# What is normal and healthy in married sex life?



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

How do you define normal and healthy sex life in a bonded committed couple?

Do you think sex a few times a year is normal? If not, how do you confront those who seem to think it is normal?

Do you think denying one spouse sex on a regular basis is normal? Do you think it is how loving people behave toward each other?

Why do so many people seem to so easily subvert their sexuality in order to keep a spouse from calling them perverts?

I say accept the accusations of being perverted! I say embrace your sexuality and make no apologies! I say if your spouse doesn't want to have sex with you on a normal basis it is you DUTY to discover why and to fix all that is in your power to fix. 

We only get one life people, one stinking measly life and it is not a long one. Sex is what makes us feel loved, connected, desired and when we feel those things we can better cope with the outside world!

I know I've answered my own question because I KNOW what I consider normal and I would not consider any one else's idea of normal, that is different from mine to be normal.

People make trade offs all the time and we trade sex for not dividing assets. Okay then, if you decide your 401K is more important than enjoying your life prior to retirement, that's your decision to make and you have only yourself to blame for your misery.

We trade sex for the assurance that we will have a spouse to care for us in our golden years. Okay then, so you won't be having sex for the rest of your life but you'll have someone around to help you get down the steps after your hip replacement or when your eyes no longer see depth. Your choice to make and you have no one to blame for your misery.

We trade sex for being able to see our kids on a regular basis. While I personally think this trade off has merit, it doesn't have enough merit, IMO. What is the model your children are inheriting when they see no affection, no romancing, no desire and playfulness between their parents? You are handing down to your children that marriage is cold and affectionless; that this is normal. Is that really what you want your children to learn about marriage? Wouldn't you rather they see what a good marriage looks like? Wouldn't you rather they snicker at hearing their parents making love? Bang on the door and yell "quiet down in there pops!" Isn't that the message our kids should be getting about marriage?


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

:allhail:


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> I know I've answered my own question because I KNOW what I consider normal and I would not consider any one else's idea of normal, that is different from mine to be normal.


That's the key right here. Your normal isn't my normal. And my past normal is no longer my present normal (although I'd say my past was both abnormal and dysfunctional from my perspective, but was normal for my ex!). So, the question is relative, and individual - and basically unanswerable as posed.

Unhappiness and frustration are also "normal" - but that doesn't make them healthy or desirable!


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

Anon Pink said:


> How do you define normal and healthy sex life in a bonded committed couple?
> 
> Do you think sex a few times a year is normal? If not, how do you confront those who seem to think it is normal?
> 
> ...




Sex is one of the defining characteristics of a married realtiohsip. 

As far as healthy that has to be defined by both people. Are both people satisfied with the sexual intimacy provided.....to include frequency, sex acts, toys, porn use so forth and so on. Some need sex daily and some once a year. It really varies per couple as I see it.


I do agree with the rest of your post as well. I see people post here all the time about how they aren't getting their sexual needs met...but they stay for kids or finances or religion. That's fine but remember that's also your choice. What you are saying is that those things are MORE important to you so you stay. I have no issue with that..... differnt people value different things in life.

For me no sex is a deal breaker.... Always has been and suspect always will be. I further suspect that my attitude towards not being sexless is the precise reason I have never been in a sexless relationship.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Wolf1974 said:


> For me no sex is a deal breaker.... Always has been and suspect always will be. I further suspect that my attitude towards not being sexless is the precise reason I have never been in a sexless relationship.


:iagree:

And there you have it. The bottom line truth. You own your sexuality and you will not subvert it for someone else's idea of what is normal.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Married but Happy said:


> That's the key right here. Your normal isn't my normal. And my past normal is no longer my present normal (although I'd say my past was both abnormal and dysfunctional from my perspective, but was normal for my ex!). So, the question is relative, and individual - and basically unanswerable as posed.
> 
> Unhappiness and frustration are also "normal" - but that doesn't make them healthy or desirable!


The question is answerable. How you define normal and healthy and where you place your sexuality and its various forms of expression is something you own. Consequently, you will not accept someone else imposing their sexuality on you. Right?


----------



## jb02157 (Apr 16, 2014)

I understand what you say about trading sex for a 401K, but it not quite that easy, especially when kids are involved. I chose to stay over a normal sex life because I know my wife would mistreat and abuse the kids if I left. And, no, kids at the age we first started having problems do not get a choice who they life with, as long as the divorce settlemakes make the father unable to afford "suitable" living quarters for them. I wish it were that easy...to just trade in the 401K, which was worthless when this all started, to be able to get out of my sickening marriage without hurting my kids. I don't want my wife around in my later years, I hope by then I can finally get rid of her from my life for good. 

Yes, the kids saw our horrible marriage in all it's glory...and they understand from their own observations their mother was the problem. They have even told me that once the divorce happens they will never speak to her again. This is the definitlion of marriage that the court system is forcing down our throats. Financially disable divorced men to the point of helplessness so they can't see their kids, or put up with whatever bull**** his wife dishes out...and then let the children deal with the pieces left afterwards. A great choice men have today. I think you forgot to look at this angle when you wrote your post.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

jb02157 said:


> I understand what you say about trading sex for a 401K, but it not quite that easy, especially when kids are involved. I chose to stay over a normal sex life because I know my wife would mistreat and abuse the kids if I left. And, no, kids at the age we first started having problems do not get a choice who they life with, as long as the divorce settlemakes make the father unable to afford "suitable" living quarters for them. I wish it were that easy...to just trade in the 401K, which was worthless when this all started, to be able to get out of my sickening marriage without hurting my kids. I don't want my wife around in my later years, I hope by then I can finally get rid of her from my life for good.
> 
> Yes, the kids saw our horrible marriage in all it's glory...and they understand from their own observations their mother was the problem. They have even told me that once the divorce happens they will never speak to her again. This is the definitlion of marriage that the court system is forcing down our throats. Financially disable divorced men to the point of helplessness so they can't see their kids, or put up with whatever bull**** his wife dishes out...and then let the children deal with the pieces left afterwards. A great choice men have today. I think you forgot to look at this angle when you wrote your post.


I have great sympathy for you and your sitch. Maybe I am naive, but I do believe that when a husband can show his wife to be abusive he gets custody of the kids. This is 2015 and unless you live in a very backward state, you should be able to prove your wife's unsuitability to parent and gain custody. You just need to find out what proof you need and then acquire it.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> The question is answerable. How you define normal and healthy and where you place your sexuality and its various forms of expression is something you own. Consequently, you will not accept someone else imposing their sexuality on you. Right?


Correct. However, answering this from MY perspective has little value to anyone else whose views and priorities will differ on what's normal. Ultimately, if a couple can reach a compromise and be content with it (even if not optimal for one or both), then that's *their* normal.

With that caveat, *my* normal is that we both do our best to please each other, pretty much on a daily basis. I/We would not accept long periods of sexlessness for other than sound medical reasons, or would resort to mutually agreed alternatives. I/We would not let other people or responsibilities push our sex life and emotional connection out of our top few priorities.

My views are informed by having been in a sexless marriage, and I will never again accept that while I still have the interest and ability to enjoy a healthy sex life. If "our" views begin to diverge significantly, then the relationship is at serious risk.


----------



## jb02157 (Apr 16, 2014)

Anon Pink said:


> I have great sympathy for you and your sitch. Maybe I am naive, but I do believe that when a husband can show his wife to be abusive he gets custody of the kids. This is 2015 and unless you live in a very backward state, you should be able to prove your wife's unsuitability to parent and gain custody. You just need to find out what proof you need and then acquire it.


In vertually any state showing that your wife is abusive/unfit is almost impossible. Other men who have been divorced tell me as long as you are female, you get the kids. It doesn't matter if she had affairs, hits the kids or what, she gets the kids. Men almost never get custody. Yeah this is 2015 and the divorce laws should be fair, they're not. If they were I would have been divorced and with someone else 20 years ago.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Married but Happy, your views do have value to others. Because when we pick up our heads and look around we take stock comparatively. Since sex is not something we can easily make comparative judgments, posting our views on what we consider normal and how firm we are in those views helps those who have come to believe accepting the unacceptable is acceptable.

Jb02157, so you've taken advice from other divorced men but haven't actually seen an attorney yet? I suggest, if that is so, that you make an appointment and shell out the 300 to get the right answer for your state laws.


----------



## jb02157 (Apr 16, 2014)

Anon Pink said:


> Jb02157, so you've taken advice from other divorced men but haven't actually seen an attorney yet? I suggest, if that is so, that you make an appointment and shell out the 300 to get the right answer for your state laws.


I have already been there, seen lawyers and that's what they say. I should have said that I seen and divorce lawyers and talked to other divorced men. I've even had a divorce lawyer say to me that he won't take my case because I would lose so much, I would never be able to recover and he didn't want to be party to that. I guess some people don't want to believe how unfair divorce laws are to men. Men can't just play the divorce card like women can.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

jb02157 said:


> I have already been there, seen lawyers and that's what they say. I should have said that I seen and divorce lawyers and talked to other divorced men. I've even had a divorce lawyer say to me that he won't take my case because I would lose so much, I would never be able to recover and he didn't want to be party to that. I guess some people don't want to believe how unfair divorce laws are to men. *Men can't just play the divorce card like women can.*


You know, what men fail to realize is that those assets that are cut in half are also cut in half for the wife too. With the exception of child support, both you and your wife would be suffering the same financial loss. Also, if your kids are over the age of 11 most states take their desire into consideration for custody. So if your kids hate their mom, they will have no problem telling the judge they want to live with you, thus she makes child support payment to you.

While I agree that women do tend to get a better deal financially, it is still a financial hit to them just as it is to men. Yet women pull the trigger more often. I suggest it is because more women are willing to say, I'm not going to take this any longer. I can and will do better on my own.


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

AP
First off, I would change the word normal to "acceptable."

I believe acceptable lies in the word "deny." If your spouse is constantly denied sex, than that is NOT acceptable. Acceptable, in my opinion, is when both sides match up, or at least come close. One will want less and one will want more, but both accept the compromise. 
Acceptable could look like this;
Wife wants once a year, husband wants once a year.
or
Wife wants 365 times a year, husband wants 365 times a year.
Abnormal would be when one spouse constantly denies the other, aside from medical.

As you say, "life is short". One of the very few things in life that can achieve bliss, albeit short lived, is sex with the one you love.

Why "deny" that wonderful gift to your spouse or even yourself?


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

UMP, I intentionally used the word normal. Too many spouses come to SIM with the impression their sexuality might not be normal because that's what their spouse is telling them. So they wonder, is it normal to want to have sex with my spouse a few times a week, a month, a year?


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

Anon Pink said:


> UMP, I intentionally used the word normal. Too many spouses come to SIM with the impression their sexuality might not be normal because that's what their spouse is telling them. So they wonder, is it normal to want to have sex with my spouse a few times a week, a month, a year?


OK, 
In that case, I would define normal as an agreed compromise that both can live happily with.


----------



## jb02157 (Apr 16, 2014)

Anon Pink said:


> You know, what men fail to realize is that those assets that are cut in half are also cut in half for the wife too. With the exception of child support, both you and your wife would be suffering the same financial loss. Also, if your kids are over the age of 11 most states take their desire into consideration for custody. So if your kids hate their mom, they will have no problem telling the judge they want to live with you, thus she makes child support payment to you.
> 
> While I agree that women do tend to get a better deal financially, it is still a financial hit to them just as it is to men. Yet women pull the trigger more often. I suggest it is because more women are willing to say, I'm not going to take this any longer. I can and will do better on my own.


