# How big is the LD/HD gap?



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

There are a lot of discussions of mismatch in levels of sexual interest in relationship - LD/HD. Sometimes I think people may be thinking of very different things when they use those terms. Do most people really have a similar idea of what is OK in a sexual relationship?

So: Assuming that the rest of your relationship is good and that their partner does their fair share of chores, work etc. Assuming that they take reasonable care of themselves physically. Assuming that they are generous lovers who try to please you in bed. 

Could you be content in a relationship with sex 2.5 times / week on average - assuming it will vary depending on how busy you are etc?


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

To the mods: while this looks sort of like a "preference" poll, the goals are different so I hope it can stay. I noticed in the "is sex the bottom line" discussion, many of the people complaining about their partners being too HD were being asked for sex multiple times per day. Many of the people who were complaining about their partners being too LD were being denied sex even once a month. 

I think this may underlie a lot of the confusion in these discussions. I suspect most posters can be content with a roughly average sex life, even if it is not optimal and that the people at the extreme ends are not posting.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

The best way to put it is this. If there are different units in frequency then there's a gap. If one side wants 3 times a day vs the other 3 times a week, for example....


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

I answered 2.5 times a week and I could be content. I'd prefer more, but I love DH enough that I could work with once every other day or every 3rd day.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I guess I'm trying to get an idea of how big the gap is ans how flexible people are. 

One person might prefer sex every day, but be happy with twice a week. Another might prefer every day, and feel neglected if they don't get that. Someone might prefer once a month, but be happy with twice a week. 




john117 said:


> The best way to put it is this. If there are different units in frequency then there's a gap. If one side wants 3 times a day vs the other 3 times a week, for example....


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

The more flexible people are, the smaller the gap. But keep in mind that people have a desired frequency they're willing to put up with, and unless there's a good reason they will not deviate from it. 

And some gaps are simply not closeable. If one is once a day and one is once a month theres hardly a compromise...


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

In my opinion HD/LD works like this:

A) Wants orgasms 3 times per X amount of time.
B) Wants orgasms 1 times per X amount of time.

The problem occurs when A) wants B) to orgasm more than once per X amount of time out of fear that B) no longer loves A). 

Other than that if A) and B) respect each others frequency for desired orgasms each other wants to have, the two can have as much or as little sex as they want and be a happy couple.

Badsanta


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

That depends on whether B finds sex when they don't want it to be such a negative experience that they are unable to provide what A wants.



badsanta said:


> In my opinion HD/LD works like this:
> 
> A) Wants orgasms 3 times per X amount of time.
> B) Wants orgasms 1 times per X amount of time.
> ...


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

With my ex, the gap was about 355 times a year. Now, there is no gap - but I could be content in _this_ relationship if the _gap_ was no more than 3x/week.


----------



## tripod (Jun 18, 2016)

I voted "does not apply," and here's why. There's sex, as in intercourse; and then there's passionate bonding. I get the sex occasionally, but only if I were into necrophilia would it be at all satisfying. Corpse sex, duty sex whatever you call it, it ain't passionate. And, lately there's not even been that, or acceptance of any discussion. There have been excuses: UTI, tired, depressed, and my fav: "hit menopause and lost libido." No, she won't consider counseling...I've tried that.

Looking at three options: 1) divorce, 2) mind-numbing dissatisfaction, or 3) finding a friend with benefits.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

tripod said:


> Looking at three options: 1) divorce, 2) mind-numbing dissatisfaction, or 3) finding a friend with benefits.


2 and 3 usually lead to 1 anyways, so why not skip the middle?


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I guess that was why I made the comment about a partner who is trying to please you. I agree that sex with an uninterested partner really doesn't count.



tripod said:


> I voted "does not apply," and here's why. There's sex, as in intercourse; and then there's passionate bonding. I get the sex occasionally, but only if I were into necrophilia would it be at all satisfying. Corpse sex, duty sex whatever you call it, it ain't passionate. And, lately there's not even been that, or acceptance of any discussion. There have been excuses: UTI, tired, depressed, and my fav: "hit menopause and lost libido." No, she won't consider counseling...I've tried that.
> 
> Looking at three options: 1) divorce, 2) mind-numbing dissatisfaction, or 3) finding a friend with benefits.


