# Ld / hd ?



## ShyEnglishman (Aug 23, 2013)

In the week or so I've been a member here, I've learned the acronyms LD and HD for Low Drive and High Drive.

It raises a few questions for me.

By what criteria do we decide if a partner is LD or HD?

Is either an actual condition or just a figment of imagination?

Has it ever been considered that the partner described as 'LD' may simply not be turned on by the 'HD' partner?

This last point is most important to me, because from what I've read, it seems whenever someone is talking about their 'LD' husband or 'LD' wife, they are invariably describing a problem exhibited by the partner, which may be valid, but in my experience it often pays to look at ones self before pointing fingers at others. When things don't go smoothly in a relationship it is so easy to head into a the spiral of oblivion. You feel a bit down, your partner senses this so they are down. This makes you feel more down etc.

By the standards I've determined from here, I am 'HD'. My wife is 'HD'. Great. Fantastic, except sometimes if I'm a bit down for some reason, maybe feeling insecure that I always start it, then my mood is not a turn on, so my wife becomes 'LD' too. Or sometimes my wife starts it, and I'm simply too exhausted and its one of the rare occasions when I'd rather just sleep. Could she describe me as 'LD'? Maybe she could end up in a mood with me, which would be a turn off, so she becomes 'LD' too.

Its a concept that's totally alien to me and doesn't fit at all with my life experiences, that somebody can be 'classified' as one or the other. Surely we all have good days and bad days, and if its a bad day, we really need our partner, the one that promised to stick by us in sickness and in health etc, to help pick us up. And equally we have a duty in ourselves to think about how our feelings affect others, and so sometimes, despite all the new age nonsense about total openness, maybe sometimes we need to put our chins up and be jolly and not make our partners feel down. Then their cheerfulness may help us to not have to pretend, but to actually really feel happy.

Or maybe I've misunderstood this LD / HD thing. Thoughts?


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Shy,
Great questions. 

I actually believe that we should have 3 separate but related terms, and use them as carefully as possible. I am starting with definitions and will give examples:

Drive: this is someone's 'baseline' desire for sexual activity
Desire: this is the degree to which our partner causes a sexual response in us (a related term is 'responsive desire' - more on that below)
Bond: this is the degree to which we are emotionally enmeshed without partner. It reflects how much we want to please THEM

Example 1:
Abe is high drive, finds his W Allison is very attractive and has a strong Bond with her. 

He knows his W has a somewhat lower drive, genuine desire for him and an equally strong bond. 

They understand each other well. He wants sex daily, and she wants it once or twice a week. Their mutual bond makes a frequency compromise somewhere in the middle fairly painless. 

When genuine life events disrupt their schedule and impacts frequency - she a genuine effort to find a way to minimize that impact. And he makes a genuine effort to show his appreciation for her commitment. 

Example 2: 
Bill is married to Becky. 
Bill is high drive, low desire and low bond. 
Almost all his sexual energy goes into masturbation. Becky, who is high drive, high desire and high bond is in a sexless marriage and losing his mind. She doesn't realize that his low 'bond' to her allows him to reject her advances with minimal guilt. 

And now to add one more piece of the puzzle. If you BOTH have a strong bond - then 'responsive desire' can become a big positive factor in your marriage. 

For the first 20 years of our marriage we would have had sex 30-40 times a year if we were limited to situations when my W got into bed already feeling desire. Instead we were at more like 150-200 times a year because she would relax and let me get her in the mood. Responsive desire is when you start out not thinking about sex - not aroused - but you allow yourself to respond to your partners touch and you do get aroused and typically reach the rapture. 













ShyEnglishman said:


> In the week or so I've been a member here, I've learned the acronyms LD and HD for Low Drive and High Drive.
> 
> It raises a few questions for me.
> 
> ...


----------



## mablenc (Feb 26, 2013)

OP, it sounds like you have a perfect normal marriage 

It seems like the labels are used when there are problems in the marriage in regards to sex.


