# Chicken and egg: Bonding and Sex???



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

No, not bondAGE.... 
I found this very interesting article, don't know if it's been on TAM before but it might explain my own desperate need to get more touchy feely .... 
_*MY LINK DIDN'T WORK - see Enchantment's, below....*_
I've tried to explain to my OH but he sees it as needing/creating hurdles and hoops before sex. 
What does anyone else think?


----------



## Enchantment (May 11, 2011)

Hi mad ~

I couldn't get your link to work. But found this one with a similar title on the site you referenced:

The Lazy Way to Stay in Love | Reuniting

I would generally agree with this. You are saying that you need non-sexual affection in order to feel close to him. He is saying that he doesn't have that need so he sees no reason to do it, and it would appear you are not as much of a priority with him.

Would he be willing to engage in an experiment with you to find out how it works?

Best wishes.


----------



## Lionelhutz (Feb 2, 2012)

As long as it truly isn't an barrier or excuse, then yes, I think non-sexual physical affection or bonding is very important, particularly if you say it is important to you.

Mind you if there is a history of rejection and sexual frustration, he may not be able to help feeling irritated and annoyed at what he may feel is "teasing". 

A compromise might be in order.


----------



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

(ref link: Thanks Enchantment!)

E: I don't think he's said he doesn't have that need, but he certainly doesn't see it with anywhere near the same priority as I do. The experiment idea would be good...

L: There have been times when although I've had reasons they haven't been valid (tarring him with the same brush as an ex, for example) but as a principle, no, me wanting non-sexual affection isn't a barrier or excuse. We've had plenty of problems so I see it (non-sexual affection) as a way of reinstating closeness. The link I (attempted to) post is the first time I've seen quite such a clear explanation of the fact this may have a 'palpable basis' in truth, albeit without mentioning couples who've had problems. 
If couples without problems can drift even slightly for lack of 'bonding', I think it has to be even more important in the lives of those of us with issues, whether ancient, recent or current. 
L cont'd: And yes, for the reasons mentioned briefly above, I know he sees there as being quite a history of rejection (whatever my reasons may have been) and gets irritated that I want to 'create hurdles' before we can be intimate. I absolutely don't want to, haven't tried to and would hate to be seen to, tease. 
Compromise is a good idea. Not sure where to start, though!


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

> I've tried to explain to my OH but he sees it as needing/creating hurdles and hoops before sex.


The way I read the article, the cuddling and kissing and touches are not supposed to be preludes to sex. The intent is that they are not foreplay, but bonding.

Why is he opposed to cuddling, say while watching tv? Or a little hug or kiss every now and then during the day, like when he comes home from work or when you bring him a glass of water or something? 

These are things that should be going on every day between you, not just "hoops before sex".

Does he understand that part? That we need touch in order to bond?


----------



## romantic_guy (Nov 8, 2011)

I don't see it that way as a guy (needing/creating hurdles and hoops before sex) but then one of my love languages is physical touch so non-sexual affection comes easily for me. In fact, it is easier for me than my wife. I totally agree with the article and even though it is not one of my wife's love languages, it still applies.


----------



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

norajane said:


> The way I read the article, the cuddling and kissing and touches are not supposed to be preludes to sex. The intent is that they are not foreplay, but bonding.
> 
> Why is he opposed to cuddling, say while watching tv? Or a little hug or kiss every now and then during the day, like when he comes home from work or when you bring him a glass of water or something?
> 
> ...