----------



## Spicy (Jun 18, 2016)

I opted for 2.5... With DH he is a once a month, so twice a week would make me slap happy. 

The problem with me is, once I get it, I want more and more and more lol. So maybe if I got the 2.5, my body would say "Hey, doesn't 7.5 sound better?!?!" 

>


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

A good point. In the other direction someone who thinks that they could manage 2.5/week, but prefer less, might find that it gets tiring after a while and they don't really want to keep it up.



Spicy said:


> I opted for 2.5... With DH he is a once a month, so twice a week would make me slap happy.
> 
> The problem with me is, once I get it, I want more and more and more lol. So maybe if I got the 2.5, my body would say "Hey, doesn't 7.5 sound better?!?!"
> 
> >


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

uhtred said:


> A good point. In the other direction someone who thinks that they could manage 2.5/week, but prefer less, might find that it gets tiring after a while and they don't really want to keep it up.


Which is why I coined the term SLA... We have our own SLA's and those are not so easy to compromise on as many people would think...


----------



## DustyDog (Jul 12, 2016)

As has already been pointed out, it it just sex, or a way to increase passion and bonding? 

For me, it had always been the latter, save for one lone one-night-stand when single...that one instance told me I didn't like it unless it was a "next stage" of a gradually evolving deep connection.

Had GFs in college (2), LTRs (4 year and 10 year) and it was always a wonderful activity for bonding. How often? Any time we were together, the mood was calm, peaceful, or maybe upbeat/jubilant, and we had time to make it matter instead of a quickie. Typically every night unless someone was out of town, not feeling well, etc.

Married finally at age 40...with this one it was a bit different...unlike anybody before (not that I had that much experience), she seemed anxious to get to intercourse fast with little build up and the focus was on The O - for both of us. As long as she seemed to want and like it enough to initiate, I was OK with it - both partners gaining some satisfaction from it. Although I was puzzled why she insisted it was "sex" and not "making love."

The dam burst and she blurted out that she never liked it with or without an O, with me or anybody before and only did it because "men expect it" and her childhood programming said she had to be married and had to please her husband.

After that, she acquiesced a few times, maybe once a month for a while and I started feeling that she's not getting anything from it, so it has been...quite a while.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

badsanta said:


> In my opinion HD/LD works like this:
> 
> A) Wants orgasms 3 times per X amount of time.
> B) Wants orgasms 1 times per X amount of time.
> ...





uhtred said:


> That depends on whether B finds sex when they don't want it to be such a *negative experience* that they are *unable to provide what A wants.*


Why is it that A) would demand that B) provide something? Shouldn't it be that A) is "sharing" desire and arousal with B) as a way to compliment how wonderful B) is? 

For example you indicate that *A) would get upset* if requests were made for B) to provide a BJ or PIV and perhaps *B) might refuse.* 

Why could A) not mention to B) that A) is aroused and allow B) to address that in anyway that B) would enjoy to address that arousal that A) has WITHOUT A) getting freaking upset? Perhaps B) might want to tease A) a little until B) is ready later in the day for some action....

Just say'n...

Badsanta


----------



## southbound (Oct 31, 2010)

To help me better understand, I'm curious as to what the starting point for HD & LD would be. In other words, I assume wanting to have sex 6 times a day every day would be HD, and wanting sex only once a year is LD, but where would you start those labels? Would once a day be HD, and once a week be LD? 

Ok, I know this varies according to the person, but with that aside and for general understanding, what would be a good start point for each, assuming two people are in love and are healthy.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

DustyDog said:


> As has already been pointed out, it it just sex, or a way to increase passion and bonding?


If you're into your partner physically and emotionally, it's a physical act that increases bonding.

If you're not into your partner at all or are just into your partner physically, it's plain old sex.



badsanta said:


> Why could A) not mention to B) that A) is aroused and allow B) to address that in anyway that B) would enjoy to address that arousal that A) has WITHOUT A) getting freaking upset? Perhaps B) might want to tease A) a little until B) is ready later in the day for some action....
> 
> Just say'n...
> 
> Badsanta


The usual way the LD/ND partner will "address arousal" is to ignore it, argue about it, or cry. Anything to get out of actually touching genitals.

