willing to leave. In fact the conversation was not "we need more sex or I will leave", but "I am leaving". I just never got to saying that before she said that she would change everything, and for a while she did.
> 
> Right now though, everything considered, I am not going to leave. I would be dishonest for me to tell her that I will leave if the sex doesn't improve, because I won't actually do it. Even if I was willing to leave, it would feel like a threat -and I don't want sex under threat.


I don't agree with those that say people with always do what's enjoyable for them. I know of lots of circumstances where that's not the case.

I believe that she probably DOES enjoy sex with you, but that it's outside of her comfort zone. She needs motivation to go outside her comfort zone and make it more of a priority. Since you can't provide her the motivation required, then you're out of luck.

Do you do anything for her that you'd rather not do? 

Do you like going to see kittens? Going to Jazz clubs? Being aroused by her naked or scantily-clad body when you're not allowed to have sex with her?

Unless making her happy makes you happy (and I think it does, although I don't understand why if she doesn't care about your happiness) then perhaps a 180 with the statement "since you don't prioritize my happiness, I will stop prioritizing yours" might be worth trying.


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> @Lila, if I were you I'd take @Buddy400's advice over mine when it comes to the situation with your husband. *He knows what he's talking about and I'm trying to get through my own situation using his advice.
> *
> The advice I gave to ease up on the pressure came from me observing the effect of that kind of pressure on my husband. But my situation is not exactly the same as yours, and importantly, I'm still in the middle of mine and I don't even know for sure that what I'm doing will lead to success. So definitely keep that in mind when you read anything from me; these things are so tricky to navigate and I sure don't want to say anything that might lead you down the wrong path.


Olivia, I don't think it's a matter of @Buddy400 advice being better than yours. I've been following this thread for a while now in the hopes that it'll help me figure out my own issues with H. 

The basis for this thread is that "men express their love through sex". Unfortunately, I come to realize that this idea doesn't apply to my H. My husband is an outlier from the norm (a.k.a. not normal). Even more unfortunate is the lack of information available for couples dealing with an HD wife and an LD husband. 

One thing is absolutely true regardless of the sex of the HD / LD....IMO both partners have to be 100% aware and committed to sexual issues in a marriage for there to be success. IMO, it'll never work without both partners acknowledging the issue and compromising on a resolution.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

Holdingontoit said:


> StS: Yes and no. Maybe if the LD is always and everywhere low drive with all partners.


That is not true.

Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder is any extended period of low or no sexual desire that persists for a long period of time (6-months is the number I am seeing) that causes distress to the individuals.

There are apparently multiple forms, including life-long (Asexuals want this identified as a Sexual Orientation not dysfunction), and acquired. The acquired types are either specific (to this relationship/situation) or generalized.



Holdingontoit said:


> But more typically, the LD is LD in the context of a long term relationship with their current partner, based on their partner's current behavior, level of fitness, etc. Which is why the first level of advice to HDs is always "up your game".


Also, not true.

Everything I have read when it comes to HSDD seems to imply that there are varied factors and that usually there is a combination of physical, mental, relationship, and stress. Usually, it is a mystery.

It is simply just that "upping your game" is the only thing we have control over and, I would guess, the only thing that can covertly signal the problem without having The Talk (TM).

Waning sexual desire is common in a relationship. Life gets in the way and stress works wonders on a libido.

But sustained non-interest in sexual intimacy, sustained avoidance of sexual intimacy, and sustained failure to experience arousal are all signs of a serious problem.

Personally, I feel like the treatment of what is a literal, clinically classifiable, sexual disorder as just "the way people are" is spending too much time protecting the self-esteem of the LD individual. 

Interestingly, the clinical stuff indicates that, so long as the person is single, the DSM is going to avoid categorizing it as a clinical disorder.

Basically, so long as you are by yourself and your physical dysfunction is not impacting someone else, then they protect the individual's self-esteem by eschewing classification. Same goes with self-identified Asexuals apparently.

But again, pretending that a sexually reproducing mammal without a sex drive is normal helps no one.

And at the end of the day, if it really is not HSDD, but some other kind of "loss of attraction," and if your partner's response to you faltering in either physical attractiveness or relational-intimacy is to cut off sex, either through conscious decision or neglect, that signals in my mind a deeper issue.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> I meant to add that I agree 100% with the above. You have to agree on the diagnosis of the problem - that's the first hurdle - and then you have to agree on a treatment - the second hurdle.
> 
> Both of these hurdles are extraordinarily difficult to get over. Painful struggles with what to say and how to say it so as not to hurt the other; trying to figure out how to communicate honestly but without entirely demoralizing oneself or one's partner. It's a very tough situation, to put it mildly.


Much less winded, this is what I am getting at.

You have to accept that there is a problem and agree to find a solution.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

OliviaG said:


> I think that you can rely on the advice of a guy who's been through it more so than that of a woman who hasn't, is what I mean. I would. It's not that I'm not giving the best advice that I can give, it's just that I don't have the same experience that's all.
> 
> What I've learned in the past year is that the behaviour of HD and LD is not gender-specific, it's entirely related to the status of HD or LD, regardless of gender. So you can't make any generalizations about gender with regards to how a person feels about sex and be completely accurate - you'll get more accuracy if you make generalizations about how an HD partner feels about sex vs an LD partner.
> 
> An HD partner needs the sex for connection; the LD partner gets the connection through means other than sex (as long as s/he's getting *enough* sex from partner, however little that may be).


I'm HD and I don't need sex for connection. Part of me learning to be a better husband was to specifically seek out that connection by other means, so as not to be emotionally needy with sex.

I need sex for sex.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Lila said:


> Olivia, I don't think it's a matter of @Buddy400 advice being better than yours. *I've been following this thread for a while now in the hopes that it'll help me figure out my own issues with H.
> 
> The basis for this thread is that "men express their love through sex". Unfortunately, I come to realize that this idea doesn't apply to my H. My husband is an outlier from the norm (a.k.a. not normal). Even more unfortunate is the lack of information available for couples dealing with an HD wife and an LD husband.
> *
> *One thing is absolutely true regardless of the sex of the HD / LD....IMO both partners have to be 100% aware and committed to sexual issues in a marriage for there to be success. *IMO, it'll never work without both partners acknowledging the issue and compromising on a resolution.





OliviaG said:


> I think that you can rely on the advice of a guy who's been through it more so than that of a woman who hasn't, is what I mean. I would. It's not that I'm not giving the best advice that I can give, it's just that I don't have the same experience that's all.
> 
> *What I've learned in the past year is that the behaviour of HD and LD is not gender-specific, it's entirely related to the status of HD or LD, regardless of gender.* So you can't make any generalizations about gender with regards to how a person feels about sex and be completely accurate - you'll get more accuracy if you make generalizations about how an HD partner feels about sex vs an LD partner.
> 
> An HD partner needs the sex for connection; the LD partner gets the connection through means other than sex (as long as s/he's getting *enough* sex from partner, however little that may be).


 @Lila If you are having problems understanding an LD partner, this thread and the reason I started it may be problematic. But as @OliviaG suggests, the issues may not be gender specific. Odds are the HD partner desires sex as a means to feel emotionally/physically accepted by the LD partner regardless of gender. Now it is unique sexually that men are literally accepted physically inside a female spouse, and that was why I started my theory (also based on how I feel) that a man's emotional desire to feel accepted is manifested physically. 

While it may not be helpful, I'll try to describe reasons I may NOT want to have sex with my wife at times (rarely happens):

#1 I'm upset with her over an argument and want her to feel me distant (trying to get better at this in the past few years). 
#2 I need to be left alone for some personal space.
#3 Performance anxiety. (Even as an HD, I know my wife expects me to reach climax with little effort on her behalf or she gets frustrated, withdraws, and accuses me of not really being into it. So if I have miscalculated when she will be receptive and masturbated recently, I sometimes cringe when she gets playful)
#4 I have predetermined obligations bothering me that she may not be aware of (like something I have procrastinated on and need to take care of (oil change, yard work) rather than relax and be intimate with my wife)
#5 Someone recently ordered pizza and I ate way too much again and feel bloated!

While #1 is the polar opposite of wanting to feel accepted, I often find those times to coincide with a high level of arousal personally. It can be rather frustrating, even so bad that I'll sometimes have to cry/laugh. My wife often withdraws and stonewalls my arguments in the past, so it is not as if she is begging me to calm down or be closer. I am often the one that has to end the arguments, and she is slow to forgive and reconcile.

At the end of the day when we argue/engage in issues over intimacy, my wife does listen and she does try to resolve things eventually. Although at first we sometimes have to air out many negative things together before we can moves forwards.

Hope that helps, 
Badsanta


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

StilltheStudent said:


> That is not true.
> 
> Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder is any extended period of low or no sexual desire that persists for a long period of time (6-months is the number I am seeing) that causes distress to the individuals.
> 
> ...


In my experience, LD has only been a mystery because someone's not being honest, or not saying what needs to be said.

Here's what friends/family members/my marriages reasons for LD:

A) unattractive partner
b) unhealthy lifestyle
C) deprioritizing sex
D) deprioritizing the whole relationship

Never "I don't want sex and I don't know why."

Usually it's "I don't want sex with my spouse, and I know why but I don't have the balls/ovaries to say."

Or "I don't want to have sex with my spouse and I don't want to admit it's because I can't be bothered to keep my equipment well maintained."


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

marduk said:


> I'm HD and I don't need sex for connection. Part of me learning to be a better husband was to specifically seek out that connection by other means, so as not to be emotionally needy with sex.
> 
> I need sex for sex.


So if sex stopped for some reason, hypothetically let us assume your wife has a mystery medical emergency/condition which renders PIV sexual activity life threatening for six months until she has fully recovered.

If you still need sex for sex because you are still healthy, would you take care of that all on your own, OR would you try to find an alternate way to share that with her?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

badsanta said:


> So if sex stopped for some reason, hypothetically let us assume your wife has a mystery medical emergency/condition which renders PIV sexual activity life threatening for six months until she has fully recovered.
> 
> If you still need sex for sex because you are still healthy, would you take care of that all on your own, OR would you try to find an alternate way to share that with her?


You can have lots of great non PIV sex, but yes if I couldn't satisfy her, I'd have to free her up to get that somewhere else. And vice versa.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening Lila
The more I read and discuss, the more I become convinced that there is no "normal" with HD/LD situations. They may seem similar because there is a natural tendency for people to map what they read about onto their own experience. When you look in detail though, it seems that this issue occurs in a wide variety of forms and that there are not effective standard answers. Different things work for different couples and for some couples nothing ever works.


I completely agree that in order for things to improve, both people have to be aware that there is a problem, but sadly in some cases is is almost impossible to convince a LD that problem exists (other than their partner being sexually selfish / addicted / a slvt / horndog).

I think that HD wife, LD husband is not very rare - I've known several cases in forums, and one in real life. I think it is just not talked about as much. Maybe women are more likely to feel that there is something wrong with them if they are not desired. 

To me the most frustrating thing is that since in a LD/HD relationship the HD will do almost anything to improve their sex lives, it is generally LD people who have the most attentive passionate lovers - the sort of people who would be perfect companions for other HDs. But for the LD it doesn't matter.








Lila said:


> Olivia, I don't think it's a matter of @Buddy400 advice being better than yours. I've been following this thread for a while now in the hopes that it'll help me figure out my own issues with H.
> 
> The basis for this thread is that "men express their love through sex". Unfortunately, I come to realize that this idea doesn't apply to my H. My husband is an outlier from the norm (a.k.a. not normal). Even more unfortunate is the lack of information available for couples dealing with an HD wife and an LD husband.
> 
> One thing is absolutely true regardless of the sex of the HD / LD....IMO both partners have to be 100% aware and committed to sexual issues in a marriage for there to be success. IMO, it'll never work without both partners acknowledging the issue and compromising on a resolution.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

OliviaG said:


> Tomato/tomahto. I'm betting that you need sex for sex (so do I) but that if you don't get it you start to feel disconnected. That's what I mean. There is a significant correlation between sex and connection for HD people whether or not it is causal.
> 
> Go ahead and try to deny it; I won't believe you though. 0


Oh no - I do agree with that. If any of the deal breakers of a marriage don't get satisfied, disconnection happens.

If I don't get enough attention, I disconnect. If I don't get enough sex, I disconnect. If I don't get enough respect, I disconnect. Attention, whatever. Over the longer-ish term.

What I'm saying is that sex is for sex for me now. If I don't get enough emotional attention or affection, I'm not seeking sex. I seek attention or affection. KWIM?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

OliviaG said:


> Saying I'm LD due to deprioritizing sex is a redundant statement. It's not an explanation of being LD, it's a description of it.


Not for those that claim to be asexuals. Or for those that claim not just not want sex any more and they don't know why, or say it's not about the spouse, or whatever.