The laywer told me the way they figure out who gets what is they make the income of both the husband and wife equal and then they give a certain percentage on top of that to the wife for child support. Men, in this situation will always have less income then the wife and in most circumstances precludes them from gets an apt. big enough to get even partial custody. Also, around here anyway, if you are female you get the kids.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

JB, I'm sure you are more familiar with divorce law in your state than I could possibly hope to be. I'm just saying I don't believe your circumstances to be as cut and dried dire as you seem to believe and so I think a different lawyer might be in order.


----------



## ericthesane (May 10, 2013)

In a healthy and good marriage, barring health issues and the inevitable 'today, too much stuff happened' a married couple will have sex as often as either one of the parties wants to have sex.


----------



## masyflora (Feb 25, 2015)

I am probably the odd one on this forum, but I don't see sex as being more important then lets say children and being financially ruined. What if the only thing in your marriage that is lacking is sex. Should your V or P be more important then your children. And how healthy is it when a child ask you why you left. Are you going to be honest and say it is because I wasn't getting my required sex per week?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

jb02157 said:


> The laywer told me the way they figure out who gets what is they make the income of both the husband and wife equal and then they give a certain percentage on top of that to the wife for child support. Men, in this situation will always have less income then the wife and in most circumstances precludes them from gets an apt. big enough to get even partial custody. Also, around here anyway, if you are female you get the kids.


Are you in the US or another country? That has not been the experience I have read and heard about from talking to divorcing Mothers in the US (a different forum I used to be in) 
I also suggest a new lawyer.


----------



## Marriedwithdogs (Jan 29, 2015)

Normal is when both are equally happy with their sex life and the frequency.

Having said that, I don't think it's realistic to think both husband and wife will want sex at the same time all the time. As long as each are willing to compromise, that's all that matters.


----------



## jb02157 (Apr 16, 2014)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Are you in the US or another country? That has not been the experience I have read and heard about from talking to divorcing Mothers in the US (a different forum I used to be in)
> I also suggest a new lawyer.


That's because you were talking to women. Women always fair better in divorce court then men do.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

jb02157 said:


> That's because you were talking to women. Women always fair better in divorce court then men do.


I'm talking to broke women who get a very small amount of child support, some have spouse support for a short time but are barely making ends meet because the child support they get does not cover much. They do not get even close to 70% of his income. They also have shared custody. 

In my own country, even years ago before things got more equal, I've never seen a man have to give 70% of his income to his ex wife. 50% of the home and assets that were acquired during the marriage and then child support and spouse support were based on income and were not even 50% of his income.

What state are you in? There are simple calculators that will show you the approx. amount you would be paying.


----------



## Marriedwithdogs (Jan 29, 2015)

masyflora said:


> I am probably the odd one on this forum, but I don't see sex as being more important then lets say children and being financially ruined. What if the only thing in your marriage that is lacking is sex. Should your V or P be more important then your children. And how healthy is it when a child ask you why you left. Are you going to be honest and say it is because I wasn't getting my required sex per week?


I agree. On average most couples have sex 2-3 times a week. Let's say the average time from start to finish takes 10-20 min. That accounts for 60 min a week (on the high end) where as rearing children, working, cooking and cleaning account for 40+ hrs a week. When I read about men complaining they don't get enough sex, in the back of my mind I'm wondering what they are doing those other 39+ hrs that are just as important, meaningful and bonding. If it's a Saturday and I just cleaned the house, went grocery shopping, cooked a meal, all within 3 hrs,and my husband throws me in the closet and says "let's do it", yes I'm gonna say let's take a rain check when I've gotten a chance to breath!!!


----------



## Young at Heart (Jan 6, 2015)

Anon Pink said:


> How do you define normal and healthy sex life in a bonded committed couple?
> 
> Do you think sex a few times a year is normal?
> 
> ...


OK, I am going to go all Schnarch on you. But first, I think I understand what you are saying as I was in a SSM and set a boundary that sex had to occur at least twice a week or I was going to get a divorce.

It took my wife a long time to believe that sex was that important to me.

One thing I will say is that if you read Chapmans 5 LL, sex isn't one of the LL's. Touch is, but that is different. So you can feel "loved," cherished, etc. without sex. However, for me sex really results in a feeling of bonding and closeness that is hard to come by any other way.

Still, what is normal when you are in your 20's may not be normal when you are in your 90's and in an assisted living situation with a non-spouse roommate or worse with a spouse that has Alzeheimers and would yell that you were raping them if you tried to make love.

As Schnarch likes to point out almost every aspect of marriage contains an HD and LD component where the couple must negotiate something that they can both live with and enjoy for the long haul or until they need to renegotiate. It is part of the differentiating process that causes them to grow (hopefully together).

I like his classic Schnarch example of one person in a marriage may be HD for chocolate ice cream and the other may prefer vanillia or no dessert. That doesn't make the vanilla person wrong or the HD chocolate person a "perv." The same is true for sex. What might he cruel LD for one couple (say once a week), might be HD and a dream come true for someone in a true SSM where sex is say once every few months.

So, "normal" is a pretty broad bell-shaped curve, with lots of deviation for the deviants. I therefore agree with the person who said "acceptable" is a better concept.


----------



## jb02157 (Apr 16, 2014)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> I'm talking to broke women who get a very small amount of child support, some have spouse support for a short time but are barely making ends meet because the child support they get does not cover much. They do not get even close to 70% of his income. They also have shared custody.
> 
> In my own country, even years ago before things got more equal, I've never seen a man have to give 70% of his income to his ex wife. 50% of the home and assets that were acquired during the marriage and then child support and spouse support were based on income and were not even 50% of his income.
> 
> What state are you in? There are simple calculators that will show you the approx. amount you would be paying.


I'm sorry that you don't believe me but 60-70% is the norm. This comes from talking to many people and lawyers about this. Some of my closest friends went through divorce and this is what they paid. I spend literaly all last year fixed on this very subject and there no getting out of paying or making the percentage lower. I wish there was a way around it because I would have found it by now. There are no simple calculators that show you how much you have to pay, each case is different but most of the time the guy is looking at 60 to 70%. There are times when they go down to 50% but that's only if both husband and wife and make the same and contributed equally to all the "marital property". 

Let me show you how they get 70%. Let's say they have three kids and the husband makes 100K and the wife makes 30K...they will make the incomes equal to 65K each so he loses 35% here. He also loses an additional 32% for child support for three kids. So that's 67%

and they have property ...a house and cars worth 200K but the equity is only 60K. The wife will get 70% of the house because she has the kids so that's 18K for H 42K for W. 

So after divorce he has to live on 33K/year and gets only 18K in cash. After taxes that about $2000/month. most apt. complexes around here won't give you a 3br apt if that's all you make. So, according to laws around here, if you can't get an apt with separate living quarters for the kids you don't even get partial custody. So you would lose 60-70% and the kids. 

I wish it were different but this is the way that it is.


----------



## Zouz (May 28, 2014)

love should be a mutual pleasure ; 

when it is as a chore is ;it is not love , it is a duty sex.

Why most women consider love making as a favor ?

is it because it is how a male is structured to express love through love making ?

does that means that rarely women are HD ?


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

According to a recent U.S. Census Bureau report (pdf link), the median child support payment in the U.S. is $280 a month. The average child support payment is a little higher – $350 a month.
Men’s Rights Myth: Typical Child Support Payments Are Insanely High | Alas, a Blog

That is much more typical of what the women I know are getting.

A man making 100,000 with 3 kids in my province would be paying $1866/month which is 22,392 a year. Not even close to 70% of his income. I checked for California and it was 2053 so pretty close. I guess they will all be around the same.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

masyflora said:


> I am probably the odd one on this forum, but I don't see sex as being more important then lets say children and being financially ruined. What if the only thing in your marriage that is lacking is sex. Should your V or P be more important then your children. And how healthy is it when a child ask you why you left. Are you going to be honest and say it is because I wasn't getting my required sex per week?


How healthy is it to model a loveless, passionless marriage for your child? How healthy is it for your children to find out later in life that they were the only reason two people stayed together who hated the situation they were in?

Your V or P is not what sex is all about. It's about initimacy.

Besides, the OP's has one adult kid and one minor. I'm assuming the minor is on the older side of minor-hood (although I don't know that for sure).


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Ok, here's my nerd answer.

Normal in any given relationship, and I'm not sure that mine qualifies, but nonetheless it should be the intersection of your individual sexual Venn diagrams. 

You do the things you both find mutually satisfying with a frequency close enough for horseshoes for each of your preferences. You do not do things far away from the other person's universe. You work compassionately and patiently to increase that intersection over time, and understand that you may never achieve complete coverage. Sometimes, much, much less.

It does mean that the more sexually conservative partner will retain more control over your sex life. 

Here's an even nerdier answer for the rest of the question. Happiness is a weighted sum of happiness factors, something like:

A*(sexual frequency) + B*(sexual expressiveness) + C*(intelligence) + D*(emotional connection) + E*(fiscal attitudes) + ... = Happiness Quotient

If Happiness Quotient > my individual threshold, I am nominally but perhaps not optimally happy. The individual weights given to each category are personal. I may have a weight for sexual frequency 10 times higher than for fiscal responsibility, and so I'm willing to trade an occasional shoe buying binge for some good freak-on time and still remain above my Minimum Happiness Threshold.

Some things are Deal Breakers - their contribution to my Minimum Happiness Quotient is so great that I cannot be minimally happy in their absence. Some things are Don't Cares, with a weighting factor near zero. So of course I will be willing to trade some of column A for a little of column B and still say that I am Happy, even if I'm not particularly happy with Column A taken by itself.

The notion that I should look for someone to simultaneously maximize all of my happiness factors is a laudable goal that has to be tempered by the reality that it's highly improbable to find such a God or Goddess among us mere mortals. I might trade my wife for a Backbreaker She-Cat in the sack, only to find that she's a narcissistic self indulgent pooh-head.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

masyflora said:


> I am probably the odd one on this forum, but I don't see sex as being more important then lets say children and being financially ruined. What if the only thing in your marriage that is lacking is sex. Should your V or P be more important then your children. And how healthy is it when a child ask you why you left. Are you going to be honest and say it is because I wasn't getting my required sex per week?


Let's keep things in perspective here. Some people act like they will, be living in the poor house if they divorce a sexless spouse when that is not likely true. Other people act like their children will grow up to be strippers and axe murderers if mom and dad divorce when that is really unlikely to be true.

Would I be honest and say I got divorced because my marriage was sexless? Hell yes! Someone who thought less of me for that would not be the right person for me, someone who understood that decision, would be the right person for me.

Luckily, I don't have that problem because my husband gives me all the sex I want. But if he didn't...not sure I'd be sticking it out without a very very legitimate medical reason for which he has exhausted all possible resources.

ETA: I have two adult children and one minor child. And when they're all home the minor child finally has someone to complain to about the noise coming from Mom's bedroom while the older kids explain why that noise is a good thing.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Cletus said:


> Ok, here's my nerd answer.
> 
> Normal in any given relationship, and I'm not sure that mine qualifies, but nonetheless it should be the intersection of your individual sexual Venn diagrams.
> 
> ...


Ah Cletus, thanks for your happiness quotient analysis. 

If your happiness quotient indicates you are reasonably happy than who am I to argue?


----------



## MarriedDude (Jun 21, 2014)

Anon Pink said:


> How do you define normal and healthy sex life in a bonded committed couple?
> 
> Do you think sex a few times a year is normal? If not, how do you confront those who seem to think it is normal? *A few times a year is what I would consider cruel. I don't typically confront those folks...but the times I have...I simply assured them that NO, that is not even close to what I would call normal. *
> 
> ...


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Anon Pink said:


> Ah Cletus, thanks for your happiness quotient analysis.
> 
> If your happiness quotient indicates you are reasonably happy than who am I to argue?