The way LD/ND partners usually respond to teasing etc. is to get pissed off, shove away, and accuse the HD/ND of "only wanting sex/only caring about sex".


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

southbound said:


> To help me better understand, I'm curious as to what the starting point for HD & LD would be. In other words, I assume wanting to have sex 6 times a day every day would be HD, and wanting sex only once a year is LD, but where would you start those labels? Would once a day be HD, and once a week be LD?
> 
> Ok, I know this varies according to the person, but with that aside and for general understanding, what would be a good start point for each, assuming two people are in love and are healthy.


I can give you my definitions/cutoff points. Let's start with normal or average drive: statistically, that would be in the range of 1x to 4x a week (maybe 3x, but whatever). High drive would be more than 4x a week (perhaps very high drive would be more than 7 to 10x a week), and low drive would be less than 1x a week (with very low drive 2x a month or less).


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

MJJEAN said:


> The usual way the LD/ND partner will "address arousal" is to ignore it, argue about it, or cry. Anything to get out of actually touching genitals.


OMG Seriously? 


Knock Kock!
Who's there?
Boi
Boi who?









It is also a sound a door makes! Get it?


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

badsanta said:


> OMG Seriously?
> Knock Kock!
> Who's there?
> Boi
> ...


I really need to get better at gifs and emoji guys...My personality isn't being properly conveyed, dammit!

Yeah, really. I have watched it in action. Poor saps of both genders in marriages or LTR's who try being flirty, upbeat, tease-y, etc. with their ND/LD SO and...nadda. At best. Sometimes, slapping away of hands, side hugs, etc. with a does of some variation on the "WTF are you _doing_?" theme.

I'll admit I did it in my first marriage. I'm not nor have I ever been LD, but I definitely didn't want to have sex with him if I could avoid it.

Two examples. 
*
The Lacy Nightie Incident*

My friend M and her H B hadn't had sex in almost 5 months, she'd tried everything from talking to doing more, blah blah blah.

B comes home from work and gets on his computer to goof around in game and on forums. M takes a bath, shaves, does a mani and pedi, does full hair and make up, and puts on lingerie. She even does the heels and thigh highs under the negligee and robe.

M approaches B, he tells her she looks pretty, she tries to initiate touching and kissing, B rebuffs M. Not to be deterred, M gets under the desk, unzips his pants, and is about to start oral (Cuz if she gets him "interested", she can just..umm...hop on. Not my words, but they express the sentiment well)when he jumps up and back, knocks over his chair, and says "WTF are you doing??"

M went to bed and cried herself to sleep.

And
*
The Star Trek Incident*

My friend J was married to a man named S for about 6 years. She wasn't into him. Shotgun wedding, not really a happy couple. More like frenemies who occasionally had sex.

J is a Star Trek Fan and this took place when DS9 was airing new episodes. Long before DVR and network websites streaming episodes you missed.

J was lying in bed watching DS9. S was trying to get her to have sex, grouping, trying to kiss her, tickling, etc. She tried to shove him over and kept making grumpy noises, but he was being persistent.

J sees the screen fade for a cut to commercial, looks at her H, and then says "If I let you, can you hurry up and finish before the commercials are over so I don't miss anything?"

The really sad part is that he A) took her up on it and B) did finish just as the episode resumed.

We did many celebratory shots when their divorce was final. I'll never drink Tequila again. And the worm is BAD JUJU!


----------



## CuddleBug (Nov 26, 2012)

I would say sex 3x week I am content.

3x week is just enough I don't get grumpy and miserable.

So sex 1x every 2nd day and I can live with that.

Less than 3x week, like 1x month or 2x month, waste of time.


----------



## WorkingWife (May 15, 2015)

uhtred said:


> I guess I'm trying to get an idea of how big the gap is ans how flexible people are.
> 
> One person might prefer sex every day, but be happy with twice a week. Another might prefer every day, and feel neglected if they don't get that. Someone might prefer once a month, but be happy with twice a week.


