# Some hope... maybe



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

So if you've read any of my previous posts, you'll know that my sex life with my wife is very up and down, and that I'm always looking for ways (here, and with her) to make it better.

Very quick background - she's LD, self-professed asexual (though I have my doubts), is never sexual with me UNTIL we're having sex, and only initiates when she feels it's been too long, etc.

Our actual sex, up until about a year ago, was fantastic. Nothing she wouldn't do, nothing she didn't like, more or less. Adventurous, the whole nine. She knows what she's doing in the bedroom, and she has no complaints on my end, either. Her lack of initiation and general lack of frequency was more than made up in quality. I'm telling you, without trying to be crude, she would bang the hell out of me once a week, and I was good. Of course I wanted it more, but it was SO good, it kept me going for a week.

Over the past ~18 months, her participation has slowed in that regard, to the point where - she's not "star fishing" - but that it's 95% me doing the work. 99% me initiating, then me making sure she gets off numerous times and taking the lead the rest of the way, too.

After many months of this, it started to get to me, to the point where I'd lose my erection halfway through, or just not finish. Can't blame me. It's not like she was laying back and yawning, or telling me to hurry up, or even bored. She was getting hers and having a grand old time, and I guess the expectation was that it'd be enough for me, too. She just got lazy, and she admits it. (???? Gee, thanks)

So after both of us being off work the last week, mind you with the usual xmas stresses and family and all that, we haven't had sex in 9 or 10 days, despite several great opportunities. I can't say I've been rejected, it's more a case of I missed my chances (ie. she's snoring away on the couch, or went up to bed 2 minutes before I did (or I was brushing my teeth and when done, she was out). Just bad timing all around.

At the same time, I've made it very clear to her over the past 10 days or so that I'm "in the mood". I've also been very attentive to her needs, and we've had ample time to take advantage of non-sexual intimacy, too. So her needs have been met (as usual), yet there just hasn't been any effort on her part to meet mine.

So I had a chat with her last night, yet again. Nothing heated, but just that she had been slipping into the routine of nothing again - her needs being met, mine not, and not a second thought on her part about it.

I asked her something I had always wondered, yet never had the balls to ask her - and keep in mind, I was NOT asking her if I COULD do this, or that it would be something I would EVER do. I made that abundantly clear. It is not an option for me, nor something I was probing about, or anything.

But I asked her if she would care if I got my needs met elsewhere. Honestly, I didn't know what to expect. Obviously I was hoping that it's not something she would entertain or consider. I don't know how I would have reacted if she would have been okay with it. I wouldn't have been happy, I know that.

Again, I can't stress enough that I made it VERY clear that this is not something I would ever do, nor want to do, nor think about doing. She knows me, and that's not an option I would consider. I was NOT probing. More over, I wanted to know how she would feel about that, given that it's often one of the first things people tell their partner in a failing relationship. "Go elsewhere, I don't care", that type of thing. My ex wife gave me that line some 2 years before we split up.

In any case, she was very much against that type of thing happening, which was a great relief to me, so I'm encouraged.

However the fact remains that I have no hope of things changing permanently. I told her I feel like Charlie Brown kicking the football, and she's Lucy. "THIS time, Charlie Brown!"

I have told her, several times, that I can not live like this. Not WILL not, CAN not. I have asked her to put herself in my shoes. She has been in relationships that ended because her needs were not being met. She's broken up with people because she did not feel loved, or they did not meet her needs to her standards. She understands how I feel. Yet she doesn't.

She's broken hearts before. She's fallen out of love before. She's given people chances to change and meet her needs before. She's been where I am, yet she's been the one to have had enough and end the relationship. And I don't get why this isn't sinking in to her.

I have not threatened divorce, per se, but she knows that I can not live this way, that knowing she loves me isn't simply enough.

So how many times do I do the Charlie Brown and take a run at the football, hoping to have her finally hold it without pulling it away?

I love her dearly, and her me, but will this ever sink in? She KNOWS what she has to do, she doesn't dispute it. She knows what the consequences are, and she doesn't want it to get to that point. Yet thinking, knowing and acting are 3 separate things in her mind, apparently.

How many more chances do I give her?


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

It's very frustrating when you feel like you're finally getting through to your spouse after a good heart-to-heart, only for the status quo to creep back in. Then you have another talk. Rinse and repeat.

I don't know if there's a solution for this either, other than accept that you're going to have to keep pestering her to some degree, possibly for the rest of your life.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Two thoughts...


1. The Approach: 

What do you mean exactly when you say you've made it clear to her that you're in the mood?

Past rejections and the hurt they cause can certainly make anyone rethink their desire to initiate sex. So what happens is that sex initiation becomes an unasked question; a series of subtle hints that can easily be ignored if she isn't feeling it. The more she ignores, the more subtle you become until your frustration prompts some sort of blood letting.

Generally, these subtle hints about wanting sex aren't very sexy and depending on the level of conflict that surrounds sex in general it works against you. The more subtle you are, the less she wants sex.

So you had this conversation in which you felt reassured that she isn't willing to allow you to outsource. But how did that conversation leave her? Is she now even more convinced that you just need to ejaculate into something warm?


2. The Real Problem: 

Alex, your wife claims to be asexual. Full stop there. Asexual, meaning she doesn't ever want sex, doesn't ever think about it and wouldn't care if she never had sex again the rest of her life. You disagree with her self assessment and this is where you might be missing the boat. She is essentially telling you no matter how many talks you have, she will never be interested in you sexually because she doesn't feel sexual attraction to you or anyone.

No amount of talking will over come this sexual mismatch. No amount of love will overcome it either. This is the rest of your life. You constantly wanting sex and she constantly NOT. This is it. She has told you this and you continue to believe that you can find the magic words that will make her be different. Sometimes she throws you a bone or two, and that keeps you in the game. 

Just like Lucy, sometimes she is nice to Charlie Brown and that little bit of kindness is enough to keep Charlie Brown in the game. This is why he is such a block head. Lucy will never change because Charlie Brown doesn't ever change.

What would happen if Lucy placed the football down and Charlie Brown walked away?


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,
Here's a totally honest outside viewpoint for you:
1. The biggest change in your marriage is that A2 has lost her desire to please you
2. And that's largely because she feels very safe treating you badly 

I feel pretty sure that's largely due to a pattern where you reach a high level of anxiety and just start talking. 

The conversation you describe below - sorry man - that's a total train wreck. 

Why would you hypothetically 'ask her permission' for something you claim you would 'never do'? 

The real conversation is the one you seem determined not to have. That's the one where you ask her: Do you actually want to be married to me. Or is it mainly that your life is easier financially with me in the picture? 

And then you gently say: I'm slowly losing my feelings for you. At this rate we wont make another Christmas. 

If you don't get a strong positive uptick in effort from that conversation, you know where you stand. 

Hypothetical conversations about outcomes you swear will never happen erode respect. And most of her bad behavior is driven by a lack of respect. 

To be fair, most of the folks who struggle in these situations have a hard time connecting the dots. 

For example: 
Deep down, A2 doesn't believe you are capable of leaving her because you seem unable to allow her to disconnect from you once a year for her (weekend) shopping get away. 







alexm said:


> So if you've read any of my previous posts, you'll know that my sex life with my wife is very up and down, and that I'm always looking for ways (here, and with her) to make it better.
> 
> Very quick background - she's LD, self-professed asexual (though I have my doubts), is never sexual with me UNTIL we're having sex, and only initiates when she feels it's been too long, etc.
> 
> ...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Anon Pink said:


> Two thoughts...
> 
> 
> 1. The Approach:
> ...


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> What would happen if Lucy placed the football down and Charlie Brown walked away?


Walked away from the football, or walked away from Lucy?


Walked away from the football: Lucy puts the football away and goes back to her career in the relationship advice booth (The doctor is IN, and unable to diagnose herself). Meanwhile, Charlie has a measure of pride intact but is still just wishing he could kick a football.

Walked away from Lucy: Lucy puts the football away and goes back to her career in the relationship advice booth (The doctor is IN, and unable to diagnose herself). Meanwhile, Charlie goes and plays football with Peppermint Patty, who's better at football anyway, and always had a soft spot for Chuck.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Fozzy said:


> It's very frustrating when you feel like you're finally getting through to your spouse after a good heart-to-heart, only for the status quo to creep back in. Then you have another talk. Rinse and repeat.
> 
> I don't know if there's a solution for this either, other than accept that you're going to have to keep pestering her to some degree, possibly for the rest of your life.


It's crazy though. She knows what's going on, and what could happen. She agrees with it all, there's no denial of it. She even enjoys sex. Yet here I am, having the same conversation every two months. In one ear, out the other, it seems.

She just can't bring herself to do what needs to be done, and neither of us have any idea why - herself included, even though she knows what it is she has to do, and she even admits it's not difficult.

She swears up and down it's not me. There's really nothing I can do, physically or emotionally, to get her to wake up or take more notice. And she swears up and down this is a problem she's always had, with others, not just me. According to her, I'm attentive and thoughtful, and good looking and a good husband. No amount of "upping my game" would make a difference.

Just like most people, she's dated or been with all the different types of people out there - alpha males and romantics, fat guys and fit guys, athletes and couch potatoes and guys who were great in bed (me, apparently!) and guys who were duds. To her, her sexual desire for any of them, me included, did not waver based on any of these things, or anything else. Whether the guy had a 6 pack or he DRANK a 6 pack didn't matter. Height, weight, hair color, penis size, income - none of it mattered, or matters.

I've asked her what attracts me to her, and it's all mental and emotional. I treat her well, I love and respect her, I'm good to her and the kids, I'm funny, etc etc etc.

I've met or seen a few of the guys she's dated before, and they range from "you dated THAT guy?" to "how'd you land a guy that looks like that?" (not that I said either to her... lol). There's just no physical desire on her part for anyone, no matter what they look like. All us guys are the same to her, when it comes to physical attraction.

What makes it all the more frustrating is that she has said that I am far and away the best she's ever had in bed, for a variety of reasons (which she happily listed off for me!) So that tells me not that I'm good in bed, but more that we are very sexually compatible, at least physically. If you asked my ex wife, she'd probably tell you I was the worst she ever had, even though I didn't suddenly learn anything new after her.

I don't get it, and neither does SHE - she loves me, more than anybody she's ever loved before. We are physically compatible, and we are capable of absolutely blowing each other's minds in bed (and do, more often than not). Yet there is no desire to do so, at least not regularly.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Because she is asexual.

Or maybe gray sexual.

Learn to not give a damn that she doesn't have desire for sex with you or start making exit plans. 

She will not change because she accepts herself the way she is and expects you to do the same. As MEM has pointed out on numerous occasions, your discomfort doesn't affect her anywhere near as much as her discomfort.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

The bedroom pyramid looks like this:

1. Raw lust (it's the top of the pyramid and the best - but in a 50 year marriage drives the smallest number of encounters)
2. Desire to please - It's the healthy mid point and it maintains a strong, healthy sexual bond over time. It's what causes us to pause at the moment of initiation and remind ourselves that if we just relax and let nature take its course - we'll be glad we did.
3. Commitment - Two sides to this coin. The avoidance of sexual entanglements with others even when we are tempted. And the determination to keep having sex because it's good for the marriage. And that means being grateful for the effort even when the results are somewhat mediocre sex now and then....

A2 has fallen off the pyramid. 

And maybe without meaning to, Alex has kind of pushed her off the pyramid. 





Anon Pink said:


> Because she is asexual.
> 
> Or maybe gray sexual.
> 
> ...


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> Because she is asexual.
> 
> Or maybe gray sexual.
> 
> ...


Asexual--gray sexual--nanosexual....I don't believe that should have any bearing on her behavior. If she doesn't have any discomfort from being sexual--either physically or emotionally--and she KNOWS that this is what Alex needs but doesn't do it, then she's making a concious choice not to provide it. Period.

The fact is, she's choosing the lazy way over Alex's needs.


Now, coming at it from another standpoint--let's assume that she DOES bust her butt to initiate sex, bring her A game, etc. Would that be enough to meet Alex's needs in reality? He'd know that she's basically just putting on a show. Is the raw lust from the top of MEM's pyramid what he really needs? Or would the desire to please be enough? I've asked myself this same question before. I'd LOVE for my wife to lust after me. I've come to grips with the fact that it's not going to happen. But then I've asked myself if I could allow myself to feel the love that comes from a desire to please. Alex would need to determine the answer to that question to know if it's worth continuing the struggle. If the answer is "no, I need the lust", then the best course of action is to walk away.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

alexm said:


> I don't get it, and neither does SHE - she loves me, more than anybody she's ever loved before. We are physically compatible, and we are capable of absolutely blowing each other's minds in bed (and do, more often than not). *Yet there is no desire to do so, at least not regularly.*


But she was able to at least make a good show for you up until a year or so ago. So something HAS changed. Have you asked her what? I mean, if she was "faking" desire all along well enough to fool you, why stop now?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

This is tricky... same position, but at least my wife has a reason for not wanting sex - her sex drive has been nuked by ADs...

Even so, she enjoys sex when we have it. When the switch comes one (once a month), she is a bomb... 

She does the minimum to keep me there. And this is because she know I'll never leave. Well, until we have kids in the house. So, she gives me sex once in while, so I don't get too upset. She knows I'm unhappy, but she can't be bothered. She needs to put her brain into gear and that's too much effort, apparently... 

The reason why your wife is treating you like that, imo, is because, like my wife, she knows you'll never leave her. You are asking permission for something you'd never do anyway? Dude, that's just wrong. I guess you'll have to make her a bit insecure. She needs to know that you WILL go if things don't improve. And, if they don't, you need to pack your bags... high stakes, but if the situation is unbearable for you, you have nothing to lose.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Alexm- Do you and your wife have kids together?

Honestly, she is not the only woman out there who can do what she does.

I am sure that you love her and that the lack of interest hurts very much. Especially since you know what she is capable of.

But she is not that unique. You should take her off the pedestal.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

no, they don't... he doesn't have any... she does... two kids from previous relationship, one pre-teen, one early teen...

Just read some of his threads...  so, no kids to keep him there, really...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

In Absentia said:


> This is tricky... same position, but at least my wife has a reason for not wanting sex - her sex drive has been nuked by ADs...
> 
> Even so, she enjoys sex when we have it. When the switch comes one (once a month), she is a bomb...
> 
> ...


I wasn't asking permission, and I made that clear. My ex wife told me I can go elsewhere, and at the time, it didn't register with me. Being here on TAM, it is clear this is a relatively normal thing to say for partners who have checked out, and the general consensus is that when that's a suggestion (or the partner doesn't mind) then it's time to pack your bags and go.

I asked the question being up front and honest about why I was asking it. She knows I was not asking her permission. I was seeing if this type of thing would be allowable to her, and had she said yes, I would have packed some bags and left right then and there.

I am comfortable now knowing that my wife would have none of that, not even "for me". Despite her inability to wrap her mind around this subject, she still adamantly wants and needs to be the only one to provide for me this way. That's good.

This tells me, at this moment, anyway, that she has not given up. She knows what is required and that outsourcing is not an option she would consider (nor would I).

As for leaving her, that is not the case. I have told her I can not live this way for the rest of my days. Not WILL not, CAN not. Trust me, she's not comfortable that I will be around forever and therefore she can just sit back and do what she wants.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

alexm said:


> she's not comfortable that I will be around forever and therefore she can just sit back and do what she wants.


But she is doing that? :scratchhead:


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Alexm--

If I were in your position, here is what I would be asking myself:

1. Have I fully examined myself and reasonably concluded that the problem is not with me? The fact that your wife was meeting your needs a year ago but stopped possibly indicates that something about you changed that instigated a reciprocal withdrawal from her. Only you would know this though. 

2. If the answer to 1 is "yes" (i.e., you have not screwed up somehow), then what exactly is she contributing to your life on balance? Does being with her cause you more pain than pleasure? Are you dependent on her in some way (e.g., financially)? What exactly does she do for you that is so great? You do not have children with her, so the question is really about what she offers you.

If you do not have a clear answer to number 2, then I cannot see why you would put up with this.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

I don't see it either... to be honest, if I didn't have any children, I would be out of my marriage like a shot. Why would I stay with a woman who doesn't respect me and my needs? Because it's a matter of respect.

On the other hand, she has told you she doesn't want to have sex with you, that she is asexual. So, why stick around if sex is so important to you? You are trying to convince her it's not true? I can understand it's difficult to reconcile her present form with the past one - when she was up for it and wild in bed. Something has changed or maybe not. Maybe she's never been into sex and she was doing it for you. I still don't know if you really know what's changed, apart from your wife telling you she is asexual... something's gone wrong somewhere...


----------



## Openminded (Feb 21, 2013)

I wouldn't put much stock in her not wanting you with anyone else. Just because women don't want their husbands to outsource sex doesn't necessarily mean they plan to step up (even when they understand their husbands need them to). It's complicated.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Of course she doesn't want him to have sex with other women... she thinks she can keep him there... just giving him a bit of sex here and there... the bare minimum. This is what my wife is doing to me, for selfish reasons. She also told me I can have sex with other women if I'm very unhappy, but to tell her first... so we can separate, I guess. At least she had the decency to say that. On the other hand, it means she's checked out of the marriage... but she is not well upstairs... so...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,

It is the 'norm' for the LD partner in a sex starved relationship to insist on what I call: selfish monogamy

They assert their right to your fidelity - while not taking care of you. There's nothing loving about that. 

Worse - in your own very indirect way - you just told HER that you aren't going anywhere. 

Because it's the guy who isn't going anywhere who goes out of his way to reassure his partner with: I would never do this

The guy who is really thinking about leaving - says something entirely different than this. 

More like: The whole idea of monogamy without the LD spouses commitment - is a no go. 





alexm said:


> I wasn't asking permission, and I made that clear. My ex wife told me I can go elsewhere, and at the time, it didn't register with me. Being here on TAM, it is clear this is a relatively normal thing to say for partners who have checked out, and the general consensus is that when that's a suggestion (or the partner doesn't mind) then it's time to pack your bags and go.
> 
> I asked the question being up front and honest about why I was asking it. She knows I was not asking her permission. I was seeing if this type of thing would be allowable to her, and had she said yes, I would have packed some bags and left right then and there.
> 
> ...


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

Alex,

Have you tried scheduling sex? This might work for both of you.

The pressure is off of both of you and you say you're quite happy once there.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

GettingIt,

You could help Alex more than anyone. My guess is that without meaning to he's doing the same stuff that G2 did - put you off your game. 




GettingIt said:


> But she was able to at least make a good show for you up until a year or so ago. So something HAS changed. Have you asked her what? I mean, if she was "faking" desire all along well enough to fool you, why stop now?


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> GettingIt,
> 
> You could help Alex more than anyone. My guess is that without meaning to he's doing the same stuff that G2 did - put you off your game.


Funny you should say that MEM. G2 has been following Alex's thread, and he and I had a long conversation about it last evening.

We kicked around a few possibilities, all sort of based on the same idea that Alex's wife doesn't really want him to know the truth about her loss of desire to please him sexually. . . if indeed she knows it herself. She doesn't want to hurt him any more than he wants to hurt her, so she dances around the facts.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

MEM11363 said:


> Alex,
> 
> It is the 'norm' for the LD partner in a sex starved relationship to insist on what I call: selfish monogamy
> 
> ...


Well,she's aware that I may not (will not) stick around forever, or even all that much longer if things don't get worked out. So there's that. She knows she doesn't have me nailed down and thus doesn't need to do anything.

What she does know is that I won't cheat on her. I just won't. I see nothing wrong with reassuring her of that.

That, I suppose, gives her some comfort, but it's very clear to her that I will not remain married to her. Cheating or outsourcing is off the table.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

This is some hard stuff to talk about. 

So there was this crazy long thread about A2's request for a tiny - and I mean tiny amount of space. For one weekend a year she wants to be left to herself. 

I was appalled at how many (otherwise intelligent) folks were telling Alex he was right to insist she call him when she got there and call him to let him know when she'd be home. 

And I'm thinking - as always - in the short run you can do whatever you want. 

And Alex had so many good reasons for why she should 'do the right thing'. 

But to many folks, space is such a precious thing. You start crowding them - and you can kill that spark faster than you can blink. 

And she was crystal fvcking clear about what she wanted. 

By the end of the thread - Alex is using the kids as a 'prop' to get what he wants - because they also want to know when Mom is going to be home. 

He's a smart, resourceful guy and yet he couldn't figure out how to manage the kids expectations for her arrival time. 

That stuff - it wasn't honest. It was just logical reason number 7 why she shouldn't be able to unplug for a weekend. 

I don't think she'd feel safe telling him that he's needy/clingy and that is a turn off. Hell - I'm not sure she even recognizes how much of a turn off it is. 

What she DOES know, is when she asks for space he tells her why she can't have it. 

What really jumped out at me was the 'tone' of a text he got through one of her friends. That's the kind of thing happens when your wife has been complaining to that friend about you being up her azz. 







GettingIt said:


> Funny you should say that MEM. G2 has been following Alex's thread, and he and I had a long conversation about it last evening.
> 
> We kicked around a few possibilities, all sort of based on the same idea that Alex's wife doesn't really want him to know the truth about her loss of desire to please him sexually. . . if indeed she knows it herself. She doesn't want to hurt him any more than he wants to hurt her, so she dances around the facts.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Has she considered professional help to discover what's at the root of her block? Not necessarily to discover why she doesn't need sex--that part could be perfectly normal--but to discover why she can't bring herself to put in the effort to ensure your satisfaction with the marriage? She acknowledges that it's in her power to do, and "not that difficult" as stated earlier, so there's something keeping her from doing it. If she can't identify what the issue is, maybe some outside help is necessary.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,
This is normal stuff. You are normally the hotter partner in your marriage. You've overheated the house. Sex is the last thing a woman wants to do when she's feeling hot and crowded.

So she's shutting down the sex/lowering the temperature in the house. 

This is making you - understandably - anxious. And triggering a lot of HOT (read clingy) behaviors. Like the conversation below. 

She didn't ask for your reassurance. You initiated that conversation. 

You have a 'low temperature' partner and you just subjected her to a very high temperature conversation. 

That conversation was your attempt to get HER to reassure you. 




alexm said:


> Well,she's aware that I may not (will not) stick around forever, or even all that much longer if things don't get worked out. So there's that. She knows she doesn't have me nailed down and thus doesn't need to do anything.
> 
> What she does know is that I won't cheat on her. I just won't. I see nothing wrong with reassuring her of that.
> 
> That, I suppose, gives her some comfort, but it's very clear to her that I will not remain married to her. Cheating or outsourcing is off the table.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

GettingIt said:


> Funny you should say that MEM. G2 has been following Alex's thread, and he and I had a long conversation about it last evening.
> 
> We kicked around a few possibilities, all sort of based on the same idea that Alex's wife doesn't really want him to know the truth about her loss of desire to please him sexually. . . if indeed she knows it herself. She doesn't want to hurt him any more than he wants to hurt her, so she dances around the facts.


Those are fair points. And yes, that's exactly what it is - the desire to please me is no longer a priority. At times, it is (ie. she remembers...) and then she pulls out all the stops.

The issues I have are that a) she needs reminding from time to time and b) what happened that it is no longer a priority.

So far, she and I have established that she has never been interested (or disinterested) in sex. It's just something one does, and it IS fun. Her desire for it is nill most of the time, and every now and again she gets just enough desire (if it has been a long time, for example) and will act upon this tiniest of desires, provided the timing is right. If it's not, then the desire is easily stashed away and forgotten about.

Now, for what it's worth, she has never been a relationship with anyone longer than 3-ish years. We have had 6 together. This is new territory for her (not for me). The sheer fact that she still had the desire to please me for the first 5 or so years is encouraging, in my (and her) eyes. In her own words, she has never felt the desire, or need, to continue this beyond a year or two at most with anybody else.

Now, when she is "reminded" of my needs, she acts, and acts happily. This is not a case of "Fine, make it quick" or any sort of anger or anything. We had a discussion the other day, and the next night she pulled out all the stops, and also had a great time herself.

I know everybody in these types of threads thinks their situation is different, but I honestly believe mine IS. More often than not, partners who need to be reminded of their... duties... often show resentment and/or don't care, and eventually detach from their spouse. This does not seem to be the case (yet) with her and I. She is more than happy and willing to step up her game when reminded. Not once have I ever had duty sex with her, nor has she ever done anything with me that she clearly did not want to be doing, or simply wanted to get over with.

The desire to please me is still there, somewhere, it's just not at the top of the list like it used to be. Granted, it was never #1 on the list, either, but it was up there. Now it's buried somewhere between brushing her teeth and grocery shopping.

It's just the reminders that are driving me nuts. To me, it's not a difficult thing to remember and put a small priority on. It's like training our kids to brush their teeth right before bed. Eventually, you want them to be able to do it without thinking and you having to remind them. My wife is the equivalent of a 17 year old who still needs to be reminded every few weeks to brush his teeth. It shouldn't be happening, and you start to wonder if your teenager is incapable of remembering basic life skills.

Why it's frustrating is this: sex, especially within a marriage, is a basic life skill. It's not far below food, water and air in terms of living. It's certainly not as life or death as those, but it's a relatively basic necessity for just about every man or woman on the planet, with very few exceptions. Even my wife requires it occasionally, and she would tell you that.

Now the interesting thing is that she has claimed to have gone ~2 years at one point with no sexual contact or even masturbation. (not due to choice, just circumstance). In her own words, it was not pleasant, and she did feel depressed at times due to the lack of physical contact. So even she requires it. It's just that her threshold is far bigger than the rest of us.

As far as she and I are concerned, I figure she could probably go months without. Probably less, actually, but given that her urges may come when I am not available, or it is not possible, then they can be easily stored away and forgotten about.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

MEM11363 said:


> This is some hard stuff to talk about.
> 
> So there was this crazy long thread about A2's request for a tiny - and I mean tiny amount of space. For one weekend a year she wants to be left to herself.
> 
> ...


I need to address that particular thread, as I feel it's an inaccurate portrayal of events and quickly got out of hand when it was posted.

Although the details were more or less correct, the insistence that I was being dishonest are not. The fact of the matter is (was) that I didn't even think twice about getting in touch with her - which is where I went wrong, and I was told (thankyouverymuch). NOT by her, but by the friend she was with and people here. My wife did NOT, then or after, give me any sort of grief because I tried to get in touch with her. And believe me, she is not afraid to tell me when I've screwed up or crossed a line.

The end result, as far as she was concerned, was that it was a non-issue and she was apologetic for her friend's tone with me.

That said, she IS also the personality to pick up and go for 2 or 3 days and not feel the need to check in - which is fine with me, it really is.

I was made to sound like I was in the fetal position in the corner, rocking back and forth while she was gone. TO those who did not read this thread, I sent a text to my wife's friend many many hours after they were supposed to arrive where they were going, simply to make sure they arrived safely, and also (horrors!) what time they expected to be back several days later. My wife did not own a cell phone, so her friend was my means of contact. No response for several hours, so OF COURSE I started to worry. Sent another one HOURS later and got a less than friendly response. End of "text-gate".

This thread has followed me around, for some reason, and I am now branded the local TAM clingy husband, and thus my issues with other things tend to come back to my alleged clinginess.

Let's set the record straight - neither my wife nor I feel that I am clingy. SHE is extremely independent, let's give her that. I am, too, though not to the extreme that she is. If, and when, I go away for a day or two or three without her, I have NO problem letting her know I arrived and what time I expect to be back. And, believe it or not! she would much prefer that I do so, for her sake. Or let her know I am running late. Otherwise, leave me alone. She ALSO has no problem doing these things. Or not. It's no skin off her back, either way. She would have a problem if I kept texting or calling her several times a day, but wouldn't we all?

So can we forget that thread ever happened, please? Thank you.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

alexm said:


> So can we forget that thread ever happened, please? Thank you.


Alex, I don't remember that thread . . . but I have a strong suspicion that you are too needy for your wife's taste, and that is part of the equation here. 

It's not you . . . it's you AND her. It's a dynamic, and she is half of it. 

I'm highly doubtful of her assertion that she's not capable of feeling sexual desire. She sticks by it because you bought it, that's all. No need for her to dig any deeper for the real answer if you go along with the first reason she provided.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Nobody thinks that about you Alex. Certainly not me. 

Overall I believe you are an honest person. We all rationalize the things we want and do from time to time. 

GettingIt is saying this better than I am - but: 

A2 strikes me as fiercely independent. 

I don't think the average woman would find you clingy/needy. But at some level A2 does. 

If I repeated some stuff M2 has said to me, half the guys on the board would say: that is some COLD stuff to say to your man

Not how I see it. The truth has no temperature. 

And the more the thing they say hurts - the more it proves their trust in you. 






alexm said:


> I need to address that particular thread, as I feel it's an inaccurate portrayal of events and quickly got out of hand when it was posted.
> 
> Although the details were more or less correct, the insistence that I was being dishonest are not. The fact of the matter is (was) that I didn't even think twice about getting in touch with her - which is where I went wrong, and I was told (thankyouverymuch). NOT by her, but by the friend she was with and people here. My wife did NOT, then or after, give me any sort of grief because I tried to get in touch with her. And believe me, she is not afraid to tell me when I've screwed up or crossed a line.
> 
> ...


----------



## Vanille (Dec 13, 2014)

I'm probably going against the majority here... You say going 9 or 10 days without sex like it's a long time? If you're having sex once a week that seems pretty good. She claims to be asexual, she's probably right. Just because you can make her body orgasm doesn't mean she isn't asexual. She doesn't think about it and that's why she doesn't initiate. She's not being insensitive, it's how her mind works. She's uninterested in sex but willing to have it. I don't see how that is a reason to divorce at this point, just because it's boring? Especially if you knew in advance that she was asexual. I do sympathize with a giver not getting equal back though. I think you both just have two very different outlooks on sex.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

alexm said:


> Those are fair points. And yes, that's exactly what it is - the desire to please me is no longer a priority. At times, it is (ie. she remembers...) and then she pulls out all the stops.
> 
> The issues I have are that a) she needs reminding from time to time and b) what happened that it is no longer a priority.
> 
> ...


so, you know the reasons... just accept them (as difficult as it might be) or leave. This is the way it is and it's not going to change. Sh!t happens... people get to different stages in their life. You are at different stages now. Nothing wrong with that. It's just life. You'll have to adjust to that. Or you know what you need to do.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,

She doesn't want you to initiate right? 

She's either directly asked you not to, or she almost always rejects you when you do. 

So the way this is setup is she's told you she will let you know when she wants to. But then she 'forgets'. 

Because if there wasn't a control and/or rejection issue, there wouldn't be an issue. 










Vanille said:


> I'm probably going against the majority here... You say going 9 or 10 days without sex like it's a long time? If you're having sex once a week that seems pretty good. She claims to be asexual, she's probably right. Just because you can make her body orgasm doesn't mean she isn't asexual. She doesn't think about it and that's why she doesn't initiate. She's not being insensitive, it's how her mind works. She's uninterested in sex but willing to have it. I don't see how that is a reason to divorce at this point, just because it's boring? Especially if you knew in advance that she was asexual. I do sympathize with a giver not getting equal back though. I think you both just have two very different outlooks on sex.


----------



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

MEM11363 said:


> Alex,
> 
> She doesn't want you to initiate right?
> 
> ...


If that is accurate, then it's complete and utter BS. Why would anyone live that way? Fact is that the wife was told repeatedly that Alex needs intimacy. She does not care to provide it, and he regularly goes above and beyond for her. It screams nice guy pleasing a wife hoping to get some crumbs.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vanille (Dec 13, 2014)

MEM11363 said:


> Alex,
> 
> She doesn't want you to initiate right?
> 
> ...


I must have missed something because I hadn't gotten that impression originally. Alex, do you feel this is an accurate representation of what is happening?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

I really don't understand this need to beat up on Alex for being too clingy. I get that some men are, and that some women find that a turn-off, but it doesn't always happen that way.

Why complicate matters? Wife says she is not that sexual. Why can't we believe her? She is probably telling the truth.

She says it is not him, but her. Why can't we believe her? She is probably telling the truth.

Speaking as just one example of a highly independent woman, it simply isn't the case that all such women are into chest-thumping-male-dominating-anti-beta .


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

Alex, one of the things that my husband and I discussed in regards to your situation is this: she's been faking it with you for years in the hopes that you'd get better at meeting her needs sexually, but you haven't, so she's given up--perhaps out of resentment, perhaps out of frustration. 

I hesitated to bring this up as a possibility because you are fairly adamant in all of your threads that SHE IS SATISFIED. 

Are you sure? Because I'm not. Particularly after going back and reading this thread that you started last fall:

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/sex-marriage/230490-good-sign-bad-sign.html#post10846034 

I apologize in advance for some of the things I'm going to throw out there. However, I think you are here honestly looking for any and all possibilities. 

Some points/excerpts that really jump out at me:

1. You caught her masturbating ten or fifteen minutes after the two of you had sex. (Not usual for someone who is asexual, I'd think.) How much does she masturbate? I'm guessing more than you think she does. Yes, I know you say you keep the toys in a drawer and can tell if they've been used, but if she wants to hide it from you, it's not that hard.

2. You said, _"It took her almost 6 years to tell me that my oral skills, while excellent, were sloppy, for example. It took her 5 years or so to tell me that she, although capable, did not want 5, 6, 7 orgasms, because it simply tired her out and it was too much. In other words, it is clear that she does not want to upset me in any way by being critical of anything I do in the bedroom._ 

The longer you fake it with your husband, the harder it is to come clean--particularly is you KNOW your husband thinks he's been a great lover because, well, that's what you've led him to believe. Her intentions might have been good, and she might have figured you'd "get it" after some practice, but things just never got better because after awhile she got backed into a corner by her dishonesty. 

3. You said, _"I'm telling ya, she's got some barriers up around her sexuality, and it's not likely they'll ever be addressed or even acknowledged by her. It's a case of complete and utter separation. In bed with me, she's a beast, and she lets go. Outside of bed, she can barely watch something on TV without her facial expression changing, let alone talk about sex. If she and I aren't actually HAVING sex, everything to do with the subject is uncomfortable to her, whether it's us talking about it, other people around us, TV shows, movies, whatever._

Why can't she talk about sex? What is she ashamed of? What is running through her mind when she's being a beast in bed with you--THAT'S where the key to this is. Something gets her engine going, and she conjures it as a fantasy, I'm guessing, during sex. Nothing wrong with that, but unless she'll share it with you, you can't really know what her kink might be. There are some kinks out there that can be hard to for a woman accept in her own mind, let alone share with a partner. When you are aroused by scenarios or behaviors that are judged negatively by social mores, it can be hard to embrace them. You can trust me on this one. 

4. You said, _"She HATES me touching her breasts outside of the bedroom. Touching her butt is more tolerable, but she doesn't like that, either. I asked her once why such a bad reaction, and she had no answer. And I'm talking about, if I touch her breast, she'll want to punch me in the face, kind of reaction. Not a "hey" and a hand slap."_

That's aversion--not asexuality, but an aversion. Those things turn her OFF. It might be that she has developed an aversion to you as a sexual partner, Alex. I know that is hard to hear, but that is how I felt about my husband for years, and I did at times confuse it with not having a libido. This does not mean she doesn't love you or doesn't want to be married to you or that she doesn't wish she was attracted to you--she just doesn't know how, at this point, to get there with you. 

5. You said, _"One thing I learned just a few months ago (and I mentioned this in an earlier thread) is that she absolutely despises with a passion giving oral sex. This is after 5 years of her giving me oral sex, and very well, I might add. Even to the point that I could swear she enjoyed doing it. (never on its own, though, always as fore or after play). I have no idea how this subject even got brought up, but her exact words were "I HATE doing it, and I want to rip it off every time I do it." Ouch. Apparently she has always felt this way and it has nothing to do with me, personally. Again, no answer as to why she feels this passionately about it. And no real reason as to why she continued doing it for so long, either, other than she felt it was just something she should be doing. Guess that ended." _

Again, you listen to her words too easily, and ignore her actions too readily. Was she happily meeting your oral needs all those years while she hid the truth from you about her own needs not being met? How long could she realistically do that before she began to think, "f*ck it, this isn't worth it?" Resentment is hard to admit to (especially when it's your fault for ending up with it)--much better feed you an excuse. Especially when you accept them so readily. 

6. She likes attention from men--you say she's had issues with boundaries with men she works with. You also say she's had 25-30 sexual partners before you, and has always been the one to break off relationships. You say she's terrible at initiating, and that she claims she's never had to initiate with her partners in the past. 

Sigh. Alex . . . your wife is not asexual, IMO. She doesn't want to hurt you so she's putting her sexuality away. She loves you--and that's why she can't tell you why she doesn't desire you. She doesn't think you could handle it--she doesn't trust you to handle it. She sees herself as the emotionally strong one in this marriage. 

I have my doubts as to whether she is fully aware of all the reasons she doesn't desire sex with you. It's easier to cast around for an easy answer (I'm not a sexual person) than it is to face the truth. Besides, she figures she can handle a sub par sex life in this marriage. And maybe she can. 

But you cant. 

And when she can't either, I think you know what she will do.


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

I think MEM is onto something though, as is gettingit. You are too clingy for your wife. That doesn't mean you're in the fetal position when she's gone, it means that your intimacy requirements are different. I remember that other thread as well and while you want it to go away it may be representative of a certain dynamic. 

Your wife feels crowded, and it's tough to get turned on when you're feeling crowded. And while you're looking for reasons that everything you want is reasonable your wife is actually not getting what she needs. You're trying to fill the needs you think she has but her attitude suggests her true needs are not being met. 

Based on everything you wrote your wife is not asexual, she is not hot for sex with you. And I agree with gettingit that she may not be as satisfied as you think. You guys are lacking in some fundamental intimacy and I too think that she's not comfortable talking to you about the real issue. 

You can inform her of your needs all you want but in the end you'll either find out why she's not comfortable communicating her needs to you or you'll split up.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Vanille (Dec 13, 2014)

GettingIt said:


> I hesitated to bring this up as a possibility because you are fairly adamant in all of your threads that SHE IS SATISFIED.


I noticed this too, but I wasn't brave enough to say it..
I used to fake it but I wasn't satisfied. He thought he was king of the world. Then I stopped faking it, I got tired of it after a year or two. He was so confused, thought something radical had changed, but it was all the same to me. 
I would ask her gently and honestly if she had been faking it. That would explain a few things.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

Alex, 



Does she drink alcohol or otherwise medicate before her sexual encounters that seem more porn star-like than asexual or sexually averse? I ask because my wife recently informed she wouldn't be able to not drink and have a sexual relationship.



Someone posted a very interesting article about sexual aversion awhile back. Can't remember whose website it was as on. Maybe the HNHN author? Sound familiar?



I can't help but feel that the hole you are in is getting deeper and deeper. Just feels familiar to me. Feels like her understanding of herself and honesty with herself is insufficient to come up with the information you need to know what, if anything, you can do to rebuild attraction to you, if that is even possible.



I'm becoming old and more cynical/resigned to these situations the longer mine just goes in circles.



I think your best chance is to table your interest and discussion about what is "off" or unsuitable about you and your behavior such that it would suffocate her interest in you. Instead, turn your thoughts and innate curiosity about human behavior towards yourself and the question of why you feel even tempted to spend your life chasing cause and effect relationships in her head. The cost of doing the latter, I'm afraid, can be quite high -- as high as all the remaining precious days of your life. And it is not your job. You can't do it. She very well will interfere with any such attempts by you anyways.



Set a new course. She'll either fix her steering and catch up with you. Either way you live your life rather than waiting for permission.



(As is often the case, those were words I need to hear. Here is hoping they ate not as relevant to you as I think they might be.)


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

GettingIt,

I'm just going to add some data in the spirit of helping triangulate. 

M2 hates being 'groped', which for us means: Touched sexually in a non sexual context. 

The only exception to that is when we wrestle - and she gets spanked. But in a way the whole fighting thing is a form of foreplay for her - so even that happens after quite a bit of 'physical dominance' foreplay. 

So perhaps an aversion to being groped is not the same as an aversion to sex. 

-----------
That said, I do believe A2 is afraid to be totally honest with Alex. And that is a huge problem. Because he actually has no idea what's going on. 

As for why his needs are becoming invisible to her: It's because he's always there. Always. 

As for how fiercely she guards her space - she doesn't have a CELL PHONE. 

And actually I think that's kind of cool. She's a little different and comfortable enough to BE different. 

I also know that I would be very careful with such a person not to be overly present. 









GettingIt said:


> Alex, one of the things that my husband and I discussed in regards to your situation is this: she's been faking it with you for years in the hopes that you'd get better at meeting her needs sexually, but you haven't, so she's given up--perhaps out of resentment, perhaps out of frustration.
> 
> I hesitated to bring this up as a possibility because you are fairly adamant in all of your threads that SHE IS SATISFIED.
> 
> ...


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Alex, everyone here is either amazingly right, or colossally wrong. I wish I knew which one it was.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

MEM11363 said:


> Alex,
> 
> She doesn't want you to initiate right?
> 
> ...





Vanille said:


> I must have missed something because I hadn't gotten that impression originally. Alex, do you feel this is an accurate representation of what is happening?


No, that's not the way it is at all. What it always has been is me initiating - which was fine when she rarely said no and also completely blew my mind each and every time.

The quality has gone down drastically, and my prior insistance that she initiate from time to time has had a negative effect. So totally my fault. However, my asking this of her only came about after her participation started to noticeably drop in the bedroom. Not that she just laid there or anything, or told me to hurry up, just that she wasn't as nearly into it and participatory as she once was. Again - fine, and generally to be expected after the length of time we'd been together, as well as age, stress, etc.

I had been in this position before, where my partner suddenly stopped giving a damn, and I didn't like how that ended up, at all. So rather than accept it without a fight, I fought.

My main issue is figuring out how to get the wife back who wanted to please me, even if it wasn't on her mind. This has been the struggle for the past year +. And I have gotten nowhere. She swears up and down that she's happy, that I didn't do anything, that there's nothing that's changed. She's as confused as I am. And she's not BS-ing me. She genuinely wants to go back to the way it was, as she knows what it means to me, and to us. She IS scared of losing me.

She struggles with this remembering thing. Where once it was second nature for her brain to click in to where it needed to be a couple of times a week (and make a solid effort to make sure I am satisfied, as well as her) it is now not on the radar.

She has gone so far as to tell me she has laid in bed next to me, after rejecting me earlier in the evening without a thought, and suddenly feel like she missed the opportunity - to which she will beat herself up over. An opportunity she wouldn't have thought twice about taking 18 months ago and prior.

It's almost as though she's subconsciously forced it entirely out of her brain. Then she has these "oh s***" moments when it's too late. She has genuine remorse about this, she doesn't want to be like this. She liked the way things were before, and how SHE was before.

That's the crazy thing - most of you are right, she IS taking me and the relationship for granted - but she KNOWS she is, doesn't want to be, but can't stop it. She's entirely cognizant of all of this and what it's doing, and how easy it is to "fix".

The other problem with my wife is that withholding my own affection and not meeting her needs does not, and will not, trigger any sort of "aha moment" for her.

She's broken, and she knows it, and is terrified of getting to the bottom of it. That's just her personality. She knows what's wrong with her, but does not want to know why. She has a lot of stuff buried, that much is clear, and she has no desire to exhume any of it, I don't think. Rock, meet hard place.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

Sisyphus, meet boulder.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

GettingIt said:


> Alex, one of the things that my husband and I discussed in regards to your situation is this: she's been faking it with you for years in the hopes that you'd get better at meeting her needs sexually, but you haven't, so she's given up--perhaps out of resentment, perhaps out of frustration.
> 
> I hesitated to bring this up as a possibility because you are fairly adamant in all of your threads that SHE IS SATISFIED.
> 
> ...


I'll reply to this and hope to god it doesn't come off as me stomping my foot and saying "NO! I'm awesome in bed!".

This was one of the first avenues I explored when we started having issues - and not in a whiny "are you sure?" way. Confident and gentle, with no hint of insecurity on my behalf. The reality is, is that I would not have been as po'd as one would think if I was told I wasn't good as I thought I was - seriously. I am confident she knows this, as she knows I am a confident person and MORE than able to handle criticism. Where most people take offense to criticism, I take it as an opportunity, in every aspect of my life. Sex is no different. I have no ego when it comes to sex.

As far as this general subject is concerned, she knows I can handle criticism from her, and she has no problem doing so (politely, mind you, she's not a terribly critical person).

Furthermore, I have routinely asked, or even told her, to tell me what she wants in bed, to communicate to me what she wants or doesn't want, and she HAS provided feedback over the years. There have been many things I have worked on at her suggestion, and the end result was what she wanted.

Look, honestly, if she's faking it, she's amazing at it and/or going way over the top with it. I'm not sure why anybody would fake 3, 4 or 5 orgasms per session. And I'm not sure how anybody could fake gspot orgasms (squirting), or bother to fake an orgasm from anal sex (which is a rarity for us, anyway).

I can't claim to know when a woman is orgasming or not, but it's not difficult to tell when a woman is sexually aroused. And I'm not talking just about vaginal lubrication.

She has said to me, without me inquiring, that I am the most attentive and best lover she's ever had. She said numerous times during our courting period that no man has ever spent a great deal of time "down there" with her, and that she never had multiple orgasms before me, never mind gspot or anal orgasms.

I can't begin to imagine why any person would go to such extremes to fake it for somebody else's benefit. Fake one orgasm per session, okay. But 4? And wet the bed?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - my ex wife would tell you I was the worst lover she's ever had, or at least up there. So I know I am not some Romeo who can rock every woman's world, and I won't assume I'm amazing in bed for one and all.

Lastly, my wife has no problems telling me what I'm good or not good at, and I her. We don't have that type of relationship, and she's anything but that type of person, believe me. To get any kind of praise out of her, it better be good. As far as criticism goes, she's not OVERLY critical, but when it's something moderately important, she doesn't shy away or sugar coat. I have no reason to believe our sex life is, or would be, any different.

She knows I am not some sort of egotistical man-child who'd throw a tantrum if she tells me I suck at something, including sex. I have also made it very very clear to her that *I* want to make sure she is satisfied and that I am doing things the way she wants. She has been somewhat slow on the draw with some things (my previously sloppy oral skills, for example) and all too quick to tell me to not do this or that, or to do whatever it is differently. And I have never acted insulted or hurt, because I HAVEN'T been insulted or hurt. She knows I wouldn't be.

From her perspective, she allegedly has never had a lover spend much time on her, down there. Now that she does, she was probably reluctant to criticize my "sloppiness". I could understand that, as I didn't have a BJ for the last 7 years of my previous marriage. If my new partner happily and passionately gave me BJs every time we had sex, I likely wouldn't complain about a damn thing, either! I'd just be happy I was getting them and had a partner who liked giving them. But eventually, I'd end up telling her if she was doing something wrong (teeth!) or something she could do better. I once had a very very short relationship with a girl who was just awful at oral sex, but she was so damned into it, I just let her do her thing. You pick your battles. Had I stuck with her, I would have found the right time to tell her how she could do it better.

So I don't know what else to say, but I genuinely don't believe this is a case of her not being satisfied.

That said, tastes change, people grow, and things get stale. So perhaps there is an element of truth to this, after all. I have told her I am open to suggestion or to hearing if she has anything she'd like to try, or fantasies, etc. Allegedly none of the above, which doesn't mean there isn't... I know. But short of me water boarding her to get information, she knows not to be shy or feel judged, or that I will be hurt or insulted.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

This has the ring of accuracy to it. It feels right to me. 

I don't believe the issue is your sexual compatibility. 

I do believe the entire issue is that your dynamic outside the bedroom has eroded her respect for you. 

And I believe that is caused by a shortlist of issues:
1. There ARE things that anyone can do to begin to deprioritize their partner and destabilize the relationship. You are doing the Exact Opposite via conversations like the: I would never outsource. That was you seeking her reassurance. 

In this context - that's a HUGE mistake. 

2. As for her circular reasoning: I don't know why I'm treating you badly, but I feel bad about it even though I'm not going to actually DO anything about it like see a therapist. 

You just accept it. 

You don't respond with: I guess deep inside, you really would be ok if we weren't together. Because that's where we're headed. 








alexm said:


> I'll reply to this and hope to god it doesn't come off as me stomping my foot and saying "NO! I'm awesome in bed!".
> 
> This was one of the first avenues I explored when we started having issues - and not in a whiny "are you sure?" way. Confident and gentle, with no hint of insecurity on my behalf. The reality is, is that I would not have been as po'd as one would think if I was told I wasn't good as I thought I was - seriously. I am confident she knows this, as she knows I am a confident person and MORE than able to handle criticism. Where most people take offense to criticism, I take it as an opportunity, in every aspect of my life. Sex is no different. I have no ego when it comes to sex.
> 
> ...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Alex, I think it has been suggested before, but recent things you are saying sound like she has Asperger's to me. A lot of AS people have a tenuous relationship with their own sexuality. Since they have trouble deciphering their own and other people's emotions, and since sex has a lot to do with emotions for most people but not for most AS people, things are very confusing for them.

Another idea is that she may have a personality disorder. If she's blocking "something" so horrible that it caused her to never even want to discuss sex, even though having had so many partners and has weak boundaries with men, that is a pretty big clue to some kind of trauma in her life, which can cause a PD or other type of dysfunction.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Was going to add...I have a friend who is highly sexual and has a PD. She genuinely loves sex, is highly orgasmic, and loves feeling, looking and acting sexual. However, she is not healthy in general in her relationships, and sometimes "uses" sex to try to create a bond with a guy. She is the porn star type you are describing of your wife. And I have seen her date guys who I knew she was highly physically attracted to, and ALSO guys she was totally "meh" about physically...and with all of them she was the same porn star.

As far as I could tell, she genuinely enjoyed the sex with all of them, at the times she was with them. The way she talked about sex with them, and the way they talked about it too (sometimes I'd get to hear their side) made it seem like she just had the most fluid sexual attraction any person could have.

However...later, as those relationships were crumbling, or after a break up, she would tell me all about how gross they were, and how she really was just doing it out of pity or duty at the end. 

I guess all I am saying is that her enthusiasm is what created the porn star in her, but she wasn't always enthusiastic about the sex itself...though sometimes she was...but a lot of times she did have some other agenda behind making sure she was giving a porn star performance.

She also told me once that when she was 14 and saw porn for the first time, she understood immediately that this was how it was supposed to look, this is what men like. Though again, she was clearly, honestly highly orgasmic (and I kind of thought that about porn the first time I saw it too, because I was seeing and hearing real sex sounds for the first time). But I definitely think in my friend's case, she adopted at a very young age the idea that she should always look like a porn star during sex. But she also really is just very sexual.

I think even if she was doing it out of duty and was totally not attracted to a guy, she could have still had O's, squirted, and looked like a porn star. She was just able to do those things easily, and it didn't mean all that much, really.

In fact, one time a guy told her "like WOW, I've never seen anyone put so much effort into sex before!" and she was kinda miffed by it because she felt like he didn't buy her obvious display of REAL desire and passion if he thought it looked like "effort".


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

maybe she's just lost her drive? It happens... a very simple explanation... the fact that she "forgets" is an indication that she has no sexual urge left. She doesn't think about it.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

MEM11363 said:


> This has the ring of accuracy to it. It feels right to me.
> 
> I don't believe the issue is your sexual compatibility.
> 
> ...


*I've said this almost verbatim to her, and I'm not sure why that's such a bad thing? The alternative is I don't say anything, and it appears to her that I'm not going anywhere, ever. I don't use it as a threat, it's just reality.*


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Faithful Wife said:


> Alex, I think it has been suggested before, but recent things you are saying sound like she has Asperger's to me. A lot of AS people have a tenuous relationship with their own sexuality. Since they have trouble deciphering their own and other people's emotions, and since sex has a lot to do with emotions for most people but not for most AS people, things are very confusing for them.
> 
> *I still don't buy this, though. First off, she doesn't fit one other descriptor of AS (other than the very general sexuality link), and the vast majority are exactly the opposite of what one finds to describe AS folks.
> 
> ...


*This very well could be the case, but I'm not seeing it. I won't get into great detail, but the obvious signs of trauma are not there.

I posted in another thread about her background and upbringing and general personality, and the results of it vis-a-vis adult relationships.

Nutshell version - parents split up when she was very young, she lived primarily with her mother and two older brothers. Her mother was early 20's with 3 kids, and not ready to give up the "fun" life just yet. My wife grew up with a mother who acted single while single, and occasionally had long term relationships here and there. So no parental stability and no family dynamic and no real role models for relationships. Her two older brothers (one over 40 and one approaching 40) are unmarried. The older one has given up on women (his words) and the other dates like he's 20. So they've all got relationship issues.

My wife, growing up, and into adulthood, was plus-sized, and she'd be the first to tell you her self-esteem took a major hit, especially while in school. She was the "fat kid" when she was 11, 12, 13, and her brothers spared no opportunity to pick on her because of this.

She and I dated for 3 years in our mid-teens, our first relationships with anybody. 3 years with your first boyfriend/girlfriend is uncommon. I would venture to guess that she sought this out going forward, with no success, as that was what she knew and what she likely expected out of relationships. Yet she found out the hard way that most guys that age aren't interested in LTRs or even monogamy.

Several years of this likely did not do much for her already low self esteem. She most definitely puts up walls to this day, even with me. I know she invested a lot into 1 or 2 other guys over the years, only to be completely and utterly burned by them. And a third, with whom she did not have a serious relationship with, got her pregnant, then f'd off and left her to raise a child on her own. That can't be good for how one views relationships OR men.

I can tell you, she's a smart woman. I believe strongly that she identified early on that she did not want to follow the same path as her mother did, and tried very hard to settle down and "do it right". Through unfortunate circumstances and general bad luck, she more or less ended up, in her late 20's, having followed a similar path as her mother, much to her dismay. Imagine trying to do the opposite, yet having it end up almost the same. That's got to be disheartening. What I DO know about my wife is that she had no intentions whatsoever of bouncing from guy to guy. I do know she wanted to settle down, be married, have kids, etc.

Not only did she not have the life she envisioned by whatever age she had hoped, she ended up with the life that she was trying so hard to avoid in the long run. I think now that she has this life, she's not confident about it, which is a shame.

So yes, she has issues when it comes to relationships and men in general. She has intimated that the few of them she dated long term also broke her trust in the end. So perhaps that's it - she's subconsciously expecting us to go boom, as well.

She has had periods of her life where she didn't date, let alone have sex, for a year or two. And she's had periods of her life where she went out, or slept with, anybody who smiled at her.

All that to say - I don't see any "trauma" there, at least from the standpoint of abuse, or bad situations. To my knowledge, and her words, she has never been hit or physically abused, nor sexually assaulted (raped). She has been taken advantage of, sure, and there was an element of emotional abuse in her previous LTR prior to me, but generally nothing that we haven't all experienced in one way or another. What I do see is an upbringing surrounded by unhealthy relationships (her mothers and her own), coupled with low self esteem and a general just 'not knowing what it takes to be in a marriage'. She's learning, and HAS learned, and has thanked me many times for being patient with her.

But it's almost as if she's expecting things to go South eventually, and she doesn't want to invest 100%, as it'll hurt MORE when all is said and done.

That's my perspective, and I'd never offer it to her, mind you. Nobody wants to be analyzed to their face.*


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

In Absentia said:


> maybe she's just lost her drive? It happens... a very simple explanation... the fact that she "forgets" is an indication that she has no sexual urge left. She doesn't think about it.


According to her, she's never had a sex drive, not with me, nor anybody else.

Now "drive" as in "willing, or seeing the need to provide for your partner"? Yes. She had the drive to do that. So that's clearly barely there, at this point.

FWIW, she's said this has happened before in other LTR's, and much sooner than it happened with us. With her LTR before me, for example, he turned into a bit of a d**k after the first year or so, so her desire to take care of him dwindled. With me, this desire to take care of me lasted ~5 years, then stopped.

The thing is, neither I nor she can figure out why. I didn't turn into a d**k.

SHE has just as much no clue as I do.

It's easy enough to say boredom got the best of her. Same partner, 6 years, same sex, etc. I get that. The excitement one has in year one is not the same as year 3, 5, or 10, it just isn't. There isn't much one can do to make it all that different from the last time, no matter how good it is.

I've suggested we mix it up, become more adventurous, more spontaneous, try this or that, and she's not interested. She's a self-described prude. She may not have been prior to me, I don't know, so maybe she's tried this that or the other thing and doesn't want to do it again. Besides, we've done it all. Short of getting really kinky, there's not much left on the table. Things like swinging or bondage are not options we want to explore. She has no taste for porn of any kind. She's not a voyeur or an exhibitionist, or into dressing up, roleplay, or even lingerie. She has about half a dozen toys, and she only uses one.

So perhaps it's simply boredom. She knows what she's going to get, and it's no longer exciting. I do know that at first, it was. The thought of her having not just one orgasm, but multiple, was foreign to her. For her part, she usually orgasmed during sex in the past, not more than once, and quite often, not at all. So I assume the novelty of a guy who's taking care of her, for once, has eventually worn off, and now it's the same every time. I don't know what else to do, or where else to go, to mix it up or make it better.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

alexm said:


> According to her, she's never had a sex drive, not with me, nor anybody else.
> 
> Now "drive" as in "willing, or seeing the need to provide for your partner"? Yes. She had the drive to do that. So that's clearly barely there, at this point.
> 
> ...


well, that's possible... if she never had any sex drive, then the excitement of a new relationship has worn off and she can't be bothered anymore (with sex)... not saying she doesn't love you, just that with no drive and no novelty factor she is not interested... mind you, this happens in many relationships after a few years... it's happened in mine. But if you still have a sex drive, you get horny and want sex... without, she'll do it for you (as always), but less enthusiastically and less frequently...

The fact she says "she doesn't know" is a bit scary... she could be honest with you, but maybe she doesn't want to hurt your feelings...


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

When an LD says that he/she doesn't know why they don't want sex, they usually do but they don't want to hurt the HDs feelings. It usually means they lost attraction to you. In another thread, you stated that you caught her masturbating after you had just had sex. She may not be getting satisfied with you, in other words she does not find you sexy enough to get her full satisfaction with you.

You may see it differently because no one wants to think that their partner who they still burn for does not burn for them as well. But this may be where you are. The novelty wore off and she is turning cold. In MEM's previous post he stated that you may be smothering her with your hot while she may want to still be cold. You even stated that she told you to get a partner who will appreciate your warmth.

She is telling you and showing you what the situation is but you don't want to see it, but you must decide whether you can just deal with the reality.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Fozzy said:


> Alex, everyone here is either amazingly right, or colossally wrong. I wish I knew which one it was.


You and me both!

Regardless, it's ALL good advice, thoughts and words, whether I feel it's off base or there's something to it.

I think there may be a little bit of truth in everything everybody has said here, it's just not black and white.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

techmom said:


> When an LD says that he/she doesn't know why they don't want sex, they usually do but they don't want to hurt the HDs feelings. It usually means they lost attraction to you. In another thread, you stated that you caught her masturbating after you had just had sex. She may not be getting satisfied with you, in other words she does not find you sexy enough to get her full satisfaction with you.
> 
> You may see it differently because no one wants to think that their partner who they still burn for does not burn for them as well. But this may be where you are. The novelty wore off and she is turning cold. In MEM's previous post he stated that you may be smothering her with your hot while she may want to still be cold. *You even stated that she told you to get a partner who will appreciate your warmth.*
> 
> She is telling you and showing you what the situation is but you don't want to see it, but you must decide whether you can just deal with the reality.


My ex wife did this, not my current one.

But yeah, it all comes down to having lost the desire to please me, at least in this way. Therefore, it is something I have done (or not done).

The tricky thing is, neither of us can suggest anything that will rectify this, because she doesn't even know why it's become this way. I genuinely don't believe she's sparing my feelings (as said, this is not her personality, nor is it mine to be insulted or hurt by her). But clearly there is SOMETHING.

I mean, I'm NOT always here, and even when I am, I'm not always with her. I have my own hobbies and interests. I guess I don't leave the house for guys weekends or much longer than 3, 4, 5 hours at a time when I do, so technically I'm always "around". I also don't insist we do things together at all times, etc etc etc. She also leaves the house and has time to herself, or with friends or family. I think we have a healthy balance, though as many have said here, she is ULTRA independent, so perhaps what others feel as normal and not-at-all smothering, is to her...

But it's such a mind-****. Although she values her alone time, or not being bothered, she also does not want to be on her own. The times she was single and not looking drove her crazy. She absolutely wants a partner and someone to share her life with. Maybe she wants the emotional equivalent of a friend with benefits (where the benefits are non-sexual)?


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Alex, I think it has been suggested before, but recent things you are saying sound like she has Asperger's to me. A lot of AS people have a tenuous relationship with their own sexuality. Since they have trouble deciphering their own and other people's emotions, and since sex has a lot to do with emotions for most people but not for most AS people, things are very confusing for them.
> 
> *Another idea is that she may have a personality disorder. If she's blocking "something" so horrible that it caused her to never even want to discuss sex, even though having had so many partners and has weak boundaries with men, that is a pretty big clue to some kind of trauma in her life, which can cause a PD or other type of dysfunction*.


I've been having this same thought. The discrepancy between her capabilities inside the bedroom and her aversion to even discussing it ouside just doesn't add up. Seems like a complete personality shift from one context to another.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Alexm-- 

Let's say your situation was reversed. You hit up your wife whenever you wanted sex, but otherwise could not be bothered to support her emotionally. She tells you it bothers her over and over and you say, sure, I understand. But she keeps putting out and, really, you remain only interested in having sex with her.

How would you describe this type of relationship?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Alex, I can't help but be reminded of of our conversation about body image, where you swore up and down that it was your ex wife who had the problems, but that your current one was supremely confident.

What I see are similar issues wrapped up in different forms. She isn't bursting with confidence, she has been putting on a show. A show that she knows to be important to catching and keeping a man. As FW pointed out, it is very easy for a woman to put on, and even enjoy these performances without ever being all that into it. Or being into it in the moment, but not beyond.

I'm guessing that part of her is wondering if you will still truly like / love / be attracted to her when you actually get to see the real her. The one that has told you the truth about how she feels about sex, the one that will sometimes wish that her sexual desires (or rather lack thereof) are not always second to yours.

It can be difficult, especially for an independent woman who knows how to look after herself to let go and trust that he really is there for her, warts and all.

This is why I'm concerned about this judgement that you're not being alpha enough. If she *knows* you're thinking of walking, she might just be preparing herself for the inevitable hurt and fallout from that. If that's the case, further destabilizing may make her more protective, not less.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

techmom said:


> In another thread, you stated that you caught her masturbating after you had just had sex. She may not be getting satisfied with you, in other words she does not find you sexy enough to get her full satisfaction with you.


That's obviously what I thought, too, and I'm not throwing that out the window, because it's the most likely scenario, however...

When I mentioned this to her, which I did eventually, and gently, her response was not one of embarrassment or horror. She DID want more, as our session was short (I had somewhere to be) but not rushed. She had more than one O, I had mine, I left. So this particular time was not at all like our usual sessions, I guess.

I decided to take this as a positive - I left her wanting more - and not as a failure - I didn't satisfy her.

The sheer fact that she had a couple of O's and it was not enough for her is encouraging, in my books. It means that I'm doing something right the rest of the time and left her wanting more, at least this time, given the time crunch I was in.

I'm generally a pretty positive guy, so I put a positive spin on things like this, just as I would (and do) when given constructive criticism by my wife in regards to sex. If she wants to give me hints and tips on how better to satisfy her, I'm all ears. It's a win-win situation, not a knock against me. The more people, men AND women, realize this, the better everyone's sex lives would be. As opposed to not saying a word to your partner because he or she might be hurt, or you THINK they'd be hurt.

In our 6 years together, there have been a handful of times where she's wanted more and she's asked (or told...) me, and I've complied. I'm not a quick shooter at all, but there have been times... lol. So she has no issues in doing so, at least some of the time. In this case, she did state to me that had I not had anywhere to be shortly after, she would have kept going, with me. As I was not able to do so, she had only the one option to get her fix.

There have also been several times where I just don't have the stamina or strength to do my usual with her (hey, I'm getting old), and she's continued on her own with me next to her. So she has no qualms about this. She wants more, she gets more - either from me, or with me next to her. Generally speaking though, this is rare, as I tend to tire her out more often than not, and she's done.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Anon1111 said:


> Alexm--
> 
> Let's say your situation was reversed. You hit up your wife whenever you wanted sex, but otherwise could not be bothered to support her emotionally. She tells you it bothers her over and over and you say, sure, I understand. But she keeps putting out and, really, you remain only interested in having sex with her.
> 
> How would you describe this type of relationship?


I love irony.

She told me once, a long time ago, that she bailed on a relationship that she felt was only about sex. As in, every time she got together with this guy, it led to sex, or he wanted sex. There was little else from him, other than that.

So she cut it off, and rightfully so.

I kept this analogy in the back of my mind, and brought it out very recently, but with the roles reversed. Basically told her that hey, the same thing is happening here, with us, but with the issues somewhat reversed.

In that case, his needs were being met (sex) and hers were not (everything else), so she ended it.

In our case, her needs are being met (emotional, etc.) and mine are not (sex).

I believe her exact words when it dawned on her that it was pretty much the same damn thing were "Oh s***!"


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

alexm said:


> But yeah, it all comes down to having lost the desire to please me, at least in this way. _Therefore, it is something I have done (or not done)._





_Non sequitur._



It may be. It may be something else. It may be a combination of many things.



Prematurely discarding possibilities is risky business.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,

Just to clarify, at the end of my post I had a statement:

You don't say: ....

Which should have read: 

What you did not say, and should have is: deep down inside ....


--------------
At least you accept that - this is caused by - the death of her desire to please you. 

The sad thing is that I don't believe you are wired to do what needs to be done. 







alexm said:


> My ex wife did this, not my current one.
> 
> But yeah, it all comes down to having lost the desire to please me, at least in this way. Therefore, it is something I have done (or not done).
> 
> ...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

I would look at the brothers possibly. If they were mean to her and called her fat and her mother didn't protect her from it, they may also have been molesting her.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Alex,
> --------------
> At least you accept that - this is caused by - the death of her desire to please you.
> 
> The sad thing is that I don't believe you are wired to do what needs to be done.


MEM, you are scaring me with your insistence that all women are like your wife and will respond the same way.

Please consider that she is meeting many of his needs, and does express a desire to please him. She has simply turned down the pornstar performance a notch, and come clean about her own sexuality.

Why are you so convinced she is lying and needs to be destabilize?

Okay, so maybe I'm way off too, but I do have a fair bit of experience with ultra independent women. Not making them "behave" of course, but being one.

When I first got with my SO, I had a very hard time with normal relationship type stuff like "checking in". I would disappear for hours, without ever calling, and be surprised when he was unhappy with me. No one ever before had cared, or if they did, they never called me on it, and I assumed I should be free to do what I want.

The very worst thing he could have done was "turn down the heat". If he had, there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that we would not be together, as I would have taken this as a sign that like everyone else, he wasn't very invested and didn't care.

Now, you might be able to argue that he would be much better off without me, and that maybe he should've walked. But as far as I'm concerned, I *need* him to not feed my automatic assumption that I am destined to be always alone, a relationship failure. I *need* him to realize that asserting my own feelings and desires is about being *me* and not a backhanded way of saying "I don't care about you"

It depresses me to no end to see time and time again tis idea that women have to be delivering porn star performances, and as long as she does that, she's a-okay, supremely confident and caring. And soon as she isn't, she's selfish and doesn't give a damn about anyone else.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Faithful Wife said:


> I would look at the brothers possibly. If they were mean to her and called her fat and her mother didn't protect her from it, they may also have been molesting her.


Even if not, this could have been a very real source of trauma.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

True but there seems to be a sexual issue here.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Always,

We all synthesize our 'model' of human behavior by combining:
- Our direct relationship experiences 
- Our first person observations of other folks interactions 
- Third party depictions of events - like on TAM

I like to believe that at least half my viewpoint comes from the Tens of thousands of TAM posts I've read and the patterns I've extracted from reading them. 

No doubt there is a bunch of M2 specific stuff in my head. It's also true that there's a long, long list of stuff that M2 seems to have in common with other women. 

---------
Let's start with this: 
- I believe she may or may not consciously realize what's driving this
- I believe that Alex is inherently too warm for her or equally valid she's inherently too cool for him. 

After being inside about a hundred threads like this, I can tell you that the saddest thing about these situations is:

Once the warmer partner starts to feel cold, they simply CANNOT keep their hands off the freakin thermostat. They keep doing stuff that turns the heat up. 

It's not because they are selfish. Not because they are stupid. They don't even realize they are raising the temperature. Chasing a partner who - being chased - only runs faster. 

-----------
That example down below - made me laugh. 

M2 often heads out the door planning to do one thing and then goes all ADD - ends up doing five things. If I sat around waiting on her - staring at the clock - that would make for a pretty unhappy marriage. 

----------
All that said, worst thing BY FAR about hot partners. When they are 'doing their thing' - which is SOLELY about getting their need for warmth met - they will look you in the eye and tell you that it's ALL about YOU the cooler partner. 

Now I know most folks aren't really conscious of this dynamic. Hell I wasn't directly conscious of it until I hit my mid forties. 

But I'll tell you one thing I am for damn sure of. When you making it too hot - the cooler partner doesn't care WHY. They just want you to stop. 








always_alone said:


> MEM, you are scaring me with your insistence that all women are like your wife and will respond the same way.
> 
> Please consider that she is meeting many of his needs, and does express a desire to please him. She has simply turned down the pornstar performance a notch, and come clean about her own sexuality.
> 
> ...


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> GettingIt,
> 
> I'm just going to add some data in the spirit of helping triangulate.
> 
> ...


I have (well, had) the same "aversion," and I agree it's not the same thing as an aversion to sex in general. But when you are groped when you are NOT "in on" the attraction/arousal, it's hard to contain the visceral reaction of disgust. For women who are not attracted to their husbands and need "warm up" time to get to a place where they can put that aversion aside, it can feel like an assault. 

I rarely have that reaction anymore when my husband touches me sexually in non sexual contexts, but that's because I wanted to get over it, and worked on it. And that was still after my desire for my husband came back. I don't think it's that unusual to find it . . . not pleasurable . . . to be sexually groped unexpectedly. Even men would agree--I think. 