All of the stupid math talk aside, is this not how happiness works for you? I know your husband doesn't tick all of your check boxes - so how do you decide if you're happy with him as a spouse?


----------



## MarriedDude (Jun 21, 2014)

_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

This thread seems very familiar.




Anon Pink said:


> How do you define normal and healthy sex life in a bonded committed couple?
> 
> Do you think sex a few times a year is normal? If not, how do you confront those who seem to think it is normal?


You try to talk it out. But if one partner refuses to change, there is little you can do about it. The only person you can change is yourself.





Anon Pink said:


> Do you think denying one spouse sex on a regular basis is normal? Do you think it is how loving people behave toward each other?


Doesn't this depend on wants and needs? Why is the strong sex drive automatically assumed to be the normal and the weak sex drive the abnormal? 

My spouse told me flat out that she doesn't need sex to express her love for me, but that is all I want from her. I don't agree, but that is her reality, and therefore, her truth.





Anon Pink said:


> Why do so many people seem to so easily subvert their sexuality in order to keep a spouse from calling them perverts?


Everyone has said things in anger they later regret. That doesn't make it right, but it happens. 





Anon Pink said:


> I say accept the accusations of being perverted! I say embrace your sexuality and make no apologies! I say if your spouse doesn't want to have sex with you on a normal basis it is you DUTY to discover why and to fix all that is in your power to fix.


You're assuming there is something to "fix." If the other person is content in the situation, there is nothing broken, therefore no fixing is required. 





Anon Pink said:


> We only get one life people, one stinking measly life and it is not a long one. Sex is what makes us feel loved, connected, desired and when we feel those things we can better cope with the outside world!


For you. What about others that don't feel the same way? Are they wrong just because they don't agree with you?





Anon Pink said:


> I know I've answered my own question because I KNOW what I consider normal and I would not consider any one else's idea of normal, that is different from mine to be normal.
> 
> People make trade offs all the time and we trade sex for not dividing assets. Okay then, if you decide your 401K is more important than enjoying your life prior to retirement, that's your decision to make and you have only yourself to blame for your misery.
> 
> ...


Once again, your assuming that sex is the only thing that ties people together. In my own case, I still care deeply for my wife. I don't want to loose her and if I have to suppress my desires, then I will. Why is it that I'm right and she is wrong? Just because she doesn't agree with me? 

That works both ways. From her point of view, she's right and I'm wrong. Is my opinion more valid than hers?

The money thing isn't about the money, its about seeing something you labored for your entire life taken from you. It's about you making sacrifices for years, sacrifices that then become meaningless. It's about having to start over with no family, no prospects and no guarantees.


Copper


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Cletus said:


> All of the stupid math talk aside, is this not how happiness works for you? I know your husband doesn't tick all of your check boxes - so how do you decide if you're happy with him as a spouse?


Perhaps I should make him answer that question?

He gets points for trying. He gets points for consistent effort. And he gets double points for wearing me out!


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Ok then. Sounds like you're content with the life your wife has given you. You don't seem to want anyone's help here. Good luck.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

CopperTop said:


> This thread seems very familiar.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Copper, as I said in your thread. If you're unhappy with your sex life you have the power to change it. You have options. But you don't want to hear about your options and you refuse to believe you have the power to change it. I reiterate, the Buddhism forum might be your best way to cope with the unacceptable.


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

Anon Pink said:


> Copper, as I said in your thread. If you're unhappy with your sex life you have the power to change it. You have options. But you don't want to hear about your options and you refuse to believe you have the power to change it. I reiterate, the Buddhism forum might be your best way to cope with the unacceptable.



Seems to me the only option anyone has given is to leave. What I originally asked for help with was coping. 

If someone can give me an actionable item that I can use to convince her that she should change her ways I am willing to try it. I appreciate everyone's input, but I can't (don't want to, read that as you will) throw away 26 years of marriage over this one disagreement. That seems very shallow and, to be blunt, immature. Conflict resolution by "It's my way or the highway" doesn't seem like a winning solution. 

And perhaps this just applies to me and my world view is out of touch, but doesn't anyone stand by their word anymore? I made a promise in front of her family and mine that I would never leave her. In no way did I predicate that on "so long as we have sex every day."

In any case, thank you all for your suggestion. I will think about everything that has been said.


Copper


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

jb02157 said:


> In vertually any state showing that your wife is abusive/unfit is almost impossible. Other men who have been divorced tell me as long as you are female, you get the kids. It doesn't matter if she had affairs, hits the kids or what, she gets the kids. Men almost never get custody. Yeah this is 2015 and the divorce laws should be fair, they're not. If they were I would have been divorced and with someone else 20 years ago.


Is your wife a SAHM?


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

CopperTop said:


> Seems to me the only option anyone has given is to leave. What I originally asked for help with was coping.
> 
> *If someone can give me an actionable item that I can use to convince her that she should change her ways I am willing to try it.* I appreciate everyone's input, but I can't (don't want to, read that as you will) throw away 26 years of marriage over this one disagreement. That seems very shallow and, to be blunt, immature. Conflict resolution by "It's my way or the highway" doesn't seem like a winning solution.
> 
> ...


Read the book "Divorce Busters". Pay special attention to the chapter on introducing change and the 180. (It's not the 180 that everyone here talks about. )

There I gave you an actionable thing to do that could change your entire marriage for the good.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

I would sacrifice my sex life for the sake of assuring the best start possible for my children. Living with a mother and father is the optimal situation for children. 

Children don't want to know anything about sex between their parents. They need to learn about normal sexuality but not by knowing anything about their parents sex lives, IMO. These days, many children learn about sex from porn, TV, movies and their peers. That's the area that parent should develop strategies to negate these influences. Many never even discuss sexuality with their children. 

Leaving a spouse for sex does not teach children a positive message about love or sex. They learn that sex is more important than every other consideration in life, That includes the people who are dependent on a parent, their children. I don't know if that sets them up for a happy life.

I think the possibility of leaving can never be taken off of the table in a relationship. But the benefit of any adult action to children must be weighed against the risk to them. Abuse, alcoholism, drug addiction, intractable mental illnesses, or PD's, and cheating, creates an environment that harms children and warrants D. But low or no sex, I don't think so. That is until children are no longer in jeopardy.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

> *CopperTop said*: *You're assuming there is something to "fix." If the other person is content in the situation, there is nothing broken, therefore no fixing is required.
> 
> For you. What about others that don't feel the same way? Are they wrong just because they don't agree with you?
> 
> ...


 When I read posts like yours Copper.. I say to myself.. what an Honorable man, probably an amazing Father.... . You will put your wife, your kids and their needs before your own happiness... you consider her side.. and won't jump to insist you should get *your way* -just because you are HIGHER DRIVE and have to live with that aching feeling of rejection, or just dullness cause she just doesn't need it LIKE THAT...I so believe this can ZAP the spirit within us.. .. where people need to find something else to fulfill to make up for the loss somehow. 

Sometimes I think *certain personalities* are able to sacrifice & put themselves down more so than others..

As I can SEE the difference in my Husband vs. Myself.. when he wanted MORE sex (though it was never anything near sexless--I NEEDED it at least once a week or I would chase him down)...but he just "put himself down " -he didn't push, it never affected his Love towards me ... he never wanted another, continued to love our family, he seemed HAPPY even......but he was HURTING , feeling less loved by me..(this is what he told me speaking of our earlier yrs- we had yrs of infertility which wasn't helping matters)... 

Then there is ME.. .. No patience at all in this area... this sounds awful right !... when I came into my insatiable drive in mid life (hormones overtaking my mind).....there was such an unrelenting craving there.. I was thinking... if this is what YOUNG MEN go through ..  .. how in the h*ll do they even concentrate .. I wanted to look at porn-it became ELECTRIC...... I literally needed to be filled...

Even thinking he didn't want me.. it would drag me down.. I would get MOODY.. very emotional.. I might even start a fight!! (my Husband never did these things!! Honestly I don't know how he contained himself).... 

That intensity has calmed.. but still...whether from my younger yrs (more preoccupied with kids/ projects) to now....... *Romantic Intimacy* is very dear to me, it's more than a WANT -I do need it for happiness...

That emotional & physical entanglement "cumming" together....is like the greatest HIGH there is to bond 2 people, so I feel... those moments carry a couple... it brightens their world, no matter what they are going through, this is a comfort, something to look forward to, to make love after grieving, to celebrate, out of just wanting to give each other pleasure.. there is no greater acceptance or showing of the deepest of LOVE.. that's how I feel.. these things fulfill something deep within...

Someone geared LIKE ME could not stand to be with someone who was unaffectionate and rejecting.... I would not be able to handle it... Resentment would eat me alive.. and this would manifest in ugly ways.. One of those... "IF Mama ain't happy, ain't nobody happy" type situations... which wouldn't be good for the kids either...

I feel so sad for those who are struggling in this area. The 1st time I read this *>> *

This is What a Sexless Marriage Feels Like - And yet - Open Salon

It spoke it ALL.. to what a spouse has / is sacrificing ....No... some of us COULD NOT live like this.. and if we tried.. we may fall into the arms of another.. and honesty... the way or integrity is to get out BEFORE that happens. 



> *Anon Pink said*: *Let's keep things in perspective here. Some people act like they will, be living in the poor house if they divorce a sexless spouse when that is not likely true. Other people act like their children will grow up to be strippers and axe murderers if mom and dad divorce when that is really unlikely to be true*.


If I didn't like sex.. with my H's Blue collar job, as many kids as we have...he's said.. he might as well shoot himself in the head if we were to divorce. 



> *Would I be honest and say I got divorced because my marriage was sexless? Hell yes! Someone who thought less of me for that would not be the right person for me, someone who understood that decision, would be the right person for me*.















> *Luckily, I don't have that problem because my husband gives me all the sex I want. But if he didn't...not sure I'd be sticking it out without a very very legitimate medical reason for which he has exhausted all possible resources.
> 
> ETA: I have two adult children and one minor child. And when they're all home the minor child finally has someone to complain to about the noise coming from Mom's bedroom while the older kids explain why that noise is a good thing*.










...


----------



## ThePheonix (Jan 3, 2013)

I'm going to cut to the chase, avoiding this visceral crap about everybody's different, etc., etc. A couple who can manage to have sex a couple or three times a week will only moderately complain, not be highly disappointed with their sex life, not feel or claim to be married to an iceburg, or break up over a "sexless" marriage. Once a week will leave one or the other wanting and may cause tension . If its consistently and long term less than once a week, one or the other is going to feel neglected and the marriage will be unfulfilling and stressful to the neglected. If they had it to do over, they would have never married you knowing what they no now. Its a breeding ground (no pun intended) for EA and PA.
Argue if you will but my calculations are correct within 2 standard deviations of the mean.


----------



## ThePheonix (Jan 3, 2013)

CopperTop said:


> My spouse told me flat out that she doesn't need sex to express her love for me.



Here's the reality. Nobody needs sex to express love. People love a lot of thing without having sex with them. But when a woman tells you she doesn't need sex to express her love for a man, it means he doesn't turn her on. Could be for a lot of reason but nevertheless, she doesn't wet her pants when she sees you coming. Sounds like you're more of a roomy, provider/financier, than a husband and lover. (yoked to a chick who is more satisfied with what she doling out rather than what you may want/need.) I had one that I traded for another model that was more responsive and have never experienced buyers remorse.


----------



## jb02157 (Apr 16, 2014)

EleGirl said:


> Is your wife a SAHM?