You're absolutely right the article is talking about non-sexual and not even preludes to sex, simply bonding. 
I'm not sure he's opposed to it, he just doesn't prioritise it the same way I do. I've said to him I understand his love languages (I do. They're acts of service followed by physical/verbal) But when I point out mine is overwhelmingly physical/verbal, he says 'well find someone who can do that AND make the money, bring the wood in, etc'. Now that mustn't be taken too out of context - he was a bit uppetty when he said it, but it's meant to illustrate that he doesn't see it as important (or not so far, anyway) to do something I find important. I'm trying, albeit maybe not enough, to do things he finds important. He may say too little too late but I think he'd agree I'm trying.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

madimoff said:


> You're absolutely right the article is talking about non-sexual and not even preludes to sex, simply bonding.
> I'm not sure he's opposed to it, he just doesn't prioritise it the same way I do. I've said to him I understand his love languages (I do. They're acts of service followed by physical/verbal) But when I point out mine is overwhelmingly physical/verbal, he says 'well find someone who can do that AND make the money, bring the wood in, etc'. Now that mustn't be taken too out of context - he was a bit uppetty when he said it, but it's meant to illustrate that he doesn't see it as important (or not so far, anyway) to do something I find important. I'm trying, albeit maybe not enough, to do things he finds important. He may say too little too late but I think he'd agree I'm trying.


Some men fear (and not without some reason) that non-sexual touch will replace sex. Just as a woman will complain that a man only touches her when he wants sex, a man can complain that snuggling and touch never lead to sex. So he may be reacting poorly to that. 

Try to explain to him that you need that balance. Also, train him. After an evening on the sofa just cuddling, try to give him sex the next night. Explain your needs, but also recognize his and show him that his fears are unfounded.


----------



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

Tall Average Guy said:


> Some men fear (and not without some reason) that non-sexual touch will replace sex. Just as a woman will complain that a man only touches her when he wants sex, a man can complain that snuggling and touch never lead to sex. So he may be reacting poorly to that.
> 
> Try to explain to him that you need that balance. Also, train him. After an evening on the sofa just cuddling, try to give him sex the next night. Explain your needs, but also recognize his and show him that his fears are unfounded.


Yes. I do kind of get that. I suppose it's down to scale/degree/timing or some combination of the three. You see there have been occasions (in fact one he quotes time and again) when he's felt he's been affectionate, away from home, say holding hands, we've gone for a walk near the beach, had coffee, maybe lunch, and it's been lovely. His point, and expressed almost verbatim, being why didn't we have sex as a result. 
I say well if we weren't arguing so much of the time NOT THAT SPECIFIC AFTERNOON but generally, maybe we would have made love that specific afternoon.... but equally it shouldn't necessarily be a given. Certainly it - in my books anyway - might take a few 'times' of bonding before we claw back some closeness and it leads to physical intimacy rather than emotional/mental/spiritual intimacy. 
That is a good measure of why I found the article I tried to link so refreshing, made me feel I wasn't in the wilderness aline, feeling that way. That, and the belief that regardless of our difficulties, non-sexual physical affection should be important to the bond between a couple. 
dunno how to explain all this without seeming a total dingbat who's complaining for the sake of it.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

madimoff said:


> Yes. I do kind of get that. I suppose it's down to scale/degree/timing or some combination of the three. You see there have been occasions (in fact one he quotes time and again) when he's felt he's been affectionate, away from home, say holding hands, we've gone for a walk near the beach, had coffee, maybe lunch, and it's been lovely. His point, and expressed almost verbatim, being why didn't we have sex as a result.
> I say well if we weren't arguing so much of the time NOT THAT SPECIFIC AFTERNOON but generally, maybe we would have made love that specific afternoon.... but equally it shouldn't necessarily be a given. Certainly it - in my books anyway - might take a few 'times' of bonding before we claw back some closeness and it leads to physical intimacy rather than emotional/mental/spiritual intimacy.
> That is a good measure of why I found the article I tried to link so refreshing, made me feel I wasn't in the wilderness afternoon. That, and the belief that regardless of our difficulties, non-sexual physical affection should be important to the bond between a couple.
> dunno how to explain all this without seeming a total dingbat who's complaining for the sake of it.


As a former dingbat, my advice is to try explaining it to him as flirting that will eventually lead to sex. An important lesson that I learned was that initiating sex did not start at 10:30 pm at night. It starts at 8 in the evening when we hang out on the couch, or at 2:30 in the afternoon when I send a flirt text, or at 8 in the monring, when I pin her against the coutner with a hard kiss and a grab around the waist, or 10:30 pm the evening before when I give her a backrub to put her to sleep. 