Also, your question makes me realize that the same person might be considered HD in one relationship and LD in another. (Though that may not be your point at all.)


----------



## joannacroc (Dec 17, 2014)

At mid-30s, still HD, and haven't yet met a man who can keep up in that department with the frequency I would prefer. But I've learned to try and be grateful for what I have. Passionate sex with current LD BF who is fun is a big improvement on crappy, passionless sex with my LD XH. He makes me feel wanted again. So while I would prefer it a lot more often, it's not really attainable. His medication seems to make more often that once or twice a week a really tough ask. And since I like him a lot, I've learned to find his mental health more important that my desire to jump him a lot more often. 

Reading on TAM the other point of view has made me see that rather than being a victim in a relationship, the HD person can control how they react to their LD partner's rejection and see it for what it is, rather than making it the be-all and end-all of a relationship. It's not about me not being attractive, it's about his drive being lower and learning to accept that anatomy has its limitations. I'd rather have him enthusiastic and into it, than badger him for sex more often and make us both miserable. 

Passion trumps frequency.


----------



## DustyDog (Jul 12, 2016)

Married but Happy said:


> I can give you my definitions/cutoff points. Let's start with normal or average drive: statistically, that would be in the range of 1x to 4x a week (maybe 3x, but whatever). High drive would be more than 4x a week (perhaps very high drive would be more than 7 to 10x a week), and low drive would be less than 1x a week (with very low drive 2x a month or less).


Having been curious about this, I did a web search to find out how often couples actually have this interaction. Those in year #1 engage a few times a week. When asked "why not more often", the usual answer is time...and the desire to make each session extended and deeply meaningful.

Late 20s to 50-ish, the average seems to stabilize at 2-4X a month, and the various organizations who did these studies didn't bother asking why not more often. Frequency diminishes in the presence of children, and I have none and won't, so I focused on those without...and those are the 2-4X a month crowd.

I was 40 when I first read these stats and was both pleased and frightened. I was between relationships at the time, and I was pleased and thankful that my relationships had always been notably more frequent. My partners seemed equal in desire as I was, and it would be every night, unless we went out to a show and didn't get home to 2am or something like that. I was frightened, however, because at 40, I was single, and fearing that my days of making fortunate connections with those who wanted it that much might end, and I'd end up in the 2-4X a month category....which I didn't want.

In my college days, it would be the way my SO and I said good morning and good night to each other, and the "bad little girl" and "bad little boy" during the day might even sneak in some more attention while in one of the university library stacks. Those early days were experimental, no?


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

MJJEAN said:


> *
> The Lacy Nightie Incident*
> 
> My friend M and her H B hadn't had sex in almost 5 months, she'd tried everything from talking to doing more, blah blah blah.
> ...


If a couple has not had sex in _5 months_, and one person tries to perform *forced oral* so that she can just "hop on," I am fairly certain he could have called the police and filed charges of sexual abuse against the wife. That example belongs in a thread about sexual abuse and is not ideal for a discussion about improving sexual frequencies between a couple with mild issues of a mismatched desire. 



> And
> *
> The Star Trek Incident*
> 
> ...


Describing a couple that did NOT want to get married in the first place and that one person is/was not that attracted to the other is not ideal feedback for this thread. Getting back to the OP:



uhtred said:


> There are a lot of discussions of mismatch in levels of sexual interest in relationship - LD/HD. Sometimes *I think people may be thinking of very different things when they use those terms.* Do most people really have a similar idea of what is OK in a sexual relationship?


 @uhtred from everything I have read over many years would define HD and LD as follows:

*Very HD* = More than once a day
*HD* = More than once a week
*Normal* = Once a week
*LD* = Less than once a week
*Very LD* Less than once a month

In terms of defining what is OK in a sexual relationship in terms of denying the drive of a HD individual or overexerting the drive of a LD individual, there are no legal limits other than the following. If one person says no, or does not consent in some way, then continuing to find a way force a person to engage in sex is considered sexual abuse (in most countries). If a person without any desire repeatedly denies his/her partner sex at a frequency that is less than once a month, it is then defined as a "sexless marriage" and there are reasonable grounds for divorce. 