It's like not cultivating a garden and then wondering why you get weeds instead of vegetables. 

Don't say you just don't want to have sex anymore and it's not about the marriage, when the reality is that you just can't be bothered to cultivate a healthy sex life with your spouse.

Or do what I experienced -- go try to have sex with your husband's buddy instead.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Lila said:


> Olivia, I don't think it's a matter of @Buddy400 advice being better than yours. I've been following this thread for a while now in the hopes that it'll help me figure out my own issues with H.
> 
> The basis for this thread is that "men express their love through sex". Unfortunately, I come to realize that this idea doesn't apply to my H. My husband is an outlier from the norm (a.k.a. not normal). Even more unfortunate is the lack of information available for couples dealing with an HD wife and an LD husband.
> 
> One thing is absolutely true regardless of the sex of the HD / LD....IMO both partners have to be 100% aware and committed to sexual issues in a marriage for there to be success. IMO, it'll never work without both partners acknowledging the issue and compromising on a resolution.


I'm not entirely certain that your husband is LD. It's probable that he does desperately want the emotional connection to you. It's probable that he does desperately want to fulfill your sexual needs. If doing those things didn't matter to him, he probably wouldn't have PA. Where he's going very wrong is in not showing you that he's doing everything possible to address the problem. Especially since the effort is what you care about the most. 

He probably isn't HD since I imagine HD guys have no trouble getting or keeping erections (if anybody has info to the contrary, chime in).

A guy can have physical desire and a desire to connect emotionally but, if there's a good chance that their penis isn't going to cooperate, the base instinct is to avoid the hurtful situation.

I really have no input into LD guys. I would think that it was mostly due to performance problems that lead to avoidance (but what little I've read doesn't really seem to back that up). If a guy has PA it takes a willingness to be vulnerable to your partner to work through the problem and I can imagine that a lot of guys would have problems being that vulnerable, especially if they already feel vulnerable.

T shots to up the libido and/or Viagra etc to support erections might give the boost needed to power through the mindfvck, so they can help.

It really comes down to the conscious mind being involved in something it has no business being involved in. It's like a tennis player starting to think about hitting the ball instead of just letting their body do what it does. Then performance suffers, the brain gets even more involved and the death spiral continues. 

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if engineers (generally very rational people) are more vulnerable to this than most.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

marduk said:


> I'm HD and I don't need sex for connection. Part of me learning to be a better husband was to specifically seek out that connection by other means, so as not to be emotionally needy with sex.
> 
> I need sex for sex.





badsanta said:


> So if sex stopped for some reason, hypothetically let us assume your wife has a mystery medical emergency/condition which renders PIV sexual activity life threatening for six months until she has fully recovered.
> 
> If you still need sex for sex because you are still healthy, would you take care of that all on your own, OR would you try to find an alternate way to share that with her?





marduk said:


> You can have lots of great non PIV sex, but *yes if I couldn't satisfy her, I'd have to free her up to get that somewhere else. And vice versa.*


So if your wife has a life threatening condition that temporarily does not allow you to please her, and non PIV sex with her is problematic, then there is a mutual understanding that you are free to go elsewhere? Of course you base that understanding on YOU not being able to satisfy HER for some backwards reasoning in this hypothetical situation. 

***almost speechless***

If I were in that hypothetical situation with my wife, she would likely joke about me having to give her a mandatory vacation from sex. She would probably enjoy the break! I would find OTHER ways to emotionally/physically connect with her to strengthen the relationship. While my desire would still be present, if I needed to do something about that, I think she would condone me just taking care of those urges on my own in a discrete manner. She may even participate by suggesting I shop for some novelties to make the best of my time alone. 

I don't know, perhaps I am partly a dirty old man, but my ability to take care of my own needs sexually continues to surpass my own expectations to this day. My wife knows me well enough to be a superior experience, but the idea of a going outside the marriage seems like a waste of time if you ask me. 

So I guess with reference to this question we are not alike.

Badsanta


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Holdingontoit said:


> So when she gets me gifts, it is like I am the one having starfish gifting.


I know this is off topic, but "starfish gifting" would be a great name for a rock band.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> In my experience, LD has only been a mystery because someone's not being honest, or not saying what needs to be said.
> 
> Here's what friends/family members/my marriages reasons for LD:
> 
> ...


If it was only this easy...

The above LD's seem to be aware of the fact they're LD. A lot of cases here are not aware, in the sense they think sex over 4x or 10x a year is normal and the rest of humanity are freaks of nature.

It also ignores the impact of external factors such as culture or FOO and the like.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

marduk said:


> Not for those that claim to be asexuals. Or for those that claim not just not want sex any more and they don't know why, or say it's not about the spouse, or whatever.
> 
> It's like not cultivating a garden and then wondering why you get weeds instead of vegetables.
> 
> ...


There's nothing (not involving doctors) to be done with someone who just doesn't like sex and therefore doesn't prioritize it. They don't like it so they don't prioritize it. Duh!

Then there are those like sex but who don't want sex with a particular person. In this case there may be things that that particular person can do to make themselves desirable. Unlikely, but possible. 

What I'm most interested in is situations where someone DOES like sex but, for whatever reason, doesn't prioritize it. I think this really is the case sometimes and should be solvable.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Also, I don't think anyone here is saying sex is the only way to build a connection with their SO. Once again, the focus has been on healthy marriages / relationships which already have strong connections. My W and I are married for the many various connections we have. If it was just based purely on sex, well TBH I would have never gotten married. It just comes down to, and I thought the point of this thread, two people who view sex differently in their otherwise healthy relationship, and how to bridge the gap. For me, sex makes the connection with my W that much stronger where possibly for my W the non-sexual stuff makes the connection stronger for her.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

badsanta said:


> So if your wife has a life threatening condition that temporarily does not allow you to please her, and non PIV sex with her is problematic, then there is a mutual understanding that you are free to go elsewhere? Of course you base that understanding on YOU not being able to satisfy HER for some backwards reasoning in this hypothetical situation.
> 
> ***almost speechless***
> 
> ...


What? If I could permanently not have sex with her or get her off by any other means, yes. I would not ask her to be celibate for me. 

But not if its short term. Cmon man, what are you going for?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> If it was only this easy...
> 
> The above LD's seem to be aware of the fact they're LD. A lot of cases here are not aware, in the sense they think sex over 4x or 10x a year is normal and the rest of humanity are freaks of nature.
> 
> It also ignores the impact of external factors such as culture or FOO and the like.


I think lds are mostly aware of why they are ld. I don't buy the whole "tra la la, sex is no biggie" argument. Period. 

I'm not ignoring those arguements. People are aware of those things.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Buddy400 said:


> There's nothing (not involving doctors) to be done with someone who just doesn't like sex and therefore doesn't prioritize it. They don't like it so they don't prioritize it. Duh!
> 
> Then there are those like sex but who don't want sex with a particular person. In this case there may be things that that particular person can do to make themselves desirable. Unlikely, but possible.
> 
> What I'm most interested in is situations where someone DOES like sex but, for whatever reason, doesn't prioritize it. I think this really is the case sometimes and should be solvable.


For me it's the same as someone who knows they're out of shape and its negatively impacting their life and does nothing about it. 

You make choices. Those choices are your priorities. They either work for you and your marriage, or they don't.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

john117 said:


> The above LD's seem to be aware of the fact they're LD. A lot of cases here are not aware, in the sense *they think sex over 4x or 10x a year is normal and the rest of humanity are freaks of nature.
> 
> *.


That's odd. It seems that is the HD who sees the LD as a "freak of nature". After all, aren't all "healthy" adults "supposed" to want as much sex as possible almost ALL the time? 

And that there's something "wrong" with people who DON'T want it that often?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Vega said:


> That's odd. It seems that is the HD who sees the LD as a "freak of nature". After all, aren't all "healthy" adults "supposed" to want as much sex as possible almost ALL the time?
> 
> And that there's something "wrong" with people who DON'T want it that often?


They both see each other in a not so positive way. For wanting and not wanting sex.

Healthy adults wanting sex etc come with an asterisk (*) meaning "as long as they fit my stereotypes". So in my wife's eyes at least two newlyweds should be into each other's pants but once the honeymoon is over...

The "wrongness" of not wanting sex often is the implication that the lower drive individual hijacks the intimate life of both.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Buddy400 said:


> someone DOES like sex but, for whatever reason, doesn't prioritize it. I think this really is the case sometimes and should be solvable.


Buddy, I DO enjoy sex, but I don't want my intimate relationship to be ALL or MOSTLY about sex. I want other experiences...other 'connections' besides sex that are non-sexual. When someone says that they want sex or the marriage is over, to me, that's like saying that the entire marriage was based SOLELY on sex. So not what I'm looking for in a partner. 

I love lobster, but I don't want to eat it every day, once a week or even once a month. Because I don't eat it that often, the experience is "richer" when I _do _eat it. I know that some will protest, "If you like it THAT MUCH, why don't you eat it more often?" Because if I eat it THAT MUCH, I will grow to NOT like it. It's like being...I dunno...saturated or *smothered*. After a while, you lose all interest. Eating it that often takes away the 'specialness' of it to where it's not longer 'special', but routine and COMMON. Kind of like, brushing your teeth. 

Hope this helps. A little.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

StilltheStudent said:


> That is not true.
> 
> Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder is any extended period of low or no sexual desire that persists for a long period of time (6-months is the number I am seeing) that causes distress to the individuals.


Please, let us remember that the distress must be felt by the *individual*, not his or her partner, for it to fit the diagnosis. 

The way you frame it makes it sound like HSDD can be diagnosed no matter who is distressed by the lack of sex, and this is simply not how the DSM works.

The reality is that a huge range of sexual frequency desires are considered completely normal. This has nothing to do with assuaging egos or making people feel good: it is because "normal" encompasses a lot of things, even if you don't like it.

Some cultures have claimed that too much sex depletes your life force and energy, and men especially should be careful not to have too much. I've seen suggestions that once a month is reasonable. 

And for procreating mammals, this is actually fits pretty well. Women are only fertile for a short period during their cycles, and so really any more sex than that is just futile effort (at least from a procreation perspective).


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

john117 said:


> They both see each other in a not so positive way. For wanting and not wanting sex.
> 
> Healthy adults wanting sex etc come with an asterisk (*) meaning "as long as they fit my stereotypes". So in my wife's eyes at least two newlyweds should be into each other's pants but once the honeymoon is over...
> 
> The "wrongness" of not wanting sex often is the implication that the lower drive individual hijacks the intimate life of both.


I think part of the problem is WHY the HD partner wants "so much" sex in the first place (which is kind of what this thread is about). In my late husband's case, he was VERY HD, but his reasons had nothing to do with wanting any kind of intimacy. He wanted the orgasms. That's pretty much it. He hated walking around with that 'tightness' in his balls (overstimulation is probably the reason WHY he felt that way), and expected ME to 'take care of it'. Plus, he masturbated quite often and had cybersex to boot. 

I'm guessing that when a man says that he wants sex 3-4 times a week (or however many times a week), he's not basing it on how often he's going to want an emotional 'connection' with his wife. It seems that his desire for a 'connection' (if he wants one) is directly related to how often he knows he will feel that 'tightness' in his balls.


ETA: I want to write more but my computer is really having some issues.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Vega said:


> I think part of the problem is WHY the HD partner wants "so much" sex in the first place (which is kind of what this thread is about). In my late husband's case, he was VERY HD, but his reasons had nothing to do with wanting any kind of intimacy. He wanted the orgasms. That's pretty much it. He hated walking around with that 'tightness' in his balls (overstimulation is probably the reason WHY he felt that way), and expected ME to 'take care of it'. Plus, he masturbated quite often and had cybersex to boot.
> 
> I'm guessing that when a man says that he wants sex 3-4 times a week (or however many times a week), he's not basing it on how often he's going to want an emotional 'connection' with his wife. It seems that his desire for a 'connection' (if he wants one) is directly related to how often he knows he will feel that 'tightness' in his balls.


Seems to me we've mostly abandoned the connection portion of this discussion and are back to how to best extract more sex from LD spouses (and how those LD spouses should realize that they really should want to lovingly provide whatever the HD deems he/she needs -and if they don't, well clearly they don't care.)


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Vega said:


> That's odd. It seems that is the HD who sees the LD as a "freak of nature". After all, aren't all "healthy" adults "supposed" to want as much sex as possible almost ALL the time?
> 
> And that there's something "wrong" with people who DON'T want it that often?


From an evolutionary perspective, if someone's not reproductively successful, their line ends with them. 