Doing these things, which are fun and intimate, with no expectation for sex, gets my wife in the mood. I did all of those things to my wife starting on Tuesday night, and we had a great time between the sheets Wednesday. She got her physical touching to bond, and I got my sex to bond. It was a fun build up to the event. And it was all done without strings attached. I did not because I expected to get sex, but because it was fun. I hoped we would have sex, and knowing my wife, was pretty confident that if it did not happen last night, it would happen tonight. But without the pressure on her, she becomes more open to it, and I can enjoy the snuggling because I don't feel rejected because O know that she will be interested soon, even if it is not right then.


----------



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

Tall Average Guy said:


> As a former dingbat, Mmy advice is to try explaining it to him as flirting that will eventually lead to sex. An important lesson that I learned was that initiating sex did not start at 10:30 pm at night. It starts at 8 in the evening when we hang out on the couch, or at 2:30 in the afternoon when I send a flirt text, or at 8 in the monring, when I pin her against the coutner with a hard kiss and a grab around the waist, or 10:30 pm the evening before when I give her a backrub to put her to sleep.
> 
> Doing these things, which are fun and intimate, with no expectation for sex, gets my wife in the mood. I did all of those things to my wife starting on Tuesday night, and we had a great time between the sheets Wednesday. She got her physical touching to bond, and I got my sex to bond. It was a fun build up to the event. And it was all done without strings attached. I did not because I expected to get sex, but because it was fun. I hoped we would have sex, and knowing my wife, was pretty confident that if it did not happen last night, it would happen tonight. But without the pressure on her, she becomes more open to it, and I can enjoy the snuggling because I don't feel rejected because O know that she will be interested soon, even if it is not right then.


Good post, well explained, but could you just be a bit more specific about how long you hadn't realised that initiating didn't start at 10.30, and what effect had it been having on your relationship? What you've suggested sounds fine. To me. Putting it into practice (ie actually saying that flirting will *eventually *lead to sex) contains a word designed to be a red rag to a bull!!!!!!! 
plus of course you have the kissing, backrub,whatever, which creates a bonding mood, which leads...... back to my original post!


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

Can you lay it out for him simply? 

"I need regular, non-sexual physical touch throughout the days, weeks, months in order to WANT to have hot monkey sex. Without the regular, non-sexual touch, my desire for sex take a LOT longer to awaken.

How about we try the non-sexual touching and bonding for a month and see if our sex life improves in that time?"


----------



## Chris Taylor (Jul 22, 2010)

norajane said:


> Can you lay it out for him simply?
> 
> "I need regular, non-sexual physical touch throughout the days, weeks, months in order to WANT to have hot monkey sex. Without the regular, non-sexual touch, my desire for sex take a LOT longer to awaken.
> 
> How about we try the non-sexual touching and bonding for a month and see if our sex life improves in that time?"


But this could go the other way, too. Why can't a guy say "I want hot monkey sex on a regular basis and then I'll be more apt to give you the non-sexual bonding you need?

I know in my marriage, the hot monkey sex (well, ANY sex) left long before the non-sexual intimacy did. It wasn't until that left that my wife said "WTF???"


----------



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

norajane said:


> Can you lay it out for him simply?
> 
> "I need regular, non-sexual physical touch throughout the days, weeks, months in order to WANT to have hot monkey sex. Without the regular, non-sexual touch, my desire for sex take a LOT longer to awaken.
> 
> How about we try the non-sexual touching and bonding for a month and see if our sex life improves in that time?"