Well pretty much, has a job that really doesn't do much for the household income, and what she does make she spends on herself


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

ThePheonix said:


> Here's the reality. Nobody needs sex to express love. People love a lot of thing without having sex with them. But when a woman tells you she doesn't need sex to express her love for a man, it means he doesn't turn her on. Could be for a lot of reason but nevertheless, she doesn't wet her pants when she sees you coming. Sounds like you're more of a roomy, provider/financier, than a husband and lover. (yoked to a chick who is more satisfied with what she doling out rather than what you may want/need.) I had one that I traded for another model that was more responsive and have never experienced buyers remorse.



I can't argue with this, because you are correct. I don't turn her on. Why? I wish I knew. 

I have tried to find out what she wants, but she offers nothing and every suggestion I have made is met with an "Ewwww..." or something similar. I would love to have a spouse that wanted to try new things. There are many things that I would like to try and experience that I probably never will.


Copper


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

On sex vs. kids and other "higher" commitments:

I go back and forth on this issue. I understand the goal of trying to make it work for the kids. Your relationship with your spouse is bigger than the two of you. 

On the other hand, I am very skeptical of people who say that "it's just sex" and that everything else in their marriage is fine "except for this one thing."

That one thing is really the only reason you are not just friends. 

Friendship is a lower commitment than marriage. Friends do not generally take care of each other when they get sick. Many friends will not stick by you when you lose your wealth, status, etc. 

If your spouse treats you as if you are just a friend in the sex department, why are you so confident that this will not apply across the board?

But, really, it's even worse than this. A true friend would not try to monopolize your time/affection the way a spouse does. An actual friend would realize that you will be friends with other people who may give you other things. 

The general expectation of commitment without sex is what, to me, really pushes things over the line from a situation that is not ideal, but maybe practical on some level to serve another purpose, to one that is deeply dysfunctional.

This aspect (which is usually present in these marriages) reveals a mindset of control and power and the idea that one person is really there to serve the interests of another.


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> On sex vs. kids and other "higher" commitments:
> 
> I go back and forth on this issue. I understand the goal of trying to make it work for the kids. Your relationship with your spouse is bigger than the two of you.
> 
> ...



I understand your point, and agree. 

With us, we do lots of things as a family. We spend at least an hour each night together, as a family, talking to each other. I can't speak for my wife, but for me, I enjoy this hour above all others in my day. I delight in finding out what my family did when I wasn't around.

If my wife and I could just do some therapeutic cuddling each night, and a couple of times a week, do a little more, I wouldn't ask for anything else. But when we retire for the evening, all she wants to do is sleep. 

Perhaps we are just dysfunctional at a high level.


Copper


----------



## *LittleDeer* (Apr 19, 2012)

I believe healthy is where two people make the effort for one another, and they don't stop. 

I think there are a few exceptions, one is severe illness and the other is pregnancy and newborns. Some women who would normally desire sex lose their drive due to hormones, exhaustion and morning sickness. 

I have no qualms about ending a relationship if my sexual needs aren't met most of the time. That said I would try hard to work it out first, but at the end of the day like you said Anon you only get one life and I want mine to involve a lot of orgasms.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

CopperTop said:


> I understand your point, and agree.
> 
> With us, we do lots of things as a family. We spend at least an hour each night together, as a family, talking to each other. I can't speak for my wife, but for me, I enjoy this hour above all others in my day. I delight in finding out what my family did when I wasn't around.
> 
> ...


I can understand why that family time is so valuable to you. That's a hard thing to contemplate giving up.

It's also hard to consider that the person you've committed your life to is comfortable just ignoring you.


----------



## Zouz (May 28, 2014)

Anon Pink said:


> How do you define normal and healthy sex life in a bonded committed couple?
> 
> Do you think sex a few times a year is normal? If not, how do you confront those who seem to think it is normal?
> 
> ...



for me the formula is simple ,

No trading should be involved ; they should be sexually compatible , no matter if make 100 per year or 4 times .

respect, respect , respect ....

Affection , affection , affection .

Givology, givology, givolgy....


once selfish in anything , everything breaks down ....


----------



## naiveonedave (Jan 9, 2014)

Catherine602 said:


> I would sacrifice my sex life for the sake of assuring the best start possible for my children. Living with a mother and father is the optimal situation for children.
> 
> Children don't want to know anything about sex between their parents. They need to learn about normal sexuality but not by knowing anything about their parents sex lives, IMO. These days, many children learn about sex from porn, TV, movies and their peers. That's the area that parent should develop strategies to negate these influences. Many never even discuss sexuality with their children.
> 
> ...


I tend to disagree. If your basic needs are not being met, you won't be a good parent or role model for your kids. You need the intimacy that sex provides. Absent that, your kids will grow up to think sex in marriage is wrong/personal needs are not imprortant, intimacy is not important.


----------



## masyflora (Feb 25, 2015)

naiveonedave said:


> I tend to disagree. If your basic needs are not being met, you won't be a good parent or role model for your kids. You need the intimacy that sex provides. Absent that, your kids will grow up to think sex in marriage is wrong/personal needs are not imprortant, intimacy is not important.


So you are basically saying if you are not getting enough sex you will be a bad parent? I completely agree with Catherine children do not want to know about there parents sex lives. I know as a child I was sheltered from it and I am glad. I learned sex through talking with my mother her not sharing her sex life with me. There is a fine line to draw there before coming disgusting.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

There's also a fine line between sheltering and instilling shame.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Both spouses have to be invested in making the marriage work.

If you can honestly say that you have done everything you can to make it work, but your spouse does not try, then it is not your fault if it doesn't work out.

Obviously that is a sad outcome for everyone, husband, wife and kids included.

But I think it is unreasonable to say that one person should just suck it up endlessly even if his/her partner is completely unwilling to do anything.


----------



## Marriedwithdogs (Jan 29, 2015)

I have a friend who told me (at a girls night out)they both only have sex once a month and both are happy with it. She was shocked when a few of us revealed we have it 2-3 times a week. She immediately said oh my gosh, you guys have it that much, and went on to make sure we all knew that their marriage was good, but sex wasn't that big of a deal to them. I would never tell her that's not normal or they should have more. They've been happily married 18 yrs, and she's never said a bad word about him, always sings his praises! Not many can say the same!


----------



## ThePheonix (Jan 3, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> On the other hand, I am very skeptical of people who say that "it's just sex" and that everything else in their marriage is fine "except for this one thing."


That's like saying, "the house is great except the material its constructed from."


----------



## masyflora (Feb 25, 2015)

Fozzy said:


> There's also a fine line between sheltering and instilling shame.


Shame would have been my mother never discussing sex with me. Children do not want to know there parents sex lives. I read on here from a poster that he was fondling his wife's V while his children were playing on the floor and watching TV. That is not only disgusting but abusive. Where do you draw the line?


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

masyflora said:


> So you are basically saying if you are not getting enough sex you will be a bad parent? I completely agree with Catherine children do not want to know about there parents sex lives. I know as a child I was sheltered from it and I am glad. I learned sex through talking with my mother her not sharing her sex life with me. There is a fine line to draw there before coming disgusting.


You minimize the importance of sex.

Obviously, sex is not that important to you. Sex is something that is nice but not something that drives you and certainly not something worth inconveniencing anyone over.

You think it sick or wrong that children might be able to figure out their parents are having sex! What on earth do couples do in countries where insulation or carpeting are not the norm? What did parents do in those one room cabins? Did those people never have sex?

Children learn that sex is healthy when parents MAKE sex healthy. Hiding it and pretending it doesn't ever happen is not healthy. 

To be clear, I am not talking about leaving the door open or screaming down the roof while your kids are watching TV. And it depends on the age of the child. A young one wouldn't know what was going on under that blanket, and older child would. 

My goodness you can let go of your pearls!


----------



## masyflora (Feb 25, 2015)

Anon Pink said:


> You minimize the importance of sex.
> 
> Obviously, sex is not that important to you. Sex is something that is nice but not something that drives you and certainly not something worth inconveniencing anyone over.
> 
> ...


And you make sex to important. Children learn that sex can be healthy by parents talking to there children. Not them listening to there mother or father having a orgasm.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

masyflora said:


> And you make sex to important. Children learn that sex can be healthy by parents talking to there children. Not them listening to there mother or father having a orgasm.


Depends on the age really. My middle daughter was about 17 when she out the noises together and figured out what it meant. My youngest, now 15, has naturally been clued in by her big sister. Sex is a very open topic in my family. I personally would not have explained that when you hear this sound it means that but I have no intentions of allowing my kids to think their parents never have sex. Kids should know their parents have sex and have sex frequently. 

I think you have some residual shame attached to sex. I think you are uncomfortable with sex being an open topic for discussion and I personally think that is very wrong attitude to take about something as important as a healthy view of sex.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

masyflora said:


> *Shame would have been my mother never discussing sex with me*. Children do not want to know there parents sex lives. I read on here from a poster that he was fondling his wife's V while his children were playing on the floor and watching TV. That is not only disgusting but abusive. Where do you draw the line?


It all depends on the talk. Many MANY kids get the talk from their parents. And a lot of the time the talk ends up leaving the children with the impression that sex is dirty, evil and disgusting (and you should save that evil dirty disgusting thing for the one you truly love).

When you teach someone that something needs to be hidden away in secret, the natural logical conclusion is that it needs to be secret because there's something wrong with it.

My kids are pretty young. We don't leave the door open. I don't grope my wife's genitals in front of them. But the oldest one has had the talk, and when the other two are old enough to understand what's happening....well they can just turn the TV up.


----------



## masyflora (Feb 25, 2015)

As I said in my previous posts sex is discussed in my house. There is no shame if a child has a question or is curious. But I do not want my children listening to me having sex or having a orgasm. Why do you feel the need to to let your children listen to you having sex? What is that really teaching them? My guess nothing except there parents have sex. I discuss it seems you show by example.


----------



## just got it 55 (Mar 2, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> How do you define normal and healthy sex life in a bonded committed couple?
> 
> Do you think sex a few times a year is normal? If not, how do you confront those who seem to think it is normal?
> 
> ...


:iagree: I don't want to turn this into a HD/LD thread but this spot on for both Men and Women

The whole post is pretty damn good 

55


----------



## Jellybeans (Mar 8, 2011)

I think whatever is "normal and healthy" is whatever a couple decides works for them. What works for some may not work for others, etc.

Within couples, it comes down to compatibility. If you enjoy sex/want a sex life, it's best not to be involved with someone, and especially, not marry someone who does not want to have a sex life. 

I once dated a guy who was not into the fact that I wanted sex because it didn't fit his idea of how a woman should be/act, etc. He tried to shame me for liking sex! 

We did not last long.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening all
(slow to catch up with this thread).
I think "healthy" and "typical" are sadly quite different.

I think many relationships are unbalance sexually. One partner is getting everything they want and the other is feeling either deprived or used. I think this is a natural but very unfortunate consequence of the wide range of human sexual interests and levels of desire, coupled with the great difficulty people have in discussing sex before getting into long term relationships.

IMHO "healthy" would be a relationship where neither person needed to feel frustrated or used. Where sexual favors were happily given and received, and where the partners' desires were well enough matched that most lovemaking was greatly enjoyable for both.

If there was just one thing I could teach young people about sex it is that there is a huge variety of interests among people and that things will NOT just work out for an incompatible couple. Sexual compatibility is necessary, thought not sufficient, for a happy relationship.


----------



## Young at Heart (Jan 6, 2015)

CopperTop said:


> Seems to me the only option anyone has given is to leave. What I originally asked for help with was coping.
> 
> If someone can give me an actionable item that I can use to convince her that she should change her ways I am willing to try it. I appreciate everyone's input, but I can't (don't want to, read that as you will) throw away 26 years of marriage over this one disagreement....





CopperTop said:


> I can't argue with this, because you are correct. I don't turn her on. Why? I wish I knew.
> 
> I have tried to find out what she wants, but she offers nothing and every suggestion I have made is met with an "Ewwww..." or something similar. I would love to have a spouse that wanted to try new things. There are many things that I would like to try and experience that I probably never will....