So kinda, ya.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Vega said:


> Buddy, I DO enjoy sex, but I don't want my intimate relationship to be ALL or MOSTLY about sex. I want other experiences...other 'connections' besides sex that are non-sexual. *When someone says that they want sex or the marriage is over, to me, that's like saying that the entire marriage was based SOLELY on sex. * So not what I'm looking for in a partner.
> 
> I love lobster, but I don't want to eat it every day, once a week or even once a month. Because I don't eat it that often, the experience is "richer" when I _do _eat it. I know that some will protest, "If you like it THAT MUCH, why don't you eat it more often?" Because if I eat it THAT MUCH, I will grow to NOT like it. It's like being...I dunno...saturated or *smothered*. After a while, you lose all interest. Eating it that often takes away the 'specialness' of it to where it's not longer 'special', but routine and COMMON. Kind of like, brushing your teeth.
> 
> Hope this helps. A little.


For a reverse spin on that thought, imagine it as "The Lamborghini isn't all about the spark plugs". A very true statement. The Lamborghini is a feat of engineering and aesthetics without even leaving the driveway. But see how far your Lambo gets on the freeway without those spark plugs.

It's been said in other words that sex is 10% of a healthy marriage, but remove that 10% and the other 90% can break down quickly.

With regards to your lobster comparison--I understand and agree. Too much of a good thing can turn into a bad thing. There has to be some balance.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> Seems to me we've mostly abandoned the connection portion of this discussion and are back to how to best extract more sex from LD spouses (and how those LD spouses should realize that they really should want to lovingly provide whatever the HD deems he/she needs -and if they don't, well clearly they don't care.)


Lds should hook up with hds. And vice versa. 

Lds that used to be hds and aren't after a ring goes on need to look at why the hd should accept the new deal. And hds should look at why the ld may be ld because of themselves. 

Once you've agreed to be monogamous, your partners sex life is partly your accountability.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Vega said:


> Buddy, I DO enjoy sex, but I don't want my intimate relationship to be ALL or MOSTLY about sex. I want other experiences...other 'connections' besides sex that are non-sexual. When someone says that they want sex or the marriage is over, to me, that's like saying that the entire marriage was based SOLELY on sex. So not what I'm looking for in a partner.
> 
> I love lobster, but I don't want to eat it every day, once a week or even once a month. Because I don't eat it that often, the experience is "richer" when I _do _eat it. I know that some will protest, "If you like it THAT MUCH, why don't you eat it more often?" Because if I eat it THAT MUCH, I will grow to NOT like it. It's like being...I dunno...saturated or *smothered*. After a while, you lose all interest. Eating it that often takes away the 'specialness' of it to where it's not longer 'special', but routine and COMMON. Kind of like, brushing your teeth.
> 
> Hope this helps. A little.


Bwhahahaa you're funny. 

A marriage that ends because of no sex is only about the sex?

So a marriage that ends because of no respect is only about respect? A marriage that ends because one partner drives them into bankruptcy is only about money?

Hang on, I'm going to tell my boss that I don't need to show up for work any more because I'm a salaried employee and not hourly, so it's not about me actually showing up.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Please, let us remember that the distress must be felt by the *individual*, not his or her partner, for it to fit the diagnosis.
> 
> The way you frame it makes it sound like HSDD can be diagnosed no matter who is distressed by the lack of sex, and this is simply not how the DSM works.
> 
> ...


Hmm. I wonder if the LD woman is merely responding to her own biology...?

I mean, a lot of female animals will fight off or show disinterest toward the males _unless she's fertile_. 

There's probably a study on this. Somewhere.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Vega said:


> Hmm. I wonder if the LD woman is merely responding to her own biology...?
> 
> I mean, a lot of female animals will fight off or show disinterest toward the males _unless she's fertile_.
> 
> There's probably a study on this. Somewhere.


Here you go. 
Women instinctively guard their sexual partners from other women who are ovulating ? Quartz
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> Please, let us remember that the distress must be felt by the *individual*, not his or her partner, for it to fit the diagnosis.
> 
> The way you frame it makes it sound like HSDD can be diagnosed no matter who is distressed by the lack of sex, and this is simply not how the DSM works.
> 
> ...


Except human females evolved to hide their ovulation. 

For pretty good reasons. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_ovulation
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

marduk said:


> Bwhahahaa you're funny.
> 
> A marriage that ends because of no sex is only about the sex?
> 
> ...


Oh c'mon Marduk. How many people have come to TAM over the years complaining about the lack of sex in their marriages and are ready to END marriage because of it? Happens almost every day!


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Vega said:


> Hmm. I wonder if the LD woman is merely responding to her own biology...?
> 
> I mean, a lot of female animals will fight off or show disinterest toward the males _unless she's fertile_.
> 
> There's probably a study on this. Somewhere.


I believe it is fairly well documented that women tend to be more into sex during the fertile parts of their cycle.

Humans are also said to be different than most other mammals because we like to have sex just for the fun of it. But you're absolutely right that a b1tch that is not in heat will not permit any sex whatsoever. Any dog that comes sniffing around is likely to get bit. True for most mammals.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Humans are also said to be different than most other mammals because _we like to have sex just for the *fun* of it_. .


Except for the LD. Of course. (!)


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> Except human females evolved to hide their ovulation.
> 
> For pretty good reasons.
> 
> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concealed_ovulation


Even if all this speculation is true, it doesn't make a whit of difference to the wide range of normalcy in human drives.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> Oh c'mon Marduk. How many people have come to TAM over the years complaining about the lack of sex in their marriages and are ready to END marriage because of it? Happens almost every day!


And most of those you dig deeper to find out that lack of sex isn't the only issue in the marriage ...


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> It's been said in other words that sex is 10% of a healthy marriage, but remove that 10% and the other 90% can break down quickly.


That's just it. It seems that the HD puts more weight on that 10% to sustain the other 90%, whereas the LD puts more weight on the 90%.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Sex 3-4 times a day (in any form) in my humble opinion is more a sign that one has way too much free time on their hand(s) ( 😂 ) rather than desiring an intimate connection. 

I don't disagree with the lobster analogy but when the lobster becomes a unicorn then there's a problem.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

EllisRedding said:


> And most of those you dig deeper to find out that lack of sex isn't the only issue in the marriage ...


You're right! It's not the only issue in the marriage. 

I've mentioned before that my late husband was HD. When we went to counseling, I spent about 15 minutes talking about the issues (his selfishness, lack of respect, desire for control, etc.). When it was his turn to talk, the ONLY thing he talked about was the lack of sex.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> EllisRedding said:
> 
> 
> > And most of those you dig deeper to find out that lack of sex isn't the only issue in the marriage ...
> ...


If he was HD it would make sense that would be his focus (right or wrong).

Also, I think what happens, sex is something that for those who do not want to participate in infidelity, they can only get via their marriage. That is why it might become easier to point to that as a reason to end the marriage while sidestepping the other issues.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Vega said:


> That's just it. It seems that the HD puts more weight on that 10% to sustain the other 90%, whereas the LD puts more weight on the 90%.


Sometimes, yeah. But think about it in terms of those spark plugs again. Suppose one of those plugs begins to misfires sometimes. Liveable, but not ideal. As more of those plugs go out though, the more the driver begins to put effort into getting those plugs working again. When you're down to the point where your engine won't even start anymore, you get pretty damned desperate to get that situation fixed. And then you go to the parts store and they don't have plugs. Then you go online and still can't find plugs. Pretty soon you're on the street corner with a cardboard sign BEGGING for some $3 plugs. You look and FEEL ridiculous at the lengths you're going to, but unless you just want to have the car towed to the scrap heap, or even worse, walk past it every morning to get to your bicycle--what are you going to do?

So yeah, sometimes they put more than 10% effort into it. Sometimes, like in the case of your late husband, they're just being a tool. Sometimes though they just don't want a driveway ornament for a marriage.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> My own assessment, and I really would like to be corrected if I'm wrong please, is that for a man to be LD there has to be low T. T is where the D (desire, drive, whichever) originates.
> 
> However, PA can have multiple causes - many things, including low T, stress, a single "failure", feeling a lack of respect from partner, etc., etc., can cause PA to develop.
> 
> ...


Well, there goes the rest of my evening :smile2:

I wanted to think about this a while since I owe you the best answer I can give.

You (or someone) really ought to start a performance anxiety thread. I don't think we're reaching the widest audience here; 92 pages into a thread about men wanting sex with their wives.

LD & HD have something to do with PA, but I think only generally. Testosterone provides the physical desire, think of it as the Voltage. At a high enough voltage, it's hard to get in the way of. At lower voltages, getting an erection can be problematic and it's much easier for it to be interfered with. 

I don't think you'd previously said this, your H is now having PA problems, right? Not the least bit surprised. If ever there was a need for him to perform, it's now. Since he's a good guy and wants to satisfy you, that adds more pressure. You couldn't have avoided telling him though (you described how much damage that did). This situation totally sucks. Both people care, both people want to make it better. The more he cares; the worse it gets.

I'm guessing this problem can be solved much of the time using methods that I'm not an expert in. But, if you're both on board, the outlook is probably pretty good.

Why wouldn't the guy try to do something about it?

1) He's a jerk and blames the woman for it. He'd rather trash the relationship than believe he's not a "real man".

2) He's stupid.

3) He's so wrapped up in his image of what a man should be that he just pretends that it isn't a problem and refuses to do anything about it. He says that it's no big thing and hopes it goes away on it's own (it won't)

4) He has a fear of medicines or drugs that aren't "natural" (Fvck that! This is no time to worry about "natural". It's time for drugs made in vats the size of Rhode Island!)

5) Admitting that you have problems doing what all men are supposed to do with no effort is making yourself more vulnerable than you can handle.

6) He already feels vulnerable with his marriage and can't handle being even more vulnerable than he already is.

I'm guessing your husband is some mixture of #4 & #5, I'd put @Lila 's H at #6.

Try to make him feel as safe as you can and hope for the best.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Probably true, but cause and effect can be confusing. A lack of sex will often cause other problems in the marriage -which of course may lead to less sex....



EllisRedding said:


> And most of those you dig deeper to find out that lack of sex isn't the only issue in the marriage ...


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

john117 said:


> Sex 3-4 times a day (in any form) in my humble opinion is more a sign that one has way too much free time on their hand(s) ( 😂 ) rather than desiring an intimate connection.
> 
> I don't disagree with the lobster analogy but when the lobster becomes a unicorn then there's a problem.


If you've got time to watch the telly and or play computer games read a book, browse social media, , go out to dinner or lunch, play tennis, cook cupcakes etc one easily has the time to have sex 3-4x a day (on weekends at least).

Through twenty years my wife and I have never had any trouble easily fitting in sex 2-3x a day on any given weekend.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

Vega said:


> That's just it. It seems that the HD puts more weight on that 10% to sustain the other 90%, whereas the LD puts more weight on the 90%.


Therein lies the issue when you have an imbalance such as this. It shouldn't be the sole responsibility of the HD to come down to the LDs level, nor should it be the sole responsibility of the LD to come up to the HDs level. If the relationship is important and they care enough about each other, they will work together to meet somewhere in the middle.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

OliviaG said:


> My own assessment, and I really would like to be corrected if I'm wrong please, is that for a man to be LD there has to be low T. T is where the D (desire, drive, whichever) originates.


Not necessarily true. A guy can have Low T and a perfectly normal, even high drive. And a man with high T can be low drive.

The two are connected, but there is no direct causal relationship.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> I don't think you'd previously said this, your H is now having PA problems, right? Not the least bit surprised. If ever there was a need for him to perform, it's now. Since he's a good guy and wants to satisfy you, that adds more pressure. You couldn't have avoided telling him though (you described how much damage that did). This situation totally sucks. Both people care, both people want to make it better. The more he cares; the worse it gets.


Okay, now take all of that lovely understanding and generosity and apply it to women.

And then maybe you'll see what I've been talking about.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Personal said:


> If you've got time to watch the telly and or play computer games read a book, browse social media, , go out to dinner or lunch, play tennis, cook cupcakes etc one easily has the time to have sex 3-4x a day (on weekends at least).
> 
> Through twenty years my wife and I have never had any trouble easily fitting in sex 2-3x a day on any given weekend.


Think of the money saved on cable TV, eating out, tennis lessons...

😂


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

john117 said:


> Think of the money saved on cable TV, eating out, tennis lessons...
> 
> 😂


That said a good game, a good feed and some TV bingeing does have its appeal...


----------



## Piper502 (Jun 2, 2016)

Sejin said:


> A common perception is that women want intimacy and gentle touch more than men, in my case, I constantly touch my wife and enjoy it, somewhat like patting a dog, and she says stop it whereas dog would enjoy my touch. It changed over time. She used enjoy touch and also used to take initiative.
> 
> I would love to hear women 's view on this kind of change and problem it cause to men. Well, if it a problem for husbands, it is also a problem for wives. Wives will be affected by husbands' unhappiness.
> 
> ...