I agree wholeheartedly. 
I'll quote you from one of my own posts a few weeks back:
_I've been so insecure for so long about our future that I've found sex MEGA difficult to emotionally warm to... now we're theoretically so nearly 'there' and I've tried to explain in the following terms as I see it: A full-on, happy mix of sex and love-making needs to be preceded by a period of regular, intimate, emotionally close love making which needs to be built up by a first love-making session, which needs to be preceded by flirting which needs to be preceded by verbal intimacy which in all honesty just isn’t likely to happen without confidence which comes from emotional stability and reassurance from him.... _

I've said this to him, think I actually emailed it so I didn't get flustered. All he said was his mantra about hoops and hurdles. We have got a bit closer between then and now, but only by me taking a bit of an emotional leap of faith. 
So although I agree with the last suggestion, I'm not sure how I can phrase it differently (or in what circumstances) to make him any more receptive. ??

And C T's post sounds so like it might come from my OH's mouth......


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

madimoff said:


> Good post, well explained, but could you just be a bit more specific about how long you hadn't realised that initiating didn't start at 10.30, and what effect had it been having on your relationship? What you've suggested sounds fine. To me. Putting it into practice (ie actually saying that flirting will *eventually *lead to sex) contains a word designed to be a red rag to a bull!!!!!!!
> plus of course you have the kissing, backrub,whatever, which creates a bonding mood, which leads...... back to my original post!


Ideally, both of you need to move from your positions and try and meet in the middle. 

In my relationship, we had sex regularly, just not regular enough for my tasts (once every 10-14 days). She enver cut me off, but had a lot of reasons why she did not want sex. I could not change her, so I worked on me. Part of it was improving some alpha traits, such as working out, being more assertive in bed, fixing things around the house (a hug turn on for her) and the like. I also started dating her, not just romantically, but with fun stuff, like going to an arcade/bar for adult fun. I also upped the flirting and touch, with the mentality that I expected nothing from it. So on a night when my wife was sending me every signal that she was not interested, I would still do something physical, like snuggle on the couch or hold hands or ask for some make out time, then leave her alone when we got to bed. The best effect was when I did it when it was clear that no sex could come from it (a hard kiss in the kitchen right before the kids came down to go to school). She loves it and is attracted to me. She initiates (in her own way - that is a separate topic) and we are in the 2-3 times a week category.

One thing to deal with is his comment on the hoops and your email. As I noted above, ideally both of you should take steps, but it sounds like he is not willing to do that. Since he is not here, and you are, I would urge you to consider taking the first step. To be clear, if he was here and you were not, I would urge him to take it, but what is, is.

Right now, neither of you wants to move. Both of you think you are right and the other person is being unreasonable. You can both sit there, secure in the rightness of your position and wrap yourself in your unhappiness. Or you can take a step to try and fix things. You can't make him change, you can only change yourself. So with that in mind, consider taking the first step yourself. I am not saying you are incorrect, or that he is not handling this poorly. I am asking you to consider being the bigger person for the benefit of your marriage.


----------



## Lionelhutz (Feb 2, 2012)

Chris Taylor said:


> But this could go the other way, too. Why can't a guy say "I want hot monkey sex on a regular basis and then I'll be more apt to give you the non-sexual bonding you need?
> 
> I know in my marriage, the hot monkey sex (well, ANY sex) left long before the non-sexual intimacy did. It wasn't until that left that my wife said "WTF???"


I agree.


Why make it a standoff? 

I would be cautious about about telling your husband that it is HIS job to fix things and your job to assess how he is doing and let him know when he has jumped high enough to pass bar.

This will reinforce any existing anger and resentment

How about you both take responsibility for addressing both the sexual and non-sexual affection in the marriage? Maybe you should find a compromise.


----------



## Sawney Beane (May 1, 2011)

madimoff said:


> Good post, well explained, but could you just be a bit more specific about how long you hadn't realised that initiating didn't start at 10.30, and what effect had it been having on your relationship? What you've suggested sounds fine. To me. Putting it into practice (ie actually saying that flirting will *eventually *lead to sex) contains a word designed to be a red rag to a bull!!!!!!!
> plus of course you have the kissing, backrub,whatever, which creates a bonding mood, which leads...... back to my original post!


You need to define "eventually" as being a number that seems to offer a reasonably immediate timeframe - e.g. some time this week, not "within the lifetime of any grandchildren you may have".