CopperTop said:


> ....we do lots of things as a family. We spend at least an hour each night together, as a family, talking to each other. I can't speak for my wife, but for me, I enjoy this hour above all others in my day. I delight in finding out what my family did when I wasn't around.
> 
> If my wife and I could just do some therapeutic cuddling each night, and a couple of times a week, do a little more, I wouldn't ask for anything else. But when we retire for the evening, all she wants to do is sleep....


My heart goes out to you. I was in a Sex Starved Marriage. It didn't start out that way, but it got worse and worse until sex became too emotionally painful. We were in a downward cycle.

A hard lesson that I learned is that I can not make my wife do what I would like her to do, only she can change her behaviors. 

A wonderful lesson I learned from reading MW Davis book the Sex Starved Marriage, was that there are things I can do to change myself and there are things I can do to change the way that interact with my wife (180's) that will so fundamentally change the dynamic between my wife and me, that she will have to consider treating me as a different person.

So my advice to you is to focus on changing yourself, if you want to change the way you are treated in your marriage. You have more options than just leaving.

Get a Life, become physically fitter, dress better and become more desirable by all women, take up hobbies that make you the most fascinating man a woman would want to spend time with. Most importantly figure out how you hurt your wife emotionally and why she is angry with you (you have and she is), then apologize to her and give her the unconditional love she needs. If you can do all of that, you just might get the woman back that you fell in love with and married you. Then again, you might not, because it will be up to her.

Things really started to change in my marriage when my wife noticed how different I was, when her friends were telling her how good I looked to them and se was quite lucky, and when she tried to punish me by not doing things with me, I said fine I am going to go do my new hobbies without you.

That was the point she became worried and agreed to marriage counseling and sex therapy sessions. That in turn is when the sex therapist confronted my wife with her own self-interest in having a viable marriage and when my wife started to fear loosing me should she not change how she teated me. Since I was no longer doing the things that caused her to hate me, she had to decide if her hanging on to her ancient anger was a good enough reason to allow our marriage to end.

Good luck. Saving a marriage is something worthy to try, if for no other reason that to make yourself a better person before you move on.


----------



## naiveonedave (Jan 9, 2014)

normal - weekly or more frequently
Healthy as often as the HD of the pair wants it, assuming it is mutually a good experiecnce.


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

Young at Heart said:


> So my advice to you is to focus on changing yourself, if you want to change the way you are treated in your marriage. You have more options than just leaving.
> 
> Get a Life, become physically fitter, dress better and become more desirable by all women, take up hobbies that make you the most fascinating man a woman would want to spend time with. Most importantly figure out how you hurt your wife emotionally and why she is angry with you (you have and she is), then apologize to her and give her the unconditional love she needs. If you can do all of that, you just might get the woman back that you fell in love with and married you. Then again, you might not, because it will be up to her.



I have tried. I lurked here a long time, almost two years, before I posted my first question. I've tried many of the things you suggest as I had seen them suggested before. 

I'm fit. I'm in better shape than all my male friends, some of which are as much as 20 years younger than I am. Leaving out male beauty, physically I am trimmer and better muscled than almost everyone I see locally in my age group. Ten years ago I really started hitting the weights, not only to take off a few pounds, but to try to make myself more desirable to my wife. I trimmed down, toned up, and she complimented me often during the process. Changed nothing, and now, she takes it for granted because I have always been this way. In other words, who remembers how someone looked 10 years ago when you see them every day?

I dress neatly, but conservatively. Casual shoes, pleated pants, oxford button downs, a sweater in the winter. Occasionally I will wear jeans and sneakers, but even then they are nice jeans with no holes or any of the other things that seem to be in style. 

I have two hobbies I pursue. I restored a collection of antique automobiles, one of which I race in local auto-crosses. She couldn't care less. To her they're just old cars. She has never seen me race, nor attended any of the meets that I will occasionally attend to show the cars. It's something my son and I do together and enjoy immensely. 

I also write professionally and with some success. John Gresham doesn't have anything to worry about, but in my own little niche, I sell well. 

According to my wife, she is happy and content. She has asked for no changes though I have asked her on multiple occasions, what can I do for her? What does she want? How can I improve in her eyes? What can I do to improve our situation?

If I am missing something in the above from your suggestion, do please point it out, because I am always willing to try something new.


Copper


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Copper-- you know the answer. She is just not into you. It manifests sexually, but it is bigger than that. You have a lot going for you, but she just isn't interested.

She'll probably only realize what she had once you're gone.

The question I have is why you feel you need to accept this crap.

Don't you think you can do better?


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> Copper-- you know the answer. She is just not into you. It manifests sexually, but it is bigger than that. You have a lot going for you, but she just isn't interested.
> 
> She'll probably only realize what she had once you're gone.
> 
> ...



I don't know. Except for our lack of intimacy, there is a great deal I like about her. 

What if I'm the one that didn't realize what I had until it was gone? This would be so much easier if I hated and despised her.


Copper


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I think you know what you have now and you know you don't like it.

I think you are deceiving yourself by trying to say it's just this one thing.

She might be a fine person for someone else, but she's not fine for you.


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> This is a new one for me, but it has come after years of rejection, which has lessened my attraction for her (so that even on the rare times that I am successful, it is just not that awesome for me anymore).



You said this in another thread. May I ask why you stay?


Copper


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> Copper-- you know the answer. *She is just not into you.* It manifests sexually, but it is bigger than that. You have a lot going for you, but she just isn't interested.


She is not into sex. She has turned that part of herself off. Her self hatred ensures that she has no sex drive. This is not about copper's behavior good bad or indifferent. She does not go there because she hates herself.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

CopperTop said:


> You said this in another thread. May I ask why you stay?
> 
> 
> Copper


For my kids.

It's more complicated than that (of course), but that is what it really boils down to.


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> For my kids.
> 
> It's more complicated than that (of course), but that is what it really boils down to.



That is part of my reason as well.


Copper


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

masyflora said:


> As I said in my previous posts sex is discussed in my house. There is no shame if a child has a question or is curious. But I do not want my children listening to me having sex or having a orgasm. Why do you feel the need to to let your children listen to you having sex? What is that really teaching them? My guess nothing except there parents have sex. I discuss it seems you show by example.


First of all, rarely do older children actually ask questions to their parents. In the age of Internet, that's where they go first. Do you want your kids exposure to sex to happen on the Internet, or because they have a strong suspicion that Mom and dad are getting on behind the closed door? I pick the closed door.

Second, I don't feel a need to let my kids hear me having sex or having an orgasm. However, I also don't feel the need to put off sex or an orgasm for when they are sound asleep or not at home. My sex life is a hell of a lot more important to me than to leave it up to those precious few times.

And lastly, when children grow up with a vague awareness that Mom and Dad have sex because they've seen the closed door or they've heard the odd noise, this shows them that sex is healthy, normal and noting to hide. Also, while they are still children, it teaches them boundaries to respect the closed door. 

In my home sex is not something we pretend only happens when everyone is asleep, the lights are out, and not a creature was stirring.


----------



## michzz (Jun 6, 2008)

Anon Pink said:


> I have great sympathy for you and your sitch. Maybe I am naive, but I do believe that when a husband can show his wife to be abusive he gets custody of the kids. This is 2015 and unless you live in a very backward state, you should be able to prove your wife's unsuitability to parent and gain custody. You just need to find out what proof you need and then acquire it.


It is extremely difficult to prove that a mother is unsuitable, barring drug or booze in blood and abandonment.

A guy has to practically use his children as bait to get proof. What father wants to risk that harm to his children?


----------



## masyflora (Feb 25, 2015)

Anon Pink said:


> First of all, rarely do older children actually ask questions to their parents. In the age of Internet, that's where they go first. Do you want your kids exposure to sex to happen on the Internet, or because they have a strong suspicion that Mom and dad are getting on behind the closed door? I pick the closed door.
> 
> Second, I don't feel a need to let my kids hear me having sex or having an orgasm. However, I also don't feel the need to put off sex or an orgasm for when they are sound asleep or not at home. My sex life is a hell of a lot more important to me than to leave it up to those precious few times.
> 
> ...


I have two grown children and one in high school and I talked with them when they were younger and told them to come to me about anything. As they have through out the years. Also hearing you having sex it not teaching them that sex is normal it is just letting them know you are having sex. Look I see my children and my sexual desires completely different then you. I feel it is inappropriate to not take into account children s feelings when sex is involved. Children do not want to hear the parents having sex it is that simple. Also honest question if your son does knock on the door and tell you to quiet down how do you stay being turned on? Hearing any of my children will kill the mood for both my husband and I. I will take my night sex without interruption.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

masyflora said:


> I have two grown children and one in high school and I talked with them when they were younger and told them to come to me about anything. As they have through out the years. Also hearing you having sex it not teaching them that sex is normal it is just letting them know you are having sex. Look I see my children and my sexual desires completely different then you. I feel it is inappropriate to not take into account children s feelings when sex is involved. Children do not want to hear the parents having sex it is that simple. Also honest question if your son does knock on the door and tell you to quiet down how do you stay being turned on? *Hearing any of my children will kill the mood for both my husband and I. *I will take my night sex without interruption.



Teenager knocks on the door, we say, what do you want? Teenager says never mind. Problem over now we giggle.

Your bolded statement says it all. Under cover, in the dark of night, with not a creature stirring. No thanks.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

michzz said:


> It is extremely difficult to prove that a mother is unsuitable, barring drug or booze in blood and abandonment.
> 
> A guy has to practically use his children as bait to get proof. What father wants to risk that harm to his children?


Not entirely true.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> Teenager knocks on the door, we say, what do you want? Teenager says never mind. Problem over now we giggle.
> 
> Your bolded statement says it all. Under cover, in the dark of night, with not a creature stirring. No thanks.


Or you know....teach them to just not knock unless there's an emergency.

I can't remember which poster said it recently--they'd taught their kids that any knock on a locked bedroom door had better involve blood or fire.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

CopperTop said:


> That is part of my reason as well.
> 
> 
> Copper


It's a crappy situation with no good answer, unfortunately.


----------



## ThePheonix (Jan 3, 2013)

masyflora said:


> But I do not want my children listening to me having sex or having a orgasm.


If you don't think teenage kids purposely try to hear their parents going at it, and discuss it with their friends, you're mistaken. We did it fifty+ years ago, our kids did it to us (I heard one snickering about it on the phone) and their kids have likely done it to them.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

ThePheonix said:


> If you don't think teenage kids purposely try to hear their parents going at it, and discuss it with their friends, you're mistaken. We did it fifty+ years ago, our kids did it to us (I heard one snickering about it on the phone) and their kids have likely done it to them.



She probably did it herself which is why she's uptight about it now.


----------



## masyflora (Feb 25, 2015)

WorkingOnMe said:


> She probably did it herself which is why she's uptight about it now.



Dang was that a personal attack? Or your own projections


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

certainly not an attack. just an observation. this seems to be a very important issue to you for some reason. if I had done things as a kid that I was embarrassed about, I might be a little paranoid that my kids were doing the same to me, so I totally understand your stance.


----------



## masyflora (Feb 25, 2015)

WorkingOnMe said:


> certainly not an attack. just an observation. this seems to be a very important issue to you for some reason. if I had done things as a kid that I was embarrassed about, I might be a little paranoid that my kids were doing the same to me, so I totally understand your stance.[/QUOTE
> 
> LOL nice cover. I hate to be the bearer of bad news but your observation is way off. I would have been mortified if I had heard my parents. And next time please don't attack me with your passive aggressive comments. I don't mind you disagreeing, but what you said was unnecessary.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

ThePheonix said:


> If you don't think teenage kids purposely try to hear their parents going at it, and discuss it with their friends, you're mistaken. We did it fifty+ years ago, our kids did it to us (I heard one snickering about it on the phone) and their kids have likely done it to them.