----------



## RedRose14 (Aug 15, 2013)

Maybe it's not so much one partner is ld and one is hd, maybe the problem is when there is an imbalance in drives. I guess in terms of this forum I would be considered ld and my husband hd because he would happily have sex every day but that is too much for me and I am happy with once or twice a week. As a result we have sex once or twice a week which makes me wonder whether I am neglecting my H and whether I should try and have sex more often. Am I being unreasonable? My H doesn't complain though, he has friends who have very little or no sex so he feels he is lucky to get the sex he gets.

So, I suppose the problem is if one partner is not getting as much sex as they would like and their partner is unwilling or unable to comply.


----------



## ShyEnglishman (Aug 23, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> I'm guessing you aren't only having half-hearted sex once every 5 months/years/decades.





mablenc said:


> It seems like the labels are used when there are problems in the marriage in regards to sex.





RedRose14 said:


> Maybe it's not so much one partner is ld and one is hd, maybe the problem is when there is an imbalance in drives.


Ok, I understand that bit now, I think. But what about the point about the HD partner _maybe_ not being a turn on to the LD partner? For example (hypothetical and deliberately extreme for illustration only), lets say my method of trying to initiate sex with my wife was to simply and formally say to her, "dear, let us now proceed to the bedroom as I desire some intercourse". You can bet how that would go. Once, it might work as a joke, but if it was my regular technique, she is not going to go along with that. Lets say that on the few occasions when it did work, I made no effort at all to satisfy her, and focus purely on my own pleasure. How long would in then be before my wife becomes 'LD'?

So what I'm asking at this point is, when declaring someone to be 'LD', do we consider if we ourselves may be at least part of the problem? I've seen so many of my friends' relationships collapse because one or other partner refused to accept their own shortcomings or consider their partners' feelings, and I'm wondering if the 'LD' label is sometimes a symptom of exactly that.



> I guess in terms of this forum I would be considered ld and my husband hd because he would happily have sex every day but that is too much for me and I am happy with once or twice a week.


I wouldn't use the terms LD and HD because as I've indicated, I don't think they are valid labels. If life was as black and white as that though, I wouldn't call you 'LD' if you only want it twice a week. Life can be tiring, both mentally and physically. Twice a week is fine. I'd say it would be a problem if you wanted it more but there was a physical reason why you couldn't, but if its just drive and desire, I'd say twice a week is normal to frequent.


----------



## I Notice The Details (Sep 15, 2012)

mablenc said:


> OP, it sounds like you have a perfect normal marriage
> 
> It seems like the labels are used when there are problems in the marriage in regards to sex.


:iagree: 

I am not a big fan of the labels either, but I can understand different desire levels. I know a lady who can go weeks without even thinking about sex, wanting sex, or craving sex. It is the last thing on her mind. I would consider this LOW desire, or maybe even NO desire by MY standards! 

Instead of labeling a person quickly, I think it is important to understand WHY a person has low desire...religious upbringing, uncomfortable with his or her own body, fear of pregnancy, fear of intimacy, fear of hurting their spouse, unattracted to their spouse, pain from intercourse, hormonal changes...etc. 

That is the complex, million dollar question that brings so many people to places like TAM. HD and LD are just quick labels to put on people, but as you have mentioned, the issues are much deeper than that.


----------



## RedRose14 (Aug 15, 2013)

So what I'm asking at this point is, when declaring someone to be 'LD', do we consider if we ourselves may be at least part of the problem? I've seen so many of my friends' relationships collapse because one or other partner refused to accept their own shortcomings or consider their partners' feelings, and I'm wondering if the 'LD' label is sometimes a symptom of exactly that.



I think that's a really valid point Englishman, I know many of my girlfriends are LD, or at least they very rarely have sex and a contributing factor is they no longer "fancy" their husbands. They still talk about sex, one friend almost constantly, and she flirts cringeworthingly at anyone with a penis. I think she would have much more of sex if she did get more out of sex with her H.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Rose,
A large difference in raw 'drive' does create some level of tension. 

There are a short list of considerations that both LD and HD partners can make to reduce friction. 

A 'kind' LD partner gives a clear signal when they are ok with being approached. 