----------



## effess (Nov 20, 2009)

I think my big issue with cuddling is that it is frustrating because you know it leads to nothing - that it *always* leads to nothing.
I'm not against cuddling if sometimes there's is some sexual conclusion - but when nothing never ever happens - it becomes frustrating and depressing. Its a reminder how pathetic our sex life has become.
I don't cuddle because its a "hurdle" to sex, I don't cuddle because its symbol of our current relationship. How her needs must always proceed mine.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

madimoff said:


> dunno how to explain all this without seeming a total dingbat who's complaining for the sake of it.


I totally get what you are saying. But, it does seem like you are setting somewhat of a hurdle. You recognize it is possible that he might be wary because of past lack of sex. At the same time, you ask why must non-physical touch lead to sex.

I do not argue that non-physical touch must be associated with sex, or vice versa. I would caution against you always feeling you have to come first. It's just as valid that he want sex to restore the feeling to cuddle as you want the opposite.

So, if you establish a pattern where the sex must follow non-sexual contact, inevitably the sex does not always happen because it's always the last thing on the list. If you cannot just give a good roll in the hay once in a while without build up, he will perceive that you feel the sex is disposable while the cuddling, etc. is important if not essential.

There are women who will indeed argue that the non-sexual contact is more important, and that getting it without being available for sex is okay. Don't be one of those women.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

norajane said:


> Can you lay it out for him simply?
> 
> "I need regular, non-sexual physical touch throughout the days, weeks, months in order to WANT to have hot monkey sex. Without the regular, non-sexual touch, my desire for sex take a LOT longer to awaken.
> 
> How about we try the non-sexual touching and bonding for a month and see if our sex life improves in that time?"


Given that the husband might be gunshy, the poster here might have to ask for somewhat less. I don't mean that she does not deserve it. All I am saying is that this essentially is another way of saying "give me what I want and then we'll see about you". I would expect to get significant push-back from him.

My advice is that she should commit at the same level she is requesting of him. As in, if he _will commit_ to meeting her need for romance then she _will commit_ to meeting his need to sex. Just as a matter of fairness, I'm wary of one-sided commitments.

Also, that month-long period is too long. From what I've read, she has to prove herself to him as much as he to her. Optimally they should work on meeting each other's needs simultaneously. There is too much potential for a bad dynamic to take place given their history. I certainly would not agree to this unless I was guilty of a major screw-up and atonement was in order.


----------



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

DTO said:


> Given that the husband might be gunshy, the poster here might have to ask for somewhat less. I don't mean that she does not deserve it. All I am saying is that this essentially is another way of saying "give me what I want and then we'll see about you". I would expect to get significant push-back from him.
> 
> My advice is that she should commit at the same level she is requesting of him. As in, if he _will commit_ to meeting her need for romance then she _will commit_ to meeting his need to sex. Just as a matter of fairness, I'm wary of one-sided commitments.
> 
> Also, that month-long period is too long. From what I've read, she has to prove herself to him as much as he to her. Optimally they should work on meeting each other's needs simultaneously. There is too much potential for a bad dynamic to take place given their history. I certainly would not agree to this unless I was guilty of a major screw-up and atonement was in order.


The rest of your post is so reasonable it kind of outweighs the last..... kind of. I think we're both guilty of major screw-ups for sure. To paraphrase bigtime, my insecurity about his long-term feelings/hopes for our relationship result from a major instance of double standards on his part, his belief about rejection results from me tarring with the same brush, my built-in 'love and disagreement/unpleasantness are mutually exclusive' button put there from childhood, and experience with his ex. 
That having been said, if we want to move on which I truly believe we do, I go back to that the rest of your post is so reasonable............ it's achieving that leap past the past which is proving the sticking point for me and probably him too.


----------



## Diolay (Jan 25, 2012)

I just need to ask this. Did you go back and read what you had written and not given any thought about what is going on??? What has and is happenig? 