I would love for my H to touch me. I always have to ask for hugs and cuddling. Our sex life is non existent. I want to feel desired and passion. Obviously there are issues for another thread. I'm trying to figure out what resentments or issues he has with me so we can move forward. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

marduk said:


> What? If I could permanently not have sex with her or get her off by any other means, yes. I would not ask her to be celibate for me.
> 
> But not if its short term. Cmon man, what are you going for?


I DO actually know of a case of a couple that had only recently married, when the wife fell ill. She got some type of infection in her brain stem that rendered her completely paralyzed for the rest of her life. The husband was unable to deal with that and promptly left her. She has remained in the care of of parents and sister ever since (about 15 years now). So I guess you would be that guy?

Badsanta


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

Vega said:


> I'm guessing that when a man says that he wants sex 3-4 times a week (or however many times a week), he's not basing it on how often he's going to want an emotional 'connection' with his wife. It seems that his desire for a 'connection' (if he wants one) is directly related to how often he knows he will feel that 'tightness' in his balls.


Some men. Other men want a connection that has nothing to do with "tightness". Masturbation cures tightness. Masturbation does not trigger feelings of connection - in fact quite the opposite. These days I am older and the tightness takes longer to develop and I masturbate frequently enough that I never feel "tightness". But I still yearn for the connection with my wife that is created by partner sex and only by partner sex.

I agree that it is often very difficult to distinguish men who want emotional connection and men who want relief from tightness. They tend to say the same things and behave in the same way when rejected. Not saying it is easy for a woman to know which kind of man she is dealing with.

Just saying that if you want a relationship that is not "all about sex". And you happen to fall for a guy who has a high sex drive. Then the way to make the relationship NOT be "all about sex" is to engage in sex often enough that the guy doesn't feel much tightness. And if you are not comfortable having sex that often (which is OK), then end the relationship. Because it is overwhelmingly likely that if you can't engage in sex often enough for him to avoid frequently feeling tightness, then your relationship will eventually become "all about sex".

Which is why I keep saying to LDs who think it is in their best interest to "trick" a HD into marrying them, it is not going to be the "happily ever after" that you imagine.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Vega said:


> Oh c'mon Marduk. How many people have come to TAM over the years complaining about the lack of sex in their marriages and are ready to END marriage because of it? Happens almost every day!


I agree. I'd be one of them.

What I don't agree with is the notion that ending a marriage over sex makes the marriage only about the sex.

It's like life. Without water, you die. But life isn't just about water.

It's semantically illogical. If X -> Y does not mean Y -> X.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> Even if all this speculation is true, it doesn't make a whit of difference to the wide range of normalcy in human drives.


My point is that humans (and many primates) seem to have specifically hidden their fertile periods because it has an evolutionary advantage.

And those same primates seem to mate a lot as part of the pair bonding strategy to raise offspring. So if it evolved, it must increase reproductive fitness.

By this logic, it would be less reproductively successful or fit to only have sex for the purpose of procreation.

At least before cities and TVs and computers, etc.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

badsanta said:


> I DO actually know of a case of a couple that had only recently married, when the wife fell ill. She got some type of infection in her brain stem that rendered her completely paralyzed for the rest of her life. The husband was unable to deal with that and promptly left her. She has remained in the care of of parents and sister ever since (about 15 years now). So I guess you would be that guy?
> 
> Badsanta


Hmm.

That's a good one.

I don't know.

Knowing my wife, she would offer an open marriage to me, as long as she didn't know about it, and it was only sex.

She's extremely jealous, but she's also HD and would know what that meant.

I do know that if it were reversed, I'd offer her an open marriage or an easy divorce.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Personal said:


> That said a good game, a good feed and some TV bingeing does have its appeal...


Rejoice Chicago Cubs fans 😭


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

OliviaG said:


> I guess I should have clarified what I meant by low T. When I say low T, I mean low *available* (i.e. usable by the body) T.
> 
> Some men can have normal total T levels but their T is bound up by a protein in their blood and can't be used by the cells. Thus they have low free T. Some men produce plenty of T but the body converts too much of it to estrogen, leaving too little T available to the cells and putting too much estrogen into the cells. All of these I include in the category of "low T".
> 
> ...


Just like to sneak in the obvious... That a dude can have normal T levels and just not be into you, or be upset with you, or be insecure about you, or getting some on the side, or be gay, or a million other things.

It's not always T. According to my doc, ED (which luckily I've never had) is 80% psychological or emotional. I think not initiating sex can be similar.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

RainbowBrite said:


> Yes, ED is usually caused by things other than low T, and there are many factors correlated with ED, most of them relational or psychological.


And if someone has emotionally driven ED, they likely avoid sex because if they get ED again, it makes the whole thing worse. Which looks a lot like low T to begin with.

Which is what I wish @Lila would at least test out.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Okay, now take all of that lovely understanding and generosity and apply it to women.
> 
> And then maybe you'll see what I've been talking about.


Sure. Give me a situation where you don't think I'd be equally understanding of women.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

RainbowBrite said:


> The thing is, that Lila has been testing it out for years. This is not a new problem. Her H has never had anything but total T tested at his family doctor's. If I were her, I'd be finding him a specialist that actually knows what to test for and ruling that out first (which she wants him to do but he's just going back to his GP so I don't hold out much hope for any resolution to that question).
> 
> The length of time it goes on just has such a detrimental effect on the marriage - on the bond, the connection, what this thread is about. It's crisis time now, probably long past crisis time. He needs to pull out all the stops and get the correct diagnosis by process of elimination asap because, if I read her right, she is just about done. The problem's been around for years now and it is killing the relationship. This is no time to exclusively test out possible solutions that will take months to show any improvement, IMO. He's got to attack it on all fronts simultaneously now, I think, to show that he sees it as a crisis and wants to fix it.


Yes. 

But she's got to face up to the possibility that her own outlook or actions could be part of the negative dynamic. 

She seems fixated on mechanics and performance. And tough to please, because it's PIV or nothing.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

always_alone said:


> Please, let us remember that the distress must be felt by the *individual*, not his or her partner, for it to fit the diagnosis.
> 
> The way you frame it makes it sound like HSDD can be diagnosed no matter who is distressed by the lack of sex, and this is simply not how the DSM works.


The DSM standard requires a combination of “persistently or recurring deficient (or absent) sexual fantasies and the desire for sexual activity,” and “marked distress *or interpersonal difficulty*.”

There is a reason that statistics show that 90% of people who seek counseling for HSDD are in relationships when they do so.

The interpersonal difficulty factor plays a greater role in pushing people with HSDD towards help than basic personal distress does. It is actually exceedingly rare for a single individual to be classified with HSDD or seek help because it is primarily an issue within relationships.



always_alone said:


> The reality is that a huge range of sexual frequency desires are considered completely normal. This has nothing to do with assuaging egos or making people feel good: it is because "normal" encompasses a lot of things, even if you don't like it.


Not a relevant point and one I have already addressed.

And one that is addressed directly in the DSM-5 classification.

A Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder classification takes into account all of the little confounding variables people use to make excuses, including age, health, relationship status, culture, as well as biological and psychological influences.

And “normal” sexual desire and frequency are indeed things.

Everything I have ever read indicates that normal sexual desire and frequency falls within the range of between one and three times a week on average, age and healthy depending.

If an individual persistently falls outside of the normal range for an extended period of time, lacks arousal or sexual desire, and that lack causes interpersonal issues within the relationship, then you have a prime candidate for HSDD.

And it is not healthy or normal for that to happen.



always_alone said:


> Some cultures have claimed that too much sex depletes your life force and energy, and men especially should be careful not to have too much. I've seen suggestions that once a month is reasonable.


We are not talking about “some cultures.”

In the United States, in my age group, a Clinically Sexless relationship has 10 or less sexual encounters in the course of a year, and the average frequency of a healthy sexually involved couple is within a range of 1 to 3 times a week.

If you have a relationship where a spouse is persistently outside of that frequency, for an extended period of time, and it is causing interpersonal issues in the relationship, then you have a sexual dysfunction.

And just to cover my bases here, that does indeed include hypersexual individuals who go to the other extreme. But that is another issue entirely.



always_alone said:


> And for procreating mammals, this is actually fits pretty well. Women are only fertile for a short period during their cycles, and so really any more sex than that is just futile effort (at least from a procreation perspective).


Peak fertility only occurs a few days before and after ovulation, sure. But for many women the ovulation window is somewhere around 10 days long without any way of knowing when the egg will be released. Basically, 3 to 5 days on each side of actual egg release.

So to stick with the “Sex tied to biology would only be during ovulation,” in reality it would be normal for a healthy couple to pursue sex for 6 to 10 days out of a statistically average 28 day cycle.

What does that average out to on a weekly basis? About 1 to 3 times a week.

I will never understand the need for people to fight against the notion that “normal” is a thing.

A partner with a sexual desire disorder who is having relationship issues because of it needs to address their issues.

The “this is normal for me” defense does not preclude that “normal for you” is in fact not normal, not healthy, and is causing problems.

Sexual Mismatch causes issues when the person with the dysfunction refuses to recognize they have a problem and take moves to fix it.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

RainbowBrite said:


> I think this discussion should be taken to another thread - Lila's I guess. We're threadjacking here. I don't disagree with you, but the reality is that people have their limits. This has been going on for more than two years. TWO YEARS!!! I advised her to back off and give him time to sort it out without pressure, but OTOH, I recognize that she's done that before, and has been patient, and there's a limit after which you just can't take it any more, especially if the other person refuses to recognize the problem.


Sure.

But in my opinion, they're both refusing to recognize the problem, and both refusing to take accountability for their end of it.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

StilltheStudent said:


> The DSM standard requires a combination of “persistently or recurring deficient (or absent) sexual fantasies and the desire for sexual activity,” and “marked distress *or interpersonal difficulty*.”
> 
> There is a reason that statistics show that 90% of people who seek counseling for HSDD are in relationships when they do so.
> 
> ...



Insightful.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

> Peak fertility only occurs a few days before and after ovulation, sure. But for many women the ovulation window is somewhere around 10 days long without any way of knowing when the egg will be released. Basically, 3 to 5 days on each side of actual egg release.
> 
> So to stick with the “Sex tied to biology would only be during ovulation,” in reality it would be normal for a healthy couple to pursue sex for 6 to 10 days out of a statistically average 28 day cycle.
> 
> What does that average out to on a weekly basis? About 1 to 3 times a week.


the thing is, it would be sex during that week only, and then a month of no sex. Isn't that what seems to happen with a lot of people? Sex essentially once a month or so?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

norajane said:


> the thing is, it would be sex during that week only, and then a month of no sex. Isn't that what seems to happen with a lot of people? Sex essentially once a month or so?


If you take a narrow view of it, that can happen.

What I tried to do is use the magical sexyfunplaytime week to be so filled with fun and o's that it spills over into the rest of the month.

Systems thinking -- meaning feedback loops -- instead of reductionism.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

RainbowBrite said:


> So, people who believe sex is evolutionarily determined to be only during ovulation - do you also think evolution has wired us to eat only for maximum nutrition? Because look around: neither seems to be what's happening in most people's lives.


You and your food references lol


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

RainbowBrite said:


> Are you starting to get the impression that I'm "hungry"...?


Well, let's just say if we ever went out to eat this would be me once I got the bill with everything you ordered >


----------



## anonmd (Oct 23, 2014)

RainbowBrite said:


> I think this discussion should be taken to another thread - Lila's I guess. We're threadjacking here. I don't disagree with you, but the reality is that people have their limits. This has been going on for more than two years. TWO YEARS!!! I advised her to back off and give him time to sort it out without pressure, but OTOH, I recognize that she's done that before, and has been patient, and there's a limit after which you just can't take it any more, especially if the other person refuses to recognize the problem.


TWO YEARS? :grin2: Is that a long time? >

Not criticizing Lila, when dealing with a male I think two years actually is quite a long time as the eval period is day to day rather than month to month. 

I was just smiling at the 2 year comment because when dealing with an LD women I can't come to much of a conclusion UNTIL a couple years have passed. Pre-menopause any given month would often not look anything like any other given month. and then layer on a annual work related overall mood disturbance and you'll drive yourself nuts figuring out if the overall trend is up or down and how much of a d1ck do you want to be about at the present time or will this pass? :surprise:

Then add menopause, some of these guys are going to need a whole new attitude adjustment as far as what is possible goes...


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

RainbowBrite said:


> I know. I've said it many times in various threads: I don't know how men withstand it for so long. I'm not kidding, I really can't comprehend it.


Because, contrary to what some women think, men aren't walking penises, we have hearts and compassion too.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

marduk said:


> Because, contrary to what some women think, men aren't walking penises, we have hearts and compassion too.