-----------


MEM11363 said:


> That said, I do believe A2 is afraid to be totally honest with Alex. And that is a huge problem. Because he actually has no idea what's going on.
> 
> As for why his needs are becoming invisible to her: It's because he's always there. Always.
> 
> ...


I think that there is much merit to this. She seems to not get space--emotional or physical--as much as might be ideal for her. 

But I think even that need waxes and wanes within a relationship. My need for space--which used to be very much at odds with my husband's need--has changed dramatically since we've introduced far more transparent communication. I think Alex's wife would feel less apt to run for space if she was able to tell Alex exactly what was on her mind and trust 1) That she wouldn't hurt him and 2) That it wouldn't change his behavior towards her and 3) That he wouldn't try to "fix" things for her.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Always,
That last bit you wrote - the porn star performance comment - that cuts. 

Seriously girl - you're killing me. I haven't had intercourse in 3 years. M2 has a medical condition. It's chronic. That part of our sex life is over. 

As for the emotional temperature in the house - M2 sets that. Some days it's 90, some days it's 50. Personally I like the variety. One big difference between me and M2 is this: She can have sex at 50 degrees. I don't really like 'COLD start' sex. But she's fine with it. 

She's more like a man that way. Only way I go along with that, is if she's hitting me with a blast of desire and saying: baby - we ARE doing it tonight - strip. But if she makes a soft pass after a cold day - I gently decline. 

50 degrees doesn't imply she's been in any way unkind. Just that she's been completely disconnected from me. That isn't hurtful - it's simply not a turn on - for ME. 






always_alone said:


> MEM, you are scaring me with your insistence that all women are like your wife and will respond the same way.
> 
> Please consider that she is meeting many of his needs, and does express a desire to please him. She has simply turned down the pornstar performance a notch, and come clean about her own sexuality.
> 
> ...


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

I don't want to beat a dead horse too much, but just wanted to follow up on a few things that stood out to me. I think your wife's sexual needs DO play into the equation--but whether the "in the bedroom" needs overshadow the "outside the bedroom needs" I can't say. Probably a combination of both, since sexual desire for our husbands is commonly tied to our enthusiasm in the bedroom. You don't have anything to fake if you want your husband as badly as he wants you. 



alexm said:


> I'll reply to this and hope to god it doesn't come off as me stomping my foot and saying "NO! I'm awesome in bed!".
> 
> This was one of the first avenues I explored when we started having issues - and not in a whiny "are you sure?" way. Confident and gentle, with no hint of insecurity on my behalf. The reality is, is that I would not have been as po'd as one would think if I was told I wasn't good as I thought I was - seriously. I am confident she knows this, as she knows I am a confident person and MORE than able to handle criticism. Where most people take offense to criticism, I take it as an opportunity, in every aspect of my life. Sex is no different. I have no ego when it comes to sex.
> 
> ...


All this is well and good--but that doesn't mean that if SHE deems that what she has to say would hurt the man she loves deeply, it might still be hard for her to tell you the full truth. This is less about how you handle criticism, than about her withholding information that she feels could really hurt you, or the marriage. After all, once you say something, it can't be "unsaid." You seem, to me, to be a "thinker." Perhaps I'd even go so far as a "ruminator." At the very least, you are highly analytical and have a need for information. It can be risky to hand too much information or conjecture to a person like that.



alexm said:


> Look, honestly, if she's faking it, she's amazing at it and/or going way over the top with it. I'm not sure why anybody would fake 3, 4 or 5 orgasms per session. And I'm not sure how anybody could fake gspot orgasms (squirting), or bother to fake an orgasm from anal sex (which is a rarity for us, anyway).
> 
> I can't claim to know when a woman is orgasming or not, but it's not difficult to tell when a woman is sexually aroused. And I'm not talking just about vaginal lubrication.


I think a woman might fake in that fashion because they see how it pleases their husband when they do so. 

Out of curiosity--does your wife differentiate for you between clitoral and vaginal/g-spot orgasms? I can't fake the intense contractions brought on by a clitoral orgasm--and my husband can easily feel those (he's made comments about being afraid he was going to lose a finger or two ) But he can't discern a g-spot orgasm. I sometimes squirt, but it's not tied to the intensity or the orgasm so much as to my husband doing the correct movement at the right time and intensity. 

I can have a multitude of g-spot orgasms, but unless I get that one clitoral orgasm, I'm not done. Gold standard, in my book. It's not the same for every woman, but I was thinking about it in regards to your comment about not being able to tell if a woman is orgasming or not. 




alexm said:


> So I don't know what else to say, but I genuinely don't believe this is a case of her not being satisfied.
> 
> That said, tastes change, people grow, and things get stale. So perhaps there is an element of truth to this, after all. I have told her I am open to suggestion or to hearing if she has anything she'd like to try, or fantasies, etc. Allegedly none of the above, which doesn't mean there isn't... I know. But short of me water boarding her to get information, she knows not to be shy or feel judged, or that I will be hurt or insulted.


Have you read She Comes First? A friend of mine is struggling with being very unsatisfied sexually with her husband, and she bought it for him to read (which he refused to do, but I digress.) She read it herself and said she found out things about her body and what it can do that she hadn't even known. 

What if, just as a fun exercise, you read it (or read it together--if your wife was willing.) As you pointed out, tastes change, people grow, and things get stale. As long as she's not forthcoming with ideas, you could always do worse than to look for ways to up your game.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

When M2 told me to STOP groping her 24 years ago - we were having sex almost every day. And I thought: If I'm not careful - this groping thing - is going to kill a great sex life. 

And that one change completely altered our Non sexual affection. Made it 100% positive and angst free for her. 

That last bit you wrote is HUGE. I bolded it. 

And man you NAILED that bit about the variation in need for space. 

As the warmer partner, when it gets a bit nippy you got two choices, you can flex or you can fight. But a warmer partner will NEVER EVER win a thermostat war. At best you will win a battle or two - maybe. But not a war. 

End of the day, the cooler partner controls the thermostat. You let them have their cool/cold days and they will bring the heat when they are ready to. 




GettingIt said:


> I have (well, had) the same "aversion," and I agree it's not the same thing as an aversion to sex in general. But when you are groped when you are NOT "in on" the attraction/arousal, it's hard to contain the visceral reaction of disgust. For women who are not attracted to their husbands and need "warm up" time to get to a place where they can put that aversion aside, it can feel like an assault.
> 
> I rarely have that reaction anymore when my husband touches me sexually in non sexual contexts, but that's because I wanted to get over it, and worked on it. And that was still after my desire for my husband came back. I don't think it's that unusual to find it . . . not pleasurable . . . to be sexually groped unexpectedly. Even men would agree--I think.
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Disclaimer: 

This stuff - is early draft of a theory. Might be wrong. 

You take a woman doesn't care too much about sex either way. And you give her a choice of it being too warm (kills her desire) but makes her totally confident the marriage is stable. 

I think she slowly (subconsciously) chooses the hyper-stable but sex starved marriage. Partly because you're a great father to her kids. 

So A2 - she's tolerating an overly warm house - because she doesn't want to agitate Alex by pushing him away. But it is killing her desire. 

And Alex - I 100% believe that you:
- Have your own life 
And
- Act in a manner that an average woman would not find needy / clingy or too warm

But A2 she isn't close to average. And what you are doing is not working for her. 





GettingIt said:


> I don't want to beat a dead horse too much, but just wanted to follow up on a few things that stood out to me. I think your wife's sexual needs DO play into the equation--but whether the "in the bedroom" needs overshadow the "outside the bedroom needs" I can't say. Probably a combination of both, since sexual desire for our husbands is commonly tied to our enthusiasm in the bedroom. You don't have anything to fake if you want your husband as badly as he wants you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> Disclaimer:
> 
> This stuff - is early draft of a theory. Might be wrong.
> 
> ...


I've had the same thought--the lack of desire/sexual fulfillment is an easy trade off for her. I think it is for a fairly large subset of women. She might love sex--but she doesn't NEED it. Or at least she believes that now. It's on a back burner, that's all. 

I do worry what happens *if* she reaches a point in her life when she starts wishing for man who can ring her bell (not saying she WILL reach this point, but as we all have said time and again, wants and needs change over time). Alex has said a few times that she's had no qualms about ending relationships in the past when she felt her needs were not being met. 

If Alex's wife were here, I'd counsel her to participate with Alex in locating her desire, and helping him understand how to trip it. But that's only because I do believe Alex's wife is a sexual person--she just (currently) places her sexual needs very low on her list of priorities.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

The thing is there is a first step needs to happen, without which nothing is going to improve. 

Alex needs to try to make the leap from where he is - to where SHE is. 

A2 loves Alex. She just doesn't need him. Or at least she feels that way. 

Now I KNOW this next bit varies a lot by couple, but for us what works best is remarkably simple. 

I love M2 more. Always have. Prefer it that way. 
But I need her less than she needs me. Always have. Prefer it that way. 

Love and need. They different. 

You listen to the stuff Dug says about JLD. When he meets her
he has a kick ass collection of man toys. Expensive man toys. 

He sells em all. For her. Not a hint of regret in his voice when he reflects back on that time. That's a man who loves his woman. 

But Dug doesn't NEED JLD. And that's the biggest reason they have such a stable marriage. 









GettingIt said:


> I've had the same thought--the lack of desire/sexual fulfillment is an easy trade off for her. I think it is for a fairly large subset of women. She might love sex--but she doesn't NEED it. Or at least she believes that now. It's on a back burner, that's all.
> 
> I do worry what happens *if* she reaches a point in her life when she starts wishing for man who can ring her bell (not saying she WILL reach this point, but as we all have said time and again, wants and needs change over time). Alex has said a few times that she's had no qualms about ending relationships in the past when she felt her needs were not being met.
> 
> If Alex's wife were here, I'd counsel her to participate with Alex in locating her desire, and helping him understand how to trip it. But that's only because I do believe Alex's wife is a sexual person--she just (currently) places her sexual needs very low on her list of priorities.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Faithful Wife said:


> I would look at the brothers possibly. If they were mean to her and called her fat and her mother didn't protect her from it, they may also have been molesting her.


Oh god no. The three of them have an excellent relationship currently, and almost always have. They're all pretty close in age, so it was them against the world growing up.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> MEM, you are scaring me with your insistence that all women are like your wife and will respond the same way.
> 
> Please consider that she is meeting many of his needs, and does express a desire to please him. She has simply turned down the pornstar performance a notch, and come clean about her own sexuality.
> 
> ...


Holy ****, THIS.

Coming from an ultra-independent woman, this makes all kinds of sense.

And I didn't "like" this because it was what I wanted to hear. I liked this because this is a fresh take on things.

I'm going to PM you at some point in the next few days, if you don't mind. I'd like to bounce some things off you


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

GettingIt said:


> Out of curiosity--does your wife differentiate for you between clitoral and vaginal/g-spot orgasms? I can't fake the intense contractions brought on by a clitoral orgasm--and my husband can easily feel those (he's made comments about being afraid he was going to lose a finger or two ) But he can't discern a g-spot orgasm. I sometimes squirt, but it's not tied to the intensity or the orgasm so much as to my husband doing the correct movement at the right time and intensity.


Oh yes, very much so. If I happen to be inside her (she can O from PIV, too) it can hurt me. Not pleasant!

So, she can O from oral, manual stimulation, PIV, anal (with no clitoral stimulation) and is capable of g-spot/squirting O's.

One thing we do, without purposefully getting too TMI, is if I pull out and start thrusting my penis along her vaginal opening, including her clit, she will almost always squirt, and usually within 30 seconds or so. I assume this is also a clitoral O, but I guess I should ask her! When this happens, there is nothing inside her, or touching her g-spot, which was something I was long under the impression was needed for squirting (my ex wife being the only other experience I've had in this regard. With her, it had to be fingers inside, on the g-spot). My wife can also squirt from this alone.

Long story short, there doesn't seem to be a way that she can't reach orgasm. She's even been close with nipple stimulation before, and I assume if she/we really wanted to, it could happen.

FWIW, I've never strutted around afterwards thinking I was sex god or anything, nor have I said anything to that effect to her, so if she's faking all of this, she's doing it well and for no real reason.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,

You are making a huge and frightening assumption. Which is that A2 and Always alone are similar. 

My gut tells me that you are going to be bitterly disappointed. 

Still - it's clear you've chosen a path and I wish you well. 






alexm said:


> Holy ****, THIS.
> 
> Coming from an ultra-independent woman, this makes all kinds of sense.
> 
> ...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

MEM11363 said:


> Disclaimer:
> 
> This stuff - is early draft of a theory. Might be wrong.
> 
> ...


Yeah, but what do I do? Hop a flight to Vegas a few times a year without telling her? Don't come home from work until 2am every Friday?

I'm genuinely asking, not being facetious. I have no idea how to be LESS clingy than I already think I am! (other than not freakin' communicating with her about this subject, but geez... that seems to be cutting off my nose to spite my face...)

So what? Just leave this subject behind altogether and let her figure her own ****e out?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

MEM11363 said:


> Alex,
> 
> You are making a huge and frightening assumption. Which is that A2 and Always alone are similar.
> 
> ...


Mem, it doesn't mean I am disregarding what you are saying AT ALL. It's just that the words she has said are eerily similar to what my wife might say, were she more communicative.

As I said earlier, it may be combination of any or all of the things that everybody in this thread has put forward, including you.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,

I'm not offended. Truly. 

I just worry that Always Alone is combining two things that, at a glance look really similar, but underneath are completely different.

Love
And 
Need

So M2 and I were in this fvcked up high conflict mode a year or so back. And she was periodically talking about leaving. 

So one day she goes house hunting. Comes back and shows me the places. 

I'm saying: 
Babe, you are NOT living in that neighborhood. I looked at the crime reports - not happening. You can leave, but as my baby momma I'm in charge of security - married or not. 

So - you want to leave - I'll help you move - long as it's into a safe place. 

---------
The thing is, if it's not security related - I NEVER tell M2 what to do. One its not my place. And two she's likely to do the opposite of what I say just to make the point. But security stuff - that's different. Hell we don't even fight over that because on the rare occasion I just lay down the law. 

And that isn't about control. Or need. That's love. 




alexm said:


> Mem, it doesn't mean I am disregarding what you are saying AT ALL. It's just that the words she has said are eerily similar to what my wife might say, were she more communicative.
> 
> As I said earlier, it may be combination of any or all of the things that everybody in this thread has put forward, including you.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

alexm said:


> Yeah, but what do I do? Hop a flight to Vegas a few times a year without telling her? Don't come home from work until 2am every Friday?
> 
> I'm genuinely asking, not being facetious. I have no idea how to be LESS clingy than I already think I am! (other than not freakin' communicating with her about this subject, but geez... that seems to be cutting off my nose to spite my face...)
> 
> So what? Just leave this subject behind altogether and let her figure her own ****e out?


I know that my H is less interested in me if I am around all the time, expecting to hang out with him. That's why the standard GAL is so important in most relationships.

So I really do have a life, and I live it without apology. I put on the calendar the things I'm going to do, but I also do things on a whim with no notice. I don't let him count on when I'll be home or which nights I am free. I basically have it set up so that he has to ask me for a date if he wants to spend an evening with me. Because even if we're both home for the evening, I will not plan on spending it with him unless we both say so...I will instead plan on spending it with myself, doing my own hobbies and living my own life. 

We don't have kids so we can both be pretty free with our time and casual with our expectations of togetherness. I'm not sure how much you are involved with your kids' lives but I assume a lot like most parents so it is harder to carve out time for yourself. But if you can, the best way to start GAL'ing is to date yourself. Take yourself somewhere you have really been wanting to go, and treat yourself well. Spend time in your own mind, getting to know you, and do it enthusiastically like you would if courting anyone. Be fascinated with yourself. See if you can get to second base with yourself. 

The point of all of it really is to allow you two as adults to have somewhat of an autonomous life, almost like you would if you were not in a committed relationship. Just HAVING this life helps create the spark that NON-long-term-committed people have for each other. The main reason women stop having desire for their men is that this spark dies when we get too cozy and in each other's biz all the time. Women must be courted and dated...and they must know this about themselves and not get too lazy in their end of the dating game (like getting all fluffed up and excited about your date).

I think a lot of couples hit a problem when they don't put this kind of thing into practice and make it a lifestyle habit. We really can't ever stop dating ourselves and being fascinated with ourselves. We aren't interesting to others if we don't.

Men sometimes seem to think something like "well that's stupid, *I* still get horny for HER even though we're in a long term committed relationship, so she has all these CONDITIONS to be met and therefore, she doesn't have real desire for me and that sucks".

I think the problem with that thinking is just caused by the lack of sexual education most people have. It is common knowledge that mating habits DO change from the norm any time an animal is in captivity. Some animals simply will not mate at all. There is, perhaps, something deep within our instinctual patterns, that causes a message of "don't make babies in captivity, obviously you will not be free and may die" (because who would have you in captivity other than something that wants to eat you).

Just because men don't seem to be affected this way doesn't mean anything. It only takes one side of the male-female pair to close up shop in order to halt procreation. If that leaves the males with blue balls, I'm pretty sure nature doesn't care.

So if it could be seen as a "couple's" problem and not the "wife's" problem...and if it could be understood that this isn't always personal, there is a large component here that has to do with far more than our dealings with each other and has at least somewhat to do with an inescapable instinctual message we have to refuse to mate in captivity (even if we are treated well and fed).

But there are plenty of men who lose their desire due to captivity boredom too, but their wives don't know it, because these men can still perform and have sex and can even act like they LOVE it, but secretly they are picturing someone else and that's the only way they can get off. It is sad that all of these issues are seen as primarily WOMEN's sexual issues. This isn't true at all, there just hasn't been enough time in this sex positive generation to do all the research that is needed to ferret out all these issues and lay it out for everyone who is younger.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

I was going to say also, if Miss Scarlet was around, her thoughts on why she faked the porn star thing for so many years would be interesting to hear.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

alexm said:


> Oh yes, very much so. If I happen to be inside her (she can O from PIV, too) it can hurt me. Not pleasant!
> 
> So, she can O from oral, manual stimulation, PIV, anal (with no clitoral stimulation) and is capable of g-spot/squirting O's.
> 
> ...


So it indeed would seem like it's the out of bedroom desire that is waning. Mechanically, you can "get her there," but her desire to seek you out or to reciprocate is not what it used to be. Do you think her decrease in sexual interest could be, in part, out of guilt? She can and does enjoy your efforts, but she can no longer bring herself to do the same for you. This feels wrong to her, so she'd rather avoid the whole exchange altogether?

I still wish you knew what was in her head--what her fantasies are, or what they would be if she allowed herself to fantasize.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> When I first got with my SO, I had a very hard time with normal relationship type stuff like "checking in". *I would disappear for hours, without ever calling, and be surprised when he was unhappy with me.* No one ever before had cared, or if they did, they never called me on it, *and I assumed I should be free to do what I want.*
> 
> 
> Now, you might be able to argue that he would be much better off without me, and that maybe he should've walked. But as far as I'm concerned, I *need* him to not feed my automatic assumption that I am destined to be always alone, a relationship failure. * I *need* him to realize that asserting my own feelings and desires is about being *me* and not a backhanded way of saying "I don't care about you"*


These details are very akin to aspects of my relationship. My husband struggled with my independence, especially early on. 

For us, my need for him to "turn down the heat" amounted to him learning that my feelings and desires were not about him, or were not reflections of the intensity of my love for him. 

I saw his "need" to have me check in as to controlling and clingy. I've adjusted to his need in this category. And his reaction to my feelings was often to feel hurt and to alter the way he did things in order to try and appease me, or to try and "fix" my feelings in some other way. That would lead to him I felt emotionally crowded and worried about him resenting me. He has adjusted to my need in this category. 

I don't think that "turning down the heat" necessarily means destabilization. It CAN mean that in some circumstances, but in Alex's case, I think there are ways he can lower his emotional intensity that will make his wife feel better, not worse.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

One thing that I notice in this thread and many others on TAM is that many men come to the conclusion that if he can make the wife orgasm multiple times then she will want more sex. This is not true, at least in my opinion. As an ld I can have an orgasm that is out of this world, but if there is no attraction to hubby or if I feel crowded and smothered, then I don't seek or desire sex.

Many men themselves feel that we will desire more orgasms WITH THEM, but if the emotional connection is not there then we can just as soon masturbate. And fantasize. But we will still continue to avoid sex until the emotional temperature adjusts to our liking.

This may sound mean, but it will do men well to take heed to this. Some of us will put out, but it will be duty sex. This is why some men will say, gee when we do have sex she orgasms multiple times and she even squirts! So, why doesn't she want it more?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

alexm said:


> It's crazy though. She knows what's going on, and what could happen. She agrees with it all, there's no denial of it. She even enjoys sex. Yet here I am, having the same conversation every two months. In one ear, out the other, it seems.



You are running against her SLA. 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service-level_agreement

She enjoys sex but on her SLA - or frequency. If you want to crank up the frequency she drops the quality to discourage higher frequency.

Or it could be good ole' boredom, "this is all there is to it" type reaction.


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

always_alone said:


> Okay, so maybe I'm way off too, but I do have a fair bit of experience with ultra independent women. Not making them "behave" of course, but being one.


Me too and, in my own life-experience women like us are relatively rare. IMO, we become that way partly because we were born with that tendency and then, FOO situations in our childhood may foster that inborn tendency to the point where it becomes dominant in our personalities. We are generally self-confident/self-sufficient in our abilities and our professions. Most of us desire to be partnered but we learned early in life that most males are “uncomfortable” around us, sometimes we knew why but most often we didn’t. And, this male discomfort toward us seems to be unrelated our level of physical attractiveness or personality traits.



always_alone said:


> When I first got with my SO, I had a very hard time with normal relationship type stuff like "checking in". I would disappear for hours, without ever calling, and be surprised when he was unhappy with me. No one ever before had cared, or if they did, they never called me on it, and I assumed I should be free to do what I want.
> 
> The very worst thing he could have done was "turn down the heat". If he had, there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that we would not be together, as I would have taken this as a sign that like everyone else, he wasn't very invested and didn't care.
> 
> Now, you might be able to argue that he would be much better off without me, and that maybe he should've walked. But as far as I'm concerned, I *need* him to not feed my automatic assumption that I am destined to be always alone, a relationship failure. I *need* him to realize that asserting my own feelings and desires is about being *me* and not a backhanded way of saying "I don't care about you"


Yup, I can verify this experience. Every man I ever dated for a time and then later "dumped" was for this very reason. They seemed to have the attitude that, once we were dating exclusively, I should always be available to them. I initially believed that my husband was an independent personality, I later learned that he was also a passive-aggressive type and so he mostly punished me covertly by behaving coldly/dismissive toward me in various ways. He is now an ex-husband for that reason.

If you continuously “over heat” a very independent woman she will (at best) withdraw because she needs some degree of personal space. If you continuously “over cool” that same woman she will also (at best) withdraw because she will assume you are “just not that into her”. Bottom line is an independent woman will “run away” emotionally (if necessary) to gain the space she needs however she will not “chase you” emotionally in order to get her needs met.


----------



## jorgegene (May 26, 2012)

techmom said:


> One thing that I notice in this thread and many others on TAM is that many men come to the conclusion that if he can make the wife orgasm multiple times then she will want more sex. This is not true, at least in my opinion. As an ld I can have an orgasm that is out of this world, but if there is no attraction to hubby or if I feel crowded and smothered, then I don't seek or desire sex.
> 
> Many men themselves feel that we will desire more orgasms WITH THEM, but if the emotional connection is not there then we can just as soon masturbate. And fantasize. But we will still continue to avoid sex until the emotional temperature adjusts to our liking.
> 
> This may sound mean, but it will do men well to take heed to this. Some of us will put out, but it will be duty sex. This is why some men will say, gee when we do have sex she orgasms multiple times and she even squirts! So, why doesn't she want it more?



you make a GREAT point. Despite the positve that may come from 'sucessful' sex, if negatives outweigh that one positive, then sex is avoided. :slap: duh!!


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Red,

You want a partner who is loving without being controlling. Sounds perfectly healthy to me. 





Red Sonja said:


> Me too and, in my own life-experience women like us are relatively rare. IMO, we become that way partly because we were born with that tendency and then, FOO situations in our childhood may foster that inborn tendency to the point where it becomes dominant in our personalities. We are generally self-confident/self-sufficient in our abilities and our professions. Most of us desire to be partnered but we learned early in life that most males are “uncomfortable” around us, sometimes we knew why but most often we didn’t. And, this male discomfort toward us seems to be unrelated our level of physical attractiveness or personality traits.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Tech,

I always wondered about this. Many/most of the guys on here in sex starved/sexless marriages say their wives come every time or damn near. 

When things are good - M2 is maybe at 80%, when they're bad she's closer to 25%. 

And yet - the absolute worst frequency we had was a year where we dropped to every 5 days. 

As for M2 reaching the rapture - isn't about me. I do what feels best for her - works sometimes not others. 

We going on 25 years of me saying the same thing: I love that you're straight with me, would slowly lose my mind if I thought you were faking it with me - cause you don't need to. 

And I do NOT like the low O rate. Never have. But I love the raw truth of what's what. 

I'm thinking the worst thing I say to M2 about it is: I'm sorry it isn't as good for you as it is for me, and if there's anything I can do different - tell me. 


QUOTE=techmom;11387266]One thing that I notice in this thread and many others on TAM is that many men come to the conclusion that if he can make the wife orgasm multiple times then she will want more sex. This is not true, at least in my opinion. As an ld I can have an orgasm that is out of this world, but if there is no attraction to hubby or if I feel crowded and smothered, then I don't seek or desire sex.

Many men themselves feel that we will desire more orgasms WITH THEM, but if the emotional connection is not there then we can just as soon masturbate. And fantasize. But we will still continue to avoid sex until the emotional temperature adjusts to our liking.

This may sound mean, but it will do men well to take heed to this. Some of us will put out, but it will be duty sex. This is why some men will say, gee when we do have sex she orgasms multiple times and she even squirts! So, why doesn't she want it more?[/QUOTE]


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

In response to Mem, I feel that when men ask what they can do to make it better (more O's) they are expecting an answer pertaining to what they can do better in bed. They don't figure in the rest of the day, week and month of events which transpired to kill desire. Resentment builds up over time, that is not something that can be solved with a new sex technique or sex position. Sex is emotional for most women in that orgasms don't come easy when we are upset about something. Some women may be different and are able to compartmentalize sex, but the majority can't do this.

It sounds like it is distressing for men, which is why they are so fixated in fixing everything she is upset about, which makes her more upset because now she has a guy who is orbiting her. This is just one of those things which make relations between the genders so complicated.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> Holy ****, THIS.
> 
> Coming from an ultra-independent woman, this makes all kinds of sense.
> 
> ...


Yes, it's fine for you to pm me. Or you can ask me right here in open court, where MEM and GettingIt can jump in and correct me. Either way, I'll answer as honestly as I can.

Basically, though, it boils down to this: If everyone is working hard to "turn down the heat", there will be none left. This is pretty much guaranteed to kill the relationship, as without heat there just is no relationship.

I do not believe this idea that men always need to be worried about turning down the heat, or being clingy or what have you. I get that this is a common dynamic, but not the be-all and end-all that solves everyone's problems.

When I, for example, was talking about "disappearing", I didn't mean I'd be out just a little longer, or that he would be sitting at home with nothing to do, waiting. I mean I would do things like tell him I would be home for dinner and not show up until late at night, without a phone call or warning. I might go to a conference or a trip and not speak to or check in with him at all while away. 

It's true that I chafed, especially at first, from having someone else to answer to. I wasn't used to it, and was determined to preserve my space and sense of self. But the truth is that this heat was (is!) exactly what keeps us together. And without it, I doubt I could survive an LTR.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

It seems that the solution to this will be for the husband to listen to the wife when she talks about problems and concerns, and do this BEFORE the sex tanks. Men usually recognize the lack of sex as the problem first, then they complain about the sex. Rarely do I see a guy start a thread without sex being the problem. This is what makes most women angry and then we blame guys for being fixated on sex.

Would Alexm have recognized any problems if the wife kept the sex going good? Most women are communicators, and we state problems before we lose desire. A2 did state that she needed space, and anybody who does not have a cellphone is a person who cherishes their privacy and time alone. He should have backed off, imo, and just let her have her time with her friends. But now, she is losing desire for him because he is always THERE. 

Finding something to take him out of the house would be a good first step.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Yes, it's fine for you to pm me. Or you can ask me right here in open court, where MEM and GettingIt can jump in and correct me. Either way, I'll answer as honestly as I can.
> 
> Basically, though, it boils down to this: If everyone is working hard to "turn down the heat", there will be none left. This is pretty much guaranteed to kill the relationship, as without heat there just is no relationship.
> 
> ...


I think it would be very useful if we all could avoid catch phrases like "turn down the heat" in favor of more specific examples of types of behavior. I know I have often defaulted to the shorthand of picking up "TAM lexicon" instead of being more clear in my wording. 

As if often the case here, folks have a slightly different understanding of these catch phrases, and the nuances can be a real monkey wrench. The proliferation of threads bickering over "alpha" and "dominant" come quickly to mind. 

I don't actually see as much daylight between your position and mine as you do, Always. For nearly 20 years my "independence" was a source of conflict between my husband and me. We simply did not communicate about it well. We tended to assume intentions based on one another's behavior, and that is dangerous indeed. 

While I often agree that women who feel emotionally crowded appreciate their partner "turning down the heat," that doesn't mean I think it's always the solution, or that it proscribes the same method for every couple. 

Ideally, as it was for my husband and me, we worked on this together. I wish Alex's wife was here so we could hear her side, but I have a feeling she's not ready to be totally transparent with Alex, and perhaps he would not be comfortable with her reading what he has shared with us here. 

Always Alone, what does "turning down the heat" mean to you? You say it was the heat that kept you and your husband together. What does "heat" mean in the context of that statement. Just trying to get a better handle on how far apart we really are in our advice to Alex.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

GettingIt said:


> I do worry what happens *if* she reaches a point in her life when she starts wishing for man who can ring her bell (not saying she WILL reach this point, but as we all have said time and again, wants and needs change over time). *Alex has said a few times that she's had no qualms about ending relationships in the past when she felt her needs were not being met.*



I just want to point out that it wasn't her sexual needs that weren't being met, it was everything else.

AFAIK, and going by what she's told me (and still tells me), she's never had better sex in her life. But as we all know (or should know) even great sex can get boring, when it's the same old, same old. From my pov, I also have never had such great sex in my life, and I can't imagine anybody being better, but I know what I'm getting every time, as does she, if that makes sense. However, she's rather unwilling to mix it up or spice it up.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

techmom said:


> One thing that I notice in this thread and many others on TAM is that many men come to the conclusion that if he can make the wife orgasm multiple times then she will want more sex. This is not true, at least in my opinion. As an ld I can have an orgasm that is out of this world, but if there is no attraction to hubby or if I feel crowded and smothered, then I don't seek or desire sex.
> 
> Many men themselves feel that we will desire more orgasms WITH THEM, but if the emotional connection is not there then we can just as soon masturbate. And fantasize. But we will still continue to avoid sex until the emotional temperature adjusts to our liking.
> 
> This may sound mean, but it will do men well to take heed to this. Some of us will put out, but it will be duty sex. This is why some men will say, gee when we do have sex she orgasms multiple times and she even squirts! So, why doesn't she want it more?


I was only discussing our sex for the sake of a handful of people who were suggesting she might be faking or that the sex just isn't good enough, and THAT'S why she's uninterested.

It's clear to me, and to her, that's not the reason why, and that yes, it is, an unattraction to me - outside of the bedroom.

For the record, men are the same way. A woman can screw our brains out, but if there's not much else in the way of attraction, we ain't gonna stick around, either. We may stick around LONGER... lol, but it won't make us marry you, either.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt, what I see is a bunch of people telling Alex he is too clingy and needy, and that *he* is killing her desire because he "doesn't have a life" and "is always there".

Now maybe y'all are right, and I'm way off base. I don't know and won't pretend to know. But I just don't see it, or why everyone is so convinced that this is indeed his problem.

What I do see is a man who is in the throes of achieving (or not) a new level of intimacy with his wife She is showing him new sides of herself, ones that challenge all of his preconceptions and assumptions, and he is trying to come to terms with it all.

By "turning down the heat", I am talking about the same type of activities that have been the subject if this thread: calling to see if someone has arrived safely, and when they plan on coming home; reassuring your partner that you won't cheat, but asking them what they think about outsourcing. The supposed grievous sins that Alex has committed.

Stability, constancy, availability, support. These are not inevitable desire killers for women. Indeed they may provide exactly what's needed for the spark.

From what I have seen from your posts, you are unabashedly submissive in your sexuality, and so I can see why you counsel men to adopt the alpha, the dominating, the man who refuses to ever "need", or ask, or be weak. But not all of us are like you.

No one lays down any law for me, not through love or need, and so I do not accept MEMs solution for "not telling her what to do" while still telling her what to do. 

Rather, it is my SO's vulnerability to me that opens my heart, and makes me want to feed his needs and then some. The more aloof and disinterested he is, the "cooler" he is, the "cooler" I will become too.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

In your case you got two people working together. In Alex's case, I'm not sure I can say that.

Without her taking an active role you can adjust the temperature and use the Kelvin scale but the outcome is dubious at best.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> GettingIt, what I see is a bunch of people telling Alex he is too clingy and needy, and that *he* is killing her desire because he "doesn't have a life" and "is always there".
> 
> Now maybe y'all are right, and I'm way off base. I don't know and won't pretend to know. But I just don't see it, or why everyone is so convinced that this is indeed his problem.


Any of us could be way off base--me included--that is for sure. I think it's natural to provide advice, at least in part, from our own experiences. It's important for Alex to have different perspectives to consider since none of us really know his wife. He will have to choose which perspectives he thinks are most accurate. 

It's not that I am convinced that it's the case that Alex is too needy FOR HER (not just "too needy"--that's an important distinction that I've tried to make), but I do think it's a possibility. Without her input, it's hard to say. 



always_alone said:


> What I do see is a man who is in the throes of achieving (or not) a new level of intimacy with his wife She is showing him new sides of herself, ones that challenge all of his preconceptions and assumptions, and he is trying to come to terms with it all.


I think this is a great observation about them being on the brink of a new level of intimacy. Frankly, I think he's doing an admirable job of trying to understand her. In this thread, he's also been clear with his concern that, unless something changes with their sex life, he is going to start building resentment. It's imperative that he communicate this to her so that she can make a choice of her own. It sounds to me like she wants to work with him, but I think if that is the case, she's going to have to work harder on finding the reasons for her recent changes in her desire to please him. She is perfectly justified in not doing so, but she has to know what the consequences are, and it's up to Alex to be clear and upfront with her on this. 



always_alone said:


> By "turning down the heat", I am talking about the same type of activities that have been the subject if this thread: calling to see if someone has arrived safely, and when they plan on coming home; reassuring your partner that you won't cheat, but asking them what they think about outsourcing. The supposed grievous sins that Alex has committed.


I don't think any of those things, specifically, are the problems. The sense that a partner is too needy can come from an overall feeling that what you do and how you feel are under constant scrutiny. The sense that your parnter bases their security (and how secure they feel the marriage is) on their perception of your feelings for them. For lack of a better way to say it: you feel like you _matter too much_. That you aren't free to feel how you feel without bearing the responsibility for your partner's feelings as well. This might not be the case for Alex's wife at all, but it does seem to be a fairly common dynamic in a marriage where the woman is less dependent than the man, and the man wants more intimacy than the woman. 



always_alone said:


> Stability, constancy, availability, support. These are not inevitable desire killers for women. Indeed they may provide exactly what's needed for the spark.


I absolutely agree--I think we ALL want those things. However, the _behaviors_ that make us feel that our partners are constant, available, supportive are NOT the same for us all. 



always_alone said:


> From what I have seen from your posts, you are unabashedly submissive in your sexuality, and so I can see why you counsel men to adopt the alpha, the dominating, the man who refuses to ever "need", or ask, or be weak. But not all of us are like you.


I don't have a read on Alex's wife's sexuality--evenshe doesn't seem to understand it all that well. At least she's been unable to articulate much about it to Alex, much to both of their frustration. I do think that our psychosexual make up, when it can be known, is VERY revealing about what we desire from our partners. However, I'm also of the opinion that social, cultural, educational, and religious mores have kept many women (and men, for that matter) from being able to understand and embrace their own sexual identities--even within the confines of a safe and consensual relationship. 

Again, I don't for one minute think that everyone is like me. I'm fit into a category, just like all of us probably do, and that "category" does inform my perspective. I try to be as descriptive as I can when I bring my own experiences into my posts, and I try to avoid being prescriptive (although I do think I tend to lapse in this goal as a thread progresses.). Alex and decide how like or unlike his experience is to mine. 

Not that it is relevant to this thread, but sexual submission is only a very small part of my dynamic with my husband. I'm not naturally submissive (at ALL, lol!) but rather crave to be dominated into that state. I'm also a masochist, which complicates matters considerably (in a good way for us, lucky for me.) 



always_alone said:


> No one lays down any law for me, not through love or need, and so I do not accept MEMs solution for "not telling her what to do" while still telling her what to do.


You sound like you have strong boundaries that have served you well in your relationship. I see MEM's suggestions as geared more toward helping Alex set better boundaries for himself, rather than as being controlling (although your take on his advice is not an uncommon on one TAM.) I believe that when we set boundaries, we show our partners who we are, and it increases the intimacy rather than damages it. 




always_alone said:


> Rather, it is my SO's vulnerability to me that opens my heart, and makes me want to feed his needs and then some. The more aloof and disinterested he is, the "cooler" he is, the "cooler" I will become too.


I think this reflects that you are highly self aware, and in tune with what you need from your partner. It's from this vantage point that you offer your perspective and your advice--and I think many folks will find it valuable. 

There is no right and wrong here--just honesty. Alex can only benefit from honestly and sincerely offered perspectives.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

From 20,000 feet this looks pretty clear to me. 

A2 tells Alex nobody has ever treated her so well - in or out of bed.

And freely admits she is no longer that motivated to please him. 

Alex has done all the basic communication on this. Nothing's changed. 

This is NOT a greater level of intimacy. This is hard wired biology 101.

You can fight Mother Nature. You just won't win. 

As for the cheap shot taken at me over my comments regarding security.

M2 is in charge of aesthetics in our family. She makes everything more beautiful over time. Also has a narrow comfort zone on what she likes/dislikes. 

If I tried to get her to let me make half the home decor decisions:
- that would make her miserable
- I wouldn't do as good a job at it
- over time it might kill the marriage 

If she tried to take charge of security: same bad result in reverse








GettingIt said:


> Any of us could be way off base--me included--that is for sure. I think it's natural to provide advice, at least in part, from our own experiences. It's important for Alex to have different perspectives to consider since none of us really know his wife. He will have to choose which perspectives he thinks are most accurate.
> 
> It's not that I am convinced that it's the case that Alex is too needy FOR HER (not just "too needy"--that's an important distinction that I've tried to make), but I do think it's a possibility. Without her input, it's hard to say.
> 
> ...


----------



## Duguesclin (Jan 18, 2014)

MEM11363 said:


> You listen to the stuff Dug says about JLD. When he meets her
> he has a kick ass collection of man toys. Expensive man toys.
> 
> He sells em all. For her. Not a hint of regret in his voice when he reflects back on that time. That's a man who loves his woman.
> ...


MEM, I think you wrote this above based on this post:



Duguesclin said:


> Actually my wife says "the man gets the marriage he earns".
> 
> I do not fully agree with it because I feel I have been a better man because of JLD. She has been direct and transparent and has not allowed me to hide behind a bunch of excuses.
> 
> ...


I want to keep the record straight. I flew planes and gliders, but I did not own them. I just rented them by the hour. I did own a Mustang GT, but I bought it used.

But the part about my love for JLD, you got it exactly right . And well, I did own the bicycle .


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Let me guess, a Mercier 10 speed aluminum frame? Or a more mainstream Peugeot?


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> Tech,
> 
> I always wondered about this. Many/most of the guys on here in sex starved/sexless marriages say their wives come every time or damn near.
> 
> ...


[/QUOTE]

I can't agree enough with this. I won't lie and say I've never faked before, but I have not faked with my current husband. Do I orgasm every time? No, but I can probably 80-90 percent of the time and I'm honest when I can't. I'm also honest about what I need to get there. The trust and honesty is so important for true intimacy, and awesome is the man that can handle this honesty. My husband can. 
I've had this discussion with him, and he has said that faking seriously erodes trust in his eyes.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

I don't want to wrap this thread up, it's actually fascinating, and possibly beneficial to others who stumble upon it.

But, here's what I've arrived at (currently... it may change...) :

-My partner of ~6 years, who once had a desire to please me sexually, no longer does. Until the subject is brought up, then it's all systems go for a few days or weeks. Then the cycle repeats.

-Whatever angle I take does not stick. In one ear, out the other. THIS is my biggest concern.

- She hears what I have to say, agrees with much of it, agrees it's an issue, says things like she knows she needs to work on it, etc. yet never really does.

-I have taken just about every angle I can think of, or that has been suggested - alpha male, beta male. Talk of divorce. I have offered up, and listened to, every possibility under the sun. I have inquired about abuse, trauma, etc. You name it, it's been discussed, either by me or by her.

-She swears she is attracted to me. She swears she has never had physical attraction to anybody prior (man or woman). She swears she does not, nor ever has, thought about sex, fantasize about sex, have urges to have sex. Ever. She swears she never masturbated before me. She knows she is "different" sexually, and she's always - always - felt different from everybody else. When her friends talk about sex (whether she was 16 or 30) she didn't understand what the big deal was. Thus, she is not a sexual personal, at all.

-That said, she has had sex as much as any of you/us have over the years. More than some of you, less than some of you. She's not new to sex, nor is she a "pro". It's something she can physically enjoy, and in her words, it's what you do with your partner.

-I do not believe she has an unhealthy attitude towards sex, simply because this is how she's always been/felt. This is just how she is, which is neither common nor uncommon. It happens - sex is just not important or desirable to some. I can accept this, as she makes up for her lack of desire by actually being willing to have sex, and enjoying it, but mostly for my sake. You can't win them all.

-I am left with wondering why/what happened for her desire to please me to disappear. She is in the same boat. We have talked at great length about what's different between 18 months ago and now, and neither of us can think of a damn thing.

-I do not believe she is being dishonest with me, or holding back information. That said, it's obviously a possibility. As I said previously, we know each other well, to the point where she knows lying or withholding information is infinitely more damaging than actually telling me. Although I appear sensitive here on TAM, in real life, I am not quite so. This place gets me to read and think and pour out my heart, and the way it comes out sometimes is not indicative of real life me. I have rarely, if ever, let things get to me. One person's opinion is just that - opinion. If they're right, then I can rectify it (if possible). If they're way off base, I can let it go. Everything is a learning experience, and my wife knows that about me. So criticism is something she's always allowed to do, and welcomed by me. Tell me how to be better, please.

So. We have to get to the bottom of this, and get this back. It was there in spades for years, so it's possible. We have to figure out what happened. Are we drifting apart? Is SHE drifting apart? Is she bored? Did she suddenly discover the sexual side she's never had, and now realizes I am not what she desires in a sexual partner?

I am 99.9 % certain there's never been someone else. (I'll never say 100% ever again, thanks to my ex wife). There's no use in listing why I don't think this way, as it could all be ripped to shreds in two seconds.

I think she means well, I KNOW she loves me. I know she's not capable of loving me (or anybody else) in a physical way. I know she wants to be married, and to have a partner. I know that she likes the life we have. I know that she likes to be around me, spend time with me, do things with me. There's no hint of withdrawal, other than in the physical side of things.

Something is making her resist, though. She knows, and even wants, to do what needs to be done, she just can't do it.

Thanks all, some great replies in here.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

sorry, but she can't love you _that_ much, if she forgets your needs... like my wife. She tells me she loves me, but she is completely ignoring my needs. This is the conclusion I've come to.

You have no kids with her. Probably still fairly young. Go and find someone who adores you and shows it to you.


----------



## Big Dude (Feb 24, 2013)

alexm said:


> -I have taken just about every angle I can think of, or that has been suggested - alpha male, beta male. Talk of divorce. I have offered up, and listened to, every possibility under the sun. I have inquired about abuse, trauma, etc. You name it, it's been discussed, either by me or by her.


Alexm, I have avoided posting on this thread because our current situations are so similar that I fear projection on my part, and our past situations are so different that those projections would almost certainly be wrong for you. 

But this frustration with trying so many different things and getting nowhere resonates with me. So I offer two things to think about.

1) Stop jumping through hoops. Just stop. In the absence of accurate and honest communication from your wife, your chances of changing her attraction for you sexually by changing how you behave are worse than winning Powerball. Embrace your authentic self. If you are angry, well, be angry without shame or fear. If your wife asks you how you feel, tell her without a trace of sugar coating. Don't be afraid that what is said cannot be unsaid. One of you at least needs to be honest with themselves and their partner.

2) Never forget the opportunity cost of staying in this marriage. Never. Only you know what this cost is likely to be. 

Best of luck to you!


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> From 20,000 feet this looks pretty clear to me.
> 
> A2 tells Alex nobody has ever treated her so well - in or out of bed.
> 
> ...


MEM, I really don't see how you can airbrush this as biology 101. More like Psych601 if you ask me.

You say there is no new information, but I see plenty. I'm over in a body consciousness thread and Alex is telling me how supremely confident and sexy his wife is. How free with her sexuality. How does this jive with the obvious difficulty he's having processing her revelation that she just isn't that sexual? The message is not just a clear cut one --be more alpha to turn me on. She is giving completely conflicting information -at least as far as he's understood things to date.

Also, she points out that she was less sexual in many respects with all previous partners, and that he has done more for her than all of them.

Will you also say that biology 101 means that every partner she's ever had is too clingy and needy? That all men are destined to be a turn-off to her, that she is relationship-broken, and needs a steady supply of new guys to keep her interested?

I'm very sorry you saw my comment about security as a cheap shot. I really didn't mean it that way at all. I was just trying to say that "laying down the law" isn't always a solution, no matter if it comes from love or need. Maybe I was misreading what you were getting at?

This "biology 101" thing that you speak of is, I think, a tactic to destabilize a relationship, that can induce an uptick in sex from hysterical bonding. I've seen some posters here that are plenty happy enough to have this at the root of their relationship. Personally, I think it at best a short term solution that probably does more damage than good, at least from the perspective of LTR and a woman who is not just a limbic system that needs to be tripped by some aloof, emotionally unavailable man, but rather struggling to come to terms with her own sexuality.

If we're talking very simple "don't be a doormat" and "have something interesting to say", then I'm in full agreement. But I think Alex is probably already there. 

So we need to move beyond bio101.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> MEM, I really don't see how you can airbrush this as biology 101. More like Psych601 if you ask me.
> 
> You say there is no new information, but I see plenty. I'm over in a body consciousness thread and Alex is telling me how supremely confident and sexy his wife is. How free with her sexuality. How does this jive with the obvious difficulty he's having processing her revelation that she just isn't that sexual? The message is not just a clear cut one --be more alpha to turn me on. She is giving completely conflicting information -at least as far as he's understood things to date.
> 
> ...


This reply is bang on.

The bolded part, unfortunately, is kind of how I'm feeling. Except that (at least currently) she's embracing the "settling down" aspect of marriage. This is what she's always wanted, and she's quick to say so. Long term, stable, a partner in (and for) life.

However, and I would never say this to her, the bolded part above is what I think her brain might be fighting her with.

She's liking the stability of marriage and, well, me. But I think she has a hard time with the routine of things. And this includes sex. And this manifests in going through the motions, when it comes to marital duties and intimacy.

It's exciting to date somebody new, even for a short time. We can all agree on that. It can become addicting. You get butterflies in your stomach if he/she is great. Given that her past LTR's have never lasted longer than 3 years, and at that, only 3 of them, perhaps long term isn't something she deals with all that well.

That said, she's had two relationships in the past 10-11 years, and one or two first dates where nothing happened. So it's not like she's been all over the place since her 20's. Prior to that, though, it was dozens of short relationships and casual stuff, with a couple of longer ones which ended spectacularly. 

She's also had the same job for close to 20 years now, which she loves, so she's capable of settling down, I guess.

So much contradiction with her, which is what's killing me. Everytime I think I have something figured out, something else points in the opposite direction.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Always,

Damn girl - your man is one lucky guy. 

That was a diplomat grade thrashing you just gave me. Where I come from it's a rare and highly prized skill. 

I agree with everything you said - though I would like to clarify two things. 

1. My earlier comment about Alex taking your advice - was me being childish and thin skinned. I apologize. 

It is now VERY obvious to me you can help Alex. 

2. There's a critical difference between:
- Taking care not to overheat / smother someone 
And
- Deliberately removing their sense of stability

I firmly believe that you should NOT mess with a partners sense of stability unless you are reaching the point where you are starting to make plans to move on. 

I could easily crank up our sex life from our current 6-8 times or so. But to do that I'd have to take away a little bit of M2's sense of security. That's just plain wrong. 

M2 says this thing every month or so: I wouldn't blame you if you went and got a concubine. 

Any fool knows the difference between an 'ask' and an 'offer'. And that's not an offer. It's an 'ask'. An ask/request for reassurance. 

I just say: Already have a concubine. Seeing her tomorrow night - right here in this bed - bet she wears that smokin hot red satin thing never stays on too long.

M2 just smiles. 

















always_alone said:


> MEM, I really don't see how you can airbrush this as biology 101. More like Psych601 if you ask me.
> 
> You say there is no new information, but I see plenty. I'm over in a body consciousness thread and Alex is telling me how supremely confident and sexy his wife is. How free with her sexuality. How does this jive with the obvious difficulty he's having processing her revelation that she just isn't that sexual? The message is not just a clear cut one --be more alpha to turn me on. She is giving completely conflicting information -at least as far as he's understood things to date.
> 
> ...


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> 2. There's a critical difference between:
> - Taking care not to overheat / smother someone
> And
> - Deliberately removing their sense of stability
> ...


QFT. 

It's the taking care not to overheat/smother that I tend to focus on. As you point out MEM, when either partner destabilizes, I think they have to be prepared for and accept that it might be the final nail in the marriage coffin instead of the first brick in the road to reconciliation. 

Had my husband made certain moves to destabilize, I would have bid him adieu--I was that close to the edge. But I think he would have been prepared for that--he was that close to the edge. 

Alex is still looking for ways to be happy and satisfied in this marriage. He knows what he needs in order to feel fulfilled, and he's communicated that to his wife. It's up to her to decide whether or not she can step up, or if she is going to stay where she is.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Oh, totally relevant: my wife finally got a cell phone, and happily. I got a very good deal on a new phone (and new provider) for myself, and she took my old one (there's still half a year left on the term). She's been texting ME throughout the day. Not a lot, mind you, but just saying hi, etc.

So that's a positive!

Also, she's going away this weekend with one of her friends who is doing some work training, so she decided to tag along.

I haven't said two words to her in regards to when she's leaving/will be back etc. and I don't plan to. The only thing I said when she told me, was "cool!".

I'll bet you whatever's in my pocket that she texts or calls me at some point over the weekend. I won't be...


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

alexm said:


> Oh, totally relevant: my wife finally got a cell phone, and happily. I got a very good deal on a new phone (and new provider) for myself, and she took my old one (there's still half a year left on the term). She's been texting ME throughout the day. Not a lot, mind you, but just saying hi, etc.
> 
> So that's a positive!
> 
> ...


Just curious Alex--why won't you be calling or texting her? What effect are you thinking that will have?


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> You say there is no new information, but I see plenty. I'm over in a body consciousness thread and Alex is telling me how supremely confident and sexy his wife is. How free with her sexuality. How does this jive with the obvious difficulty he's having processing her revelation that she just isn't that sexual? The message is not just a clear cut one --be more alpha to turn me on. She is giving completely conflicting information -at least as far as he's understood things to date.


I see so many contradictions in what Alex observes about his wife. I can't decide if she's really that complex, or if its a case of Alex seeing the contradictory behavior but being willing to accept his wife's assertion that she has no idea what is going on. 

I'm feel like I have to choose between two scenarios when I offer my thoughts here: either Alex's information is accurate, or his wife is playing him. So far I've been going with the former. But I'd be lying if I said I'd be floored if it was the latter. 




always_alone said:


> This "biology 101" thing that you speak of is, I think, a tactic to destabilize a relationship, that can induce an uptick in sex from hysterical bonding. I've seen some posters here that are plenty happy enough to have this at the root of their relationship. Personally, I think it at best a short term solution that probably does more damage than good, at least from the perspective of LTR and a woman who is not just a limbic system that needs to be tripped by some aloof, emotionally unavailable man, *but rather struggling to come to terms with her own sexuality.*


Very much so--I think it really is a struggle for many women to understand, accept, embrace and nurture their sexuality. For some women, it's too daunting or painful or uncomfortable to take on. 

In my experience, understanding my sexuality included learning how to shut off my rational mind and just listen to what my biology is saying _within the confines of a safe, consensual, monogamous relationship with someone I share deep trust and intimacy with._ I now can easily reject the idea that what I like sexually says anything about my worth as an individual, a woman, or about my place in our society and culture. 

I guarantee you that this was not an easy journey, and one that I still struggle with at times. But I can also say that learning who I am sexually and choosing not to suppress it has brought me more joy and peace than anything else I've done for myself. And the ability to share all of this with a partner who is fascinated by my journey, and who embraces my sexuality with enthusiasm and passion? Really can't ask for anything more. 

Is Alex's wife capable of making that journey? Does she want to? Will Alex embrace what she would find? Those questions just cant be answered ahead of time.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Best way to reinforce the behavior you want is to make it a positive experience for her. 

When M2 is doing something fun - checks in with me: I tell her I'm glad she's having fun and that we (me and the kids are too). 

With A2 - I would stay away from stuff like: thanks for checking in

Maybe I'm wrong - but - the less she feels Alex NEEDS her - the better. 





alexm said:


> Oh, totally relevant: my wife finally got a cell phone, and happily. I got a very good deal on a new phone (and new provider) for myself, and she took my old one (there's still half a year left on the term). She's been texting ME throughout the day. Not a lot, mind you, but just saying hi, etc.
> 
> So that's a positive!
> 
> ...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Alex, did you see my post a page or two back about captivity boredom?

Also did you see the references in recent posts to the book What Women Want?

Everything you are describing in as far as her drop off in desire to please you falls in line easily with the well documented loss of desire of women in long term monogamous relationships.

I'm just asking if you saw my other posts or that book, because if you can get your mind around this, how it isn't a "woman's" issue it a a "couple's" issue, then you could stop feeling hurt about it and she could stop feeling guilty about it.

There are ways to handle this...but you'd both have to understand it a bit first.

Maybe start here at least: Esther Perel: The secret to desire in a long-term relationship | Talk Video | TED.com

Given how complicated the rest of her sexuality sounds, this basic, easy view of what is happening NOW is the best bet for you...because it may not even matter what her sexuality is, it may matter more that you two have hit the sex in captivity wall.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Getting,

I totally believe this. I mean that you would have bailed rather than complying. 

I do think there's a big difference between (1) which feels like blatant extortion and (2) which is collaborative problem solving. 
1. Fvck me or kiss my a$$ goodbye 
AND
2. This level of sexual disconnect isn't sustainable for me. I don't know what's caused the breakdown, and I NEED to know you are willing to work with me to 'fix' it. Fixing it doesn't mean that you learn how to bite the pillow. It means us both figuring out how to make this something you WANT to do on a regular basis. 

A partner who doesn't trust you enough to engage in (2) isn't a good partner. And a partner who says: 

*I have no idea at all why I'm constantly rejecting you so there is nothing I could possibly contribute to such a venture*

Is either:
- checked out/indifferent
- sexually dysfunctional 
- dishonest 
Or some combination of all 3. 




QUOTE=GettingIt;11400298]QFT. 

It's the taking care not to overheat/smother that I tend to focus on. As you point out MEM, when either partner destabilizes, I think they have to be prepared for and accept that it might be the final nail in the marriage coffin instead of the first brick in the road to reconciliation. 

Had my husband made certain moves to destabilize, I would have bid him adieu--I was that close to the edge. But I think he would have been prepared for that--he was that close to the edge. 

Alex is still looking for ways to be happy and satisfied in this marriage. He knows what he needs in order to feel fulfilled, and he's communicated that to his wife. It's up to her to decide whether or not she can step up, or if she is going to stay where she is.[/QUOTE]


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

GettingIt said:


> Just curious Alex--why won't you be calling or texting her? What effect are you thinking that will have?


There's another post of mine from a while back, which is conveniently linked within this thread somewhere, and also briefly touched upon


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> This reply is bang on.
> 
> The bolded part, unfortunately, is kind of how I'm feeling. Except that (at least currently) she's embracing the "settling down" aspect of marriage. This is what she's always wanted, and she's quick to say so. Long term, stable, a partner in (and for) life.
> 
> ...


Alexm, it's entirely possible that she is relationship-broken. At the very least, she does sound relationship-challenged. 

So, first, let me clarify that my posts here are in no way intended to suggest that you have some kind of duty to fight the good fight, to put up with whatever indignities, to run yourself into the ground to help her heal. On that point, I agree with the other posters here that you absolutely do need to look after yourself.

But that said, let's examine what we mean by relationship-broken. 

It's not as if LTR comes with a manual, and in every case we are dealing with individuals, individuals who are complex, and changing, who have needs and desires of their own, and yet are struggling to make them mesh with one another. Some people find this easier than others, no doubt, but even under the best of conditions it's no mean feat.

Women, especially independent women, have greater freedom to choose our own destinies than ever before. This freedom, however, comes with a price.

It would not surprise me one bit to learn that your wife is very much struggling with "settling down".

At the same time, I think it's a mistake to assume that what she wants is someone new and different. New sometimes offers the illusion that it will solve all problems, but it rarely does. It just puts them on layaway for a little while. It really is only when you get to truly know someone and trust them that you can even see these issues, let alone have the confidence to start digging deeper into them. 

My guess is that she comes off as contradictory because she is genuinely conflicted. She can't answer about what she wants because she isn't sure --not because she lacks awareness, but because she wants mutually incompatible things. Such as, for example, you AND a sex life that allows her to be true to and free in her own sexuality, however she should choose to define that.

This type of contradiction may seem totally dysfunctional at times, even relationship-broken. But mostly I think it's just part of human nature.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> I see so many contradictions in what Alex observes about his wife. I can't decide if she's really that complex, or if its a case of Alex seeing the contradictory behavior but being willing to accept his wife's assertion that she has no idea what is going on.
> 
> I'm feel like I have to choose between two scenarios when I offer my thoughts here: either Alex's information is accurate, or his wife is playing him. So far I've been going with the former. But I'd be lying if I said I'd be floored if it was the latter.


I do not at all get the sense that Alex's wife is playing him, nor am I inclined to think she is any more complex than the rest of us.

I get the sense that she is struggling, much like he struggles you describe below - and it can be very, very, very difficult to articulate these struggles without saying the most hurtful things imaginable, of coming off like a gibbering pile of contradictions.

Personally, the main reason I'm here at TAM is to practice saying what I think, both to learn what it actually is and to communicate more usefully with my SO.



GettingIt said:


> Very much so--I think it really is a struggle for many women to understand, accept, embrace and nurture their sexuality. For some women, it's too daunting or painful or uncomfortable to take on.


Indeed, yes, I agree with this. For the most part, women are actively discouraged from being true to our sexuality, and taught to hide it, malign it, sublimate it, or mould it into some pornstar ideal to please someone else's fantasy. Very difficult to sort through all of this to see what it is we actually want and feel.

One of the problems, I think, is that we all want what we want when we want it. But rarely does life provide us with such instantaneous gratification. We have to work for it --and even then it rarely works out just how we envisioned.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I do not at all get the sense that Alex's wife is playing him, nor am I inclined to think she is any more complex than the rest of us.


It's less that I get that sense, than I think that it belongs within the realm of possibility. That's why my comments aren't reallly focused in that arena. 



always_alone said:


> I get the sense that she is struggling, much like he struggles you describe below - and it can be very, very, very difficult to articulate these struggles without saying the most hurtful things imaginable, of coming off like a gibbering pile of contradictions.


Yes, I think there is a reluctance, as we discover new and different things about ourselves, to articulate the pieces that we feel are at odds with our partner's sense of security or satisfaction with us or with relationship. I think this is especially true if we are still in the exploration stage with those things. Why rock the boat if we might eventually determine that those things are really not important after all?



always_alone said:


> Personally, the main reason I'm here at TAM is to practice saying what I think, both to learn what it actually is and to communicate more usefully with my SO.


Me too!



always_alone said:


> Indeed, yes, I agree with this. For the most part, women are actively discouraged from being true to our sexuality, and taught to hide it, malign it, sublimate it, or mould it into some pornstar ideal to please someone else's fantasy. Very difficult to sort through all of this to see what it is we actually want and feel.


Yes, this is sadly so true. My discoveries about my sexuality and how it works have been met with much judgment. Disappointingly, the judgment has largely come from women--including here on TAM. On the upside, once I took the plunge and allowed my husband to see how my desire works, he wasn't threatened or hurt, nor did he judge me in any way. He encouraged me to look deeper, and to show him ways that he can actively participate to keep my desire strong. He, like so many men who come to SIM seeking advice, wants a partner whose genuine desire for physical intimacy in the marriage matches his own. 

The ONLY way I could give that to him was to be honest with myself, and then trust him enough to share what I discovered with him.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

GettingIt said:


> But she was able to at least make a good show for you up until a year or so ago. So something HAS changed. Have you asked her what? I mean, if she was "faking" desire all along well enough to fool you, why stop now?


Nothing needs to "have changed" for this situation to develop. If something act, condition, or circumstance is sufficiently unsatisfying, your tolerance of it just depletes.

I am thinking in terms of my ex's CSA history, where you could distinctly notice tolerance of sex decreased over time and the effort to make it happen was higher. But, this could apply to any situation - an unpleasant boss, rude co-worker, etc. that you tolerate for some unspecified length of time until you just don't tolerate it any more.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

techmom said:


> When an LD says that he/she doesn't know why they don't want sex, they usually do but they don't want to hurt the HDs feelings.


Not sure about this. IMO it can happen because the LD person still gets something out of the relationship. The LD person knows the HD person may leave, so the excuses start. Anecdotally, you see a good number of posters (here and on other sites) whose spouses avoid sex but insist they remain faithful.

If avoiding hurt feelings was the goal, the acknowledgement of the lack of drive and willingness to go elsewhere would be a relief. But fear (of being alone, diminished lifestyle), shame (religious / cultural issues), wanting to see your kids every day, etc. can be powerful motivators.

In the end though, you are correct that the behavior is more important than the words expressed. The only difference my observation makes is it gives you some leverage to exert in saving your relationship, if you want to go there.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

always_alone said:


> This is why I'm concerned about this judgement that you're not being alpha enough. If she *knows* you're thinking of walking, she might just be preparing herself for the inevitable hurt and fallout from that. If that's the case, further destabilizing may make her more protective, not less.


Quite possibly. The solution (as always) is for the OP then to be his best genuine self. He needs to tell his wife this is a deal-breaker (and maybe sooner rather than later), do his best to be worth having, and leave it to her to act in a relationship-appropriate way or not.

Somehow, I see a distinction between not being a wimp that a lady will not respect, and being overtly alpha.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

DTO said:


> Nothing needs to "have changed" for this situation to develop. If something act, condition, or circumstance is sufficiently unsatisfying, your tolerance of it just depletes.
> 
> I am thinking in terms of my ex's CSA history, where you could distinctly notice tolerance of sex decreased over time and the effort to make it happen was higher. But, this could apply to any situation - an unpleasant boss, rude co-worker, etc. that you tolerate for some unspecified length of time *until you just don't tolerate it any more*.


Well, then that is what has changed. So, keeping with your example, Alex would like to know what she was tolerating about the marriage that she no can longer tolerate.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

i feel like a lot of this discussion regarding Alex's wife's personality is leaning toward a conclusion that there is some personal code of her's he could crack if he just did X, Y and Z.

That approach generally seems futile. Maybe I am missing the point of this discussion though.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

GI,

But that's not how it works in this context. Alex could do stuff that kills her desire for HIM - but if she's ok with her vibrator (I'm not being sarcastic) AND she values his fatherhood/friendship she will WANT to stay married - she simply won't want to have sex with him. 

There are a very large number of marriages (20++ percent) where the sexual refuser doesn't cheat and doesn't file for divorce because sex isn't that important to THEM. Those marriages last until death unless ended by the HD spouse. 





GettingIt said:


> Well, then that is what has changed. So, keeping with your example, Alex would like to know what she was tolerating about the marriage that she no can longer tolerate.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

GettingIt said:


> Well, then that is what has changed. So, keeping with your example, Alex would like to know what she was tolerating about the marriage that she no can longer tolerate.


I just re-read my post and realized that I was not expressing myself clearly. What I meant to say is nothing may have changed. Some pre-existing level of tolerance may have been breached, but I consider that a build-up rather than change.

So, to answer your question, maybe she can no longer tolerate the level of sexual activity (just a guess)? Maybe she did not really like it that way, did it to get someone, and now is stuck between a rock (expectations for activities she does not like) and a hard place (a partner whom she does not want to lose)?

Let me put it this way... If I go out and booze it up tonight, I can sleep it off tomorrow and be fine to do it again next weekend. If I do it for a week or two straight, I will be sick for a while but probably will recover. If I do it long enough without interruption, I will suffer serious consequences eventually.

Did I or the booze change whether I go on a bender for one night vs. one week vs. one month? No - all that happened is I hit upon a limit that had always been there. Moreover, it was my fault for getting to that point because I know that alcohol consumption to excess is bad and I should not imbibe if I am sensitive to it or prone to excessive consumption.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

always_alone said:


> Please consider that she is meeting many of his needs, and does express a desire to please him. She has simply turned down the pornstar performance a notch, and come clean about her own sexuality...
> 
> It depresses me to no end to see time and time again tis idea that women have to be delivering porn star performances, and as long as she does that, she's a-okay, supremely confident and caring. And soon as she isn't, she's selfish and doesn't give a damn about anyone else.


I dislike the term "porn star performance". What constitutes a porn star performance? It has a negative connotation. Many husbands requesting sex with enthusiasm and variety have been accused of wanting "porn stars".

That said, I am disappointed you said the above like it's no big deal. If she did it to get him, and now her true self is coming out, that is a bait-and-switch. No one made her put out a false front to attract any given guy.

All else being equal, a more sexual woman will succeed better in relationships - ditto for a more attractive woman. The same applies to a more attractive, smarter, or more affluent guy. Whether this is fair or not is irrelevant. I understand how LD people can be resentful over relationship difficulties, but that does not excuse promising what you cannot provide. Ever.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> GI,
> 
> But that's not how it works in this context. Alex could do stuff that kills her desire for HIM - but if she's ok with her vibrator (I'm not being sarcastic) AND she values his fatherhood/friendship she will WANT to stay married - she simply won't want to have sex with him.
> 
> There are a very large number of marriages (20++ percent) where the sexual refuser doesn't cheat and doesn't file for divorce because sex isn't that important to THEM. Those marriages last until death unless ended by the HD spouse.





DTO said:


> I just re-read my post and realized that I was not expressing myself clearly. What I meant to say is nothing may have changed. Some pre-existing level of tolerance may have been breached, but I consider that a build-up rather than change.
> 
> So, to answer your question, maybe she can no longer tolerate the level of sexual activity (just a guess)? Maybe she did not really like it that way, did it to get someone, and now is stuck between a rock (expectations for activities she does not like) and a hard place (a partner whom she does not want to lose)?
> 
> ...


When I said that "something" changed, I just meant that the shift her in her desire to please Alex didn't happen in a vacuum. Either she stopped being able to tolerate something that she could tolerate before, or that Alex was doing something to affect her desire, or she's experiencing a hormone shift, or she has come to be comfortable in her belief that Alex isn't going anywhere and she can stop working so hard. Really, the possibilities are endless. I wasn't saying that she knows what the change is and is lying about it, or that Alex is doing something wrong/differently. 

Sometimes it can take awhile to pinpoint what the issue is. I think that if BOTH Alex and his wife want to figure it out, they probably could. If not, then they could figure out a way for them both to be fulfilled and happy, even if the scenario isn't perfect for either one of them.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

always_alone said:


> Alexm, it's entirely possible that she is relationship-broken. At the very least, she does sound relationship-challenged.
> 
> So, first, let me clarify that my posts here are in no way intended to suggest that you have some kind of duty to fight the good fight, to put up with whatever indignities, to run yourself into the ground to help her heal. On that point, I agree with the other posters here that you absolutely do need to look after yourself.
> 
> ...


I am glad someone touched on this subject. I would suggest that not everyone is marriage material - at least not how marriage is typically conceived.

A guy I know has had a couple of marriages now where things get a little rough or he gets bored, and then he cheats. That is not marriage material.

My own ex wants someone who is less a husband and more a caretaker / sugar daddy (someone who is happy and will work hard just because she is around). That is not marriage material. 

Relationship-friendly people do not put up fronts to get someone to marry them, look for some strange when the marriage hits a rough patch, or expect their spouse to do most of the work. If you find out you are with one of those, you have to seriously consider moving on.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

GettingIt said:


> Sometimes it can take awhile to pinpoint what the issue is. I think that if BOTH Alex and his wife want to figure it out, they probably could. If not, then they could figure out a way for them both to be fulfilled and happy, even if the scenario isn't perfect for either one of them.


Maybe or maybe not. The problem I see with this scenario is the lack of regard. It is one thing for people to adapt as their spouses change over time. It is quite another to be told "I just did that because you liked it, but I'm not feeling like pretending any more, so you need to adapt."


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Dug,

One of your greatest strengths is that you know what's important. You don't over complicate life. 

I believe that life boils down to 3 things:
- time
- money
- love

In your post below it's pretty simple what happened.

You fell in love and then redirected an awful lot of your time/money from stuff you did for you - to stuff you did with JLD or for JLD. 