Go back and have a look and a think about it. The answer is is as plain as the nose on your face.


----------



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

Diolay said:


> I just need to ask this. Did you go back and read what you had written and not given any thought about what is going on??? What has and is happenig?
> 
> Go back and have a look and a think about it. The answer is is as plain as the nose on your face.


I've been thinking about it for yonks. I just don't know - and I mean exactly - how to resolve things, given one of us has to take that first step.


----------



## Diolay (Jan 25, 2012)

Let me be blunt. (Forgive me if I misunderstand)

You have been pushing away his affections (sex) and now you want his affections but on your terms.

Are you fair dinkum that you really cannot see that??


----------



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

Diolay said:


> Let me be blunt. (Forgive me if I misunderstand)
> 
> You have been pushing away his affections (sex) and now you want his affections but on your terms.
> 
> Are you fair dinkum that you really cannot see that??


Ok I see it the way you put it. 
Where we're at is that we had a MEGA hiatus in our relationship a good long while back, since which he's near as dammit refused to say he ever wants to live with me fulltime. Long story but he has his own 'cave' in another country and spends approx half the time here,half there. That refusal came after living together, being engaged and 'expecting' what comes naturally with that. 
I still see what you say, and the way you put it. The view from my personal window is that if (as he's been saying, *very* occasionally more recently) he DOES _ultimately want to work to _be together fulltime, and he DOES know how important reassurance of that is to me, why hold out on giving that VERBAL reassurance which leads to more non-sexual bonding which leads to love making which leads to a mix of lovemaking and hot monkey sex???? 
I suppose essentially the bit I missed out when saying how good the bonding article was is that verbal, spoken out loud, sweet nothings are an important feature of that tactile stuff. 
Not taking away from that I can see what you say, just don't see it from the inside. My take is another way round!


----------



## Diolay (Jan 25, 2012)

It sounds like your starting to answer your own question here. 

No doubt you read in here and other places too I imagine, many people, men and women alike, cement their relationship with sex.

The sweet nothings are fine and are a very important part of a relationship and are very beautiful but think about it this way from your partners poimt of view.

Having a relationship with sweet nothings, cuddling but no sex is like having a Lamborghini with no wheels. It's all very pretty and beautiful and all but, sut, so what? What the hell can you do with it?


----------



## Diolay (Jan 25, 2012)

I understand he's away half the time and that's gotta be hard on both of you but really!

Do you really want to mae the time you have together hard as well?


----------



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

Diolay said:


> I understand he's away half the time and that's gotta be hard on both of you but really!
> 
> Do you really want to mae the time you have together hard as well?


Bollo** you sound so straightup _very nearly _right, but that's discounting the inner insecure woman 'wtf yes I want him but I want him to want to SAY that he wants to *be* with me ..' type mental argument I have with myself. I'm hoping you see I'm not (quite) arguing with your observations, just desperately looking for a way my heart/gut can take that step without the reassurance. 


Prediction: you'll say that once I re-establish reasonable physical closeness the reassurance will come. 
Needs a bit more explanation as to how I - I also recognise ONE of us has to take the first step - achieve all this, pretty please??


----------



## Diolay (Jan 25, 2012)

It sounds like you've already partly figured that out for yourself. Of course, communication is always always always the 1st step. Numero uno. But the actual mechanics of what needs to be said and the action taken, is something no one here can help you with.

All I can say is this.
Make a plan. Write it down if you need to. When you do, make this plan a kind of map as to where you want to go. How you want to get there. Maybe even what you want to experience.

One Very important note, have a time table. Make sure you know when you are going to get to your way points. Maybe even celerbrate them some how

Talk about this plan. Understand that he may want to make changes. Little rest stops along the way if you will. LET THAT BE OK. After all, he should have a say in this journey you both are under taking.

Action that plan. You can talk about it all you like but if there's no action, you'll never arrive. Also, action speaks louder than words.

Maybe others in here have some other thoughts but at the moment, that's about all I can help you with.

Does that help at all???