This post should have been led with ****Spoiler Alert****


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

marduk said:


> Because, contrary to what some women think, men aren't walking penises, we have hearts and compassion too.





RainbowBrite said:


> Believe me, I know that! I happen to love men, they're some of my favourite people. :smile2:


My wife asked me "how do I know for sure I love her" last night, and she demanded I exclude all reasons that have to do with physical attraction as well as my desire to have sex with her. While I am going to take some time to write that down for her in a heartfelt/cheesy love letter in my chicken-scratch style of cursive handwriting, at the moment I gave her a playfully blank and goofy stare. I then asked her to define love because I was curious to know her definition. I then recited her definition back to her in the form of, "I know I love you because I feel ____insert wife's definition of love here____!" OMG, she kind of got mad at me, but I just started giggling until she started laughing too!

An odd thing is I can't remember how she defined it... It was something like, "a feeling of knowing you belong with someone."
*
I'd be curious to understand "how" other women here on TAM know they love their husbands aside from anything that has to do with attraction and sexuality?* 

...and YES, I may use those answers to help me cheat a little on my love letter to my wife, BUT I'll only steal ideas if they resonate with me.

Regards, 
Badsanta


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

norajane said:


> the thing is, it would be sex during that week only, and then a month of no sex. Isn't that what seems to happen with a lot of people? Sex essentially once a month or so?


And why would men's sexual interest be affected at all by women's fertility cycle?
Maybe this is a scientific argument against monogamous sexual relationships, at least for men.


----------



## StilltheStudent (Sep 14, 2015)

norajane said:


> the thing is, it would be sex during that week only, and then a month of no sex. Isn't that what seems to happen with a lot of people? Sex essentially once a month or so?


The evolutionary biology side of the argument becomes useless when it is over-wrought to try to make a point. People are more complicated than base biology, of course, but recognizing human complexity in no way removes the reality of normalcy or biological influence.

But if that were strictly true, the pattern would actually be multiple instances of sex over the course of 6 to 10 days, so a full week to a week and a half of sex, in the middle of a woman's cycle, then a week or two off, and then back at it again, consistently, until pregnancy.

Thinking about it I am not sure I would pass up that arrangement given the opportunity. >


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

RainbowBrite said:


> Hahaha...yeah, that's easy to define...lol..
> 
> Sorry, you got yourself into that one, you're going to have to get yourself out of it. It won't be easy, btw. Good luck!


Regarding how to define marital love completely apart from attraction and sexual desire... I can do it! I'll start throwing a few things out...

I know I love my wife because when I think of the sense of how I define myself, it includes her and our children. I feel no invasion of privacy with her by my side. 

no one can steal this one:

When I almost died and was struggling to recover, it was a sincere privilege in life to feel that I needed my wife by my side to help me heal far above and beyond wanting or needing my own mother. 

...awkwardly my wife admits the only time she knows I was being sincere and honest about my love for her was at this time when I was reawakening in the recovery room. Apparently I was nonstop talking about my love for my wife as I was heavily sedated and barely regaining consciousness. My wife says she was the envy of every nurse in the ICU. I have no recollection of those moments, but do remember of what it felt like to stand on death's door and reawaken to my wife by my side. 

...I think I'll do OK in the love letter to my wife!

Badsanta


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

marduk said:


> It's not always T. According to my doc, ED (which luckily I've never had) is 80% psychological or emotional. I think not initiating sex can be similar.


Erectile dysfunction usually has physical cause - SFGate

_"Myth: Erectile dysfunction is mostly psychological.

Fact: Although the mind can play a role in men's erectile dysfunction, it's usually a function of another health condition in the body, according to Stanford urologist Dr. Michael Eisenberg, director of Stanford's male reproductive medicine and surgery.

*Eisenberg says that 85-90 percent of erectile dysfunction can be linked to common conditions like high blood pressure, diabetes, smoking or obesity. *Medications, such as those to treat blood pressure or psychiatric conditions like depression, can cause erectile dysfunction. It is also a common side effect for men receiving prostate cancer treatments."_


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Hmmm....

http://www.everydayhealth.com/news/...ggaMAA&usg=AFQjCNGIG3c5gffY0cwCz2S0FRgQn3d1Uw

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/therapy-matters/201205/does-porn-contribute-ed


Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> If you take a narrow view of it, that can happen.
> 
> What I tried to do is use the magical sexyfunplaytime week to be so filled with fun and o's that it spills over into the rest of the month.
> 
> Systems thinking -- meaning feedback loops -- instead of reductionism.


SLA's actually 😂


----------



## Lila (May 30, 2014)

Buddy400 said:


> Well, there goes the rest of my evening :smile2:
> 
> I wanted to think about this a while since I owe you the best answer I can give.
> 
> ...


Could you elaborate on what you mean by #6 and why you think it holds true for my husband?


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

Lila said:


> Could you elaborate on what you mean by #6 and why you think it holds true for my husband?


I'm guessing that he was already vulnerable (and has problems being vulnerable), which led to the initial PA and then the problems that led to the current MC (whatever they are) have intensified the vulnerability and, subsequently, the latest PA.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

OK. Seems to obviously be some debate on the causes for ED.

Let me just posit that I'd first go down the emotional/psychological path first.

Why? Because it's non-destructive testing. That path is basically be really supportive and non-judgemental and make sex non goal-based.

Which can't hurt, right?

However, if you go the T route, it can be emotionally destructive. Because you're basically telling your man that you think he's broken, and go to the doctor to get fixed. And if it's not T, then maybe you just made the ED worse...


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Yes, it feels completely unfair. The sense that I do everything she wants, but she won't do this for me.
> 
> But that isn't the point. I expect that if I told her I wanted sex twice a week or I would divorce her, she would do it. I'd have to constantly remind her, occasionally start packing my bags etc, but she would probably do it.
> ...


Since both of you are missing out on what you want, all you need to do is tell her that since she wants a loving, affectionate marriage, all she has to do is to have sex with you twice a week. How hard is that to understand?


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I did say. About a year or so back I told her what I wanted / needed. Sex got better for a while, then went back to near zero. What should I have done next?


I think you know the answer to that. You just don't want to do it.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> it *seemed* better for both of us. Sex was better, she initiated more often and seemed to enjoy it more, and enjoy more variety. We both seemed more affectionate all the. She'd make jokes about how we didn't behave like normal "old married couples". She'd send loving or flirtatious emails at work.
> 
> ...
> ...


The answer is staring you in the face.

When you lay down the law, you are acting like a manly man.

Women like to have sex with manly men.

When you allow her to get away with her nonsense, you are acting like a wimp.

Women don't like to have sex with wimps.

So be a manly man, not a wimp.

That is, *insist *that she will have sex with you or you are through with her.

Then she will "magically" (actually quite predictably) be a lot more into you.

This isn't rocket science.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I know this is a huge thread, so no one can read all if it. I did try that. It worked for a couple of months, then decreased. Repeated a few times, same result. 



tech-novelist said:


> Since both of you are missing out on what you want, all you need to do is tell her that since she wants a loving, affectionate marriage, all she has to do is to have sex with you twice a week. How hard is that to understand?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
the problem is with the "insist". Since force is obviously out, all I can do is say "have sex with me or consequence X will happen". 

Not a lot of options for X. 

I can say I will leave, but that really isn't true - I'm not willing to give up the rest of my good marriage to get sex. I'm unhappy with limited sex, but I would be more unhappy without my wife. While there was a time when I was frustrated enough to actually leave, that isn't the case now, and it would be dishonest to say it was. 

I can stop doing other nice things - but that is likely to lead to a downward spiral where neither of us tries to make the other happy in any way until one of us is miserable enough to divorce.

You are right though - there are actions I can take to get a good sex life, but not I think a good sex life WITH my wife. 




tech-novelist said:


> The answer is staring you in the face.
> 
> When you lay down the law, you are acting like a manly man.
> 
> ...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> Sure. Give me a situation where you don't think I'd be equally understanding of women.


Don't worry, Buddy, I will deliver on your request for specific links to your posts that illustrate what I have been saying about mixed messages.

Suffice to say for now that you have mentioned in this thread that TAM posts make you dislike women. And this is not the first time you have explicitly expressed your dislike of women.

My advice? Remember that pressure to perform is off-putting. Not just for men but for women. Threats of destabilization are also just that: threats. And women too want to be made to feel safe if they are to (a) allow themselves to be vulnerable and (b) own up to and address what they "ought" to be because "all" other women are this way.

Oh, and like men, we too are different.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I may be the ultimate sucker, but there is no way I'm falling into that trap. Time to get your poetic analogy on:

Love is like a symphony, you can't describe why it is beautiful and moving, or ask if it would still be beautiful if you removed some of the notes.

Would the Sistine chapel still be a work of art if you removed all the red and blue paint? 


Would you still love me if I lost my job and became homeless? 





badsanta said:


> My wife asked me "how do I know for sure I love her" last night, and she demanded I exclude all reasons that have to do with physical attraction as well as my desire to have sex with her. While I am going to take some time to write that down for her in a heartfelt/cheesy love letter in my chicken-scratch style of cursive handwriting, at the moment I gave her a playfully blank and goofy stare. I then asked her to define love because I was curious to know her definition. I then recited her definition back to her in the form of, "I know I love you because I feel ____insert wife's definition of love here____!" OMG, she kind of got mad at me, but I just started giggling until she started laughing too!
> 
> An odd thing is I can't remember how she defined it... It was something like, "a feeling of knowing you belong with someone."
> *
> ...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

RainbowBrite said:


> So, people who believe sex is evolutionarily determined to be only during ovulation - do you also think evolution has wired us to eat only for maximum nutrition? Because look around: neither seems to be what's happening in most people's lives.


The whole evolutionary argument was brought up as proof that failing to want frequent sex is a sign of dysfunction.

I was merely pointing out that for the purposes of procreation, frequent sex is not required at all. And sex during pregnancy and until menses start again? Waste of time.

Evolution just isn't great support for an argument that people ought to want a certain frequency of sex.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

StilltheStudent said:


> Not a relevant point and one I have already addressed.


It is absolutely a relevant point. "Normal" encompasses a vast range of frequencies. As does "healthy".

That's the problem with statistics. It's easy to make the mistake that just because you can flatten the richness of human experience into a single mean, that therefore the mean is somehow more healthy than everything else. But concepts like "normal" and "healthy" just aren't that simple.

And yes, people may be more likely to seek treatment for HSDD when in relationships, but this still doesn't mean that a partner can simply diagnose it in their spouse because they are unsatisfied with the frequency. You may have a point in the very extreme ranges, but even then, people get to define their own sexuality and what it is or isn't. And the only thing we can reasonable request of them is that they are honest about it with their partners.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
almost agree.... except maybe one of the evolutionary functions of non-procreative sex is to bind a couple together emotionally....






always_alone said:


> The whole evolutionary argument was brought up as proof that failing to want frequent sex is a sign of dysfunction.
> 
> I was merely pointing out that for the purposes of procreation, frequent sex is not required at all. And sex during pregnancy and until menses start again? Waste of time.
> 
> Evolution just isn't great support for an argument that people ought to want a certain frequency of sex.


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> I know this is a huge thread, so no one can read all if it. I did try that. It worked for a couple of months, then decreased. Repeated a few times, same result.


I don't see the problem. If that approach works for a few months and works again when you repeat, then just keep repeating it.

Problem solved!


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

OliviaG said:


> I know. I've said it many times in various threads: I don't know how men withstand it for so long. I'm not kidding, I really can't comprehend it.


It's not just you. I'm a man, and I can't comprehend it either.


----------



## GusPolinski (Jan 21, 2014)

@badsanta, your next thread should be titled "Food: Why We Like to Eat It".


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

GusPolinski said:


> @badsanta, your next thread should be titled "Food: Why We Like to Eat It".


OMG, no lie... My wife and teenage daughter are synchronized with their cycles and it is that time of the month. I sat on the couch and watched in amazement as the two of them tried to share a jar of Nutella. This coincided with an extremely rare time in the house that every spoon, knife and fork was either in the sink or running through the dishwasher and they are both too civilized to eat with their fingers. My wife was digging with a small measuring cup, while our daughter was poking at the jar with a potato peeler.

As a male, I do not understand the time-of-the-month having such a strong tie to chocolate!!!!!!!!!!!

On a side note our son is just discovering periods. As my wife was explaining them he was freaking out and asked if that would happen to him. She explained that boys never have to experience that. OMG, he screamed out a loud cheer "woo hoo!" and ran off jumping for joy as the girls ravaged the jar of chocolate!!!

Badsanta


----------



## tommyr (May 25, 2014)

always_alone said:


> The whole evolutionary argument was brought up as proof that failing to want frequent sex is a sign of dysfunction.
> 
> I was merely pointing out that for the purposes of procreation, frequent sex is not required at all. And sex during pregnancy and until menses start again? Waste of time.
> 
> Evolution just isn't great support for an argument that people ought to want a certain frequency of sex.