By the standards of the Catholic Church with regards of marital obligations, once a week is the standard. More than that with an unwilling partner is problematic. Less than that with a willing partner is problematic. 

Hope that helps!

Badsanta


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

badsanta said:


> If a couple has not had sex in _5 months_, and one person tries to perform *forced oral* so that she can just "hop on," I am fairly certain he could have called the police and filed charges of sexual abuse against the wife. That example belongs in a thread about sexual abuse and is not ideal for a discussion about improving sexual frequencies between a couple with mild issues of a mismatched desire.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


For M, 5 months without sex was MUCH more than a mild issue of mismatched desire. In fact, for most spouses who actually want sex, going weeks or months is perceived as a very big mismatched desire problem.

If getting a bit grope-y with your spouse in an attempt to get the sex you desperately need causes said spouse to even consider thinking sexual abuse, my recommendation would be to file for divorce immediately. 

I believe mentioning a couple where one is more into the other is very relevant. Sure, they didn't marry because they thought they found their soul mates or anything, but that seems to be a common theme. X married Y because s/he had qualities that would make a good spouse/got pregnant/felt pressured by family/friends. The sexual side of the relationship fizzles, it becomes a problem, during either arguments or counseling it is revealed the LD was never that into their partner in the first place, yadda yadda.

Cite Catholic Church source, please? I have never heard ANYTHING about marital relations other than immoral acts and this gem often referenced:


"The husband should fulfill his duty toward his wife, and likewise the wife toward her husband. A wife does not have authority over her own body, but rather her husband, and similarly a husband does not have authority over his own body, but rather his wife. Do not deprive each other, except perhaps by mutual consent for a time, to be free for prayer, but then return to one another, so that Satan may not tempt you through your lack of self-control." 1 Cor. 7:3-5

I think Christians who are in low/no sex marriages should needlepoint that one on pillows, paint it on walls in flowing script as decoration, and maybe even have a t-shirt made


----------



## tech-novelist (May 15, 2014)

Here's some information about frequency in older couples:
Desire Discrepancies - How Often Do Older Couples Have Sex? | Kinsey Confidential


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

badsanta said:


> .............................
> 
> @uhtred from everything I have read over many years would define HD and LD as follows:
> 
> ...


Is the above what the church says? Ugh, please let's not refer to the church as an authority on what is healthy sexuality.

No way would I say normal is once a week. 
Or that HD is more than once a week if so then twice a week would be considered HD going by your description.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

MJJEAN said:


> *
> The Star Trek Incident*
> 
> My friend J was married to a man named S for about 6 years. She wasn't into him. Shotgun wedding, not really a happy couple. More like frenemies who occasionally had sex.
> ...


That's seriously messed up. DS9 was an awful show.

Enterprise on the other hand....I can kind of see it.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

DustyDog said:


> Having been curious about this, I did a web search to find out how often couples actually have this interaction. Those in year #1 engage a few times a week. When asked "why not more often", the usual answer is time...and the desire to make each session extended and deeply meaningful.


Well, it does decline over time for most. My wife and I working hard to boost the statistics for everyone - now if researchers would only ask us so we can contribute to raising the hopes of all couples everywhere!



> Probably the best source for scientifically reliable data on this topic comes from General Social Survey, which has tracked American sexual behaviors since the 1970s. According to the GSS, married couples have sex an average of 58 times per year. However, this number lumps 25-year-old newlyweds into the same pool as senior citizens who’ve celebrated their golden anniversary, and it does not include unmarried long-term couples. There may or may not be much difference in the sexual behaviors of married and unmarried committed couples, but there is almost certainly a difference between young newlyweds and their grandparents, which means the 58 times per year number is not overly-meaningful. Recent GSS surveys support this assertion, showing that couples in their 20s have sex 111 times per year on average, with frequency dropping steadily, about 20 percent per decade, as couples age. In other words, young couples have sex slightly more than twice per week on average, with the number declining steadily over time.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

MrsHolland said:


> Is the above what the church says? Ugh, please let's not refer to the church as an authority on what is healthy sexuality.
> 
> No way would I say normal is once a week.
> Or that HD is more than once a week if so then twice a week would be considered HD going by your description.