----------



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

Diolay said:


> It sounds like you've already partly figured that out for yourself. Of course, communication is always always always the 1st step. Numero uno. But the actual mechanics of what needs to be said and the action taken, is something no one here can help you with.
> 
> All I can say is this.
> Make a plan. Write it down if you need to. When you do, make this plan a kind of map as to where you want to go. How you want to get there. Maybe even what you want to experience.
> ...


Yes, it does. I'm grateful. I've posted many times before and many very good posters have had their say about this that and the other thing I've bemoaned but for some reason (maybe because I've actually moved on in my understanding..?) you've said it in a way I now start to get. 
I'm inclined to show the OH this thread - he knows I post on TAM - and see what he thinks of your conclusion. He'll definitely approve of actions speak louder than words. Maybe that's a particularly 'man' thing! But thanks.


----------



## Diolay (Jan 25, 2012)

I think too that when he sees this relationship is going some where, he may just be inclined to jusp on board with it.

Hey, good luck to you both. It was my pleasure.

Keep in touch and lets know how it progresses


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

madimoff said:


> The rest of your post is so reasonable it kind of outweighs the last..... kind of. I think we're both guilty of major screw-ups for sure. To paraphrase bigtime, my insecurity about his long-term feelings/hopes for our relationship result from a major instance of double standards on his part, his belief about rejection results from me tarring with the same brush, my built-in 'love and disagreement/unpleasantness are mutually exclusive' button put there from childhood, and experience with his ex.
> That having been said, if we want to move on which I truly believe we do, I go back to that the rest of your post is so reasonable............ it's achieving that leap past the past which is proving the sticking point for me and probably him too.


Well, I'm glad that you found most of my post helpful. In terms of that last piece you did not like, I see that it was somewhat vague. Let me clarify that I would not agree to pour affection into an SO for a month on a "wait and see" basis where there is a history of withholding sex.

I've BTDT. There is a risk that it becomes the default. The lady expects her needs be met without any regard for his, because she has come to view this "wait and see" as ordinary, not a special accomodation. That may work where the guy does not care about sex or is so enmeshed with his partner that he completely disregards his own needs (which is unhealthy).

Since I am neither of those, I see no reason to create a false expectation. Again, if I wronged her I would accept a non-sexual period as part of the trust rebuilding process. And, I would accept a non-sexual period if my SO was going through a particularly trying time in her life, but I would make it clear that we were dealing with an exceptional event, not the norm.

Otherwise, if her response to minor relationship quibbles or the stresses of everyday life is to halt sex as a way of de-stressing, I would suggest that we are not well-suited for each other. Such a person likely is very low drive. There are simply too many ladies out there who view sex as intrinsically valuable (rather than a means to maintain an emotional bond) to remain with someone who does not.


----------



## Lionelhutz (Feb 2, 2012)

DTO said:


> Otherwise, if her response to minor relationship quibbles or the stresses of everyday life is to halt sex as a way of de-stressing, I would suggest that we are not well-suited for each other. Such a person likely is very low drive. There are simply too many ladies out there who view sex as intrinsically valuable (rather than a means to maintain an emotional bond) to remain with someone who does not.


That is the heartbreaking conclusion that I often come to. There are some couples with hopelessly mismatched drives. Maybe it is no one's fault and it can't be "fixed." 

When there are no children involved, I think they sooner they accept that very difficult fact, the happier they both will be in the long run.

Too often the low sex partner imagines he or she is content with the current sexless arrangement because they are completely oblivious to the approaching storm clouds.


----------



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

Lionelhutz said:


> That is the heartbreaking conclusion that I often come to. There are some couples with hopelessly mismatched drives. Maybe it is no one's fault and it can't be "fixed."
> 
> When there are no children involved, I think they sooner they accept that very difficult fact, the happier they both will be in the long run.
> 
> Too often the low sex partner imagines he or she is content with the current sexless arrangement because they are completely oblivious to the approaching storm clouds.