What you said may well be true... for the *woman*. But there is no evolutionary reason for a *man's* sex drive to decrease during non fertile periods nor during pregnancy. And in fact, as a man, I can tell you my sex drive has been pretty constant every single day of my life, irrespective of my wife's fertility or pregnancy.

At best, this line of argument only goes to the conclusion that men should not enter into a monogamous sexual relationship if the frequency of sex will be controlled by his female partner's "evolutionary" drive. I'm not advocating this approach, merely putting this out there to shut down the argument towards once-per-month sex around peak fertility.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

tommyr said:


> At best, this line of argument only goes to the conclusion that men should not enter into a monogamous sexual relationship if the frequency of sex will be controlled by his female partner's "evolutionary" drive. I'm not advocating this approach, merely putting this out there to shut down the argument towards once-per-month sex around peak fertility.


Don't get me wrong: I am most certainly not advocating for once per month sex. Just suggesting that the evolutionist argument isn't going to convince anyone to have more sex.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> almost agree.... except maybe one of the evolutionary functions of non-procreative sex is to bind a couple together emotionally....


Thanks, richard, for bringing it back to emotional connection.

Unfortunately, while I agree that sex can provide this function, it also often enough seems to do the exact opposite.

I do honestly understand why someone in a sexless relationship struggles with that, and sees it as disconnecting. But it's also disconnecting to have sex with someone who is treating you like a masturbation aid, or who would actually prefer to be with someone else. It is disconnecting to have completely awful sex where it is clear your partner isn't into you. 

I dunno. I get that when you are being shut out completely, it becomes this huge wall between you. But, it isn't, at least IMHO, the sex itself that is connecting. Indeed, I'm currently thinking that disconnected sex makes me feel much worse than no sex at all. 

Although it's probably a toss up.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> almost agree.... except maybe one of the evolutionary functions of non-procreative sex is to bind a couple together emotionally....


If that was true then we would "bind" with the first person we had sex with...

And we know THAT'S not true in most cases these days. Prostitutes would be out of business, pronto!


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Vega said:


> If that was true then we would "bind" with the first person we had sex with...
> 
> And we know THAT'S not true in most cases these days. Prostitutes would be out of business, pronto!


I have bonded with everyone I have had sex with. That is why I wish I had never had it before Dug.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

jld said:


> I have bonded with everyone I have had sex with. That is why I wish I had never had it before Dug.



Yet there are many people who've had sex and haven't bonded with a single person they had sex with. Makes me ponder if this whole bonding phenomenon is psychological or biological (hormonal).


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Vega said:


> Yet there are many people who've had sex and haven't bonded with a single person they had sex with. Makes me ponder if this whole bonding phenomenon is psychological or biological (hormonal).


For me, it is both.


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

I never really got into the whole bondage thing ...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

You're missing out, then . . .


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

Deleted.


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## EllisRedding (Apr 10, 2015)

OliviaG said:


> I'm starting to worry about all those "male bonding weekends" my husband has gone on over the years...lol..


I figured, due to all your food references, you were no stranger to this ... >


----------



## RainbowBrite (Dec 30, 2015)

A


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Vega said:


> Yet there are many people who've had sex and haven't bonded with a single person they had sex with. Makes me ponder if this whole bonding phenomenon is psychological or biological (hormonal).


Hi @Vega

So I had a discussion with my wife this morning regarding a similar topic, based on her request to define how I know I love her excluding any physical attraction or sexual desire. So I discussed with her that there are two types of affairs that commonly happen in marriages:

A) Physical Affair
B) Emotional Affair

I told her that I describe our marriage as an experience that "unifies" both physical AND emotional desires into ONE. This makes the idea of a physical affair unappealing and empty. ALSO it makes the idea of an emotional affair unappealing and empty. I asked her if she would be capable of having either one of those affairs, and she replied that the notion of doing that seemed disgusting. I asked her, "so you can NOT enjoy being physical with someone unless you have a strong emotional connection with them as well?" ...and she replied, "exactly!" So then I told her that is what I mean by both _physical_ and _emotional_ desires merging into _one_ with one another, and that is what you want to experience in a relationship. 

So I told her that the way I know I love her is that our relationship merges the concept of myself to include her. If I imagine going on a vacation, that idea in my mind includes her there with me. If I explore my sexuality on my own in my mind, that includes here there with me. The notion of finding someone else for an emotional OR a physical affair seems empty and equally undesirable because this now takes me away from my sense of self, which she is now ingrained into who I am!

I went onto explain how my extended sense of self (that includes her and our children as well) enhances my ability to function independently. Because where ever I go all on my own, I am never alone. 

Badsanta


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

No disrespect meant but you're describing a Vulcan mind meld, not a marriage. 

I understand some level of closeness but not symbiosis. My late brother tried what you described and his marriage was a far worse failure than mine. 

People are independent entities that do not become joined when married. Of course I'm the minority view here.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Don't worry, Buddy, I will deliver on your request for specific links to your posts that illustrate what I have been saying about mixed messages.
> 
> Suffice to say for now that you have mentioned in this thread that TAM posts make you dislike women. And this is not the first time you have explicitly expressed your dislike of women.
> 
> ...


I believe on probably two occasions that I have said that reading some posts on TAM (and in particular, posts proceeded those comments) had caused me to start feeling a general dislike for women. And that I felt I needed to step away to keep that feeling at bay.

This is mostly just a result of temporarily feeling dispirited by what I read here from time to time.

But I get over it.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

jld said:


> Erectile dysfunction usually has physical cause - SFGate
> 
> _"Myth: Erectile dysfunction is mostly psychological.
> 
> ...





farsidejunky said:


> Hmmm....
> 
> http://www.everydayhealth.com/news/...ggaMAA&usg=AFQjCNGIG3c5gffY0cwCz2S0FRgQn3d1Uw
> 
> ...


I'd guess that ED is mostly physical and PA is mostly psychological.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

john117 said:


> *No disrespect meant but you're describing a Vulcan mind meld, not a marriage. *
> 
> I understand some level of closeness but not symbiosis. My late brother tried what you described and his marriage was a far worse failure than mine.
> 
> People are independent entities that do not become joined when married. Of course I'm the minority view here.


I would like to note that Vulcans are a fictional life form created by humans struggling to understand if we are alone in the universe. In reality the Vulcan is our subconscious self struggling to communicate our most basic desire. ...and that is to be able to achieve a mental/physical/emotional unity with someone. 

...think about it!

Badsanta

PS: And Vulcan mind melds are known for being rather traumatic!!!!!! As we ALSO _fear_ that type of closeness....


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Vulcan or Kentuckian it's the same. There's a huge difference between marriage and unity.

If we are struggling to communicate our basic feelings (subconscious) we're doing it wrong. Either we don't know ourselves well or we can't communicate well. Or we're simply trying to get into someone's pants the easy way.

I don't dispute that marriage or a good relationship are gestalt, ie more than the sum of their parts but marginally more. And often not even. Two loser types won't become great by marrying, and two high strung successful types will as often fvck up their marriage than prosper.

Excessive closeness makes one lose perspective.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

john117 said:


> Vulcan or Kentuckian it's the same. There's a huge difference between marriage and unity.
> 
> If we are struggling to communicate our basic feelings (subconscious) we're doing it wrong. Either we don't know ourselves well or we can't communicate well. Or we're simply trying to get into someone's pants the easy way.
> 
> ...


Yah I am more than down with closeness. I don't know if sum is only marginally greater than it's parts or not. But I am not down with the cessation of two individuals.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
Its really confusing because people are different and I think many people don't really know how they personally are affected by sex. 

Female friend of mine, back when she was in college wanted a simple FWB relationship with a guy. It was made completely clear, this was just sex, just for fun, no intention of anything serious.

He, not surprisingly for a college student, agreed. He thinks "great" this attractive woman wants to have sex with me, no strings attached - life is good :grin2:

Goes on for a few months and she finds someone she wants for a long term relationship. Her FWB is completely devastated when she stops things - not because he is missing the sex but because he has unintentionally fallen in love with her.


Many years ago I got involved in a sex-only relationship. I also found it very difficult when she ended it. Despite knowing that we had completely different goals in life, I doubt I could have said no if she had wanted a permanent relationship. 


Of course other people will react differently. Some are completely happy to have sex and leave. Some are willing to do whatever they can get away with in order to have sex, and when its over will try to kick their partner out the door.

One woman on another forum said she was bisexual but that sex with women was just for physical pleasure, but with men there was a strong emotional attachment. 

I don't think that there are simple rules that can be applied to most people. 






always_alone said:


> Thanks, richard, for bringing it back to emotional connection.
> 
> Unfortunately, while I agree that sex can provide this function, it also often enough seems to do the exact opposite.
> 
> ...


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

john117 said:


> *Excessive* closeness makes one *lose* perspective.


You use negative words @john117

Fission and fusion are both powerful sources of energy. One of the two is way more difficult to harness, but yet exponentially more powerful than the other. 










From a sexual point of view, I find a very direct correlation of the two!

Badsanta


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Yes, it feels completely unfair. The sense that I do everything she wants, but she won't do this for me.
> 
> But that isn't the point. I expect that if I told her I wanted sex twice a week or I would divorce her, she would do it. I'd have to constantly remind her, occasionally start packing my bags etc, but she would probably do it.
> ...


Assuming you are doing the work to make sure you are being attractive and wooing your wife...

There are two options. Divorce her, or open your marriage up.

But you're not willing to choose either one.

Your problem is that you're trying to invent an option 3 when there isn't one.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> Its really confusing because people are different and I think many people don't really know how they personally are affected by sex.
> 
> Female friend of mine, back when she was in college wanted a simple FWB relationship with a guy. It was made completely clear, this was just sex, just for fun, no intention of anything serious.
> ...


I find this post impossibly sad. A relationship defined by an action rather than the PERSON with whom in said relationship. An obsession with one action that completely defines the relationship regardless of seemingly anything else. Including life goals!


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Santa, maybe it's age difference but I'm not one to wordsmith how I feel. Maybe being in a sh!tty marriage has made me impervious to unicorny stuff...

Excessive closeness - transparency, unity, or anything else - has great benefits but great risks as well. Being the risk planner that I am I do not take this lightly. It only takes once to get burned.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Santa, maybe it's age difference but I'm not one to wordsmith how I feel. Maybe being in a sh!tty marriage has made me impervious to unicorny stuff...
> 
> Excessive closeness - transparency, unity, or anything else - has great benefits but great risks as well. Being the risk planner that I am I do not take this lightly. It only takes once to get burned.


Remind me John, when's D day? October?


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

john117 said:


> No disrespect meant but you're describing a Vulcan mind meld, not a marriage.
> 
> I understand some level of closeness but not symbiosis. My late brother tried what you described and his marriage was a far worse failure than mine.
> 
> People are independent entities that do not become joined when married. Of course I'm the minority view here.


Hi John and Badsanta,

You know John, I thought along similar lines about what Badsanta wrote. It reminded me of the Old English way that people used to view marriage as the woman's identity being "absorbed" into his own, along with whatever children they may have together. It's as if some people take the words "becoming ONE" to be almost literally. 

*I* also view marriage as "becoming ONE", but my meaning is, one FAMILY or one COUPLE or even one PARTNERSHIP; not one *person*. 

People bring a certain amount of independence into coupledom. Even though married, we still retain our own _separate_ likes, dislikes, tastes, preferences, beliefs, goals, etc. We can allow our spouse to influence us to a certain degree, but it's not necessary that we think exactly like our partner at all times (although some would disagree)

Having 'said' that, I DO agree that we should include our partner in our thought process when making decisions, but we need wisdom in order to do this the right way. For instance, I probably wouldn't include my partner in making the decision about what clothes I'm going to wear to work. I WOULD however include my partner in the decision about what *we* are going to eat for dinner that night because it directly affects BOTH of us equally.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Vega said:


> Hi John and Badsanta,
> 
> You know John, I thought along similar lines about what Badsanta wrote. It reminded me of the Old English way that people used to view marriage as the woman's identity being "absorbed" into his own, along with whatever children they may have together. It's as if some people take the words "becoming ONE" to be almost literally.


I thought that was rooted almost entirely in religious rationale for not ever ending marriage.



> *I* also view marriage as "becoming ONE", but my meaning is, one FAMILY or one COUPLE or even one PARTNERSHIP; not one *person*.


I LIKE this description.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> Remind me John, when's D day? October?


Planned for may 2017...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Planned for may 2017...


Why do you keep pushing it out?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Never did. Always been DD 2 graduation date...


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Vega said:


> *I* also view marriage as "becoming ONE", but my meaning is, one FAMILY or one COUPLE or even one PARTNERSHIP; not one *person*.