QUOTE=Duguesclin;11395034]MEM, I think you wrote this above based on this post:



I want to keep the record straight. I flew planes and gliders, but I did not own them. I just rented them by the hour. I did own a Mustang GT, but I bought it used.

But the part about my love for JLD, you got it exactly right . And well, I did own the bicycle .[/QUOTE]


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> i feel like a lot of this discussion regarding Alex's wife's personality is leaning toward a conclusion that there is some personal code of her's he could crack if he just did X, Y and Z.
> 
> That approach generally seems futile. Maybe I am missing the point of this discussion though.



That only opens up the gates for transactional sex and we all know how well it works in the long run...

To "crack the code" is only possible if she explains why she's acting this way and states what she wants from the relationship.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

QFT

There are thousands of different ways that we all choose to express a single, core sentiment in our marriages. At a glance, they don't look the same. But of you stare at them you realize they all the same.

I'm hurt/angry that you don't love me as much as I love you. 

Funny thing is, there is a much shorter list of ways that we express the flip side of that coin which is: I DONT love you as much as you love me. 

That said, I think the women on this thread have said it best. A2 isn't lying - she's conflicted.



QUOTE=DTO;11409754]Maybe or maybe not. The problem I see with this scenario is the lack of regard. It is one thing for people to adapt as their spouses change over time. It is quite another to be told "I just did that because you liked it, but I'm not feeling like pretending any more, so you need to adapt."[/QUOTE]


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

always_alone said:


> It would not surprise me one bit to learn that your wife is very much struggling with "settling down".
> 
> At the same time, *I think it's a mistake to assume that what she wants is someone new and different*. New sometimes offers the illusion that it will solve all problems, but it rarely does. It just puts them on layaway for a little while. It really is only when you get to truly know someone and trust them that you can even see these issues, let alone have the confidence to start digging deeper into them.
> 
> ...


Always...I hope you weren't referring to what I had said in your bolded statements above. Did you watch the Esther Perel video? The point isn't that we should take additional or new lovers when we hit the captivity boredom barrier, the point is to work with each other on creating the right conditions that combat captivity boredom. 

And the part about her not being aware...I'm going to guess that she is completely unaware. This isn't an insult, it is just based on the things Alex has reported her saying. She just doesn't sound like she has delved into her own sexuality mentally all that much or at all...at least not out loud or with a partner. She may be very aware of what she enjoys sexually within her own mind, but with a partner, I highly doubt that she understands the dynamic that is causing her to lose her desire.

But MOST women in that position really don't understand that dynamic either.

Again, did you watch the Tedtalk...it isn't about adding sex partners to the mix at all.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

FW,

This is VERY relevant to what is happening. 

M2 is a bit ADD. So she goes out for coffee and often returns 3-4 hours later. Walks in the door profusely apologizing. 

The only time (in the last few years) I contacted her during this type scenario was when she left at 2, we had a date planned and it got to be 8 PM. Wasn't mad. Just worried. She doesn't see well at night and mostly avoids driving after dark. 

She must have apologized five times. I kept saying the same thing: relax, I'm not mad, just wanted to make sure you were ok. 

Captivity and sex are uneasy bedfellows...

Somehow I was born knowing that. 





Faithful Wife said:


> Always...I hope you weren't referring to what I had said in your bolded statements above. Did you watch the Esther Perel video? The point isn't that we should take additional or new lovers when we hit the captivity boredom barrier, the point is to work with each other on creating the right conditions that combat captivity boredom.
> 
> And the part about her not being aware...I'm going to guess that she is completely unaware. This isn't an insult, it is just based on the things Alex has reported her saying. She just doesn't sound like she has delved into her own sexuality mentally all that much or at all...at least not out loud or with a partner. She may be very aware of what she enjoys sexually within her own mind, but with a partner, I highly doubt that she understands the dynamic that is causing her to lose her desire.
> 
> ...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> Alexm, it's entirely possible that she is relationship-broken. At the very least, she does sound relationship-challenged.
> 
> So, first, let me clarify that my posts here are in no way intended to suggest that you have some kind of duty to fight the good fight, to put up with whatever indignities, to run yourself into the ground to help her heal. On that point, I agree with the other posters here that you absolutely do need to look after yourself.
> 
> ...


I agree with much of what you're saying, but I hesitate to agree about the bolded part.

The thing is, and it's hard to get this across through writing (ie. you'd have to know her and hear her side of things) is that she's just not interested in sex or being sexual. I don't believe that any of this has to do with sex or sexuality in the slightest - it's just the most obvious manifestation of whatever it is that's at issue here.

The rest of your reply is very much it - relationship challenged (not broken, I don't think). The routine of things, and knowing that "this is it". The thing is, she likes "it", yet as you say, it's human nature to, I guess, want more. I struggle with that sometimes, too.

I think most of us get bored or complacent in life, and the trick is to not let it ingrain itself into our relationship. The nearest target is our spouse, and they are the ones who feel the effects of complacency.

I will tell you, this is exactly what started happening with my ex wife. For her, it was not staying put in one place for any longer than a couple of years. We married in our early/mid 20's, bought a home almost right away, and in the next 7 years we lived in or owned 5 houses, and lived in 3 different cities. Each move was at her request, sometimes on a whim. We once moved clear across the country to the West Coast because she liked it out there. I quit my career (!) to do so. Within 3 months, she was home sick and we came back to the East Coast.

The irony is that she seems to be doing the same thing with her current husband. I have heard they have moved several times, in the 6 or so years they have been together, including back to North America for a period of several months before heading back to Europe.

My current wife has no interest in moving, thankfully. So there's that. She is certainly capable of settling down and settling in, I just think it's the boredom of every day life which is being manifested in our relationship, primarily through having the same routine daily, weekly and monthly. The thing is, she doesn't want to change it. She's happy in her job, even though better opportunities have come up, for example.

So perhaps she's surreptitiously treating our marriage like she treats her job - it's solid, secure, unexciting, and therefore she's reluctant to change anything about it.

I rather think she LIKES the routine of things...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

MEM11363 said:


> Best way to reinforce the behavior you want is to make it a positive experience for her.
> 
> When M2 is doing something fun - checks in with me: I tell her I'm glad she's having fun and that we (me and the kids are too).
> 
> ...


As I said, she just got a cell phone, and she has coincidentally gone away this weekend with a friend (not the same one as last time!).

Her friend texted me yesterday evening to let me know they arrived and said my wife's phone was dead. (which it probably was, it's my old phone and the battery is lucky to last a day at this point). I said "cool, thanks" and that was it.

Several hours later, my wife texted me (!!!) just to say hi. She texted with me for about 1/2 an hour before I told her to stop texting, you're out with your friend, go have fun.

So that's a far cry from the last time she went away for the weekend (when she had no phone, and I texted her friend to make sure they arrived safely).


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

DTO said:


> Maybe or maybe not. The problem I see with this scenario is the lack of regard. It is one thing for people to adapt as their spouses change over time. It is quite another to be told "I just did that because you liked it, but I'm not feeling like pretending any more, so you need to adapt."


This is more or less how the past year or so has gone down, around here.

Although she did not say all of those things together, in one sentence, she has said them individually over the course of the past little while, perhaps not realizing exactly what she was saying.

So a few months ago, I called her on it. Basically said this was a bait and switch scenario (something she had never heard of within a relationship before).

My wife is a smart woman. She doesn't try to pull the wool over my eyes, or anybody else's. She's a straight shooter.

Thus, she did not deny this one bit. When faced with the reality of what she had been saying to me, she accepted responsibility for it. At the same time, she denied that this was on purpose, nor was able to give any reason(s) for how this happened. But she did agree that it's certainly what it appears to be.

My goal was not to make her feel bad, but I know I did. She was very upset that I felt this way (ie. bait and switched). She did not know that it was a "thing".

I've mentioned on TAM before that my wife is generally lacking empathy. I don't think there's anything "wrong" with her, she's just that type of personality - acts without thinking. In the past (and including this scenario) once confronted with the issue, she "gets it" and does not repeat that particular thing again.

For those of you who have/had kids - and I am NOT comparing my wife to a child - we all know that they learn the hard way sometimes. Parents need to tell their children not to do this, that, or the other thing and provide a reason for it. "Timmy, hitting people isn't acceptable when you're angry" etc.

I find my wife is similar to that when it comes to marriage. She knows right from wrong, obviously, but these things are unintentional, simply because nobody's really taught her (parents) or told her (previous relationships). As I am a communicator (and it appears the first man she's been with who has been) she's hearing a whole lot of things she's likely never heard before, if that makes sense. It's challenging, but she's grown a LOT since we started dating, and she's obviously very open to growing, learning, etc. Thank god.

Were I not able to communicate with her, and/or if she wasn't interested in learning/growing, this relationship likely would never have gotten off the ground.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

A grown person in a number of relationships and unaware of bait and switch? Count me a sceptic...


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

alexm said:


> The thing is, she doesn't want to change it. She's happy in her job, even though better opportunities have come up, for example.
> 
> So perhaps she's surreptitiously treating our marriage like she treats her job - it's solid, secure, unexciting, and therefore she's reluctant to change anything about it.
> 
> I rather think she LIKES the routine of things...


What is the main reason people pass up better (more money, more prestige) jobs? It is because they do not want to work that hard. They are getting what they want now and don't see the extra effort as worthwhile.

I think this is a very apt comparison (her marriage to her job). Because, she likely is doing the exact same thing to you. IMO, stalling on meeting your needs is easier than telling you it will not go back to where it was and facing the consequences.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

john117 said:


> A grown person in a number of relationships and unaware of bait and switch? Count me a sceptic...


In terms of it being a "thing" that people consciously do, yes.

In terms of her doing exactly that, though subconsciously, yes.

The reality is, she has had it done to her (as have we all, likely). Her needs being met vanishing after some time, for example. Just as many men pull the same thing as women do, but instead of sex being removed, it's holding hands and buying flowers. 6 of one, as they say.

My point was to illustrate how she reacted when confronted with the fact that she is doing what she had said previous relationship partners had done to her - dried up as far as meeting basic needs.

Her reaction was not one of denial, but rather "holy ****, you're right", hence my post about her needing a swift kick in the pants when it comes to empathetic behavior. The point is, she needs these things pointed out to her, constantly, but the reaction is almost always the same - "holy ****, you're right, and I'm sorry". That is good, no?


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

alexm said:


> *I think most of us get bored or complacent in life, and the trick is to not let it ingrain itself into our relationship. The nearest target is our spouse, and they are the ones who feel the effects of complacency.*
> 
> I will tell you, this is exactly what started happening with my ex wife. *For her, it was not staying put in one place for any longer than a couple of years. We married in our early/mid 20's, bought a home almost right away, and in the next 7 years we lived in or owned 5 houses, and lived in 3 different cities. Each move was at her request, sometimes on a whim.* We once moved clear across the country to the West Coast because she liked it out there. I quit my career (!) to do so. Within 3 months, she was home sick and we came back to the East Coast.
> 
> ...


Personalities can be so very very different..when I hear of someone like your ex, it just seems they are never satisfied.. (surely you felt this !)..they have to keep running...seeking some utopia that is elusive to them.. so they move again... and again.. I would be pulling my hair out of my head to live a life like that... ..

I can't relate to this ...when you've found this special person , the feelings are mutual...you brighten each others days...somehow the mundane still has a sparkle.. it's what we make of it (flirt, tease, do something out of the ordinary, take a different drive home, add to your traditions)... if a couple is working towards the same goals, seeing that progress...whatever it may be...(home ownership, a vacation to ____ , kids doing well -off to college)... you can't help but feel "very blessed" with each mile stone... for all that it's taken for you to GET THERE...hand in hand....you then can look back to that mountain climb/reminisce ... when you've reached the top...I look at this as Mid life).... the view is breathtaking....the wind is blowing in your hair... now to REST.. make your mark here.. and ENJOY .....but that climb is Busy.. it is exciting because you are still REACHING for something... everyone's something is different... of course. 

For me...boredom is being alone, not having someone to share my life with.. I would not enjoy being single or hanging with GF's all the time.. even my kids.. I'd get BORED.. but with Him by my side.. holding my hand.. the simple things in life are still BIG somehow..

Just throwing another view in here.. to contrast so much of what has been shared... 

Myself and H are the type that if you visited us in the 90's, we'd likely still be living in the same house, have the same phone #, he'd probably still be working the same job 30 yrs later.. I put a post on Fb yesterday that I bought my 1st android cell phone (I'm moving up in the world!) as I've been carrying around a dinosaur analog for the last 15 yrs ... and I was perfectly happy! Felt good I had a cell, didn't need all those extras.. I had my laptop at home!! 

I bought  Mating in Captivity: Unlocking Erotic Intelligence a few yrs back...it seemed contrary to how I was FEELING.. I kept saying to myself... "This isn't true of me at all ... or my Husband.. what is wrong with [email protected]#"...

*Always alone said* in post #102 "


> *Stability, constancy, availability, support. These are not inevitable desire killers for women. Indeed they may provide exactly what's needed for the spark*.


 Yes.. this is how I feel.. strongly....







...

I feel, depending on the couple themselves, some can have a whole different dynamic.. this article (below) would capture ours.. 

A while back I sought articles to explain Passion/ Romance that sustains 20 + years.. 

Brain Study Reveals Secrets of Staying Madly in Love
What brain scans teach us about intense long-term passionate love 

Pieces of the article here...



> Intense romantic love typifies symptoms (common to being newly in love) including:
> 
> *1.* Craving for union
> *2*. Focused attention
> ...
























Faithful Wife said:


> *I know that my H is less interested in me if I am around all the time, expecting to hang out with him. That's why the standard GAL is so important in most relationships.*
> 
> So I really do have a life, and I live it without apology. I put on the calendar the things I'm going to do, but I also do things on a whim with no notice. I don't let him count on when I'll be home or which nights I am free. I basically have it set up so that he has to ask me for a date if he wants to spend an evening with me. Because even if we're both home for the evening, I will not plan on spending it with him unless we both say so...I will instead plan on spending it with myself, doing my own hobbies and living my own life.


 What is the standard GAL mean ?? .. myself & H are so very different over this.... he would feel less loved if I didn't want to spend time with him.. and I love that he feels this way! .... 

... I care so much about our time together, I schedule everyone around his time off.. and make sure I have everything done so our nights are free.. in case something comes up.. ... we have our free time of course... but even when we get on the computers, we're often in the same room.... we just enjoy being near each other...we'd never leave each other hanging, or we'd worry something happened to the other , it just wouldn't be us at all.. 

I don't know where your wife fits Alex... just wanted to share another marital dynamic.. 

To understand yourself...who YOU ARE, what you deeply crave for satisfaction... as well learning what makes her feel EXCITED unto you, seeking to get closer to you emotionally ...when is the last time you took off for a romantic vacation I ask ?? .. 

I wish you well ...I've seen many of your posts.. I do hope your patience and persistence leads you & her to a deeper more satisfying place....You have been a very patient loving husband.. I hope she recognizes this...and holds on tight.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

DTO said:


> Quite possibly. The solution (as always) is for the OP then to be his best genuine self.


I agree. One thought that has occurred to me more than once in this thread is this idea of "trying things" to "solve the problem"

It reminds me very much of back in the day when I was a braty teenager, the principal of the school adopting all of these personae (disciplinarian, understanding cousellor, etc) in the efforts to "fix" me. Even as a naive and stupid young thing, I saw right through these efforts, and none of it had the desired results.

Obviously.

And while a love relationship is much different than this, I'm willing to bet I'd go a bit off the wall if I sensed my partner was playing games to make me "behave."

Being your genuine self may not get you want you want, but it does at least makes it easier to look yourself in the mirror and get through your day.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Faithful Wife said:


> Always...I hope you weren't referring to what I had said in your bolded statements above. Did you watch the Esther Perel video? The point isn't that we should take additional or new lovers when we hit the captivity boredom barrier, the point is to work with each other on creating the right conditions that combat captivity boredom.
> 
> And the part about her not being aware...I'm going to guess that she is completely unaware. This isn't an insult, it is just based on the things Alex has reported her saying. She just doesn't sound like she has delved into her own sexuality mentally all that much or at all...at least not out loud or with a partner. She may be very aware of what she enjoys sexually within her own mind, but with a partner, I highly doubt that she understands the dynamic that is causing her to lose her desire.
> 
> ...


No, FW, I wasn't referencing your comments at all, but the immediate go-to from Alex:. Either she can settle or she needs a steady stream of new guys.

What I was trying to say was very much in accordance with your advice, and that is that it isn't a simple black/white either/or situation.

Just because I am uncomfortable being vulnerable, being a good partner, building a relationship does not at all mean I need a string of new guys to keep me interested. For me, indeed, it's quite the reverse. I've zero interest in superficial "best behaviour", want-you-to-like-me dates.

The mating in captivity (lol) advice seems sound, but I also think we have to remember that it isn't captivity. You choose the relationship and can unlock cage and walk away at any time. 

We chose our relationships, and we always have options. I believe this is a significant source of many of our issues --this little voice inside that says "what the he'll am I doing? What if...?"


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> Her reaction was not one of denial, but rather "holy ****, you're right", hence my post about her needing a swift kick in the pants when it comes to empathetic behavior. The point is, she needs these things pointed out to her, constantly, but the reaction is almost always the same - "holy ****, you're right, and I'm sorry". That is good, no?


So, Alex, question: Is it really that big a problem for you to be the communicator in the relationship, and the one who reminds her of your perspective and needs?

Because it sounds to me like if you are willing to keep having these conversations, and asking her to do things for you when you're feeling neglected , you'll pretty much get what you want. Is that so bad?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

always_alone said:


> So, Alex, question: Is it really that big a problem for you to be the communicator in the relationship, and the one who reminds her of your perspective and needs?
> 
> Because it sounds to me like if you are willing to keep having these conversations, and asking her to do things for you when you're feeling neglected , you'll pretty much get what you want. Is that so bad?


yes, he doesn't want to be asking all the time... it gets a bit tiresome and boring after a while... why doesn't she get it? Sounds to me like she is on a different planet...


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

In Absentia said:


> *yes, he doesn't want to be asking all the time... it gets a bit tiresome and boring after a while... why doesn't she get it? Sounds to me like she is on a different planet.*..


I'd feel the same ..it's deeper than BORING.. it's empty....its doesn't quench one's longing.. 

This sort of thing would continue to eat at someone...till they become numb ...none of us wants to feel like a broken record ...like we are needy - then on the other hand feeling like we have to re -program the other person /their weekly reminder so we have something coming back to us....

Love, affection, Desire.. it's nature is *to give* from a place within....because it does so much for us and it has it's bountiful return (or should ).... that's the way it was intended to be....

Taken from The Gifts of Imperfection - Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are- Author Brene Brown, known as the "shame researcher" says...



> "After collecting thousands of stories , I'm willing to call this a FACT: *A deep sense of love and belonging is an irreducible need of all women, men and children*. We are biologically, cognitively, physically, and spiritually wired to love , to be loved, and to belong.
> 
> When these needs are not met, we don't function as we were meant to. We break. We fall apart. We NUMB...We ache...We hurt others. We get sick.
> 
> There are certainly other causes of illness, numbing and hurt, but the absence of love and belonging will always lead to suffering.


There is a section about NUMBING...she spend several hundred interviews trying to better understand the consequences of NUMBING & how "taking the edge off" behaviors is related to addiction...this is what she learned...



> *1*. Most of us engage in behaviors (consciously or not) that help us to numb and take the edge of off vulnerability, pain, and discomfort.
> 
> *2*. Addiction can be described as chronically & compulsively numbing and taking the edge off of feelings..
> 
> *3.* We cannot selectively numb emotions.. When we numb the painful emotions, we also numb the positive emotions.


Maybe she is doing these things and she is stuck somehow.. that's a wonderful book, by the way.. 

I think it's important to understand (for everyone of us) what our emotional deal breakers are.. there are those who could live with this sort of thing.. and those who COULD NOT..it would cause us to feel empty and dead inside, ever longing for more and heart broken as we know it will never be but we see it alive in other couples.. 

I'm not one much to care about material things but when it comes to love, feeling my partner "gets Me', is giving because it does something for HIM even... Damn I say.. that's important to some of us!


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

john117 said:


> A grown person in a number of relationships and unaware of bait and switch? Count me a sceptic...


Me too. 

And truthfully, whether or not she is doing it on purpose does not matter. What matters is: she knows she is doing it, and he is unhappy with it. What does she do from this point?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> So, Alex, question: Is it really that big a problem for you to be the communicator in the relationship, and the one who reminds her of your perspective and needs?
> 
> Because it sounds to me like if you are willing to keep having these conversations, and asking her to do things for you when you're feeling neglected , you'll pretty much get what you want. Is that so bad?


It's exhausting.

I'm willing to have these conversations and not give up on her, because she loves me. She doesn't love me fully and completely, but I hope she will someday.

Whatever it is that's blocking her from full love isn't related to me - I don't think. Nothing she's said about her past life points to her ever being any different.

She has come leaps and bounds in the past 6 years, so she's capable and clearly willing to learn and grow.

My ability to continue doing this is not finite, however. I'll know when to walk away when I get there - IF I get there. I have a lot of confidence that it won't reach that point, judging by her growth over these last several years.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

So the overall trajectory is positive?

That is not what I have been getting from your posts.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,

1. You are smart, committed and have a good heart
2. You are honest and sincere

It's also true that you communicate in a very non linear manner. 

For example you say: She just forgets to have sex with me, it's inconsiderate. And she doesn't want to initiate. 

But when I really listen, that is absolutely NOT the issue. The real issue is very simple and far more painful: She is perfectly comfortable rejecting you most of the time you initiate. And even when she implies that she's ok having sex she quickly 'falls asleep' or engages in some other intentional avoidance behavior. 

So you seem to do something that is very harmful to your cause. You describe what you 'wish' was happening. Not what really Is happening. 

And to be super clear on this point. You aren't being intentionally inaccurate. You simply have a very hard time clearly stating what is happening and why it feels bad. 

She's been treating you worse and worse. 

But because you want to stay married you then say: she's getting better and better. 

The reason I'm pointing this out is that - this type of elliptical communication - doesn't create a good marriage. 

I'll add one last point at risk of rubbing you fully raw (not my goal).

You don't seem to fully understand the polarity of some of your conversations. For example some conversations are:
- All about you 
Others are
- All about A2
And some are a mix. 

The 'I'll never cheat on you' was described as 'all about her'. 

But it was really all about your need to hear her say: I don't want you to sleep with anyone else. 

Now it's ok to ask for reassurance if you really need it - though I honestly think that A2 dislikes having to provide it. 

But it's generally a bad idea to present a conversation in a way that makes it seem that it's you reassuring A2, when in fact it's just the opposite. 

I do think you should do IC. Hey it helped me a LOT. Everyone has areas they could improve. 

Because you need to learn how to say: A2, this is the fourth time in a row you've rejected me. Its hurtful, and it's causing me to feel as if you want me here as a co-parent and friend, but not as a husband. 

You keep hinting at the idea of reaching a breaking point and leaving. But that's a sledgehammer approach. 

You have a short, direct conversation about the rejection, and when nothing happens you ramp the focus on YOU way up. That means some weekends away and a lot less focus on what A2 wants. 

Because this isn't really about porn star sex. This is about indifference. 




farsidejunky said:


> So the overall trajectory is positive?
> 
> That is not what I have been getting from your posts.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

well, she is like she is... I don't think Alex can force her to change, whatever he does. He's been trying long enough and, although there have been some improvements, she is still far away from what he wants. I'm not sure she'll ever get there. My wife is the same. She is not stupid, but she is very selfish and it's her first. Yes, she loves me, apparently, but she has a funny way of showing it to me. I've tried very hard too. Unfortunately, some people are wired differently and you either accept it or walk. I know this is not what Alex wants, but, if I can say it brutally, to me it's only matter of time.

I've been there... you will detach, eventually.

P.S. To be brutally honest again: if my wife told me she's been having sex with me only to please me and she couldn't really care less, I wouldn't be here. That's one of the most hurtful things a partner can tell you... after "I never really loved you", obviously...  Half of your marriage has been taken away from you, in one instant, and you'll never get it back. This is very sad.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

farsidejunky said:


> So the overall trajectory is positive?
> 
> That is not what I have been getting from your posts.


As far as learning to love, trust, honesty, etc. yes. It's difficult to describe, and it's hard to do so without making her out to be a monster or at least very broken.

My theory all along is that she's never known how to be in a relationship, and never been in a healthy one. Ever. What she DOES know how to do is be independent. She's good at that.

The issue with us was balance, and that's what's come a long way. She's learned, and is still learning, to not confuse wanting to be with me with losing her independence.

The irony is that, while learning and figuring this out, (especially learning to trust) she's gone too far. For example, telling me 18 months ago that she's really not that into sex and that it's more or less for my sake, and the sake of the relationship. Again, new territory for her to be so honest with someone.

When I told her how that made me feel, she was horrified at herself. In other words, she's learning balance. Honesty is great and all, but there are some things that are better left unsaid, this having been one. She did not realize that her honesty on that subject would have such a negative effect. Rather, she felt that I would appreciate her honesty and accept this, because I love her. Things that, in past relationships, she would have felt uncomfortable saying to someone.

I also learned, through this, that I set the table for it... I made her feel TOO comfortable and that I'd accept anything from her. So we have BOTH learned from this.

It's a give and take. We are compatible in so many ways that I don't discuss here. You guys only hear the negative, as with most threads from anybody.

Where we are not compatible (but are getting ever so closer to being so) is in how we act and react within relationships. We were on opposite ends of the spectrum - me being much too patient and accepting, her being much too independent and untrusting.

Whereas I spent too much time in a relationship that should have been over and done with 2 or 3 years in, I ended up spending a decade and a half. Conversely, she would bail at the first sign of trouble, usually, whether real or imagined. The few relationships she spent more than a few months in, she stuck it out, even though she knew she shouldn't. Simply because she recognized her own patterns of impatience, among other things.

The difference between our relationship and the ones we've previously had are night and day. It's not perfect, no. But I am someone she actually WANTS to be with and has been willing to work with, and on herself, to help maintain. Had we met 10 years ago, it's highly likely she would have bailed 6 months in for some reason or another.

Where I have changed since past relationships is that I'm speaking my mind, communicating better, and not being accepting of the status quo. My ex wife learned early on that I didn't put up much of a fight with things, and this allowed her to run amock, and also have no respect for me. I was the stereotypical "yes dear" husband.

So, we are both learning from each other, and we both see that and have a healthy respect as a result. She has taught me to have a backbone, whereas I have taught her to relax and trust.

We are learning from each other, not just her from me. It's very quid pro quo around here, you guys just hear the one side


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

alexm said:


> The irony is that, while learning and figuring this out, (especially learning to trust) she's gone too far. For example, telling me 18 months ago that she's really not that into sex and that it's more or less for my sake, and the sake of the relationship. Again, new territory for her to be so honest with someone.
> 
> When I told her how that made me feel, she was horrified at herself. In other words, she's learning balance. Honesty is great and all, but there are some things that are better left unsaid, this having been one. She did not realize that her honesty on that subject would have such a negative effect. Rather, she felt that I would appreciate her honesty and accept this, because I love her. Things that, in past relationships, she would have felt uncomfortable saying to someone.


When it comes to how she feels about you, there is _nothing_ better left unsaid. NOTHING.

Dude.

Hypothetically, what if there was this problem she has with you that is drastically affecting her attraction to you? What if that one thing is now off limits for her to communicate because you are not strong enough to handle it?

She was _right_ to tell you. And she was _right_ to expect you to _appreciate her honesty_, even if it hurt. And you say she had not done it in previous relationships??? She reached out to you in honesty; took a risk; got out of her comfort zone in an effort to communicate a problem to you! And your response? 

"I'm sorry, I simply can't handle that."

W... T... F...

Transparency is what your relationship lacks. And the quoted passage is the enemy of transparency. 

If it is the truth, and coming from a place of love, then it should _never_ be off limits.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

In Absentia said:


> well, she is like she is... I don't think Alex can force her to change, whatever he does. He's been trying long enough and, although there have been some improvements, she is still far away from what he wants. I'm not sure she'll ever get there. My wife is the same. She is not stupid, but she is very selfish and it's her first. Yes, she loves me, apparently, but she has a funny way of showing it to me. I've tried very hard too. Unfortunately, some people are wired differently and you either accept it or walk. I know this is not what Alex wants, but, if I can say it brutally, to me it's only matter of time.
> 
> I've been there... you will detach, eventually.
> 
> P.S. To be brutally honest again: if my wife told me she's been having sex with me only to please me and she couldn't really care less, I wouldn't be here. That's one of the most hurtful things a partner can tell you... after "I never really loved you", obviously...  Half of your marriage has been taken away from you, in one instant, and you'll never get it back. This is very sad.


No. This is so far from the truth that I cannot possibly disagree more. 

Alex is not ready to handle true transparency. And based on this post, neither are you.

Nothing has been taken away from Alex. Women do not communicate like men for the most part. I would bet money she was trying to communicate a problem to him, and how it made her feel. And his response was to tell her he could not handle it. 

So why on earth would she come back to him? In her mind, Alex would rather hear the excuses rather than the truth.

We have to be strong enough to handle the things said by a woman in the hottest of anger, or deepest level of hurt, in order to see the scared little girl behind the emotions that needs soothing. 

That is strength. That is love. That is being her rock.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> We have to be strong enough to handle the things said by a woman in the hottest of anger, or deepest level of hurt, in order to see the scared little girl behind the emotions that needs soothing.
> 
> That is strength. That is love. That is being her rock.


Truth.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> That is strength. That is love. That is being her rock.


One little detail... she _forgot_ to tell him at the beginning of the relationship. So, where's the real transparency? That's why he can't handle it... he now knows he's been living a lie...


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

In Absentia said:


> One little detail... she _forgot_ to tell him at the beginning of the relationship. So, where's the real transparency? That's why he can't handle it... he now knows he's been living a lie...


If I believed everything my wife ever said to me, we would have been divorced long ago.

People like to say that you need to watch their actions, not their words, to see where their heart lies. Yet time and time again we have men here posting about how much negative words impacted them.

So which is it? Do we only believe their words when they hurt?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> If I believed everything my wife ever said to me, we would have been divorced long ago.
> 
> People like to say that you need to watch their actions, not their words, to see where their heart lies. Yet time and time again we have men here posting about how much negative words impacted them.
> 
> So which is it? Do we only believe their words when they hurt?


I'm not sure what kind of relationship you have with your wife... I believe what my wife tells me, because she is a genuine person and she would never tells me stuff she doesn't mean, not even in an argument...

She might be economical with the truth  but when she speaks I pay attention to it... so does Alex. I don't really follow you. He is entitled to be hurt, imo...


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> When it comes to how she feels about you, there is _nothing_ better left unsaid. NOTHING.


This part I totally agree with



farsidejunky said:


> She was _right_ to tell you. And she was _right_ to expect you to _appreciate her honesty_, even if it hurt. And you say she had not done it in previous relationships??? She reached out to you in honesty; took a risk; got out of her comfort zone in an effort to communicate a problem to you! And your response?
> 
> "I'm sorry, I simply can't handle that."
> 
> ...


This part I only partially agree with. Yes, he should appreciate her honesty and tell her so, but I don't believe he's obligated to accept what she's telling him with a smile and a nod. What she told him completely undermined how he believed she felt for him. It's very important that he knew the truth, but he's completely entitled to consider it a dealbreaker.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

In Absentia said:


> I'm not sure what kind of relationship you have with your wife... I believe what my wife tells me, because she is a genuine person and she would never tells me stuff she doesn't mean, not even in an argument...
> 
> She might be economical with the truth  but when she speaks I pay attention to it... so does Alex. I don't really follow you. He is entitled to be hurt, imo...


Any time a female levies us with a sh!t test, what they are asking of us or telling us is not what they are actually saying.

For example, when my wife gets moody, and I try to get to the emotion of it through active listening, she will get snippy and try to derail the technique. It is not deliberate; it is emotional communication, which has absolutely zero resemblance to rational communication. 

Translation?

Are you strong enough to handle me?

Six or seven months ago, the answer to that question was a resounding "no". But I have gotten stronger, and now the answer is "yes". 

So even if she says to me, in the heat of an argument, that she hates me (which she has on several occasions, mostly prior to our current dynamic), she doesn't actually hate me. But she is frustrated with how I am supporting (or not supporting) her. That is what is required in being the rock of the relationship.

And Alex's wife has some very similar traits. My bet is that until he is strong enough to handle her, their dynamic will never change.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I like farside's style. I think underneath it there has to be a woman who is worth putting up with all that drama. Some women are worth it, some aren't.

I do think it is incumbent upon the man to first master the situation to the best of his ability before he makes this judgment though.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> Any time a female levies us with a sh!t test, what they are asking of us or telling us is not what they are actually saying.
> 
> For example, when my wife gets moody, and I try to get to the emotion of it through active listening, she will get snippy and try to derail the technique. It is not deliberate; it is emotional communication, which has absolutely zero resemblance to rational communication.
> 
> ...


I wouldn't handle it at all... to me, it's a dealbreaker... this is not a sh!t test. I would leave, especially because he has no children.

My wife doesn't do tests with me.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Fozzy said:


> Yes, he should appreciate her honesty and tell her so, but I don't believe he's obligated to accept what he's telling her with a smile and a nod.


Please show me where I said, or insinuated, that he should rejoice, laugh, smile, or even enjoy this type of information.

This stuff hurts, but the sooner you know, the sooner you can do something about it.



Fozzy said:


> What she told him completely undermined how he believed she felt for him.


Yep. And he has to be strong enough to recognize it for what it is, and ask open ended questions to find out not only the what, but the why; to blow through the sh!t tests that will come when he tries to peel back that onion; to emotionally communicate with her and arrive at the truth.

But to tell her that hurt his feelings? He does not see the risk she took in being honest with him. And he rewarded her by emotionally smacking her hand when she reached it out to him.

What are the questions behind the questions?



Fozzy said:


> It's very important that he knew the truth, but he's completely entitled to consider it a dealbreaker.


Yep. Only he knows what he can or cannot take. 

But he is here to save his marriage. So the advice I provide will be through that prism.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

In Absentia said:


> I wouldn't handle it at all... to me, it's a dealbreaker... this is not a sh!t test. I would leave, especially because he has no children.
> 
> My wife doesn't do tests with me.


Then she is either incredibly rare or you are naive.

I do not know nearly enough about your dynamic to be able to tell you which one, so please don't think I am insinuating the latter.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> When it comes to how she feels about you, there is _nothing_ better left unsaid. NOTHING.
> 
> Dude.
> 
> ...


I agree that she was right to tell him. He wanted to know the truth about what was going on with her, and she gave it to him. And considering his mistaken assumptions and preconceptions about who she is and what she's about, these are truths he needed to hear. Hurtful they may be, but at least they allow him to make more informed choices.

In all fairness to Alex, though, it isn't easy to have your assumptions shattered, and it isn't always clear what one should do in the fall-out. Just because someone is conflicted about how to respond doesn't mean they can't handle the transparency.

It means they have a decision to make.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> In all fairness to Alex, though, it isn't easy to have your assumptions shattered, and it isn't always clear what one should do in the fall-out. Just because someone is conflicted about how to respond doesn't mean they can't handle the transparency.
> 
> It means they have a decision to make.


I would agree with this if it happened yesterday, last week, or even last month.

This happened 18 months ago...

And he does not appear to be conflicted in any way as to whether or not he should leave the marriage.

This means he has to elicit change in himself if he expects to see change in his dynamic.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> I like farside's style. I think underneath it there has to be a woman who is worth putting up with all that drama. Some women are worth it, some aren't.
> 
> I do think it is incumbent upon the man to first master the situation to the best of his ability before he makes this judgment though.


This is a great point, Anon. When I was not strong enough, I would have told you my wife was far from worth it. I was very close to ending my marriage. 

After my growth, I have trouble seeing how I could ever leave her. 

She is _so worth it_.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> I would agree with this if it happened yesterday, last week, or even last month.
> 
> This happened 18 months ago...
> 
> And he does not appear to be conflicted in any way as to whether or not he should leave the marriage.


18 months is nothing, really, to go from thinking your wife is supremely sexual and confident to finding out she sees herself as asexual, and to work through the fallout from that.

For many it might be an immediate dealbreaker, but assuming it's not, there is the ongoing question of what that means for the relationship, whether she wants to change, how they choose to compromise, and so on.

I do not for a second believe this idea that women just spew emotional crap that they don't mean or believe, just to see if he is strong enough to "handle" her. And if she really were like that, my advice would be unequivocal: run a mile, jump a stile.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> Then she is either incredibly rare or you are naive.
> 
> I do not know nearly enough about your dynamic to be able to tell you which one, so please don't think I am insinuating the latter.


She is rare...


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> Please show me where I said, or insinuated, that he should rejoice, laugh, smile, or even enjoy this type of information.
> 
> This stuff hurts, but the sooner you know, the sooner you can do something about it.
> 
> ...


So why should she not be appreciative of his honesty about his feelings? Should marital transparency be a one-way mirror?


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> I do not for a second believe this idea that women just spew emotional crap that they don't mean or believe, just to see if he is strong enough to "handle" her. And if she really were like that, my advice would be unequivocal: run a mile, jump a stile.


It happened with high frequency until I figured it out. It has not happened again since September. 

This site is filled with men who describe their wives in exactly the same manner. 

The common thread I see is these men do not have the respect of their wives.

Your profile does not indicate your gender, but for some reason I had it in my head you were female. If so, have you ever had a sustained period of time in which you did not respect your husband? If so, how did it impact how you treated him?

If I am mistaken on your gender, my sincerest apologies.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> yes, he doesn't want to be asking all the time... it gets a bit tiresome and boring after a while... why doesn't she get it? Sounds to me like she is on a different planet...


Yes, no doubt it's tiresome. But the same question can be asked of Alex: why doesn't he get that sex just isn't as important to her, so her natural inclination will be to treat it that way?

You can't just change these things overnight (assuming you can change them at all). If she has always seen herself as different sexually, she isn't just going to snap to attention because she's learned that he wants more. It will be a process, no matter what.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Fozzy said:


> So why should she not be appreciative of his honesty about his feelings? Should marital transparency be a one-way mirror?


This is a fair point, and yes, he should communicate how he feels, but a few things need to be taken into account.

Is he reassuring her that he appreciates the transparency, no matter how much it hurts, before he explains his feelings?

Is she strong enough to hear it?

Is she strong enough to hear it?

The latter question is asked twice for a reason. Sometimes we have to sit on things when we feel our partner is not ready for the truth. This is the price of leadership.

Now ask me why I think Alex's wife is sitting on information...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

always_alone said:


> 18 months is nothing, really, to go from thinking your wife is supremely sexual and confident to finding out she sees herself as asexual, and to work through the fallout from that.
> 
> For many it might be an immediate dealbreaker, but assuming it's not, there is the ongoing question of what that means for the relationship, whether she wants to change, how they choose to compromise, and so on.
> 
> I do not for a second believe this idea that women just spew emotional crap that they don't mean or believe, just to see if he is strong enough to "handle" her. And if she really were like that, my advice would be unequivocal: run a mile, jump a stile.


I think many women, like many men, mostly react to their partners in the context of a relationship.

So if you have two people just reacting to one another and you start to head in a bad direction, you get a negative feedback loop.

In order to break that loop, one partner needs to stop reacting and just start ACTING in a consistently positive way. This is leadership.

I believe it is more common in our culture for the man to assume this role, if for nothing else due to the fact that women are not attracted to subservient men, but men do not typically have the same lack of attraction for women who assume this role. 

People are individuals, so this is not universal, but if you are applying game theory and looking for an optimal strategy, this is a logical place to start.

I also believe that when a particular equilibrium has been established within a relationship, even if unhealthy, there will be drama when one person destablizes the equilibrium. So it is reasonable to expect sh-t tests and so forth when you start acting differently even if it is better.

You need to have the strength to withstand these tests to show the other person that you are for real and allow them to have the confidence to follow you.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> I like farside's style. I think underneath it there has to be a woman who is worth putting up with all that drama. Some women are worth it, some aren't.
> 
> 
> 
> I do think it is incumbent upon the man to first master the situation to the best of his ability before he makes this judgment though.



Get old enough to need cataract surgery as I just found out I do and no woman is worth the drama. 

Peace of mind and comfortable being alone plus my list of favorite stuff >>> drama.

And I'm the most extrovert person I know...


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> This is a fair point, and yes, he should communicate how he feels, but a few things need to be taken into account.
> 
> Is he reassuring her that he appreciates the transparency, no matter how much it hurts, before he explains his feelings?
> 
> ...



Should Alex's wife have withheld the information out of concern that he wasn't strong enough to handle it? To me, it's a little patronizing and disrespectful to withhold info because you don't think your spouse can handle the truth. Transparency hurts, yeah, but I think it only works if it goes both ways.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> It's exhausting.
> 
> I'm willing to have these conversations and not give up on her, because she loves me. She doesn't love me fully and completely, but I hope she will someday.


This is just a little bit heartbreaking, Alex.

Can I ask you a rude question? Why? Why does it matter that she love you fully and completely?

I can't help but wonder if your answer to this question holds the answer to a few others.

Many independent women struggle very much with vulnerability, trust, love, openness. It doesn't come naturally. From the very beginning, I've had one foot out the door, and an expectation that it was only a matter of time before the relationship failed for one reason or another. 

For some strange reason, though, he seemed to think I was still worth loving --and I have to say it really was his willingness to be vulnerable to me in this way that showed me a different way of being. Still not one that I am altogether good at being, but nonetheless a different way of seeing and understanding myself than I ever had before.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> This is just a little bit heartbreaking, Alex.
> 
> Can I ask you a rude question? Why? Why does it matter that she love you fully and completely?
> 
> ...


It's because love and the need to be loved are separate things. Some people have one or the other, and some people have both.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Fozzy said:


> Should Alex's wife have withheld the information out of concern that he wasn't strong enough to handle it? To me, it's a little patronizing and disrespectful to withhold info because you don't think your spouse can handle the truth. Transparency hurts, yeah, but I think it only works if it goes both ways.


Should she? No.

Would she? ...

I agree that it can patronizing, but it doesn't make it _untrue_.

For it to be effective, it must go both ways. But in order for it to go both ways, both partners must foster an environment where transparency is welcome no matter how much it hurts, and to display the strength to not only _accept_ the criticism, but actually _do something about it_.

Another enemy of transparency is apathy.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Many independent women struggle very much with vulnerability, trust, love, openness. It doesn't come naturally. From the very beginning, I've had one foot out the door, and an expectation that it was only a matter of time before the relationship failed for one reason or another.
> 
> For some strange reason, though, he seemed to think I was still worth loving --and I have to say it really was his willingness to be vulnerable to me in this way that showed me a different way of being. Still not one that I am altogether good at being, but nonetheless a different way of seeing and understanding myself than I ever had before.


This post describes my wife to a tee, and is a perfect illustration of leadership in transparency. 

And despite all of the challenges, the sh!t tests, and the rough couple of years we had, the gem that she is underneath all of the hurt and pain from earlier in her life make her worth the struggle.

Thank you for this, Always_Alone.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

YES x 1000

But if your spouse keeps proving themselves unable to handle the truth - what then? 




Fozzy said:


> Should Alex's wife have withheld the information out of concern that he wasn't strong enough to handle it? To me, it's a little patronizing and disrespectful to withhold info because you don't think your spouse can handle the truth. Transparency hurts, yeah, but I think it only works if it goes both ways.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Then you either accept it, or leave.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> So if you have two people just reacting to one another and you start to head in a bad direction, you get a negative feedback loop.
> 
> In order to break that loop, one partner needs to stop reacting and just start ACTING in a consistently positive way. This is leadership.


Leadership, schmeadership.

Yes, you are absolutely right that different people bring out different qualities in us, and it's very easy to fall into to a negative pattern of hurt and reaction that only makes a problem worse.

But getting out of that rut isn't about leadership or following; it's about awareness, of paying attention when you push someone's buttons and of how and why you react when they push yours.

Pulling the whole "she should be subservient" and "follow her husband's lead" will absolutely not work on any woman who values her independence. Indeed --I'd venture that this would most likely make her inclined to think that he's not right for her. 

And that if subservient is what he likes, he really should just go somewhere else.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Nailed it... 

I'm looking at my wife's idea of independence, alone in the USA for college, has to work fast food jobs to pay college, lived in the wrong side of the tracks after growing up in a palace, smart enough to get a doctorate in math, six figures... Such methods don't work there. 

If one's idea of independent or strong willed women is Lucille Ball I have news for y'all...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Always,

I think maybe this is a trigger for you. 

I won't speak for the other guys - just myself. 

This isn't about control or dominance. More about setting a good example and letting the chips fall. 

In some marriages that is more about the actual mechanics of life: doing what you say you will do more reliably. 

In others it's more about the emotional Ecosystem. 

I do think it's incredibly manipulative to say you are thinking about eventually leaving - when you really aren't. 





always_alone said:


> Leadership, schmeadership.
> 
> Yes, you are absolutely right that different people bring out different qualities in us, and it's very easy to fall into to a negative pattern of hurt and reaction that only makes a problem worse.
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> I do think it's incredibly manipulative to say you are thinking about eventually leaving - when you really aren't.



As in, MMSLP, NMMNG, 180, et al?


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

A leader inspires. A bully dominates.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> But getting out of that rut isn't about leadership or following; it's about awareness, of paying attention when you push someone's buttons and of how and why you react when they push yours.
> 
> Pulling the whole "she should be subservient" and "follow her husband's lead" will absolutely not work on any woman who values her independence. Indeed --I'd venture that this would most likely make her inclined to think that he's not right for her.
> 
> And that if subservient is what he likes, he really should just go somewhere else.


I can only speak to my situation regarding your post, Always. But I would tell you that when I got my sh!t together, suddenly I had a wife (who is fiercely independent, feels controlled at the slightest bit of her feeling subservient to me whether it is actually there or not) was suddenly demure, and not so independent.

Make no mistake, I am leading some things in our family, just as she is leading some things in our family. But when it comes to the relationship dynamics, she _needs_ me to lead. It is not subservience per se, nor is that what I am seeking out. As a matter of fact, those who know me really well know that I am a reluctant leader, and only do so out of necessity and love for her. She needs me to lead her because that is when she is happiest, which in turn makes her more attentive to my needs.

I would be foolish not to step up and accept the challenge.

So understand my approach is not about making her subservient to me. It is about me taking the approach that brings out the very best in her, and her in me.

This may not be you, but in my experience, the ones that I have met that are fiercely independent are normally using the guise of independence as armor to guard what they are hiding inside of their hearts: fear.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Fozzy said:


> A leader inspires. A bully dominates.


Do you believe this to be true within the context of a dom/sub relationship as well?



...standing back and sweating the can of worms I may have just opened...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

We seem to have totally different interpretations of those books. 

My understanding is they advise reaching a point where love is the primary motivator, not need. 

So they encourage independence. 

But I know Athol Kay, and he most definitely does NOT advocate threatening to leave when you have no intention of doing so. 






john117 said:


> As in, MMSLP, NMMNG, 180, et al?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

In Absentia said:


> One little detail... she _forgot_ to tell him at the beginning of the relationship. So, where's the real transparency? That's why he can't handle it... he now knows he's been living a lie...


Bingo. This.

I've said here, as well as to her face, that had she been her true self in regards to sex and sexuality, I would have stuck around, and happily. She knows I love her for many, MANY more reasons than just great sex. It appears as though she felt this was necessary to keep me around for the first ~5 years. 

Then she got comfortable (thanks to me, I guess) and felt she could tell me the "truth".

The irony is that she did so out of insecurity. Insecurity that I believe I helped to diminish to some degree, at least to the point of feeling it's a-okay to tell me it was all a ruse based on her previous insecurities.

So tell me, what did I do wrong, in helping my wife to feel more secure about herself, at least as far as our relationship is concerned???


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

farsidejunky said:


> I would agree with this if it happened yesterday, last week, or even last month.
> 
> This happened 18 months ago...
> 
> ...





farsidejunky said:


> This is a great point, Anon. When I was not strong enough, I would have told you my wife was far from worth it. I was very close to ending my marriage.
> 
> After my growth, I have trouble seeing how I could ever leave her.
> 
> She is _so worth it_.


On one hand, you are telling me that, because it was 18 months ago, I've been hanging on too long. On the other, you are telling us that your wife is worth it.

My wife is worth it, in my eyes. And that is why I am taking the time and making the effort to do exactly as you are saying, and apparently exactly what you did within your own marriage.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

alexm said:


> And this is why I'm here, in this thread, looking for help and answers.


Yet you are still looking for what is wrong with her, not what is wrong with you.

This is illustrated every time you ignore or rationalize away things that are suggested you do in favor of trying to unlock her puzzle.

Blossom Leigh has a great saying: keep your eyes on your own paper.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> This is just a little bit heartbreaking, Alex.
> 
> Can I ask you a rude question? Why? Why does it matter that she love you fully and completely?
> 
> ...


I think you've answered your own question 

I'm not looking for perfection, or even to be loved the way I love her. I just know she's capable of so much more.

Although it's not my place in life to change her, it is my place in marriage to help her grow (and her, me). If she had ever been adamant about not growing, I would have been long gone. She knows she's got some growing to do, and she is accepting of my encouragement to do so.

Therefore, to cut and run, currently, would break my heart AND hers.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

farsidejunky said:


> This post describes my wife to a tee, and is a perfect illustration of leadership in transparency.
> 
> And despite all of the challenges, the sh!t tests, and the rough couple of years we had, the gem that she is underneath all of the hurt and pain from earlier in her life make her worth the struggle.
> 
> Thank you for this, Always_Alone.


I mean this nicely, so don't read into my words too much, but:

why are you insinuating that my situation isn't worth the effort?

I get the feeling that you read my posts and decide that I am so far away from the right path that there's no turning back, thus I should just give up and try again somewhere else? That I'm in over my head, or perhaps too weak to deal with a woman like her.

Am I reading into that wrong?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

You're damned right it's a trigger for me.

And I dare you to find one woman who truly values her autonomy and independence who doesn't feel this way, at least some of the time.

And that is exactly why this oft-repeated call for a "leader" man and a "follower" woman is going to cause more problems than it solves for a great many people. 

Being true to yourself and letting the chips fall where they may is wise and good advice. But this has nothing to do with leadership and everything to do with letting go.

Leadership is when one person takes over the decision-making, the planning, the direction to be taken. And so is always at least partly about control and making things happen the way you want.

Loving someone is not necessarily about leadership; it can equally be standing back and letting them be themselves

(And yes, you are right: it would be terribly manipulative to tell someone you are leaving when you have zero intention of doing so. Assuming you are directing this comment at me, let me just say that this is exactly why I would never do that. I don't threaten, name-call, or game-play. 

But I do know exactly where I will go (and yes, I will be the one to move), what I will take with me (almost nothing), and how my life will carry forward should our relationship prove no longer tenable. I'm not joking around or looking for his (or anyone's) reassurance when I say I have one foot out the door. I mean it.

Although I will add that I have mellowed considerably over the last 17 years, and so no longer as hardline as I may come off in some of my posts)


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

alexm said:


> On one hand, you are telling me that, because it was 18 months ago, I've been hanging on too long. On the other, you are telling us that your wife is worth it.
> 
> My wife is worth it, in my eyes. And that is why I am taking the time and making the effort to do exactly as you are saying, and apparently exactly what you did within your own marriage.


I should have been more specific, and I apologize. The point was made that you were reeling from the revelation that she did not enjoy sex and only did it to please you, not her. 

I was illustrating that anyone who is still reeling over that revelation 18 months later has much larger problems. That was my point.

It is clear you have made a decision to make this work, and for that I applaud you. This is certainly not the easier path.

But you are not doing exactly what I did, or anywhere close. You are still treating this situation like she is the problem. From where I sit, she has a problem, but not the problem.

But since it appears the only paths you are truly willing to explore involve focusing on her, I hope for both of your sake that you are right and I am wrong.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

alexm said:


> I mean this nicely, so don't read into my words too much, but:
> 
> why are you insinuating that my situation isn't worth the effort?
> 
> ...


I apologize because this is the opposite of what I meant, so I am clearly not communicating my points well at all.

I believe you believe she is worth it. That is all that matters, and I do not believe you should give up. I believe you should focus on _you_, not her.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Leadership, schmeadership.
> 
> Yes, you are absolutely right that different people bring out different qualities in us, and it's very easy to fall into to a negative pattern of hurt and reaction that only makes a problem worse.
> 
> ...


My definition of leadership is basically the same as what you are saying. 

I call it "leadership" because you are the one that is choosing to break the negative cycle. You are sticking your neck out with no guarantee of return. In fact, you stick your neck out with the expecation that you will get wacked repeatedly for doing so.

The reason I think it works better when a man does it is because most women, if they have the courage to stick their neck out while their men remain stuck in resentment mode- will just end up resenting their men further for being weaker than them.

Men are more apt to want to "rescue" their women. Women generally don't want to rescue men.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

It's amazing how diverse the understanding of what it means to be a "leader" in a relationship is. 

I recommend that anyone choosing to post about it be clear on the assumptions they are operating under about the concept. 

Always Alone, your definition most certainly is not how I understand it or use it. The intent to make a partner subservient is not, in my world, a quality of a good leader. 

As is often the case on TAM, folks sometimes seem much farther apart in their ideas and values than they actually are as a result of this sort of schism.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> My definition of leadership is basically the same as what you are saying.
> 
> *I call it "leadership" because you are the one that is choosing to break the negative cycle.* You are sticking your neck out with no guarantee of return. In fact, you stick your neck out with the expecation that you will get wacked repeatedly for doing so.


:iagree:

QFT

It's got nothing to do with alternative D/s lifestyles (as most people outside the lifestyle understand them, anyway). It's got to do with how much work you are willing to do on yourself with no guarantee that it will improve your relationship--only the guarantee that you'll be a better individual for it.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> You're damned right it's a trigger for me.
> 
> And I dare you to find one woman who truly values her autonomy and independence who doesn't feel this way, at least some of the time.


Of course. This is the price of interdependence, which requires sacrifice of at least _some_ independence to attain.



always_alone said:


> And that is exactly why this oft-repeated call for a "leader" man and a "follower" woman is going to cause more problems than it solves for a great many people.
> 
> Being true to yourself and letting the chips fall where they may is wise and good advice. But this has nothing to do with leadership and everything to do with letting go.
> 
> Leadership is when one person takes over the decision-making, the planning, the direction to be taken. And so is always at least partly about control and making things happen the way you want.


What you are describing is selfishness, not leadership. Leaders do not need to control every aspect of every thing. They provide the environment for excellence which allows their subordinates to flourish. Great leaders inspire. Great leaders make you want to be a better you. Great leaders are selfless. Great leaders are also not perfect. You speak of leaders as if you expect perfection from them when all men and women fall short of the grace and glory of God. I am sorry that you only see the negative aspect of control in leadership when there is so much more to it.



always_alone said:


> But I do know exactly where I will go (and yes, I will be the one to move), what I will take with me (almost nothing), and how my life will carry forward should our relationship prove no longer tenable. I'm not joking around or looking for his (or anyone's) reassurance when I say I have one foot out the door. I mean it.
> 
> Although I will add that I have mellowed considerably over the last 17 years, and so no longer as hardline as I may come off in some of my posts)


This must be a hard way to live, Always_Alone. Quite frankly it must be _exhausting_. If you truly have one foot out the door, you can't even count on the consistency of next year, next week, or even tomorrow. I don't know how you do it.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> We seem to have totally different interpretations of those books.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm talking from the practical point of view In many cultures, a lot of the staples of the 180 are a sign that the non LD is either preparing to bail, or has something on the side, and that helps the LD "adjust"....

I would have a very hard time believing that love instead of fear is the main driver... But I could be wrong.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> This may not be you, but in my experience, the ones that I have met that are fiercely independent are normally using the guise of independence as armor to guard what they are hiding inside of their hearts: fear.


Oh, yes, I know what you mean here. But this is not at all what I would characterize as a strong independent woman. Rather this is someone who wants the image of independence, not the reality of it, and is happy to swap out their cold protective walls for some warm loving arms.

I am curious, though: What did you have to do to get your sh1t together, to be strong enough for her to relax?


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Always,

The comment about a bluff to leave was absolutely not directed at you. It was about the OP. 

I believe that you say what you mean, and mean what you say. 

Read the stuff below - and tell me what parts if any - spike your blood pressure. Because I wonder if we have a different working definition of some key terms. 


As far as leadership goes I believe a few things are worth mentioning. It seems to me that in most healthy relationships:
- The partners recognize each other's respective strengths 
- They mostly align their decision making process accordingly

In areas where they are both good at something, they collaborate. In areas where one is clearly more knowledgable/experienced that person leads and the other follows. This does NOT imply the leader is more important or loves the follower less. 

That said, if we want to bring out each other's best, sometimes we flip the script. 

M2 and I were in a store. She/we wanted a certain outcome. 

M2: Will you talk to the manager
MEM: Absolutely. I'm going to handle it like this: 'explanation of approach'. 
M2: That's perfect
MEM: You really are very good at this, I don't think you give yourself credit
M2: You're better 
MEM: I will gladly drive (awkward pause) if I get hit by a truck tomorrow who's going to teach the kids how to do this?
M2: Look both ways before you cross
MEM: (laughing and shaking my head) Always 

Long silence 

M2: I'll drive 
MEM: Let me get the manager

And yes - she nailed it. 

---------
So - a couple quick things. 
1. There was no coercion only faith and support
2. If she had said: 'can you drive the conversation?' Instead of 'I'll drive the conversation', I would have done so without further discussion. 

So what was I doing? 

Helping bring out M2's best. Setting her up to collaborate and/or maybe lead the next negotiation. 

That said, the thing I did and the way I did it is what I consider to be 'leadership 101'. 




QUOTE=always_alone;11423066]You're damned right it's a trigger for me.

And I dare you to find one woman who truly values her autonomy and independence who doesn't feel this way, at least some of the time.

And that is exactly why this oft-repeated call for a "leader" man and a "follower" woman is going to cause more problems than it solves for a great many people. 

Being true to yourself and letting the chips fall where they may is wise and good advice. But this has nothing to do with leadership and everything to do with letting go.

Leadership is when one person takes over the decision-making, the planning, the direction to be taken. And so is always at least partly about control and making things happen the way you want.

Loving someone is not necessarily about leadership; it can equally be standing back and letting them be themselves

(And yes, you are right: it would be terribly manipulative to tell someone you are leaving when you have zero intention of doing so. Assuming you are directing this comment at me, let me just say that this is exactly why I would never do that. I don't threaten, name-call, or game-play. 

But I do know exactly where I will go (and yes, I will be the one to move), what I will take with me (almost nothing), and how my life will carry forward should our relationship prove no longer tenable. I'm not joking around or looking for his (or anyone's) reassurance when I say I have one foot out the door. I mean it.

Although I will add that I have mellowed considerably over the last 17 years, and so no longer as hardline as I may come off in some of my posts)[/QUOTE]


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> Always Alone, your definition most certainly is not how I understand it or use it. The intent to make a partner subservient is not, in my world, a quality of a good leader.


Okay, so dish then. What does leadership look like to you?

From my perspective, taking control over your own actions is just that. I do it all the time, but it doesn’t make me a leader of anyone -- or anyone else a follower of me.

And tbh, the idea of "leading" a relationship strikes me as quite counterintuitive. I wouldn't say I know its direction or fate anymore than he does.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

I was fiercely independent for the first 23 years of our relationship. I protected myself because I didn't trust him to protect me. I had one foot out the door, I had plan B, I didn't need him and I chafed at any thought that he could control me either indirectly or not. 

I thought I knew what intimacy meant, but I was wrong. What I have now took a huge emotional risk, and it didn't happen over night. It's still getting there, day by day. The deeper we go, the more amazing it becomes. I didn't think anyone could know me on this level because I never believed I'd be so foolish as to tear down the barriers beyond which lay my very selfhood. 

It takes two active participants to do what my husband and I have done, so it's not like a husband can somehow trick his wife into this brand of intimacy. He can, however, open the door. She might choose to walk through.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Oh, yes, I know what you mean here. But this is not at all what I would characterize as a strong independent woman. Rather this is someone who wants the image of independence, not the reality of it, and is happy to swap out their cold protective walls for some warm loving arms.
> 
> I am curious, though: What did you have to do to get your sh1t together, to be strong enough for her to relax?


I had to stop some behaviors:

*Alcohol use
*Porn use
*Nice Guy, passive/aggressive tendencies
*Find what made me happy again
*Get rid of my resentment towards her
*Toughen up

We were locked in cycle where I would be hurt by something small, I would go passive aggressive, drink and seek out porn as self medication and escapes, all because I was too focused on her validation because of my incessant need for it. 

I had to start some behaviors:

*Treating her like she mattered
*Actually listening to her
*Using active listening when she got snotty
*Showing her the discrepancy between her self image and my image of her through actions and words
*Treating her like she was my lover again and taking the lead on us doing things together
*Honoring my commitments in the household

Just the other day, she was dressing up for us to go out. I told her she looked beautiful, because, well, she did. She quickly looked away. I told her to look me in the eye. She got a little bit snarky, so I took her hands, looked her in the eye, gently told her to be quiet, look at me and for just a moment to look at herself through my eyes rather than her own so she would see just how beautiful she is (thank you Mister G, I am not all original... lol). She melted. Her melting melted me. It was a great night.

She had a lot of work to do as well, and she did it. But most of it was related to CSA in her past. And she stepped up like a champ. However, she was not willing to do it on her own. I basically ambushed her in counseling, deliberately triggering her in front of the counselor, to get her to reveal it. I _knew_ it was there, but she would not out it. So I gambled, knowing it would be a short term loss for a potential long term gain for her, whether we remained together or not, because at that time we were very touch-and-go. But it came out, and she is still going to therapy to deal with it, but will not go without me present. She wants me to lean on when she is revisiting it. 

Always_Alone, the last two paragraphs are what I envision when I think of leadership. It had nothing to do with control, and everything to do with doing everything I can to help her become a better her.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I think you are caught up in the idea that a leader requires a follower.

I don't think it works like this. The leader moves forward. The follower can follow, but the leader is moving forward regardless of whether another follows.

The leader is only a leader because he moves first and chooses his path.

The follower can choose to follow or not.

There is no coercion.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Okay, so dish then. What does leadership look like to you?
> 
> From my perspective, *taking control over your own actions is just that. * I do it all the time, but it doesn’t make me a leader of anyone -- or anyone else a follower of me.


I very much think that this is a quality of a leader. 



always_alone said:


> And tbh, the idea of "leading" a relationship strikes me as quite counterintuitive. I wouldn't say I know its direction or fate anymore than he does.


There is no destination. Only the journey. I know that sounds corny, but there it is.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

This is why I teach the college freshman and Far teaches the PhD candidates. 



QUOTE=farsidejunky;11423658]I had to stop some behaviors:

*Alcohol use
*Porn use
*Nice Guy, passive/aggressive tendencies
*Find what made me happy again
*Get rid of my resentment towards her
*Toughen up

We were locked in cycle where I would be hurt by something small, I would go passive aggressive, drink and seek out porn as self medication and escapes, all because I was too focused on her validation because of my incessant need for it. 

I had to start some behaviors:

*Treating her like she mattered
*Actually listening to her
*Using active listening when she got snotty
*Showing her the discrepancy between her self image and my image of her through actions and words
*Treating her like she was my lover again and taking the lead on us doing things together
*Honoring my commitments in the household

Just the other day, she was dressing up for us to go out. I told her she looked beautiful, because, well, she did. She quickly looked away. I told her to look me in the eye. She got a little bit snarky, so I took her hands, looked her in the eye, gently told her to be quiet, look at me and for just a moment to look at herself through my eyes rather than her own so she would see just how beautiful she is (thank you Mister G, I am not all original... lol). She melted. Her melting melted me. It was a great night.

She had a lot of work to do as well, and she did it. But most of it was related to CSA in her past. And she stepped up like a champ. However, she was not willing to do it on her own. I basically ambushed her in counseling, deliberately triggering her in front of the counselor, to get her to reveal it. I _knew_ it was there, but she would not out it. So I gambled, knowing it would be a short term loss for a potential long term gain for her, whether we remained together or not, because at that time we were very touch-and-go. But it came out, and she is still going to therapy to deal with it, but will not go without me present. She wants me to lean on when she is revisiting it. 

Always_Alone, the last two paragraphs are what I envision when I think of leadership. It had nothing to do with control, and everything to do with doing everything I can to help her become a better her.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I think someone should mine this thread for fortune cookie production purposes.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> I think someone should mine this thread for fortune cookie production purposes.


That's fine, but all rights revert the the original.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

MEM11363 said:


> This is why I teach the college freshman and Far teaches the PhD candidates.


Thanks, but it was just under a year ago that you (among others) were putting the screws to me... Deservedly so...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Always,
> Read the stuff below - and tell me what parts if any - spike your blood pressure. Because I wonder if we have a different working definition of some key terms.


MEM, none of what you wrote made my blood boil. Maybe we are working from different definitions. 

What you and some of the other posters have written about here doesn't strike me as being about leadership at all. Supportive, yes. A partnership and collaboration, to be sure. Concerned and looking out for your partner, absolutely. Being the best person you can be, totally.

But leadership? Tell, what does it mean to have 2 leaders in a relationship?

And re comment about threatening to leave: I got the impression that OP was conveying that he is reaching his breaking point, not making idle threats. Wouldn't this be an example of leadership? Choosing your path, but giving her the opportunity to improve herself? Why do you see this situation as so very different from your own?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> There is no destination. Only the journey. I know that sounds corny, but there it is.


Okay, but unless you are wandering around aimlessly and bashing into trees, there is probably at least a direction that you are headed in. 

Who chooses that? And if it is both of you, who is the leader?


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Choosing your path, but giving her the opportunity to improve herself? Why do you see this situation as so very different from your own?


It is leadership to a degree, if the OP were actually doing this. Instead, he is doing a combination of consistently communicating his needs and identifying behaviors in her that he wishes to see change. Leaders focus on improving themselves first. 

He is seeking her affirmation, both overtly and covertly, through such things as "what if" conversations about him stepping out when he has no intention to do so. Leaders mean and do what they say, and they do not ask for permission to change direction towards what they believe is right. Alex is still stuck in this affirmation loop with his wife.


----------



## BWBill (Jan 30, 2013)

_Leadership is when one person takes over the decision-making, the planning, the direction to be taken. And so is always at least partly about control and making things happen the way you want.
_


I disagree. Real leadership is more about finding common purpose and getting others to actively participate in achieving that purpose. Often that means realizing and agreeing to what the rest of the group needs or desires, even if it is not what the leader initially envisioned.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Okay, but unless you are wandering around aimlessly and bashing into trees, there is probably at least *a direction that you are headed in. *


Happiness. Maximum understanding of one another's deepest emotional needs. Complete emotional honesty. Deep intimacy--the kind where you feel you lose any barriers between two selves and sort of merge into one. Again, it sounds so corny when you put it into words. 




always_alone said:


> Who chooses that? And if it is both of you, who is the leader?


Yeah, we both chose that. But my husband's and my path to that destination is not going to look exactly like the next couple's path to that same destination. However, for any couple who chooses this destination, the path must include a tremendous amount of trust, and the ability to be highly vulnerable, and the willingness to risk great hurt.

Oh, and wandering around aimlessly and bashing into trees is DEFINITELY part of the path.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Always,

Perhaps your experience with leadership has been bad. 

Good leadership: 
- Targets the best overall outcome for the group/family
- Is based on both skill and trust (the trust is that your goals are more selfless than selfish)
- Gets active buy in from the participants 
- Seeks input on the plan and execution 

It isn't coercive. And it isn't Positional. Meaning it isn't based on the presence / absence of a penis or a title (husband, Sr. VP)

That example I gave - I was driving and then I wanted M2 to learn to drive that particular course. So I casually described the 'map'/navigation plan. She liked it. Then I got her to take the wheel. 

I drove the entire situation. 

When it's done right, the follower doesn't feel 'bossed around' or manhandled. They aren't resentful. Instead they are happy with the result and their contribution to it. 

Did I have a hidden agenda? Nope. Was I careful to sequence the discussion in a way to minimize friction - hell yes. 

Did I get M2 to teach the kids how it's done at dinner that night? You betcha. 

Is M2 just a bit more confident, more skilled and a bit less dependent on me for the experience? 

Hell yes. 

And does that scare me in the least? 

Nope. 

Does the exact same thing happen in reverse sometimes - meaning M2 has a plan and drives? Sure does. 

As to the question: overall who is the leader? 

All I can say to that is: If a situation is anywhere close to a 50-50 in terms of it's importance to the two of us - we do it her way. 

So if your looking for an overall answer - M2 gets the outcome she wants way more than 50% of the time. 

We DO fight at times about our financial support for the children. Its super painful. That's life. 





always_alone said:


> MEM, none of what you wrote made my blood boil. Maybe we are working from different definitions.
> 
> What you and some of the other posters have written about here doesn't strike me as being about leadership at all. Supportive, yes. A partnership and collaboration, to be sure. Concerned and looking out for your partner, absolutely. Being the best person you can be, totally.
> 
> ...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

For all this stuff to work (I call them mind games, anyway), you need a wife who is prepared to go along with it, or someone who can be "manipulate" to react to a different behaviour, who can't see why someone is changing... of course you can get more assertive, you can lead, whatever. But after being married many years, the reason - to an intelligent woman - is very transparent. It just doesn't work. 

Anyway. She married you for what you were. You don't need to change (unless you've become a total d!ckhead - pardon my French). If you don't like me anymore, you can say so and leave.

Women need to be lead and need to be independent... make your mind up! This is the big soup of nonsense.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Absentia,

This is REALLY painful to read. And sad. 





In Absentia said:


> For all this stuff to work (I call them mind games, anyway), you need a wife who is prepared to go along with it, or someone who can be "manipulate" to react to a different behaviour, who can't see why someone is changing... of course you can get more assertive, you can lead, whatever. But after being married many years, the reason - to an intelligent woman - is very transparent. It just doesn't work.
> 
> Anyway. She married you for what you were. You don't need to change (unless you've become a total d!ckhead - pardon my French). If you don't like me anymore, you can say so and leave.
> 
> Women need to be lead and need to be independent... make your mind up! This is the big soup of nonsense.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Reality is painful. 