We tell the story of my brother beating on my parents bedroom door thinking our mother was being hurt. My father yelled "get away from that door boy!" We think it's so funny now.

There is an entire thread from just a few days ago about kids walking in on parents. And guess what? They all lived!


----------



## ThePheonix (Jan 3, 2013)

masyflora said:


> I would have been mortified if I had heard my parents.


Come on Masy, you're holding out on us. You know you heard noises that couldn't quite be explained, or your parents returning from the bedroom after an afternoon nap, both smiling like a couple of goats eating briers.


----------



## CuddleBug (Nov 26, 2012)

Anon Pink said:


> How do you define normal and healthy sex life in a bonded committed couple?
> 
> Do you think sex a few times a year is normal? If not, how do you confront those who seem to think it is normal?
> 
> ...



Being a HD adventurous hubby married to a LD vanilla wifee of 15+ years, I can honestly tell yah, having little sex is extremely tough on me. Too many times to count relieving myself, without being crude, because Mrs.CuddleBug isn't in the mood. Only when we took the 5 love languages quiz, did we realize our main and secondary love languages. Being totally opposites in that area, she understands I am Physical and that I understand she is Acts of Service. It makes her happy to please me more than me pleasing her back the same. Just the way Mrs.CuddleBug has always been. Then she started going to the gym, braces, haircut, clothes, lost a lot of weight, more confident about her body and the sex went from 1x month to around 2x week.

To me, sex once a month isn't normal because I am a HD adventurous guy.

My wifee has denied me so many times I can't count that high but not because she is being cruel on purpose, it was because of her insecure body image and how she was raised conservative.

I recently pushed her sexual envelope a bit for a small silver bullet vib, nookie lube and I have even bought a male extension for myself but it turned out its so big in girth, I won't surprise her with it. (6.5 inches girth at 7.75 inches length)

I talk dirty to her, even if it makes her a bit uncomfortable, give her passionate hugs, grabbing and pulling in her bum, longer kisses, sometimes I pull up her shirt and mine and hug her and the skin and warmth feels nice. I don't stop any of this because that's the only way she gets comfy with it and then I push her some more. Don't push her and nothing happens.

I agree that we only have this specific one physical life to live and you're only young and in your prime once, so why waste it?

Totally agree that many couples trade off sex for many other things in life. Sex should be the main thing that keeps the marriage going through the good and bad times. A bond beyond words, that closeness and warmth, and the sex, that your other half is there for you.

Being that Mrs.CuddleBug is passive and conservative, it must be up to me to initiate and be the aggressor. Otherwise, she thinks everything is fine and weeks go on by with no physical intimacy. She likes it all mind you, but since she is LD, she does tell me, it doesn't do anything for her.......Acts of Service for her and LD vanilla, just the way she has always been.


----------



## Dogbert (Jan 10, 2015)

Sigh! Not easy being human.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> If your spouse treats you as if you are just a friend in the sex department, why are you so confident that this will not apply across the board?
> 
> .



That.

I'm just dying to find out how will my cataract surgery go next month . I hope to be in the gentle hands of Florence Frigidaire...


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

naiveonedave said:


> I tend to disagree. If your basic needs are not being met, you won't be a good parent or role model for your kids. You need the intimacy that sex provides. Absent that, your kids will grow up to think sex in marriage is wrong/personal needs are not imprortant, intimacy is not important.


Sex is not a basic need. It's a strong urge that can be controlled. 

Sexlessness is not a desirable state but it is survivable. That's what should be modeled for children. Controlling strong urges is what makes a civilized and safe society for everyone. 

If sex is a basic need, is the single mother who leaves her kids at home to go out and pick up men justified? Is a father-to-be who has sex with a co-worker because his pregnant wife has a difficult pregnancy justified? If sex is a basic need like food and water, then they are. 

I look at it this way - a mate who _lovingly_ honors commitments and promises is far more desirable than one who thinks that sex is a basic need. Commitments and promises as very important. I don't deny my husband sex, I chose to make his happiness a priority and I would feel terrible if I did not honor my promises to him. If he told me that he felt sex was a basic need, I would probably lose a little respect for him. 

We human's have a safety gap - the ability to control our urges when the need arrises. Walking away from a family for sex, is a choice made by the individual. They feel that sex has a higher priority than their promise to care for children. IMO, it has nothing to do with pursuing basic needs like food, water and shelter.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

john117 said:


> That.
> 
> I'm just dying to find out how will my cataract surgery go next month . I hope to be in the gentle hands of Florence Frigidaire...


:lol: Florence Frigidaire! Snort!


----------



## CincyBluesFan (Feb 27, 2015)

Personally I think "normal and healthy" is whatever the consenting partners mutually agree it is. The only exception is if their idea of "normal and healthy" involves bringing harm to someone else. It's funny that I have to mention it but we saw a show on the ID channel where a couple liked abducting women and raping and killing them. I guess to them that was their "normal and healthy." With that aside I say whatever works for the consenting adults involved, I say go for it!


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I think it's more accurate to say sex is a basic need within the context of a marriage.

In other words, sex is a necessary condition for a marriage.

In other words, no one would enter into a marrital commitment if sex was not included.

Obviously, sex is not a basic need for human survival. But it is a basic need for a marriage's survival.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> I think it's more accurate to say sex is a basic need within the context of a marriage.
> 
> In other words, sex is a necessary condition for a marriage.
> 
> ...


IDK, in my mind, sex is either a need or a want to have. I don't think it transforms. Otherwise I agree with you but for reasons other than sex is a need. 

I don't see why anyone would get married to not have sex. 

I'll quote Jellybean here "why get married if you are not going to bone" :rofl::rofl: 

It's a broken promise and therefore immoral and cruel. It's too easy to argue that sex is not a need and to feel justified in not having sex. Not every one feels the same strength or urge to have sex. But we all live and die on the basis of promises, commitments and expectations. What's the difference between breaking vows by cheating or by not loving your spouse intimately? Of course assuming that there is no abuse. You can't argue the point on the basis of sex as a need. If the withholder is still married then they are holding their partner to a promise that they are refusing to uphold themselves.


----------



## Dogbert (Jan 10, 2015)

Is getting married while being in love akin to a couple driving while intoxicated? You can get lucky and not crash into another vehicle or run over innocent bystanders. And after the two of you wake up with a killer hangover you turn to look at each other and say


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

True, but for some people it is extremely important. 

Solitary confinement in prison provides for needs -food, water, shelter, air etc. That doesn't mean that it is an acceptable way to live.






Catherine602 said:


> Sex is not a basic need. It's a strong urge that can be controlled.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> True, but for some people it is extremely important.
> 
> 
> 
> Solitary confinement in prison provides for needs -food, water, shelter, air etc. That doesn't mean that it is an acceptable way to live.



My bad analogy meter just maxed out.

Let's say Bob robs a bank and makes $5M in the process. He gets prison for 10 years. With good behavior out in 5, and his $ is waiting. That's a million a year. 

The moment someone crystallizes their life into a single variable, be it sex, money, etc, they're done.

I've put up with Florence Frigidaire for the last few years. Sending my kids to top colleges was a trade off. Based on what I'm seeing it was worth it. My design girl just got an offer of full ride and teaching assistantship from the #8 ranked graduate program in her field, saving us around $50k a year in the process. 1st year funding and TA offers are rare these days... Had she attended a more "affordable" undergraduate school she'd likely not been anywhere as lucky. So I traded off a healthy happy few years for my kids' success. 

So it's all about tradeoffs. For some people 5 years in prison for $5m is worth it. 

(Now that design girl has the money bagged, she wants this cat... Only $15,000. http://www.a1savannahs.com/f2.htm)

View attachment 32569


----------



## ET1SSJonota (Dec 25, 2012)

There is no simple, cut and dry, "normal" that can be objectively measured in terms of frequency (or quality, etc). However, there's a general rule, one that I think speaks highly of the actual love and value placed in the relationship with the other person. And that rule is that if the SO wants something, and it doesn't cause any harm, it is rather unloving and selfish for a party to withhold. 

There are a myriad of things that I do, small and large, some on a day to day basis, that have little or no affect/benefit for me, but I do them for my wife because I know she likes them. In fact, most of them I like doing ONLY because she likes them, hence I derive pleasure simply from my wife experiencing pleasure. 

Similarly, I think in 11 years I have never been outright denied. Don't get me wrong, I've had my frustrations, but overall I have a fantastic sex life. I can't even imagine what it would be like to be continuously rejected. (ETA: because I struggle terribly with just "feeling" unwanted despite the lack of overt rejection)

Masyflora/CopperTop - 
How about we flip the script you're putting down. Because before the impending divorce in our fictional story, there will be discussions had about frequency, about receptivity, and I'm sure about needs and love. So if the HD partner walks due to no/lack/limited sex, isn't that ALSO the LD partner choosing to leave the marriage in order to NOT "have to" participate in more sex? Are they not 50% of that decision? Or are you suggesting they are powerless to choose to give their partners pleasure in this way (yes, this is rhetorical)? Shouldn't the LD partner need to discuss how they let this (supposedly) perfect relationship slip away because they chose not to have more sex? It's not a mime act, it's interactions between TWO people. 
I'd REALLY like to take your logic even further down the rabbit hole, but I think it would go way off topic. I'm NOT trying to bash either of you - I'm trying to get you to be a little more thoughtful and thorough in consideration of the discussion of the situation at hand. Masyflora, none of the discussion was intended as a personal attack on you - which you seem to be taking it as such. Coppertop, similarly, it is not intended to impugn your decision to stay despite your misgivings.


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

ET1SSJonota said:


> There is no simple, cut and dry, "normal" that can be objectively measured in terms of frequency (or quality, etc). However, there's a general rule, one that I think speaks highly of the actual love and value placed in the relationship with the other person. And that rule is that if the SO wants something, and it doesn't cause any harm, it is rather unloving and selfish for a party to withhold.
> 
> There are a myriad of things that I do, small and large, some on a day to day basis, that have little or no affect/benefit for me, but I do them for my wife because I know she likes them. In fact, most of them I like doing ONLY because she likes them, hence I derive pleasure simply from my wife experiencing pleasure.
> 
> ...



No offense taken.

In another thread, this was said. It sums up my situation perfectly. This was a response to the question of do "selfish" low-demand spouses visit this site and say, yes, I'm selfish.



ocotillo said:


> Yes.
> 
> There have actually been several on TAM. They didn't use the word, "Selfish" because they honestly didn't seem seem to think that it was selfish. They appeared to be truly LD people who saw their lack of need as a need unto itself.
> 
> I don't agree with that mindset and can't wrap my mind around it, but at the same time, I think it's probably important not to view things in the meanest possible terms.


I don't, and never have, believed my wife was being deliberately cruel or withholding. 

I just don't want to assume that my needs should be given more weight than hers. Why should she subjugate her wants and needs for mine? 

It's a very difficult situation. 


Copper


----------



## ET1SSJonota (Dec 25, 2012)

CopperTop said:


> No offense taken.
> 
> In another thread, this was said. It sums up my situation perfectly. This was a response to the question of do "selfish" low-demand spouses visit this site and say, yes, I'm selfish.
> 
> ...


I'm going through your thread now, so I'll have more specifically to you later. However, I think you are being dishonest with yourself and us by saying you don't believe that is it deliberate. It is ABSOLUTELY 100% deliberate, she 100% knows that you have this desire and need, and she has no problem accepting her needs and desires from you with next to no reciprocation. This is not a "subjugate". This is a "compromise", or "give and take", sometimes called "partners". 