A 'unkind/inconsiderate' LD partner gives no signals and simply rejects any advance unless they happen to be in the mood. 

A kind HD partner does not bombard their LD spouse with a regular stream of unwanted sexual attention. 

There are some ways striking similarities to marital financial conflict. 

Imagine how angry the wife feels when she thinks she married a true HD man and it turns out he was just pretending because he wanted her to marry him. 

Except in this case when I say HD - the 'D' means:
His 'drive to succeed - his ambition'. 

So the W who didn't expect to be chronically tense about money - now IS chronically tense about money. 

As for her H, well he sees this differently. He worked hard early on but started to feel more and more used and taken for granted. She was fine with debt, even high interest credit card debt and spent so much that he felt that his modest needs for things like a new bike, were getting squeezed out of the budget. 

His W routinely talked about big ticket items that were on her 'wish list', and yet she was not interested in carefully managing their daily budget. He felt that - she saw this as 'his' problem and not a 'mutual' problem. And even though she wouldn't say it out loud - she really did believe that everything would be just fine if only he would make more money. 

Eventually, he becomes overwhelmed by his belief that he can't meet her needs and his resentment that she only seems to care about money. At that point the marriage rapidly spiraled down and out. 





QUOTE=RedRose14;3972994]So what I'm asking at this point is, when declaring someone to be 'LD', do we consider if we ourselves may be at least part of the problem? I've seen so many of my friends' relationships collapse because one or other partner refused to accept their own shortcomings or consider their partners' feelings, and I'm wondering if the 'LD' label is sometimes a symptom of exactly that.



I think that's a really valid point Englishman, I know many of my girlfriends are LD, or at least they very rarely have sex and a contributing factor is they no longer "fancy" their husbands. They still talk about sex, one friend almost constantly, and she flirts cringeworthingly at anyone with a penis. I think she would have much more of sex if she did get more out of sex with her H.[/QUOTE]


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Rose,
Below you provided the perfect example of:
- Normal or high Drive and
- Low desire for your current partner/spouse 

Your example also highlights her 'low bond' for him as the frequent and intense flirting does not happen in a 'high bond' situation. 

Did your friends 'lose their fancy' for their partners because the man:
- has changed for the worse or
- because he hasn't grown up / changed in the way they had hoped








RedRose14 said:


> So what I'm asking at this point is, when declaring someone to be 'LD', do we consider if we ourselves may be at least part of the problem? I've seen so many of my friends' relationships collapse because one or other partner refused to accept their own shortcomings or consider their partners' feelings, and I'm wondering if the 'LD' label is sometimes a symptom of exactly that.
> 
> 
> 
> I think that's a really valid point Englishman, I know many of my girlfriends are LD, or at least they very rarely have sex and a contributing factor is they no longer "fancy" their husbands. They still talk about sex, one friend almost constantly, and she flirts cringeworthingly at anyone with a penis. I think she would have much more of sex if she did get more out of sex with her H.


----------



## RedRose14 (Aug 15, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> Rose,
> Below you provided the perfect example of:
> - Normal or high Drive and
> - Low desire for your current partner/spouse
> ...


MEM, my friend's husband is a lovely man, very kind, sweet natured, still good looking at 55, will do anything for my friend. I don't know why she no longer fancies him and so wonder if the problem lies in his lovemaking skills, perhaps he just doesn't do it for her in the bedroom and that's why she craves attention from other men:scratchhead:


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

IMO, someone who is LD is by nature less driven to have sex with anyone, though in the early stages of a relationship they may exhibit more "normal" frequency. Average frequency for most couples is about 3x per week. If one person wants significantly less than this, say les than 1x per week, I'd say they're definitely LD. HD would be someone who wants significantly more, probably more than 7x per week. A 1x and a 7x can compromise at 3x and both be okay with it, if not truly happy about it.

Some LD may become average or HD with a different partner, but how could you know? It wouldn't do you any good, but may for them! Maybe if their past history with prior partners is known, you can guess, if they were HD before. However, since a change to LD may be caused by many factors, it may not be reversible, or may not be reversible with you, if you are the "cause".