A rather bizarre experience I had with how this changes the view of yourself was a thanksgiving argument at my parents house. Usually my bother and I are outvoted by my sister and parents. During this instance my sister was divorced. Here are how the votes of the arguments weigh in my brother's and my eyes.

*Me = me+wife+daughter+son
Brother = Brother+wife+son+son+daughter+daughter*
*Sister = sister
Mom = mom
Dad = dad*

For my brother and I we feel that our two opinions counted for a 10:3 ratio of individuals impacted by the debate. 

Badsanta


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

NobodySpecial said:


> I thought that was rooted almost entirely in religious rationale for not ever ending marriage.
> .


Not only for not ending marriage, but also for not defiling the marriage 'bed' (adultery). Once we have sex, we are not to have sex (or 'become one') with anyone else other than our spouse unless our spouse dies.


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

badsanta said:


> A rather bizarre experience I had with how this changes the view of yourself was a thanksgiving argument at my parents house. Usually my bother and I are outvoted by my sister and parents. During this instance my sister was divorced. Here are how the votes of the arguments weigh in my brother's and my eyes.
> 
> *Me = me+wife+daughter+son
> Brother = Brother+wife+son+son+daughter+daughter*
> ...


LOL! That's some twisted 'logic' you had going on! If you were counting your wife, daughter and son as 3 more votes, then your father could have counted his wife _and children_

Dad=dad+mom+you+brother+sister. 

And since your wife and children are part of *your* vote, he also could have added:

Dad=dad+mom+you+(wife+son+daughter)+brother+(wife+son+son+daugher+daughter)+sister

Looks like you and your brother LOSE. :laugh:


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

norajane said:


> Badsanta, you asked for physical touch and then kept it up so it ended in sex. Have you ever tried this touching thing WITHOUT taking it to sex? If so, it becomes more believable that you wanted to connect rather than using this as another tactic to maybe "get her to have sex."
> 
> To me, what you wrote sounded like another way to ease her into sex, rather than truly wanting to connect through non-sexual physical touch, which is how you pitched it to her...yet still "pushed" until it became sexual. It's a mixed message to me.


He said he "wanted to have sex with his wife", for the reasons he stated at the start of the thread.

I don't understand why that is so unbelievable.

I did not hear that he pitched it as a promise to be non-sexual, but just non-sexual physical touch. I heard he promised if it turned out she really and finally was sure she was not interested that night, then he would stop. (I promise I'll go back and re-read after I send this reply).

I have done exactly what it seems some here think is the right thing, or focused-message thing to do: ask for the opportunity to have skin to skin (near nude) contact, non-sexual, just spooning. It was towards the end of a weekend marriage workshop, a couple of thousand miles from home. I kept my word. It meant nothing to her. She just endured it, best I can tell. But, my point is, for those doubters out there, it can be done (just like finally realizing one isn't desired and therefore should just stop seeking intimacy ever can be done).

Someone asserted there can be no connection if the other doesn't want it too. Just wanted to point out "connection" in this context is kind of elusive and vague when I try to think about it. I believe at some level it is the release of endorphins and oxytocin, and an association is made in the brain between the "connecting feeling" those bring and the one whose presence helped release them. There is also, sometimes, a release of stress/tension brought about by the physical act, and also the letting go of resentment over being rejected repeatedly. In those cases, I can imagine a feeling of being connected -- arguably my default state for part of my marriage, was thereby unblocked and returned.

All I can say for sure was that there were times it felt good, and it was desired, specifically because it was with her and that is exactly and exclusively where I wanted to be. Having sex seemed to confirm the rightness of our life together. 

The only real data point I know for sure is my own. But when a grown man says there is something special about his partner and one way he seeks to tell more connected to her is through sex, I tend to believe him.

Btw, I'm confused by what seems to be a requirement of some that a man's motives need to be clear and unmixed and focused on only-mutual would-be connection. There are lots of good reasons sex is good for two partners and good for a relationship. It's late and I'm rambling but I'm thinking if it's "wrong" for a man to be interested in sex except for very specific partner-focused reasons, then no love is going to be made, in that sort of environment.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

jld said:


> I think depression has different effects on different people.


True. And antidepressants each have different side effects on different people and that can vary individually over time too.

Some antidepressants are notorious for zeroing libido in many who take them.



> I still desired my husband because he nurtured me. Why would a woman not want to be close to someone who nurtures her?


You seem to suggest if a man is not getting the physical affection he desires from his depressed wife that it is because he is not nurturing and supportive. If I'm reading you right then I'm confused as to how you get there, and I wish you'd go back and read your first sentence quoted above.

I forget the book title, but ten years ago I read a book of essays about various person's experiences with severe depression in themselves and/or their partners. One man reported his partner's appetite for sex increased when she was depressed as she found comfort in having it. (This was not a case of manic episode within bipolar depression, fwiw.). My take away from that and other things in that book is exactly what your first sentence says.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

PieceOfSky said:


> True. And antidepressants each have different side effects on different people and that can vary individually over time too.
> 
> Some antidepressants are notorious for zeroing libido in many who take them.
> 
> ...


It could be that a man can be nurturing and still not have an aroused wife. I think Richard made a good point when he said that some women are simply not very sexual.

I still think it is wise for a man to do what he can, though. No fun sitting around feeling powerless.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

Re the Vulcan thing, I like this from a book called Dancing With Fire by John Amodeo:
_
"When Henry David Thoreau was living at Walden Pond, he famously said, “I wanted to live deep and suck out all the marrow of life.” If we take this approach to our relationships, we may want to seize the moment and pull love and intimacy toward us. But moments cannot be seized; they can only be allowed, which means settling into ourselves and allowing our experience to unfold. We pluck the tree-ripened fruit when the moment is right.

We tend to either look too much outside ourselves for fulfillment or retreat too far within. Fixing our gaze externally, we may have supersized expectations of what others can provide. By withdrawing too far inside, we may have allowed our aspirations to become downsized. The intimacy duet requires a middle way between losing ourselves in another person and submerging ourselves in a sea of solitude.
"
_
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

We develop the opportunity for those moments then we pluck the fruit. If we don't plant the seedlings what do we pluck, rocks?

I prefer happiness from within. Explains why material culture is so pervasive. Who needs intimacy when you have the latest gadget and time to reflect?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

PieceOfSky said:


> Btw, I'm confused by what seems to be a requirement of some that a man's motives need to be clear and unmixed and focused on only-mutual would-be connection. There are lots of good reasons sex is good for two partners and good for a relationship. It's late and I'm rambling but I'm thinking if it's "wrong" for a man to be interested in sex except for very specific partner-focused reasons, then no love is going to be made, in that sort of environment.
> ]


I don't think the point is that a man's motives need to be "pure" or unmixed. There is nothing wrong with wanting sex just for the sake of it. And there is nothing wrong with wanting to connect.

And where it gets wrong is not in the intermingling of the two, but in the overlooking of the other perspective.

If I want sex with my SO, it could be for any number of reasons. If he doesn't want sex back, he isn't going to appreciate me pressuring him with all sorts of reasons why he either should want it or should "lovingly" oblige me.

The other day, my SO wanted sex. It had nothing to do with me, he was just horny. He really didn't notice or care or involve himself in my pleasure, except in the most cursory and unappealing way. So, guess, what? I felt used as a masturbation aid.

If he had tried to pretend that encounter was about connection?

Well, let's just say I wouldn't have believed him. As far as I was concerned, it was about his sexual satisfaction at the expense of mine --even though in his head it was "mutual".


----------



## knobcreek (Nov 18, 2015)

Is this really a question? A flesh and blood woman is better than my dry hand any day.

But I will admit that I've dialed back the desire for sex with my wife and dialed up the porn and solo time. She got an IUD and for some reason it has really doused my desire for her. I feel like she's just waiting for menopause and being infertile in her early 30's just feels like a bummer to me. it also makes her b*tchy and her vagina stink (her words not mine).

Porn is really good for dealing with the kinks that turn you on that your wife wants no part of.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> I don't think the point is that a man's motives need to be "pure" or unmixed. There is nothing wrong with wanting sex just for the sake of it. And there is nothing wrong with wanting to connect.
> 
> And where it gets wrong is not in the intermingling of the two, but in the overlooking of the other perspective.
> 
> ...


The only time I had sexual encounters like this with my wife is when I did not like her very much.

I know we are all wired differently, but that sounds really...shallow, A_A.

Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> The only time I had sexual encounters like this with my wife is when I did not like her very much.
> 
> I know we are all wired differently, but that sounds really...shallow, A_A.


Yes, I've had sex before with guys who, turns out, didn't like me very much. Definitely contributes to the feeling of being interchangeable genitalia that is just there to be used.


----------



## JamesTKirk (Sep 8, 2015)

Vega said:


> There's nothing written in stone by any world-wide recognized authority about how much sex we're "supposed" to have once we're married. (or, at all for that matter). The so-called 'experts' tell us that if we have sex less than 10 times a year, we're in a 'sexless' marriage. Yet I'm sure there are happily married couples who have sex 5-6 times a _year_. Then again, some people find that having sex 5-6 times a _*DAY*_ isn't 'enough'.
> 
> It's funny how there's a 'cap' on how little sex we 'should' be getting inside of marriage (less than 10 times a year). But there's no numerical cap on how much is 'too much'.


Coming back to this. A week ago I was reading Time (on a flight,) and article titled "HOW TO STAY MARRIED (and why)" (Jun 13th issue https://backissues.time.com/storefront/2016/how-to-stay-married-and-why-/prodTD20160613.html .) It's a very interesting article Staying Married: Marriage Has Changed, But it Might Be Better Than Ever (unfortunately behind a paywall.)
I really recommend everyone read it if possible.

In it they did cover one thing, sex frequency. Here's the a quote from the article:

"A 2015 study found that sex once a week was the optimum amount for maximizing marital happiness. The Canadian researchers who analyzed data from three different studies found that sex played an even bigger role than money in happiness. The difference in life satisfaction between couples who had sex once a week and those who had it less than once a month was bigger than the difference between those who had an annual income of $50,000 to $75,000 and those who had an annual income between $15,000 and $25,000."
Note: that's out of context of the article. There were many aspects covered and this was just one.

So to answer the question, "once a week." Obviously there is no right answer for every marriage but according to studies once a week was what the happiest marriages have. Personally, I think that's a pretty healthy frequency for a few reasons.

So folks, if your SO is not having sex that often, have them read this article and highlight that paragraph :wink2: (I say jokingly.)


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

JamesTKirk said:


> So to answer the question, "once a week." Obviously there is no right answer for every marriage but according to studies once a week was what the happiest marriages have.


Only once a week! Evidently my wife and I are doing it wrong.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Once a week would not cut it here. Oh and strangely we have a very happy relationship.


----------



## JamesTKirk (Sep 8, 2015)

Personal said:


> Only once a week! Evidently my wife and I are doing it wrong.


LOL, I kind of read that as a minimum of once a week. I don't think anyone would argue that there's anything wrong with more. Notice they compare that with less than once a month (which is unhappy). I now for us it about every 2-5 days. We start getting a little twitchy at a week. 

I think the takeaway from this limited info is that for more than once a month, couples weren't as happy. Once a week (or more) were happy.
Of course the frequency of sex could be a reflection of happiness or unhappiness in the relationship, not the other way around.


Holland said:


> Once a week would not cut it here. Oh and strangely we have a very happy relationship.


More or less? Which way wouldn't cut it?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Errrr, the research showed that people who have sex once a week are happier than those who had it *less*, not more.

And then said that after once a week it was diminishing returns, that is, those who had sex many times a week weren't significantly *more* happy than those at once a week.

So no, not doing it wrong, and no surprise that you can have a happy relationship with lots and lots of sex. 

Just no evidence that you are (statistically speaking) way happier than others who are at once a week frequency.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

JamesTKirk said:


> LOL, I kind of read that as a minimum of once a week. I don't think anyone would argue that there's anything wrong with more. Notice they compare that with less than once a month (which is unhappy). I now for us it about every 2-5 days. We start getting a little twitchy at a week.
> 
> I think the takeaway from this limited info is that for more than once a month, couples weren't as happy. Once a week (or more) were happy.
> Of course the frequency of sex could be a reflection of happiness or unhappiness in the relationship, not the other way around.
> *More or less? Which way wouldn't cut it?*


Sorry that was a bit ambiguous. We are a daily plus kind of couple. TBH my critical point would be if it were less than 3 - 5 times per week with no good reason. 

I lived the other side of the equation in a past life and we were worse than technically sexless. Never again for me, that is a horrible place to be.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
While I like to believe the conclusion that sex makes couples happy, it is of course just as possible that happy couples have lots of sex. 

Actually I think both those are true.