I've read before and really liked that a successful long-term relationship takes two people willing to put in 70% of the effort for the relationship. This is due to natural biases making our efforts seem greater than they likely are, and their efforts seeming less than what they likely are. In YOUR situation, you're giving 90%, and she's giving 10%. And the longer the situation continues, the higher your costs, and the lower hers. YOU are being subjugated my friend. Yours have come after hers for DECADES. A "normal, healthy" relationship would have some "me" times for both parties. 

You were married several decades ago. It was "different" then. If someone traveled in time, and read your story to the you a month before your wedding, would you have gone through with it? I think we all know that answer.

I'm a car guy as well, so I'll hit you with a car guy analogy. You go buy a resto project with all sorts of guarantees as to its mechanical condition. Just needs some paint and body work. You put the paint and body work into the car, looks BEAUTIFUL. However, within a few years, electrical gremlins start popping up. One by one, the engine, then trans, then rear, then suspension start becoming problems. 
Noticing all those problems, the original seller tells you he's got a MUCH better one waiting for you. Won't have those problems, no sir. And besides, he wasn't "deliberate", the car gave you a few good years. 

You gonna buy that car?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

CopperTop said:


> I don't, and never have, believed my wife was being deliberately cruel or withholding.
> 
> 
> 
> I just don't want to assume that my needs should be given more weight than hers. Why should she subjugate her wants and needs for mine? r



I'll give you a hint. Unless they're doe eyed new brides from a fourth world country or some bizarre cult, they know that deliberately avoiding sex is cruel and uncommon and all the bad stuff. 

This isn't like smoking where everybody went "aw shucks it's bad for y'all I didn't knows". They know. This is a rather small group of women in my opinion. 

The majority know. They likely don't care. 

Sex isn't about your needs vs her needs only. It's also about your needs vs the marriage's needs. A spouse that's out playing golf or Candy Crush all the time is a threat to the marriage. 

You may not see the threat but eventually it's all transactionalized if you're not happy. And it gets out of balance rather quickly. 

You can sit back and give her excuses but eventually you run out of them.


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

ET1SSJonota said:


> I'm going through your thread now, so I'll have more specifically to you later. However, I think you are being dishonest with yourself and us by saying you don't believe that is it deliberate. It is ABSOLUTELY 100% deliberate, she 100% knows that you have this desire and need, and she has no problem accepting her needs and desires from you with next to no reciprocation.



I said deliberately cruel. I don't think she is doing it to punish me or anything like that. In all other areas she is a very warm, caring, generous person.

Does she know I want more sex? Absolutely. Has she tried to accommodate me? No, not so much. She thinks that having sex once every 3 or 4 months is normal. ABC (Anniversary, Birthday & Christmas) sex. Those are normally the times she opens herself up to me. But even then the sex is unrewarding and I am left... wanting. 

She honestly believes that our frequency of sex, at our age and length of marriage, is fairly average. There are those here that have gone years without sex, so she may be closer to right than we know. Doesn't mean I have to like it, though. 


Copper


----------



## ET1SSJonota (Dec 25, 2012)

CopperTop said:


> I said deliberately cruel. I don't think she is doing it to punish me or anything like that. In *all other areas she is a very warm, caring, generous person*.
> 
> Except if you touch her somewhere other than her shoulders, neck or head in bed. Then you're called names, and shamed into walking on eggshells for a year (or more)
> 
> ...


I'm still hoping I'll run across MEM posting in your personal thread, as I think he's got a great insight and successful turnaround information. I'll stop highjacking this one.


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

john117 said:


> I'll give you a hint. Unless they're doe eyed new brides from a fourth world country or some bizarre cult, they know that deliberately avoiding sex is cruel and uncommon and all the bad stuff.



If I coerce her into having sex when I want, wouldn't that be considered cruel as well? Seems to me it would be.

Make no mistake, in my mind, she is wrong and I'm right. But I'm not the type of guy that says, "I'm the man, your the woman, and you have to do as I say." 

If she is resentful of me, how has that improved my situation at all? That would only serve to end the marriage more quickly. 


Copper


----------



## ThePheonix (Jan 3, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> Sex is not a basic need. It's a strong urge that can be controlled.


Why would someone want to be married, with all the "costs" of marriage, to someone who is suppose to treat you as the most important person in their life, only to have to control that urge. Face it my girl, when a woman romantically loves a man, barring some physical condition, she wants to be "with" him. There is no such thing as low sex drive woman who is wild about her man. (and visa versa)


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

ET1SSJonota said:


> I said deliberately cruel. I don't think she is doing it to punish me or anything like that. In all other areas she is a very warm, caring, generous person.
> 
> Except if you touch her somewhere other than her shoulders, neck or head in bed. Then you're called names, and shamed into walking on eggshells for a year (or more)


Not entirely true. I'm not walking on eggshells and she doesn't call me names for simple touches. What that gets me is a "not tonight" and removal of my hand. Continued pressuring would then result in ever more strident refusals until she simply leaves the bed. It's the same sort of thing most would get if you were annoying your partner and wouldn't stop when asked.





ET1SSJonota said:


> Does she know I want more sex? Absolutely. Has she tried to accommodate me? No, not so much.
> 
> This one is key here. No, not so much. NO accommodation. THAT is the problem. She's not even TRYING to work on the situation from any kind of acceptable angle. She's flat out daring you to do something about it, and has said the remedy if you do is scorched earth. She THREATENED you.


Yes. She threatened me. Probably as she felt threatened at the time. But remember we were in the middle of a frank exchange of ideas and I kind of blindsided her. 

Could she do more, be more accommodating? Of course. But I could be as well. I could stop pressuring her for something I knew she didn't want to give me. And, finally, I did. Which started his whole conversation here. Also, perhaps because I stopped pressuring her, that was about when she started getting her act together. 





ET1SSJonota said:


> She honestly believes that our frequency of sex, at our age and length of marriage, is fairly average...
> 
> BullSh1t! x1000. There are numerous statistics that can be pointed out. Beyond that "normal" is irrelevant. Maybe you'd be okay with once a month, which is still NOT "normal", but better. She's not even doing that.
> 
> Copper


And I have pointed them out to her. But as Adam Savage said once, "I reject your reality and substitute my own." I can't do that. Facts are facts. But I know several people that are of the "don't confuse me with facts" variety. Apparently my wife is one of them... at least in this regard. 


Copper


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

It does not matter who is cruel to who. All that matters is that one of you torpedoes the marriage, the relationship.

Case in point. I am hardened enough emotionally that I don't care about my wife's antics any more. Her actions can't hurt me. So in theory I should let her enjoy her Friday evening of corporate online training. I will actually. It does not bother me as a person. 

But it does damage out relationship, or, more precisely, the ghost of our relationship. So she's not hurting my feelings but is singlehandedly killing our marriage. I can fix lots of things but I can't fix that. See my point?


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

Good evening all
I believe that coppertop is right. In many cases the LD partner honestly believes that they are normal. That normal people have sex maybe once a month - or less. That normal people don't do oral sex -that's a porn things. They believe that their HD partners are way off the curve. They believe that wanting sex EVERY DAY is at best sort of cute and silly, or more likely that their partner is a slvt or "old goat". They hope their partners will just get over it.

Some time ago I mentioned to my wife that I masturbated. She was surprised - not really bothered, but surprised - it hadn't occurred to her that I might even though there have been times we went months without sex.


----------



## ET1SSJonota (Dec 25, 2012)

richardsharpe said:


> Good evening all
> I believe that coppertop is right. In many cases the LD partner honestly believes that they are normal. That normal people have sex maybe once a month - or less. That normal people don't do oral sex -that's a porn things. They believe that their HD partners are way off the curve. They believe that wanting sex EVERY DAY is at best sort of cute and silly, or more likely that their partner is a slvt or "old goat". They hope their partners will just get over it.
> 
> Some time ago I mentioned to my wife that I masturbated. She was surprised - not really bothered, but surprised - it hadn't occurred to her that I might even though there have been times we went months without sex.


The LD partner believing they are normal bypasses the point. Denying your partner THEIR desires consistently is NOT normal. 

When I'm single, it's not normal for me to give massages to women. Or do chores for their animals. Or any number of myriad items that I gladly, lovingly do for my wife whether she asks for it or not. That doesn't mean that once I'm in the relationship, I should ignore all those items because it's not "my normal", or it "doesn't do it for me". 

Consider that if the LD has a SINGLE issue that they would have a fit over if the HD partner didn't provide (and if this were NOT the case I'd be highly surprised), then maybe the live and let live approach would be warranted. Instead, we discover that we ALL have expectations. The usual dynamic is that one person gets some/most of theirs met (LD), while the HD gets to stuff it.

Interesting that the masturbating conversation went as it did. I've always found it amazing when an LD is upset over an HD masturbating when they were turning down the HD. Someone here put it along the lines of the LD forcing celibacy on the HD.


----------



## richardsharpe (Jul 8, 2014)

In my case she was not upset, but surprised. She really didn't think "normal" people needed / wanted sex more than every month or so.



ET1SSJonota said:


> snip
> 
> Interesting that the masturbating conversation went as it did. I've always found it amazing when an LD is upset over an HD masturbating when they were turning down the HD. Someone here put it along the lines of the LD forcing celibacy on the HD.


----------



## CopperTop (May 29, 2014)

john117 said:


> It does not matter who is cruel to who. All that matters is that one of you torpedoes the marriage, the relationship.
> 
> Case in point. I am hardened enough emotionally that I don't care about my wife's antics any more. Her actions can't hurt me. So in theory I should let her enjoy her Friday evening of corporate online training. I will actually. It does not bother me as a person.
> 
> But it does damage out relationship, or, more precisely, the ghost of our relationship. So she's not hurting my feelings but is singlehandedly killing our marriage. I can fix lots of things but I can't fix that. See my point?



Perfectly. 

And I guess, when I finally accept I can't fix what is torpedoing our marriage, I will have to make a choice.

Harden myself, as you have, or walk. I'm not sure which way I will go yet. I think a lot of it will depend on the age of my youngest. If he is out on his own, I will probably walk. Otherwise, I will probably stick it out.


Copper


----------



## ThePheonix (Jan 3, 2013)

richardsharpe said:


> In many cases the LD partner honestly believes that they are normal. That normal people have sex maybe once a month - or less. That normal people don't do oral sex -that's a porn things.


Not from my experience. Both women and men know what other men and women are doing. I suppose there are LD partners but most would be surprised how many LI (low interest) partners that are characterized as LD. With a lot of LD women for example, its not that they don't want to have a lot of sex. They just don't want to have a lot of sex with you.


----------



## Q tip (Apr 15, 2014)

how about this. normal varies.

my w was ill for a month + so, nothing happened. im all grown up now and did not complain. fully supported her to get better and all. did not care a wit about getting some. my priorities are my marriage and my W. i do not keep track or score.

shes my woman. i am there for her no matter what. by her side.

we do have lots of fun. life happens, thats all.

ok, gotta sign off now, shes all better now. hate to waste the day..


----------



## Oblivious2678 (Sep 3, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> We tell the story of my brother beating on my parents bedroom door thinking our mother was being hurt. My father yelled "get away from that door boy!" We think it's so funny now.
> 
> There is an entire thread from just a few days ago about kids walking in on parents. And guess what? They all lived!


When my DD was about 8 or 9, she answered the phone. It was one of my friends and she told him that I was in the shower with mom and that I'd have to call him back. :smthumbup:


----------



## jb02157 (Apr 16, 2014)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> According to a recent U.S. Census Bureau report (pdf link), the median child support payment in the U.S. is $280 a month. The average child support payment is a little higher – $350 a month.
> Men’s Rights Myth: Typical Child Support Payments Are Insanely High | Alas, a Blog
> 
> That is much more typical of what the women I know are getting.
> ...