As some have pointed out, some LD no longer fancy their partner. If that's the case, why stay and make everyone unhappy? Same goes for the HD partner not satisfied with a newly LD spouse.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Rose,
How much 'edge' does he have? 

For some folks, having a partner with no edge just kills desire. Being kind, patient, understanding and predictable is great - up to a point. Beyond that point the marriage may lose all excitement for your partner and that often results in a sexual train wreck. 

I define edge as having:
- Clearly defined, stable and firmly enforced boundaries 
- The emotional strength needed to meet your partners needs even when doing so requires getting outside your comfort zone
- The willingness to destabilize the relationship when your partner is violating your boundaries





RedRose14 said:


> MEM, my friend's husband is a lovely man, very kind, sweet natured, still good looking at 55, will do anything for my friend. I don't know why she no longer fancies him and so wonder if the problem lies in his lovemaking skills, perhaps he just doesn't do it for her in the bedroom and that's why she craves attention from other men:scratchhead:


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

ShyEnglishman said:


> So what I'm asking at this point is, when declaring someone to be 'LD', do we consider if we ourselves may be at least part of the problem? I've seen so many of my friends' relationships collapse because one or other partner refused to accept their own shortcomings or consider their partners' feelings, and I'm wondering if the 'LD' label is sometimes a symptom of exactly that.


I'm sure those situations exist. Persons of normal and high desire in a relationship with a partner of low desire are typically the ones trying to effect positive change and better their approach though.

This includes reading self help books, seeking the advice of close friends, coming to forums like this and paying for professional counseling.

In contrast, truly LD people often don't realize there is even a problem....


----------



## ShyEnglishman (Aug 23, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> Rose,
> How much 'edge' does he have?
> 
> For some folks, having a partner with no edge just kills desire. Being kind, patient, understanding and predictable is great - up to a point. Beyond that point the marriage may lose all excitement for your partner and that often results in a sexual train wreck.


You've just described one of my friends. He is such a good lad. A true gentleman. He is also handsome too. And selfless. A good laugh BUT, only within his own stringent boundaries. He also has the worst luck. I've known him since we were teenagers. He's now about 40. In that time he's fallen in love many times, treat his lady right, been happy for a few months, then found out she cheated on him, dumped her, vowed never to let it happen again, moved on, back to square one. My own wife has tried to advise him, telling him he is 'too nice'.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

We are comparing apples and oranges here.

There's LD and there's LD .

I will propose some kind of standard that people can use to refer to their LD-ness or HD-ness (the awkward moment you realize the iPhone has learned to auto spell terminology ) in more quantitative ways:

Stage 1 and 2 LD is when the difference in desire frequency is within the same unit of measurement, i.e. 2x a week vs 4x a week.

Stage 3 LD is when the difference within adjacent units of measurement i.e. 2x a week vs 2x a month, probably up to the magical once a month figure (or .0833333 or 1/12 )

Stage 4 LD is anything less than .083333.

Gross differences in service quality delivery result in additional downgrades i.e. Stage 3 LD and "corpse nookie" gets downgraded to Stage 4, etc.

Say, what's the deadline for the DSM-VI


----------



## RedRose14 (Aug 15, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> Rose,
> How much 'edge' does he have?
> 
> For some folks, having a partner with no edge just kills desire. Being kind, patient, understanding and predictable is great - up to a point. Beyond that point the marriage may lose all excitement for your partner and that often results in a sexual train wreck.
> ...


This is really interesting MEM

My friend's husband does not have "edge" as you describe it, and he would be (like the Englishman's friend" be described as being "too nice", he never has an opinion. agrees with everything my friend says, doesn't react when she flirts with other men, just smiles sweetly, does anything my friend asks him without complaint, I guess he's a bit of a doormat, but he's just doing whatever it takes to make my friend happy .... and yet she doesn't want sex with him, though she does appear to be attracted to other men, hence the outrageous embarrassing flirting. 

But it does raise an interesting point about the whole LD/HD thing. My friend hasn't had sex for years, I should mention that she reads all those erotic books, 50 shades etc, so a newbie like me would assume she would be a ld person, but her interest in sex means she's not really LD at all .... hmmmm.