I read the first ten pages of DayOne's thread and there were a number of issues that he "took ownership" and "addressed". Porn addiction, alcohol, anger.... 

This here poster has none of that (well, I did look at the Kim Kardashian nudes once expecting the Internet to break but all praise u-verse it stayed put)... Are we falling into the pop psychology of success with a small and self selected sample size, a mild case of the issue without ever having faced the loony tunes crowd, AND little repeatability or scaleability?? 

Leadership is doing. Having a vision. But Steve Jobs did all that and by all definitions he was a j3rk. A lot of CEOs are "leaders" yet their employees, customers, and suppliers vilify them. 

In three months I will get a preview of what "growing old with loony" looks like. I'm having cataract surgery on the left eye (allergic reaction from exposure to Kim's behind?) and will depend on my wife to drive me home and help with the accursed eye drops for a couple weeks. I helped her for a month when she had her fingers operated two years ago, no appreciation. In fact I fully expect near nothing from her. Bare minimum Nurse Starfish on duty.... And I'm expected to "improve myself" to get my bedpan changed?


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

john117 said:


> And I'm expected to "improve myself" to get my bedpan changed?


Nothing is "expected" of you. You do what you want to do. 

Alex should do what HE wants to do, too. 

Self improvement only works if one approaches it as such and not as something you do in order to "get" something in return from somebody else. 

If you don't think you're going to be a better person at the end of the process, then f*ck the process.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Let's say in three months and two weeks Nurse Starfish does exactly as expected, that is, nearly nothing. Never mind Orderly John did the right thing and helped her out on her time of need.

John did it without expecting a thing, but he, like most people, has not been canonized by the sanctioning body so he is not a happy camper when his turn of need arises and gets zilch.

Then, when Nurse Starfish has the operation in her other hand he can reciprocate or take the high road and help again...

If he does, he has taken the high road to self improvement and marked himself a monumental sucker at the same time. If he follows the Nurse's approach and do near nothing, he is a no good a-hole. 

Life in general is transactional, whether we want to accept it or not.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Whether we like it or not, there's a value associated with anything we do. We derive a benefit from "doing good", be it coach little league, volunteer, donate old stuff to goodwill, etcetera. This feelgoodism has a great value. So we are getting something back. 

When our kids do well it makes us look good too (we feel better about them and us). That increases our self worth so, gain.

At the same time our mind keeps score. That's how the mind minimizes bad things and maximizes good things. It is quite simple actually. 

If one is lucky enough to live in an idealized environment then more power to them. The rest of the proletariat tends to always look for what's in it for them.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I am still feeling this out but I think the deal is you get satisfaction from being consistent with your own values.

So if you think it is the right thing to do to help your wife when she has surgery, you do that. You do it only because you think it is right, not because you are setting up for some future transaction.

Ultimately, unless you are Jesus or Buddha, I do think you reach a point where you conclude that certain people in your life are toxic and your values don't require endless giving into a black hole.

The problem is getting outside of yourself enough to have a clear view. It is easy to see flaws in others and to give yourself the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

I am seeing a lot of wisdom from you, Anon. I hope it is serving you well in your journey as well.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> Ultimately, unless you are Jesus or Buddha, I do think you reach a point where you conclude that certain people in your life are toxic and your values don't require endless giving into a black hole.



Which is pretty much my point.....

Except it's reciprocity, not toxicity. The mind does keep score.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

john117 said:


> Let's say in three months and two weeks Nurse Starfish does exactly as expected, that is, nearly nothing. Never mind Orderly John did the right thing and helped her out on her time of need.
> 
> John did it without expecting a thing, but he, like most people, has not been canonized by the sanctioning body so he is not a happy camper when his turn of need arises and gets zilch.
> 
> ...


Fixed your post.

John, your wife has a personality disorder. You simply can't compare what you're going through with anyone else, except someone whose spouse has a personality disorder. Sorry for your luck, but it just is not the same.

It makes me sad for you, that you have never experienced this type of stuff from a non-disordered perspective. But since your only perspective is from inside a disordered relationship with a disordered person, you don't know what it is like to have ANY hope of change. That super duper sucks. But please don't try to compare, it is apples and oranges, except in another PD relationship.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

alexm said:


> Bingo. This.
> 
> I've said here, as well as to her face, that had she been her true self in regards to sex and sexuality, I would have stuck around, and happily. She knows I love her for many, MANY more reasons than just great sex. It appears as though she felt this was necessary to keep me around for the first ~5 years.
> 
> ...


I am going to caution that you are going to get a wide variety of answers because you left this so wide open. On the one hand, you might have people say her drive is unlikely to have dropped so far so fast on its own, or that you have no right to expect spectacular sex and need to learn to live with less.

On the other hand, some will say that you are fine in this, because people can and do fake attraction and sexuality to land someone and you should not have to accept it as a potential cost of being in a relationship.

In the end, you are the only one who can decide what advice fits best for you. If you have good reason to believe she really did fake this and is coming clean because she feels comfortable telling you now, then you can feel good about providing a place where she feels heard even if the outcome is not what she would have wanted.

ETA: Similarly, if you feel good that you are taking the road that is the best for you right now, then be happy with that. The key here is that you must generally be happy now or hopeful for the future, and not just acting out of fear that you cannot do better or blinding yourself to the reality of your situation.

Where you will always get pushback (and rightly so) is that your posts make it look like you are waffling or avoiding the problem. Saying that she loves you, or that you are actively working to improve your relationship and taking it how it goes, are positive signs. Saying that she does not love you enough but you are waiting around and hoping she will spontaneously change makes you sound like a passive participant in your life rather than someone empowered to do something about the situation which troubles you. See the difference?


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

alexm said:


> It's exhausting.
> 
> I'm willing to have these conversations and not give up on her, because she loves me. *She doesn't love me fully and completely, but I hope she will someday.*
> 
> ...





alexm said:


> As far as learning to love, trust, honesty, etc. yes. It's difficult to describe, and it's hard to do so without making her out to be a monster or at least very broken.
> 
> My theory all along is that *she's never known how to be in a relationship*, and never been in a healthy one. Ever. What she DOES know how to do is be independent. She's good at that.
> 
> ...


Ok this plus...I will be right back with one other quote...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

alexm said:


> Thus, she did not deny this one bit. When faced with the reality of what she had been saying to me, she accepted responsibility for it. At the same time, she denied that this was on purpose, *nor was able to give any reason(s) for how this happened. But she did agree that it's certainly what it appears to be.*
> 
> My goal was not to make her feel bad, but I know I did. She was very upset that I felt this way (ie. bait and switched). She did not know that it was a "thing".
> 
> ...


So the last quoted post and this one Alex...it sounds like you are talking about someone on the autism spectrum, again. I had previously said possible Asperger's, and you said she didn't have the other symptoms. I don't know how much you know about the autism spectrum, but it is certainly spectrum-rific. Many if not most people on the spectrum in the higher functioning end display such a variety of symptoms that it can literally be hard to place someone on the spectrum, that's why they have moved away from specific names like Asperger's in favor of discussing the wide range of symptoms possible. And of course, some of these symptoms occur in all of us...

But the bold parts above plus other things you have said are pointing to somewhere on the spectrum. The lack of empathy is the biggest part.

I don't know what you mean by she can't love you fully, but that's the second biggest sign. Most people in relationships with people on the spectrum feel "something missing" but can't always put their finger on it.

Her being ready to bail at any sign of trouble in a relationship, being so ultra-self-focused like that, is another symptom. It is common for people on the spectrum to be able to walk away from someone without a look back. They can also be severely attached to someone and yet, show no outward signs of attachment to that person, and also still walk away if they are unable to process emotions with that person.

Their self-focus, lack of empathy, and inability to understand emotional situations and conversations that most people do understand is what usually causes someone to check into the autism angle.

If she is on the spectrum, then the reason she couldn't give you any "reason" for the "bait and switch" is because she honestly can't imagine how you feel, nor does she try to. So when she made the decision to put on the full out porn star routine, her reasons were undoubtedly about herself, which at the time, it may have been pleasing to HERSELF to do these things in some way that she may not even remember now. But once it stopped pleasing HER to do these things, she started wondering why she did them. It was probably never actually about pleasing YOU. So once she became aware that whatever she had enjoyed about doing it at first was missing now, she wanted to stop doing it but wasn't really sure how she got there. Finally she became resentful of doing it and told you about it so she could stop now. Not once in there did she probably stop to think about your feelings....not because she is cold, but because she lacks normal empathy, as you already said. And this means much more than simply not being able to understand someone else's feelings. It also means NOT considering other's feelings before, during or after nearly ANY thing the spectrum-person decides to do. All of their actions are about pleasing themselves. This is a very subtle thing sometimes and you sometimes cannot ever tell that the spectrum-person really has not considered your feelings first, because they can be kind and caring, so it gets very confusing.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Fixed your post.
> 
> John, your wife has a personality disorder. You simply can't compare what you're going through with anyone else, except someone whose spouse has a personality disorder. Sorry for your luck, but it just is not the same.
> 
> It makes me sad for you, that you have never experienced this type of stuff from a non-disordered perspective. But since your only perspective is from inside a disordered relationship with a disordered person, you don't know what it is like to have ANY hope of change. That super duper sucks. But please don't try to compare, it is apples and oranges, except in another PD relationship.


Personality disorders have nothing to do with basic human decision making processes, an area that I spent a decade studying. Humans by definition are goal seeking. I could bore you to oblivion by discussing basic stuff like Self-Determination Theory but that's well beyond the scope of this forum. The bottom line is that pretty much everything people do is directed by some goal or another, whether it is to get laid, or to donate to charity, or to work. 

Humans have basic needs, and follow goal-directed behaviors in order to accomplish those basic needs. it does not mean that those goals have actual numeric or cash values, but they have values. They have intrinsic value, in terms of autonomy, competence, relatedness, and so on. And the mind keeps score.

But since we don't have all night to discuss it, suffice to say that entire cultures are built up on the more practical aspects of transactionalism. I'm sure there are Mother Theresas out there that do everything for Inner Glory, but hey, not all of us are saints.

Incidentally, years 1-25 of my marriage were non-PD... so I've experienced it a lot more than many people here. Yea, it was love, big love to keep two kids under four away from her hair so she could finish her school work without expecting anything back but getting a lot of appreciation - and great sex - in the process. PD does not cause one to become unappreciative; it merely changes focus from one aspect of the relationship (us) to another (me) by removing or crippling empathy and other means of discourse. 

Most people don't notice the transactional aspect of their relationship because their relationship is generally in decent shape, and they can afford to give 100 and get back 60 or 80 or what not. But culture, family dynamics, stress, and other issues - not PD - help create an entitlement framework whereas everything is expected and nothing is given back. 

This is what Anon described as 'toxic', but 'transactional' is more like it.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

*John said: "Personality disorders have nothing to do with basic human decision making processes"*

You don't know much about personality disorders, apparently. That explains a lot about why you are so confused about your wife.

It is not uncommon to go through a lot of adulthood without being diagnosed with a PD, or for one to sort of "show up" where it was not obviously there before. Usually this is simply because the PD was not triggered and stressed into exhibiting all of their symptoms earlier in their adulthood, and then suddenly something changes that puts them into a new stress level.

It sounds like you have not read up about PDs at all, based on what you said above. For your own mental health, I urge you to read more about it, so you can see where you are going to go insane yourself if you don't realize that someone with a PD does not and can not behave and react like someone who does not have one.

"Basic human decision making processes" assumes the normal human emotional abilities are in check. With a PD, this is not true.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Also a note...personality disorders and the autism spectrum are not the same thing. PDs are mostly due to nurture and autism is mostly due to nature. Yet they both can be co-morbid with each other or there can be multiple PDs in one person, and other things too like ADD can be co-morbid with all of it. John calls this the alphabet soup, but he's usually only referring to PD's. The rest of the alphabet syndromes can look a lot like a PD sometimes.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

More for you, John, from this link:

Out of the FOG - Stunted Emotional Growth

It's common for people who suffer from personality disorders to be described as "childish" or "immature" by those who live and work with them. This is often because the cognitive development process which most people use to learn better strategies for problem solving and for calculating cost/benefit analyses is not so readily available to those who suffer from personality disorders.

People who suffer from personality disorders have a strong connection between the decision-making parts of their brains and their emotions or feelings. On the other hand, those who do not suffer from personality disorders typically have stronger connections between the logical risk/reward parts of their brains and their decision making.

As a result people with personality disorders are sometimes seen as reactionary, over-emotional, immature, unreliable etc. by those who have a more logical basis for their decision making. They may seem to "never learn". This is because they often make their decisions based on their feelings rather than what they understand to be true. This can make them seem less mature.

Examples:

Chaos Manufacture - Unnecessarily creating or maintaining an environment of risk, destruction, confusion or mess.

Engulfment - An unhealthy and overwhelming level of attention and dependency on another person, which comes from imagining or believing one exists only within the context of that relationship.

Hysteria - An inappropriate over-reaction to bad news or disappointments, which diverts attention away from the real problem and towards the person who is having the reaction.

Impulsiveness - The tendency to act or speak based on current feelings rather than logical reasoning.

Lack of Object Constancy - An inability to remember that people or objects are consistent, trustworthy and reliable, especially when they are out of your immediate field of vision.

Panic Attacks - Short intense episodes of fear or anxiety, often accompanied by physical symptoms, such as hyperventilating, shaking, sweating and chills.

Raging, Violence and Impulsive Aggression - Explosive verbal, physical or emotional elevations of a dispute. Rages threaten the security or safety of another individual and violate their personal boundaries.

Self-Harm - Any form of deliberate, premeditated injury, such as cutting, poisoning or overdosing, inflicted on oneself.

Self-Loathing - An extreme hatred of one's own self, actions or one's ethnic or demographic background.

What it feels like:

It's very frustrating to live with someone who appears to be immature or who repeats the same mistakes.

Many parents of teenagers express the same frustrations with their children that non-personality disordered people express about their loved-ones. This is similar since young people have not yet developed all the connections in their brains to the frontal cortex - the risk/reward calculating area of the brain.

The result is often anger, exasperation and frustration. *This can lead to poor decision making on the part of the non-personality disordered individual if they are not careful.*


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Thank you for the fine Google scholarship, FW. Unfortunately you missed the important word "basic" in my thesis statement.

The basic decision making process (in simple terms, the mental model used) is not impacted by the PD very much. A BPD will not choose the "find food" model when sleepy. Not any more than a non BPD. These are the basic mental models I referred to.

What changes is the relative importance of the model's inputs and outputs versus a non BPD for example. That's why people with PD's are able to live relatively to fully normal lives in most cases with treatment - and manage to cover their tracks when non treated if highly functioning.

People with PD's are accountable for their actions, know right from wrong, etcetera. They, and their non PD counterparts choose the same basic processes to accomplish goals. While the priorities, inputs, and outcomes may differ, sometimes dramatically, the basic processes aren't much different, if at all.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

I know a bit more about PD's than you apparently do, though thanks for assuming I just did a bit of googling. You are way off in your last post, proving you know little about PD's. I do wish you would read some more, especially sentiments like this one from the previously linked page:

"Don't make a moral issue out of what is a mental illness. People with personality disorders do not choose to be born with them and it can be inhumane to characterize them as evil or worthless. Therefore try to focus on what is acceptable or unacceptable behavior rather than who is acceptable or unacceptable as an individual."

Your wife has a severe mental illness and can NOT function like a normal adult in relationship with you, John. I don't know how you can claim to understand anything about PD's if you don't understand this basic thing about the topic. I have both PD's and spectrum people close to me in my family and have worked through a whole lot of issues with these types of people. They are NOT capable of normalcy in the way others think of it, period.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

I wouldn't go that far saying that the OP's wife has a personality disorder, but from what Alex says, she has many emotional issues... which are difficult to deal with when you regard yourself as "normal" or you are emotionally and rationally stable... I struggle with it myself. Maybe this is one of my negative traits. But if one's partner has emotional issues, are they really entitled to request "empathy" and, if so, should the other partner supply it, reinforcing the emotional immaturity?

I admire Alex for doing so, but I suspect his success will be limited. Will this be enough for him?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

FW, it would help to remember what we are discussing... 

I indicated that everything in human behavior is transactional in nature, as part of normal goal seeking behavior. I pointed out that this goal seeking behavior is true regardless of whether one has a PD or not because this goal seeking behavior is part of basic human decision making, and such a basic behavior or mental model is not not in itself impacted by the PD (tho the outcome may be).

Somehow you think I said that people with PD's are not impacted in their decision making process by those PD's. 

There's a big difference between the two.

Best Regards


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> Always_Alone, the last two paragraphs are what I envision when I think of leadership. It had nothing to do with control, and everything to do with doing everything I can to help her become a better her.


Thanks, farside, for the list and clarification. 

Ultimately, though, to me much more like getting your sh1t together than leadership. I don't mean that as criticism -- far from it -- but just to point out a distinction.

In your relationship, you had a terrible dynamic that was caused at least in part by your lack of respect for your wife and unwillingness to listen to her. In order to get respect and good treatment, you had to earn it by being respectable. This is natural.

But why do you think this applies to Alex? From what I have read, it sounds like he listens, communicates, puts in a great deal of effort to make her feel comfortable and good about herself. Like you, he wants to help his wife deal with her FOO (and possibly other) issues.

And, like him, you describe what you did as "make her be he best her she can be." Can you see that you were also focused on fixing not just yourself, but her as well? 

And can you see that another person might describe what you did when you told her she was beautiful had nothing to do with "manning up", being tough, etc. It was providing stability, emotional support, constancy, and affirmation of love -- all of which OP has been roundly criticized for because it makes him look "needy".


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> Oh, and wandering around aimlessly and bashing into trees is DEFINITELY part of the path.


Yes! This much I know.

I'm just reluctant to call it "leadership".


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Yes! This much I know.
> 
> I'm just reluctant to call it "leadership".


Leadership is just one of the many things individuals do in a relationship--it's not something we are successful at 24/7. I don't expect that my husband or I or anyone else to exhibit perfect leadership every day and in every situation. We also struggle and fail . . . but those are necessary parts of the process. Leadership includes learning from those times of floundering and failing. Leadership includes not allowing the setbacks to define us, but keeping our eyes on the goal and always trying to move in that direction.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Always,
> 
> Perhaps your experience with leadership has been bad.
> 
> ...


Well, MEM, that's mastery no doubt. And if all intentional, then truly leadership.

One of the reasons my back gets up when talking about leadership in relationships is that in a bunch of the "literature" cited here on TAM, the way it is framed is that *he* must be the captain and *she* the 1st mate. And I've seen all sorts of justifications and rationalizations as to why it *must* be this way.

But first off, I find this characterization patronizing, and the assumption that women are just scared little girls waiting to be rescued ridiculous.

Also, I find the military or business metaphors that usually accompany quite unhelpful. A marriage is not a tightly run ship or solely dedicated to the pre-defined goal. Goals, directions, desires all have to be negotiated between the two parties; they cannot be unilaterally determined by one.

I can see how you pull off leadership in the confines of teaching your wife a particular skill that you know well -- but because of all the negotiations, conflicts, and the fact that both parties are entitled to equal say in how the relationship unfolds, I'm still not convinced that "leadership" is the best approach.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> Leaders mean and do what they say, and they do not ask for permission to change direction towards what they believe is right.


Here, for example, is a common way to characterize leadership, and it has nothing to do with negotiating common goals, or considering the feelings/opinions of others.

Don't get me wrong, leadership is a fine skill and is probably helpful at times in a relationship. It just isn't the kind of relationship I would want (either as leader or leadee).


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> Women need to be lead and need to be independent... make your mind up! This is the big soup of nonsense.


Yes, I too would like to hear more about why so many seem to be attached to this particular contradiction. 

Maybe it's build your own ego by being a leader and feed hers by letting her stay independent?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Different people have different weaknesses. Alexes weaknesses are not the same as Farside's. I think one of the biggest parts of the "manning up" or leadership or whatever you want to call it process is really just an objective evaluation of your personal weaknesses and trying to correct/manage them. 

One of Alex's weaknesses might be that he puts too much effort into trying to understand/comfort his wife.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Thanks, farside, for the list and clarification.
> 
> Ultimately, though, to me much more like getting your sh1t together than leadership. I don't mean that as criticism -- far from it -- but just to point out a distinction.


Potato, potato (po-tay-toe, po-taw-toe).



These are generally accepted examples of leadership. You can choose to define it however you like, however... 

What does it say about you that you are essentially refusing to accept that it actually _could_ be leadership? Ask yourself that question, because to me it says a tremendous amount about the proverbial goggles you wear through which you see the world.



always_alone said:


> In your relationship, you had a terrible dynamic that was caused at least in part by your lack of respect for your wife and unwillingness to listen to her. In order to get respect and good treatment, you had to earn it by being respectable. This is natural.


Sure. But we both earned that treatment. However, she was not strong enough to change the dynamic by changing herself. This is not a criticism of her, it is just the way she is. I had to accept that in order to begin my true change. And change I did.

But one thing I did do in my improvement was to set a deadline. Some people frowned on this. But in my improvement, I decided again how I wanted to be loved, and began communicating that to my wife. She then had the option to love me that way or not. Had she chose not to, I would be in the process of a divorce as we speak.

Which brings us to Alex...



always_alone said:


> But why do you think this applies to Alex? From what I have read, it sounds like he listens, communicates, puts in a great deal of effort to make her feel comfortable and good about herself. Like you, he wants to help his wife deal with her FOO (and possibly other) issues.


Because he must be willing to do his best to set aside his needs, and stop looking to her for affirmation. That is very difficult for us codependents. I find myself gravitating towards it every... single... day... Just this morning I caught myself sliding that way, and had to adjust my thinking. When you set your value as a person on how someone else views you or pleases you, your self worth is as unstable as the person who now owns your worth. See the problem?

Until Alex shifts his thinking away from how he can change his wife, and more to how he can change himself, he will continue to struggle. This is victim mentality in that he is looking everywhere but at himself for changes. 

Which transitions us your final question... 



always_alone said:


> And, like him, you describe what you did as "make her be he best her she can be." Can you see that you were also focused on fixing not just yourself, but her as well?
> 
> And can you see that another person might describe what you did when you told her she was beautiful had nothing to do with "manning up", being tough, etc. It was providing stability, emotional support, constancy, and affirmation of love -- all of which OP has been roundly criticized for because it makes him look "needy".


I tried to reach back to see if I chose the wording "make" and couldn't find it, but if I did, it was a poor choice of wording. A better choice would have been "provide the environment". 

Now, was I setting about to fix her? I guess you could view it that way. Bottom line is that in those situations, I knew what she needed. And it may not have been what she wanted, but I can live with that. I saw it as opportunities to help her heal. I spent the better part of our marriage reinforcing her misplaced beliefs about herself. So I saw it as my obligation to lead her through some things that she could not lead her through herself. 

But here is the key. I didn't do it for me. I did it for her. Like I had said, when I triggered the CSA outburst in front of the counselor, there was no guarantee that we were going to remain together. As a matter of fact, I was leaning heavily towards divorce at that time. So I triggered it to help her become better for her, not me.

Can Alex answer your question in the same way? 

*At this time, I think not.*

As for being beta, what I did as she was getting ready to go out was anything but. Needy/beta would have been for me to fawn all over her, or to somehow make what I was saying about me, or to have sulked away when she initially got snotty.

I stepped into her space, I took her hands, ignored her snottiness, made her look me in the eye, and _told her what I wanted her to see._ What can be more alpha than that?

I would encourage Alex to read two threads:

Dayone. His thread is a textbook example of what instigating change in yourself can do. His change was to make himself a man he could admire when he looked at himself in the mirror. He had to ditch issues with FOO, anger, and years of resentment. He gets it, and not so surprisingly, his walk-away-wife cannot keep her hands off of him anymore.

Anon1111. Anon is struggling mightily, and has had some setbacks, but he is starting to _truly_ understand where change begins. I see Anon on the precipice of something great, if he can just get past that final hurdle of avoiding the need for affirmation from his wife. 

And Anon, this was/is my toughest hurdle as well.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> I can see how you pull off leadership in the confines of teaching your wife a particular skill that you know well -- but because of all the negotiations, conflicts, and the fact that both parties are entitled to equal say in how the relationship unfolds, I'm still not convinced that "leadership" is the best approach.


Please understand I am not being snippy when I say this, just direct.

It is because your idea of leadership is not the same as his, mine or others. 

Until then, the discussion is pointless because you are simply agreeing with us that these actions are important while relabeling them as "awareness", "self improvement", etc.

It is like we are speaking two different languages, we agree on the fundamentals and the fact that we both like the taste of a good pilsner, but can't agree whether we should be calling it a "beer" or a "bier".


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> One of Alex's weaknesses might be that he puts too much effort into trying to understand/comfort his wife.



A classic case of subconscious Minimaxing... Either you spend x effort comforting or y effort dealing with a boil-over... For scholarly types  this is fairly light reading (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimax)

If it takes a lot of effort to understand one's wife that does not bode well. This should be fairly instantaneous in an LTR. Comfort is a different story and up to a point you'll be expected to do it for her (and hopefully she to you)...


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Yes, I too would like to hear more about why so many seem to be attached to this particular contradiction.


Dynamics in marriage are as diverse as people. The premise of your statement is that what we are speaking of is somehow "wrong" instead of "different".

While it may not agree with you, it does agree with others. 



always_alone said:


> Maybe it's build your own ego by being a leader and feed hers by letting her stay independent?


There is no room for ego in true leadership. Ego is the antithesis of humility, which is absolutely necessary for a leader. If I am coming off as egotistical, I certainly am not meaning to.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

I really don't see why I should change myself to please my wife... she was fine with me to start with... I haven't changed. If she doesn't like me anymore, tough... what about _her_ changing? She is the one with problem...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> Different people have different weaknesses. Alexes weaknesses are not the same as Farside's. I think one of the biggest parts of the "manning up" or leadership or whatever you want to call it process is really just an objective evaluation of your personal weaknesses and trying to correct/manage them.



Leadership is all about vision, planning, communicating, collaborating, executing, and monitoring (from a relative distance) towards a common goal. Leadership by definition involves other people and interacting with them for a common goal. 

Leadership has little to do with innate self improvement and much to do with how you're perceived. I can "improve" all I want and it won't make me a better leader if my actions stay the same. Likewise I can take the right actions just because it's profitable for me to do so and be exhaled as a great leader and it will work great but I will still be the inner a-hole I was.

As I tell my lab team direct reports, leadership is all about seeing the forest and the trees at the same time. My manager sees the forest only. My team sees the trees only. I'm the one stuck in between. 

It's not any different in a family. There's understanding of where we are, where we want to go, and a bunch of options. A dictator simply decrees. A leader gets the peons to see what's good for them. If you're lucky enough to have an agreeable spouse or a financially dependent spouse you can get away with a lot. If you have a financially independent spouse even a trivial issue has the potential for conflict if you don't get buy-in.

I have no disagreement with self improvement but leadership... Leadership is all about influencing others directly, not via machinations.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Not needing affirmation of your path is huge.

Sometimes I call it "not caring" "not giving a f-", etc. But "not needing affirmation" is a better description because it takes out the confrontational aspect.

It is definitely very difficult to let go of when that is the very thing you have been looking for for so long.

It gets easier when you see yourself fulfilling your own criteria. What was a heavy weight starts to seem lighter. 

But it is a constant struggle to really check yourself and ask "why am I doing this?"


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> I really don't see why I should change myself to please my wife... she was fine with me to start with... I haven't changed. If she doesn't like me anymore, tough... what about _her_ changing? She is the one with problem...


You're not describing it correctly.

You don't change to please your wife. You change to become a version of yourself that is pleasing to yourself regardless of what she does.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

In Absentia said:


> I really don't see why I should change myself to please my wife... she was fine with me to start with... I haven't changed. If she doesn't like me anymore, tough... what about _her_ changing? She is the one with problem...


Absentia, I am really, really glad you posted this. It illustrates a point I want to make perfectly.



In Absentia said:


> I really don't see why I should change myself to please my wife...


I don't either. You never change yourself for someone else. You do it for yourself. If she responds positively, all the better. If she does not respond, or responds negatively, then a reevaluation of the long term feasibility of your union is in order.



In Absentia said:


> she was fine with me to start with... I haven't changed. If she doesn't like me anymore, tough...


You are free to take this approach. She is free to leave you. You are free to leave her. But keep in mind that change happens incrementally, over time, and sometimes you do not notice until you have become something so far from what you used to be that it smacks you in the face one day. You believe you have not changed since you met her? Sorry, but I call BS.

The same goes for her. I bet she has changed as well.



In Absentia said:


> what about _her_ changing? She is the one with problem...


Is she? Why do you assume you have the authority to demand change from someone else? This comes back to my first point that one can only really change for themselves. 

Plus, this screams victimhood. Nothing is your fault, so why should you do anything about it, right? The beauty is that you don't have to. But when your marriage blows up, and you had opportunity to do something that could have helped to fix things, but chose not to, it leaves little room to complain, unless you remain in the victim chair and continue to blame her.

Victim chair mentality will get you nowhere in life, love or money.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> There is no room for ego in true leadership. Ego is the antithesis of humility, which is absolutely necessary for a leader.



Steve Jobs will be rolling in his grave as you typed this. Hopefully on an Android product 

Jobs was a visionary but at the same time people saw his "message" and followed along even if it was inconvenient for them to do so.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Well, MEM, that's mastery no doubt. And if all intentional, then truly leadership.
> 
> One of the reasons my back gets up when talking about leadership in relationships is that in a bunch of the "literature" cited here on TAM, the way it is framed is that *he* must be the captain and *she* the 1st mate. And I've seen all sorts of justifications and rationalizations as to why it *must* be this way.
> 
> ...


This explains a lot to me about your posting style, Always. It seemed to me that you consistently chafe at any discussion that contains positive reference to MMSL. 

But MMSL is just a tool with a wide range of applications. It's a misconception to think that everyone who uses the tool uses it in a way that circumvents the autonomy of the woman. MMSL, to me, is much more about learning to be master of oneself. Its value is in teaching individuals (primarily men) to be a better person so that they can be a better partner. I suppose you could see this as manipulation, but in a relationship every action does have a reaction. If you improve yourself and your partner reacts favorably, then is that a shameful thing?

My husband found MMSL very useful early on, and I followed his progress and liked what he garnered from it. I always wanted him to be a better leader--of his OWN life and happiness--and MMSL and NMMNG really resonated with him. TAM was my "getting it" place, and MMSL was his. Both of us worked very hard on ourselves . . . with the goal of a happier spouse and a happier marriage, yes, but always with the intent of just being better and more self aware individuals. 

I don't feel at all threatened by the language or the tenets of MMSL. I could care less how folks in other relationships leverage the ideas in MMSL. If a man is an a*hole, it's because he's an a*hole, not because he read MMSL. If my husband had read MMSL and, as a result, started treating me poorly, I would have blamed my husband, not Athol Kay.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> You're not describing it correctly.
> 
> You don't change to please your wife. You change to become a version of yourself that is pleasing to yourself regardless of what she does.


I'm very happy with who I am, thank you very much. I'm a good man, a good father and provider, a good cook and fairly good-looking...  This is why she married me. I don't need to become a leader or whatever, that's not me. If she is not happy to love me for who I am anymore, than, it's not my problem.

When you feel the need to having to change yourself to save he marriage, the marriage is already lost. Sh!t happens. Why do people not accept this? Changing yourself, improving yourself when you are already a decent human being, mind games... come on! People fall out of love all the time. It's life...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> I'm very happy with who I am, thank you very much. I'm a good man, a good father and provider, a good cook and fairly good-looking...  This is why she married me. I don't need to become a leader or whatever, that's not me. If she is not happy to love me for who I am anymore, than, it's not my problem.
> 
> When you feel the need to having to change yourself to save he marriage, the marriage is already lost. Sh!t happens. Why do people not accept this? Changing yourself, improving yourself when you are already a decent human being, mind games... come on! People fall out of love all the time. It's life...


I don't necessarily disagree with anything you wrote.

The only thing I would point out is that you are clearly not happy.

How much of your overall happiness is dictated by how your wife treats you?

Can you take control of that? Can you make it about your judgment of yourself rather than her judgment (lack of interest, whatever) in you?

I am sure all of the attributes you listed about yourself are correct and any number of women would love those things about you.

But I'm talking about what is going on inside your own head, not a list of things on paper.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

john117 said:


> Personality disorders have nothing to do with basic human decision making processes.





john117 said:


> FW, it would help to remember what we are discussing...Somehow you think I said that people with PD's are not impacted in their decision making process by those PD's.


Somehow, you STILL think that a PD has no effect on a person's decision making ability, and it 100% does affect a person's decision making ability AND process. I have no idea why you refuse to see that your wife is so disordered that she cannot be compared to a non-personality-disordered person, like you keep trying to do everyday at TAM. Apples and oranges, and the fact that you can't seem to agree that it is apples and oranges makes me wonder if you have some processing difficulties, too. I'm not just spouting my own opinions about PD's, I have studied them. The words you are saying make it clear that either you have not studied them and don't understand it, or if you have studied them and refuse to believe the reality of it, then you possibly have some blind spot there.

My guess is that you simply cannot let go of the view of your wife as evil, and if you had to see that she has a debilitating mental illness which prevents her from acting the way you wish she would, then you couldn't "blame" her anymore and you'd have to look in the mirror instead of at her.

Best regards to you as well, I wish you could see reality.

Absentia, I'm not thinking Alex's wife has a PD, I'm thinking she is on the autism spectrum. John's wife has a diagnosed PD, that's what John and I are talking about. Though I did mention it was possible Alex's wife had a PD earlier, because some of the symptoms look the same.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> I don't necessarily disagree with anything you wrote.
> 
> The only thing I would point out is that you are clearly not happy.
> 
> ...



I'm very happy with myself... I'm sad that my wife refuses to act to fix her problems... I can't control that and I'm not going to play silly games to "make" her do it. That's not what I want.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

In Absentia said:


> I'm very happy with who I am, thank you very much. I'm a good man, a good father and provider, a good cook and fairly good-looking...  This is why she married me. I don't need to become a leader or whatever, that's not me. If she is not happy to love me for who I am anymore, than, it's not my problem.
> 
> When you feel the need to having to change yourself to save he marriage, the marriage is already lost. Sh!t happens. Why do people not accept this? Changing yourself, improving yourself when you are already a decent human being, mind games... come on! People fall out of love all the time. It's life...


The premise of your point is that I changed to save my marriage. Nope. I changed because I could no longer stomach who I was. My failing marriage was what woke me up, but not the reason I chose to change.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> Absentia, I am really, really glad you posted this. It illustrates a point I want to make perfectly.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


As I said above, I'm happy with who I am... nobody is perfect, but I consider myself a very good man. If she doesn't want to cooperate to make our marriage better, it's out of my hands... I have tried. I'm not a victim, I'm a doer. I'm sad she is rejecting the marriage. But it's her prerogative.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> The premise of your point is that I changed to save my marriage. Nope. I changed because I could no longer stomach who I was. My failing marriage was what woke me up, but not the reason I chose to change.


well, I'm glad you did and it worked....


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> I'm very happy with who I am, thank you very much. I'm a good man, a good father and provider, a good cook and fairly good-looking...  This is why she married me. I don't need to become a leader or whatever, that's not me. If she is not happy to love me for who I am anymore, than, it's not my problem.
> 
> When you feel the need to having to change yourself to save he marriage, the marriage is already lost. Sh!t happens. Why do people not accept this? Changing yourself, improving yourself when you are already a decent human being, mind games... come on! People fall out of love all the time. It's life...


It's just a choice some people make--it's not wrong or right. If you don't want to change, whether for yourself or for your marriage, then don't. Because without sincere motivation, you'll just end up resentful and bitter. 

But for folks who are inspired to change--who WANT it, who CHOOSE it, who find it REWARDING--why disparage them? It's been well worth the effort for many folks, me included. 

Frankly, some people love this sort of challenge, and do well at it. Others see the lesser evil in just ending a relationship, and I'm not going to judge that. But for gods sake make your choice and move on it--living a half-life in limbo, unhappy and growing smaller and more bitter towards someone you once loved--is no way to live.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> It's just a choice some people make--it's not wrong or right. If you don't want to change, whether for yourself or for your marriage, then don't. Because without sincere motivation, you'll just end up resentful and bitter.
> 
> But for folks who are inspired to change--who WANT it, who CHOOSE it, who find it REWARDING--why disparage them? It's been well worth the effort for many folks, me included.
> 
> Frankly, some people love this sort of challenge, and do well at it. Others see the lesser evil in just ending a relationship, and I'm not going to judge that. But for gods sake make your choice and move on it--living a half-life in limbo, unhappy and growing smaller and more bitter towards someone you once loved--is no way to live.


You changed because you needed to change... you might call me arrogant - and I'm sure I have my flaws - but I'm perfectly fine. I'm also sure people will say that this is the reason why my marriage went wrong... but that's not the reason.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

john117 said:


> Steve Jobs will be rolling in his grave as you typed this. Hopefully on an Android product
> 
> Jobs was a visionary but at the same time people saw his "message" and followed along even if it was inconvenient for them to do so.


In fairness, there is no room for ego in _my_ path towards becoming a better leader. 

Potato, potato (po-tay-toe, po-taw-toe) again. 

Many people are drawn to ego. For me, very few things will turn me away from someone as fast as ego, in both men and women.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> It is like we are speaking two different languages, we agree on the fundamentals, but can't agree whether we should be calling it a "beer" or a "bier".


My apologies if I seem pedantic. I do not mean to be.

But, much like john, I just do not think that self-determination or improvement are the same as leadership.

And that this distinction is important when talking about what to do to fix or improve a relationship.

It's one thing to tell people that they need to be the best person they can be, and quite another to tell them that they must have x quality or do y thing or their partners will not be attracted to them.

So, we have a bunch of people who have judged OP as needy, codependent, requiring validation, and said that for him to attract his wife he must transform himself. He must detach, become "strong", not seek reassurance, not check in, step back, do his own thing, decide his own boundaries, etc.

Fine. But remember also that all of this advice is not designed to actually attract his wife, that is, although you herald the success of all those who follow this path and "get it", you readily acknowledge that none of it will necessarily help him achieve his goal, but still argue that he should do it anyway.

And why? Because it makes him a "better person", and so even if this wife leaves, he will find someone else who loves him properly.

But let's just suppose for a minute that Alex actually quite likes who he is, and doesn't define "better" in this way. Maybe detachment isn't his goal, but the true intimacy that GettingIt talks about.

I'm not saying that you are wrong and I am right, or that all of the different perspectives here aren't immensely valuable. 

I'm questioning whether this emphasis on disparaging certain types of personalities and behaviours while insisting on others is really always the solution the way it is touted here.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> My apologies if I seem pedantic. I do not mean to be.
> 
> But, much like john, I just do not think that self-determination or improvement are the same as leadership.
> 
> ...


This is a fair question. Alex is obviously free to choose his path. If he does not see it as better, then he should not do it. 

The main thing I am trying to get Alex to recognize is that certain behaviors he is exhibiting are not helping his situation, and are harmful in many cases to attraction. Need for validation, expecting others to change, using scenarios to illustrate a point under the guise of reassuring her when it is quite the opposite. If he chooses to keep them, I do not see his chances of improving his relationship. And I may be wrong, at least for him. But I was not wrong for me. 

Unfortunately, that is the best that _any of us_ can do for him.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

IA,

When you start dating again - I hope you don't ever say this to a prospective girlfriend. 

And the fact that you persist in assuming these are 'mind games' - without asking specific questions - makes you come across as jealous of others success. 


QUOTE=In Absentia;11431346]You changed because you needed to change... you might call me arrogant - and I'm sure I have my flaws - but I'm perfectly fine. I'm also sure people will say that this is the reason why my marriage went wrong... but that's not the reason.[/QUOTE]


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

IA,

It's clear your marriage is dead. What is your timeline for 'calling it'?




In Absentia said:


> well, I'm glad you did and it worked....


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> I don't feel at all threatened by the language or the tenets of MMSL. I could care less how folks in other relationships leverage the ideas in MMSL. If a man is an a*hole, it's because he's an a*hole, not because he read MMSL. If my husband had read MMSL and, as a result, started treating me poorly, I would have blamed my husband, not Athol Kay.


Yes, I chafe at MMSL, largely because it is quoted lime some kind of bible around here and is chock full of sexist bs and pseudoscience.

Honestly, if my SO decides to read and take that book seriously, I will probably leave him on the spot. 

If your h and you found it a valuable tool, well, I'm happy for you. But I'll probably continue to find it odd how committed so many are to insisting it's the be-all and end-all of male improvement.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Yes, I chafe at MMSL, largely because it is quoted lime some kind of bible around here and is chock full of sexist bs and pseudoscience.
> 
> Honestly, if my SO decides to read and take that book seriously, I will probably leave him on the spot.
> 
> If your h and you found it a valuable tool, well, I'm happy for you. But I'll probably continue to find it odd how committed so many are to insisting it's the be-all and end-all of male improvement.


Always_Alone, when you are constantly looking for something negative in life, you will often find it, whether it is _actually_ there or not.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Always,

What does your fellow do for you, when you trigger? 
Just curious.

BTW: I can't imagine ever 'leaving M2 on the spot' over reading any book. I trust her to be able to filter out the good from the bad. 

And gosh - she sure would feel like I was a controlling - ummm - person - if I threatened to divorce her over the abstract act of reading a book. 

As opposed to stayng or leaving based on the way she actually treats me. 




QUOTE=always_alone;11431842]Yes, I chafe at MMSL, largely because it is quoted lime some kind of bible around here and is chock full of sexist bs and pseudoscience.

Honestly, if my SO decides to read and take that book seriously, I will probably leave him on the spot. 

If your h and you found it a valuable tool, well, I'm happy for you. But I'll probably continue to find it odd how committed so many are to insisting it's the be-all and end-all of male improvement.[/QUOTE]


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> The main thing I am trying to get Alex to recognize is that certain behaviors he is exhibiting are not helping his situation, and are harmful in many cases to attraction. Need for validation, expecting others to change, using scenarios to illustrate a point under the guise of reassuring her when it is quite the opposite. If he chooses to keep them, I do not see his chances of improving his relationship. And I may be wrong, at least for him. But I was not wrong for me.


And the only thing I have to offer here is to question your certainty on this --at least as it applies to others.

Different people need different things, and it seems to me a grave mistake to assume such a simple formula for the code of attraction.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> And the only thing I have to offer here is to question your certainty on this --at least as it applies to others.
> 
> Different people need different things, and it seems to me a grave mistake to assume such a simple formula for the code of attraction.


Okay.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

In Absentia--

I think I really understand where you are coming from. I have many times said the exact same things you are saying.

You were both going along and one of you checked out. You just did the same thing and now it is your fault? Why are you supposed to change when you did not cause this? And by the way, you have a lot of things going for you that other women would certainly like. 

On one level, what you are saying really makes sense. It's all true.

But that is not the only way to look at it.

Here are a few others:

1. You are focusing on the WHY or HOW of the change to your relationship. Is that really the issue at this point, or is that just backward looking? It is a FACT that the relationship is now different. You will not be able to go back to how it was. What you were doing before was on another planet. The only question is how to address the relationship as it exists TODAY. 

2. You have 3 options: status quo, take action within the relationship or leave. Status quo seems deeply unsatisfactory. You don't appear ready to leave. Why wouldn't you try to take action within the relationship then? If you fail to change anything, the other two options will still be available to you. What do you have to lose?

3. What you call "mind games" I call making yourself better. Do you know who mostly benefits from this? You. Regardless of whether you stay in this relationship or leave, don't you think you will be better off if you look better, feel better and KNOW you are becoming a better person. I am not saying you're not a good person now or even that you should not be happy with yourself as you are. But you know that feeling when you put on a new suit and think "I'm the sh-t"-- what if you could push yourself so you could feel that way on a daily basis? Don't you think that your life would be improved and just maybe (as a distinct side benefit), women might find this attractive?


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> You changed because you needed to change... you might call me arrogant - and I'm sure I have my flaws - but I'm perfectly fine. I'm also sure people will say that this is the reason why my marriage went wrong... but that's not the reason.


Yes, I needed to change because I wanted to be happier. Haven't you ever done that?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Always,
> 
> What does your fellow do for you, when you trigger?
> Just curious.
> ...


Oh, I wouldn't leave him for reading it --it was the "taking it seriously" or implementing the tactics that would have me out the door. 

As for what he does when I trigger? Often he appreciates and is amused by my scathing attacks on ideologies and POVs that I object to. Sometimes he gets hurt by what I have to say. Sometimes he comes off as very vulnerable and needy.

All of these reactions play a role in why we are still together today.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Oh, I wouldn't leave him for reading it --it was the "taking it seriously" or implementing the tactics that would have me out the door.
> 
> As for what he does when I trigger? Often he appreciates and is amused by my scathing attacks on ideologies and POVs that I object to. Sometimes he gets hurt by what I have to say. Sometimes he comes off as very vulnerable and needy.
> 
> All of these reactions play a role in why we are still together today.


Has the need to control always been a problem for you?


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Oh, I wouldn't leave him for reading it --it was the "taking it seriously" or implementing the tactics that would have me out the door.
> 
> As for what he does when I trigger? Often he appreciates and is amused by my scathing attacks on ideologies and POVs that I object to. Sometimes he gets hurt by what I have to say. Sometimes he comes off as very vulnerable and needy.
> 
> *All of these reactions play a role in why we are still together today.*


I know it's fantasy, but indulge me here: what if you one day found out he had developed those reactions by what he learned about himself and his dynamic with you on MMSL?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> IA,
> 
> When you start dating again - I hope you don't ever say this to a prospective girlfriend.





In Absentia said:


> You changed because you needed to change... you might call me arrogant - and I'm sure I have my flaws - but I'm perfectly fine. I'm also sure people will say that this is the reason why my marriage went wrong... but that's not the reason



Why not? Isn't it the epitome of the "self-determined, autonomous leader" that is supposed to send all women into a tizzy of attraction?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> IA,
> 
> 
> And the fact that you persist in assuming these are 'mind games' - without asking specific questions - makes you come across as jealous of others success.


They are "mind games", for me... it's my opinion... and I can assure you I'm not jealous at all... on the contrary...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> Yes, I needed to change because I wanted to be happier. Haven't you ever done that?


No, I'm happy as I am... I only feel sad for my wife, because she doesn't seem to be able to...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> IA,
> 
> It's clear your marriage is dead. What is your timeline for 'calling it'?


About 5 years... it really is dead.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> In Absentia--
> 
> I think I really understand where you are coming from. I have many times said the exact same things you are saying.
> 
> ...


I'll answer this tomorrow... I have to go and cook...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> I know it's fantasy, but indulge me here: what if you one day found out he had developed those reactions by what he learned about himself and his dynamic with you on MMSL?


He could not because MMSL insists on alpha dominance, non-flattery, no neediness, no vulnerability, but "taking what you want", holding back validation and affection and so on. All backed by some sort of pseudoscience reference to herd animals and limbic systems of women who can never know what they want.

The two world's are so mutually exclusive, I'm not sure how to begin answering your question.

I'm no book-burner or censor, though. My point was about attitudes and approaches -- and there are simply some I can't live with. Doesn't really matter where they come from.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

You woke up full of mischief today.

It's one thing to ignore detailed explanations of a term because they defy your views of the 'male patriarchy'. 

And just an extension of that same bias - when you juxtapose it (the term you dislike) with behavior that is clearly not 'high functioning'.

You remind me of my daughter. 





In Absentia said:


> They are "mind games", for me... it's my opinion... and I can assure you I'm not jealous at all... on the contrary...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> Has the need to control always been a problem for you?


The only thing I need to control is myself. I've never had any interest whatsoever in controlling others, but yes, it's always been important for me to be self-determined, autonomous, and independent. 

Included in this is my choice to not enter into an intimate relationship with someone whose attitudes and principles that are antithetical to my own.

I do not view any of this as a problem, but as useful or living a fulfilling life.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Always,

I have read hundreds of posts by Athol and noticed the most curious pattern. 

He ALWAYS says the same thing. And yet a subset of readers seem only able to hear half the message. 

His message: You need a healthy blend of alpha and beta behaviors. You need BOTH. 

Some men need to add beta to their mix, others need to add alpha to their mix. But it's always a mix. Always BOTH.

As to your quote, it's totally out of context. He recommends doing that stuff ONLY WHEN the man has already allowed himself to become largely invisible in the marriage via a 'pure beta' style. 

That said - the same audience who only hear half the message - don't fully understand the range of alpha behaviors. 

For instance - when you trigger and your man is amused: totally alpha response

Not at all threatened by you and your ummm volatility. And he is amused BY you - not at you. Totally different. And very stabilizing for you. 

Go re read yur depiction of his responses to you. 
1. Pure alpha
2. Mid range
3. Pure beta

And it's clearly a blend that works for you. 

Perhaps your triggers are largely caused by associating certain words with men. Leadership, alpha. 









QUOTE=always_alone;11432346]He could not because MMSL insists on alpha dominance, non-flattery, no neediness, no vulnerability, but "taking what you want", holding back validation and affection and so on. All backed by some sort of pseudoscience reference to herd animals and limbic systems of women who can never know what they want.

The two world's are so mutually exclusive, I'm not sure how to begin answering your question.

I'm no book-burner or censor, though. My point was about attitudes and approaches -- and there are simply some I can't live with. Doesn't really matter where they come from.[/QUOTE]


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> He could not because MMSL insists on alpha dominance, non-flattery, no neediness, no vulnerability, but "taking what you want", holding back validation and affection and so on. All backed by some sort of pseudoscience reference to herd animals and limbic systems of women who can never know what they want.
> 
> The two world's are so mutually exclusive, I'm not sure how to begin answering your question.
> 
> I'm no book-burner or censor, though. My point was about attitudes and approaches -- and there are simply some I can't live with. Doesn't really matter where they come from.


Well, you sorta did answer my question. 

Your reply reminds me of the parable of the blind men and the elephant, in which each man feels a part of an elephant, and then describes the creature emphatically, each believing that their interpretation is the only correct one, and that the others have it wrong. It's a lesson, as you probably are aware, on the fallacy of using one's subjective experience to interpret the totality of truth.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> No, I'm happy as I am... I only feel sad for my wife, because she doesn't seem to be able to...


How can you be happy? You sound so sad. 

I'm not saying you are not happy with who you are, but that doesn't always translate into being happy in marriage, with your career, with your health, etc. When you work to affect positive change in those areas of your life, it's not necessarily a reflection of your level of happiness with who you are.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Somehow, you STILL think that a PD has no effect on a person's decision making ability, and it 100% does affect a person's decision making ability AND process.



Hardly.

A PD has *significant* effects on the *results* of the decision making process. But the basic decision making *processes* themselves are not impacted much.

The need to fulfill basic needs is there and the mechanism for fulfilling those needs is there. But what goes into those processes changes. An NPD will assign different priorities or weights than a non NPD when looking for a friend or mate or whatever. In both cases the same basic goal seeking behavior will kick in like a subroutine. And it's more than likely that in some instances someone with a PD will do the "right thing".

But selecting the same subroutine will not result in the same outcomes because the parameters of that subroutine (or basic process) and weights will change. When seeking a mate the NPD will assign more weight in the "me" part whereas a non NPD will naturally choose more of the "her" or "us" type weight.

With different weights the outcomes are naturally different.

Just so that you understand what this mental subroutine is... Write your name on a piece of paper. Then on a blackboard. The handwriting is the same, recognizably so. Why? Because it's the same subroutine that drives the wrist / fingers (small motor) vs arm / wrist (large motor). In a PD case the basic models or subroutines don't get corrupted, or the wrong ones selected. The same ones get used but with sufficient change in inputs which yield different outcomes...

Sooooo. To summarize, our difference is not in whether PD's cause people to make decisions that the rest of us would not make. I do not dispute that. Our difference is in how the impact occurs.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> But let's just suppose for a minute that Alex actually quite likes who he is, and doesn't define "better" in this way. Maybe detachment isn't his goal, but the true intimacy that GettingIt talks about.
> 
> I'm not saying that you are wrong and I am right, or that all of the different perspectives here aren't immensely valuable.
> 
> I'm questioning whether this emphasis on disparaging certain types of personalities and behaviours while insisting on others is really always the solution the way it is touted here.


I think Alex does like who he is. I don't for one minute think he NEEDS to change. But Alex came here looking for ideas, and that is what he is being offered. He IS willing to look at himself and his wife and try to understand how to improve _their dynamic_. This is all stuff that he will (I think) churn around in his head and make decisions about for himself. I have no idea what the "magic bullet" for his situation is. If his wife were here offering point and counter point, we all might be able to hone in on it a little better. Like Farside pointed out, I think we are all doing the best we can do for Alex. None of us have the answer, but we all do have different perspectives, and each of them is equally valid and deserves to be heard when presented thoughtfully and respectfully.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> In fairness, there is no room for ego in _my_ path towards becoming a better leader.
> 
> Potato, potato (po-tay-toe, po-taw-toe) again.
> 
> Many people are drawn to ego. For me, very few things will turn me away from someone as fast as ego, in both men and women.



But in the Army, the bars or stars or stripes make you a defacto leader when you outrank the grunts. My father was not remotely the leadership type but got his work done. Because anyone under his rank knew to listen or else..... 

Some ego is useful. If you're in certain types of businesses or fields a huge ego is preferred, even expected.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

GettingIt,

I believe Alex starts this thread - looking for validation. Not suggestions. I think he was hoping to hear: yes she loves you - you should stick around

We projectes our own 'style' - which is to problem solve - onto Alex's thread. 






GettingIt said:


> I think Alex does like who he is. I don't for one minute think he NEEDS to change. But Alex came here looking for ideas, and that is what he is being offered. He IS willing to look at himself and his wife and try to understand how to improve _their dynamic_. This is all stuff that he will (I think) churn around in his head and make decisions about for himself. I have no idea what the "magic bullet" for his situation is. If his wife were here offering point and counter point, we all might be able to hone in on it a little better. Like Farside pointed out, I think we are all doing the best we can do for Alex. None of us have the answer, but we all do have different perspectives, and each of them is equally valid and deserves to be heard when presented thoughtfully and respectfully.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Well, just for the record, I am not the only one hearing partial messages or "unable to see the whole."

My SO is not amused by my volatility, and regardless of what people here think of me, I am in no way overly emotional or easily triggered. Indeed, if anything, what people notice about me is the utter lack of drama I bring even in high pressure and high conflict situations.

He is amused when I spout off because he largely agrees with many of my perspectives, and enjoys some good old-fashioned sarcasm and criticism. 

I will not turn this thread into a rehash of why I do not like MMSL or some of the other sexist perspectives I see touted here as the truth of all relationships.

Let me just say, that I find it quite interesting that when I, a woman, clearly state my boundaries and and desires re a relationship, it is somehow a signal that I must be a control freak with volatile and unreasonable emotions that need to be managed by my alpha hubby. And then there's Alex, a man, who only wants to know his wife arrived somewhere safely or if she has completely checked out of the marriage, yet this is somehow a clear signal to everyone that he is desperately seeking validation, is needy, weak, and therefore *must* never text her, follow up with her, be vulnerable in any way. Instead he should detach and improve himself for his own sake, so that even if his wife won't see how awesome he is, some other women will.

I can't be the onlu one here who sees something off about this?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Men and women aren't the same.

Edit:

This is obviously flippant.

I am just saying that the same behavior/attitude as displayed by a man vs a woman will be received differently. It's not fair-- it just is.

You can try to pretend it's not real, or just deal with it.

The double standard goes both ways. Men have to take some sh-t and so do women.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Well, just for the record, I am not the only one hearing partial messages or "unable to see the whole."
> 
> My SO is not amused by my volatility, and regardless of what people here think of me, I am in no way overly emotional or easily triggered. Indeed, if anything, what people notice about me is the utter lack of drama I bring even in high pressure and high conflict situations.
> 
> ...


I think that if I saw it as you describe, I certainly would consider it to be "off." I don't think you are a control freak at all. It sounds to me like you and your husband are happy with one another. I don't think Alex is needy or weak. Whether or not his wife somehow perceives him is such is part of the equation, but again, I don't see anyone here saying that they know for sure this is the case. I see it being presented as one of the scenarios that Alex might want to consider, that's all. Alex is smart enough to know that THE ANSWER does not exist on TAM, MMSL, or anywhere but within his own heart and mind. 

Like you, I'm known for utterly lacking drama and volatility in conflict in my life. My friends tease me about it all the time and sometimes get exasperated at my unflappable nature. Oddly, my husband would describe me as a real pistol, someone who is opinionated and strong willed and independent and who needs to be in control (that is, when he's not expressing exasperation at me for not getting upset about the things HE thinks are important!) He and I are very different, granted, but I think my marriage is the one place where I feel safe just letting all of me be visible. He's learned (in part on MMSL) to appreciate that and not see it as a demonstration of poor decorum or bad behavior on my part. I thank him every day for "letting" me be me. And by "letting" I mean by not allowing expression of my feelings rock his sense of security or change how he feels about me. And yes, I've learned to do the same for him.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Always, 

Even though we aren't able to see anything the same way right now I'm going to share an observation that really helped me. 

In MC the therapist kept saying the same thing: Anger is a secondary emotion. It is caused by fear or hurt. 

Those - primary emotions - fear and hurt - simply translate to anger so fast that you don't really perceive them in the moment. 

She taught us to ask ourselves and each other: 
- What are you hurt/afraid of 
- How can I help you/myself with the primary emotion

---------

I consider the statement: If my partner read this book 'I would leave them on the spot' 

A perfect example of why you chose your screen name. Your parner clearly loves you. And yet - an ambiguous move - like reading a suspect book: provokes an intense flight response

--------
No one here is trying to harm you. 





always_alone said:


> Well, just for the record, I am not the only one hearing partial messages or "unable to see the whole."
> 
> My SO is not amused by my volatility, and regardless of what people here think of me, I am in no way overly emotional or easily triggered. Indeed, if anything, what people notice about me is the utter lack of drama I bring even in high pressure and high conflict situations.
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

*Gender asymmetry*

Socially it is perfectly ok for a woman (as long as she isn't bigger or stronger than her mate) to use mild to moderate physical aggression with their man. In private and in public.

You see it on tv shows. 

Hell - Hillary Clinton jokes about how she used to throw shlt at Bill when she caught him cheating. And we are not talking nerf footballs. Heavy stuff. Flip the genders and that is not remotely ok. 





Anon1111 said:


> Men and women aren't the same.
> 
> Edit:
> 
> ...


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

always_alone said:


> Let me just say, that I find it quite interesting that when I, a woman, clearly state my boundaries and and desires re a relationship, it is somehow a signal that I must be a control freak with volatile and unreasonable emotions that need to be managed by my alpha hubby. And then there's Alex, a man, who only wants to know his wife arrived somewhere safely or if she has completely checked out of the marriage, yet this is somehow a clear signal to everyone that he is desperately seeking validation, is needy, weak, and therefore *must* never text her, follow up with her, be vulnerable in any way. Instead he should detach and improve himself for his own sake, so that even if his wife won't see how awesome he is, some other women will.
> 
> I can't be the onlu one here who sees something off about this?


Nope and why it did not work for me either.

Just letting you know that I feel the same way and the way you 

I know you already know this, it just seems like you are a lone voice in here but I know exactly what you are speaking of as well as living it.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Always,
> 
> Even though we aren't able to see anything the same way right now I'm going to share an observation that really helped me.
> 
> ...



Err, but MEM, I said quite explicitly that it wouldn't be the reading of the book that would send me off, but the adoption of its sexist principles.

Yes, I know. Many people don't see it as sexist, aren't threatened by it at all, and are quite happy to have many, many double standards about what they expect from women vs men. It is, as they say, "reality". I happen to disagree.

Yes, sexism makes me angry. I get that others see it as natural, biologically driven, inevitable, or even just what we have to put up with because that is the way of the world.

I happen to disagree. I see it as unjust and downright harmful to both men and women. And will continue to speak out against it in much the same way I would speak out against racism, homophobia, and other hurtful prejudices.

You want to know what I fear? Living in a world where people judge others unfairly based only on what hangs (or not) between their legs (or other stupid, superficial criteria).


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Err, but MEM, I said quite explicitly that it wouldn't be the reading of the book that would send me off, but the adoption of its sexist principles.
> 
> Yes, I know. Many people don't see it as sexist, aren't threatened by it at all, and are quite happy to have many, many double standards about what they expect from women vs men. It is, as they say, "reality". I happen to disagree.
> 
> ...


Always Alone, I feel the same way about speaking out against injustice and inequality and prejudices in society. 

But one of the most freeing realizations I made is that the private is not political. If it turns me on to have my husband lead me around in a leash while I lick his shoes, then dammit, THATS MY CHOICE as a free and independent woman who has agency over her own body, mind, and sexuality. 

I'd be the first in line to cast a stone at any man suggesting that that is how women want to be or should be treated. 

I think we sometimes forget that the interplay between a man and a woman in their marriage is not _necessarily_ a microcosm of the interplay of women and men in society. I don't want your social mores to dictate my sexual choices anymore that you would want my sexual choices to dictate your social mores. 

Maybe this view of mine is informed by a kink that is significant and that has caused me to, on many an occasion, feel the very type of prejudice that you say you revile. 

P.S. No, I don't desire my husband to lead me around on a leash while I lick his shoes. Not into that . . . at the moment, anyway.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

So here's a mind game that has worked very well for us. 

M2 has abandonment issues. Always has. Likely always will.

For years we had a bad pattern:
1. I'd ask her to do something with me (go to the gym, for a walk, etc). Things that we do together fairly often.
2. She'd decline 
3. I'd go alone
4. She would feel 'left out' even though I had sincerely invited her
5. She would start a fight/be hostile when I returned

My reaction to that was very male. Hardwired response to irrational aggression is - counter aggression. 

Very emotionally draining. 

So after the counselor explained the underlying dynamic I was able to see what was really happening. 

1. Feeling 'left out' made M2 anxious/fearful. And THAT made her angry. 
2. Getting hammered for doing something 'harmless' was frightening to me - and that made ME angry. 

---------
And this is where focus is everything. If my focus is on M2, the solution is easy, on me a little less easy. 


If I focus on M2, my answer would be: 
You need some serious IC. It isn't remotely acceptable to intentionally start fights because you are insecure. This is ENTIRELY your issue. 

Before the MC enlightened me, that really WAS my attitude even though I didn't express it because I know that M2 hates IC.

Post enlightenment:

When M2 declines to join me, instead of saying: Ok - I'll see you when I get back.

I do one or more of these things:
- Do you need me to pick anything up while I'm out? (Offering act of service - subtext - ILY)
- When I get back would you like to do XYZ? (Request for quality time - subtext - ILY)
- Long hug 

The best thing about this has been her response. That little bit of reassurance COMPLETELY changed the dynamic. She has never turned the offer to run an errand into a scavenger hunt. If we are out of milk or whatever she might mention it. Grocery store is right next to the gym. Fine by me. 

---------
So we had a broken dynamic. And now we don't. 

This is the difference between coddling (which isn't good for anyone) and supporting a partner. 

Coddling would have been - not going to the gym/for a walk/etc. - if M2 didn't want to go. 









GettingIt said:


> I think that if I saw it as you describe, I certainly would consider it to be "off." I don't think you are a control freak at all. It sounds to me like you and your husband are happy with one another. I don't think Alex is needy or weak. Whether or not his wife somehow perceives him is such is part of the equation, but again, I don't see anyone here saying that they know for sure this is the case. I see it being presented as one of the scenarios that Alex might want to consider, that's all. Alex is smart enough to know that THE ANSWER does not exist on TAM, MMSL, or anywhere but within his own heart and mind.
> 
> Like you, I'm known for utterly lacking drama and volatility in conflict in my life. My friends tease me about it all the time and sometimes get exasperated at my unflappable nature. Oddly, my husband would describe me as a real pistol, someone who is opinionated and strong willed and independent and who needs to be in control (that is, when he's not expressing exasperation at me for not getting upset about the things HE thinks are important!) He and I are very different, granted, but I think my marriage is the one place where I feel safe just letting all of me be visible. He's learned (in part on MMSL) to appreciate that and not see it as a demonstration of poor decorum or bad behavior on my part. I thank him every day for "letting" me be me. And by "letting" I mean by not allowing expression of my feelings rock his sense of security or change how he feels about me. And yes, I've learned to do the same for him.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Err - but Always - in a world increasingly filled with female leaders (in public and private) you consider the word leadership a bad word. 

It is a gender neutral term - that you have errr - masculinized - and in doing so developed an allergy to. 





always_alone said:


> Err, but MEM, I said quite explicitly that it wouldn't be the reading of the book that would send me off, but the adoption of its sexist principles.
> 
> Yes, I know. Many people don't see it as sexist, aren't threatened by it at all, and are quite happy to have many, many double standards about what they expect from women vs men. It is, as they say, "reality". I happen to disagree.
> 
> ...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

john117 said:


> Sooooo. To summarize, our difference is not in whether PD's cause people to make decisions that the rest of us would not make. I do not dispute that. Our difference is in how the impact occurs.


As far as I can tell, our only difference is that you seem to expect your wife to NOT behave like someone who has a severe mental illness, and I expect her TO behave like someone who has a severe mental illness. Your refusal to accept that she is so different mentally as to not be able to compare her to a non-personality-disordered person is cruel, IMO.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> Nope and why it did not work for me either.
> 
> Just letting you know that I feel the same way and the way you
> 
> I know you already know this, it just seems like you are a lone voice in here but I know exactly what you are speaking of as well as living it.


And as both FF and AA know, I get it, too. And this is true EVEN THOUGH my husband could look like a perfect study of Athol's "natural" if looking at him through a certain lens.

But there's another lens to see my husband through...and it takes more than a surface wipe sample to see it. When seen as he really is and not just his surface behaviors, it is clear that Athol's idea of a natural is really, very far off base. Given that Athol himself admits he never was nor is a "natural", it is easy to see why he can't quite get to the quality he tries to describe about naturals. So he goes about it backwards, and tries to apply all the evo-crap he can find to it, and then declares "this must be why the natural is so good with the ladies". :rofl:

I'm not saying that Athol's idea of the "made-natural" can't be effective in achieving the goals set forth (namely, treating women as conquests and believing the women enjoy it, in all cases, in all persons, and throughout all of history). Yes, this can be accomplished. But again - - there is information in the book that is so far off base that it is actually dangerous to both men and women (when looked at through a different lens), and ignoring this just because you may use the book for improvement is just frightening to me. 

It isn't that GettingIt's husband is going to turn into a jerk if he wasn't one before (to use her example). It is that her husband may or may not absorb the message that ALL WOMEN, not just his wife, are hypergamous wh*res. It's fine if GettingIt doesn't care about this, but the IDEA being spread from mind to mind is simply a hateful piece of propaganda meant to spread bitterness. (Don't forget that women are ALSO "chubby screechtards" when they are trying to express themselves to their husbands, and that women only have a "hamster" in their heads trying to figure out how the world turns.)  (And please, no man, please do NOT come tell me how "men have hamsters, too"....whatevs).

I'm sorry, but I will never ever feel this is an ok message to send around in the form of a marriage self-help book. And I reject the same type of message when I see it on the other side, such as ideas like that men don't need love they just need sex, or that men are so simple just give them a sandwich. Those ideas are ridiculous and demeaning to men, as far as I'm concerned. And my "natural" husband matches none of it.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> For years we had a bad pattern:
> 
> 1. I'd ask her to do something with me (go to the gym, for a walk, etc). Things that we do together fairly often.
> 
> ...



And this is emotionally draining? Remember the game I used to play with my daughters where we would guess how many minutes past our ETA it would take for mom to start calling? After a while we started driving around on purpose, stop for food, etc. Then the girls told mom about the game and the calls stopped. The modified Ferber technique works fairly well...

I realize the abandonment issues - present in BPD as well - but it gets tiring after a while.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

Faithful Wife said:


> =. * (Don't forget that women are ALSO "chubby screechtards" when they are trying to express themselves to their husbands, and that women only have a "hamster" in their heads trying to figure out how the world words.)  *


This is the core of my bad experience, along with the patronizing assumption that I'm not really meaning what I'm saying.

Aaaanyhoo. I'll continue reading.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> This is the core of my bad experience, along with the patronizing assumption that I'm not really meaning what I'm saying.
> 
> Aaaanyhoo. I'll continue reading.


That would definitely suck, and I think if MMSL had been part of a bad experience for me personally, I might feel differently about it. Then again, I think I'd be much more likely to disrespect the man who treated me that way than I would be to pin it on MMSL. I'm not sure how I'd get over it with that man, or even if I could. 

I don't know--we are so much products of our own experiences. I think I've just been really, really lucky with my husband.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> As far as I can tell, our only difference is that you seem to expect your wife to NOT behave like someone who has a severe mental illness, and I expect her TO behave like someone who has a severe mental illness. Your refusal to accept that she is so different mentally as to not be able to compare her to a non-personality-disordered person is cruel, IMO.



Still puzzled by the difference in outcomes from the same subroutine. I'll have to defer it to office hours (never again )

I am sure you understand how BPD works. The same inputs and scenarios trigger different responses based on who is involved. Last week we ran into some friends that we hadn't seen in ten years and immediately wifey invited them for dinner. She was very excited etc etc. We had a good time. If it was just me and her either she would decline or would talk for 2 hours straight about her colleagues. The same" socialize" subroutine was called both times with different parameters. Totally different outcomes.

I don't expect her to act "non BPD" around me but I do expect her to recognize that something is off in her behavior and seek help. Today she spent an hour on the phone with her doctor about one test result that was a fraction above normal. The doc laughed it off as lab error but she went on for a while... Yet the same person was told in the face about her BPD from a phd clinical psychologist and she asked "is it dangerous" ?? And shrugged it off. Same subroutine... You get the idea.

I don't expect her to act like anything, FW. We are well past the expectation game. It's cruel indeed but I'm not the cruel one.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

The 'old' me is laughing. 

But the 'new me' the one that emerged after observing Dug and JLD is totally cringing. 