Different issue, guys. I imagine, and in the mists of time know, we are of similar drives. Maybe he's slightly higher, but not much, and at times maybe lower - or at least seems maybe to have a less spontaneous trait to him. We haven't had a chance to check it out properly for a while. Different issue too.

Up for debate (in this thread anyway) is whether or not non-sexual affection/bonding is critical to the security/strength of a relationship. And maybe whether or not gender is in any way relevant. And in my case specifically, whether or not my angle on it has been in any way unfair or destructive. And how to move on!


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

madimoff said:


> Up for debate (in this thread anyway) is whether or not non-sexual affection/bonding is critical to the security/strength of a relationship. And maybe whether or not gender is in any way relevant. And in my case specifically, whether or not my angle on it has been in any way unfair or destructive. And how to move on!


I don't think that is up for debate. It is critical, if you think it is critical. Different people have different needs. At the end of the day, as much as we can discuss what we as posters need or think is reasonable, what matters is what do you need, what does your husband need and your joint willingness to meet each others needs.

I do agree with DTO in saying that it needs to be a joint effort to improve things. Ideally, he should take a step while you are taking a step. Asking one person to take the leap by themselves if a tough request to make. But if he can't make that with you, what are you going to do? Can you take that leap yourself? I am not asking this to even get an answer, but for you to think about. Perhaps the hurts between you are too much for you to be willing to take that leap. I don't know, but really think about what you want. Because this limbo will cause a lot of resentments to build that may ultimately undo your marriage. Is it more important to be right than to have a good marriage?


----------



## Lionelhutz (Feb 2, 2012)

madimoff said:


> Up for debate (in this thread anyway) is whether or not non-sexual affection/bonding is critical to the security/strength of a relationship. And maybe whether or not gender is in any way relevant. And in my case specifically, whether or not my angle on it has been in any way unfair or destructive. And how to move on!


Yes, you are right. I was responding to an "off topic" issue.

I didn't think from your comments that your situation was in the "hopeless cause" category.

As I said before in a situation like yours I think the "team" approach is best rather than "if you give me this, I will think about giving you that"


----------



## madimoff (Feb 17, 2010)

TAG: The 'do I take the leap of faith alone' is a biggie. Definitely one to ponder. And your last point is indicative of maybe one of my weaknesses in that people keep saying it to me........ 

(I didn't mean it was debatable, I just meant that was intended to be the topic!)

Lionel: sorry I was a bit quick off the mark with saying 'OT'. Just so pleased to have a constructive thread going I wanted to keep it that way! I think your 'team' approach is one definitely worth hoping my OH picks up on when (if) I show him the thread. Got a few days to think about it (and get more posts), anyway - he's not here for a week!


----------



## Enchantment (May 11, 2011)

Hi mad ~

I went back and read through some of your old posts.

It sounds like you and your SO are in something of a co-dependent relationship (and there are all sorts of good resources to learn more about that.)

Have you ever done any IC on your own to try and figure out why you and he keep circling back around, engaging, pulling away, just to seemingly do it over and over again?

I mean, I think there is something fundamental there that needs to be addressed - and I'd really like for you to maybe explore the possibility of some IC on your own, if you haven't, and see if you can't get to the crux of the real issue between you two. That's the 'leap of faith' I would like to see you consider making. 

Best wishes.


----------



## deejov (Sep 24, 2011)

I never thought this would be possible... but my H is satisfied with a lot of non-sexual touching. His needs are met. A low drive male, who can rub one out occasionally as needed physically, but as long as he is getting plenty of hugs, cuddles, he is on top of the world.

Like a woman who needs emotional needs met before sex. 
Some people are NOT able to connect through sex unless their needs are met. Some people need sex before they can committ emotionally. Finding out which is the case, and working that angle might help. It sometimes means a compromise. Giving in to your partner's needs first so they are able to effectively meet yours in the long run. 

If it does not work over a period of time, then you know your partner either doens't know how to meet your needs, or doesn't want to. Only way you will find out.... is just do it.


----------