Maybe with a different man she would be HD.

Which makes me think of John's categories of LD. Could a 0.083333 person evolve into a Stage 1 or 2 LD with a new person? If so would this be a temporary thing and when the newness wears off they would revert to 0.083333?

John lord b3, who is LD himself, has a wonderful approach to being LD, and methods of coping with it in a way that keep his wife and himself happy and content .... creating conditions for himself where he is able to lovingly and enthusiastically make love to his W 3 times a month. I hope if I become LD (as may happen as a result of menopause) that I will be able to approach things the John lord b3 way


----------



## john_lord_b3 (Jan 11, 2013)

thank you for the kind words.. the credit goes to my wife's patience and to the good folks who invented energy drinks


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

The person could well be an armchair HD, no different than the typical football fan who will know all about the gridiron and follow his team but never exercise or even take to the field himself...


----------



## CuddleBug (Nov 26, 2012)

ShyEnglishman said:


> In the week or so I've been a member here, I've learned the acronyms LD and HD for Low Drive and High Drive.
> 
> It raises a few questions for me.
> 
> ...



LD can go without sex for very long periods of time and doesn't ever see sex as an issue for them.

HD needs sex almost every day, that physical connection, bonding and release and goes crazy when its been weeks, months or no sex.

If the LD wasn't turned on by the HD, why did the LD get in the relationship or married in the first place? Waste of time then, plus communication their fantasies and desires is also a must instead of saying and doing nothing. They have a voice, so use it.

Unfortunately, the LD spouse never sees sex as an issue and its always the HD spouses fault in every way. That's the root problem and whoever figures that out, will be a very rich person, write books, e-books, vidoes, etc.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Actually LD's see sex - or the lack thereof - as an accomplishment. It's the white elephant in the bedroom. 

I doubt it's one of those "out of sight out of mind" things.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

john117 said:


> Actually LD's see sex - or the lack thereof - as an accomplishment. It's the white elephant in the bedroom.
> 
> I doubt it's one of those "out of sight out of mind" things.


How do you come to that conclusion?:scratchhead:


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

techmom said:


> How do you come to that conclusion?:scratchhead:


A sense of time is built in to all humans, HD or LD or anything in between. It's also enforced to us by our daily activities; Monday, soccer practice, Tuesday is guys night out, Wednesday is date night (*), and so on. It's not rocket science.

Nookie accounting is also not difficult - after all, hardcore LD's could give a Swiss clock a run for its money. It's a gradual but calculated route that slowly introduces the white elephant.

As to why it's an accomplishment in their eyes, ask any of the proud card carrying .083333 club members. My lab has yet to come up with a mind reading gadget, but I had one, would wager that a "happily married .0833333 couple" LD partner must be giving himself / herself high fives when one more week of "success" passes and they were able to hold off the barbarians at the gates of nookie. Wasn't there a regular poster in TAM that more or less described how she adjusted her husband's expectation towards LD early on and stayed LD for years then all of a sudden turned HD?

It all boils down to people assuming they're the smart ones and everyone else is a moron...


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

As far as I know, there is no way to "fix" a LD spouse. Having been in a long-term marriage with an LD spouse, I will never accept a relationship with an LD person ever again. In this marriage where we are both very HD, we have an agreement that if either of us becomes LD, we have four escalating options available beyond simply accepting it (and will only accept it if we are mutually fine with the change): medical approach including hormone therapy if it's a physical problem, marriage counseling if it may be a psychological/relationship issue, an open relationship, or divorce.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

john117 said:


> A sense of time is built in to all humans, HD or LD or anything in between. It's also enforced to us by our daily activities; Monday, soccer practice, Tuesday is guys night out, Wednesday is date night (*), and so on. It's not rocket science.
> 
> Nookie accounting is also not difficult - after all, hardcore LD's could give a Swiss clock a run for its money. It's a gradual but calculated route that slowly introduces the white elephant.
> 
> ...