Some of what you said in quite inaccurate. The first thing they do is make your wages equal. In my example, the man takes, usually, a 30% hit here. Then *over and above*
that amount they add the child support, in Illinois for three kids that's 32%...don't believe me look it up for yourself. That's roughly 70%. *You can't tell me that women aren't getting that because they are* I'm not making this up. I'm really getting quite frustrated with this site because people discount factual information and only use what they believe to be true. This is reality whether you say it is or not! It is not a myth that men don't pay lot when divorced, it's a life change to living in poverty without your kids.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Hey JB-- I'm with you. Divorce is a tragedy for the whole family. But assuming the husband is not a deadbeat, the wife has a bigger safety net financially. Everybody knows this.

In fairness, if you start from the assumption that the woman is generally the primary caregiver, this makes sense.

The law is primarily concerned with the best interests of the children. To me, this is the correct mindset.

Obviously, the inherent flaw is that the woman is generally the filter to what is supposed to be going for the kids. So she can easily divert value to herself. 

Responsible fathers should not have a problem devoting most of their resources toward their children. 

It is just when they know that a large portion of the resources are primarily going to meet their ex-wife's lifestyle choices instead it is frustrating.

But it's not clear to me how the system could effectively meet the needs of the children on a large scale in any other way. It's just an inherent cost.


----------



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

Anon Pink said:


> Teenager knocks on the door, we say, what do you want? Teenager says never mind. Problem over now we giggle.
> 
> Your bolded statement says it all. Under cover, in the dark of night, with not a creature stirring. No thanks.


We get interrupted by kids somewhat frequently too. They knock, we tell them to go away, come back later, or we're having alone time. Kids are 2 of the 3 kids are older, only the 8 year old is still clueless; however, very rarely do they try to barge in anymore. We don't hide the fact that we have sex. But we don't broadcast it nor do we openly discuss it. The older kids pretty much get it, but with my oldest on the spectrum he can be dense at times.

Fortunately, since we both work out of the house we can normally take care of our needs over lunch.


----------



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

ET1SSJonota said:


> *There is no simple, cut and dry, "normal" that can be objectively measured in terms of frequency (or quality, etc).*


Of course there is. It's called statistics. Especially when it comes to frequency, you can divide a population into tiers of ages and the answers you would receive on a frequency standpoint will most likely conform to a distribution curve.

Quality of sex would be harder to measure because it's descriptive data vs continuous data, but it too could be measured if you want to. Objectively speaking, missionary sex where the man is frequently varying the strokes, angles, speeds, depths, kissing passionately all over the womans body, etc while the woman is undulating her body in pleasure, grabbing onto her man, caressing, stroking and trying to rhythmically match pelvis thrusts with her man, etc... would be objectively good quality sex. A man and a woman who are very mechanical, a single constant stroke, with little other movements otherwise and zero foreplay before hand is objectively poor quality sex. For those rare birds who think the latter description is great quality...they're outliers or aka "weirdos".


----------



## Holdingontoit (Mar 7, 2012)

ThePheonix said:


> With a lot of LD women for example, its not that they don't want to have a lot of sex. They just don't want to have a lot of sex with you.


I am sure that is the case for my wife. We were not young when we married. She was far from inexperienced. She had plenty of sex. She simply doesn't want any with me.


----------



## jb02157 (Apr 16, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> Hey JB-- I'm with you. Divorce is a tragedy for the whole family. But assuming the husband is not a deadbeat, the wife has a bigger safety net financially. Everybody knows this.
> 
> In fairness, if you start from the assumption that the woman is generally the primary caregiver, this makes sense.
> 
> ...


I definitely understand what you are saying but the court system makes assumptions that aren't always true.

1) The woman always is best to meet the childrens needs. I think this is definitely flawed reasonsing. Just because someone is female doesn't necessarily mean that she will care for her children. My own wife is a perfect example of that.

2) The Law is primarily interested in the needs of the children. I really don't think this is the case. If so, custody would go to the father most of the time. The court seems to be out to punish the father by killing him financially. This doesn't solve the problem, it only makes him unable to see his children. The courts most of the time have the wrong set of priorities when dealing with custody. It can't be assumed that the mother is the best care giver. 

3) Responsible fathers should not have a problem devoting most of their resources toward their children. Once again this is flawed reasoning. If a guy isn't willing to give all his money to his ex-wife who spends his money on herself not of the children, then he is an irresponsible father?? What you are forgetting here is that the father has the right to a life after the divorce to and should be entitled to the money he earns. It should be up to him what he gives his kids and ex-wife, not up to the court. 

4) Most of the money given to the ex-wife supports her kids. When you give an over abundance of money to an ex-wife without restricting it's use to that of the kids, there is nothing keeping her from spending it on herself and her selfish needs. We can't make the assumption that given the money from her ex, she will make correct and responsibile decisions with the money. Rather, we can pretty much expect she won't be responsibile and just ask for more. 

I think looking at the new generation of ruined fathers that divorce has created, the instituation of marriage has been killed. Men have learned that unless they want more than a 50% chance of spending their life in poverty without their children, they are better off not getting married.


----------



## ET1SSJonota (Dec 25, 2012)

I'm a divorced father (rather, a happily remarried one). I have majority custody of my child from the marriage. I pay no child support. In fact, if I had asked it during the divorce, she would be paying ME child support. 

Are there crap deals out there? YUP. Goes both ways too. There are a lot of dead-beat dads out there paying nothing for the mass progeny they have spread around. Stop preemptively playing victim.


----------



## ET1SSJonota (Dec 25, 2012)

Plan 9 from OS said:


> Of course there is. It's called statistics. Especially when it comes to frequency, you can divide a population into tiers of ages and the answers you would receive on a frequency standpoint will most likely conform to a distribution curve.
> 
> Quality of sex would be harder to measure because it's descriptive data vs continuous data, but it too could be measured if you want to. Objectively speaking, missionary sex where the man is frequently varying the strokes, angles, speeds, depths, kissing passionately all over the womans body, etc while the woman is undulating her body in pleasure, grabbing onto her man, caressing, stroking and trying to rhythmically match pelvis thrusts with her man, etc... would be objectively good quality sex. A man and a woman who are very mechanical, a single constant stroke, with little other movements otherwise and zero foreplay before hand is objectively poor quality sex. For those rare birds who think the latter description is great quality...they're outliers or aka "weirdos".


I have to strongly disagree with you. A bell curve in no way implies that a certain frequency is "normal". While the textbook definition of "normal" might use the term average, the "average" might work or not for a given couple. Should great-great grandma and grandpa going at it 2-3 times a week be the "normal" because the bell curve says so? Or, as you suggest, we break it down by age? Oh, but wait, it also changes by geographical location. Income. Height/weight. Education. Ethnicity. See where I'm going with this? 

Consider that the textbook definition of "normal" is also "expected". Hmm.. that could mean anything.

In the end, it's what can we be satisfied with and maintain a healthy relationship. It's somewhere between the natural drives of the two partners in a good relationship. Clue #1 there's a problem: if it centers around the drive of just one (either way).


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

ET1SSJonota said:


> Stop preemptively playing victim.


This right here. There's been a ton of that in SIM lately. They're all scared to death to do anything because of what will happen to them in the big bad unknown future.


----------



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

ET1SSJonota said:


> I have to strongly disagree with you. A bell curve in no way implies that a certain frequency is "normal". While the textbook definition of "normal" might use the term average, the "average" might work or not for a given couple. Should great-great grandma and grandpa going at it 2-3 times a week be the "normal" because the bell curve says so? Or, as you suggest, we break it down by age? Oh, but wait, it also changes by geographical location. Income. Height/weight. Education. Ethnicity. See where I'm going with this?
> 
> Consider that the textbook definition of "normal" is also "expected". Hmm.. that could mean anything.
> 
> In the end, it's what can we be satisfied with and maintain a healthy relationship. It's somewhere between the natural drives of the two partners in a good relationship. Clue #1 there's a problem: if it centers around the drive of just one (either way).


Normal means that which is most commonly observed. People get confused when they affix value judgements to the terms. A "good man" or a "good woman" is considered a normal, law abiding, moral citizen while a "bad man" or a "bad woman" is evil and a deviant (which is short for deviating from normal). I disagree with you concerning how "nebulous" sexuality is. It is not. It's definitely measurable and frequencies and quality of sex can fall within a probable expected result.

If you would study 5000 couples between the ages of 18 - 25, there will be a variety of results from a frequency standpoint. However, tabulating those results will yield a convergence towards a mean value for frequency within a given week. Let's get real and not be dense about the subject. For the most part people like to fvck. Most people like to fvck within a moderately tight band of frequency based on their age. Fewer people will want to fvck less than this tight band while a few people want to fvck even more. Then there will be a significantly smaller group who will practically act like eunichs while a significantly smaller group want to act like nymphos. 

Everyone wants to think that we're like snowflakes and no two are exactly alike. True, we are unique - but not so unique that our responses to situations or are desires cannot be reasonably predicted. IMHO, it's silly to not acknowledge that there is a degree of normal and expected outcomes when it comes to intimacy. Most of us have a healthy libido. A few of us have little or no libido while a few of us are off the charts horny at all times.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

ThePheonix said:


> Why would someone want to be married, with all the "costs" of marriage, to someone who is suppose to treat you as the most important person in their life, only to have to control that urge. Face it my girl, when a woman romantically loves a man, barring some physical condition, she wants to be "with" him. There is no such thing as low sex drive woman who is wild about her man. (and visa versa)


You completely misunderstand me. I expressed my opinion in response to a poster who said he felt that sex was a need like food or water. You are talking about sexual expectations in marriage. We are talking about two entirely different things.


----------



## ET1SSJonota (Dec 25, 2012)

Plan 9 from OS said:


> Normal means that which is most commonly observed. People get confused when they affix value judgements to the terms. A "good man" or a "good woman" is considered a normal, law abiding, moral citizen while a "bad man" or a "bad woman" is evil and a deviant (which is short for deviating from normal). I disagree with you concerning how "nebulous" sexuality is. It is not. It's definitely measurable and frequencies and quality of sex can fall within a probable expected result.
> 
> If you would study 5000 couples between the ages of 18 - 25, there will be a variety of results from a frequency standpoint. However, tabulating those results will yield a convergence towards a mean value for frequency within a given week. Let's get real and not be dense about the subject. For the most part people like to fvck. Most people like to fvck within a moderately tight band of frequency based on their age. Fewer people will want to fvck less than this tight band while a few people want to fvck even more. Then there will be a significantly smaller group who will practically act like eunichs while a significantly smaller group want to act like nymphos.
> 
> Everyone wants to think that we're like snowflakes and no two are exactly alike. True, we are unique - but not so unique that our responses to situations or are desires cannot be reasonably predicted. IMHO, it's silly to not acknowledge that there is a degree of normal and expected outcomes when it comes to intimacy. Most of us have a healthy libido. A few of us have little or no libido while a few of us are off the charts horny at all times.


Lies, damn lies, and statistics sir. How's that logical argument play out for you?

"SO, we're only at 2 times this week, where the "normal" is 3. What gives?" 

"Normal" is irrelevant to the individual case. What works "on average" to 5000 people does NOT matter to any single individual among them. If you can't understand that simple truth, then we will have to agree to disagree. 

I'm all about math and logic. I'm NOT about shaming someone who might not be as into having sex as me because they aren't "normal". Which is about all I can see someone using that bit of information to try and do.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Average is irrelevant without an estimate of variance and confidence intervals....


----------