And I'm ashamed to admit having done similar stuff. 

Only speaking for myself on this. 

The 'old me' would be insulted/offended that M2 didn't trust me. I was angry because I deserved her trust. 

Funny thing, she violently agreed with that. That I deserved her trust. When I stepped back I realized it wasn't about me AT ALL. It was M2's insecurity / anxiety. 

So now, instead of humiliating her in front of the children, I simply do what I can to help her feel less anxious. 

I do gently tease M2 when I return home to: interrogation mode

But that's a soft attempt to raise self awareness - not an attempt to punish. 






john117 said:


> And this is emotionally draining? Remember the game I used to play with my daughters where we would guess how many minutes past our ETA it would take for mom to start calling? After a while we started driving around on purpose, stop for food, etc. Then the girls told mom about the game and the calls stopped. The modified Ferber technique works fairly well...
> 
> I realize the abandonment issues - present in BPD as well - but it gets tiring after a while.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

john117 said:


> I don't expect her to act "non BPD" around me but *I do expect her to recognize that something is off in her behavior and seek help*.
> 
> I don't expect her to act like anything, FW. We are well past the expectation game. It's cruel indeed but *I'm not the cruel one*.


Again you are showing you do not understand PD's, or you would understand that they do not "recognize something is off in their behavior and seek help". In fact, this is one of the very indications of a PD. Expecting her to seek help shows your ignorance of this fact.

And the fact that you don't see what you are doing and thinking as cruel, (all the cruelty is all on her plate from you view), again makes me wonder about your processing abilities.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

When a clinical psychologist who you trust tells you after 8 sessions you have BPD I would think this is enough of a "recognize something is off balance" message.

If not...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

If you knew more about PD's you would understand this is normal.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Personality disorders--Treatment for the 'untreatable'

While people with PDs can possess very different personality disturbances, they have at least one thing in common: chances are their mental illness will not remit without professional intervention. However, exactly what that intervention should consist of remains a subject for debate. This, along with the disorders' notoriety for being problematic to treat, has posed challenges to their successful resolution, or at least management.

"[People with] personality disorders exhibit chronic, pervasive problems getting along with people in all kinds of different contexts," says Thomas R. Lynch, PhD, assistant professor of psychology at Duke University and the Duke University Medical Center. "And this includes therapists."

As a result, *people with the disorders often don't seek treatment*, and those who do often drop out, he says. For example, people with borderline personality disorder (BPD)--the most commonly treated personality disorder--quit treatment programs about 70 percent of the time.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Err - but Always - in a world increasingly filled with female leaders (in public and private) you consider the word leadership a bad word.
> 
> It is a gender neutral term - that you have errr - masculinized - and in doing so developed an allergy to.


Oh, MEM, you do not understand where I'm coming from at all.

Leadership is practical, useful, effective, necessary,and yes, gender neutral.

I'm just not convinced it's always appropriate in the context of a love relationship. I want a partner, not a leadee or a leader.

Now maybe some need/like/want to be led romantically and through life. But I also think self-appointing oneself into that role, or for that matter casting the other into that role without their consent, can lead to more strife and problems that it solves.

I also still don't quite buy that managing one's own behaviour amounts to leadership. I can do what's good for me until the cows come home. Doesn't mean it is good for him in any way. I can decide all I want what *I* think would be good for him, make him a better person, heal his hurt, whatever. But unless it is what he wants for himself, he will just tell me to **** off, and rightly so.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I've never read MMSL.

I think people project a lot of stuff onto this alpha/beta paradigm.

To me, alpha just means a self assured, confident, attractive man. There are a lot of routes to get to that destination and the perception of a man as alpha is highly situational.

If you think alpha is only the domineering, blowhard, macho man than I can see why you would be put off by the idea that all men should become this.

I do think there must be some element of dominance or mastery. Is there a woman in the world who is attracted to a guy who does not stand out in any way? Whatever he is good at is probably what pulls you in. That is dominance.

I can also see why people get put off by the idea that women will "submit" to the alpha. But again, I think this is a failure of language rather than meaning.

I think there are a lot of different ways this plays out. Sometimes it's probably outright submission, but I think more often it's that the alpha is just charismatic or charming or just hot.

When a women says, he swept me off my feet or he looked right into me, that is some alpha stuff.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> John,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I've done the approach you suggested many times. No impact. I'm sure someone with a lot more compassion and patience than me can work out a better solution. I prefer to improvise. 

But the bottom line is it should not be an issue for M2 or for you in my view. My father was gone for weeks at a time as an officer. My mom was gone for days at stone as part of her job too. No cellphones back then. Yet they survived just fine. 

If that makes me a bad guy add it to my tab.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

john117 said:


> When a clinical psychologist who you trust tells you after 8 sessions you have BPD I would think this is enough of a "recognize something is off balance" message.
> .


From what I understand, BPD are actually notoriously adept at justifying their off-balance behaviour.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

I'm a "simple" person... meaning straightforward... I'm happy for myself, I'm sad for my wife. I think I'm pretty "normal". I like to talk. I like to discuss things. I don't like being what I'm not. Take me or leave me. I'm pleased if people can change themselves for the better. I don't think I need to do that. I feel comfortable in my shoes. Could do with losing half a stone, though...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> If you knew more about PD's you would understand this is normal.



Google to the rescue I see. 

Pray tell us, if a doctor tells me I have XYZ disease and explains the typical XYZ symptoms that match my symptoms perfectly, and I trust the doctor, is that not enough of a warning to let me know something is wrong? 

I'm not talking about seeking treatment. Just to acknowledge the issue and consider treatment. 

The doctor told her treatment options, pretty much weekly IC for like ever, DBT or CBT. I have done a lot of CBT techniques with her to get her to stop some specific behaviors and had moderate success, but it was very tiring. The successes were mostly in situational behaviors at work. Sadly all that went out the window when she changed jobs and works from home with little interaction..


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> In Absentia--
> 
> I think I really understand where you are coming from. I have many times said the exact same things you are saying.
> 
> ...


I know I said tomorrow, but I'm not too tired tonight...

I'm not denying it's a journey and you grow up in your marriage and your life. I know what my relationship is. Would I like it to be different? Yes. But it's not up to me. Obviously, other people have a more malleable partner, I don't. I've done what I could. I'm not superman and losing 2 stones won't make any difference to my marriage or me... apart from having to spend a fortune for a new wardrobe. My dog likes me the way I am, anyway. 

I guess I'm saying all this because I come from a different point of view. I'm not trying to win my wife back. She is awesome in many respects, she is pretty, I fancy her like mad, she is my ideal woman, but she is from another planet and I can't visit that planet. I run out of fuel... night!

P.S. Thanks for everybody's input... very much appreciated.... very valuable.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> I'm a "simple" person... meaning straightforward... I'm happy for myself, I'm sad for my wife. I think I'm pretty "normal". I like to talk. I like to discuss things. I don't like being what I'm not. Take me or leave me. I'm pleased if people can change themselves for the better. I don't think I need to do that. I feel comfortable in my shoes. Could do with losing half a stone, though...


If I were you, I would start by losing the excess weight. That is easy and you will feel good regardless of what happens with your wife.

After you lose the weight, I would spend some money on some clothes.

Then plan some events that you enjoy. Go get concert tickets or book a hotel room someplace you always wanted to go. Figure out who to go with later.

Basically, start living your life as if your wife wasn't in it. Keep up your responsibilities but carve a space out for yourself that you can enjoy.

I'm not one of these annoyingly optimistic people so please take it from me that doing this stuff really does help.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

john117 said:


> Pray tell us, if a doctor tells me I have XYZ disease and explains the typical XYZ symptoms that match my symptoms perfectly, and I trust the doctor, is that not enough of a warning to let me know something is wrong?
> 
> I'm not talking about seeking treatment. Just to acknowledge the issue and consider treatment.
> 
> The doctor told her treatment options, pretty much weekly IC for like ever, DBT or CBT. I have done a lot of CBT techniques with her to get her to stop some specific behaviors and had moderate success, but it was very tiring. The successes were mostly in situational behaviors at work. Sadly all that went out the window when she changed jobs and works from home with little interaction..


Again...just further showing your ignorance of the disorder.

For some reason you expect YOUR WIFE to be successful in asking for, getting, and staying in treatment, even though 70% of those like her are not able to accomplish this? :scratchhead:

You also keep assuming that I'm just googling stuff to make my points...even though I have said several times now that I have experience with this because I have more than one family member who are disordered (and also more than one who are on the autism spectrum). I have seen it for myself...they do NOT seek treatment, they do not stay in treatment if they do seek it, and they do not improve...I would say the 70% is actually low.

But go on and keep expecting her to just wake up one day and "realize" she needs treatment because poor John is being harmed by her actions. 

No wonder you are so pissed and bitter about it. You still expect her to act like a non-disordered person when it comes to her mental health.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

And also John, if you'd like to show me where there are stories of SUCCESSFUL treatment of BPD patients who sought out treatment, I'd be more than happy to read about those.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Always,
There's a power dynamic in every relationship. The healthier the R, the less visible that dynamic is. 

When healthy, that dynamic is based mostly on love and minimally on fear. And it's also balanced in a way that both partners feel good about. 

That said, I've done a poor job of answering a question that I believe you asked a ways back. Who's in charge? 

That question can only be easily answered if the concept of leadership is based on positional authority. And obviously in the context of marriage - positional authority has historically meant that: penis = primacy 

Neither me nor Farsides nor GettingIt are endorsing positional authority. 

Sincere question. What do you two do when one of you wants to go left and the other wants to go right and there is no easy mid point compromise? 

What happens when one of you has much more expertise in a given area? 

Does it really feel wrong to you to either speak or hear the phrases: 
1. You're in charge, let me know what I can do to support you 
OR
2. I'll drive, I know what WE are trying to accomplish here

Real example. M2 and I had different desires regarding how many children to have. I worked VERY hard to help us reach a point where neither of us felt we were steam rolling or being steam rolled by the other. It was a tough situation and yes it was a power struggle. I didn't want it to be - it just was. 

If you and AA2 have figured out a way to handle pretty much everything as true equals - what happens when you truly want different things? 


QUOTE=always_alone;11435322]Oh, MEM, you do not understand where I'm coming from at all.

Leadership is practical, useful, effective, necessary,and yes, gender neutral.

I'm just not convinced it's always appropriate in the context of a love relationship. I want a partner, not a leadee or a leader.

Now maybe some need/like/want to be led romantically and through life. But I also think self-appointing oneself into that role, or for that matter casting the other into that role without their consent, can lead to more strife and problems that it solves.

I also still don't quite buy that managing one's own behaviour amounts to leadership. I can do what's good for me until the cows come home. Doesn't mean it is good for him in any way. I can decide all I want what *I* think would be good for him, make him a better person, heal his hurt, whatever. But unless it is what he wants for himself, he will just tell me to **** off, and rightly so.[/QUOTE]


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

GettingIt said:


> That would definitely suck, and I think if MMSL had been part of a bad experience for me personally, I might feel differently about it. Then again, I think I'd be much more likely to disrespect the man who treated me that way than I would be to pin it on MMSL. I'm not sure how I'd get over it with that man, or even if I could.
> 
> I don't know--we are so much products of our own experiences. I think I've just been really, really lucky with my husband.


I pin it on MMSL because he didn't treat me that way before he read it and after pointing out the ways he had taken it to heart and it was ****ing up everything, he stopped.

The funny thing is I see a lot of the same thing in these exchanges between always_alone, MEM and farside. Like this:




> Originally Posted by always_alone
> Oh, I wouldn't leave him for reading it --it was the "taking it seriously" or implementing the tactics that would have me out the door.
> 
> As for what he does when I trigger? Often he appreciates and is amused by my scathing attacks on ideologies and POVs that I object to. Sometimes he gets hurt by what I have to say. Sometimes he comes off as very vulnerable and needy.
> ...





> Originally Posted by farsidejunky
> Has the need to control always been a problem for you?


LOL. a_a was talking about one thing and farside jumped in with a leading question like_ wtf, were we talking or are you trying to get one over one me_? (is what I'm thinking). All the effing time from my husband during this phase

This isn't to pick on farside or say MMSL is crap--but it's really easy to see why it went wrong over here in Fryland and always_alone would quickly walk away from her SO if he started implementing it.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

IA,
So what's your exit strategy? 





In Absentia said:


> I'm a "simple" person... meaning straightforward... I'm happy for myself, I'm sad for my wife. I think I'm pretty "normal". I like to talk. I like to discuss things. I don't like being what I'm not. Take me or leave me. I'm pleased if people can change themselves for the better. I don't think I need to do that. I feel comfortable in my shoes. Could do with losing half a stone, though...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,
M2 was totally supportive of a high level of work related travel. She totally understood that it was for the good of the family. 

But anything not work related. Whole different response. 





john117 said:


> I've done the approach you suggested many times. No impact. I'm sure someone with a lot more compassion and patience than me can work out a better solution. I prefer to improvise.
> 
> But the bottom line is it should not be an issue for M2 or for you in my view. My father was gone for weeks at a time as an officer. My mom was gone for days at stone as part of her job too. No cellphones back then. Yet they survived just fine.
> 
> If that makes me a bad guy add it to my tab.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

alexm said:


> It's exhausting.
> 
> I'm willing to have these conversations and not give up on her, because she loves me. She doesn't love me fully and completely, but I hope she will someday.
> 
> ...


Going through this entire thread, I think this is probably a key statement coming from alexm and in regards to his wife. All I wonder is if he's ever said this directly to her. That would be all the motivation I need to keep growing.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> John,
> 
> M2 was totally supportive of a high level of work related travel. She totally understood that it was for the good of the family.
> 
> ...



Lucky you. J2 has fits when I go on personal or business trips. She must really love me 

Somehow she has the idea that business trips are fun (ours were). As the girls got older she grew out of that thankfully.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> I pin it on MMSL because he didn't treat me that way before he read it and after pointing out the ways he had taken it to heart and it was ****ing up everything, he stopped.


See, my husband didn't start treating me any differently while he was on the MMSL forums. He started to deal with his own sh!t, he own unhappiness. I had been BEGGING him to do that for years. So you can see how experience has a lot to do with our divergent views on it.




FrenchFry said:


> The funny thing is I see a lot of the same thing in these exchanges between always_alone, MEM and farside. Like this:
> 
> LOL. a_a was talking about one thing and farside jumped in with a leading question like_ wtf, were we talking or are you trying to get one over one me_? (is what I'm thinking). All the effing time from my husband during this phase


Yeah, but that's not exclusive to this conversation or this topic--it happens every day in just about every thread in TAM, and I think at some point we have ALL done it. We are so eager to make our own point be understood, that we fail to listen to what the other person is really trying to get across. I don't think it's malicious or even intentional most of the time, but I've also noticed that folks are over eager to call one another on it in a very defensive way instead of clarifying respectfully and continuing the conversation. Too many folks are worried about being RIGHT instead of understanding that divergent opinions are not personal attacks. 



FrenchFry said:


> This isn't to pick on farside or say MMSL is crap--but it's really easy to see why it went wrong over here in Fryland and always_alone would quickly walk away from her SO if he started implementing it.


Hey I give you credit for staying with your dude. Not sure I could have done the same and still trust him not to do something similar again. I mean, there is LOTS of bad advice out there . . .


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

I'll take all the blame--I bought the book.

No worries, I only listen to him and myself these days and like a_a, one foot out the door if he wants to listen to my hamster.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

FrenchFry said:


> LOL. a_a was talking about one thing and farside jumped in with a leading question like_ wtf, were we talking or are you trying to get one over one me_? (is what I'm thinking). All the effing time from my husband during this phase
> 
> This isn't to pick on farside or say MMSL is crap--but it's really easy to see why it went wrong over here in Fryland and always_alone would quickly walk away from her SO if he started implementing it.


This may be fair criticism.

It was reaching the point where she was using techniques (common in politics) to change the language of what I was saying in an effort to refute my point.

I saw it as controlling. 

Others may see it differently.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

Farside.

Maybe. Maybe it's just how she communicates. I have a tendency to talk widely to get to a narrower point, which can be lost in the wider view.

I personally got rather pissed off when my husband attached other adjectives to what I was saying rather than dealing with what I said. Which is why I laughed.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> And also John, if you'd like to show me where there are stories of SUCCESSFUL treatment of BPD patients who sought out treatment, I'd be more than happy to read about those.



I have read the book below along with every other BPD book I could find, read up on PD's in general from my old clinical psych text era 1980 and modern literature, spent a lot of time discussing BPD and its aftermath during FC, follow a lot of clinical psych blogs, and so on. Heck, I even have a copy of the DSM IV that I picked up. for an unrelated class. Far from being a PD noob unfortunately. 

Treatment is not easy even with the BPD fully cooperating. I spent a couple years on the 'official' BPD forum only to find it full of defeated souls. 

http://mobile.walmart.com/ip/260985...87021208&wl4=&wl5=pla&wl6=75176203968&veh=sem


""Borderline Personality Disorder. "What the hell was that?" raged Rachel Reiland when she read the diagnosis written in her medical chart. As the 29-year old accountant, wife, and mother of young children would soon discover, it was the diagnosis that finally explained her explosive anger, manipulative behaviors, and self-destructive episodes- including bouts of anorexia, substance abuse, and sexual promiscuity. With astonishing honesty, Reiland's memoir reveals what mental illness feels like and looks like from the inside, and how healing from such a devastating disease is possible through intensive therapy and the support of loved ones.""


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> If I were you, I would start by losing the excess weight. That is easy and you will feel good regardless of what happens with your wife.
> 
> After you lose the weight, I would spend some money on some clothes.
> 
> ...


I'm already doing that... as far as losing weight and buying new clothes, that doesn't work, simply because my wife would think I'm doing for one reason only: getting in her nickers...  Or maybe I'm trying to meet other ladies... well, she doesn't mind that either.

I really shouldn't post here, because my situation is somewhat irrelevant to the OP's plight. My wife has big issues (OCD), so nothing will work until she fixes herself. I finally managed to make her understand that, without therapy, our marriage is dead. But she doesn't want therapy. So, now, instead of blaming me for the problems in our marriage, she is aware where the problem lies. I'm done, because it's out of my hands. No new clothes would fix that...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> IA,
> So what's your exit strategy?


I haven't planned it yet in detail... I'm waiting for my little daughter to hit 18, which is in 4.5 years time.

I'm not originally from the UK, so I plan to spend a lot more time in my own country, not far away... going back to my roots (I can move my job). We'll see how she'll react to that. Maybe she'll have an epiphany... who knows. I'm not counting on it, though.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Always,
> There's a power dynamic in every relationship. The healthier the R, the less visible that dynamic is.
> 
> When healthy, that dynamic is based mostly on love and minimally on fear. And it's also balanced in a way that both partners feel good about.


Oh, power struggles are just about the last thing I want in my relationship. What a terrible thought to think they are inevitable...

I hear what you are saying about positional authority, and so maybe need to rethink this whole leadership thing. But my initial reaction is simply that power and leadership are two very different things, and more importantly, that power isn't always about struggle. There are many different types of it, all of which are necessary: power to heal, to grow, to create, to solve, to act, to nurture.

What happens when we disagree depends entirely on the circumstances. We squabble, we yell, we rationally put forth arguments and reasons, we research and discuss, we plead or whine, and so on.

As for calling on expertise: always. Why wouldn't you make the most of the knowledge in the room? As for deferring? Sure, all the time, both sides. I don't think of it as someone driving, though. More like division of labour. 

Our baseline is that people are who they are, and no matter what, you can't really change them, and it's a mistake to try. You need to accept who and what they are and can offer, and work with that. 

With that baseline, our efforts are mostly collaborative. We both bring what we can to the table, try not to be too freaking unreasonable (sometimes with more success than others), and tackle whatever needs to be done.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Alex, I just want to apologize for any role I may have played in derailing your thread with peanut gallery bickering.

If I were to summarize and offer my advice (for whatever it's worth), I'd say this:

If I were you at this point, I'd employ the Occam's razor approach. Never mind the labels, the diagnoses, the complications -- look for the simplest solution.

Were I in your shoes and my SO told me he was asexual and only participated in sex for my benefit, I would be reeling. And I honestly don't know if I could recover at all, let alone in 18 months. So from where I sit, your conflicts and struggles are perfectly understandable, as is the time you need to make your decision.

But remember also that this is probably the first time she has admitted this openly too, and she too is reeling, not sure what the upshot is. She may very simply be thinking that now that you know the truth about her, and ostensibly accepted it, that she is free to just be the real her.

But you don't like that real her, and want the old one back. So the question really is can you fully accept her as she really is, both good and bad?

And FrenchFry nailed it. Some women will definitely be driven even further away by alpha-man behaviour and absolutely inspired by the love and care you show for your wife.

And some women really just need to be fully seen and appreciated for exactly who they are before they will be fully in and open.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

always- I have really agreed with your posts. It would turn me off too. I agree that unless both people agree otherwise, relationships should be 50/50 leadership, both make decisions, both have the power to have the final say.
I started to read MMSL. Couldn't finish it. It's not at all what I want and I really dislike the idea that it's universal. If H tried those methods to fix our sexless relationship, he would make it worse and could lose any chance of fixing it at all.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

john117 said:


> Treatment is not easy even with the BPD fully cooperating. I spent a couple years on the 'official' BPD forum only to find it full of defeated souls.


Then why on earth would you still be saying things like you "expect" her to seek treatment? :scratchhead:

I don't really expect an answer that will make any sense...I really just wish you'd stop being so hateful and bitter about your wife and your situation, take some ownership and stop blameshifting it all upon your wife's illness, and show some compassion for her illness. None of that means you have to love her or like her, but your constant contempt of her is cruel given her illness, whether you see it yourself or not.

Alex...sorry for threadjack.

One note about MMSL...I would not be offended with the book at ALL if it presented itself as "one way some guys have found success" instead of "this SCIENCE is PROVEN to show you the ONE AND ONLY WAY a woman will EVER be attracted to you, man up or die, beta wuss!"

The book has no place in it for any type of man or woman that doesn't fall into line with its pretend-scientific premise: that women only want men who dominate them.

If this was true and could be universally applied, then people outside of this forum would have heard of this book (when you step out into the rest of the world of relationship books, people haven't really heard of it).

Sorry Athol, but there are gay and bi-sexual people, dominant women/submissive men, intersexed and trans and queer and asexual people all over the world....many many types of people who don't fit into your narrow, diversity-phobic ****** tightey viewpoint. And not only that, but take your hamster and shove it up your azz.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Let's see... Hypochondriac of epic dimensions, constantly bugs DD22 to continue therapy to deal with her "issues" the moment DD22 has any behavior wife finds objectionable (girl did 3 years of therapy thru high school and had phenomenal improvement)... Avid fitness and health aficionado, vegetarian, two diagnosed mental health patients in immediate family... Great health insurance that actually pays for BPD... Ten years work in Big Pharma including marketing analytics of mental health pharmaceuticals.... 

Dunno, FW. I guess I expect too much :rofl:

Perhaps I should take her father's lead who literally left his wife (mental patient ground zero) to die of heart disease and family induced stress at her country's public hospitals all while getting top western care for himself. Now her dad is 85 and enjoying life, working part time, dating his housekeeper, etc. 

You can't even begin to understand the meaning of cruel.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Mega-like for your MMSL review.... Pretty accurate.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

john117 said:


> You can't even begin to understand the meaning of cruel.


John, you are bright enough to recognize a justification when you see it...

Just because someone is "more cruel" than another does not give us an excuse for inaction.

Also, to outright state she does not know cruelty takes a rather large leap of sh!t because you have no idea where she comes from or her life experiences.

You are being held to task. I think that is healthy for all of us, no matter how hard we rationalize or justify.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

I don't know FW from Adam but I'm not here to play the "my life is more / less cruel than your life" game. I read thread after thread of "epic fight because he was 10 minutes late" or "epic fight because his kid was disrespectful" and "epic fight because he bought one more gadget / pet" and it's like... These are first world problems.... 

With her family (and culture) we are dealing with krap that is so off the grid there's no point even mentioning them or asking for understanding. I'm glad my girls made it out of the house undamaged and all I want is my 27 months. After that I'll be happy to join the "whoa me her match dot com profile picture is fake" first world problem discussions.

Mental illness is what's cruel. The rest is just breadcrumbs.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

john117 said:


> I don't know FW from Adam but I'm not here to play the "my life is more / less cruel than your life" game. I read thread after thread of "epic fight because he was 10 minutes late" or "epic fight because his kid was disrespectful" and "epic fight because he bought one more gadget / pet" and it's like... These are first world problems....
> 
> With her family (and culture) we are dealing with krap that is so off the grid there's no point even mentioning them or asking for understanding. I'm glad my girls made it out of the house undamaged and all I want is my 27 months. After that I'll be happy to join the "whoa me her match dot com profile picture is fake" first world problem discussions.
> 
> Mental illness is what's cruel. The rest is just breadcrumbs.


John, I am not suggesting you don't have it hard. Harder than most. 

But it is still not an excuse to be lousy. You know this. But being bitter sometimes make you forget.

Stay grounded, my friend.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,
No one here is intentionally minimizing how ugly it is to be on the receiving end of this type mental illness. 

You do seem absolutely convinced that you've managed your side of things in a high functioning way - and that its all her.

Humor a sincere observation from a well meaning third party. 

You - as an individual are without doubt mentally healthy

Your dynamic with J2, well - I'm starting to view mental disease as if it's similar to an infectious disease. 




john117 said:


> I don't know FW from Adam but I'm not here to play the "my life is more / less cruel than your life" game. I read thread after thread of "epic fight because he was 10 minutes late" or "epic fight because his kid was disrespectful" and "epic fight because he bought one more gadget / pet" and it's like... These are first world problems....
> 
> With her family (and culture) we are dealing with krap that is so off the grid there's no point even mentioning them or asking for understanding. I'm glad my girls made it out of the house undamaged and all I want is my 27 months. After that I'll be happy to join the "whoa me her match dot com profile picture is fake" first world problem discussions.
> 
> Mental illness is what's cruel. The rest is just breadcrumbs.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

There's a word for it in the PD community...it's called getting fleas. Referring to when a non-personality disordered person begins emulating some of the behaviors of a loved one of a PD. Refusing to see any of your own contribution to your own issues is a common one that gets passed around via fleas.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Sigh... The therapist checked me for that. Other than having an annoying tendency to challenge and over analyze everything plus my ADHD I'm in very good mental shape. 

It helped that the therapist went to the state rival university from me :rofl:


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Always,

In our house there are two kinds of conflict. 
1. Miscommunications 
2. Sincere differences of opinion

The first aren't power struggles. The second are. 

One thing that M2 and I were BOTH really good about was recognizing where we had large power imbalances and acting accordingly. 





always_alone said:


> Oh, power struggles are just about the last thing I want in my relationship. What a terrible thought to think they are inevitable...
> 
> I hear what you are saying about positional authority, and so maybe need to rethink this whole leadership thing. But my initial reaction is simply that power and leadership are two very different things, and more importantly, that power isn't always about struggle. There are many different types of it, all of which are necessary: power to heal, to grow, to create, to solve, to act, to nurture.
> 
> ...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Of course, whatever it is, john doesn't have it. Nothing to see in his mirror except all good things. Again this is a sign of mental issues (inability to accept even a hint of a problem with oneself).


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

The therapists stamp of approval, that's not the real metric. 

You have two young adult daughters who love and respect you. And when pushed to the brink, you bet the marriage to ensure that the designer could pursue her dreams, not J2's dreams for her. 

Your job requires a good mix of pragmatism and interpersonal skills. And it's obvious that your focus at work is on producing the best product possible given a certain set of financial and engineering parameters. 

And that's all stuff you sort of mention 'in passing'. It's not a sales pitch it's the type of context folks typically provide along the way on TAM. 

As far as J2 goes - her disease has penetrated your psychological immune system. I am not saying that your conduct towards her is crazy. I am saying that she has harmed you in a way that has made for a lower functioning reponse pattern. 

And - I absolutely believe that J2 is full blown BPD. And M2 is at worst BPD-lite. That said, I have experienced a less intense version of what you've been subjected to. And for quite some time responded as badly or worse than you have. 

For a long time I felt disoriented. Than angry. Then bitter and resentful. 

I still remember that day in counseling when I said: After all I've done for M2, I can't believe she would do X, Y and Z to me. 

M2 had a schedule conflict - so it was just me that day. 

The MC asked me - WHY is she doing that? I shook my head. She askee me: Is M2 doing this TO you, or FOR herself?

Once I accepted that M2 was just trying to feel 'less awful' in the moment, my entire viewpoint changed. 

So John, this might or might not resonate with you. 

I had two totally conflicting views of M2. 
1. The mature, confident, clever, funny, financially successful, sexy, socially adept, playfully competitive woman I met
2. The insecure, sometimes socially awkward, frightened of abandonment, jealous, controlling woman she sometimes is

You also have two lists for J2. One is pure admiration. And deservedly so. The way she adapted when her financial support disappeared shortly after getting to the U.S. Getting her PhD. while remaining highly engaged with you and the girls. 

The other - your second list - feels a lot closer to contempt. 

----------
So - if you are still humoring me - and I hope you are. 

The MC helped me realize that: When M2 was in (2) mode, I would quickly slip into (2) mode myself. Train wreck. 

She told me to do this self check - she said: Ask yourself: can I be playful? Because if you can't be playful with M2 - if you've temporarily lost that ability - YOU are slipping into (2) mode. And that means YOU are now injecting negative emotional energy into a partner who is already upset. 

I asked her why the whole Playfullness thing mattered. And she said: Because when you act that way with M2, she takes it as you not being the least bit destabilized by her - ummm - antics. 

It means that you still love her and accept her even when she is off the rails. That you aren't making it about YOU. You're letting it be about her. 











john117 said:


> Sigh... The therapist checked me for that. Other than having an annoying tendency to challenge and over analyze everything plus my ADHD I'm in very good mental shape.
> 
> It helped that the therapist went to the state rival university from me :rofl:


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

But MEM...John has no intention of trying to stay married to his wife, he is just waiting it out until kids are out of college. Which I do agree, that's the route he should take...they are far beyond hope or help of a marriage recovery. So I totally understand why John wouldn't bother trying to understand her anymore, or try to be a good husband to her, or anything like that. He has stopped trying, and that's for the best. 

I just wish he would see how different his situation is than others around here and stop comparing apples to oranges, and that he would have simple compassion for her illness and stop talking so badly about her around here (or anywhere). Just doing those simple things would help him move on and stop being so entrenched in bitterness so that when he does leave her, he might move on faster. But this seems unlikely given his defensiveness and inability to see any part of his own issues...this is going to hold him back, possibly forever. He can leave her, but his life won't change for the better while he's holding on to all of that crap and he won't be able to maintain any future relationship because of it (unless with yet another disordered person).

And John knows I LIKE HIM...nothing I'm saying here changes that fact. He's a grumpity bumpity bit of maleness, but I like people like this. Doesn't change how I feel about the apples and oranges problem.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Faithful Wife said:


> But MEM...John has no intention of trying to stay married to his wife, he is just waiting it out until kids are out of college. Which I do agree, that's the route he should take...they are far beyond hope or help of a marriage recovery. So I totally understand why John wouldn't bother trying to understand her anymore, or try to be a good husband to her, or anything like that. He has stopped trying, and that's for the best.
> 
> I just wish he would see how different his situation is than others around here and stop comparing apples to oranges, and that he would have simple compassion for her illness and stop talking so badly about her around here (or anywhere). Just doing those simple things would help him move on and stop being so entrenched in bitterness so that when he does leave her, he might move on faster. But this seems unlikely given his defensiveness and inability to see any part of his own issues...this is going to hold him back, possibly forever. He can leave her, but his life won't change for the better while he's holding on to all of that crap and he won't be able to maintain any future relationship because of it (unless with yet another disordered person).
> 
> And John knows I LIKE HIM...nothing I'm saying here changes that fact. He's a grumpity bumpity bit of maleness, but I like people like this. Doesn't change how I feel about the apples and oranges problem.


nah, I totally get where John is coming from... he is just lucky he is only got 27 months left of his sentence, whilst I have 54... roughly twice as much... nobody is bitter... well, I am, but i am intelligence enough to understand what happened, at last... but feelings are feelings... you can't stop those. They'll go, eventually.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Of course, whatever it is, john doesn't have it. Nothing to see in his mirror except all good things. Again this is a sign of mental issues (inability to accept even a hint of a problem with oneself).



If I was in half of the counseling sessions of my daughter for 3 years, plus a few individuals and a few with my wife I would tend to think I'm ok 

But I may just accept Dr. Faithful's second opinion and commit myself to the nearest facility for further evaluation.

I do have plenty of issues, like we all do: 

- I have ADHD 
- I'm not ambitious 
- I'm not hardworking enough
- I spend way too much time on hobbies
- I'm way too stubborn
- I'm too analytical
- I can be manipulative
- I'm impossible to read (too many layers)
- I am very sarcastic and cynical
- I'm a pessimist
- I take few things seriously 
- look, a squirrel

With the exception of ADHD nothing in the above list is in DSM IV. Maybe I should get DSM V to see if squirrels are listed...

View attachment 31634


----------



## pidge70 (Jan 17, 2011)

Faithful Wife said:


> There's a word for it in the PD community...it's called getting fleas. Referring to when a non-personality disordered person begins emulating some of the behaviors of a loved one of a PD. Refusing to see any of your own contribution to your own issues is a common one that gets passed around via fleas.


I call it BPD by proxy. Joe has it.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

John knows his own issues fairly well. He just listed them. He's never hid them or pooh-pooh'ed them. He also has no plans to sulk in sorrow. As long as the financial settlement is fair it's ding dong the witch is gone time. He's got a good ability to block things from memory. 

He plans to get out of the relationship with two grudges. One, that despite a decade of psychology education he did not make this work. Two, as DD22 put it, three billion women in the world and you got married to her... Blame the odds.

I'm not bitter. I came to America 33 years ago and accomplished most of what I wanted to accomplish. I leave behind two incredible daughters, a JD Power award for my team's work, a few patents, publications, and people who will remember me for a while. I lived my dream. I can go to a store and buy stuff I helped design. Not bad.

Enough with the eulogy, gotta eat dinner


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Sorry for the epic thread jack Alex.

John, all I was ever getting at is that you can't compare your sitch to the average TAM marriage. Let's hug it out, ok? (Grabs john, gives big hug). There see? Much better.


----------



## Buddy400 (Aug 30, 2014)

always_alone said:


> I do not for a second believe this idea that women just spew emotional crap that they don't mean or believe, just to see if he is strong enough to "handle" her.


I do believe such women exist (probably a lot of them). I didn't used to. I thought that this would be treating woman like a dog instead of an equal. And for those women, I'm glad that there are men like FarSide.

However, I don't have any interest in "handling" those women, so I'll take alone's advice.

However, it is very confusing to relations between the genders when people (mainly in the MSM) try to deny that there are ANY women like this. And then the men than can handle women like this, and the women who need to be handled like this, say that what we're being told is all BS. *When we see it all around us*.

Personally, I looked forward to the women that feminism was going to deliver. I got one (who still needs "some" handling) and I'm happy.

But people have to be made aware that there are different sorts of men and different sorts of women. But, no matter what, you'll still need to "Man up" somewhat.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Sorry for the epic thread jack Alex.
> 
> John, all I was ever getting at is that you can't compare your sitch to the average TAM marriage. Let's hug it out, ok? (Grabs john, gives big hug). There see? Much better.



Now how do I explain the long red hair on my shirt? {{{epic hug}}}

Alex, just a note - TAM is like the Cleveland Clinic of marriages. By the time most marriages come to TAM it's time for heavy duty intervention and not as much hope as if the marriage was sent to Paducah General Hospital. 

Work with what you have, and be lucky that you're not headed for Cleveland. The biggest problem I see personally in TAM is that people don't know what mess they're in until it's too late. The classic "my spouse is my best friend etc but we never have sex" fallacy. People tend to ignore or underestimate bad situations and think that the usual acronym books or 180 will fix dire straits. 

Make sure you understand what you're doing and what your partner is doing then seek help if it's beyond DIY stage.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

FW,

Clever phrase. Never heard that before. 

I do try to be careful about this concept. Because for 20++ years M2 mostly brought out my best. 

During the last 5 years it seemed like two things were happening:
- She was becoming much more like her mother
- I was having a cumulative reaction to stuff that I had never liked but had mostly tolerated 











Faithful Wife said:


> There's a word for it in the PD community...it's called getting fleas. Referring to when a non-personality disordered person begins emulating some of the behaviors of a loved one of a PD. Refusing to see any of your own contribution to your own issues is a common one that gets passed around via fleas.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

You are side stepping. 

I bet you've chosen to remove folk from teams or maybe from your company entirely. And in most cases they don't show signs of DSM type behaviors. They are simply low functioning. 

Your response pattern to J2 has become - low functioning relative to how you interact with everyone else. 

I didn't say you wee DSM grade fvcked up. Just that your pattern had degraded. 

And - my man - I have oft smiled reading your ummmm expla/ratio/nalizations. They sound just like mine were:
- she started it 
- she deserved it
- if she didn't do X, I wouldn't have done Y







QUOTE=john117;11445450]If I was in half of the counseling sessions of my daughter for 3 years, plus a few individuals and a few with my wife I would tend to think I'm ok 

But I may just accept Dr. Faithful's second opinion and commit myself to the nearest facility for further evaluation.

I do have plenty of issues, like we all do: 

- I have ADHD 
- I'm not ambitious 
- I'm not hardworking enough
- I spend way too much time on hobbies
- I'm way too stubborn
- I'm too analytical
- I can be manipulative
- I'm impossible to read (too many layers)
- I am very sarcastic and cynical
- I'm a pessimist
- I take few things seriously 
- look, a squirrel

With the exception of ADHD nothing in the above list is in DSM IV. Maybe I should get DSM V to see if squirrels are listed...

View attachment 31634
[/QUOTE]


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Buddy400 said:


> However, it is very confusing to relations between the genders when people (mainly in the MSM) try to deny that there are ANY women like this. And then the men than can handle women like this, and the women who need to be handled like this, say that what we're being told is all BS. *When we see it all around us*.
> 
> Personally, I looked forward to the women that feminism was going to deliver. I got one (who still needs "some" handling) and I'm happy.
> 
> But people have to be made aware that there are different sorts of men and different sorts of women. But, no matter what, you'll still need to "Man up" somewhat.


But women see all around us men who are jerks, creeps, idiots, chumps, violent abusers...so to say that "women" all exhibit the same amount of very bad traits (that many men seem to agree they are seeing around them, like you said above), isn't fair and doesn't represent a true reality. I try not to say "men this and men that", especially when talking about any negative feature a man might exhibit. I will not lump together the actions of a few men with "men". Even if it is a lot of men, I still won't say that "men" are this or that.

And stating sentiments like "women don't know what they want" or "women all give sh*t tests" or "women only want to be with a leader, even if she says she doesn't want that" and similar actually HELPS CAUSE the very problems we see here at SIM all the time.

It is true that men and women can be categorized into groups very easily, yes. So there will be a sizable group of men and a similarly sizable group of women who can totes get down with MMSL type relationships and DIG IT, baby.

But there will be sizable groups of both men and women who cannot and will NOT get down with MMSL stylings, baby. 

Plus many other groups still that don't look anything like the above two groups.

So...to say "men this" or "women that" when it comes to these relationship issues, it makes the world a very unclear place to the people in relationships. The reality is "you might be MMSL but your spouse might be FITB, and this incompatibility is what is killing off your marriage". Trying to cram THAT into MMSL or FITB is also going to kill off the marriage. 

Only an understanding that they might figure out a new path together on their own would fix such a big incompatibility.

At the same time...any relationship advice that deliberately suggests to one gender over the other that they are smarter, better, and more aware and that they should use this supposed advantage "against" their spouse just can't be right, ya'll...I mean c'mon now, be real.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Sorry, MEM. My team has a phenomenal record because I and my boss are pretty good in hiring people who know their sh!t but aren't afraid to eat humble pie. I lead by example. It is a very interdisciplinary team and by necessity we have to wear multiple hats. You think if I took my perceived TAM attitude I would last a day after a 25 year old kid showed me how to do something in JavaScript ?? Nope. My boss is an elder in his church and does a lot of volunteer MC. He's very good at it. You think I would have worked for him since 1998 if I was full of 'fleas'??? 

That's why I don't buy one bit of the leadership stuff. If the man is a total loser, yea, I suppose it helps. But if the guy has his act together... Leadership is just icing on the cake. 

From my personal point of view, desire for sex is fairly complex as a cognitive process. All the same, leadership is fairly simple. You like what the leader says and does, you follow. Then you emulate and hopefully you learn. I have wasted many hours in "leadership training" and all they teach you are no brainer stuff. Don't be an a-hole. Lead by example. Pet puppies. Don't grope subordinates (nothing about interns...) don't waste corporate money on useless purchases... 

Let's say I'm Joe Dirt. And win Powerball. Do you think for a second I will be Peter Drucker, Alfred P Sloan, and Steve Jobs all rolled into one for dating purposes? For many women I will be. Minimaxing anyone?

I'm no PD fleabag, much as I would like to be (easier to take the rejection). I'm just brutally honest and painfully cynical.

❤ John117 


[say, how come I can't like my own posts?]


----------



## Duguesclin (Jan 18, 2014)

John, you seem to have taken a beating today. I thought you needed a like on your post.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

You are so focused on defending yourself - that you aren't absorbing a narrowly focused message, and fairly clear message which is: 
1. You are high functioning with your daughters and 
2. With your work colleagues 
3. And probably everyone else with one exception.....

And that said success showed a lack of mental illness. 

And than I added that your interactions with J2 are low functioning when compared to those with everyone else. 

You respond by telling me how sane everyone at work thinks you are. 


QUOTE=john117;11447050]Sorry, MEM. My team has a phenomenal record because I and my boss are pretty good in hiring people who know their sh!t but aren't afraid to eat humble pie. I lead by example. It is a very interdisciplinary team and by necessity we have to wear multiple hats. You think if I took my perceived TAM attitude I would last a day after a 25 year old kid showed me how to do something in JavaScript ?? Nope. My boss is an elder in his church and does a lot of volunteer MC. He's very good at it. You think I would have worked for him since 1998 if I was full of 'fleas'??? 

That's why I don't buy one bit of the leadership stuff. If the man is a total loser, yea, I suppose it helps. But if the guy has his act together... Leadership is just icing on the cake. 

From my personal point of view, desire for sex is fairly complex as a cognitive process. All the same, leadership is fairly simple. You like what the leader says and does, you follow. Then you emulate and hopefully you learn. I have wasted many hours in "leadership training" and all they teach you are no brainer stuff. Don't be an a-hole. Lead by example. Pet puppies. Don't grope subordinates (nothing about interns...) don't waste corporate money on useless purchases... 

Let's say I'm Joe Dirt. And win Powerball. Do you think for a second I will be Peter Drucker, Alfred P Sloan, and Steve Jobs all rolled into one for dating purposes? For many women I will be. Minimaxing anyone?

I'm no PD fleabag, much as I would like to be (easier to take the rejection). I'm just brutally honest and painfully cynical.

❤ John117 


[say, how come I can't like my own posts?][/QUOTE]


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Duguesclin said:


> John, you seem to have taken a beating today. I thought you needed a like on your post.



Beating? Meh. Beating is your demo unit surviving CES and from what the marketing chick reports it's working fine, couple minor slowdowns - fix by rebooting slyly while smiling. Marketing chicks are pretty cool.

Alas, my request for Asian girls in miniskirts and thigh high leather boots was not considered.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM my man, I've played the high functioning krap game with J2. For years. Didn't buy me squat. How did Lincoln (??) put it? Insanity is doing the same thing etc etc.

I won't deny I'm not exactly in the TAM husband hall of fame. With the right person I can be. I was for 25 of our 32 years together. I could have been the TAM super Alpha and walked out after a year or two of BPD but I stuck with it even before money was an issue... When she ran into serious job trouble in 2007-2009 I stuck with her. When she changed jobs in 2011 I busted my tail helping her to prepare for and land her dream job. I supported her when her mother and sister passed. I got exactly sh!t for all that. Not even a thank you.

Is there hope? No.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Nothing worse than taking terrific care of someone and having them totally take you for granted. 

It's painful in way that nothing else is.

Some of M2's undesirable behavior is just plain selfish/entitled. But most of it is based on fear/insecurity.

Are you truly sure that J2 isn't also that way? 

The reason I ask - the phone calls immediately after your expected ETA - those sound like an anxiety issue. 







john117 said:


> MEM my man, I've played the high functioning krap game with J2. For years. Didn't buy me squat. How did Lincoln (??) put it? Insanity is doing the same thing etc etc.
> 
> I won't deny I'm not exactly in the TAM husband hall of fame. With the right person I can be. I was for 25 of our 32 years together. I could have been the TAM super Alpha and walked out after a year or two of BPD but I stuck with it even before money was an issue... When she ran into serious job trouble in 2007-2009 I stuck with her. When she changed jobs in 2011 I busted my tail helping her to prepare for and land her dream job. I supported her when her mother and sister passed. I got exactly sh!t for all that. Not even a thank you.
> 
> Is there hope? No.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Control more than anxiety. She's not interested in dealing with real life so I have all the control. She hates that. So she tries her best to "alpha up"...


----------



## Tony Conrad (Oct 7, 2013)

Sounds a bit like my wife although she never says she is asexual. Whenever there is sex it is always because of my initiation. I could go a month without initiation and she still appears happy and content. However to give it to her she does respond everytime when I initiate and appears to enjoy it as do I. Maybe she is built to repond so I'm not going to put her in a box. The mysteries of marriage.


----------



## calvinandhobbes (Jul 11, 2014)

I was in pretty much the same place as you. I said I will and and cannot go on like this for another 20 years of little or no sex. So she came out to me and to herself as a lesbian. So no sex since then - nearly two years and counting. I've realized that she simply cannot change, is not able to, cannot handle any effort to re-sexualize herself, since that would re-awaken lesbian desires, not desire for me. And for me at least, despair has lead on to a form of acceptance and almost peace. My therapist - I'm still in therapy and on anti-depressants - notes that the good feelings of satisfaction in the brain can also be released by other shared pleasures... My new year decision is just that: to note and cherish and appreciate the small daily pleasures. And I realized that my wife and I both enjoy doing things together for other people; we're a good team. So good chemicals in the brain, even with no sex... Will it prove enough? I honestly don't know.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

MEM11363 said:


> GettingIt,
> 
> I believe Alex starts this thread - looking for validation. Not suggestions. I think he was hoping to hear: yes she loves you - you should stick around
> 
> We projectes our own 'style' - which is to problem solve - onto Alex's thread.


No, not at all. And I'm not insulted this is what you think. It's very easy to read some posts and decide if someone is looking for actual advice, or simply validation. I question the odd post here, too.

But genuinely, I'm looking for answers. And I've been given a lot to think about here. Many different approaches - which is good. Gives me a lot to think about.

And it's all appreciated.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

GettingIt said:


> I think Alex does like who he is. I don't for one minute think he NEEDS to change. But Alex came here looking for ideas, and that is what he is being offered. He IS willing to look at himself and his wife and try to understand how to improve _their dynamic_. This is all stuff that he will (I think) churn around in his head and make decisions about for himself. I have no idea what the "magic bullet" for his situation is. If his wife were here offering point and counter point, we all might be able to hone in on it a little better. Like Farside pointed out, I think we are all doing the best we can do for Alex. None of us have the answer, but we all do have different perspectives, and each of them is equally valid and deserves to be heard when presented thoughtfully and respectfully.


I wish I could introduce this place to my wife. However, she would not like a lot of the things I have written here (not just in this thread) and it wouldn't help in the slightest.


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

john117 said:


> MEM my man, I've played the high functioning krap game with J2. For years. Didn't buy me squat.


How many years? How long ago?

Does replacing high functioning responses with tit-for-tat correspond with the sexlessness? Be honest.

IIRC your sexual relationship was "on" and "hot" until 5 years ago. "On" "hot" sex is not "squat" IMO.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

The whole Rapture went from 2007 to 2009 - sex did not suffer all that much in retrospect. In 2010 her mother passed and she went back for a month. 2011-2012 were transition years where despite my phenomenal help and support in getting her a dream new job sex and communication really vanished. By late 2012 I pretty much figured out that she's checked out and realized that's where I'm headed too. I joined TAM in mid 2013 and really thought it was just a phase, this, that. But by late 2013 after I posted my story it became pretty clear that it's as zombie a marriage as they go...

So, figure 2010-2012 or 3 years where I worked like a dog to be the Superior Man - try spending 2 weeks full time coaching interview skills - and we all know how well this worked. She was diagnosed with BPD in late 2009 iirc.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

John, when did you leave the divorce papers on the table? Blonde thought that might have been the turning point. The abandonment trigger?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Mid 2010....


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

FrenchFry said:


> Going through this entire thread, I think this is probably a key statement coming from alexm and in regards to his wife. All I wonder is if he's ever said this directly to her. That would be all the motivation I need to keep growing.


I sure have, and I'm pretty sure I've said it here in this thread


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> Alex, I just want to apologize for any role I may have played in derailing your thread with peanut gallery bickering.


Not at all, a_a. Sometimes these highjacks are completely relevant. Nothing has strayed too far off topic, and honestly, it's all good discussion that centers around the same basic premise anyway.

I prefer to think of these threads to not be solely about ME. As there are others with similar issues, it can be useful to others.

It's like we're all sitting around a big circle in one of those therapy groups where we all have the same general problem, and bouncing things off each other is the norm.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

alexm said:


> -She swears she is attracted to me. She swears she has never had physical attraction to anybody prior (man or woman). She swears she does not, nor ever has, thought about sex, fantasize about sex, have urges to have sex. Ever. She swears she never masturbated before me. She knows she is "different" sexually, and she's always - always - felt different from everybody else. When her friends talk about sex (whether she was 16 or 30) she didn't understand what the big deal was. Thus, she is not a sexual personal, at all.
> 
> -That said, she has had sex as much as any of you/us have over the years. More than some of you, less than some of you. She's not new to sex, nor is she a "pro". It's something she can physically enjoy, and in her words, it's what you do with your partner.


I think you need to accept that this is true for your wife. Period. She has told you who she is, how she views sex, and how sex feels to her and that this is how it's always felt and how she's always been. 



> -I am left with wondering why/what happened for her desire to please me to disappear. She is in the same boat. We have talked at great length about what's different between 18 months ago and now, and neither of us can think of a damn thing.


I don't think anything has changed. In the 18 months you've been thinking and talking about this, you would have figured it out by now if you had started treating her differently or if she resented you for some reason or something.

The only thing that has happened is new relationship smell has finally worn off. And now her real sexual self is asserting itself, rather than the honeymoon phase of bending over backward to please your partner. Maybe because your honeymoon phase lasted 5 years, it seems shocking to you that it could be just the honeymoon phase wearing off and you seek some other, deeper answer that you can fight against. I don't think there is another, deeper answer.

This is who she is. Can you live with it?


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

alexm said:


> I wish I could introduce this place to my wife. However, she would not like a lot of the things I have written here (not just in this thread) and it wouldn't help in the slightest.


Alex, you have asked your wife to tell you what is on her mind, to be honest with you. That is what you want, no matter how much it hurts, right? Yet you cannot do the same for her--reveal your true heart, even if she would not "like" how you feel. Until the two of you can trust one another fully, it's hard to find the sort of intimacy I get the impression you are seeking.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> Alex, you have asked your wife to tell you what is on her mind, to be honest with you. That is what you want, no matter how much it hurts, right? Yet you cannot do the same for her--reveal your true heart, even if she would not "like" how you feel. Until the two of you can trust one another fully, it's hard to find the sort of intimacy I get the impression you are seeking.


Wow, GettingIt, that's an insightful post! I can't speak for Alex, but it opens for me a whole new perspective on what intimacy is:
Openly acknowledging and accepting all of the incredibly hurtful things we might say or think about each other.

So very different than the cautious, protective, and supportive approaches that you more commonly see.

Do you suppose that our typical inclinations to "spare feelings" and "manage reactions" are really more about manipulating others to feed our own wants than they are about love or intimacy?

eep!


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

This is a great suggestion if the two people are able and willing to communicate with each other and share the experience. Perhaps a slow approach to sharing such feelings may work best rather than a Big Bang...


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

always_alone said:


> I do not for a second believe this idea that women just spew emotional crap that they don't mean or believe, just to see if he is strong enough to "handle" her.





Buddy400 said:


> I do believe such women exist (probably a lot of them). I didn't used to. I thought that this would be treating woman like a dog instead of an equal. And for those women, I'm glad that there are men like FarSide.


Yes there are women who just spew emotional crap that they don’t mean or believe. Are you aware that there are also men who do this? It’s probably about the same number in both genders. I’ve known men like this. I was married to one. It was exhausting. 

But we don’t hear about that characterization being applied to all men. We don’t’ see books and web sites written telling women how to ‘handle’ them as unequal.



Buddy400 said:


> However, I don't have any interest in "handling" those women, so I'll take alone's advice.


I think that most men and most women have no interest in “handling” emotionally out of control people. 



Buddy400 said:


> However, it is very confusing to relations between the genders when people (mainly in the MSM) try to deny that there are ANY women like this. And then the men than can handle women like this, and the women who need to be handled like this, say that what we're being told is all BS. *When we see it all around us*.


I’m confused. What women on TAM who “spew emotional crap that they don’t mean or believe” are saying that what the men are being told is BS? 

Men who “spew emotional crap that they don’t mean or believe” are all around us too. The MSM seems to deny that they exist. I’ve never seen anything written to characterize men that way even though there are a lot of men who act like this.

The problem is that it’s a small subset of men and women who behave this way. But things like MMSL tries to say that all women are like this. And it completely ignores that a subset of men are like this too.



Buddy400 said:


> Personally, I looked forward to the women that feminism was going to deliver. I got one (who still needs "some" handling) and I'm happy.
> 
> But people have to be made aware that there are different sorts of men and different sorts of women. But, no matter what, you'll still need to "Man up" somewhat.


Hm, does a woman who is married to a man who is like this need to “man up” to “handle” him?


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Wow, GettingIt, that's an insightful post! I can't speak for Alex, but it opens for me a whole new perspective on what intimacy is:
> *Openly acknowledging and accepting all of the incredibly hurtful things we might say or think about each other.*


This is exactly the foundation of the intensely deep intimacy that I've finally been able to cultivate with my husband after more than 20 years together. 



always_alone said:


> So very different than the cautious, protective, and supportive approaches that you more commonly see.


It's the most supportive and loving and protective feeling to know that you can tell your spouse your deepest thoughts and fears, your truest feelings and emotions, and not be judged, or fear that it will cause a negative change in the relationship. 



always_alone said:


> Do you suppose that our typical inclinations to "spare feelings" and "manage reactions" are really more about manipulating others to feed our own wants than they are about love or intimacy?


I don't think there is conscious malevolent intent behind those typical inclinations. I think it's natural not to disclose things that you believe will cause pain--either for your spouse, or for yourself due to the reactions you anticipate from your spouse. I think most people do it without thinking about it much. It's counterintuitive to trust that you can say ANYTHING to the person you love and still have them accept you fully and lovingly. 

Progress towards radical honesty or full transparency is undertaken intentionally and is practiced. It's sort of like yoga--you don't ever completely master it, you just commit to the practice. Sometimes you fall on your face. My husband and I are less than two years in, and we still have areas that trip us up.

As John points out, having two people intentionally practice it together is ideal, but I think an individual can come along way just by understanding that complete emotional trust is not something you can just assume should exist in a marriage. And if you're asking your partner for that sort of honesty, you should be prepared to handle it, and to give it back if asked to.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

aa, I was not quite clear on your last post. It seemed kind of sarcastic, but I may have misread that. I don't know you very well.

As GI has shared, being transparent with a spouse is an excellent way to deepen the relationship. When Dug first approached me, nearly 22 years ago, about becoming more than friends, I was surprised. I had just come out of a bad relationship and really did not have much energy to put into a new one. 

But I decided to take a chance on him, and I went in with my palms open. Told him every bad thing I could think of about myself and my family within the first few days. If anything were too bad, I wanted him to leave me right away. 

Dug was surprised at my openness, and the first month or so got angry at some of the things I said. But the longer he was with me, the more he realized I was not trying to be unkind. I was just direct. 

He actually started to appreciate it, and learn from it. Even now, he says it makes living with me easy, because he does not have to guess what I am thinking or feeling.

If you are with a man you do not feel comfortable being completely transparent with, I would urge you to reconsider the relationship, or at least your approach to it.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Wow, GettingIt, that's an insightful post! I can't speak for Alex, but it opens for me a whole new perspective on what intimacy is:
> *Openly acknowledging and accepting all of the incredibly hurtful things we might say or think about each other.*
> 
> So very different than the cautious, protective, and supportive approaches that you more commonly see.
> ...


When I read the bolded part I started laughing thinking, "well maybe it would be better not to tell me my ass look huge in my favorite jeans just yet."

But I think the point about total transparency is to be transparent about YOURSELF. What hurts and why, what you need and why. For me, those are giant scary risks to undertake. But I've done it.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

GettingIt said:


> Alex, you have asked your wife to tell you what is on her mind, to be honest with you. That is what you want, no matter how much it hurts, right? Yet you cannot do the same for her--reveal your true heart, even if she would not "like" how you feel. Until the two of you can trust one another fully, it's hard to find the sort of intimacy I get the impression you are seeking.


Oh no, I do, trust me. She knows my feelings inside and out.

I wouldn't bring her HERE, because I've analyzed and picked her apart and theorized. Even if it's more or less anonymous, she would not at all be happy that I've bared her and my life to anybody.

I realize the irony of this all, but at the same time, I need this place, this outlet. I'd LOVE to share it with her, but it's not her cup of tea, for one.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

jld said:


> But I decided to take a chance on him, and I went in with my palms open. Told him every bad thing I could think of about myself and my family within the first few days. If anything were too bad, I wanted him to leave me right away.


Jld, I am often sarcastic, but not this time. This is truly a way of thinking about intimacy that I've never thought about before.

Funny thing is that I first responded to my SO in a similar way as you. When he first asked me on a date, I told him that he didn't want to go out with me, and all of the reasons why ( in shorthand, of course, because there were a lot of them). All of this before even saying I would go on a date with him

And I'm not exactly one to beat around the bush or pretend to like something I don't, I have been pretty open with him over the years. He has undoubtedly seen me at my worst and knows probably most of the things that rattle around in my brain.

But there are also things that I haven't said or don't say or wouldn't say. Because I know they would be immensely hurtful. Because I cannot see that saying them would have a purpose. Because I'm not sure what the consequences would be.

As for the flipside, I know my SO pretty well, and certainly have seen him at his lows. But he also keeps quite a bit to himself, and tbh, I'm not entirely certain that I even want to know the unimaginably hurtful things he thinks about me. I'm not sure the relationship could survive it. I find it hard enough knowing what I do already and still believing that he loves me and wants to be with me. 

Love and intimacy are so often framed as being about overlooking each other's flaws, support, loving through sickness and health, and blah, blah, blah, not as teetering on the edge of the abyss, hand-in-hand.

I would think you'd want to be very careful indeed about how you go about this sort of intimacy, as surely it could implode any relationship.

Indeed, I can think of many things that would send me scrambling. Or him. 

But I always thought that holding back these things was showing love, looking out for him, caring. It never occurred to me that our real intimacy might lie in stripping all of that "care" and "concern" away.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> I don't think there is conscious malevolent intent behind those typical inclinations. I think it's natural not to disclose things that you believe will cause pain--either for your spouse, or for yourself due to the reactions you anticipate from your spouse. I think most people do it without thinking about it much. It's counterintuitive to trust that you can say ANYTHING to the person you love and still have them accept you fully and lovingly.


I wasn't thinking or suggesting it was malevolent, but rather egotistical. That is, more about us trying to manage and protect *ourselves*, and our own feelings, rather than the partner that we are ostensibly protecting.

Because, let's face it: not everyone *can* trust that they can say anything to their spouse without it negatively affecting the relationship. Even with practice.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

always_alone said:


> But I always thought that holding back these things was showing love, looking out for him, caring. It never occurred to me that our real intimacy might lie in stripping all of that "care" and "concern" away.


Glad to hear you were not being sarcastic. I think the more sincere we can be in these sensitive discussions, the more fruitful they are.

I would encourage you to strip away anything that is not just your raw self. Show him that. 

Yes, there is always the chance he might leave you. But do you want to be with him if he cannot see you emotionally naked, and accept you?

Nothing I have told Dug has sent him running, even the things I was really scared to say. Often he has surprised me by smiling or being empathetic. Those times really deepened my trust in him.

I understand the need for some distance in relationships outside of marriage. But with our partners, I don't think it is wise to hide. I am not willing to do it, anyway.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

jld said:


> I would encourage you to strip away anything that is not just your raw self. Show him that.
> 
> Yes, there is always the chance he might leave you. But do you want to be with him if he cannot see you emotionally naked, and accept you?
> 
> Nothing I have told Dug has sent him running, even the things I was really scared to say. Often he has surprised me by smiling or being empathetic. Those times really deepened my trust in him.


Jld, I'm very glad that you have such a strong relationship, and that Dug will stand by you, even at your rawest. Lovely!

Sincere question:. Does he also stand before you emotionally raw?

I ask because in previous posts, I've seen you say things like "It's up to the man to be strong, to not be perturbed by his wife's emotional storms", but never the reverse. 

But what if his true self were perturbed or made vulnerable by your feelings? Would you be able to keep deepening your trust in him? Or might you worry that your own "rawness" would send him scrambling?

I have said things to my SO that *have* made him feel vulnerable. And likewise, he has said such things to me. These feelings/expressions are as sincere as it gets, but they do not necessarily deepen trust.

They quite literally make me --and him -- even more vulnerable.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Rawness is relative... That's the whole point of group therapy / TAM.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Oh sorry, I thought you said RAWR-ness....

carry on.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Jld, I'm very glad that you have such a strong relationship, and that Dug will stand by you, even at your rawest. Lovely!
> 
> Sincere question:. Does he also stand before you emotionally raw?
> 
> ...


I have written a couple responses to you, aa, but deleted every one. Every one was heartfelt, but just did not seem quite fitting.

My heart hurts for you. I think you would like to be raw in front of your SO, and have him be so with you, without either feeling attacked and defenseless, without fearing he will flee, or that you will. I think you would find peace and security in that. I know I do.

Does my sig seem unreal to you? That it is just not possible?

I don't know, really, how many men can do it, especially without feeling resentful. I am questioning how much people can really change.

I can tell you that when I started with Dug, I was tired of all the dishonesty of the previous relationship. I was going to be honest, or I was going to be out. It was not worth it to me anymore to be with someone if it meant I had to be less than transparent. I would have had to figure out how to be happily alone if Dug had not been able to handle it. I just had to have emotional intimacy, and be safe within it.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> When I read the bolded part I started laughing thinking, "well maybe it would be better not to tell me my ass look huge in my favorite jeans just yet."
> 
> But I think the point about total transparency is to be transparent about YOURSELF. What hurts and why, what you need and why. For me, those are giant scary risks to undertake. But I've done it.


Yeah, let me be clear here, the "does my ass look fat" is not the sort of emotional transparency I'm talking about. 

I think Anon Pink is right--you are transparent with your own feelings, specifically the feelings that reflect things you don't like about yourself because you fear they could be an impediment to your spouse's love for you. 

As I said, it's not the sort of thing you just decide you're going to do, and then suddenly dump a bunch of revelations on your partner. The idea of opening up, of being more vulnerable, of taking down walls, is one that can be a huge change for a couple that has operated under a different set of assumptions about trust and privacy in a marriage. 

My husband and I learned about it together, which as I said is ideal, but an individual can decide to start taking down walls on their own, too. Sometimes when you show that vulnerability, the other person will start to do the same. Not always. Another way to practice it is to encourage your partner to be more open by reflecting on how you normally react when they say or do something that makes you uncomfortable. Are you shutting the door to that sort of intimacy by being "easily hurt." Does your partner feel that he or she needs to walk on eggshells, to hide aspects of themselves from you, because the cost of being honest is too high?

The process won't look the same for any two couples. jld, for example, dove in with both feet and has known nothing different in her marriage. Other couples (like my husband and me) started out much like jld and Dug, but then as our marriage deteriorated after we had kids, we built many, many walls and basically stopped "knowing" one another. Some couples may have started out with fairly high walls but over time come to want more. 

Its not a secret on TAM that my husband and I have chosen to model our marriage dynamic on how my sexual desire works--that is, I desire man who is dominant and dominates me in ways that seem to most folks at best very kinky or at worst abusive and unhealthy. _But this is so secondary to the deep intimacy that predated my being able to admit to him (AND to myself) that this is what I want, that this makes me feel so happy and content and well cared for for reasons I don't even really understand._ His acceptance of these aspects of my sexuality that were so new to us both could have sent him running in a different direction, but instead he was so appreciative of my honesty, so very, very interested in what I was revealing to him. The amount of research that he has put into the psychology of submission and domination, into masochism and other areas related to D/s has been stunning. 

So this is what our love looks like. It doesn't look like anyone else's love, because we are not like anyone else. It doesn't look like my parents' marriage (50 years strong and so happy), or my friends' marriages, or the marriage I envisioned when I was in college and grad school and very cynical about the institution of marriage. It doesn't reflect how I think gender roles should play out in marriage or in society. It is solely the product of looking deep into myself and deciding that I wanted to share what I saw there with the only person in the world I trust without an iota of reservation. 

It's a risk, it continues to be a risk, but it's been nothing but worthwhile every step of the way.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

That is just beautiful GI!

Being transparent to me means that instead of reacting with anger and jumping down his throat I have to reflect on what it is I'm truly feeling because anger is ALWAYS the reaction to the root feeling, hurt or fear.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> Being transparent to me means that instead of reacting with anger and jumping down his throat I have to reflect on what it is I'm truly feeling because anger is ALWAYS the reaction to the root feeling, hurt or fear.



Bring transparent works to the extent that there is meaningful communication... I'm as transparent as Rasputin but with no communication it makes little difference. 

When I was fairly young it dawned on me that understanding is the key. Not transparency and not communication.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

john117 said:


> Bring transparent works to the extent that there is meaningful communication... I'm as transparent as Rasputin but with no communication it makes little difference.
> 
> When I was fairly young it dawned on me that understanding is the key. Not transparency and not communication.


And who wouldn't want to be married to Rasputin, amirite?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

To me, transparency includes vulnerability. I can be hurt when I expose my deepest feelings.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

john117 said:


> Bring transparent works to the extent that there is meaningful communication... I'm as transparent as Rasputin but with no communication it makes little difference.
> 
> When I was fairly young it dawned on me that understanding is the key. Not transparency and not communication.


Understanding via what...mind reading? Without transparency there IS no understanding.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

alexm said:


> Oh no, I do, trust me. *She knows my feelings inside and out.*
> 
> *I wouldn't bring her HERE, because I've analyzed and picked her apart and theorized.* Even if it's more or less anonymous, *she would not at all be happy* that I've bared her and my life to anybody.
> 
> I realize the irony of this all, *but at the same time*, I need this place, this outlet. I'd *LOVE to share it* with her, *but it's not her cup of tea*, for one.


So there are risks you are not willing to take in pursuit of deeper intimacy?

I bolded all the phrases that indicate areas where, if you were so inclined, you could begin examination as a very early stage in the pursuit of a practice of transparency.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> And who wouldn't want to be married to Rasputin, amirite?


Hear he was hung like a horse!


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

GI,

In 25 years - M2 has only shocked me twice. Once it was the harmless flavor of shock. The other time I was appalled - though I concealed it. 

And that - is why - this requires an extraordinary degree of faith. The thing that appalled me - took a while to just - accept. 

The harmless shock was when M2 showed a mid cycle preference for violent sexual role play. 

But the thing I struggled with for quite some time was M2 being jealous of one of our daughters. It doesn't happen often - but the whole concept made me very sad. 

FWIW: M2 is a great mom, has always put the kids first. She has 'felt' jealous but I never saw her act jealous. 







GettingIt said:


> Yeah, let me be clear here, the "does my ass look fat" is not the sort of emotional transparency I'm talking about.
> 
> I think Anon Pink is right--you are transparent with your own feelings, specifically the feelings that reflect things you don't like about yourself because you fear they could be an impediment to your spouse's love for you.
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> Understanding via what...mind reading? Without transparency there IS no understanding.



Transparency allows you to see. Seeing is not the same as understanding. 

Without understanding transparency is wasted, which explains why transparency is not practiced. 

I can open up and be as transparent as Saran Wrap but if my partner does not understand what she's seeing I might as well be wrapped in cardboard. 

Transparency is the first step. Understanding the second. You need both.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

john117 said:


> Transparency allows you to see. Seeing is not the same as understanding.
> 
> Without understanding transparency is wasted, which explains why transparency is not practiced.
> 
> ...


Absolutely you need both. But you can be transparent without being understood. I sometimes feel like the poster child for that! You can't be understood without being transparent. 

The goal is that transparency leads to understanding.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

jld said:


> I have written a couple responses to you, aa, but deleted every one. Every one was heartfelt, but just did not seem quite fitting.
> 
> My heart hurts for you. I think you would like to be raw in front of your SO, and have him be so with you, without either feeling attacked and defenseless, without fearing he will flee, or that you will. I think you would find peace and security in that. I know I do.
> 
> Does my sig seem unreal to you? That it is just not possible?


You are dodging my question, jld.

Yes, surely we would all feel more peace and security if we knew that our spouses would stand with us, without feeling attacked, defenseless, or if the relationship ended. But why is it the way of the superior man, but not the woman? 

And what if I *know* in his heart is all the conditions that would lead him to cheat on me, all of the friends that he finds more attractive and desirable than me, all of the people he keeps in regular contact with that he thinks about chasing, and would be happy to replace me with, all of the times he closes his eyes so that he can fantasize about porn girl and doesn't have to look at the likes of me during sex, all of the things I have done that turn him off, gross him out, and on and on.

Because I do know these things, and there is undoubtedly plenty more that I don't know.