You shouldn't paint all LDs with the same brush. As it was stated in other threads, there are numerous reasons why a person is LD. I wouldn't look at not having sex as an accomplishment, it is something that needs to be worked on. Maybe your wife feels that way, not all LDs feel that way. You think that LDs must want to punish their partners and this is not true.

Stereotyping LDs as heartless, punishing, soulless people does nothing to solve the problem and bridge the gap between LD/HD. All it does is cause resentment and misunderstanding. We are here to learn. There are numerous reasons people avoid sex, getting to the heart of the problem through therapy and/or other means is the way to go.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

LD is for the most part not a choice, and by itself is not punishing anyone.

Not doing anything about it, and waiting for the white elephant in the bedroom to grow old are choices, and are punishing.

For every LD person who is "working on it" on TAM there's one or more that are card carrying members who ignore their partners needs and then sound surprised when they get dumped or cheated on.

I joined TAM a few months ago thinking that the perfect storm of BPD, resentment, career stress, and a culturally constipated sexual viewpoint all conspired to rain on my marital bed... What II found sort of confirmed my suspicions...

I attended PTO meetings since the mid 90's as the token guy. PTO moms in preschool elementary school were for the most part good looking and took care to look good, by mid school the same moms began to let go a bit. By high school and with threat of trade in, many all of a sudden discovered their inner HD and started looking better etc, others did not, and do on. The chronology is strikingly similar to what we see in TAM. Same for dads, too. Many look great by middle school and then they too hit the gym or the buffet table...

What I did find in TAM was that there are plenty of men and women in far worse situations, without having had any of the issues we had to deal with... So thanks to TAM I kinda count my blessings...


----------



## john_lord_b3 (Jan 11, 2013)

techmom said:


> You shouldn't paint all LDs with the same brush. As it was stated in other threads, there are numerous reasons why a person is LD. I wouldn't look at not having sex as an accomplishment, it is something that needs to be worked on. Maybe your wife feels that way, not all LDs feel that way. You think that LDs must want to punish their partners and this is not true.
> 
> Stereotyping LDs as heartless, punishing, soulless people does nothing to solve the problem and bridge the gap between LD/HD. All it does is cause resentment and misunderstanding. We are here to learn. There are numerous reasons people avoid sex, getting to the heart of the problem through therapy and/or other means is the way to go.


:iagree: I've been wanting to hear you saying this, and there you said it. Glad to know that we are at the same page


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

techmom said:


> We are here to learn. There are numerous reasons people avoid sex, getting to the heart of the problem through therapy and/or other means is the way to go.


You are here to learn.... Those stuck for a decade with a handful of pity sex quickies a year at best and total emotional disconnect from their spouses are well past learning, therapy, or other means to have a meaningful physical / emotional relationship with their spouse.

Ultimately we don't resent our spouses as much as we resent ourselves for emotionally checking out of our marriages (tho our spouses seem to have no problems doing the same). But emotional checkout for us is not a choice, it's a self defense and preservation mechanism.

LD is not about avoiding sex for half an hour once a week. It's about checking out of the marriage, it's about breaking the wedding bows and promises made, all while pretending for all practical purposes that it's all a big misunderstanding and that we need to be patient, etc. 

A few people do learn and deal with it, but most don't.


----------



## unbelievable (Aug 20, 2010)

What makes no sense at all to me is why a LD person would fraudulently enter into a marriage and make vows they have zero intention of fulfilling. I understand that for some people, their drive decreases at some point after marriage. There are others, however, who absolutely have no interest in sex and get married to a normal or high functioning heterosexual, anyway. The entire time through the wedding, they are working on a plan to avoid sex during the honeymoon. If someone wishes to be celibate, that's their beer. Be single, be sexless, be happy.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

It's usually not quite this blatant. If you look at the typical chronology it's all rosy up to a certain point, ho-hum to acceptable for a while, then slows down. Various external factors influence the points of the curve.

Desire is not an instantaneous measure like speed (miles per hour) or change over time like acceleration but rather a 3-dimensional (or higher) graph involving time, family, work, culture, and the like.


----------