I won't get into a Church debate because there is a lot of misinformation out there. However, there are many Church approved books on marital sex and sexuality. A commonly recommended one is "Holy Sex! A Catholic Guide to Toe Curling, Mind-Blowing, Infallible Loving".

I also thought saying someone is HD for wanting weekly sex is a bit low. Considering that the average couples have sex is 2 times a week, I'd define wanting sex 2 times a week as an average drive.



Fozzy said:


> That's seriously messed up. DS9 was an awful show.
> 
> Enterprise on the other hand....I can kind of see it.


I loved em all, but DS9 was my favorite. Garek and Odo. Nuff said.

If I were ranking, DS9 would be #1. TNG and Voyager would tie for 2nd place, Enterprise would be 3rd and the original series 4th.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

MJJEAN said:


> Cite Catholic Church source, please? I have never heard ANYTHING about marital relations other than immoral acts and this gem often referenced:


If you want to pick on the church, you can find a tremendous amount of guidance from the church on why birth control is in inherently immoral. So once a couple reaches an age at which they are naturally sterile and modern research suggest we also enter into the height of our sexual maturity (age 60) the church offers the following advice:

"sounds of crickets chirping"

Perhaps it is easy to forget that man rarely lived past the age of 40 in historical times. 

As for my original cite of "once a week" this is what I heard two priests say on separate occasions when I went through Pre-Cana and the topic was brought up for discussion.

Badsanta


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Nothing that a good crusade or two can't fix 

The problem is that quotes about sex in religious documents are often taken out of context and are ripe for misinterpretation...


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

badsanta said:


> If you want to pick on the church, you can find a tremendous amount of guidance from the church on why birth control is in inherently immoral. So once a couple reaches an age at which they are naturally sterile and modern research suggest we also enter into the height of our sexual maturity (age 60) the church offers the following advice:
> 
> "sounds of crickets chirping"
> 
> ...


I am NOT "picking on the Church", I'm Catholic! I'm married to a Catholic from a Catholic family and I was raised by a Catholic man from a Catholic family. Heck, most of my friends are Catholic or were at least raised in the Church.

You are aware that what two priests say is NOT the same thing as official Church teaching? 

Church teachings on birth control simply state that use of artificial means of contraception are inherently wrong and that the only moral family planning option is to track fertility and avoid sex during the fertile period if the couple wishes to avoid conception. There is nothing that states a couple should have sex a certain number of times per week/month/year. 

The Church assumes marriage to be a sexual relationship and teaches that denying a spouse sex without a good reason is a sin. Anything beyond that, frequency wise, is left to the couple.


----------



## badsanta (Oct 13, 2014)

MJJEAN said:


> You are aware that what two priests say is NOT the same thing as official Church teaching?


Are you trying to say that is why I can not find any sources to cite? If so, that would explain a lot. That also explains why our priest was not opposed to birth control (he was a campus priest at the university that my wife and I attended), so I knew his beliefs and advice may not _exactly_ adhere to the teachings of the Catholic church. 

Anyway, I find it humorous that if a couple's frequency drops BELOW what two priests would recommend, that it is at least worth a chuckle. Generally the church is rather reserved when it comes to sexuality, but if you can say, "honey, according to the priest, you are not giving it up nearly enough in our marriage and we need a lot more sex" AND have the priest back you up on the matter... well I find that to be somewhat _humorously ironic_ given the tendency for the church to be reserved on these topics.

Cheers, 
Badsanta


----------



## notmyrealname4 (Apr 9, 2014)

.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

badsanta said:


> Are you trying to say that is why I can not find any sources to cite? If so, that would explain a lot. That also explains why our priest was not opposed to birth control (he was a campus priest at the university that my wife and I attended), so I knew his beliefs and advice may not _exactly_ adhere to the teachings of the Catholic church.
> 
> Anyway, I find it humorous that if a couple's frequency drops BELOW what two priests would recommend, that it is at least worth a chuckle. Generally the church is rather reserved when it comes to sexuality, but if you can say, "honey, according to the priest, you are not giving it up nearly enough in our marriage and we need a lot more sex" AND have the priest back you up on the matter... well I find that to be somewhat _humorously ironic_ given the tendency for the church to be reserved on these topics.
> 
> ...