----------



## Personal (Jan 16, 2014)

I was just trying to be funny, that said I also think happy couples usually have more sex (not that more sex necessarily always relates to happiness either).

At the moment I can't say I would be happy with a usual frequency of less than 3x a week.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening
> While I like to believe the conclusion that sex makes couples happy, it is of course just as possible that happy couples have lots of sex.
> 
> Actually I think both those are true.


Yes both can be true but what would happen if you applied that to your life RS?
You seem like part of a happy couple so why doesn't that translate to lots of sex?

For me, sex makes me very happy and lack of sex makes me very unhappy. It is a given though that there are no issues such as abuse, cheating etc as those would outweigh the desire for sex or to stay in the relationship.


----------



## JamesTKirk (Sep 8, 2015)

Holland said:


> Yes both can be true but what would happen if you applied that to your life RS?
> You seem like part of a happy couple so why doesn't that translate to lots of sex?
> 
> For me, sex makes me very happy and lack of sex makes me very unhappy. It is a given though that there are no issues such as abuse, cheating etc as those would outweigh the desire for sex or to stay in the relationship.


I agree.
I'd say the main reason lack of sex makes me unhappy is because that translates to me feeling like I'm not desired (at least not as much,) not necessarily just the lack of actually doing it (and orgasm.)
I feel that if she still desires and loves me, she should want sex with me.

That's not to say I don't love the raw sex part and like to physically do it on a regular basis because I'm horny . But sex is just sex. In the context of the relationship it's about being desire (at least for me.)


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening
I think that for many (most?) people a good sex life tends to make them happy, and they desire sex with someone with whom they are happy. 

Not everyone though. There as some people who can be happy without sex. (or maybe they are unhappy, but sex doesn't make them less unhappy).






Holland said:


> Yes both can be true but what would happen if you applied that to your life RS?
> You seem like part of a happy couple so why doesn't that translate to lots of sex?
> 
> For me, sex makes me very happy and lack of sex makes me very unhappy. It is a given though that there are no issues such as abuse, cheating etc as those would outweigh the desire for sex or to stay in the relationship.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

JamesTKirk said:


> I agree.
> I'd say the main reason lack of sex makes me unhappy is because that translates to me feeling like I'm not desired (at least not as much,) not necessarily just the lack of actually doing it (and orgasm.)
> I feel that if she still desires and loves me, she should want sex with me.
> 
> That's not to say I don't love the raw sex part and like to physically do it on a regular basis because I'm horny . But sex is just sex. In the context of the relationship it's about being desire (at least for me.)



I have actually done a lot of reflecting on this thread and back to my original post about desiring sex to feel physically accepted is to also feel that your wife desires you. Even if she has a responsive desire OR she is willing to have sex for the sole purpose of enjoying to please her husband, the end result of that is a connection that makes us feel loved. 

But back on my thoughts of this thread physically. Here is a list of what motivates men to pursue sex:

1) for his pleasure. (no emotional closeness required)
2) mutual pleasure. (no emotional closeness required)
3) for pleasure and emotional desire for closeness.
4) a desire to feel emotionally close. (no arousal required)
5) to pleasure her. (no arousal required)

ALL of the above result in a male feeling physically/emotionally accepted in the relationship. 

Acceptance is NOT always synonymous with a desire for continued closeness. For example, you can be accepted as a member of an elite community for which afterwards you do not really care to attend or develop a close relationship with that community. It is VERY possible for women to experience the Groucho Marx effect when sex may or may not be regular in the relationship:










So a man will work very hard to be physically accepted by his partner. In my opinion the woman also should work equally as hard so that the process of granting acceptance is something that promotes personal growth in a nurturing way as opposed to granting or rejecting sexual acceptance with complete disregard for the overall wellbeing and growth of the relationship. 

Badsanta


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

JamesTKirk said:


> Coming back to this. A week ago I was reading Time (on a flight,) and article titled "HOW TO STAY MARRIED (and why)" (Jun 13th issue https://backissues.time.com/storefront/2016/how-to-stay-married-and-why-/prodTD20160613.html .) It's a very interesting article Staying Married: Marriage Has Changed, But it Might Be Better Than Ever (unfortunately behind a paywall.)
> I really recommend everyone read it if possible.
> 
> In it they did cover one thing, sex frequency. Here's the a quote from the article:
> ...


This is such a complex issue. I feel distilling it down to sex once a week makes for a happy marriage is misleading. 

One thing the article does not address is cause and effect. Do happily married couples have more sex than unhappy couples or does frequent sex make a marriage happy. I agree with @richardsharpe, I don't think it is binary, it is probably a combination of the two. 

Not having sex may distance a couple who are already unhappy. Sometimes maintaining an emotional and physical bond while sincerely working on problems helps to bridge the gap. I think getting into the habit of avoiding resolution and then creating intimate physical distance further exacerbates problems. Conversely, having sex as a problem solver and ignoring problems creates distance and eventually less sex.

My husband and I kiss, maintain physical closeness and hold hands even when we have an unresolved issue. I feel it reaffirms that we still love and care about each other. We don't stay angry for a long time. 

He is the type of person who is not resistant to listening to my point of view and compromising or changing his view. It may take him some time. Some people are not like that. I am the same way but it did not come naturally for me, I learned it from him. We tell each that we are not enemies. Words have power, and that's our mantra, keeps us focused on the kind of partnership we want.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Catherine602 said:


> This is such a complex issue. I feel distilling it down to sex once a week makes for a happy marriage is misleading.
> 
> One thing the article does not address is cause and effect. Do happily married couples have more sex than unhappy couples or does frequent sex make a marriage happy. I agree with @richardsharpe, I don't think it is binary, it is probably a combination of the two.
> 
> ...


Very good points!

I'll add if men desire sex to feel connected/accepted in a relationship, the quantity of sex is somewhat irrelevant in relation to happiness. It is more about "HOW the wife feels" knowing her husband is feeling this way. If a husband knows she enjoys his desire for her, even though opportunities for sex may be unavailable, then odds are he is a happy person even though there is no actual sex occurring at that moment. If she reacts upset or threatened by his desire, then odds are he will NOT be happy even if she is willing to have sex to try and please him and sex occurs.

I think happiness is much more closely correlated to the acceptance/rejection of a partner's desire and is not actually associated with the actual frequency of sex. 

An example is that my wife woke me up the other day by throwing her boobs in my face, and telling me to enjoy the moment that she had a busy day ahead of her. We did not have sex, and I think it has been a week or more now... Anyway, I was (still am) a happy guy for how she handled that moment. I've always told her I would love to wake up with boobs in my face, and I can tell she enjoyed doing that for me!

Cheers, 
Badsanta


----------



## JamesTKirk (Sep 8, 2015)

badsanta said:


> Very good points!
> 
> I'll add if men desire sex to feel connected/accepted in a relationship, the quantity of sex is somewhat irrelevant in relation to happiness. It is more about "HOW the wife feels" knowing her husband is feeling this way. If a husband knows she enjoys his desire for her, even though opportunities for sex may be unavailable, then odds are he is a happy person even though there is no actual sex occurring at that moment. If she reacts upset or threatened by his desire, then odds are he will NOT be happy even if she is willing to have sex to try and please him and sex occurs.
> 
> ...


I can't agree with this more. My wife and I had a about a year with somewhat rare sex and she almost never expressed interest or initiated. I started to become a bit depressed about not being wanted anymore. I became obsessed with having sex and I was convinced that I had to get her to have sex with me twice a week or something like that. Once we finally talked about it I learned that there was a medical reason behind it that I wasn't fully aware of.
But once she understood how I felt she started conveying her desire for me, that obsession went away. I really don't care how often we have sex because she expresses desire even when we can't or don't want to.


----------



## Good Guy (Apr 26, 2016)

To the people who say it's only an "interchangable vagina" and there is no closeness or connection involved:

Why would a husband expend all that time and energy trying to have sex with his wife when he could go out and pick up a hooker or some other willing woman with far less drama and effort, who would do what he wants sexually a lot easier, and probably be a lot ****tier into the bargain ?

With the meal analogy, the husband is literally STARVING and there is a McDonalds across the road from his house, yet he still waits in hope for the gruel his wife might give him once a month if he's lucky? If it's all about sex, there are much easier ways to get it than to pester and deceive an unwilling wife.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Good Guy said:


> *To the people who say it's only an "interchangable vagina" and there is no closeness or connection involved:*
> 
> Why would a husband expend all that time and energy trying to have sex with his wife when he could go out and pick up a hooker or some other willing woman with far less drama and effort, who would do what he wants sexually a lot easier, and probably be a lot ****tier into the bargain ?
> 
> With the meal analogy, the husband is literally STARVING and there is a McDonalds across the road from his house, yet he still waits in hope for the gruel his wife might give him once a month if he's lucky? If it's all about sex, there are much easier ways to get it than to pester and deceive an unwilling wife.


In my opinion to the people who say it's only an "interchangeable vagina" and there is no closeness or connection involved:

A) He has low self esteem issues and does not feel worthy of being loved, and therefor it is easier for him to emotionally disconnect and engage in sex purely from a physical standpoint which will make his wife feel like an "interchangeable vagina."

B) She has low self esteem issues and does not feel worthy of being loved, and therefor it is easier for her to emotionally disconnect and engage in sex purely from a physical standpoint which will makes the act of sex feel like it could be done with an "interchangeable vagina."

C) A combination of (A) & (B).


I also think (A), (B), & (C) are all done out of a basic desire to try and improve an emotional connection so that the couple can feel accepted and loved by each other. However since one or both lacks self esteem, it leaves her feeling like she might as well be an interchangeable vagina. 

How can you change that?

Something about self esteem and confidence...

Badsanta


----------



## Vega (Jan 8, 2013)

Good Guy said:


> To the people who say it's only an "interchangable vagina" and there is no closeness or connection involved:
> 
> Why would a husband expend all that time and energy trying to have sex with his wife when he could go out and pick up a hooker or some other willing woman with far less drama and effort, who would do what he wants sexually a lot easier, and probably be a lot ****tier into the bargain ?


Not all husbands are created equal. There ARE husband who treat their wives like an "interchangeable vagina". Hence, the reason some wives feel that way. 

And some husbands DO have sex with hookers. In fact, some husbands claim they are HAPPY with their sex life and their wives, but they simply want "MORE".


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

Good Guy said:


> To the people who say it's only an "interchangable vagina" and there is no closeness or connection involved:
> 
> Why would a husband expend all that time and energy trying to have sex with his wife when he could go out and pick up a hooker or some other willing woman with far less drama and effort, who would do what he wants sexually a lot easier, and probably be a lot ****tier into the bargain ?
> 
> With the meal analogy, the husband is literally STARVING and there is a McDonalds across the road from his house, yet he still waits in hope for the gruel his wife might give him once a month if he's lucky? If it's all about sex, there are much easier ways to get it than to pester and deceive an unwilling wife.


Because the hamburgers are $10,000 a pop plus half of the accumulated marital assets?


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

Catherine602 said:


> Because the hamburgers are $10,000 a pop plus half of the accumulated marital assets?


 @Catherine602 assume the burgers are free and the accumulated marital assets are of a negative value (as in very bad debt, like her unused $250,000 college loan). The guy still wants to stay, but she just feels like an interchangeable vagina. 

...wait a minute, there is no such thing as a free burger, my bad!

Badsanta


----------



## Good Guy (Apr 26, 2016)

Catherine602 said:


> Because the hamburgers are $10,000 a pop plus half of the accumulated marital assets?


I don't buy that. If you have a full on affair with someone, then yes that's hard to hide. Hookers ? ONSs ? Dead easy.


----------



## DustyDog (Jul 12, 2016)

I want to have sex with my wife because it's such a wonderful form of intimacy, a type of closeness that is forbidden between me and anybody outside the marriage. I can engage with other women intellectually, spiritually and even emotionally, outside the marriage, but fidelity places the physical intimacy by itself.

I have to say I don't understand men saying things that suggest there's ever a time when they're not interested. I'm interested! Yes, there's a physical desire, but the strong desire is to do the act, not have an orgasm. It is being with her, with no barriers of any kind.

But, she has informed me, over the years, that she has never liked the activity, not once, with me or anybody before me. This was a shock, because in our early days, she was very sexually aggressive, leading me into positions I'd never heard of, "going for the record" for number of times in a day, etc. She now maintains that she only did that because "men like it" and she's an obedient Catholic girl. Which has another issue - in general, she views sex as evil anyway...which might explain why she could never like it.

So now, I'm in a position where - she'll "let" me have sex now and then, but she makes it abundantly clear this is "all about me" and frankly...it doesn't feel intimate any more.

She HATES alpha males, it doesn't matter if it's me, a salesman, or a friend of hers trying to get her to go out and do something - become the least bit dominant and she's gone, possibly for good.


----------