And what if what's really in my heart is that my love isn't undying, or stable, that he can't actually trust that I won't hightail it out of there, and that there are any number of things he could tell me that would have me gone in a flash. Because he *does* know these things, and there is plenty more besides.

Let me just say that I absolutely agree that I would rather be alone than in an abusive, dishonest, or otherwise crappy relationship. But note also my moniker. That is where being my authentic self has always landed me. And so I will probably never trust that someone will still be there with me no matter what ugliness about myself I reveal. They never have been before, and I've no reason to think that anyone ever will, now or in the future.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> Absolutely you need both. But you can be transparent without being understood. I sometimes feel like the poster child for that! You can't be understood without being transparent.
> 
> The goal is that transparency leads to understanding.





Transparency should begin with clothing.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> Transparency should begin with clothing.


It begin in the eyes, then moves downward.

I think transparent clothing is sexier than nekkedness. The lightness and shadows more alluring than clinical clarity.

And maybe that's John's problem. He is looking for clinical clarity when that kind of mental understanding conjures an image cold detachment rather than one of empathetic understanding.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> It begin in the eyes, then moves downward.
> 
> *I think transparent clothing is sexier than nekkedness. The lightness and shadows more alluring than clinical clarity.*
> 
> ...


ZOINKS! Amen to that. Schwing!


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I think that true "openness" with your partner will only work if you first own your own problems and do your best to resolve them.

"Openness" cannot just be license for one person (or both) to just dump all of their problems on another.

If you do not believe that your partner could handle you being open with him/her, to me this indicates that you need to work on yourself more than anything else.

And if you're not willing to do this, then why would you expect that someone else would care about fixing you more than you do?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> I think Anon Pink is right--you are transparent with your own feelings, specifically the feelings that reflect things you don't like about yourself because you fear they could be an impediment to your spouse's love for you.


Oh, that stuff I covered even before we went on our first date. I flat out told him I was bitter, cynical, jaded, impossible to get along with, and probably a few other things I can't remember.

I had totally given up on relationships by that point and wasn't really up for wasting either his or my time, with niceties or pretending that I had anything to offer. 

Of course all of this "transparency" at this stage wasn't intimacy, but walls. Totally sincere, though, as I was (am?) pretty relationship broken.

Hence my sympathies for Alex's story.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> I think that true "openness" with your partner will only work if you first own your own problems and do your best to resolve them.
> 
> "Openness" cannot just be license for one person (or both) to just dump all of their problems on another.
> 
> ...



Hard brutal truth there!

The last line though is a red herring I think. We age, we grow, we learn, we change. But what happens when that growth has taken the couple in opposite directions from where they began? What happens when one has grown, or been fixed, and the other has not or not enough?

We strive to recreate a symbiotic harmony by striving to fix the other or we continue to drift apart?


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> ZOINKS! Amen to that. Schwing!


You're welcome Fozzy.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

This type transparency - the goal is acceptance - not repair. 

It's much more: this is who I am 
As opposed to: this is my current self improvement checklist, pitch in where you can







Anon1111 said:


> I think that true "openness" with your partner will only work if you first own your own problems and do your best to resolve them.
> 
> "Openness" cannot just be license for one person (or both) to just dump all of their problems on another.
> 
> ...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> This type transparency - the goal is acceptance - not repair.
> 
> It's much more: this is who I am
> As opposed to: this is my current self improvement checklist, pitch in where you can


Fair enough.

My point is if you're saying I'm a d-ck, I'm a *****, I'm selfish, I think I can do better than you, stuff like that-- do you really just expect your partner to be like, Oh that's OK, thanks for telling me.

If you're honest with yourself and say, I'm comfortable that I'm a good person, I'm not perfect but I really try and do the best I can-- then you have nothing to be ashamed of so be open.

A lot of people do have things to be ashamed of though.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> It begin in the eyes, then moves downward.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's the other way around actually. 

I'm the one full of empathy and she's the one full of "what's in it for me" clarity...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> Fair enough.
> 
> My point is if you're saying I'm a d-ck, I'm a *****, I'm selfish, I think I can do better than you, stuff like that-- do you really just expect your partner to be like, Oh that's OK, thanks for telling me.


Seriously, this!!

TAM is chock full of advice to dump partners because they gained weight, and are no longer sexy (being attractive is important); or cheated (selfish, deceitful a-holes); or asexual (no one should be expected to live that way!); or any of a host of other reasons.

And I get it. Why should we accept these things? 

This is the only thread I've seen that really suggests that acceptance of them is in any way desirable or appropriate, let alone *the* key to intimacy.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Sorry, aa. Yes, Dug is emotionally raw with me. But he is not nearly as emotional as I am, so there is not much rawness to see, nor very often.

He did cry for 2 days when our son was diagnosed with cancer. Never tried to hide it. Sometimes we both cry about it.

There are women like Dug. They can handle a man's emotional outbursts without feeling scared and wanting to run away. They might use active listening, or just let him blow off steam. They just do not take his emotions personally.

I could not do it, but some women can.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Most men's default emotion is anger.

It's really one of the only emotions that men are allowed to express.

Women are understably scared of an angry man.

So I think it is natural that women do not just generally tolerate men being emotionally raw in the same way men can tolerate women.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

jld said:


> Sorry, aa. Yes, Dug is emotionally raw with me. But he is not nearly as emotional as I am, so there is not much rawness to see, nor very often.
> 
> He did cry for 2 days when our son was diagnosed with cancer. Never tried to hide it. Sometimes we both cry about it.
> 
> ...


But if Dug is raw with you, and you not only put up with it but seem to embrace it, then aren't you doing the thing that you say you couldn't? Or is it because there just isn't as much to have to put up with?


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> Most men's default emotion is anger.
> 
> It's really one of the only emotions that men are allowed to express.
> 
> ...


As has been pointed out recently (AP?) anger is a reactionary emotion with the root being hurt or fear. Men showing hurt or fear is VERY frowned on in our society, which leaves us with anger (much more destructive, but for some reason more socially acceptable).

A man showing hurt or fear in a relationship would be considered "beta" and "unattractive". A man showing anger in a relationship would be considered (justifiably sometimes) abusive.

This leaves men with two options--smile and shut the hell up, or be judged accordingly.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Fozzy said:


> A man showing hurt or fear in a relationship would be considered "beta" and "unattractive". A man showing anger in a relationship would be considered (justifiably sometimes) abusive.
> 
> This leaves men with two options--smile and shut the hell up, or be judged accordingly.


I was under this illusion prior to my wife and I reconciling. I just shut the hell up... For years... With bouts of regurgitating the resentment that inevitably built up over that time. Occasionally, I would completely lash out.

After understanding the emotions behind the anger, which was mostly hurt, I started communicating that to my wife when it happened. 

Our situation may not be like others, so YMMV. But anger and defensiveness is _her_ trigger. As soon as I started communicating how I truly felt when she hurt me, anger and negativity disappeared and was replaced with remorse, which was something she rarely displayed prior to me expressing myself in an honest and raw fashion.

So I vehemently disagree with the "social norms". But again, that is my situation. And I am different in that I am pretty sensitive for a dude. So again, YMMV.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Of course! And that's how it SHOULD be. My point however is that conventional wisdom seems to run contrary. Even a lot of advice given out on this forum.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> But if Dug is raw with you, and you not only put up with it but seem to embrace it, then aren't you doing the thing that you say you couldn't? Or is it because there just isn't as much to have to put up with?


My daughter was sitting beside me as I typed that and told me that her dad is not emotionally raw with me, that he does not have any emotion to be raw about. But he did have those two days when he cried. That is something. And I was pretty distressed. I was so used to his seemingly endless optimism and composure. Seeing him shaken was an additional shock.

Dug and I are probably too far in, too compatible, with too many kids, for us to realistically stand any chance of ever splitting up. But I would encourage any woman in the beginning of a relationship, or without great commitments, to consider backing away from a man who could not provide emotional support, or did not seem capable of emotional intimacy. I don't think it gets better with time. Jmo.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

Sorry but - that's exactly - verbatim - what I said about me and M2 before the MC inspired revelation. 

But you have lost your empathy for J2 as surely as I was losing mine for M2. 

I ask you: why does J2 call you one minute past your ETA?

You answer: it's about control

But being overly 'controlling' isn't an emotion. It's a dysfunctional response pattern - used to help the controller feel LESS BAD. 

You see: successful PhD who does this stuff in a fully intentional manner and think: controlling bltch who doesn't trust/respect me despite all my years of reliable performance

And understandably that provokes a reaction. You called it ferberizing. Angry people do cruel things and feel no guilt. 

I see: the frigthened little girl inside the perfectly coiffed PhD. And think - there's probably a way for ME to help her feel less anxious in these situations. 

Not much empathy in the word: controlling 






john117 said:


> It's the other way around actually.
> 
> I'm the one full of empathy and she's the one full of "what's in it for me" clarity...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

You have compassion, MEM. You are looking past the behavior to the fear that not only J2, but many women have. 

We try to control to make ourselves feel safe. If that inner need for safety could be met, we could relax.

And I am sorry, John, but I agree with Blonde that leaving those divorce papers on the table probably pushed your wife over the edge. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Women are fine with seeing male emotion. 

Most men suck at expressing it. 

Typical male patterns:
- Expressing secondary emotion (anger) instead of primary emotions (hurt and fear)
- Spew: letting emotions build until the breaking point

I do think a concise, 'low affect' delivery works best with MOST women most of the time. Because most of the time - you aren't dealing with life and/or relationship ending stuff. So low affect shows a true grasp of priorities. 






QUOTE=farsidejunky;11464649]I was under this illusion prior to my wife and I reconciling. I just shut the hell up... For years... With bouts of regurgitating the resentment that inevitably built up over that time. Occasionally, I would completely lash out.

After understanding the emotions behind the anger, which was mostly hurt, I started communicating that to my wife when it happened. 

Our situation may not be like others, so YMMV. But anger and defensiveness is _her_ trigger. As soon as I started communicating how I truly felt when she hurt me, anger and negativity disappeared and was replaced with remorse, which was something she rarely displayed prior to me expressing myself in an honest and raw fashion.

So I vehemently disagree with the "social norms". But again, that is my situation. And I am different in that I am pretty sensitive for a dude. So again, YMMV.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> Women are fine with seeing male emotion.
> 
> *Most men suck at expressing it. *
> 
> ...


I tend to agree with the bolded, underlined, red and greatly enlarged part!

Some men are so adept at suppressing their emotions they have lost the ability to actually name their feelings.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anon Pink said:


> Some men are so adept at suppressing their emotions they have lost the ability to actually name their feelings.


Amen.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

The other day a sister asked me a question. 

It was about a brief discussion she had with M2 about an upcoming trip that involved just me. 

Prior to MC: 
1. I would have gotten furious at M2 for being controlling 
2. It would have led to a long painful argument with M2 - leaving her feeling LESS secure

Instead I responded with: 
1. It's not about you, just her abandonment issues 
2. Thanks for telling me I'll take care of the situation

The biggest difference is that - this stuff - which used to make me furious. Doesn't make me the slightest bit angry. Because it's not about me. 





jld said:


> You have compassion, MEM. You are looking past the behavior to the fear that not only J2, but many women have.
> 
> We try to control to make ourselves feel safe. If that inner need for safety could be met, we could relax.
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Close enough MEM!

I have plenty of empathy for J2 left. Empathy in itself is free. It's not like wifi or Bluetooth that if you're powered up and transmitting you're draining battery. 

What I don't have any more is understanding.

Transparency, empathy, or honest communications are all the different carriers of the message. Whether you see it, feel it, or listen to it is just the transport protocol (curse the EE team). Understanding is where it's at.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> And I am sorry, John, but I agree with Blonde that leaving those divorce papers on the table probably pushed your wife over the edge.



If that's what it took to convince her so be it.

Compassion is a luxury where J2 came from. I'm simply playing by her rules.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

john117 said:


> I'm simply playing by her rules.


John:

You know I love you man... But...

You are claiming it is okay to reduce yourself to someones level, while at the same time claiming it is not really your level.

Rationalization. 

If you have to mislead yourself to justify, perhaps you should take a closer look at it...


----------



## vellocet (Oct 18, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> I think transparent clothing is sexier than nekkedness. The lightness and shadows more alluring than clinical clarity.


Oh ya!!! The way a thin see through negligee hangs over a woman's breasts. UGH!!!


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

My initial attempts to understand M2 were tainted. 

By anger. Competitiveness. Being focused more on me than on her. 

She deflected or denied. 

I got better at it. She relaxed. 

The irony was that the more understanding I was, the greater M2's effort to address the associated (undesirable) behavior. 






john117 said:


> Close enough MEM!
> 
> I have plenty of empathy for J2 left. Empathy in itself is free. It's not like wifi or Bluetooth that if you're powered up and transmitting you're draining battery.
> 
> ...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

So, at the beginning of this thread, the overall tone was "man up". Whatever you do, don't be vulnerable, needy, or seek validation lest your spouse lose attraction and refuse to have sex. Instead, do whatever makes you happy, be aloof, disinterested, she has no effect on you. Take care only of yourself, and she will again be attracted.


But now it's all about compassion, being aware of and sensitive to her vulnerabilities and sharing your own. Admitting when you are hurt, or worried, and recognizing when she is coming from the same place.

A very different picture. 

Just sayin'


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Anon Pink said:


> I tend to agree with the bolded, underlined, red and greatly enlarged part!
> 
> Some men are so adept at suppressing their emotions they have lost the ability to actually name their feelings.


Damit, Anon, you make me so, so, so ... what's the word?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> My initial attempts to understand M2 were tainted.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And again, the opposite for me.

My initial attempts were flawless (let's hear it for my cuddly personality ). We had great times for 25 years. Then I realized that a lot of fears and the like were coming upon her. She was not - and is not - interested in addressing any of them so... 

In our 32 year history even at our worse times I always tended to focus on her first. She never appreciated it. Right now all I want is for the clock to run out. 

Even when things are going well for her she does not "relax". It's always a conspiracy theory. I'm too old for this sh!t... Maybe she should have gotten married with someone from her country who would rear her like krap and cheat on her then she can understand.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> So, at the beginning of this thread, the overall tone was "man up". Whatever you do, don't be vulnerable, needy, or seek validation lest your spouse lose attraction and refuse to have sex. Instead, do whatever makes you happy, be aloof, disinterested, she has no effect on you. Take care only of yourself, and she will again be attracted.
> 
> 
> But now it's all about compassion, being aware of and sensitive to her vulnerabilities and sharing your own. Admitting when you are hurt, or worried, and recognizing when she is coming from the same place.
> ...


Or perhaps all of that is part of "manning up".

Or maybe is was intricately interlaced with what I was saying before.

Sometimes it is hard to hear things when we think we are listening but really aren't.

Just sayin'


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> So, at the beginning of this thread, the overall tone was "man up". Whatever you do, don't be vulnerable, needy, or seek validation lest your spouse lose attraction and refuse to have sex. Instead, do whatever makes you happy, be aloof, disinterested, she has no effect on you. Take care only of yourself, and she will again be attracted.
> 
> 
> But now it's all about compassion, being aware of and sensitive to her vulnerabilities and sharing your own. Admitting when you are hurt, or worried, and recognizing when she is coming from the same place.
> ...


right? RIGHT????


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> Or perhaps all of that is part of "manning up".
> 
> Or maybe is was intricately interlaced with what I was saying before.
> 
> ...


If you can take some time and tell me exactly how "don't be vulnerable or needy because it's unattractive" squares with "show her your vulnerable and needy side" I'll be a lot more inclined to consider the profundity of what you are saying here.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> If you can take some time and tell me exactly how "don't be vulnerable or needy because it's unattractive" squares with "show her your vulnerable and needy side" I'll be a lot more inclined to consider the profundity of what you are saying here.


I definitely advocate for not being needy.

But I am all about being vulnerable.

I think you must be confusing me with someone else. Because I would _never_ say to someone that vulnerability is bad.

Just like I would say to you that you can be vulnerable without being needy, which is where I think you are tying this together.

Or am I wrong?


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Cletus said:


> Damit, Anon, you make me so, so, so ... what's the word?


LOL, the words are: I missed you terribly during your ban!


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Anon Pink said:


> LOL, the words are: I missed you terribly during your ban!


You got banned? How the hell did you manage to get banned from here long before me? Now I'm really pissed-off.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> John:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Occasionally playing at a certain level does not mean one is at that level forever. There is a reason that rationalization is called so. 

Think of the biblical "an eye for an eye"...


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Cletus said:


> You got banned? How the hell did you manage to get banned from here long before me? Now I'm really pissed-off.


Ah Cletus, you're going to have to get in touch with your feelings and express them in socially inappropriate ways to get banned. My filter is rather porous on the best of days. Adhd and all that fun ...SQUIRREL.... !


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

JLD,

True understanding is a beautiful thing. 

When I met M2 she was 'full package':
- At 26, in today's dollars she made 80K a year plus great benefits doing a job she loved
- Very pretty - great sense of style - casual but - just right 
- Playful and fun 
- Organized and disciplined 

Those last two things - I'd never met anyone else who had fully retained a child like sense of playfulness - while achieving an adults maturity and self control. 

What I never accepted was the massive chasm separating MY view of M2, and her self image. 

Two years ago - still lacking that understanding - M2 and I were constantly grinding gears. 

As she felt less 'secure' she acted more controlling. As she became in my view - increasingly crazy - I got increasingly angry. 

Back then - a couple times a month M2 would trigger on 'being left out' of something or other. 

M2 would discover I was watching or had watched a TV series without her. In many cases these were shows we had long ago started together - and after an episode or two she bailed. Here we are 5 years later and she (claims) she has forgotten that we had tried it together. 

And that was when I realized that - when she felt insecure - M2 became frightened by ANY differences between us. Even stuff like TV preferences. 

We had a few blowouts over this. Ugly and counter productive. 

M2 tried to mask her hurt and anger beneath humor. She referred to me watching shows without her as me 'cheating on her'. But she wasn't amused - she was upset. 

And then I changed the focus to me. And the next time this came up I told M2 MY truth about ME. Which was remarkably simple: 

I'd always rather do stuff with you. And there is no show or movie I won't gladly watch a second time - with you.

And then I started to point out ALL the things we do without each other. And I framed every one of them in the same light M2 initially used. 

So this thing that caused a lot of strife is now a source of banter many times a week. 

And in the increasingly rare situations where I can see she is genuinely feeling left out and IS upset, I just get her to lie down - rub her back and take her down happy memory lanes until she relaxes. 

M2 is mostly very high functioning. But if I get this bit wrong - not supporting her when she needs support. It colors everything else. 









jld said:


> You have compassion, MEM. You are looking past the behavior to the fear that not only J2, but many women have.
> 
> We try to control to make ourselves feel safe. If that inner need for safety could be met, we could relax.
> 
> ...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I'm with Always Alone. I don't think the advice here squares.

I don't think it's politically correct, but I don't think our culture wants to hear from men with problems.

Men who do express problems are perceived as weak or whiny or aggressive.

Men are supposed to solve their own problems.

If you come to a woman and express vulnerability, you are expecting her to act like your mother.

She might take pity on you, but she does not really want to assume the mother role with you.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Vulnerable = Freely admitting my fear of heights

Needy = Trying to discourage/prevent family members from sky diving

Adventurous = Going sky diving with them - and when asked 'aren't you going to be scared?' Replying: 'yes but if fear and fun were mutually exclusive 'horror films' wouldn't be a billion dollar industry.'








Anon1111 said:


> I'm with Always Alone. I don't think the advice here squares.
> 
> I don't think it's politically correct, but I don't think our culture wants to hear from men with problems.
> 
> ...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

OK, but let's put this in the context of a relationship vulnerability. Sky diving is not really the same thing.

E.g., I'm afraid that you're not really interested in me since being with me does not seem to be a high priority for you.

Is there any way a man does not come off as weak and pathetic by saying that?

I can't see one.

For the record, I've had that conversation many times before in so-called "safe environments" (i.e., marriage counseling).

It did nothing for me. If anything, I think it diminished me.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Anon,
It takes real courage to say something like that. I mean that. And it's very painful when you get a negative response to that type of openness. 

Sometimes the hardest thing to do is accept the 'what' and try to understand the 'why'.

Like so: 
It's obvious that you don't like spending time with me as much as you used to. 

Am I not as fun as I used to be? 
Too talkative?
Too serious? 
Tell me what it is, I want to know. 





Anon1111 said:


> OK, but let's put this in the context of a relationship vulnerability. Sky diving is not really the same thing.
> 
> E.g., I'm afraid that you're not really interested in me since being with me does not seem to be a high priority for you.
> 
> ...


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

If my wife had rejected me when I really, really opened up to her back in late summer, or made me to feel like I was lesser due to it, I don't think we would be together.

And now that my relationship has that vulnerability, I could never go back to having one without it.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Oh, that stuff I covered even before we went on our first date. I flat out told him I was bitter, cynical, jaded, impossible to get along with, and probably a few other things I can't remember.
> 
> I had totally given up on relationships by that point and wasn't really up for wasting either his or my time, with niceties or pretending that I had anything to offer.
> 
> ...


I don't know you're history AA, but I think anyone can practice transparency in a relationship. How that would look for you and your husband now depends on a lot of things. 

Often it's the emotional baggage that one accumulates while with a partner, more so than the things one brings to the relationship, are the issues of focus. That's not the case for every couple, of course--often we have history that we are reluctant to share with a partner, even though it affects our behavior and therefore is an important part of who we are. 

I think until there is emotional trust--or the possibility of that trust--then it is hard to begin thinking about enhanced transparency in a relationship. If you are too relationship broken to contemplate trusting anyone, then I think the best you can do is be honest about that boundary or limitation. It is then up to your partner to decide if that is a deal breaker or not.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> So, at the beginning of this thread, the overall tone was "man up". Whatever you do, don't be vulnerable, needy, or seek validation lest your spouse lose attraction and refuse to have sex. Instead, do whatever makes you happy, be aloof, disinterested, she has no effect on you. Take care only of yourself, and she will again be attracted.
> 
> 
> But now it's all about compassion, being aware of and sensitive to her vulnerabilities and sharing your own. Admitting when you are hurt, or worried, and recognizing when she is coming from the same place.
> ...


The change I see isn't so much in message, but in delivery. There's been a lot of really thoughtful discussion about an fairly slippery subject (transparency and how it works in relationships.)

I also think on TAM there is a shorthand way of talking about a particular marriage dynamic in which the husband seeks more emotional reassurance than the wife and the way that this MIGHT affect her desire. I don't think everyone who offers advice in these cases is saying exactly the same thing when they suggest that the husband "man up." 

This "man up" solution (for lack of a better term) in my mind doesn't mean that the husband shouldn't express his feelings to his wife. _However, he shouldn't expect that she'll change her behavior to make him feel more secure._ A man telling his wife that he gets insecure when she goes away with her girl friends for a weekend isn't the problem. The problem is a man telling his wife he doesn't want her to go because it makes him feel insecure, and if she chooses to go anyway, there will be consequences in the form of him being a pissy jerk, or worse. Basically she gets a punishment for her not alleviating his uncomfortable feelings. 

Ideally, in this sort of situation, a compromise could be reached. For example, the wife goes on her weekend away, but agrees to check in. Not because she's been held hostage to the petulance of her spouse, but because, in relating his feelings, her husband wasn't demanding any concessions or changes in her behavior. He was simply telling her how he felt, and in response she found an acceptable way to adjust her plans to make him feel a little better. However, if she chose to do the weekend her way in spite of his feelings, he shouldn't hold a grudge. He made his feelings clear, and she made her choice. _If this is a deal breaker for him, then he should let her know. _ He should tell her what his boundary is, and tell her that if she ignores it, it changes the way he feels about her and the relationship. 

To me it's about taking responsibility for communicating your feelings to your partner, but not transferring responsibility to them for alleviating those feelings. If your happiness in the relationship--if your love for the other person--requires that they adjust their behavior to alleviate your feelings, then this must be communicated. If you choose to stay in the relationship despite not getting a need met, then it's not right to place all the blame on your partner for the subsequent resentment and erosion of intimacy that eventually leads to emotional detachment, sexlessness, affairs, the development of "exit strategies," etc. 

I find all this really, really hard to write about. The idea of transparency demands so much trust and security in oneself and in one's relationship. Like I said before, it's not that a couple ever arrives at some sort of magical "Transparency Nirvana." You just keep slogging away at trying to improve from where ever you are. If you want to.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM, I have supported J2 for years. Decades. Even today. She had an issue with an Indian dude (not a romantic one, sigh) and I walked her into the proper response using John-speak vs J2-speak which would have been catastrophic career wise. Left to her own devices she would have (rightfully) blasted the guy and damaged her own career as well.

The only thing she ever "needs" genuine support for is work because lacking empathy she can't read between the lines. For non work related issues like her family she talks about them - say, for months at a time - but goes into a curious "constantly talk" mode for hours at a time which is beyond the listening skills and abilities of a stadium full of golden retrievers. I offer solutions but they are often rejected as not punitive enough towards her evil relatives etc... 

You can offer compassion to some people and they will respond some but ultimately for some people it's like sending food to North Korea... Fixes a temporary issue with no long term solution.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> I definitely advocate for not being needy.
> But I am all about being vulnerable.



Awesome. Let's define vulnerable.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

But you want to keep her working for your own reasons, right, John? You want to make sure she is paying her half of the tuition bills?

It is not really being done out of love for _her,_ right?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> Awesome. Let's define vulnerable.


You go first.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> But you want to keep her working for your own reasons, right, John? You want to make sure she is paying her half of the tuition bills?
> 
> 
> 
> It is not really being done out of love for _her,_ right?



You may recall when I joined TAM in May 2013 I had this crazy notion that my marriage was fixable. It's been nearly two years and now I know better.

So yea, if I believed that she would honor her commitment to our kids and pay her share without an epic legal battle I would have bailed out a long time ago.... Love left the building circa June 2012. Took me a year to figure it out... I ain't that smart I suppose.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

You are very smart, John. You are also prideful and stubborn, like the rest of us.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> You go first.



Well... In a couple months I have cataract surgery on the left eye. Then in a few months the right. Granted it's a no brainer automated snip snip but I'm concerned. I'm a very visual person and depend on my eyes. This is my first time ever for surgery.

I feel "vulnerable" because it's out of my planning horizon. But for all J2 cares I'm just cutting my hair. No concern. She hasn't asked once. 

Meanwhile she has a bad back strain (because she won't listen to directions on how to lift furniture) and she's whining every half hour. Wish I was like that... 

I'm worried DD22 won't get into a top 10 school . Or if she does it will be the one in Oregon. Too far. Or the one in NYC. My little girl in NYC. W.t.f.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

I would be worried about eye surgery, too. Will either of your girls be around to help, by chance?

I bet your daughter will do fine. She is a very impressive artist.

Does your wife express any concern about what is coming up for your daughter?


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Dammit John,

Every time you write about your daughters I think: This guy - he sets the gold standard for being a father. If we had been neighbors - he could have taught me how to do it right. 

And half the time when you write about J2 I think:
- Ouch that is painful and would upset me also
The other half The time I think
- I want to slug this guy - he's being competitive and not collaborative. Prideful and not perceptive. 

Of everyone on TAM, my most polarized reactions are to you. 

I KNOW you deserve better. Equally I KNOW you can DO better. 

And I am NOT ok with your Pearl Harbor strategy. J2 gave you 25 good years. She deserves to NOT be surprised. 




QUOTE=john117;11468201]Well... In a couple months I have cataract surgery on the left eye. Then in a few months the right. Granted it's a no brainer automated snip snip but I'm concerned. I'm a very visual person and depend on my eyes. This is my first time ever for surgery.

I feel "vulnerable" because it's out of my planning horizon. But for all J2 cares I'm just cutting my hair. No concern. She hasn't asked once. 

Meanwhile she has a bad back strain (because she won't listen to directions on how to lift furniture) and she's whining every half hour. Wish I was like that... 

I'm worried DD22 won't get into a top 10 school . Or if she does it will be the one in Oregon. Too far. Or the one in NYC. My little girl in NYC. W.t.f.[/QUOTE]


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Pearl Harbor was well known to the American intelligence community who wanted the Japanese to be engaged... 

I'm thinking more subtle than that... 

View attachment 31682


Yea, I can do better. But why should I? For someone who makes an issue about how the Christmas ornaments are packed? Do I really need this? I don't think so.

The time for collaboration and compassion is over.

ETA: not perceptive? Even with cataract vision I am pretty good


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

One thing I've recently started to learn the hard way John is that the more I cared about how much my wife didn't care about how much I was hurting, the less and less she would care, you know what I mean?

When I stopped caring so much about her not caring, all of a sudden she started caring...

I don't have the answers and it still doesn't make sense to me, but I think it does have a lot to do with neediness.

For me, neediness in my marriage is needing my wife to make me feel better. Things have been a lot more stable since I've started culling that need.

Vulnerability is being open to being hurt. Different thing. One is a hand that reaches, the other is a hand that is open and ready to receive, maybe.

I suck at that last one, and given what I've gone through with her I don't know that I'll go back there.

But neediness kills.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

It doesn't bother me that she doesn't care. She can't care. Cat. Calculus. Solve....

I'm very comfortable not having anyone caring about me... I know my girls do. That's all I need. To get my daily fix of cat pictures from DD22 and biology lab antics from DD19... 

Being hurt? Epic lolz. Think arriving in the USA at 22 with $500 and a suitcase of books. Once you get past that there's a bit of a G*d complex after making it, I'll grant you...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

What is it that you want, John?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> If my wife had rejected me when I really, really opened up to her back in late summer, or made me to feel like I was lesser due to it, I don't think we would be together.
> 
> And now that my relationship has that vulnerability, I could never go back to having one without it.


Interesting. Well, I'm the opposite.

I think vulnerability for men is a trap. It's what you're supposed to say, but nobody really means it.

I hope I'm wrong in your case and that your wife won't hold it against you. But I'd be careful about trusting her too far with this.

One thing sticks in my mind. Once, I said to my wife, you know if you're so stressed out taking care of our kids, I can stay home and you could work. I'd be totally fine with that.

She laughed. I could never do that, she said.

This is from an Ivy League educated woman with a minor in Women's Studies.

women do not respect weak men. Bottom line.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> What is it that you want, John?



Up to 2012, a wife and decent marriage. Past 2012, a fair and amicable :rofl: divorce settlement. 

That's not too much to ask, is it? 

Truth is, I'm a fairly low maintenance guy. To keep me happy make sure I have enough coffee, gas for the Mini, air in my bike tires, and my digital toys charged.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

Anon1111 said:


> One thing sticks in my mind. Once, I said to my wife, you know if you're so stressed out taking care of our kids, I can stay home and you could work. I'd be totally fine with that.
> 
> She laughed. I could never do that, she said.
> 
> ...


I did it. It's awesome.

I understand why women would be hesitant. I didn't want to be stuck in a position where I was working and then doing all of the stuff that I did while I was at home as well.

But, I also had trust that my husband wasn't a) going to be a burden in that manner and b) that he would do an excellent job at raising our kid. Which he hasn't and he is.

What would have lost my respect is if he slacked off and did nothing all day while still expecting the kudos for being an awesome dad because he stayed home. That would be the weakest thing ever.

All women don't define weakness the same way and everyone hates weakness when it starts to affect them.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Up to 2012, a wife and decent marriage. Past 2012, a fair and amicable :rofl: divorce settlement.
> 
> That's not too much to ask, is it?
> 
> Truth is, I'm a fairly low maintenance guy. To keep me happy make sure I have enough coffee, gas for the Mini, air in my bike tires, and my digital toys charged.


What does a fair and amicable settlement look like?

And, once that's done, will you be happy with coffee, gas, air, and power?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> And understandably that provokes a reaction. You called it ferberizing. Angry people do cruel things and feel no guilt.
> 
> 
> 
> I see: the frigthened little girl inside the perfectly coiffed PhD. And think - there's probably a way for ME to help her feel less anxious in these situations.



I'm past angry. I wonder if the first paragraph applies still. Probably does.

I can see the frightened little girl too. But I can't help of the only thing she thinks I want is to get into her pants. (Panties?) 

I remember when I would show her some particularity tricky piece of work or clever solution to a nasty issue a decade ago her face would light up and she would say "how smart you are!". Or twenty years ago when she would act a bit too off the wall she would apologize and tell me "I'm sorry... I'm just a little crazy". And she'd smile and all would be fine. That girl is long gone. 

Tell me how you'd react to these two cases:

Case one era 1998... She was at a new job and panicky as she had to give a design review presentation. She could not sleep at night before and asked me for a massage. I did, and it was fairly, ehem, intensive . She did fine the next day. 

Case two era 2015. She has some lower back pain but will rather suffer than ask for a massage...

Oh well. My apple pie finished baking.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

I'm truly sorry you are in this situation. Like most/all the folks here who read your stuff I genuinely like and respect you. 

I admit to being unsure whether this is solvable. 

I have calmly said to M2: If you are behaving this way the day after our youngest turns 18 I will end it. 

Hated saying it. Absolutely meant it. M2 is FULLY responsible for NOT turning into her mom. I'm glad to help - she does however have to accept that help. 

When I said that to M2:
1. I wasn't angry - I was determined 
2. I wasn't trying to optimize a financial result - I'm a romantic at heart - had she chosen to take that to the wall - I would have accepted whatever financial consequences came of it

We were about 6 years from that end date. M2 asked me a LOT of questions in the wake of that discussion. She then adjusted her behavior. 





john117 said:


> I'm past angry. I wonder if the first paragraph applies still. Probably does.
> 
> I can see the frightened little girl too. But I can't help of the only thing she thinks I want is to get into her pants. (Panties?)
> 
> ...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> I'm past angry. I wonder if the first paragraph applies still. Probably does.
> 
> I can see the frightened little girl too. But I can't help of the only thing she thinks I want is to get into her pants. (Panties?)
> 
> ...


How have you changed in all that time?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> How have you changed in all that time?



Very little to no change at all. 

I have been like this - very deliberate, planning, etc on the inside and very outgoing, very funny and carefree on the outside. 

I did not let success get in my head too.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Very little to no change at all.
> 
> I have been like this - very deliberate, planning, etc on the inside and very outgoing, very funny and carefree on the outside.
> 
> I did not let success get in my head too.


What would MrsJohn say?

And, sorry, life is change. _Everyone_ changes.

Well, everyone that breathes.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

She would agree with me wholeheartedly. 

I'm still the curly haired grad student she fell in love with. Just rounder a bit, more caustic humor, but by and large the same guy.

I've learned a lot but personality wise the same.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

That simply isn't accurate. 

There are too many 'tells' that say otherwise. 

Somewhere in this mass of posts you made a statement to the effect: apologies are meaningless, people do what they do with intent

This is the J2's disease infecting you. Because miscommunications happen between spouses. Even in a healthy marriage. I have misheard M2 and in the process hurt her. And when I realized it - profusely and sincerely apologized. 

BUT - if it IS accurate - than J2 will be absolutely stunned - utterly shocked - when you nuke her upon your daughters graduation. 

How is that remotely ok? 








john117 said:


> She would agree with me wholeheartedly.
> 
> I'm still the curly haired grad student she fell in love with. Just rounder a bit, more caustic humor, but by and large the same guy.
> 
> I've learned a lot but personality wise the same.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

So, John, in short...

Your position as a mature, educated, successful, intelligent man...

Is that you've always been awesome, and she used to be, and changed for reasons absolutely opaque and having nothing to do with you?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

foolscotton3 said:


> I asked my wife to come here, she said she wouldn't, because its my safehaven, but I don't need a safehaven. She reads what I post, kinda funny, her stalking me on here, doesn't creep me out one bit.
> 
> Alex, would you ever let her know you are here.


No, because she is intensely private, and even though this place is anonymous (ish), she'd have a proverbial cow. I haven't said much here that I haven't to her, but she's not the type to put a lot of stock into internet forums dealing with issues of any kind.

If she happens to stumble upon this place, which is doubtful, she'd actually have to read my posts to realize who I am. Alex is not my given name, for starters.

I wouldn't be embarrassed to bring her here, but she probably would be.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> You changed because you needed to change... you might call me arrogant - and I'm sure I have my flaws - but I'm perfectly fine. I'm also sure people will say that this is the reason why my marriage went wrong... but that's not the reason.




InAbsentia,



I am not familiar with your story, but until proven otherwise, I'm going to assume your assessment of yourself, your wife, and your marriage trouble was made with your eyes and mind open, and with a sincere heart and thoughtful mind.



There are some in this world that will point the finger at their partner and claim they need to see this or that changed before their hearts can soften or they can be vulnerable or sexual again. The one being pointed at can spend years thinking "it's me", fixing this, worrying about that, jumping through hoops, suppressing their own needs -- and, in the end, it turn out the finger-pointing partner had some things he or she needed to fix in him or herself too, before R or love or intimacy or desire could come alive again.



In such a case, if one is the partner being pointed at and blamed for everything, it may take time to acquire the skills, understanding, and mental health to see the situation for what it is.



Once that clarity is achieved, there is good and healthy thing to say I am happy with who I am. If my partner cannot see my value, it is my partner's loss.


----------



## PieceOfSky (Apr 7, 2013)

The term "leadership" is problematic when used in discussing behavior in relationships, precisely because it means different things to different people.



There is a culture, I'm told (but not sure I believe) where when a husband and wife go on a walk, the wife is supposed to walk some distance behind her husband.



There are some here on TAM, if not this thread, who have stated that the husband should be the leader in the marriage. Yet, if being such a leader is really about cooperating and setting a good example and making oneself the best one can be, then why isn't it said both spouses should be co-leaders in the marriage? Maybe I have missed it, but what I have heard is that it us the man who is supposed to lead.



Mixed in with that, in my head, is memory of marriage services where excerpts from a holy book are read stating the role of the wife is to be submissive to the husband. And, apparently, not everyone who reads the same book agrees whether it is mutual submission or just one way.



Given that leadership does mean different things to different people, and given how easily it can get mixed in with teachings of what marital roles are advocated in different religions, even from one sect or denomination to another, I don't understand why the word continues to be used here. Seems like there are clearer choices, and the writers here would prefer clarity.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

PieceOfSky said:


> InAbsentia,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The lack of communication on her behalf killed our marriage... without proper communication, you make mistakes and these reinforce the bad aspects until there is no way out.

I was talking to my sister in law the other day (she is a therapist) and she confirmed to me that my wife is pretty much unable to express her feelings and let go. She won't talk about them.

When she got OCD, I had no idea, because she didn't tell me. When I found out, I must admit I could have handled it better, but I was tired of trying and I was hurt she kept it away from me.

Anyway, she now refuses to see a therapist. So, we are in a blind alley. There is no way out. She has decided to condemn our marriage.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> John,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



First, apologies are meaningless in general IMHO. Most sentient people know what they're doing and simply don't give a sh!t. 

This isn't miscommunication we are dealing about when you have a wife gloating that she's withholding intimacy and expressing her delight. It's not a "misheard" or other communication or misunderstanding issue.

I can - and have - forgive one or two incidents but if you're talking a systematic and deliberate behavior over years, no.

To be clear. None of this has anything to do with BPD - it's what FW and I were discussing a few pages back . It's basic decision making. It's her culture and upbringing and the like that are getting in the way. 

To be further clear. J2 is well aware that I don't plan to stick around. The surprise is the outcome of the divorce process, not the divorce itself. By that I mean financial in the short term as we have sizable assets and her half of everything is not quite as much as she thinks. Also practical for her as she will have to deal with a phenomenal amount of sh!t as single (aka normal life) and long term implications on her - no support network.

The last part is by far the biggest surprise. I have encouraged her to build up friendships but ultimately she thinks it's too much trouble to invite people over once or twice a year and cook a pot of goat stew or two...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> So, John, in short...
> 
> Your position as a mature, educated, successful, intelligent man...
> 
> Is that you've always been awesome, and she used to be, and changed for reasons absolutely opaque and having nothing to do with you?



Me Mature? You must be new to the Legend of John :lol:

In a nutshell, yea. Not awesome - no six pack tho, too much accent, and more pizza and donuts than fine dining. Just cool.

The reasons for her change are not opaque. As people get older they often align back to their birth culture. Return to our roots type stuff. She actually believes that once you're 50 or so physical and emotional connections are meaningless. Using her parents' own marriage as a template to boot. Joy.


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> Interesting. Well, I'm the opposite.
> 
> I think vulnerability for men is a trap. It's what you're supposed to say, but nobody really means it.


I think it takes *great strength *for a man to lay down his ego and pride and be vulnerable and transparent emotionally on occasion. I also think that most wives's hearts would be touched.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Blonde said:


> I think it takes *great strength *for a man to lay down his ego and pride and be vulnerable and transparent emotionally on occasion. I also think that most wives's hearts would be touched.


Totally agree.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

ah, yes... we are supposed to be leaders and vulnerable at the same time...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> ah, yes... we are supposed to be leaders and vulnerable at the same time...


Why do you see this as contradictory? Have you heard of servant leadership?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

jld said:


> Why do you see this as contradictory? Have you heard of servant leadership?


No...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

I know my husband is vulnerable with me, all the time, it is not difficult for him or for me. It would be foolish for anyone to pretend they are NOT vulnerable, because, who the hell isn't vulnerable?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> Why do you see this as contradictory? Have you heard of servant leadership?



The religious version?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Servant leadership - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

In Absentia said:


> ah, yes... we are supposed to be leaders and vulnerable at the same time...


Sarcasm?

Just so you understand brother, I spent 20 years in the military. Leading soldiers. 

When I first came in the army, leaders were supposed to be invulnerable. 20 years later, they were teaching the exact opposite in both leadership doctrine and resiliency training.

When the military acknowledges that leaders need to be emotionally vulnerable, you should probably take note.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> It would be foolish for anyone to pretend they are NOT vulnerable, because, who the hell isn't vulnerable?



In American culture yes. In many other cultures.... Not so sure.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> When the military acknowledges that leaders need to be emotionally vulnerable, you should probably take note.



Makes sense given the shift from B-52 carpet bombing to Falujah style street fighting as the gamut of OpFor's has shifted. Off topic but I would be curious to see how the Israeli armed forces do it....


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> The religious version?


10 Timely Traits of a Husband Displaying Servant Leadership | The Respected Husband


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

I'm vulnerable, but not quite a leader...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> I'm vulnerable, but not quite a leader...


Do you want to become one?


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

john117 said:


> My initial attempts were flawless (let's hear it for my cuddly personality ). We had great times for 25 years. Then I realized that a lot of fears and the like were coming upon her. She was not - and is not - interested in addressing any of them so...
> 
> In our 32 year history even at our worse times I always tended to focus on her first. She never appreciated it.


IOW* YOU* changed how you interact with your W and that is when the sex stopped and the relationship became an untenable one you can't wait to leave.

As long as you're honest, John. I resemble that, actually: I am the one in my M who has changed and I am no longer willing to be continually hurt with no sign of ownership from "God's gift to women"/"alpha" H (detached, emotionless, and in impenetrable denial)


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

john117 said:


> I'm past angry. I wonder if the first paragraph applies still. Probably does.
> 
> I can see the frightened little girl too. But I can't help of the only thing she thinks I want is to get into her pants. (Panties?)
> 
> ...


Yet you say it would make no difference if the sex was "on"

Sorry John, I don't buy it.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

jld said:


> Do you want to become one?


Not particularly...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> Not particularly...


Not sure how to solve marital problems if neither partner is willing or able to take initiative in addressing them . . .


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

john117 said:


> In a nutshell, yea. Not awesome - no six pack tho, too much accent, and more pizza and donuts than fine dining. Just cool.


If I was you, I'd change the diet and lose the weight. For those of us in our 50's, the body becomes way less forgiving of bad eating habits.

Maintaining a low-ish carb diet works for me. Once I got used to avoiding them, I no longer have carb cravings.

Not saying the return of the six pack would bring back your W sexual attraction, but it sure does feel good to look good.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> 10 Timely Traits of a Husband Displaying Servant Leadership | The Respected Husband



I have all ten in spades. Do I care to use them... Does it matter?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Blonde said:


> If I was you, I'd change the diet and lose the weight. For those of us in our 50's, the body becomes way less forgiving of bad eating habits.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I've dropped 10 lb already from a year ago via cycling and will drop more. If the weather holds this year likely more.

Food wise we actually eat pretty healthy as wife is a health nut. Not six pack material but how many 55 year olds cycle 100 miles a week, incl. 25-30 miles once a week?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> *I have all ten in spades.* Do I care to use them... Does it matter?


I think that would be for your wife to say, not you.

You have a very high opinion of yourself, John. That can be a stumbling block in marriage.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Blonde said:


> Yet you say it would make no difference if the sex was "on"
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry John, I don't buy it.



Yep. Here's an example.

Our younger is in college a dozen hours away in the Deep South. Has a good chance to go to med school down there. Wifey wants to transfer to her group's main base in another city an hour away. I could work remotely or find work there.

But she wants to keep the house here, me here, her there in an apartment, and paying med school and one more tuition. Now, my landscaping skills are good but I don't have a sprig for a money tree if you get my drift.

The woman does not comprehend the concept of money... La La Land...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

That is hard. It is so important to be on the same financial page in marriage.

Aren't money, sex, and child disputes the top reasons for divorce?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

jld said:


> Not sure how to solve marital problems if neither partner is willing or able to take initiative in addressing them . . .


Solve marital problems by being a leader? I'm not Julius Caesar... and it's well beyond that... I've already been killed by Brutus...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> Solve marital problems by being a leader? I'm not Julius Caesar... and it's well beyond that... I've already been killed by Brutus...


You are not powerless.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

jld said:


> You are not powerless.


Of course not... but I'm not in a normal relationship, so standard values and reasoning don't apply...


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

john117 said:


> Yep. Here's an example.
> 
> Our younger is in college a dozen hours away in the Deep South. Has a good chance to go to med school down there. Wifey wants to transfer to her group's main base in another city an hour away. I could work remotely or find work there.
> 
> ...


That's where you have to have a backbone/put your foot down. Geez, I can't tell you how many times I've moved (in my old "submissive wife" days) following H's "dreams".

Lately, I just put my foot down.

Sounds like you wouldn't mind BOTH of you moving to an apt near DD. Sell the McMansion.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> Of course not... but I'm not in a normal relationship, so standard values and reasoning don't apply...


You might have different challenges than another couple (not familiar with your situation). Not sure what normal means, anyway.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

jld said:


> You might have different challenges than another couple (not familiar with your situation). Not sure what normal means, anyway.


Dealing with someone who's not devoured by their mental state... which takes precedence on everything... even the ability to be fixed or wanting to be fixed...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> Dealing with someone who's not devoured by their mental state... which takes precedence on everything... even the ability to be fixed or wanting to be fixed...


IA, we all have limits. It would be honest to tell your wife that you are either unwilling or unable to meet her needs. It could free both of you up for more suitable mates.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

jld said:


> IA, we all have limits. It would be honest to tell your wife that you are either unwilling or unable to meet her needs. It could free both of you up for more suitable mates.


We've had this conversation... she agreed to therapy and then changed her mind. I'm free to go - she told me I can go - she would understand. But I'm staying until the little one flies the nest... about 5 years... not long. This doesn't mean I'm not pretty sad about the whole thing, but it's out of my hands.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

In Absentia said:


> We've had this conversation... she agreed to therapy and then changed her mind. I'm free to go - she told me I can go - she would understand. But I'm staying until the little one flies the nest... about 5 years... not long. This doesn't mean I'm not pretty sad about the whole thing, but it's out of my hands.


Well, try to make the best of it. You know it has an end date. That in itself might keep you in a better mood.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

jld said:


> Well, try to make the best of it. You know it has an end date. That in itself might keep you in a better mood.


I'm fine... I've accepted it... she is a good woman... shame it's gone a bit wrong... but it's life...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> That is hard. It is so important to be on the same financial page in marriage.
> 
> 
> 
> Aren't money, sex, and child disputes the top reasons for divorce?



Yea... Glad to see I've got all my bases covered.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> I'm with Always Alone. I don't think the advice here squares.
> 
> I don't think it's politically correct, but I don't think our culture wants to hear from men with problems.
> 
> ...


Whoa, Anon. I do think the advice here has taken a turn towards the vulnerable -- but I see this as a good thing.

I could not be with my SO if he wasn't open and vulnerable.

If he were to keep all of his problems to himself, not let in to help solve them, I would feel shut out.

If he were to always remain impassive to me, or unaffected, I would wonder if he takes me at all seriously or is just patronizing me.

None of which I could abide.

I think we do boys and men a great disservice with these crazy ideas that "boys don't cry" or "men cannot show their soft side."


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Blonde said:


> That's where you have to have a backbone/put your foot down. Geez, I can't tell you how many times I've moved (in my old "submissive wife" days) following H's "dreams".
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Putting your foot down requires leverage. With both of us pulling fairly similar money leverage is in short supply.

The Rasputin part of the plan is to get her to agree to sell the house before filing. Once all assets are liquid it's a lot easier to untangle. 

We could buy a dream > 55 community home in Tampa or similar but those are about 2500-3000 sq ft max. J2's idea is more like 2x that or more. That again is part of her cluelessness. My personal preference is to buy small - 2000 sq ft and under - or not buy at all and use some money to renovate my apartment in Europe which could use it and then live six months there and six months here. 

In general I'm open to realistic suggestions and what-if analysis but Dr. J2 simply sees a 6000 sq ft home in Miami or what not and instantly shuts down all discussion. The horror of her living in a 3000 sq ft home is probably second only to her having sex I suppose :rofl:. 

I suppose I need to show vulnerability - maybe I should show her what out of state or private med school tuition is like


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> I think until there is emotional trust--or the possibility of that trust--then it is hard to begin thinking about enhanced transparency in a relationship. If you are too relationship broken to contemplate trusting anyone, then I think the best you can do is be honest about that boundary or limitation. It is then up to your partner to decide if that is a deal breaker or not.


Thanks, GettingIt, but I think you've misunderstood where I'm coming from. I didn't say I cannot trust, I said I cannot trust that my relationship will survive whatever bomb I choose to drop into it.

Neither my SO or I have committed to unconditional love. We both know there are things that there's no way we could live with.

My point was that sometimes emotional intimacy is easy to accept because it reinforces good and positive feelings. Or it is about harmless stuff like watching tv shows or showing up late or going on business trips. 

Sometimes, however, we really are asking our partners to deal with a bomb.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

This is the very first time I've heard those things. 
1. She's intentionally cruel/gloating when she rejects
2. She knows you are leaving her on said date - but doesn't fully grasp the financial impact





john117 said:


> First, apologies are meaningless in general IMHO. Most sentient people know what they're doing and simply don't give a sh!t.
> 
> This isn't miscommunication we are dealing about when you have a wife gloating that she's withholding intimacy and expressing her delight. It's not a "misheard" or other communication or misunderstanding issue.
> 
> ...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Look past the behavior, MEM (#1); she is hurt inside.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> I did it. It's awesome.
> 
> I understand why women would be hesitant. I didn't want to be stuck in a position where I was working and then doing all of the stuff that I did while I was at home as well.
> 
> But, I also had trust that my husband wasn't a) going to be a burden in that manner and b) that he would do an excellent job at raising our kid. Which he hasn't and he is.


Me too! Except that we don't have kids.

And you know what? Some days he wastes on Facebook and lazing around the house. And sometimes I do get a bit jealous that he has so much free time when I work so hard.

Then I remember that he's making my breakfast and feeding me coffee while I waste time on TAM.

And if we did have kids? He would be a way better parent than me. He is much better with both patience and people.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Me too! Except that we don't have kids.
> 
> And you know what? Some days he wastes on Facebook and lazing around the house. And sometimes I do get a bit jealous that he has so much free time when I work so hard.
> 
> ...


He does not work at all?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Me Mature? You must be new to the Legend of John :lol:
> 
> In a nutshell, yea. Not awesome - no six pack tho, too much accent, and more pizza and donuts than fine dining. Just cool.
> 
> The reasons for her change are not opaque. As people get older they often align back to their birth culture. Return to our roots type stuff. She actually believes that once you're 50 or so physical and emotional connections are meaningless. Using her parents' own marriage as a template to boot. Joy.


Have you taken accountability for your failings in your marriage?

Everyone has some.

Even when you divorce, this may still serve you well.

And, if you can't learn to accept a sincere apology, people will stop offering them and give up John. And stop accepting yours in return. Everyone ****s up.

You included.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Failings? The only failing was that i did not walk out in 2008...

Apology is good once. More than that it becomes a behavior.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Thanks, GettingIt, but I think you've misunderstood where I'm coming from. I didn't say I cannot trust, I said I cannot trust that my relationship will survive whatever bomb I choose to drop into it.
> 
> Neither my SO or I have committed to unconditional love. We both know there are things that there's no way we could live with.
> 
> ...


Well, it is hard to converse about this productively is we're not on the same page about what counts as risky "transparency.

But yes, in general, I'm not referring to telling your partner that you spend every Thursday evening sacrificing small children at the alter of Gometh. 

That being said, "risk" is quite relative, and its assessment is one-sided (in that one partner decides whether something is "too risky" to reveal in a relationship. He or she might either over assess or under assess that risk.) What might be a "bomb" to some relationships might be a mere blip to others. What one partner assesses as "too risky" and therefore keeps to  himself might have actually ended up being quite a boon to the relationship if it had been disclosed.)

I don't believe in unconditional love either except as an ideal that one can attempt to steadily move towards. I've found that when I challenge myself to push beyond what I thought I was capable of in meeting my husband's needs, I've always surprised myself. One of his needs for as long as I've known him is for me to not keep any part of myself from him. He wants to know what goes on in the deepest recesses of my mind. He's always wanted to know what I was thinking, and what my fantasies are, and how my emotions work, etc. I've come a LONG way in being able to tell him my feelings without fearing his reaction. The reason I've been able to come this far is that he doesn't react negatively when I tell him things. He doesn't take it as a reflection of how much I love him or desire him, or as a judgement on him as a partner. 

AA, this might not seem like much of a risk to you at all. Perhaps you started your relationship with a higher level of emotional transparency than most folks manage after twenty years. But that doesn't mean it's not a scary risk for some couples. That doesn't meant that Alex's wife isn't struggling with what to disclose and what not to disclose to Alex about how her desire works, or her feelings about sex with him. Alex feels like he can't tell her that he has come to TAM for support, so it wouldn't surprise me in the least that there are things she deems she cannot tell him. 

I just use Alex as a convenient example since this is (or was, lol!) his thread. I think that most folks are in a place where they could improve the transparency in their relationship with the goal of better knowing how to lovingly and willingly meet needs for their partner, and to have their needs needs met in the same fashion. In other words, improving intimacy.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

2008 wasn't a failing. It was a rational decision based on the belief that J2's behavioral changes were an outlier not the new mean. 

It took you quite some time to realize just how mean the new mean was. 

No one faults you for that. I do believe that you remain somewhat unaware of how contagious that new mean was. 

I saw a study recently. Said that humans will endure just about anything to avoid humiliation. 

My hobby is patterns, an area where (except for one blind spot) you also excel. Riddle me this:

What's the difference between you humiliating J2 in front of the girls - over her ETA anxiety
And
J2 humiliating you sexually

At a core emotional level those two actions wreak the same havoc.....







john117 said:


> Failings? The only failing was that i did not walk out in 2008...
> 
> Apology is good once. More than that it becomes a behavior.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I was raised by pretty progressive parents. Hippies. So I sort of heard all of this gender equality sh-t all my life.

High end schools. More of the same. 

I've come to the point in my life where I've concluded that it's all a bunch of Utopianism.

Basically, what it all amounts to is women want the former privileges of men, but men are still expected to carry all of the burdens of yesteryear, without any of the old priviliges.

I am totally surrounded by examples of this.

The majority of my social circle consists of families where the man works his @ss off, while the wife stays home with kids. The wife has a nanny, cleaning lady, only orders takeout (never cooks), landscaping services, personal trainer, etc.

These are all intelligent women with blue chip degrees from top schools.

The men in my social circle who cannot provide this lifestyle are perceived as lesser. It is pretty obvious.

One particular outlier is one of my best friends who is a SAHD. His wife is in a prestige profession. A couple of years ago, she mentioned to me while he was out of the room that she wished he would get his sh-t together. He has the exact same set up that all of the wives have, but it's not OK for him.

I didn't create this world, I just live in it.

I used to believe that men and women could be interchangeable, but in real adult life, I've never seen an example of it.

I believe men's roles are more rigid than ever.

Success is playing your role best.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Lot of truth to what you are saying, Anon.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Failings? The only failing was that i did not walk out in 2008...
> 
> Apology is good once. More than that it becomes a behavior.


A marriage with one mistake from the husband?

Really?

I can see your frustration, you've been nearly perfect after all. She _should_ be bowing down at your feet and thanking the gods for you.

I'm not at all saying she deserves you, John.

I am saying that we all have **** to work on.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> I saw a study recently. Said that humans will endure just about anything to avoid humiliation.


So true. Pridefulness is so powerful, so blinding. So many problems in marriage, if not in life, could be solved by rigorous honesty.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

I did not graduate from an Ivy League. I graduated at the peak of the 2008 recession and was one of the lucky ones out of my class to get a job right after graduation. My "lawn" is maybe 12x12, I have no nanny, no landscaper and a budget so strictly drawn out takeout everyday seems laughable.

I don't get the complaining. Your social circle isn't bound to you and if you are constantly surrounded by judgmental hypocritical people, get away from them.

My parents weren't hippies, they got a lot of the crap shoveled on them from the Civil Rights Era and their lessons to me reflect that more than this hyper-achievement that other parents seemed to stress.

Not Ivy League thinking, maybe. My parents didn't raise me to look happy, they raised me to be happy, however that looks to everyone else.


----------



## Wazza (Jul 23, 2012)

jld said:


> 10 Timely Traits of a Husband Displaying Servant Leadership | The Respected Husband


Counter point of view...

I have no interest in leadership. I know where I am going, I will compromise for the sake of the marriage to a point, and if we exceed that point the marriage will end. Should that happen, it will be my wife who crosses the line, and she will know how I feel as a factor in her decision. 

My wife is an adult. She is empowered and responsible to make her own decisions. I am a partner, not a boss. This is 2015, not 1950.

To the extent that these ten principles simply reflect healthy interpersonal relationships, I can embrace them. But for example in my world #5 is about joint direction setting, not just the mechanics of how I get my way. Or #7, my wife is responsible for her own plans. I support her in her decisions. I don't make them for her. #8. It happens I manage the money in our family....because I understand it and my wife doesn't. But I know other families where the wife is the one who can add figures.

And so on.


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

john117 said:


> I suppose I need to show vulnerability - maybe I should show her what out of state or private med school tuition is like


We've discussed this previously. My oldest daughter graduated med school and took out *her own loans* (which she has paid off in her third year of residency by dedicating all of her resident salary to that purpose and living on her H's income)

DD lived and worked in the state where she graduated college for a year and the first year applying to med school was accepted in that state but denied in state tuition. She waited another year and reapplied early admission to the school near BF and got in.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> A marriage with one mistake from the husband?
> 
> Really?
> 
> ...



I was actually expecting her to sacrifice a lamb in my honor every year as is the custom in her country 

Look, nobody's perfect. I've pointed out my flaws but they are not the kind of flaws that matter in the grand scheme of things. I'm pretty sure she feels I should be a manager making more. But... I don't want to be a manager. I love what I do. My team loves me. So...

I'm immature. Good. How do I fix that? Toastmasters, Rotary, and the like? Pardon me while I lol. Do you really need to be married to some middle age accountant whose idea of fun is finding rounding errors? Does it matter if I do? 

I was immature when we met in 1982. I was immature during our great years (1990-2005). It's like my manager who wrote in my last performance review that I tend to give too many details. Duh, Bob, you just noticed? I've only worked for you since 1998.

As a designer, I firmly believe everything can be improved. But I also believe at some point one should stop messing with a good design and just tweak and make small measurable improvements like Apple does. Not like Android where things change every release...

I'm not an alcoholic, I don't abuse anyone, don't do drugs, I'm resourceful, I haven't cheated (yet), etc. I make damned good money, I raised two kids...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

foolscotton3 said:


> Every shot they fire is followed my a medic.



Lolz

The Israelis are seriously funny people... One of my suppliers is in Haifa and hearing him make fun of the rocket attacks they get on occasion is quite funny. Good people.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

But you were blessed with a wife who will not let you rest on your laurels, John. This could be a challenge for you to deepen your empathy and learn true humility in marriage.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Wazza, we all do what works for us. John asked about a religious version of servant leadership, and that is one of the first ones that came up on google.

I respect that you waited out your wife's affair, btw. I am sure you have a good heart. I hope the next 24 years of your marriage are happy and healthy.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> John,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well.... Let's cue in the Relativist Choir here...

There's many differences. I don't see either one as humiliation to begin with. In my line if work it requires a very thick skin to survive. I'll call it hostile feedback...

It really is an apples to oranges comparison. I do what I do after repeated attempts to get her to understand that the Paducah Costco is not exactly the Falujah Sam's Club or the Beirut Piggly Wiggly. So if I'm 10 minutes late chances are I'm stuck on the road and I'm not in the ditch somewhere courtesy of the Pablo Escobar goon squad... Her action is completely uncalled for and has no rational basis. I can explain why I do it. She can't.

(Pause for the Choir to get to the right hymnal)

Also, my behavior is voluntary and controllable. I can choose to play games or not. Hers is not. It's 100% rejection unless she's the one calling the shots (how's that working for you?). In other words I can turn it on and off at will. She can't.

(Pause for the Choir to get to the right hymnal)

There's the issue of deceit. I am fairly clear about what I do and why I do it. She can't explain it. I've asked. She's formed the idea that this is how things are and that's how they'll be. 

(Pause for the Choir to get to the right hymnal)

There's the issue of cognition. I'm fully cognizant of what I'm doing and it's implications. For her it's business as usual. 

(Pause for the Choir to get to the right hymnal)

Finally, there's the issue of "an eye for an eye". Reciprocity. Leadership. Blah blah. Even if I turn my behavior off, she won't. She has a fairly good number of such behaviors that can't be turned off. These are basic behaviors that impact her alone but she won't take action because good ole' John said so.

In the last year or so I've turned to complete 180, literally. I can see this annoys her but hey, that's life...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> But you were blessed with a wife who will not let you rest on your laurels, John. This could be a challenge for you to deepen your empathy and learn true humility in marriage.



True humility is putting up with her sh!t for 7 years now jld. It's the self restrain to not make her wear her laptop for a necklace or to cheat or to simply walk away. True humility is being patient enough to survive thru the worse of her BPD and still help her. True humility is having to turn down jobs in the west coast for twice my salary because of her. So.... Exactly what else am I supposed to sacrifice for her?

View attachment 31690


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> I did not graduate from an Ivy League. I graduated at the peak of the 2008 recession and was one of the lucky ones out of my class to get a job right after graduation. My "lawn" is maybe 12x12, I have no nanny, no landscaper and a budget so strictly drawn out takeout everyday seems laughable.
> 
> I don't get the complaining. Your social circle isn't bound to you and if you are constantly surrounded by judgmental hypocritical people, get away from them.
> 
> ...


Hey, I will be the first to admit that your attitude about this stuff is healthier.

I provided my story because I simply see a massive gulf in my life between the message "it's OK for a man to be vulnerable" and the reality. If you don't see the same thing, I think that's great.

I am not trying to say I'm better than anyone.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anger is useful as a warning. Not as a background source of motivation...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> True humility is putting up with her sh!t for 7 years now jld. It's the self restrain to not make her wear her laptop for a necklace or to cheat or to simply walk away. True humility is being patient enough to survive thru the worse of her BPD and still help her. True humility is having to turn down jobs in the west coast for twice my salary because of her. So.... Exactly what else am I supposed to sacrifice for her?
> 
> View attachment 31690


John, look in my mirror. None of that is humility. It is all self-interest.

Domestic violence, cheating, walking away would not have served your interests. You helped her because you want her contribution towards those tuition bills. You turned down those jobs because you like the hours you work at your current job.

Humility would be admitting that leaving those divorce papers on the table scared the **** out of your wife. She grew up in a culture where the man had the final word. She married you thinking she could trust you and not be dominated by you. She was trying to protect her daughter in the way her culture taught her: by trying to push her into a lucrative career field. She believed you were harming her daughter, risking her future by supporting her art ambitions. In her culture her behavior might be considered normal, not disordered. It is a culture where people fight to survive, still.

And those tragedies at the same time, losing her sister and mother. She loves her girls and wanted the best for them. And in her eyes, you, the man whose intelligence she respected and who she thought had her back, turned on her, leaving divorce papers on the table. And she did what she never thought she would have to do in the West, as a highly paid career woman: she backed down to the man in her life. And she hates you for forcing her submission.

Shoot, John, can you get into her head and see things through her eyes? Can you put your hurt aside, not just to rub her back, or to put gas in her car, but to see into her heart? She has one. She loves those girls, who grew up in a far different culture and family than her own. And she loves you, even though you betrayed her.

The woman needs real humility from you. She needs you to read that article I posted on a wife with a hardened heart, and she needs to feel your genuine contrition. She needs to feel like her heart matters, too.

I wish you would embrace leadership instead of insisting it is half on her or all on her. I wish you would just put your pride aside and look at how what you have done has made her feel, and then reach out to her. 

You are smart and funny, John. But your pride is holding you back from growing and healing in your marriage.

And you don't want to leave her. You respect her and are attracted to her and love her. And you might not have to leave all that behind if you could try to embrace some of our advice instead of defending yourself.


----------



## Duguesclin (Jan 18, 2014)

John,

I think you problem is that you have become way too American. If you were thinking more like her, you marriage would not be where it is.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> Well, it is hard to converse about this productively is we're not on the same page about what counts as risky "transparency.
> 
> But yes, in general, I'm not referring to telling your partner that you spend every Thursday evening sacrificing small children at the alter of Gometh.


GettingIt, I'm not talking about anything that extreme, although extreme too does exist. I'm talking about situations exactly like alex's.

His wife told him several years in that she is not into sex and just does it to please him. That's a bomb! And no doubt she knew that Alex might very well leave her for it. Still might.

Indeed, many people here would advise him to do so outright. 

It is my biggest fear right now, that my SO is going to come out with something along those lines. Either that or "I really did cheat on you that time when ...". And quite frankly I simply cannot give him a safe environment for that kind of revelation because I can't promise that I won't react badly and hightail it out of there.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying transparency isn't worth striving for or bad. I'm saying that if you don't have the luxury of knowing that your spouse really wants to know these things or will always accept your revelations without burdening you with their own, then it becomes abundantly clear why more people don't practice it.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Duguesclin said:


> John,
> 
> 
> 
> I think you problem is that you have become way too American. If you were thinking more like her, you marriage would not be where it is.



Awesome, Dug. 

Last time I checked this was the USA and not the People's Republic of Farawaystan or Transylvania (hard to come up with a fake European country name, with all due respect to Frau Merkel)

If we were in either of those two countries things would have gone far worse for J2. Neither country is known as a paradise for women and yea, we get ObamaDayCare and ObamaTuition and so on in Tranny land and in Farawaystan.... Well... Good luck in an Islamic court.... But cheating is rampant in both countries. So, hard as it may be to portray myself as a knight in shining armor, here I am.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> GettingIt, I'm not talking about anything that extreme, although extreme too does exist. I'm talking about situations exactly like alex's.
> 
> His wife told him several years in that she is not into sex and just does it to please him. That's a bomb! And no doubt she knew that Alex might very well leave her for it. Still might.


Alex's wanted the truth from his wife--he wanted an answer for her change in behavior. She gave him that answer--it might have been difficult to hear, but he asked to hear it. If he accepts it as the truth (and I'm not saying he must), then he should give her his truth in return. When you press a spouse for the truth of their feelings, you must be prepared to accept what you hear. By "accept" I don't mean waive your right to act (to leave the marriage in Alex's case), but you don't bemoan the fact that your spouse gave you what you asked for. 

Sure, it would be sad for her if her honest disclosure ended up making her lose a marriage she was happy in. But the fact of the matter is that Alex wasn't happy watching his needs be disregarded day after day. Either she takes her medicine now or she takes it later as the marriage slowly erodes into detachment and perhaps bitterness and infidelity. 

To be clear, I don't think Alex's wife is to blame. I don't think she intentionally misled him. I think she was plenty optimistic about her ability to keep meeting his sexual needs. But things did change for her, and now she has had to examine why, and has chosen to provide answers to Alex--answers that might have consequences for the marriage. 

I don't think they are done working through this by a long shot. I think they very well could find a way to move past this that is acceptable for them both. 



always_alone said:


> Indeed, many people here would advise him to do so outright.


And I think that is a valid choice. Everyone's needs are different, and if Alex cannot feel loved fully and completely without genuine sexual desire from her, and if that lack will cause him to build resentment and cause him to stop meeting her needs . . . then how else to escape the marriage's death spiral than to be honest and discuss whether it should be dissolved? 



always_alone said:


> It is my biggest fear right now, that my SO is going to come out with something along those lines. Either that or "I really did cheat on you that time when ...". And quite frankly I simply cannot give him a safe environment for that kind of revelation because I can't promise that I won't react badly and hightail it out of there.


Committing to transparency doesn't mean you promise to stay no matter what. For some people, not knowing and living a lie is worse than knowing and having to deal with the fallout. 

I assume you've told your SO that if you find out he cheated on you, then you are gone. That probably goes into his calculations of how much transparency to bring to the relationship. I'm assuming that this is an acceptable "understanding" for each of you--as long as you don't have evidence of his infidelity, you can continue in the relationship. 



always_alone said:


> Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying transparency isn't worth striving for or bad. I'm saying that if you don't have the luxury of knowing that your spouse really wants to know these things or will always accept your revelations without burdening you with their own, then it becomes abundantly clear why more people don't practice it.


I agree that it's clear why there are walls to transparency in relationships--as I said before, I think it's the more natural state, while transparency is an intentional practice. I think transparency is valued differently by different people, too. The deeper into the practice I go, the better the intimacy in my marriage becomes. But I have the luxury of an ever deepening trust in my partner to handle things that I never thought I'd be able to tell him. And when he is vulnerable to me in return, it is just as rewarding to be able to return the favor. 