Basically, yes. Those campus priests went a bit rogue. The Church is and always has been very clear on the issue of birth control. If a priest told you artificial birth control was allowed, he was actually directly opposing Church teaching. 

The reason you can't find an official Church source to cite is that there is literally no official teaching on frequency other than it's a sin to deny your spouse without just cause. And just cause is usually defined as illness, exhaustion, pain..that kind of thing. 

The Church really isn't all that reserved when it comes to sexuality. The official teaching is that sex, within marriage, serves to not only participate in God's creation by possibly bringing forth new life, it also unifies the couple and strengthens their bond. God designed us to want and enjoy sex. Mutually pleasurable sex with our spouses is human sexuality working as intended.

The problem a LOT of people have is that the Church really isn't saying a whole lot other than marriage is a sexual relationship, denying your spouse is a sin unless you have good reason, artificial birth control is wrong, and don't commit immoral sexual acts. This leaves maybe too much open to individual interpretation. 

To swing this around to the mysteries of LD/HD, some spouses may be LD because their religious upbringing made them suppress their sexual side. There are many books about having a healthy and active sex life written by Christian authors that may help the LD spouse see sex as something God wants us to do with our husbands and wives instead of as something somehow bad. 

Whew! Now Ele won't smack us across the knuckles with a stick for threadjacking


----------



## sscygni (Apr 13, 2016)

At best once a week now, so 2.5X sounds like heaven to me


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

What's involved in the .5 time? Is that just foreplay and then a cigarette?


----------



## notmyrealname4 (Apr 9, 2014)

.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

On average, so maybe 3 times one week, 2 times another.



Fozzy said:


> What's involved in the .5 time? Is that just foreplay and then a cigarette?


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I think of "sex" as a mutual activity which includes sexual pleasure, hopefully orgasm for at least one participant.

I *hope* it most often involves an O for both, but I count sexual favors (like oral) as "sex". 




notmyrealname4 said:


> One way oral?? That's what I think anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> Or just evenly dividing up 10x per month.


----------



## notmyrealname4 (Apr 9, 2014)

.


----------



## WorkingWife (May 15, 2015)

I think this is a great post.




joannacroc said:


> At mid-30s, still HD, and haven't yet met a man who can keep up in that department with the frequency I would prefer. But I've learned to try and be grateful for what I have. Passionate sex with current LD BF who is fun is a big improvement on crappy, passionless sex with my LD XH. He makes me feel wanted again. So while I would prefer it a lot more often, it's not really attainable. His medication seems to make more often that once or twice a week a really tough ask. And since I like him a lot, I've learned to find his mental health more important that my desire to jump him a lot more often.
> 
> Reading on TAM the other point of view has made me see that rather than being a victim in a relationship, the HD person can control how they react to their LD partner's rejection and see it for what it is, rather than making it the be-all and end-all of a relationship. It's not about me not being attractive, it's about his drive being lower and learning to accept that anatomy has its limitations. I'd rather have him enthusiastic and into it, than badger him for sex more often and make us both miserable.
> 
> Passion trumps frequency.


----------



## uhtred (Jun 22, 2016)

I see nothing at all wrong with one-way sex as long as overall a couple's sex life is balanced. I think it can be great fun to make a lovemaking session all about pleasing your partner - or even just getting them off quickly can be fun. That assumes that it isn't always like that.

Other people are different. Maybe a HD/LD thing?



notmyrealname4 said:


> Me too. I'd love to do that for H as much as he'd like. No, I don't have an orgasm from doing it; but I feel really close to him, and it comforts me a lot emotionally.
> 
> 
> But I totally get that others don't get any satisfaction from one-way sex. I've read here on TAM about guys especially taking advantage and being happy to have a sex life of one way bj's.
> ...