One other thing I've noticed about myself and my relationship, though--and this might be very significant in my ability to move my "walls." I've noticed that I don't KNOW what my reaction to a real "bomb" from him would be. I don't KNOW what I would do if one day he disclosed to me that he had cheated during our bad years, or if he told me that he really hated my kink needs and was just faking enthusiasm. I don't mind not knowing--I don't think there is a right way or a wrong way to react to those sorts of things, but I know I can't predict my feelings with certainty. You obviously have confidence in your ability to do so--and I've seen many others here on TAM say with certainty what their actions would be under certain circumstances. Perhaps my not being confident in my future feelings is a benefit and a luxury when it comes to developing transparency with my husband. It leaves me less to fear.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Jld, not quite as simple as that. But I appreciate the write up. It really means a lot. 

Most everything people do is self interest based. Maybe at age 18 it isn't but we are older. I'm not an idealist. I'm a pragmatist. 

I understand the part about the divorce papers but guess what, by the time we came to that it was pretty much her way or the highway... Part of being a caring parent is to understand what your kid's abilities and limitations are. Which, if you (J2) had bothered to attend one expletive deleted parent teacher conference or help the kid with homework you would have known. Or if you had bothered to come to year end art shows you would have seen that your kid was creating art and design work that was off the charts good. Or if you had talked to her guidance counselor and art teachers.... Or of you had listened to your expletive deleted husband who is a product design professional you would trust his judgment about her design skills a bit... You get the idea. 

J2 got her way with the younger one. Do you need to bat 1.000 for both kids to medical school? 

The tragedies? She talked to her sister once a year. Always upset with her because - imagine that - she was a normal human being who wanted love and affection and all the stuff NormalPeople (tm) take for granted. Her mother? The one who hated me, hated her, and only cared about her two doctor kids? "Whaaaaat? A PhD in math? Can you teach in high school?"... The one who screwed up all her kids' lives? The one who changed her will to ensure nobody gets anything?

I had to make a decision. My kids or her. Easy decision. The kids aren't adults and can't defend themselves. Game over. She needs to compromise. Just like our younger girl compromised - but being John's true daughter she is doing a bit of extracurricular college work... Good job 

I did not betray anyone. The sh!t had hit the fan for 3 years before the infamous kitchen table debacle. That's 3 years of her raging that I lost. My girls lost. Think you're 15-16 years old and the psychologist tells your parents that you came out of the ordeal unscathed but skipped all your teenage-hood straight into adulthood. Think you're raged upon for looking good. Sorry jld, the divorce paperwork should have been on the table years earlier and filed. But as the lawyer I spoke to in 2008 said, "in our county family court system the usual is an exec dad cheating or wife walking and unless she's Susan Smith (exact words) you get a weekend or two a month. Not me.

It is not half on me by any stretch. In her country I would get her kids and that would be all. I did not do it to gain anything. I did it to protect my kids like any parent would. 

It's not pride that is holding me back. I don't want anything to do with her. I sacrificed seven years of my life, going to ten, for what? A zombie? There's no turning back. Yea, I'm attracted to her in a Kathy Griffin way (be quiet in the back) and years ago I loved her. Now it's all zombie land. 

In my view it's basically simple. She's emulating her parents' marriage and following her culture's customs. Nothing to do with BPD or divorce papers or college plans or the phase of the moon. Just a guess.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Anger is useful as a warning. Not as a background source of motivation...


Funny.

I think the opposite.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> I was actually expecting her to sacrifice a lamb in my honor every year as is the custom in her country
> 
> Look, nobody's perfect. I've pointed out my flaws but they are not the kind of flaws that matter in the grand scheme of things.


In your opinion.

Perhaps that's the only one that matters to you?


> I'm pretty sure she feels I should be a manager making more. But... I don't want to be a manager. I love what I do. My team loves me. So...


As long as you're 100% sure that isn't complacency or fear talking, I agree.



> I'm immature. Good. How do I fix that? Toastmasters, Rotary, and the like? Pardon me while I lol. Do you really need to be married to some middle age accountant whose idea of fun is finding rounding errors? Does it matter if I do?
> 
> I was immature when we met in 1982. I was immature during our great years (1990-2005). It's like my manager who wrote in my last performance review that I tend to give too many details. Duh, Bob, you just noticed? I've only worked for you since 1998.


I'll say it -- you are so sure you're right and everyone else is wrong about everything.

Have you ever been wrong about anything, ever?

In business, like every social element of life (like marriage), perception doesn't just alter reality, it _is_ reality. If someone thinks you're an a-hole, guess what? You're an a-hole. If someone thinks you're a sex god, then you're a sex god.

Our internal reality and self-perception may be quite different, but that matters sweet f-all to how you make someone feel.


> As a designer, I firmly believe everything can be improved. But I also believe at some point one should stop messing with a good design and just tweak and make small measurable improvements like Apple does. Not like Android where things change every release...


Sure. I agree. Industrial design is a passion of mine.

Do you put yourself in this category? Of everything can be improved?

Or are you only the improver?


> I'm not an alcoholic, I don't abuse anyone, don't do drugs, I'm resourceful, I haven't cheated (yet), etc. I make damned good money, I raised two kids...


Sure. All good stuff.

In most people's life we call that "you must be at least this tall to get on this ride," not really success in and of itself.

Look. Leave. Do whatcha gotta do. I was trapped in a dead end marriage, too. We split and I was nothing but better for it.

But it did send me on some serious soul searching that has never ended, and those scars from that marriage still haunt me.

They will you, too.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> Funny.
> 
> 
> 
> I think the opposite.




Anger motivates people to get started but in the stretch most people need a more rational motivation to keep going. That's why I used the qualifier "background". 

I will get angry when the high school prom queen turns me down and tells me I am too chubby. Then I'll hit the gym motivated initially by the anger. In the long sustainable term this won't work. I need a more rational sustainable (background) reason to keep going to the gym.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

foolscotton3 said:


> When little girls play mommy, its adorable, but when a teenage girl says she wants to be a sahm, something is wrong with her, she doesn't get it. Nobody ever thinks, maybe she does get it, maybe the world doesn't define her worth.


It can be pretty hard to say something like that. Nobody respects it, you know?

I think education and career choices are really important for women. I believe there is a lot of value to SAHMs, too. 

I am really glad I have been able to be home with my kids. And I admire the career accomplishments of women I know, too.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> I'll say it -- you are so sure you're right and everyone else is wrong about everything.
> 
> Have you ever been wrong about anything, ever?


Many times. Lots of times. I have worked on stuff that flopped. I have released bad software. And so on. But people related failures like hiring a fluke? Rare.



> In business, like every social element of life (like marriage), perception doesn't just alter reality, it _is_ reality. If someone thinks you're an a-hole, guess what? You're an a-hole. If someone thinks you're a sex god, then you're a sex god.


I know a thing or two about perception  that's pretty much what my team does (UX/UI).



> Do you put yourself in this category? Of everything can be improved?
> 
> Or are you only the improver?


Everything myself included. After working for a decade I decided I wanted to go for the gold, received a fellowship from work and spent four years pursuing a PhD. Loved it. 

Convinced my wife to do the same - almost - she left her work tho. These were our good days... As in giving birth in the middle of the semester 

At 54 I took up cycling. Started in May doing 3-4 grueling miles, by October I did 25-30. I'll do my birthday ride (55). 

I took up Arabic. Always wanted to learn it. I have always been like that.



> Look. Leave. Do whatcha gotta do. I was trapped in a dead end marriage, too. We split and I was nothing but better for it.
> 
> But it did send me on some serious soul searching that has never ended, and those scars from that marriage still haunt me.
> 
> They will you, too.



I wonder about that. I'm usually not frazzled about things. I store bad experiences away and off I go... I'm not a very emotional person inside tho I appear to be on the outside. It's all good.

The only thing that will haunt me is that with what I know about the human mind I should have been able to make this marriage work. It's like out end of January post CES pizza bash at work. Lots of pizza and soda, gifts for the team from Bob, and brutal feedback from the hundreds of people who used our stuff in the show. You thought that this icon should be a bunny and not a toilet? Well, customer Kim and 19 of her BFF's think it sucked. That's a bad feel. Then it dawns on you.... And you go fvvvvvvvck. 

That will haunt me.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Well, my daughter is planning to either do an MD degree or PhD, or a combined program. She does not want to be a SAHM. She is glad she had a SAHM, but she does not want to be one herself.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

My older girl plans to do a PhD in her field (design) and then marry rich  and spend her time baking. 

The younger plans to stay in college forever. She somehow outfoxed Academic Adviser John and signed up for a Philosophy Minor. So I'm paying serious money for classes in philosophy. 

Her explanation - college English is too easy and I wanted a course where I can type pages and pages arguing about life's choices.

Maybe she needs a TAM account?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> I know a thing or two about perception  that's pretty much what my team does (UX/UI).


How does your wife perceive you?

How will J2 2.0?

I can passably speak several languages, too. Japanese, Spanish, Quechua (Incan), a teensy bit of latin, some Arabic as well. Enough Mandarin to have a decent night out in Singapore or Hong Kong. My biggest achievement, language wise, was probably being able to understand what the damn bartender was saying in Aberdeen after 10 pints and half a bottle of whiskey, or why the old guy in the bathroom wanted to fight me.

Read several more. Once learned enough German just so I could read Kafka without translation. Enough Greek so I could read Plato. Some cuneiform and Mayan, but mostly just the numbers. Was interested in how they did math. I drew the line at French -- Sartre's amazing, but it wasn't worth the effort.

Got me laid a few times, I think. Impressed my wife for about 10 minutes. 

All that, at the end of the day, just made me look pretentious.

I just about did my post-grad in UI too, back in the day. Pure math, too. Can write software in a dozen languages. Can debate number theory until the cows come home.

Again, so what?

Who does that impress?

No-one.

There are millions of smart people in this world. There are millions of people smarter than me, maybe including you.

I've been laid thousands of times. By more than a few women. I still don't understand relationships at all.

Just ask my wife. For all my book learnin'... I'm a dumbass.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

That would make a good thread for the general board, marduk: How does your spouse perceive you?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

My wife's answer wouldn't just depend on the day of the week, jld... it would depend on the minute of the day...

I swear to god there's some kinda magic 8 ball that gets shaken every time she sees me...

Right now is "Signs point to yes."

In 5 minutes it could be "Outlook not so good."


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Do you want to do the thread anyway?

If you don't, do you mind if I steal the idea?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Giver jld... I'm eager to see your take!


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> Who does that impress?
> 
> No-one.
> 
> ...



Well.... Intelligence, like politics, is local. In other words, you don't have to be the smartest person who ever lived. Just smarter than a few people around your locale.

Or, take my approach and specialize in areas nobody really understands. Then you can get away with a lot 

Intelligence buys you options. Whether your wife thinks you're a genius or not is irrelevant. Intelligence has a street value.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

So...

Round and round we go, John.

What do you want to achieve?

12 months from now, if all goes well, where are you?

What are you willing to do to get there?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

12 months from now - nowhere.

24 months from now - nowhere.

27 months from now - poof.

To quote Fred... "All I want to do is disappear. Like, face on milk carton disappear. Except my face will be smiling."

The poof part? Prepare. Plan. Line up a lawyer and have everything set. Execute plan. Easy.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

I've done it.

It ain't easy.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

I don't expect it to be easy. But then moving to the USA at age 22 with $500 wasn't easy either


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> I don't expect it to be easy. But then moving to the USA at age 22 with $500 wasn't easy either


I could tell you similar stories of hardship.

As could most here.

Why are you here? What are you looking for?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Good question.

Up to a couple years ago I was quite certain my marriage was fixable. Turned out it is as fixable as my old Saab. 

I seek to understand how common the issue I ran into is. Like any problem one does background research. I found a couple cases with stunning similarities to mine. I learned about things. It's been a journey.

I am also fascinated by watching people juggle the what-ifs of sex vs the alternatives. It is frightening to discover the drive that Mother Nature built into us go head first against the desire to avoid sex. 

Fun stuff.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Your situation is not very common, John. But as you know, there are plenty of others, they have their own forums, etc. It not being typical does make it harder. In fact, in your case, sadly...I think it is impossible to fix. I don't know why some with PD's can catch a glimmer of awareness and some can't....but it seems yours can't.

Your bravado may be just a mask for how deeply you were hurt when your wife seemed to turn into an alien toward you. But I'm thinking you may still be experiencing a type of PTSD about those events...because (sorry to tell you, we are ALL trying to tell you) some of the things you are saying don't quite make sense. It is almost like you are stuck in that moment, reliving it constantly. (Whatever "that moment" was...the moment your heart broke in half maybe?) 

Do you have an IC? Can you get one?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Why is it so difficult to accept that I'm past these events? 

You want to talk PTSD? When I was in college in the old country I landed a gig doing data analysis for the university medical center. Cardiology department. They gave me a desk in the cardiac ultrasound lab. Nearly everyone there - young and old - was a goner. Ever seen an 18 year old girl, as good looking as they get, to be told she's done because some heart valve thingie is off kilter? Had a father ask you if his kid will be alright? 

Both my parents had heart disease too. I lost a brother to cancer at 50. You think I'm going to get all PTSD'd up because the love of my life turned into an alien? Not likely...

I did have a few sessions in IC. Nothing spectacular. Just ADHD and being annoying


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

I call it Ground Hog Day. And no, you're not past these events, they are still circling around you constantly.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

They can circle all they want. That's the whole point of emotional growth.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

GettingIt said:


> Alex feels like he can't tell her that he has come to TAM for support, so it wouldn't surprise me in the least that there are things she deems she cannot tell him.
> 
> I just use Alex as a convenient example since this is (or was, lol!) his thread. I think that most folks are in a place where they could improve the transparency in their relationship with the goal of better knowing how to lovingly and willingly meet needs for their partner, and to have their needs needs met in the same fashion. In other words, improving intimacy.


Well, I honestly would tell her about this place, had I not a) originally come here before I even met her to get advice about my ex wife and the divorce I was going through, and b) that I've put some incredibly intimate details about her life here.

I have nothing to hide, that's not the reason. I wouldn't be afraid to show her TAM if this was the only thread I participated in, etc.

At this point, were she to go back and read some of the things I wrote, I think it would do more harm than good to our relationship, even though it's nothing I've not said to her in person. I know she wouldn't be happy that I'm sharing this stuff with others, no matter how anonymous.

Irony, eh? Dammit.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

alexm said:


> Well, I honestly would tell her about this place, had I not a) originally come here before I even met her to get advice about my ex wife and the divorce I was going through, and b) that I've put some incredibly intimate details about her life here.
> 
> I have nothing to hide, that's not the reason. I wouldn't be afraid to show her TAM if this was the only thread I participated in, etc.
> 
> ...


You have your reasons for the wall--I get that. Justifying the walls is the easy part. She, too, has information in her head and heart that she holds close for the exact same reasons--she thinks it would do more harm than good to tell you.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

john117 said:


> Why is it so difficult to accept that I'm past these events?
> 
> You want to talk PTSD? When I was in college in the old country I landed a gig doing data analysis for the university medical center. Cardiology department. They gave me a desk in the cardiac ultrasound lab. Nearly everyone there - young and old - was a goner. Ever seen an 18 year old girl, as good looking as they get, to be told she's done because some heart valve thingie is off kilter? Had a father ask you if his kid will be alright?


John, I think what's going on here is that your hurt and loathing for your wife are palpable, even by us random strangers over the Internet. Because of this, we can't help but think how it must be in your household. 

Certainly, when I first encountered you here that was my first reaction: he hates her so much, she *must* be aware of it and protecting herself further. No way anything could be repaired under that climate.

And no way that he is passed it. And as long as you can only describe her as stupid and/or evil, it will be hard to believe you have gotten over it. Because she is sick, not stupid, not evil, but sick. And while I can most certainly understand why this is not a sickness that you can continue to live with, especially as she shows zero sign of wanting to work on it, to really move past it, you will need to let go of your hurt and loathing.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

foolscotton3 said:


> Open up bro, the truth will set you free.


Umm, maybe we should get back to GettingIt's advice for baby steps?

Because, on the whole, I think revealing that you've been dissecting your partner on a website of strangers counts as another bomb.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> John, I think what's going on here is that your hurt and loathing for your wife are palpable, even by us random strangers over the Internet. Because of this, we can't help but think how it must be in your household.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The operative word is "clinical detachment". If you have a relative in the health care business ask them how they do it. I don't hate anyone. We had our 25 good years and things break down. I loved my Saab SPG and it served me very well. But eventually it was time for her to rest. 

As I have said many times, mental health has nothing to do with it. Pfizer could market a BPD-be-gone magic pill and we'd still be in square one.

She is simply driven by culture and family "values" that are a bit on the alien side. Reporting such behaviors is hardly hating or loathing. In WW2 the Germans wiped out my hometown. If I report it, is that "not over with it", hate, or loathing?

I am well past hurt and loathing. In late 2013 I wisely saw that it's not fixable, with TAM help from my friends. 2014 was detachment year. 2015 will be too. I don't take it personally any more. It's like the weather. It happens.

The only feeling I have right now is like what one feels when they watch Eastern European bad winter driving accidents on YouTube . Morbid curiosity. It just saddens me that she decided to throw away three decades together because "in her culture emotional connections are for teenagers" and "people our age don't need sex".


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

J2 periodically talks to you about longer term life plans. 

Detachment would look like this: 

J2, 
We had the best 25 years of my life together. I'm not going to voluntarily stay in a marriage that has become loveless. My current plan is to ......

And then I would emphasize that the house has X equity and she can either buy you out (we both know she really can't afford to) or split the proceeds from the sale. 






john117 said:


> The operative word is "clinical detachment". If you have a relative in the health care business ask them how they do it. I don't hate anyone. We had our 25 good years and things break down. I loved my Saab SPG and it served me very well. But eventually it was time for her to rest.
> 
> As I have said many times, mental health has nothing to do with it. Pfizer could market a BPD-be-gone magic pill and we'd still be in square one.
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

And I have told her just that. She's not hearing it because her mind hears "no retirement McMansion" and shuts down 

Even for splitting the proceeds she has a hard time understanding the concept of equitable distribution or deal with actual numbers. Having talked to a couple lawyers I understand what's on the horizon quite well.

There's a lot of intricate decision analysis in selling off in 2 years vs paying it off in 8. Most has to do with the shelf life of McMansions. In a couple years the house still looks new, noting major breaks, etc. In 8 you're pushing your luck and more important the house is 20 years old and well past it's prime for all the a-holes who would want to buy. So they'll use every scratch on the wall to browbeat you into a lower price... Not to mention that in 2 years economy is likely good, meaning more a-holes, in 8... Crap shoot.

This is regardless of money needs. But this deep analytic thinking eludes her. Soooo...


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

John, I can't imagine loving someone for 25 good years and not be affected by a divorce. 

You must have a special talent.

It doesn't "compute" with most of the human race.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

john117 said:


> The operative word is "clinical detachment".


Yes, and it's a skill you can and must learn with family members as well, especially ones like mine with schizophrenia, bipolar, or in your case, BPD. 

I get it.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

T&T said:


> John, I can't imagine loving someone for 25 good years and not be affected by a divorce.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I know.

But then, most of the human race didn't wait 7-8 years to file either.

If I know myself I will have another year of reality laden facts and squabbles to report, a year of quietness while the process starts and I prepare or the finale, and then a few months of warfare after filing. 

I'm not going to deny that it will hurt. But that's how it is.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Cletus said:


> Yes, and it's a skill you can and must learn with family members as well, especially ones like mine with schizophrenia, bipolar, or in your case, BPD.
> 
> I get it.


I get it too...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

john117 said:


> I know.
> 
> But then, most of the human race didn't wait 7-8 years to file either.
> 
> ...


I'm lucky... knowing my wife, she won't say much... she'll bottle it up, like the last 15 years...  Although my sentence is longer...


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

john117 said:


> I know.
> 
> But then, most of the human race didn't wait 7-8 years to file either.
> 
> ...


John, I was under the impression it wouldn't bother you in the least, but am glad to see that you realize it will hurt like hell. 

I wouldn't want to be in her shoes though...

Best,


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,
I have a huge amount of respect for you. I know you've done this for your daughters. 

And I think it's a true show of strength to be able to admit that it will hurt - when you do it. You have a lot of love in you (hard as you oft try to conceal it  ). And that my man - is far more gift than curse. 




john117 said:


> I know.
> 
> But then, most of the human race didn't wait 7-8 years to file either.
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Everything undesirable in life hurts. It's just a matter of perspective and degree. 

Will it bother me? Yea. Hurt me? Yea. Is she screwed? Yea. But all that is healable. 

What I don't think I can get over is the emotional math part of it. If we stay together we have two pensions, two 401ks and two social security checks. The projections are very encouraging. Plus two daughters with superb educations paid for. Plus an apartment in Europe. What kind of person would kick all that away because where she came from "people over 18 don't need emotional connections" and also "people over 50 don't have sex". (Her words).

It really boils down to "if you're this incapable of seeing the forest and the trees how can I trust my future with you?". That, my friend, is what hurts the most.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> Umm, maybe we should get back to GettingIt's advice for baby steps?
> 
> Because, on the whole, I think revealing that you've been dissecting your partner on a website of strangers counts as another bomb.


Well, that's it right there. Right down to the wording - dissecting. It would not go over well.

There are several threads I have started or participated in that I would be comfortable showing her. There are several that I am not.

Again, nothing I've said here, I haven't said to her, in person. The issue with showing her TAM, is that I am saying these things to strangers, on the internet. She is also not at all the type of person to come to a place like TAM, or participate, or engage in discussion on internet message boards.

I respectfully disagree with whomever said this is a wall for me. I am hiding nothing, in truth, except the fact that I am here, discussing her, myself, and us with you guys. Just as I'm sure many of us (my wife included) talk about our partners to our friends or family and don't feel the need to let them know they are being talked about. That's what I see this place as.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

alexm said:


> I am hiding nothing, in truth, except...


In fairness, I have told my wife about TAM on several occasions, to the point of discussing some of the issues that I have read about, but I have not _formally_ invited her here. 

That said, I think the above statement from your quote pretty well sums it up.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

alexm said:


> Well, that's it right there. Right down to the wording - dissecting. It would not go over well.
> 
> There are several threads I have started or participated in that I would be comfortable showing her. There are several that I am not.
> 
> ...


Alex, it was me who said it was a wall for you. It's not meant to be a pejorative term, simply a descriptive one. A "wall" is something that stands in the way of complete transparency. WE ALL have walls, we ALL decide which ones we are better off keeping. Not one of us has complete transparency; it's really just impossible to meld two minds into one, so there will always be those walls. 

Although I advocate for practicing increasing transparency in a relationship as a way to enhance intimacy, I can't confidently tell someone how _best_ to do this in their own relationship.

I pointed out to you this "wall" of yours simply to remind you that your wife has similar "walls." Her walls are perhaps getting in the way of you getting a satisfactory answer to why she has changed her behavior towards you in regards to meeting your sexual needs. Just as it seems impossible that you can ever show her what you write on TAM, she finds it impossible to contemplate sharing some things with you. Unfortunately, it might be the very things you want and need to know to have a satisfactory answer to your question. 

As a side note--my inviting my husband to TAM was a slow and scary process that involved many fights, hurt feelings, a few appointments with my therapist, and a huge shift in old privacy "rules" in our relationship. At first I was afraid I'd lose TAM as a resource. But when the dust all settled, we were sitting on top of the rubble of something we no longer needed anyway. He reads here all the time now and occasionally posts, and we both have learned a ton about marriage dynamics and just people in general. It's been really good for us.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

GettingIt said:


> Alex, it was me who said it was a wall for you. It's not meant to be a pejorative term, simply a descriptive one. A "wall" is something that stands in the way of complete transparency. WE ALL have walls, we ALL decide which ones we are better off keeping. Not one of us has complete transparency; it's really just impossible to meld two minds into one, so there will always be those walls.
> 
> Although I advocate for practicing increasing transparency in a relationship as a way to enhance intimacy, I can't confidently tell someone how _best_ to do this in their own relationship.
> 
> ...


I get it, no worries, and I'm not insulted.

I just really think that this isn't a "wall", nor am I not being transparent.

There's nothing I've said here that I haven't said to my wife. Nothing. It just wouldn't go over well if she learned I was saying these same things to, well, strangers. That's her personality. She's closed off enough as it is.

In regards to transparency, I don't believe that not telling her about TAM is not being transparent.

The difference between her lack of transparency and mine (alleged!) is that she can barely tell me how she feels. Whereas mine is simply that I have a place to go to vent, get advice, etc. I don't even consider this place "my little secret", fwiw.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

john117 said:


> The operative word is "clinical detachment". If you have a relative in the health care business ask them how they do it. I don't hate anyone. We had our 25 good years and things break down. I loved my Saab SPG and it served me very well. But eventually it was time for her to rest.


Clinical detachment is a coping mechanism. It doesn't necessarily resolve the underlying problem.

I'm not at all suggesting that you haven't done the best you could, or that you have made the wrong decisions, or that you should do yet more for an unwilling wife. You have to preserve your sanity too.

I'm only suggesting that the way you talk about her is not at all like a man who is detached or over it in any way. 

So that alone might lead some of us in the peanut gallery to think that (a) your contempt likely affects the home dynamic in negative ways and/or (b) that you aren't really fully addressing your own hurt in all of this.

Don't get me wrong: I can see why your marriage is done, and I understand why you probably have the feelings you seem to. My comment was only because you expressed confusion over why some posters here are skeptical that you are as detached or as healed as you claim.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> There's nothing I've said here that I haven't said to my wife. Nothing. It just wouldn't go over well if she learned I was saying these same things to, well, strangers. That's her personality. She's closed off enough as it is.
> 
> In regards to transparency, I don't believe that not telling her about TAM is not being transparent.


Transparency is entirely see through. Which means that if you really were transparent with her, she would know what a struggle this is for you, as well as that you are on here trying to hash out your relationship dynamic.

And what you are protecting is exactly the sorts of things one protects when not being fully transparent: your relationship, your progress, your feelings, her feelings.

That said, I'm not entirely sold on this idea of transparency. On one hand, I found it very enlightening to rethink what intimacy is and how it relates to not just sharing our thoughts and feelings, but exposing ourselves, including all the harmful, self-destructive and negative things we do/think/feel.

On the other hand, while I can see that it makes jld and GettingIt very happy and feel closer to their spouses by "standing in the rubble of what they don't need", I'm pretty sure a lot of us would just be standing in the rubble going "wtf did I just do".


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> Transparency is entirely see through. Which means that if you really were transparent with her, she would know what a struggle this is for you, as well as that you are on here trying to hash out your relationship dynamic.
> 
> And what you are protecting is exactly the sorts of things one protects when not being fully transparent: your relationship, your progress, your feelings, her feelings.
> 
> ...


FWIW, she knows I'm on the internet reading about marital issues, sex, etc. I have shared the odd thing with her (including some things I've learned here).

I just haven't specifically told her about TAM. This is my safe space, if you will.

Again, I feel that I AM very transparent with her. I don't hold back my feelings or my thoughts, and I never have. I haven't been afraid to rock the boat, which is her problem, I think.

I think (and this is speculation; and also why I wouldn't want her reading these things...) that this is the smoothest relationship she's ever had. I know I've challenged her like nobody else ever has.

Judging by what she's said about her previous LTR's, nobody was willing to sit down and talk rationally, to provide, and act upon, solutions. To communicate. As she is not a communicator herself, I can't imagine having to deal with another non-communicator in a relationship. Nothing would ever get solved. In the past, when issues would arise, neither party would sit down and talk. Rather, it would be a fight and some accusations.

With me, however, I'm not a fighter or a yeller. I get upset, and even angry, yes, but I'd much rather communicate why, discuss, etc. than jump into accusatory mode.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Clinical detachment is a coping mechanism. It doesn't necessarily resolve the underlying problem.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Fair points. I don't expect anything to be resolved. If I was not on TAM ie IRL I would not talk like this at all. Exactly one person IRL knows MAYBE 10% of what's going on. So in real life it's pretty different than online.

I talk a lot about us because I'm the analytical type. Up to a year or so ago I thought there was a silver bullet of some kind, something I had overlooked. Nope. 

I simply report facts, I don't get all emotionally worked up about facts one way or another. And I even water down facts on occasion... So if the peanut gallery thinks I'm hyping things they're in for a surprise.

I could be as "detached" on TAM as IRL and simply never mention anything about her.- the way I do IRL. You should see the faces of piano teachers or dentists on the rare occasion she went with them. It was a universal "you're her mom? I thought your husband was a single parent" type response...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Alex, I think always pointed out that you may be working off a different definition of transparency than some of the rest of us. When I say transparent, I also mean see through, as always mentioned.

If there are things I have not told Dug, it is only because I have not thought of them, or we have not had time to discuss them. I do not feel right holding things back. In our particular relationship, I think he has the right to know all of my inner life.

But that has been earned, and could be rescinded if he lost my trust in him. I cannot overemphasize the importance of earning and maintaining a wife's trust.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> And I have told her just that. She's not hearing it because her mind hears "no retirement McMansion" and shuts down
> 
> Even for splitting the proceeds she has a hard time understanding the concept of equitable distribution or deal with actual numbers. Having talked to a couple lawyers I understand what's on the horizon quite well.
> 
> ...


Really?

When she talks about retiring, or your future life, and you say "wife, you know I'm not spending the rest of my life in a sexless and loveless marriage with you so don't make those kind of plans if you think they include me."

And she turns around and walks away, or pretends that you've said nothing?

Really?

If this is the case she is either completley irrational, which I put at a low probablility, or more likely either has zero faith that you'll do what you say or you're not actually saying it that unambigiously.

Even the "nuke the site from orbit, it's the only way to be sure" approach took clearing the target zone of civvies before launch...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Far be it from me to suggest pure irrationality but alas, that's the diagnosis. Makes her very easy to manipulate for most things but there are some that aren't changeable.

Funny you mentioned retirement. Pre Rapture we were all in agreement that we'd retire either in Boston or suburban Washington, D.C. - maybe Chicago or Atlanta. Buy a nice condo in a high rise and watch the ants go to work. 

Post Rapture it's all been one sided "blah blah Oprah's mansion blah blah" from her while my response is "make sure your next husband is wealthy enough to pay for it 'cause I are not"... Eventually she stopped talking. 

The plan resurfaced as in a couple years both girls will be moving on to long term academic programs and she kind of misses them rofl so... And once again I have indicated we can't keep two houses in our current state. 

I'm generally a very good communicator and frame the problem in terms she understands. Framing it as "no intimacy no Oprah McMansion" won't work for obvious reasons. 

So far she has 100% faith I will do what I set out to do. I'm quite the planner and if financially things work out then we can do it. I'm also communicating fairly clearly that I'm not part of any retirement McMansions. 

If she does not hear the message perhaps she needs hearing aids (which she does).


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Wait, didn't what you just said contradict the earlier statement (which perhaps I misread) that said she'll be very surprised when you drop the D-bomb on her?

Is this purely a financial separation? As in, you're basically living as roommates?

Do you sleep in a different bed?

If her best friend/family member/someone she confides in asked her if you're going to divorce her, would she say "yes" or would she say something like "he makes noises about it because he wants to get laid but he's not going anywhere" or would she say "no, everything's fine?" 

If she answered honestly?

If you said to her "since you're not going to have sex with me, would it bother you if I found someone that would?" what would she say?


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,
She perceives the comment about her next husband being rich as 'John humor'. She gets that your resistance to a McMansion - but does NOT understand you are leaving her. 

In fact - her discussions about big houses ALL reflect her belief that the marriage will continue. 

I don't believe you have been honest about your future plans to divorce - in a way that J2 can process. 

I DO think you have been honest enough so that - on D day you can say: I've been telling you this for 3 years. 

But you say it in a way that she doesn't really hear. 

Your daughters are not going to be ok with you Pearl Harboring their mom. 

Especially since they also perceive her as impaired. 

I don't know why you take pride in being able to manipulate J2. 

You should be honest and admit you don't want to bluntly tell her the truth because you are afraid she will get angry and do something rash that adversely impacts your retirement plans. 

On your deathbed you will NOT feel ok with this. 





john117 said:


> Far be it from me to suggest pure irrationality but alas, that's the diagnosis. Makes her very easy to manipulate for most things but there are some that aren't changeable.
> 
> Funny you mentioned retirement. Pre Rapture we were all in agreement that we'd retire either in Boston or suburban Washington, D.C. - maybe Chicago or Atlanta. Buy a nice condo in a high rise and watch the ants go to work.
> 
> ...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

A good test is the A or B plan.

Plan A is whatever she needs to do for you to stay in this. Assuming that's even possible at this point.

Plan B is a separation/divorce agreement that's hopefully fair.

Two pieces of paper in front of her, one with details for Plan A, one with details for Plan B. She gets to pick ONE.

Now THAT's a serious unambiguous conversation.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

john117 said:


> Everything undesirable in life hurts. It's just a matter of perspective and degree.
> 
> Will it bother me? Yea. Hurt me? Yea. Is she screwed? Yea. But all that is healable.
> 
> What I don't think I can get over is the emotional math part of it. If we stay together we have two pensions, two 401ks and two social security checks. The projections are very encouraging. Plus two daughters with superb educations paid for. Plus an apartment in Europe. What kind of person would kick all that away because where she came from "people over 18 don't need emotional connections" and also *"people over 50 don't have sex". (Her words).*It really boils down to "if you're this incapable of seeing the forest and the trees how can I trust my future with you?". That, my friend, is what hurts the most.


John, didn't you say earlier that she's been the one initiating most recently? How does her actions square with this? Is she initiating based on her own personal drive, or is it "SLA"? If it's SLA, doesn't that mean she's at least peripherally aware of your needs?


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

alexm said:


> FWIW, she knows I'm on the internet reading about marital issues, sex, etc. I have shared the odd thing with her (including some things I've learned here).
> 
> *I just haven't specifically told her about TAM. This is my safe space, if you will.*
> Again, I feel that I AM very transparent with her. I don't hold back my feelings or my thoughts, and I never have. I haven't been afraid to rock the boat, which is her problem, I think.
> ...


Shouldn't the goal be to make HER your safe space? Not judging you--this is my safe space too. But if you think she'd be willing to at least check it out, you can always clean up your posting history before you invite her.


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

always_alone said:


> That said, I'm not entirely sold on this idea of transparency. On one hand, I found it very enlightening to rethink what intimacy is and how it relates to not just sharing our thoughts and feelings, but exposing ourselves, including all the harmful, self-destructive and negative things we do/think/feel.


IMO there is an unhealthy lack of impulse control and filter which could be mis-labeled "transparency"

IMO we should not just dump on our loved ones every passing judgment that flits through our minds.

IMO the kind of transparency which is helpful in M is more along the lines of being transparent about how *I* am FEELING.

Happen to be married to someone who lacks a filter and impulse control and it is a very destructive force at times. Imagine fat lazy wuz pansy directed from a father to a son. The father prides himself on being "frank and honest"

Would it not be better to approach this from feelings? "I love you and I am concerned." -love and concern being feelings.

Whatever is going on in my M is sure not working so I'm not going to export it! But I firmly believe that caring partners should have a filter on their mouth so they don't spout off every hurtful thing that pops into their heads. 

OP may be motivated to keep his participation here private to spare hurting his W feelings if he did not share "delicately". What do you think OP?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> Wait, didn't what you just said contradict the earlier statement (which perhaps I misread) that said she'll be very surprised when you drop the D-bomb on her?
> 
> Is this purely a financial separation? As in, you're basically living as roommates?
> 
> ...



The D surprise is largely due to the emotional and financial aftermath - not on the D itself. Emotional more than financial.

We are not living as roommates. But in the last few years there is basically no emotional connection and no amount of sex can fix that. When you get to the point that sex with your wife, tho good, feels like an ONS the day after you know it's time to move on.

She has very few friends - like nearly none - and she's not the kind of person to talk about intimacy or problems to anyone. No BFF's, no GNO's, the works. This in fact has been a huge part of the problem. Lack of peer feedback.

The only time she considered external inputs in our marriage was after a spectacular entrapment divorce of her cousin... LD wife "allowed" husband an open marriage and nailed him for infidelity.... That idea needless to say did not materialize . An open marriage is not the issue as I'm resourceful enough to cover my tracks if you get my drift, and morally relativist enough to justify it.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> John, didn't you say earlier that she's been the one initiating most recently? How does her actions square with this? Is she initiating based on her own personal drive, or is it "SLA"? If it's SLA, doesn't that mean she's at least peripherally aware of your needs?



SLA. She's fully aware of what my needs are.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> A good test is the A or B plan.
> 
> Plan A is whatever she needs to do for you to stay in this. Assuming that's even possible at this point.
> 
> ...



American ClearSpeak at it's finest  Clint Eastwood here we go. Our cultures value subtlety tho... 

I did that trick once. It worked pretty well, but would prefer a more interesting and subtle approach the next time.

She knows what I need and vice versa. They aren't compatible.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> John,
> 
> She perceives the comment about her next husband being rich as 'John humor'. She gets that your resistance to a McMansion - but does NOT understand you are leaving her.
> 
> ...



Let's save the tears for after my cataract surgery 

If we are not splitting in two plus years what would be the point of spoiling the surprise? Did the Japanese send a couple of destroyers across from Maui a year early to soften up the locals with artillery?

Manipulation is a fact of life - and a staple in her culture. Like, bread and milk. Am I immoral somehow to play by her standards???

I've told my plan to both girls this Christmas. Neither was surprised and both were pleased. If you were driven in three years of therapy to cope with an emotionally abusive parent would you be expected to shrug it off long term? If your emotionally abusive mother forced you in a field you did not want but you did it anyway to please her, and lost your childhood on the process, would you shrug it off? 

I think not.

She's free to think what she wants. Perhaps she should listen more and talk less...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

OK John.

What's your timeline for D-day? What do you need to have in place before that happens? How are you going to handle telling her?

And what are your plans for yourself once it's done? Your own place? Dating? More hobby time?

Is success just not having this boat anchor in your life? Because once you pull it up off the seabed, where you take your life is up to you.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

jld said:


> Alex, I think always pointed out that you may be working off a different definition of transparency than some of the rest of us. When I say transparent, I also mean see through, as always mentioned.
> 
> If there are things I have not told Dug, it is only because I have not thought of them, or we have not had time to discuss them. I do not feel right holding things back. In our particular relationship, I think he has the right to know all of my inner life.
> 
> But that has been earned, and could be rescinded if he lost my trust in him. I cannot overemphasize the importance of earning and maintaining a wife's trust.



I get you, and I don't disagree.

But every couple - every person - is different. I feel that it would be a huge negative if I introduced her to TAM at this point.

Again, I stress that I don't feel that I am hiding anything from her by not telling her I regularly post on TAM. I have few, if any, "secrets" from my wife, honestly. I'm pretty much an open book. I can tell you that I've never actually lied to her about anything, which sounds crazy, but hey. If she ever happened to ask if I was posting on an internet message board about this type of thing, I would tell her the truth. If she asked what's the address, I would tell her.

That's the thing about this place - I find that MOST participants here are, or would be, reluctant to invite their spouses along. Obviously there are a number of you who have no qualms about that, but the rest of us have our reasons - whether we want our privacy, a "safe" space, or that that option would prove to be negative. I'm a little bit of all of the above.

And fwiw, and yes, this is somewhat patronizing to my wife, but, the issues we/I have are not nearly as serious to her as they are to me. That is often how these things go. I am primarily here because of our immense differences in the importance of sex and sexuality (which is not at all aided by her self admission that she is asexual). That is simply not something that a number of voices on an internet message board can help her/me with. She is, quite frankly, not cognizant of the importance of sex and sexuality within a relationship, other than to keep her partner happy. It's a thing you do. It can be fun. Yet it's not in the slightest bit important, no matter what I say, you say, books say, or counsellors say. It's just not hardwired into her brain.

In fact, she could care less either way. If I said tomorrow that I'm never going to have sex with her again (or anybody else, for that matter), she probably wouldn't blink. She wouldn't feel relief or happiness at never having to do it again, she wouldn't feel negatively towards it. It likely would barely impact her in the slightest, and I'm not kidding. Sex is neither a positive or a negative to her (at least as far as she and I are concerned). It's just something she doesn't mind doing (when she has the time...) but otherwise just does not think about, period.

I have learned here on TAM that some people are just like that, and that's it. There's no cure, there's no changing. It just doesn't matter what anybody says or does or suggests.

To her, sex is like laundry, but fun. I only ever do laundry when it needs to be done, and quite often, only when it REALLY needs to be done (ie. I need clothes, stat!) Otherwise, laundry is not on my mind AT ALL. This is what sex is like for her. It's not on the radar until it's "necessary". Instead of a pile of dirty laundry in the baskets glaring at her, it's a husband who is obviously a little snippy and frustrated. Then, and only then, does her brain equate the two things, and then it's action time.

The crappy thing about it is that she genuinely enjoys it when she's doing it (unlike laundry), yet that's still not enough of an incentive to do it regularly or before it NEEDS to be done.

Like I said, some people's brains just aren't wired that way, and can't be re-wired. So I see little positive reason to bring her here and have her read the message boards with me.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,
You do tend to revert to mischievous hyperbole when caught with both hands in the cookie jar and a dusting of crumbs on your lip.

Clint Eastwood is the American archetype of white hat aggression. 

We both know there is a healthy middle ground between Machiavelli and Eastwood. 

And it's a bit ironic that you are mocking ClearSpeak while publicly exercising your right to DoubleSpeak.









john117 said:


> American ClearSpeak at it's finest  Clint Eastwood here we go. Our cultures value subtlety tho...
> 
> I did that trick once. It worked pretty well, but would prefer a more interesting and subtle approach the next time.
> 
> She knows what I need and vice versa. They aren't compatible.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Blonde said:


> OP may be motivated to keep his participation here private to spare hurting his W feelings if he did not share "delicately". What do you think OP?


Bingo. primarily because I have dissected her here umpteen times. And worse - other people have.

If I had a time machine and could go back a couple of years before I returned here, I'd almost certainly bring her on here.

I couldn't imagine if my wife said to me one day that her best friend, or mother, or somebody else knows each and every problem we've ever had in our marriage, how good (or bad) the sex is, how big my penis is, etc. never mind all about my previous marriage, that I don't buy her flowers enough, or that I snore.

It would have been much different if she was clear that she talked to her friend about us long before. I'd be cool with that, because I'd know. Her best friend is pretty cool, and I wouldn't care what she knew about me. But if she had been blabbing at her for 5 years and I had no idea - big difference.

It's too late for me, I'm afraid! I started blabbing here too long ago to bring her into the fold all of a sudden. It'd only complicate things.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Fozzy said:


> Shouldn't the goal be to make HER your safe space? Not judging you--this is my safe space too. But if you think she'd be willing to at least check it out, you can always clean up your posting history before you invite her.


She is, though. Seriously. There's nothing I truly hide from her, and I don't think TAM is something I'm hiding. It's not a secret, and I wouldn't lie to her about it.

And clean up my history? That'd take days!


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Blonde said:


> IMO there is an unhealthy lack of impulse control and filter which could be mis-labeled "transparency"
> 
> IMO we should not just dump on our loved ones every passing judgment that flits through our minds.
> 
> ...


I actually do say everything pretty much the way it presents itself in my head. I have said very hurtful things to Dug that were exactly what I was feeling at that moment. 

I am sure he does not do this to me. He surely thinks angry thoughts at times that he does not share. He knows it would hurt me and he does not want to do that.

He does not seem to be bothered by what I tell him, though. He says he hears my words but he knows my heart. He also says I have a big imagination. 

He told me once that he would rather know everything, even if unkindly said, than not have that information, as it helps him know me better. And knowing your partner, through and through, can be pretty helpful.

I understand that this is not how every couple wants to operate. Just sharing how it works at our house.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

jld said:


> I understand that this is not how every couple wants to operate. Just sharing how it works at our house.


I'd have a pretty big problem with you in a marriage. I can live with a minimal filter that doesn't stop a lot from coming out, but I expect what comes out to be a reasonably accurate picture of what you're thinking. If it doesn't, I would be left wondering why you would basically make stuff up in the heat of the moment - just to be hurtful? To ****test for a reaction? 

I'd rather a little reticence with the truth than having to decide for myself what was really "in your heart". But congratulations on finding a man who manages to make it work.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Cletus said:


> I'd have a pretty big problem with you in a marriage. I can live with a minimal filter that doesn't stop a lot from coming out, but I expect what comes out to be a reasonably accurate picture of what you're thinking. If it doesn't, I would be left wondering why you would basically make stuff up in the heat of the moment - just to be hurtful? To ****test for a reaction?
> 
> I'd rather a little reticence with the truth than having to decide for myself what was really "in your heart". But congratulations on finding a man who manages to make it work.


We are not all meant to be married to each other. I have to be with a man like Dug. The ability to share all my thoughts freely, knowing that there is not going to be an emotional, reactive response, is very reassuring. It deepens my trust in him. 

I do not make things up. I just say what I think or feel. Sometimes just having the raw data can be helpful in figuring out what is really going on. And all this transparency is a big part of his knowing my heart, Cletus.

You have to remember, too, that Dug really wanted to be with me. He pursued me. And I decided right away that I was going to be absolutely truthful with him. Anything that was too much for him would give him the chance to end things right away, before either of us was too attached.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> John,
> 
> You do tend to revert to mischievous hyperbole when caught with both hands in the cookie jar and a dusting of crumbs on your lip.
> 
> ...



Dusting? I'm neater than that!!!!

Americans to is non natives have one enduring quality. Not white hat aggression, but honesty. One only has to look at voluntary taxation compliance rates 

Also cultures like hers know there's no such thing as compromise. If they did, my late mother in law's will would have been executed five years ago. It's still there in their version of court.

Cultures like mine are all about compromise if offered the opportunity.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

jld said:


> We are not all meant to be married to each other. I have to be with a man like Dug. The ability to share all
> JLD,
> That's the KEY to this pattern. It has always been like this. Dug was happy with it - pursued and married you. He is clearly still happy.
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

That's the KEY to this pattern. It has always been like this. Dug was happy with it - pursued and married you. He is clearly still happy. 

Besides this is a trust thing - not an inability to filter. You do not interact in this manner with your children. 

Your comment about Dug saying that 'you have a big imagination' is what prompted the comment about making things up. 



-----------

I do not make things up. I just say what I think or feel. Sometimes just having the raw data can be helpful in figuring out what is really going on. And all this transparency is a big part of his knowing my heart, Cletus.

You have to remember, too, that Dug really wanted to be with me. He pursued me. And I decided right away that I was going to be absolutely truthful with him. Anything that was too much for him would give him the chance to end things right away, before either of us was too attached.[/QUOTE]


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

So the girls know. That's important. 




john117 said:


> Dusting? I'm neater than that!!!!
> 
> Americans to is non natives have one enduring quality. Not white hat aggression, but honesty. One only has to look at voluntary taxation compliance rates
> 
> ...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Dusting? I'm neater than that!!!!
> 
> Americans to is non natives have one enduring quality. Not white hat aggression, but honesty. One only has to look at voluntary taxation compliance rates
> 
> ...


FWIW, I'm Canadian, not American. 

And, once again, you don't really answer the question, but take us on an intellectual turkey trail. 

And if you were interested in compromise, you'd be working on her complaints of you, and wouldn't be pushing for an uncompromising divorce. 

Your're obviously, and perhaps understandably way past compromise.

So how are you going to execute?


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

JLD,

It took me a full year to absorb this theme. And it works like magic. 

When M2 did NOT fully trust me - we fought about her behavior. 

Now that she trusts me - she feels safe being very transparent. 

There's a phrase we used at work: Did I just say that out loud? 

Loosely translates to: can you handle the truth? Or: How well are you handling the truth. 

Her version of that is: Are you sorry you married a crazy person? 

My response to that is consistent. 
Human, not crazy. Happy, not sorry.





jld said:


> We are not all meant to be married to each other. I have to be with a man like Dug. The ability to share all my thoughts freely, knowing that there is not going to be an emotional, reactive response, is very reassuring. It deepens my trust in him.
> 
> I do not make things up. I just say what I think or feel. Sometimes just having the raw data can be helpful in figuring out what is really going on. And all this transparency is a big part of his knowing my heart, Cletus.
> 
> You have to remember, too, that Dug really wanted to be with me. He pursued me. And I decided right away that I was going to be absolutely truthful with him. Anything that was too much for him would give him the chance to end things right away, before either of us was too attached.


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

alexm said:


> Bingo. primarily because I have dissected her here umpteen times. And worse - other people have.


I respect that.

Not too familiar with your history on here but there have been a couple other posters whose histories I followed fairly closely.

One is bagdon who- though they had issues- always spoke of his W in a manner above reproach. The other, if I was his W and read his thread, I would divorce him in a hot minute (I won't say who, he's gone now and I think it might be related to his W finding his thread). 

alexm, I think it is sensitive and loving of you to spare your W from the wild west Harshness of her reading her sex life being dissected at TAM.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

alexm said:


> I get it, no worries, and I'm not insulted.
> 
> I just really think that this isn't a "wall", nor am I not being transparent.


That's simply a matter of difference in how we use those words. Complete transparency, when I talk about it, means you share everything. If you don't share everything with yours spouse that you _could_ share (despite the assumed negative consequences), then there are things you are not transparent about. It's a "wall." And remember, we all judge walls as necessary in order to keep the relationship how we like it.



alexm said:


> There's nothing I've said here that I haven't said to my wife. Nothing. It just wouldn't go over well if she learned I was saying these same things to, well, strangers. That's her personality. She's closed off enough as it is.


This isn't about the words you've said to her. It's about hiding the fact that you've resorted to "dissecting" her with strangers because you are unhappy/concerned with an aspect of your relationship. It might implode your relationship to share this fact with her--you are a better judge of that than me. But it would also serve to show her how deeply your unhappiness/concern has affected you. It would serve to show her how her own choice of "walls" has affected you. It would communicate something you have not communicated with the words you have spoken to her so far. 



alexm said:


> In regards to transparency, I don't believe that not telling her about TAM is not being transparent.


Again, difference in how we are using the term. The way I use it is objective, black and white, and can be used in this way to talk about any relationship--you are giving it a subjective nuance that suits your particular relationship. 



alexm said:


> The difference between her lack of transparency and mine (alleged!) is that she can barely tell me how she feels. Whereas mine is simply that I have a place to go to vent, get advice, etc. I don't even consider this place "my little secret", fwiw.


Lack of transparency is lack of transparency--like I said, I use it in a very objective way. 

Her lack of transparency about her sexual behavior (past and present) has led you to engage in behavior that you decided you cannot be transparent about with her. How is what you are learning on TAM changing your behavior in ways that she can perceive, but perhaps not fully understand? How will she choose to react in return? More or less transparency? How will you then react? 

This is the way it goes. You are free, of course, to choose how transparent you want to be with a spouse. You are not free of the consequences of those choices.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

alexm said:


> I get you, and I don't disagree.
> 
> But every couple - every person - is different. I feel that it would be a huge negative if I introduced her to TAM at this point.
> 
> ...


I highly doubt she's actually asexual. That's about as rare as hen's teeth, and for good reason, biologically.

Is there anyone she's attracted to? Movie stars, models, that kind of thing? Does she have a "type?"


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

GettingIt said:


> This isn't about the words you've said to her. It's about hiding the fact that you've resorted to "dissecting" her with strangers because you are unhappy/concerned with an aspect of your relationship. It might implode your relationship to share this fact with her--you are a better judge of that than me. But it would also serve to show her how deeply your unhappiness/concern has affected you.


To me, the transparency should be about his feelings that he is unhappy/concerned, feels rejected/disconnected, etc. 

not that he discussed with Joe Shmoe on the internet how many orgasms she had or did not have in what position blah blah blah....

We have anonymity here. It can function like counseling where we can dump out the baggage and sift through and eliminate what would be counterproductive and distill what would be productive to share.


----------



## 343612534 (Apr 15, 2014)

I am sure the hate is going to come down on me but have you considered not trying so damn hard to make sure she is happy, satisfied, and content? Sometimes that just makes it to easy. Sure, who would not want to be treated the way you treat her................I will tell you who. Her! She is not getting EVERYTHING she wants. My wife whom I treated this way one day told me "sometimes I wish you would focus on your pleasure rather than mine".

After considerable though, I realized that she wanted to be screwed once in a while rather than made love to all the time. I took her at the first opportunity and things have never been the same. We now screw, make love, and are on special times considerate of each others funky desires.

I am so glad that I "got the message" and acted on it. When she needs to screw me it is the best because I get to see her express herself and satisfy herself with out being all lovie dovie. Best thing ever.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Blonde said:


> I respect that.
> 
> Not too familiar with your history on here but there have been a couple other posters whose histories I followed fairly closely.
> 
> ...


Thank you. Couldn't have said it better myself.

Fwiw, I don't think I've spoken terribly of my wife. For anybody who reads what I write here, it is clear that I love her, and (mostly!) respect her. I don't think I've said anything that she'd read that would upset her - other than just talking to... strangers... period.

She's a private person, a little too private if you ask me, and this would not help in that regard.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

marduk said:


> I highly doubt she's actually asexual. That's about as rare as hen's teeth, and for good reason, biologically.
> 
> Is there anyone she's attracted to? Movie stars, models, that kind of thing? Does she have a "type?"


This has been discussed in previous threads of mine, so I'll forego turning this into another discussion.

To answer your questions - no. None of the above.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

343612534 said:


> After considerable though, I realized that she wanted to be screwed once in a while rather than made love to all the time. I took her at the first opportunity and things have never been the same. We now screw, make love, and are on special times considerate of each others funky desires.
> 
> I am so glad that I "got the message" and acted on it. When she needs to screw me it is the best because I get to see her express herself and satisfy herself with out being all lovie dovie. Best thing ever.


I actually really like this.

We do (or have) done this occasionally, and now that you're making me think about it, she seems to rather enjoy it.

That's the interesting thing, because for the first few years of our relationship. it really was "screwing", but not the 5 minute kind (usually). It was hot, heavy, passionate, loud, etc. It's since slowed down to where it's almost the same every time, so you may be on to something. Mix it up a bit.

That said, it irks me that she can't communicate something like this to me, if it's the case. Or maybe I've put my "man ears" on over the years and am missing it...

Good first post!


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

Blonde said:


> To me, the transparency should be about his feelings that he is unhappy/concerned, feels rejected/disconnected, etc.
> 
> not that he discussed with Joe Shmoe on the internet how many orgasms she had or did not have in what position blah blah blah....
> 
> We have anonymity here. It can function like counseling where we can dump out the baggage and sift through and eliminate what would be counterproductive and distill what would be productive to share.





Blonde said:


> I respect that.
> 
> Not too familiar with your history on here but there have been a couple other posters whose histories I followed fairly closely.
> 
> ...





alexm said:


> Thank you. Couldn't have said it better myself.
> 
> Fwiw, I don't think I've spoken terribly of my wife. For anybody who reads what I write here, it is clear that I love her, and (mostly!) respect her. I don't think I've said anything that she'd read that would upset her - other than just talking to... strangers... period.
> 
> She's a private person, a little too private if you ask me, and this would not help in that regard.


To be clear (again), where to draw transparency lines is a choice we ALL make. I'm not advocating for Alex to "bomb drop" by brining his wife to TAM. He feels it would be detrimental and hurtful. I wouldn't do something that I felt would be detrimental and hurtful to my relationship, either. 

My point is that we all must recognize that, just as we justify where we draw our lines in spite of how our spouse might feel about the matter, our spouses do the same. Alex's wife doesn't want to "bomb drop" anymore than he does. So we--and he--perhaps may never know the truth of her sexuality, just as she won't know how her not revealing that truth has led Alex here to TAM. 

My question is simply to ask Alex to contemplate the chain reaction (positive or not) caused by where he has chosen to draw his transparency lines. I would ask his wife to do the same if she were here. 

And such awareness, such willful contemplation, such deep examination of the motives for those choices and how they relate to our hopes--all are part of the "transparency practice" that I do advocate. For some people, such contemplation is enough of a practice. For others, it leads to more. There is no right or wrong: it really is about self-awareness, more than anything else.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> FWIW, I'm Canadian, not American.
> 
> And, once again, you don't really answer the question, but take us on an intellectual turkey trail.
> 
> ...



Past a certain point there's no compromise. Let's say I want to buy another Mini. I offer $10k on a $20k car. No amount of compromise will gap that... 

(I could explain why but it would be a doctoral level intellectual turkey trail)

To compromise you need some common ground. Each side has limits and if her limits don't intersect you're not going to negotiate, you're going to argue.

Execution is the least of my concerns. I'm a good planner and prepare ahead. Won't be too difficult. If we sell the McMansion ahead of time it really helps. Let's just say it's not a difficult decision tree, something I know well.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

GettingIt said:


> To be clear (again), where to draw transparency lines is a choice we ALL make. I'm not advocating for Alex to "bomb drop" by brining his wife to TAM. He feels it would be detrimental and hurtful. I wouldn't do something that I felt would be detrimental and hurtful to my relationship, either.
> 
> My point is that we all must recognize that, just as we justify where we draw our lines in spite of how our spouse might feel about the matter, our spouses do the same. Alex's wife doesn't want to "bomb drop" anymore than he does. So we--and he--perhaps may never know the truth of her sexuality, just as she won't know how her not revealing that truth has led Alex here to TAM.
> 
> ...


All I can think when I read your posts is... you write so beautifully.... it always gives room for a variety of views -depending on each couple.. such clarity .. I love your posts Getting it !!.. difficult decisions to be made when one wants more than another in this area though..

My self awareness has always been .. I needed to be with someone *entirely open* to me, willing to go where-ever I want to roam..... as this is what I yearn to give back.. it's just THAT important... it may seem like a high calling to some.. but when you're with another who values it.. it just isn't..

For the record, I have read many of Alex's posts and I never got the impression he didn't love & cherish his wife.. very devoted man...when others may have thrown in the towel...... just that he is beside himself wanting desperately to understand her ...get closer to her.. If I was his wife.. and found these posts.. I would not think badly of him at all.. but look to myself -that I have not shared *enough* that he was LED to come here ....pouring it all out -seeking answers to better his marriage..


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

I would feel pretty bad, too, SA, if Dug came here and appealed to strangers for help because he felt he could not get through to me. Yes, I would be embarrassed, and I would feel my privacy had been violated. And then I would feel bad that that is what it had come to: that he could not get through to me, and in desperation had turned to strangers. 

And the only thing to do after acknowledging all that would be to get down to brass tacks and start discussing the problem. We would simply have to resolve it.

If we want a healthy marriage, we have to put our pride aside and look at the issues. If our partner is acting out, whether by talking to strangers about our personal issues without our permission, yelling at us, having an affair, or whatever else various people do when they cannot get through to their partner, it just means they are struggling and need help. 

To me, it would be best to put pride aside, dive down to the root of the problem, and work to get both of us on a healthier path.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> OK John.
> 
> What's your timeline for D-day? What do you need to have in place before that happens? How are you going to handle telling her?
> 
> ...



Timeline is 2 years 4 months from now or when my girls graduate from part of their studies. Telling her is no issue. I've been dropping more hints and have completely detached. Should I get a billboard?

View attachment 31754


Plans vary. Probably a cheap pad and travel. I am not sure I'll enter the dating scene at that age. Maybe a senior cycling babe? And plenty of hobby time, driving my Mini, taking pictures...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Couldn't help myself, John. Laughed out loud at your billboard.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

There is a real company that helps couples split amicably and cheaply...it is not available in all states yet but...

Wevorce :: Turning every divorce amicable. Offices in San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Boise...and online.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> Couldn't help myself, John. Laughed out loud at your billboard.



I have this wild urge to photoshop our mugs on it and put it on my Thinkpad as a screen saver...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> I have this wild urge to photoshop our mugs on it and put it on my Thinkpad as a screen saver...


Stop it! You're making me laugh again!

And I know that sounds terrible . . .


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

So do your daughters realize that with you out of the picture, they are the ones their mom is going to be constantly turning to for help as she ages?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> So do your daughters realize that with you out of the picture, they are the ones their mom is going to be constantly turning to for help as she ages?



If things go as expected the older will be in the Gulf region and the younger in college or putting her French double major to good use. The running family joke is DD19 marrying some 60 year old French nobility, living in his chateau, and working in France with me and DD22 in tow (me the gardener and DD22 the cook)...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> If things go as expected the older will be in the Gulf region and the younger in college or putting her French double major to good use. The running family joke is DD19 marrying some 60 year old French nobility, living in his chateau, and working in France with me and DD22 in tow (me the gardener and DD22 the cook)...


She is not going to let go of her daughters, John. You are really just transferring her care to them, don't you think?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> Stop it! You're making me laugh again!
> 
> And I know that sounds terrible . . .



View attachment 31762


Apologies for the festive good mood. All of DD22's grad school applications and portfolios are in!!!


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> She is not going to let go of her daughters, John. You are really just transferring her care to them, don't you think?



They aren't sticking around... Not for me, not for her. Family tradition.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> They aren't sticking around... Not for me, not for her. Family tradition.


They'll be the ones getting the calls, John . . .


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> They'll be the ones getting the calls, John . . .



Not if they're a continent or two away. She'll likely return to her country as she so often threatens.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Guilt is going to get to them. I think all three of you are going to carry it.

Well, not going to dwell on it anymore. But I don't think it is going to be as easy to let go as you think. Jmo.

And best of luck to your older daughter on getting into her grad school choices.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

So here's the type of post I wouldn't be comfortable showing my wife: 

So it's been a bit over 2 weeks now since any sex, which is longer than usual. But, we both get a pass as we had the xmas holidays (busy, very busy. And tiring), then she went away for a weekend, then she got sick for a week, then it was that time of the month). So no complaints there, and no hard feelings.

So Sunday morning, I'm in the shower, and she comes in and joins me (!!!) She fondles me for a few minutes, then gets out. I follow about 5 minutes later, and she's already dressed. I try to get things going again, but she smiles at me and says that was foreplay, for later. Cool with me! Something to look forward to the rest of the day. But the rest of the day is busy with errands, chores and kids. Also fine, because we're all together, doing stuff (including some fun stuff). After dinner, she decides she's going to go to bingo (something she does maybe twice a year, once on her own, once with a friend). I've got plans that night for about 9, but it's only my adult recreational sports league, so I'm only gone til about 10:30 or so.

I get home, she's snoring away, but she left the lights on (which is, I have learned a "sign"... sigh). I shower, get out, she wakes up just slightly enough to say hi, and by the time I get into bed, she's snoring again. I try to snuggle up against her, but she rolls over within 30 seconds, away from me, so I call it a night.

She texts me the next day from work saying hi, miss you, etc. I reply with the same, and say "btw, what was this "foreplay" supposed to be before? lol!" She apologizes, and says I should have woken her up, that's why she left the light on, and I tell her I did try, but she was snoring away and she had rolled away from. She apologizes, and says when she gets home, there will be more foreplay. Cool, I think, she's really trying!

When she gets home, we do the usual, sit down and talk about our days for a few minutes, before we get dinner ready. There's a couple of hugs here and there in the kitchen, but nothing else. By bed time, she hasn't kissed me, touched me, nothing. None of this "foreplay" she spoke of. Whatever, all good.

Before bed, she hops in the shower, and I ask her if she's coming back down afterwards, she says something like "no, but I'm not going to bed, either..." Her way of hinting that she's game.

I know this is dragging, sorry, almost done...

So I'm left in a bit of a quandary. One of the things she told me she hates that I do is wait around in the bedroom for her while she's showering, basically waiting for sex. Especially if I'm naked. She's also not usually a fan of me jumping in the shower with her (it's small, barely fits the two of us). My only other option is to go watch the end of the BCS game downstairs, then I feel awkward when she comes and gets me.

So I weight my options, and decide that going up to bed is the better one. I open my drawer to get something while she's in the shower, and I see these cards I/we bought a couple of years ago. It's basically a deck of 50 cards that have different sexual positions on them, illustrated on the front, with a little blurb on the back. I think "this will be fun and something different". She's recently mentioned that *I* should spice things up, and be more playful when it comes to sex. I think this is a perfect time to break out these cards that have been collecting dust for two years.

So when she gets out of the shower, with her hair wrapped in a towel and one around her body, I'm sitting on the bed going through these cards. I've picked out a dozen or so that seem like they'd be fun to try. She gets into bed, sees what I'm doing, and puts the most disgusted look on her face. I've got two piles going, and I tell her the one pile is the ones I'd like to try, maybe pick one or two. She says "NO, ugh". I ask her what's the matter, and she says "I'm not looking at those cards". "Why not?" "Because I don't want to" "But you told me to spice things up, be a little spontaneous" "That's fine, but I don't want to look at those cards, and read the back and try to figure out how to do it. YOU pick a couple and just do them"

Which is fair enough, I guess, but a lot of those positions require some sort of coordination and communication, and I don't think it would be possible to just do them without her knowing what to do. I tell her this, and that this is supposed to be FUN, and something we can both have a good time with, and that I find it rather sexy.

Her response: "Looking at cards isn't sexy at all. What we do is fine and I quite enjoy our sex. If you want to try new positions, just do them, but I don't want to sit here and look at cards".

I said I was just trying to have some fun with this, mix it up, do something different. No reply, she got up and got dressed. Night over.

So I really feel like I'm damned if I do, damned if I don't. I can't do this, that or the other thing. I can't "wait" in bed for her, especially naked. She asks me to be more playful and "fun" when it comes to sex, but apparently not like this. (and then tells me she likes what we currently do, anyway). I can't join her in the shower. And on and on and on.

It's long past the point of I have no idea what to do anymore. The status quo, to her, is a turn off. Be more playful, but how?

So I'm being told to mix things up and be more playful. When I'm more playful, then she feels like she has these expectations upon her. I mean, I'm doing what she's telling me to do, and avoiding doing what she doesn't want me to do, and same results. I mean, I LISTEN to her. She clearly told me that she's tired of the same old, same old, that we go about sex the same way every time. She clearly tells me to loosen up and have fun and be playful and spontaneous. So I do. She tells me to mess around with her throughout the day. Rather than get all "romantic" and sensual, she'd rather I walk by and smack her a$$, for example. Give her a wink. That sort of thing. I do these things. She doesn't want me to sit and wait for her in bed even when we "know" we're going to have sex. Fine, I don't do that anymore. She wants to have more fun in the bedroom, rather than just we kiss, fondle, a bit of foreplay, then the main event. I try to do this and it backfires. This is not the first time.

Talk about mixed messages and no room for error. I hate that s***.


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

GettingIt said:


> My point is that we all must recognize that, just as we justify where we draw our lines in spite of how our spouse might feel about the matter, our spouses do the same. Alex's wife doesn't want to "bomb drop" anymore than he does. So we--and he--perhaps may never know the truth of her sexuality, just as she won't know how her not revealing that truth has led Alex here to TAM.
> 
> My question is simply to ask Alex to contemplate the chain reaction (positive or not) caused by where he has chosen to draw his transparency lines. I would ask his wife to do the same if she were here.
> 
> And such awareness, such willful contemplation, such deep examination of the motives for those choices and how they relate to our hopes--all are part of the "transparency practice" that I do advocate. For some people, such contemplation is enough of a practice. For others, it leads to more. There is no right or wrong: it really is about self-awareness, more than anything else.


Nothing to disagree with there.

Consider that Mrs Alexm may not have communicated "facts". She claimed to be asexual. I wonder what the feelings are behind that claim? 

JLD has spoken about how she rants and raves and Dug responds "you have a good imagination"

So Mrs AlexM says "I AM ASEXUAL". Is that a case of a good imagination at work? (Her feelings are swirling around and she feels "off" at the moment and feels like she will never be "on" again?) Or is she stating a medical *fact* and she TRULY asexual?

Is an asexual person capable of O's? If she has had O's it belies her claim and her present aversion to sex is more about her feelings in the moment.

So, he feels bombed if he takes her statement at face value. But is the statement even accurate?

Similarly, when people rant and rave on TAM, a lot of the time it is an inaccurate picture of what is TRULY going on in that relationship IMO. 

Another conclusion I came to in my own M is along the lines of "you can't buy bread in a hardware store". If a partner is emotionally stunted, you cannot expect them to reach the kind of state you and your H have reached. They are arrested at an egotistical age where the world revolves around them and they are incapable of empathy. (ALEXM, NOT SAYING THIS ABOUT YOUR RELATIONSHIP. JOHN117 and my own M sound like this, however)


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Dammit, Alex. Your opportunity was perfect. And you go and "nice guy" (read: flubbed) it up.

Dude, she wants you to tell her what to do, not ask. She wants you to wake her up and take her, not ask if it is okay.

When she gives you normal signals, you assume sex is on until she tells you otherwise. Got it?

When was the last time you told your wife that you were just going to take her when you get her in the bed?

SHE WANTS YOU TO BE IN CHARGE OF SEX. GIVE HER WHAT SHE WANTS.

ETA: When she responded to your idea of the cards, you got your feelings hurt. That was so unattractive to her. You should have told her you weren't asking for her permission, rather just giving her an idea of what was to come, and just gone for it.

ETA 2: You desperately need to read the book "Hold on to Your N.U.T.'s" by Wayne Levine. You would learn so much from it.


----------



## Blonde (Jan 7, 2013)

Cards doesn't sound "spontaneous" to me alexm

and your W doesn't sound asexual.

Others will have better input. Sexual chemistry and attraction has not been an issue in my M.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

When Dug says I have a big imagination, he means I see problems as bigger than they really are, or problems where there aren't any. So I come to him all emotional and scared. 

By talking it out with him, just laying it all out there in front of him, not worrying about the presentation, he can help me see what really is a problem, and what is just my imagination running wild.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

> *farsidejunky said*: When was the last time you told your wife that you were just going to take her when you get her in the bed?
> 
> SHE WANTS YOU TO BE IN CHARGE OF SEX. GIVE HER WHAT SHE WANTS.


While you are at it.. you can add this book to your collection also... if she wants you to slap her aZZ and all that...

Just **** Me! - What Women Want Men to Know About Taking Control in the Bedroom (A Guide for Couples) 

The introduction...


> "You're the Man... Act Like One!"
> 
> Look, I know you're not a mind reader, so I'm going to be blunt...
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

The cards "violate" her SLA's... The cards are sort of like a contract, much like going to a restaurant and ordering from a menu. She puts her "trust" in (a) the cards and (b) your interpretation of them.