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

notmyrealname4 said:


> *I like this :nerd:. My version would be*:
> 
> 
> *Are you kidding me? = Once every day, or more, after the Honeymoon phase [ first 1-2 years]*
> ...


None of it matters, only compatibility matters. But it is a bit off when those on either extreme of the spectrum are considered abnormal. There is no mass normal with sex drive, only an individuals normal.


----------



## notmyrealname4 (Apr 9, 2014)

.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MrsHolland said:


> None of it matters, only compatibility matters. But it is a bit off when those on either extreme of the spectrum are considered abnormal. There is no mass normal with sex drive, only an individuals normal.


That depends on the definition of normal and the time period in question.

1/2 

Not normal is not derogatory in this context incidentally... It simply means atypical.


----------



## MrsHolland (Jun 18, 2016)

notmyrealname4 said:


> Oh, @MrsHolland you've taken my post in the wrong spirit :wink2:, I was taking badsanta's chart, and running with it.
> 
> "Are you kidding me?" was not meant in a derogatory fashion at all. It *is* rarer for this to be true after the heady, infatuation of the early days wears off. If it doesn't? More power to you, yay :grin2:
> 
> ...


All good, found my SOH again


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

any time one person wants it more than the other it is a source of tension

people need to feel as though they are not "making" someone do something or being made to do something

once this feeling takes hold, the extent of the discrepancy is secondary


----------



## BradWesley2 (Jul 15, 2016)

MrsHolland said:


> Is the above what the church says? Ugh, please let's not refer to the church as an authority on what is healthy sexuality.
> 
> No way would I say normal is once a week.
> Or that HD is more than once a week if so then twice a week would be considered HD going by your description.


Agreed. To even consider the catholic church as a sexual authority is a complete farce.

That would be like me talking to my auto mechanic about legal matters.


----------



## ChargingCharlie (Nov 14, 2012)

DustyDog said:


> In my college days, it would be the way my SO and I said good morning and good night to each other, and the "bad little girl" and "bad little boy" during the day might even sneak in some more attention while in one of the university library stacks. Those early days were experimental, no?


Had a GF like this, although we were mid-30's at the time and lived about 100 miles apart. When she got to my house, we'd get her stuff to my room then it was clothes off. Couple of sessions, then go out to get dinner. Get home and have bedtime sex. Morning was wake up sex (maybe two sessions). Usually out all afternoon, so a session when we got back, then another bedtime session. Wake up sex Sunday morning, then sex before she leaves. 

Nowadays, it's maybe once a year. Wake up to have sex? No way in hell - sleep is more important than sex.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

ChargingCharlie said:


> Had a GF like this, although we were mid-30's at the time and lived about 100 miles apart. When she got to my house, we'd get her stuff to my room then it was clothes off. Couple of sessions, then go out to get dinner. Get home and have bedtime sex. Morning was wake up sex (maybe two sessions). Usually out all afternoon, so a session when we got back, then another bedtime session. Wake up sex Sunday morning, then sex before she leaves.
> 
> Nowadays, it's maybe once a year. Wake up to have sex? No way in hell - sleep is more important than sex.


I think this neatly illustrates the difference between a successful relationship and a failed relationship.

in a successful relationship, there's no struggle. both people want each other and it just happens.

in a sh-tty relationship, it's a constant struggle and any friction is seized as an excuse.


----------



## ChargingCharlie (Nov 14, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> I think this neatly illustrates the difference between a successful relationship and a failed relationship.
> 
> in a successful relationship, there's no struggle. both people want each other and it just happens.
> 
> in a sh-tty relationship, it's a constant struggle and any friction is seized as an excuse.


One minor nit - in my case, I wouldn't even call it a struggle. I don't bother her with sex because I know that she's ZD and equates sex with work - I'm not going to initiate with someone who views it as a chore and needs the moon and planets in perfect alignment along with about ten other conditions to even think about sex. 

With the ex, we were both ready, willing, and able. If we were watching TV, we'd pleasure each other while watching then be good and ready when we went up to bed. With the wife, I don't even contemplate anything remotely close to that - don't want to interrupt her computer game.


----------