Fix the frequency first so she can get to a comfortable SLA then worry about variety. Trying both in parallel is not going to work.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

john117 said:


> The cards "violate" her SLA's... The cards are sort of like a contract, much like going to a restaurant and ordering from a menu. She puts her "trust" in (a) the cards and (b) your interpretation of them.
> 
> Fix the frequency first so she can get to a comfortable SLA then worry about variety. Trying both in parallel is not going to work.


I think the cards just sound boring.


----------



## 4x4 (Apr 15, 2014)

farsidejunky said:


> Dammit, Alex. Your opportunity was perfect. And you go and "nice guy" (read: flubbed) it up.
> 
> Dude, she wants you to tell her what to do, not ask. She wants you to wake her up and take her, not ask if it is okay.
> 
> ...


This ^^^^ except I wouldn't give Alex and more books to read. He may be over analyzing at this point and needs to go back to just doing it for awhile. Lead with your body and actions and watch for her reactions. Don't always take words at face value.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Alexm--

I feel like you are caught in the weeds and not seeing the big picture.

You are still bent on trying to figure your wife out. Maybe if I lay in bed, or do this or do that, she'll like it.

It's a waste of time and energy. On one level you know this, but you haven't really accepted it.

Stop trying to crack her code. She hates it. You hate it. It's like a form of grovelling.

Have you ever just stopped wondering what she's thinking and just do what you want instead?

Yes, I know that you can't always do everything you want because some of that requires her to participate.

But what if you just started from the standpoint that you will do what you want and only stop when she affirmatively stops you.

You don't wait for her to give you a signal or to otherwise approve. Listen to yourself first and her second.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> I think the cards just sound boring.



That too..


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

Bingo!! This is exactly what I was thinking as soon as I read your post!!

Alex, *SHE WANTS YOU TO DOMINATE!*




farsidejunky said:


> Dammit, Alex. Your opportunity was perfect. And you go and "nice guy" (read: flubbed) it up.
> 
> Dude, she wants you to tell her what to do, not ask. She wants you to wake her up and take her, not ask if it is okay.
> 
> ...


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> Alexm--
> 
> I feel like you are caught in the weeds and not seeing the big picture.
> 
> ...


This post sums it up perfectly. Alex, you stop when she gives you a definitive "NO". 

Her: I don't feel like it. 
You: I'm okay with that. Now hush. (As you smile while you take her panties off)
Her: I have been overwhelmed all day! (My wife's favorite BTW)
You: That's terrible! (As you smile and take her panties off)

Get it? If she really, really does not want to, she will tell you "NO". Some of the most satisfying sex my wife and I have is when she "games" me a little bit like this before sex. And she is honestly telling me how she feels. However, me honoring that every time it is brought up means I am valuing her over me. Sorry, but that had a good bit to do with how we ended up in sexual dysfunction. It is not happening anymore. 

Now when "NO" comes out, it means it. Don't confuse the two. But until then, consider it on.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

FWIW, I haven't gotten to the point Farside is at.

I've just gotten to the point where I've stopped trying to look for the "signals" and I've stopped trying to set up "the perfect mood"

To be honest, alexm is probably getting laid more than me.

But I have dropped the mindset that if I just do X, Y and Z I will get there. 

Because in reality, when you adopt that mindset, there will always be another hurdle set up right after and your wife will actually be angry at you because she will believe you made her set it up!


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> FWIW, I haven't gotten to the point Farside is at.
> 
> I've just gotten to the point where I've stopped trying to look for the "signals" and I've stopped trying to set up "the perfect mood"
> 
> ...


Anon, I got the "I have been overwhelmed and it does not put me in the mood" just last night, brother. And I am still not 100% where I need to be either, because my initial internal reaction was "Well damn, that doesn't make _me_ feel very sexy". On the outside, I listened to her vent for a few minutes over it, then I just smiled at her. I wanted to tell her that it hurt my feelings. But then I would have been guilty of exactly what I excoriated Alex over in this thread. So I gave her a poker face. That is the price of leadership. 

Her: Don't you have anything to say?
Me, smiling: No.
Her: No?
Me, turning out the lights and moving in: Nope!

The thing is, it is not about her view of me. It is about her having a rough evening. And it had been 10 days since we had sex due to her cycle and a few other factors, so I was not going to stop until she gave me a definitive "no".

Had she, it would have been full stop. But she wanted to have sex as well as she was definitely ready, enjoyed it, and was completely lovey dovey both afterwards last night and this morning.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> This post sums it up perfectly. Alex, you stop when she gives you a definitive "NO".
> 
> Her: I don't feel like it.
> You: I'm okay with that. Now hush. (As you smile while you take her panties off)
> ...


It's getting hot in here . . .

Alex, listen to far. Forget the cards.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> bed?
> SHE WANTS YOU TO BE IN CHARGE OF SEX. GIVE HER WHAT SHE WANTS.
> 
> ETA: When she responded to your idea of the cards, you got your feelings hurt. That was so unattractive to her. You should have told her you weren't asking for her permission, rather just giving her an idea of what was to come, and just gone for it.


Okay, I read so many posts like this, and they make me cringe every time.

I can accept that SOME women are like this. I have heard them here and elsewhere wishing their husbands wouldn't listen to them, and would treat them as submissive sex toys. "Just take me".

But this is simply NOT a solution to all problems. And if she is grossed out by the idea of him lying in bed naked waiting for her, she has some kind of sexual aversion going on there. 

Something tells me that she would view his sort of domination as rapey, as treating her as just a sex object without regard to her feelings and desires.

There are many women out there who find this sort of attitude utterly objectionable, and will shut down completely if they think their partner doesn't really give a whit what they want or don't.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> definitive "NO".
> 
> Her: I don't feel like it.
> You: I'm okay with that. Now hush. (As you smile while you take her panties off)


Eew. Just eeew!


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Always has a point. If I did not have total trust in Dug, trust that has been earned and continues to be maintained, we could not have the relationship we do. 

Far's methods do work great on some of us. But not all.

Always, what do you suggest instead?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> FWIW, I haven't gotten to the point Farside is at.
> 
> I've just gotten to the point where I've stopped trying to look for the "signals" and I've stopped trying to set up "the perfect mood"
> 
> ...


I thought the same man. Exactly the same.

All these stupid freaking hurdles and games and dishes and laundry and making everything perfect... for something SHE should be wanting as much as ME... because it's supposed to be a WE thing, right?

And I felt rejected, and afraid, and alone, and hurt.

Then I read a bunch of stuff. Here and there and everywhere. And I made two mental buckets in my head. 

Bucket one was the stupid stuff. Words she'd say and things she wanted me to do... that were really signals of fatigue and "pay attention to me and the work I do" but NOT "go do them for me."

That was the dishes, the laundry, that stuff. That stuff never got me laid. In fact, it got me less action than before, because when I did her stuff for her she'd just be freed up go to party with her friends. Doing that stuff didn't turn my wife on.

So, I'd just playfully, respectfully, and with a ****-eating grin on my face, IGNORE it. Because it just means "I had a hard day" or "I have a lot of stuff going on that I'm having trouble getting out of the mindset of."

What I found, for our marriage, is if I didn't try to problem solve her stuff, or give it energy at all, she had an easier time letting it go. Because it wasn't about solving her problems so she'd be into sex (male mindset perhaps), it was about her being allowed to forget her to-do list. And if she expressed it, and I smirked and ignored it, maybe it wasn't such a big deal, after all.

Bucket two I reserved for things that were actual, real issues that I needed to pay attention to. Structural things; the roof has a leak, or the car has a flat, or whatever. Real things that she needed me to do, to take care of my ****, so she could let it go.

And what I would do is pay careful attention to what turned her on. Physically, emotionally, in whatever way. And do more of that stuff.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Okay, I read so many posts like this, and they make me cringe every time.
> 
> I can accept that SOME women are like this. I have heard them here and elsewhere wishing their husbands wouldn't listen to them, and would treat them as submissive sex toys. "Just take me".
> 
> ...


I suppose it is possible.

But I guess you missed the part that I repeated three times in two posts that said "no means no", but everything else until this is on.

The other part that I see she finds objectionable is him "waiting" on her. It probably appears pathetic to her. He should busy himself with something he wants to do, then come in when she is done. It really is simple psychology.

Humor me. What do you ask of your husband in your relationship that could be construed as a want more than a need? A particular act of service that he does not have to do but chooses to because you want it or agree to it based on how you run your household. Or perhaps him listening to you at the end of a very hard day?

ETA: I would also like to add that I listen to her constantly. I comfort her when she has had a rough day, without trying to solve her problems. I help with things that are not part of our agreement to help her deal with being overwhelmed.

She had from the moment we arrived home until when I initiated sex to tell me anything she wanted. That she deliberately chose to bring it up right at sex, and that it was essentially over something minor, tells me it was a total sh!t test. If it wasn't, we would have been discussing it this morning at length.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> Eew. Just eeew!


I have reached the conclusion that if I have your approval, I must be doing it wrong...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Not sure smirking is ever advisable. Jmo.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

jld said:


> Not sure smirking is ever advisable. Jmo.


Really? 

Maybe it's how you pull it off.

Worked for me, many many times.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

marduk said:


> Really?
> 
> Maybe it's how you pull it off.
> 
> Worked for me, many many times.


I'll take your word on it. Just would not advise it, myself.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> I suppose it is possible.
> 
> But I guess you missed the part that I repeated three times in two posts that said "no means no", but everything else until this is on.
> 
> The other part that I see she finds objectionable is him "waiting" on her. It probably appears pathetic to her. He should busy himself with something he wants to do, then come in when she is done. It really is simple psychology.


No, I didn't miss your point. I get that you would listen to her "no", and aren't actually advocating having sex with her when she genuinely doesn't want to.

This is not simple psychology! Can you see how contradictory the advice is here? He should *not* listen to what she says, just do what he wants, take what he wants until she says no. But he *should* listen to what she wants, because him lying in bed is "unattractive", and waiting to have sex is "unattractive". 

What I was trying to do was drive home the point that someone who doesn't want to fool around in the shower or look at sex cards or is uncomfortable (rather than turned on) by someone who wants sex with her, she probably isn't going to be very receptive to someone telling her that they don't give a damn what she wants, they're going to have at it anyway. Even if it isn't actually a threat, it's likely to be viewed as one. Especially if there are CSA (or related) issues in the background.

This is not simple psychology! Can you see how contradictory the advice is here? He should *not* listen to what she says, just do what he wants, take what he wants until she says no. But what he wants to do is lie in bed naked. But since this is "unattractive" he *should* listen to what she wants, lest he just be a giant turn off. So instead, he should pretend he wants to watch sports, or check the weather, or maybe repair the dishwasher so he can generate the illusion that he is the "leader" in the relationship.

Does this not seem a tad messed up?



farsidejunky said:


> Humor me. What do you ask of your husband in your relationship that could be construed as a want more than a need? A particular act of service that he does not have to do but chooses to because you want it or agree to it based on how you run your household. Or perhaps him listening to you at the end of a very hard day?


Not sure where you are going with this? :scratchhead: I like it when he makes me coffee. It's always the best.

Although I do view coffee as more of a need than a want.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

jld said:


> Always, what do you suggest instead?


The more I read TAM, the more I wonder what happened to good old-fashioned seduction.

We seem to see only extremes here: either he's a pandering fool who let's her walk all over him, or he is the dominant take whatever he wants because that's all she wants too type.

What about the middle ground?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Of course it's messed up always.

One of the wisest people I've ever known once told me that "everything good in life is messy."

And, dammit, she was right. 

The key is not to pretend, I think, and to _actually_ listen. To the meaning behind the words, not the words themselves.

What I mean by not pretending is doing what he wants. If he wants to watch sports, watch sports. If he wants to lie in bed naked, lie in bed naked... but have a plan B. Maybe the naked is plan A, and sports is plan B. Or lie in bed naked and watch sports. KWIM?

And, fixing the dishwasher in my house is kinda my licence to operate, so to speak. My job. We all have jobs to do, we don't have to like them. I don't like coming home from work and being elbows deep in funky dishwasher gunk fixing it... but I do it. Not to attract my wife, but because it needs doing. And, if I need the added kick in the ass to get it done knowing my odds of getting any go down if I don't, so be it.

And... different strokes. For me, until I fixed the "getting my **** done" and the attraction stuff... seduction was just a passive-agressive contract that actually turned her off.

'Oh, he got a sitter and is taking me out for a nice meal. Sigh. If I go, I guess that means he'll expect me to put out tonight.'

So, it's complex. It depends where the relationship is at. Fixing that one took some romance and seduction... and then not trying to actually have sex at all.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

There really is not any substitute for knowing your partner. You have to know when to take words at face value, and when to look past them to deeper issues.

It just takes time and effort.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

I think you should try a bear suit.

( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> I think you should try a bear suit.
> 
> ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> I have reached the conclusion that if I have your approval, I must be doing it wrong...


Well, hey, you're happy and presumably she is too. So congratulations!

My "approval" means squat. But it's not like I'm some sort of freak of nature with completely alien viewpoints either. Lots of women disagree with me, no doubt. But lots also react in similar ways.

And the phenomenon of a woman being completely turned off by a guy who seems only worried about his sexual needs and nothing else is a common one indeed.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

always_alone said:


> The more I read TAM, the more I wonder what happened to good old-fashioned seduction.
> 
> We seem to see only extremes here: either he's a pandering fool who let's her walk all over him, or he is the dominant take whatever he wants because that's all she wants too type.
> 
> What about the middle ground?


Please give examples. I thought far's example _was _seductive.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> Anon, I got the "I have been overwhelmed and it does not put me in the mood" just last night, brother. And I am still not 100% where I need to be either, because my initial internal reaction was "Well damn, that doesn't make _me_ feel very sexy". On the outside, I listened to her vent for a few minutes over it, then I just smiled at her. *I wanted to tell her that it hurt my feelings. But then I would have been guilty of exactly what I excoriated Alex over in this thread. So I gave her a poker face. That is the price of leadership. *Her: Don't you have anything to say?
> Me, smiling: No.
> Her: No?
> Me, turning out the lights and moving in: Nope!
> ...


Do you communicate this at a later point, or do you simply bury it and let her continue behavior that hurts you?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> .What about the middle ground?



Out the window. The two messages of male and female behaviors are textbook mass media and entertainment materials...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

always_alone said:


> And the phenomenon of a woman being completely turned off by a guy who seems only worried about his sexual needs and nothing else is a common one indeed.


But far is not like that. He is very sensitive and nurturing with his wife.

I do agree, though, that a man who is just focused on his own pleasure is a complete turn off. Self-centeredness, imo, is always a turn off, in or out of the bedroom.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

It is interesting to me to see women here advocating for transparency, but the men seem to be advocating anything but.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> It is interesting to me to see women here advocating for transparency, but the men seem to be advocating anything but.


Pretty standard fare for our gender roles.

Not to say it's ineffective, but it's kind of sad that so many people have to go along to get along so to speak.

ETA: I think that most everyone would rather have transparency, but it seems like enough women respond to the "shut up and take me" line of thinking that it perpetuates men needing to "shut up and never speak about it".


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> It is interesting to me to see women here advocating for transparency, but the men seem to be advocating anything but.



For a good reason.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Fozzy said:


> Do you communicate this at a later point, or do you simply bury it and let her continue behavior that hurts you?


It depends. If I think it will result in a net negative for our relationship, I will sit on it, work through it and get over it. If I see a net positive, I will bring it up. 

My wife is not the one who carries our relationship. Nothing against her, but just is not in her make up. This is why she wants me to lead, as little as I actually care to do it.

Please pay attention to this, Always_Alone, because I believe you think I am self centered.

Sometimes, often, I have to make personal sacrifices in order to help her in our relationship. So sometimes, I have to sacrifice my transparency to assure hers is _never_ affected. And I am incredibly sensitive for a dude, despite what some folks may think, making this _incredibly_ difficult for me. But it is what is best for us, so that is the burden I will bear.

But we all have our hills on which we are willing to make our final stand and die. Sex and passion are mine.

ETA: Fozzy, sometimes I am not that disciplined, and I cannot help bringing it up. I still have anxiety issues from where we were just a short year ago. It is a struggle sometimes, brother. But nothing in life worth doing is easy...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

jld said:


> Please give examples. I thought far's example _was _seductive.


Really? I find the idea that my sex partner doesn't care one way or the other if I'm into it, and just wants to have at it anyway, just about the biggest turn off I can think of. Just no!

But seduction is personal, I suppose. And personally, I need him to express his desire in a way that shows that he cares very much whether I'm into it or not.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Really? I find the idea that my sex partner doesn't care one way or the other if I'm into it, and just wants to have at it anyway, just about the biggest turn off I can think of. Just no!
> 
> But seduction is personal, I suppose. And personally, I need him to express his desire in a way that shows that he cares very much whether I'm into it or not.


That is why I said in my other post that far is sensitive and caring. She would not feel comfortable with some dominance in the bedroom if there were not that backdrop.


----------



## 4x4 (Apr 15, 2014)

Sorry Alex, I think you just flubbed the encounter. You were 2 weeks without sex, I wouldn't have been thinking about playing cards I would have been thinking ravishing her. My hands and mouth would have wanted every inch of her body, no games, cards, or instructions needed. Save the games for the 5th or 10th encounter of the week.

You stated you feel awkward waiting for her to come get you. Why is that? Is she seductive at all when initiating this way or is it otherwise awkward for some reason? Maybe she feels hurried by you waiting for her (rightly or wrongly ). Maybe she wants time to get herself ready at her pace, maybe her routine helps he get in the mood? From my experience, people tend have specific bathroom routines even if subconsciously.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> No, I didn't miss your point. I get that you would listen to her "no", and aren't actually advocating having sex with her when she genuinely doesn't want to.
> 
> This is not simple psychology! Can you see how contradictory the advice is here? He should *not* listen to what she says, just do what he wants, take what he wants until she says no. But he *should* listen to what she wants, because him lying in bed is "unattractive", and waiting to have sex is "unattractive".


Okay. This is where understanding what is and what isn't is important. Blonde brought up a great point in that she _did not_ think Alex wife was asexual. You didn't even question that post.

So I ask you, do you believe _everything_ that Alex wife is saying? I don't. I believe she is communicating some things overtly and some things covertly.

The attraction thing of him waiting on her? That is direct. As is the disgust at him showing her the cards. The both feel like him pandering to her and seeking her approval rather than just doing.

The part about being asexual? I don't buy that. Not in any conventional sense.

This is where sh!t tests come in. And I know the subject is not very popular with many female posters, but the less secure a woman is in her relationship, the more frequent the sh!t tests. Time and time again we see it here.

Sh!t tests are not true communication in what is being said. They are communication in what is not being said. My wife gave me a sh!t test last night. Funny thing was, her body was ready for sex (without getting too graphic). Again, were it not a sh!t test, she would be wearing me out about it again today. That is her way. But she was _anything but_ both last night after sex and this morning. 



always_alone said:


> What I was trying to do was drive home the point that someone who doesn't want to fool around in the shower or look at sex cards or is uncomfortable (rather than turned on) by someone who wants sex with her, she probably isn't going to be very receptive to someone telling her that they don't give a damn what she wants, they're going to have at it anyway. Even if it isn't actually a threat, it's likely to be viewed as one. Especially if there are CSA (or related) issues in the background.


My wife was a victim of CSA. I don't know if you were aware of that or not. It was something we dealt with in our reconciliation, and still occasionally gets triggered, although it is incredibly rare now. That is another situation where we are "all stop".

You are taking some liberty with assuming that I don't give a damn about what my wife wants. I am emotionally communicating to her something that I want, with the clear option to tell me "no". If her desire to not have sex is not worth her giving me a clear "no", then it is a maybe. And maybe sounds an awful lot like "yes", until there is a "no".

Yes, no...

:scratchhead:


----------



## 4x4 (Apr 15, 2014)

I just think Always is taking advice regarding this specific encounter as it was advice for every encounter.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

always_alone said:


> Okay, I read so many posts like this, and they make me cringe every time.


Same here.

It's not that I doubt anybody when they say that this has proven to work in their relationship.

It's that I know what bad, bad advice this is with my wife and probably other women like her.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> Same here.
> 
> It's not that I doubt anybody when they say that this has proven to work in their relationship.
> 
> It's that I know what bad, bad advice this is with my wife and probably other women like her.


Again, can you give a specific example of what to do instead?


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

ocotillo said:


> Same here.
> 
> It's not that I doubt anybody when they say that this has proven to work in their relationship.
> 
> It's that I know what bad, bad advice this is with my wife and probably other women like her.


And you have figured this out for certain, which is fantastic.

It means you understand your partner.

But Alex does not understand his.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

jld said:


> But far is not like that. He is very sensitive and nurturing with his wife.
> 
> I do agree, though, that a man who is just focused on his own pleasure is a complete turn off. Self-centeredness, imo, is always a turn off, in or out of the bedroom.


I agree in general but there are specific exclusions to this.

Say, my wife agrees to have sex but she's not in the mood. She's just gonna do it for me and lay there and starfish out. (It doesn't happen anymore BTW, but I'll get to that).

So... I can go down any number of paths at that point.

I can say "No, if you're not into it then I'm not into it." Now, depending on how you've framed it that can be a good thing or a bad thing. It could be that you're showing sensitivity... or it could be being passive-agressive. The latter might cause her to thing "oh, great, I give him what he wants and he won't even take it! I'm not even gonna offer next time."

Or, I can have sex, and try to get her into it. Again, that could be a good thing or a bad thing. If your sex life is generally good and she's into you, maybe it gets her in the mood. Or maybe it frustrates her because she's letting you have sex with her but you don't respect her not wanting to have an O or whatever. 

And if she's not actually that into you, it just can get converted into another passive-agressive ploy of her thinking whatever she gives isn't good enough so she shuts down and gets mad more.

Or, I can have sex with her... and just rock out and have a great time... just for me.

Oddly, when my wife wasn't that into me, she sometimes started to get into sex. Because it's kinda hard not to get into it when someone's going all animal on you and really, really enjoing you. For themselves. KWIM?

And, even though I was selfishly just taking pleasure for myself, I never got a "you just want me for sex" conversation.

Again, only on occasions where she said yes, but just for me.


----------



## naiveonedave (Jan 9, 2014)

I tend to agree w/Far. My W used to put up barriers as a sh*t test. I used to fail miserably, now I go more towards not stopping until I hear "No", which has not happened, unless at the in-laws. I also get the sh*t test much less frequently.

If I didn't get past the belly ache, running nose, or other lame excuses, I wouldn't have any kids.


----------



## naiveonedave (Jan 9, 2014)

marduk said:


> I can say "No, if you're not into it then I'm not into it." Now, depending on how you've framed it that can be a good thing or a bad thing. It could be that you're showing sensitivity... or it could be being passive-agressive. The latter might cause her to thing "oh, great, I give him what he wants and he won't even take it! I'm not even gonna offer next time."
> 
> Or, I can have sex, and try to get her into it. Again, that could be a good thing or a bad thing. If your sex life is generally good and she's into you, maybe it gets her in the mood. Or maybe it frustrates her because she's letting you have sex with her but you don't respect her not wanting to have an O or whatever.
> 
> ...


Action will get her in the mood if she is into you. Inaction or hesitation will kill her desire.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Earn her trust, fc.


----------



## vellocet (Oct 18, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> Any time a female levies us with a sh!t test, what they are asking of us or telling us is not what they are actually saying.
> 
> For example, when my wife gets moody, and I try to get to the emotion of it through active listening, she will get snippy and try to derail the technique. It is not deliberate; it is emotional communication, which has absolutely zero resemblance to rational communication.
> 
> ...


Question is, do you get the same consideration in return?

Translation, is she strong enough to be fair?

If not, then its not about being strong enough to handle that person, its about being too weak to put up with it.

I'm all about being a rock. But not when its a one way street.(not the rock part, but understanding when I have my moments as well.)


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> Earn her trust, fc.



Is there a Groundhog Day emoji? I could use one or three...

I have the full trust of my wife for all the good it has done me . Trust is another code word. A mental sinus infection.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

jld said:


> Again, can you give a specific example of what to do instead?


The trick with my wife is to make her think it was her idea. Her defenses will go through the roof at the tiniest hint of being put on the spot. 

What works can be as subtle as a candle burning somewhere in the house or as overt as a slow kiss on the back of the neck when her mind is somewhere else. The common thread is that she has to be free to accept the gesture as either sexual or non-sexual.

None of this makes any sense to me and it's not how my mind works, but then I don't fully understand what her early life was like as a sweet, innocent young girl with no need for a wonderbra either.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

vellocet said:


> Question is, do you get the same consideration in return?
> 
> Translation, is she strong enough to be fair?
> 
> ...


Yes, there is. Just the other night, I snapped at her over something. I was tired, she was tired, she thought I did something that I did not as it happened in the blink of an eye, I told her (in other words) to go pound sand for questioning me.

I apologized later. I was out of line. 

Both before and after the apology she was not bitter. 

So the answer is yes.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

I agree with always, the push until/unless she says no approach should be used with extreme caution. You'd have to really know your wife and know she is into that kind of thing. 

If I said I was overwhelmed, the proper response for me would be "What can I do to help?" not taking my underwear off. He might get kicked if he tried, I'd lose a lot of trust.

Alex- when she does a foreplay for later move, do you spend the day doing moves back? Or just wait until bedtime to start? Even if you're cleaning and running errands you can flirt, touch, send romantic texts. I don't know what she's into specifically.

If it was me, I would feel like I made a move and now it was his turn to seduce me. I'd be a little annoyed if he just went through the day like nothing until bed time when he wanted to jump right to sex.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> Okay. This is where understanding what is and what isn't is important. Blonde brought up a great point in that she _did not_ think Alex wife was asexual. You didn't even question that post.
> 
> So I ask you, do you believe _everything_ that Alex wife is saying? I don't. I believe she is communicating some things overtly and some things covertly.
> 
> ...


I think you are being awfully presumptuous about what is and is not a direct communication from alex's wife, a woman you don't know and never met.

I agree that it's possible that she isn't actually asexual, or at least not irrevocably so, but my default is to assume that women are indeed capable of rational communication, and that if she is *saying* she is asexual, this is likely true. Maybe not the be-all and end-all of truth --but at least as good an approximation as she can manage in relation to her own experience and sense of self.

And I do not see at all why you think her disgust at him waiting or looking at cards is based on this vague notion of pandering, rather than an authentic expression of how she reacts to certain sexual stimuli.

She *says* she is asexual, and she *acts* in ways that clearly show she is troubled/disgusted by certain sexual approaches.

So why re-write all of this to fit your preconceived notions of women's irrationality and ****-testing?


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

always_alone said:


> I think you are being awfully presumptuous about what is and is not a direct communication from alex's wife, a woman you don't know and never met.
> 
> I agree that it's possible that she isn't actually asexual, or at least not irrevocably so, but my default is to assume that women are indeed capable of rational communication, and that if she is *saying* she is asexual, this is likely true. Maybe not the be-all and end-all of truth --but at least as good an approximation as she can manage in relation to her own experience and sense of self.
> 
> ...


Alex, do you have any deal breakers at all? Or are you the suffer in silence type who is just going to take it forever? AA's post made me wonder, I mean, what if. What if you just take what she says at face value. She is asexual. Period. Ok, is that a deal breaker or not?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

We call it "availability heuristic"...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> Or, I can have sex with her... and just rock out and have a great time... just for me.
> 
> Oddly, when my wife wasn't that into me, she sometimes started to get into sex. Because it's kinda hard not to get into it when someone's going all animal on you and really, really enjoing you. For themselves. KWIM?
> 
> And, even though I was selfishly just taking pleasure for myself, I never got a "you just want me for sex" conversation.


Well, she let's remember that said yes, just for you. So clearly she wasn't expecting anything more from the encounter than you getting an orgasm.

However, I wouldn't guarantee that if commonly employed this style of interaction won't lead to a huge pile of resentments. Just because someone is physically aroused doesn't mean they are actually getting into it.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

farsidejunky said:


> Dammit, Alex. Your opportunity was perfect. And you go and "nice guy" (read: flubbed) it up.
> 
> Dude, she wants you to tell her what to do, not ask. She wants you to wake her up and take her, not ask if it is okay.
> 
> ...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Consider your marriage as a microcosm of your social status.

Women, as a rule, are much more influenced by social dynamics than men. Look at how women fight-- not physically, but through social pressure. 

Look at how women find socially dominant men attractive. Does a man care if a woman is a CEO if she is physically unattractive? Most men would rather be with a physically hot cashier. 

But your wife probably would not.

She cares about social power/prestige. Your relative power within the social dynamic of your marriage is massive signal to your wife of your worth as a mate.

Who is the weaker one in the relationship? If you are constantly trying to figure her out, then it is you. 

Most women don't want to be with men who are socially weaker than them or even their equals. They want someone more powerful. They recognize power on a social level first. 

Even if all you do is stop trying to figure her out, you will move toward equalizing the power dynamic to some degree.


----------



## A_DelVeccio (Jan 13, 2015)

alexm said:


> So if you've read any of my previous posts, you'll know that my sex life with my wife is very up and down, and that I'm always looking for ways (here, and with her) to make it better.
> 
> Very quick background - she's LD, self-professed asexual (though I have my doubts), is never sexual with me UNTIL we're having sex, and only initiates when she feels it's been too long, etc.
> 
> ...


Sorry you are feeling this way... Are you religious at all? I don't mean to be a bible thumper but God didn't create woman to solely have sex. Sex... is icing on the cake. Did your vows state "to have sex constantly?" or do your vows mean nothing to you? As a woman we go through stages. EVERY relationship is hot and heavy in the beginning.. but as life/marriage goes on its becomes less. This is a known fact. There is more to life than sex. Have you ever tried to uncover WHY she is so distant? Woman are not the same as men... Constantly being begged or yelled at is a big turn off... It makes us feel as though that's all you want from us. We like to feel safe, secure and loved. When we don't feel that way sex is the last thing on our mind.... unless we approach it as to only do it so YOU are happy." But then its robotic and boring, no feeling, etc. I think there is something deep down going on that needs to be uncovered and its deeper than you feeling you have to have sex in order to be "married".


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

Anon1111 said:


> Women, as a rule, are much more influenced by.....
> 
> 
> Who is the weaker one in the relationship? If you are constantly trying to figure her out.....



You do see the irony here?


----------



## A_DelVeccio (Jan 13, 2015)

foolscotton3 said:


> W and I have had similar issues, "too exhausted," "too much acid reflux," "too ashamed of her appearances," I got tired of excuses, and just gave up, then when she did initiate, I assumed their was ulterior motives behind it. With all the rejection, I started to resent my marriage, this was supposed to be our honeymoon period, things were only going to get worse. I lost all ambitions in the bedroom, when we did have sex it felt empty and like a chore because of all the effort I went through just to bat .200 overall. When I did get lucky, all I could think about was making sure she got off, making sure she enjoyed it, because who knew if I would ever get it again. The sex was bad, as bad as I could ever imagine, you wonder why do I bother at all.
> 
> If your SO never shows interest in intimacy, transparency, or your basic need to trust them. What benefit do you get out of being married to them?



So you're basically saying that marriage is only about sex?  I think you need to read the bible my friend.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

A_DelVeccio said:


> Sex... is icing on the cake.


Sex (Or at least an honest effort) is the ethical corollary to the vow of fidelity.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> Consider your marriage as a microcosm of your social status.
> 
> Women, as a rule, are much more influenced by social dynamics than men. Look at how women fight-- not physically, but through social pressure.
> 
> ...


Yes, yes yes!

One thing to add or provide a different lens is context.

Take, for example, many a wife. Very conservative, inhibited, deep social ties, and cares very much about what other people "think" of her: her social standing and what is considered to be acceptible.

Take this same woman, put her with a group of similar women with one party animal in the mix, and plop down the whole kit 'n kaboodle into a nightclub in Vegas with no husbands present.

Pretty soon, quite often... they're dancing, partying, dressing more provocatively, and very much open to less... conservative behaviour.

As an example, I once ran into one of our female senior execs in a well known strip club in vegas putting $100 bills into a female stripper's g-string.

And this is someone I knew fairly well socially and would NEVER be seen doing such a thing.

And you see this kinda thing all the time. I see my wife do this kinda thing all the time (not the strippers, I mean moderating her behaviour heavily depending upon the social situation they find themselves in).

Now, to bring my point home, not only does there need to be an equitable (not neccessarily equal) power dynamic, but the one wanting more sex needs to undertand how to set the social 'context' up to create an environment that is more unihibited, accepting, and supportive of this kinda behaviour.

For me, I took a very conscious look at how I can 'become Vegas.'


----------



## A_DelVeccio (Jan 13, 2015)

Right - but when it becomes the only thing important in a marriage it is more than that. Why not try to be a supportive husband and find out whats going on rather than constantly annoy her with sex requests? She may be battling depression and all he cares about his getting off.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> Okay, I read so many posts like this, and they make me cringe every time.
> 
> I can accept that SOME women are like this. I have heard them here and elsewhere wishing their husbands wouldn't listen to them, and would treat them as submissive sex toys. "Just take me".
> 
> ...


This is more or less how I feel about this. Now, I am capable of doing this, and I have experience prior to my wife. This can and does work, but not with all people.

As I said, this has worked on occasion with my wife, and others have been a disaster. There is no visible or auditory clue to when this tactic will work or not. And there is not much of an in between in the reactions. It's either awesome for her, or it's a huge slap in the face. Total gamble.

Again, I am 99.9% positive this comes down to her lack of communication with me in this regard. If I knew the 5W's, (well, the WHO should be clear, I hope!) I could at least take an educated guess at how any particular session will play out and what avenue to take.

And yes, I have asked, pleaded and begged her to just talk to me. I have repeatedly told her I have no idea what she wants, or when, or how, and that it's usually a total crapshoot.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

farsidejunky said:


> The other part that I see she finds objectionable is him "waiting" on her. It probably appears pathetic to her. He should busy himself with something he wants to do, then come in when she is done. It really is simple psychology.


Yeah, but, she IS basically telling me to wait for her. Seriously. When I pick up the hints (which are, on occasion, not hints but rather "see you in bed after I shower") what am I supposed to do? Hang out on the couch until she comes and gets me? This seems very much like "wait for me", no?

And, true to the confusing nature of it all, I am occasionally told that lying in bed (naked or not - usually NOT) while she is in the shower or whatever is a turn off.

But... didn't you just tell me "I'm going to go shower, meet you in bed?"


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

alexm said:


> This is more or less how I feel about this. Now, I am capable of doing this, and I have experience prior to my wife. This can and does work, but not with all people.
> 
> As I said, this has worked on occasion with my wife, and others have been a disaster. There is no visible or auditory clue to when this tactic will work or not. And there is not much of an in between in the reactions. It's either awesome for her, or it's a huge slap in the face. Total gamble.
> 
> ...


What would happen if you just kinda went quiet about it?

Like "Wife, you know I'm open to talking about this if or when you're ready to. You know I want to enjoy this part of our relationship more, and you know I love you and totally have the hots for you. But I'm not gonna pressure you about talking about it any more; do it if you want and I'm here. But what I am gonna do is just going to try to make love or have sex with you when I want to, and going to accept 'no' for an answer without debating it or taking it personally. So your job, and you only have one job, is to say 'no' if that's what you want."

That's kinda what I said a few years ago. She was hesitant that I wouldn't actually be pissy about it, but actually was pretty happy with the result.

Now, living that has been hard of course.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> This is not simple psychology! Can you see how contradictory the advice is here? He should *not* listen to what she says, just do what he wants, take what he wants until she says no. But what he wants to do is lie in bed naked. But since this is "unattractive" he *should* listen to what she wants, lest he just be a giant turn off. So instead, he should pretend he wants to watch sports, or check the weather, or maybe repair the dishwasher so he can generate the illusion that he is the "leader" in the relationship.


This is exactly where I'm at. If I "wait" for her (even though she's essentially inviting me to do so) it is wrong. If I **** off downstairs and wait for her to shower or whatever, then I appear uninterested.

I kid you not, I have done exactly that. NOT waited for her. And have come upstairs and she's in bed with the lights out. I missed my 30 second window, apparently. If I say squat to her the next day, it's somehow my fault.

Occasionally waiting in bed for her doesn't phase her in the slightest. Occasionally it's ruined the moment. Occasionally if I hang out somewhere else and come back upstairs, she's waiting for me. Even naked sometimes. Occasionally she's got her pj's on, a towel on her head, and the lights are out.

See how confusing this is?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

alexm said:


> Yeah, but, she IS basically telling me to wait for her. Seriously. When I pick up the hints (which are, on occasion, not hints but rather "see you in bed after I shower") what am I supposed to do? Hang out on the ouch until she comes and gets me? This seems very much like "wait for me", no?
> 
> And, true to the confusing nature of it all, I am occasionally told that lying in bed (naked or not - usually NOT) while she is in the shower or whatever is a turn off.
> 
> But... didn't you just tell me "I'm going to go shower, meet you in bed?"


C'mon man, that's an easy one.

Join her in the shower.

Don't ask. Get naked, open door, get in shower.

It's your shower too, right?


----------



## A_DelVeccio (Jan 13, 2015)

A LOT of woman hate feeling like a piece of meat.. like its all you want her for.. woman also hate feeling like that have to initate it or that you're a wimp.. whiney and begging is annoying. Just saying. Making her feel safe, secure, wanted and respected and more than a sexual object is a turn on. So is "just being taken". Women don't like wimpy, scared men.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

A_DelVeccio said:


> A LOT of woman hate feeling like a piece of meat.. like its all you want her for.. woman also hate feeling like that have to initate it or that you're a wimp.. whiney and begging is annoying. Just saying. Making her feel safe, secure, wanted and respected and more than a sexual object is a turn on. So is "just being taken". Women don't like wimpy, scared men.


Yup.

And this isn't a false dichotomy with "wimp" on one side and "treats me like a sex object" on the other.

And you can make (at least some) women feel both wanted and respected as more than a sexual object.... AND a sexual object.

I've been told that the difference in feeling objectified and not isn't necessarily that you may derive intense purely sexual satisfaction from the seeing, or the touching, or the doing... it's consentually approving of the objectification. Which in my experience has a lot to do with how you treat them outside the bedroom, and how you initiate, and, importantly how you treat them after.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

A_DelVeccio said:


> Why not try to be a supportive husband and find out whats going on....


That's pretty much what these type of threads are all about. 

I would agree with you that there is more to life than sex, but at the same time, it would be awfully cruel to deprive a person of an important human need and then condemn them when they become preoccupied with filling it.

Is that how we treat starving people? Do we spin their preoccupation with food as greed or some other failing?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Alex- when she does a foreplay for later move, do you spend the day doing moves back? Or just wait until bedtime to start? Even if you're cleaning and running errands you can flirt, touch, send romantic texts. I don't know what she's into specifically.
> 
> If it was me, I would feel like I made a move and now it was his turn to seduce me. I'd be a little annoyed if he just went through the day like nothing until bed time when he wanted to jump right to sex.


Oh yeah, definitely, and within her comfort zone. She prefers playful over romantic. So all day on Sunday, we were both like this. Nothing overly sexual or gropey. Hey, she started it, I continued it, as did she, then nothing happened, despite my best efforts - really and truly.

Yes, I could have woken her up, I get that. But she was SNORING. As in, she was snoring when I got up there, she woke up just long enough to mumble hi, I left the room for no more than 20 seconds, and full on snorefest by the time I got back.


----------



## A_DelVeccio (Jan 13, 2015)

Umm... start doing it while being playful! Don't wait til later... Hell if I am tired.. Sorry I am not doing it.


----------



## SlowlyGoingCrazy (Jun 2, 2011)

alexm said:


> This is exactly where I'm at. If I "wait" for her (even though she's essentially inviting me to do so) it is wrong. If I **** off downstairs and wait for her to shower or whatever, then I appear uninterested.
> 
> I kid you not, I have done exactly that. NOT waited for her. And have come upstairs and she's in bed with the lights out. I missed my 30 second window, apparently. If I say squat to her the next day, it's somehow my fault.
> 
> ...


Is there something you can be doing during this time to prep things? Not get naked, maybe get the bed ready, light some candles, put on some music, maybe get lotion out to rub on her after the shower. Keep yourself busy preparing, not waiting. When she comes out she'll see a nice, romantic space and an H who set it all up


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

She is painting you nearly into a corner, leaving a 4 inch passage for you to walk over in your size 10 shoes. My wife used to pull this same stuff when we were unhealthy, and I told her this exact thing in marriage counseling. 

Do you know why she did this? Because I allowed her to. Because I was too much of a nice guy to look at her and tell her that the paint didn't really matter anymore to me than it did to her, which it really didn't. I just did it because it is what she said she wanted, no matter how thin the path was. 

So I deliberately walked through her paint because if she could place completely unrealistic expectations on me so fast, I could track through them just as fast. I made her understand that I would no longer acknowledge her paint unless she gave me a path that a normal human foot could fit on. 

If she could not do that, I would track through it like it did not matter. 

After realizing what she was doing, she stopped painting the path so small. Then I started to push the boundaries of the path. Pretty soon I was setting the width of the path 80% of the time. In this process, she realized she really did not want to be responsible for the width of the path and allowed me to determine it for the most part, as long as she could continue to make her mark here and there, and as long as the path wasn't the width of the room.

After reading this, it really sounds convoluted. Maybe it will make sense to you... It does to me for the most part...

I need a nap...


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

marduk said:


> Yup.
> 
> And this isn't a false dichotomy with "wimp" on one side and "treats me like a sex object" on the other.
> 
> ...


Well said, Marduk.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

marduk said:


> C'mon man, that's an easy one.
> 
> Join her in the shower.
> 
> ...


As I said earlier here, this is about as successful as the waiting in bed thing. Might work, might not. Usually not.

Among the other things she has told me she doesn't like (like being in bed...) is joining her in the shower.

But occasionally this is exactly the right move. Usually it is not.

Damned if I know when to do this or not.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

SlowlyGoingCrazy said:


> Is there something you can be doing during this time to prep things? Not get naked, maybe get the bed ready, light some candles, put on some music, maybe get lotion out to rub on her after the shower. Keep yourself busy preparing, not waiting. When she comes out she'll see a nice, romantic space and an H who set it all up


Been there, done that. Honestly it doesn't matter. She's not the romantic type, so candles, lotion, music, whatever, doesn't make a difference.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> She is painting you nearly into a corner, leaving a 4 inch passage for you to walk over in your size 10 shoes. My wife used to pull this same stuff when we were unhealthy, and I told her this exact thing in marriage counseling.
> 
> Do you know why she did this? Because I allowed her to. Because I was too much of a nice guy to look at her and tell her that the paint didn't really matter anymore to me than it did to her, which it really didn't. I just did it because it is what she said she wanted, no matter how thin the path was.
> 
> ...


This makes sense to me and I was more or less thinking the same thing. I don't know, if she's doing the shower/wait thing on a regular basis it seems to me Alex should be calling her on it when she says it, not hopping into bed and waiting (especially since he knows the likely outcome of any action he takes). He seems like Charlie Brown trusting Lucy to hold the football.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

A_DelVeccio said:


> She may be battling depression and all he cares about his getting off.


Or from his end:

He really wants to emotionally connect with his wife but she is too self absorbed to make any effort.

The point? Both are a mischaracterization. That was a terrible way to refer to his needs from her.

If all partners were to view the needs of their spouse in such a manner, TAM membership would probably triple.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

alexm said:


> As I said earlier here, this is about as successful as the waiting in bed thing. Might work, might not. Usually not.
> 
> Among the other things she has told me she doesn't like (like being in bed...) is joining her in the shower.
> 
> ...


It's pretty obvious that when she gives you this invitation she doesn't really mean it. You're taking it on good faith that she's telling the truth when she implies that she wants you after the shower. But the fact is she's only saying it so she can tell herself that she offered and that you ruined it. That way she doesn't take the blame or feel guilty. And worst of all, you keep falling for it.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

WorkingOnMe said:


> It's pretty obvious that when she gives you this invitation she doesn't really mean it. You're taking it on good faith that she's telling the truth when she implies that she wants you after the shower. But the fact is she's only saying it so she can tell herself that she offered and that you ruined it. That way she doesn't take the blame or feel guilty. And worst of all, you keep falling for it.


The thing is, WOM, my wife was doing this, but was not doing so deliberately. 

It was another sh!t test; subconscious, but no less frustrating.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> That's pretty much what these type of threads are all about.
> 
> I would agree with you that there is more to life than sex, but at the same time, it would be awfully cruel to deprive a person of an important human need and then condemn them when they become preoccupied with filling it.
> 
> Is that how we treat starving people? Do we spin their preoccupation with food as greed or some other failing?


This right here is the biggest mindf*ck in the whole sexless marriage thing.

The sexlessness arguably starts out as not your fault and then eventually mutates into completely being your fault.

There is so much temptation to continually blame it on your wife as you spiral farther and farther down.

It does you no good to do this, but you have to constantly remind yourself to resist the urge.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

alexm said:


> As I said earlier here, this is about as successful as the waiting in bed thing. Might work, might not. Usually not.
> 
> Among the other things she has told me she doesn't like (like being in bed...) is joining her in the shower.
> 
> ...


Success isn't necessarily having sex today. 

Success I would say is positioning your marriage to have more and better sex as a natural consequence. 

Whether or not you get laid tonight is of no consequence.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> See how confusing this is?


Yes. And, sincerely, I feel for you. This can't be easy!

My best guess says that she's being mostly honest with you, as honest as she knows how to be, but you keep getting these wildly conflicting messages because she herself is conflicted. Sometimes she is mentally in the game, as it were, and sometimes she's not, and so she reacts differently at different times.

What this says to me is that it's more about where her head is at than anything in particular that you do or don't do. 

And that unless you can perfect your mind-reading skills, where the work lies is in building better communication.

I get that she is not good at it, and I get that you have tried and tried, to no (or not enough) avail. Assuming you're still in, though, I'd say keep chipping away at it. If she feels like she's "different", "not like others" (which you mentioned earlier), she probably has quite a few walls and not very many models or examples to help her express what she's feeling. Also, she may be terribly afraid that this is deal-breaker territory, as it would be for many.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> This right here is the biggest mindf*ck in the whole sexless marriage thing.
> 
> The sexlessness arguably starts out as not your fault and then eventually mutates into completely being your fault.
> 
> ...


I hear what you're saying about fault. 

But no one can change their partners behaviour. 

We can only change our own...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

I think it's hard for those of us who have not experienced sexless marriage to really understand the issue. What to the rest of us looks straightforward ends up being presented as quite complicated.

For sure, I would not blame your wife. That will surely kill any good will.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

jld said:


> I think it's hard for those of us who have not experienced sexless marriage to really understand the issue. What to the rest of us looks straightforward ends up being presented as quite complicated.
> 
> For sure, I would not blame your wife. That will surely kill any good will.


I have, and it sucks. 

I have a massive amount of sympathy for people in this situation and wished that the other spouses that put the ones they love in a sexless prison understood how much that ****s up your self esteem, sense of self worth, and distorts their sexuality.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

Anon1111 said:


> This right here is the biggest mindf*ck in the whole sexless marriage thing.
> 
> The sexlessness arguably starts out as not your fault and then eventually mutates into completely being your fault.
> 
> ...


:iagree:


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

marduk said:


> I have, and it sucks.
> 
> I have a massive amount of sympathy for people in this situation and wished that the other spouses that put the ones they love in a sexless prison understood how much that ****s up your self esteem, sense of self worth, and distorts their sexuality.


If I felt my husband were begging, or whining, or blaming, or really anything other than completely _inspiring_ my response to him, I would just not feel attracted.

Empowerment, not victimhood, men.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

farsidejunky said:


> The thing is, WOM, my wife was doing this, but was not doing so deliberately.
> 
> 
> 
> It was another sh!t test; subconscious, but no less frustrating.



Don't attribute to voluntary sh!t tests what can better be explained as involuntary - subconscious lolz - behavior.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

jld said:


> Empowerment, not victimhood, men.


My turn. 

How would you flesh this out into a real life scenario?

How would you avoid the appearance of weakness with a spouse who wants to spin all sexual advances as weakness?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> If I felt my husband were begging, or whining, or blaming, or really anything other than completely _inspiring_ my response to him, I would just not feel attracted.
> 
> 
> 
> Empowerment, not victimhood, men.



If we were dealing with NormalPeople (tm) wives we would be thinking on the same lines...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> My turn.
> 
> 
> 
> How would you flesh this out into a real life scenario?



That hopefully applies to non storybook marriages


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

ocotillo said:


> My turn.
> 
> How would you flesh this out into a real life scenario?
> 
> How would you avoid the appearance of weakness with a spouse who wants to spin all sexual advances as weakness?


I know it's hard. Trust me, I know. 

To steal from MMSLP... Basically stop playing games you can't win, and change the rules so you can. Redefining success is part of it. 

If you undergo a massive uplift in your structural problems (for me it is neediness, was being in shape, and being outcome independent) and your wife responds to that, great. 

If they don't, you reframe the existing situation as clearly unreasonable and allow them to make the choice - stay and be reasonable, or let me go so I can find reasonable with someone else. 

And, should this outcome happen, you can do it guilt free and be in a good position once you re-enter the dating game... Because you've undergone the massive self-improvement. 

What you can't do, is sit there and complain about it. Even if it's unreasonable. Because you let them hold all the cards, and make the game unwinnable. 

Which keeps both you and them in a bad place. Even if they think they're in a good one.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> Success isn't necessarily having sex today.
> 
> Success I would say is positioning your marriage to have more and better sex as a natural consequence.
> 
> Whether or not you get laid tonight is of no consequence.


Great point, but I would go one step further and say that success is positioning YOURSELF (not your marriage) to have more and better sex.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> My turn.
> 
> How would you flesh this out into a real life scenario?
> 
> How would you avoid the appearance of weakness with a spouse who wants to spin all sexual advances as weakness?


Stop trying to get IT.

Turn all that energy on yourself. Make yourself the prize.

She either wants you or she doesn't.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

This has nothing to do with whether Alex waits in the bed or downstairs. 

Absolutely nothing. 

This is entirely about whether or not A2 feels like following through on her expressed willingness to have sex. 

If she does NOT want to, she doesn't care that she has already created an expectation. Doesn't care - that it is painful to Alex to expect it and then get blown off last minute. 

Largely doesn't care because there is a respect issue. And that's what needs to be fixed. 

So if she decides 'in the moment' it isn't happening:
- If Alex is in bed (especially if he is naked - because that makes it easy for her) she claims he is hovering/pressuring her
- If he's downstairs she races for the bed, turns off the lights and goes to sleep ASAP.

-----------
These are the type of avoidance tactics that many LD folks engage in when they don't feel safe saying what's really on their mind. 

-----------
Just a point of contrast FWIW. A few days ago - M2 comes home and we do our normal - very long - happy hug. We eat dinner while talking and bantering. 

1. M2 asks (as is her norm) do you mind if I watch xyz? 

That means: Is it ok if I have time by myself watching tv in the kitchen? (She asks this despite my answer always being the same)

2. She doesn't come to bed until maybe half hour before sleep time.

3. She is at the far edge of the bed.

4. After I've made a couple random current event comments she looks at me and says: Is it ok if we have quiet time?

I just laugh and pantomime zippering my lips. She closes the night with: ILY and a soft kiss on the lips. 

Sooooo.........
That's about a 45 degree evening. That's what it is. That's what M2 wanted it to be that night. She absolutely wasn't angry with me. She wanted some space. She was delightful - in a very limited way. And that is perfectly fine. I KNOW M2 loves me. Know that some days she's IN LOVE with me and other days - she just LOVES me. It has always been this way. 

A couple extra data points:
- A couple times in the last week M2 has volunteered: I absolutely adore you (I just say: good, ditto)
- The last few times we've had sex have been 100% about me (I don't like that near as much as our mutual encounters - still - afterwards I always say, what I always say: thank you for loving me. And M2 responds in kind with: I luuuuuvvvvveeeee you)

So - what's the real point? 

If you believe you are lovable and loved. Than none of this is troublesome. If you aren't so sure, than this stuff gives you frostbite and most folks begin to seek warmth when that happens. 





QUOTE=ocotillo;11501242]That's pretty much what these type of threads are all about. 

I would agree with you that there is more to life than sex, but at the same time, it would be awfully cruel to deprive a person of an important human need and then condemn them when they become preoccupied with filling it.

Is that how we treat starving people? Do we spin their preoccupation with food as greed or some other failing?[/QUOTE]


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

marduk said:


> I know it's hard. Trust me, I know.





Anon1111 said:


> Stop trying to get IT.



I've walked through the desert (On bloody stumps....) and come out on the other side. My wife suffered a fairly rare condition at menopause where female sex drive goes through the roof. That's pretty much over now, but she has seen what it is like to be acutely HD herself and is thoroughly, thoroughly sorry.

My perspective on threads like this is simply what would and what would not have worked, back in the bad old days when she thought that sex was icing on the cake. 

And this is where I part company with Athol Kay and others. What would work with a young woman who is still doing fairly immature things like saying, "No" when she means, "Yes" and sh*t testing vs. what would work with a forty something law professor, for example are probably two very different things. What would work with someone with a latent or reactive desire vs. what what would work with someone with no desire are definitely different. 

I'd like to offer AlexM some helpful advice, just like you guys would, but sometimes it takes a life changing event for a truly LD person to ever, "Get it."


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

WorkingOnMe said:


> Alex, do you have any deal breakers at all? Or are you the suffer in silence type who is just going to take it forever? AA's post made me wonder, I mean, what if. What if you just take what she says at face value. She is asexual. Period. Ok, is that a deal breaker or not?


Alex - I want to make sure you do not miss this. Can you answer these? Because I think these answers tie very closely to your problems.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> I've walked through the desert (On bloody stumps....) and come out on the other side. My wife suffered a fairly rare condition at menopause where female sex drive goes through the roof. That's pretty much over now, but she has seen what it is like to be acutely HD herself and is thoroughly, thoroughly sorry.
> 
> My perspective on threads like this is simply what would and what would not have worked, back in the bad old days when she thought that sex was icing on the cake.
> 
> ...


Interesting perspective.

In a way, it must have been very hard when your wife finally "got it." I would imagine I would have some thoughts of, Oh, now that it's important to you, it's important.

I obviously have not had the experience you've had, but I am skeptical that there is much difference between the 40 something law professor and the younger woman when it comes to a lot of this stuff.

I think this is not about intellect or logic. I actually think that many so called LD women WISH they felt more toward their husbands. They just don't. And the reasons they don't I think are mostly the same reasons that young women don't find their counterparts attractive.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

ocotillo said:


> I've walked through the desert (On bloody stumps....) and come out on the other side. My wife suffered a fairly rare condition at menopause where female sex drive goes through the roof. That's pretty much over now, but she has seen what it is like to be acutely HD herself and is thoroughly, thoroughly sorry.
> 
> My perspective on threads like this is simply what would and what would not have worked, back in the bad old days when she thought that sex was icing on the cake.
> 
> ...


Here's the thing. The really really key thing. 

Some people will never like sex anywhere near as much as you do, or at all. 

Some people will never want to have sex much with you no matter what you do. 

The solution to thes situations is to improve yourself as much as possible, and then decide if it's important enough to you to leave. And if it is, and you've done your stuff, you leave. With a clear conscience and with your spouse clearly understanding why. 

See, it puts the shoe on the other foot. You're not the victim any more - and the LD one isn't in the position of power any more. You are squarely back in the driver's seat of your life. 

Sometimes you gotta break a thing to fix a thing, too. Sometimes you gotta get to this place to truly get your partner to look at doing their piece of the work - assuming what you want is reasonable. 

Or, sometimes, your partner will choose not to. 

Either way you win. That's the brilliance of improving yourself. No matter what happens you are better off.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Outcome independence is a fine thing, for those who can manage it without any negative emotions.

It seems like however outcome independence can come in a couple of different flavors. There's the outcome independence that comes secure in the knowledge that your spouse loves and desires you, or at least has the POTENTIAL to desire you. This is optimal.

Then there's the outcome independence where you finally are just done taking that sh!t and focus on yourself. It comes with that small dash of F U and the horse you rode in on.

Now what happens when outcome independence reignites attraction (as it supposedly does)? In scenario one, fireworks. In scenario two.....more resentment, more bitterness, further disconnect.

Not even sure what I'm getting at here, other than if you're going to start down the path of outcome independence and the "180" type behaviors, examine first if that means you're even capable of coming back from it.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

Anon1111 said:


> I am skeptical that there is much difference between the 40 something law professor and the younger woman when it comes to a lot of this stuff.


_Iuventus stultorum magister_  

I hope you can see the humor here.



marduk said:


> Here's the thing. The really really key thing....


I couldn't agree with you more.


----------



## vellocet (Oct 18, 2013)

jld said:


> If I felt my husband were begging, or whining, or blaming, or really anything other than completely _inspiring_ my response to him, I would just not feel attracted.
> 
> Empowerment, not victimhood, men.


I empowered myself in my marriage in response to constant rejections. There was no begging or whining. Just a husband trying to engage his wife, affectionately and sexually.

Rejected time and time again. So I basically learned to do without. I empowered myself by resolving not to lower myself to someone whose efforts were futile.

Is this still considered victimhood to you?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

marduk said:


> Here's the thing. The really really key thing.
> 
> Some people will never like sex anywhere near as much as you do, or at all.
> 
> ...


This is exactly my perspective.

It took me a few years to get out of the victim chair. I still want to sit down in it from time to time, but I fight that.

I'm now in the working on me phase and most days I feel better than I have in 5 yrs. I am still not getting any more sex, but I feel a lot better day to day.

So that to me is success regardless of what happens to my marriage.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

vellocet said:


> I empowered myself in my marriage in response to constant rejections. There was no begging or whining. Just a husband trying to engage his wife, affectionately and sexually.
> 
> Rejected time and time again. So I basically learned to do without. I empowered myself by resolving not to lower myself to someone whose efforts were futile.
> 
> Is this still considered victimhood to you?


So what's your plan next?

If it's sitting there being unhappy in your life, well, that's pretty much the definition of victim hood. 

If you "settled" and convinced yourself to live without sex, then that's up to you. Maybe you get so much out of marriage that you don't need sex to be happy. I can't imagine that, personally, but maybe it's the case. Then, maybe, you're not a victim. You've made what to you is a rational choice. 

If it were me in that situation, I'd be talking to my spouse about having another person provide what they're not willing to, but that's me.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

vellocet said:


> I empowered myself in my marriage in response to constant rejections. There was no begging or whining. Just a husband trying to engage his wife, affectionately and sexually.
> 
> Rejected time and time again. So I basically learned to do without. I empowered myself by resolving not to lower myself to someone whose efforts were futile.


That is exactly how I coped with it. I went back to school. I built a long series of custom AR style rifles. I got published. 

Sometimes I still feel bad about the years my wife and I wasted though.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

ocotillo said:


> That is exactly how I coped with it. I went back to school. I built a long series of custom AR style rifles. I got published.
> 
> Sometimes I still feel bad about the years my wife and I wasted though.


I did similar things in marriage 1. I mean I whined and moaned about it, but focused on my career, martial arts, etc. That was my solution. 

My wife's solution to not liking sex anymore was to start having sex with someone she wanted to have sex with without letting me know. 

My regret in that situation was not pulling the plug sooner, not fixing it, but maybe I'm just a cynical jerk.


----------



## vellocet (Oct 18, 2013)

marduk said:


> So what's your plan next?
> 
> If it's sitting there being unhappy in your life, well, that's pretty much the definition of victim hood.


She was a cheater. I divorced her. 

Will never enter into a committed relationship ever again. That's my plan.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

vellocet said:


> She was a cheater. I divorced her.
> 
> Will never enter into a committed relationship ever again. That's my plan.


If that's success for you, then you've succeed.

Does your plan make you happy? Fulfilled?


----------



## vellocet (Oct 18, 2013)

marduk said:


> If that's success for you, then you've succeed.


Success it is my man. Being single again is fun as hell. Nobody to answer to, not looking for a relationship, but if a woman happens to come my way, she knows up front I don't want a relationship. That way she isn't led on and she can decide if that's for her or not.


----------



## 4x4 (Apr 15, 2014)

marduk said:


> Here's the thing. The really really key thing.
> 
> Some people will never like sex anywhere near as much as you do, or at all.
> 
> ...


Pretty much what Marduk posted. I had to leave my wife for her to finally "get it". She's turned it around since then. I won't go back to anything close to a sexless marriage again.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> This is not simple psychology! Can you see how contradictory the advice is here? He should *not* listen to what she says, just do what he wants, take what he wants until she says no. But he *should* listen to what she wants, because him lying in bed is "unattractive", and waiting to have sex is "unattractive".


Again, I think the "short hand" version of standard "man up" advice might be getting in the way. 

It is not that she he should not listen to to what his wife says, and then do what he wants with no regards to her feelings. He should listen to his wife, and try to understand her. However, when it comes time for him to show her what he wants, he shouldn't approach it like this: "I'd like to have sex with my wife tonight. Let me think back to all the things she's said that she likes and doesn't like and try to use them to manipulate the situation so that she has no reason to say no."

Alex's constant mental gymnastics about how to seduce his wife on her terms are, IMO, a huge turn off to her. And they must be exhausting for him. 




always_alone said:


> What I was trying to do was drive home the point that someone who doesn't want to fool around in the shower or look at sex cards or is uncomfortable (rather than turned on) by someone who wants sex with her, she probably isn't going to be very receptive to someone telling her that they don't give a damn what she wants, they're going to have at it anyway. Even if it isn't actually a threat, it's likely to be viewed as one. Especially if there are CSA (or related) issues in the background.


I don't think anyone has suggested that Alex tell his wife he doesn't give a damn what she wants--but again, an unfortunate (but understandable) misinterpretation of the "man up" shorthand. Alex should give a damn about what his wife wants. But he should also assume that what he wants is important, too, and he should show her what he wants--not some version of what he thinks she wants. Because that's a loosing game--to "guess" or "assume" meaning. And its especially dangerous for someone like Alex, who has become so gun shy that he can't even make a move without first going though all the scenarios of what her reaction might be. 

Alex, you sound frustrated. But you also sound way to sure that you know how to manage seducing your wife. If she's got as many walls up as you claim, then why are you so sure you know what she wants/likes/prefers when it comes to how you initiate? Why do you assume that you shouldn't get in the shower if you want to get in the shower? Why should you assume that you can't wake her up for sex? Let her tell you no if she doesn't want to have sex. She obviously has responsive desire (I don't think she's asexual, as I've mentioned before). I think you give up too easily based on your assumptions about what she wants and doesn't want. 

But even if that is not the case, why are you putting your own desires last all the time and basing all your initiating decisions on ? Just to get laid? Well, its not working--and its leading you down the typical "Nice Guy" path which ends in detachment and resentment because you've been burying your own wants and desires as you try to guess what hers are so you can tailor the situation to avoid rejection. 




always_alone said:


> This is not simple psychology! Can you see how contradictory the advice is here? He should *not* listen to what she says, just do what he wants, take what he wants until she says no. But what he wants to do is lie in bed naked. But since this is "unattractive" he *should* listen to what she wants, lest he just be a giant turn off. So instead, he should pretend he wants to watch sports, or check the weather, or maybe repair the dishwasher so he can generate the illusion that he is the "leader" in the relationship.
> 
> Does this not seem a tad messed up?


Was Alex advised not to lay in bed naked, even though he wanted to? I thought that was a decision that he made, based on what he though his wife wanted him to do. _ That_ is what is messed up--that when he thinks about sex, it's all about how to weed out all the obstacles that might make her say no instead of making the focus of his initiating the message that he wants and desires her. He can't do this with confidence, so she doesn't feel wanted or desired, she just feels manipulated. 

Sex is now a huge elephant in the room for them because it's not about sex anymore. . . . its about the process by which sex is arrived at.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

GettingIt said:


> If she's got as many walls up as you claim, then why are you so sure you know what she wants/likes/prefers when it comes to how you initiate? .



The walls are not opaque for the most part. After a decade or two of marriage the walls are plexiglass transparent. 

The initiation routine is based on individual preferences, observation, habits, and the like. I don't think anyone is misreading those either. 

In a healthy marriage such walls are largely absent - in a not so healthy marriage the walls are simply conjured out of, or exist because of, convenience. The same for initiation rites. Hence no Jedi mind tricks needed.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

GettingIt,

FCS if this isn't just the most perfect description of this dynamic. 

Alex - struggles to grasp a simple theme. 

For Me/M2 it's mostly about her. We both prefer it that way. And I say that with total sincerity. 

Still - every once in a while I say: HEY! (in a sharp voice) 

That is shorthand for: Hey, I MATTER TOO....

M2 gets that. It's a simple message. 

She would never frame it this way out loud - but subconciously she totally gets it. 

In an 80/20 world - the giver (that would be me) is WAY less impacted by a relationship fracture - than the taker (M2). 






GettingIt said:


> Again, I think the "short hand" version of standard "man up" advice might be getting in the way.
> 
> It is not that she he should not listen to to what his wife says, and then do what he wants with no regards to her feelings. He should listen to his wife, and try to understand her. However, when it comes time for him to show her what he wants, he shouldn't approach it like this: "I'd like to have sex with my wife tonight. Let me think back to all the things she's said that she likes and doesn't like and try to use them to manipulate the situation so that she has no reason to say no."
> 
> ...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I would go further than Gettingit suggests.

Alex needs to practice listening to himself for a change.

I think this requires going cold turkey for a while on trying to figure his wife out.

I think it will be very hard for him to resist the urge to try to jump through hoops.

It is something he needs to develop. His desire to figure his wife out I think has caused him to lose his own signal.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Fozzy said:


> Outcome independence is a fine thing, for those who can manage it without any negative emotions.
> 
> It seems like however outcome independence can come in a couple of different flavors. There's the outcome independence that comes secure in the knowledge that your spouse loves and desires you, or at least has the POTENTIAL to desire you. This is optimal.
> 
> ...


I think by definition with outcome independence you can't really care whether you come back from your path.

You're just on your path one way or another. 

I would imagine if your wife ends up meeting you there, you could have some feelings of resentment, as in, it took all of this to get you to notice me.

At that point I could see saying, you know what, you're just not worth it. 

I think that's a much better position to be in than the alternative, however. Where her choice regarding you determines your worth.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

To simplify I guess...

take your standard harried wife. She's tired at the end of the day, the dishes still need to get done, the kids need to get their homework done, and she has an early start to the day tomorrow. 

The last thing she wants is to have sex with her husband tonight. 

So - everything being equal, if her husband tried to have sex with her after he took care of these things, she'd say yes, right?

Wrong. Because the whole logic chain was backwards in my marriage. It had little to do with the kitchen, or the kids, or the early start. How did I figure this out?

No sex on vacations, when none of these things were true, and no sex on days where I did EVERYTHING for her. 

What was actually happening was she didn't want to have sex with me. She may not have understood why - she just wasn't "in the mood."

So the dishes, and the kids, and the early start were all justifications why she didn't want to have sex with me. And if I fixed all those issues it would just frustrate her more, because I'd now expect sex, and she still wouldn't be turned on. 

What she couldn't tell me, or didn't consciously understand, was that it was structural stuff. I had a beer gut. I didn't pay attention to my appearance. I let a lot of stuff slide, not enough that I was a total slob, but in effect I was the male version of the nagging wife coming to bed in flannel pajamas with curlers in her hair and green stuff on her face. 

In other words, not sexy. 

Fixing that, initiating confidently, outcome independence, owning my stuff, and expecting the same of her...

You know, just like dating successfully. You present yourself well, have confidence, and go for it. 

I guess that wasn't that simple. 

But for me, it took a long time to fix the mindset and learn what to listen to and what not to.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Hold on... 

The best sex of my marriage was when we were so harried.... Try writing a dissertation while keeping two preschoolers busy so she could get her dissertation written... Talk about earning bonus points.... 

Late night romantic discussions about empirical probabilistic models, the benefits of Diaper Genie, and the like. Rarely a fight.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

I think many are missing an important point: Alex's wife is NOT your "standard" wife. Form what I remember she is a very private person, she doesn't talk about her feelings (how I can relate to that!), she behaves in an almost child-like way... I can see why Alex is finding it difficult. Because he is coming from a normal, healthy attitude, but he has to deal with something he doesn't really understand, because it's far far away from his reasoning and attitude. His approach to life. These are the situations when "standard" tactics just don't work. They will never work. These are the marriages where you have to adapt and take it as it is. There is no point in trying to change yourself or your wife. She doesn't get it. Or, if she does, it's not important to her. These are people who do stuff irrationally and possibly selfishly, because they only listen to themselves, everything rotates around them. They don't really understand the outside world, you or me. It's a futile battle.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

WorkingOnMe said:


> Alex, do you have any deal breakers at all? Or are you the suffer in silence type who is just going to take it forever? AA's post made me wonder, I mean, what if. What if you just take what she says at face value. She is asexual. Period. Ok, is that a deal breaker or not?





Tall Average Guy said:


> Alex - I want to make sure you do not miss this. Can you answer these? Because I think these answers tie very closely to your problems.


Well, I'm not suffering in silence. She hears it from me, we talk, I put my foot down. She knows I won't live like this, and yes, I've brought up the D word.

I do take what she says at face value. She says she's asexual (or at least identifies as such). The pieces do fit. I do NOT want to get into a discussion on that particular topic again, but I will say that she very much fits any description that I have read of a "grey asexual".

I am fine with this, it is not a deal breaker.

What IS a deal breaker (and I am quickly getting to the point of no return) is her inability/unwillingness to bring things back to where they were at for the first ~5 years of our 6 years together.

She is clearly capable of having that type of relationship with me.

If it is my fault in some way, then she needs to communicate this to me. I have invited her to do so, and in a welcoming manner.

The ball is in her court, and has been for quite some time. Whatever the issue is, she has the power to fix it, deal with it, work on it. With me or without me. Whether it's her, me, or us that is the problem, I've done, and am doing, my part, whereas she is going in circles.

If she doesn't trust me enough to talk to me, tell me what's really on her mind, then I don't know what to do about that. I've wracked my brain trying to figure out what, or even if, I've done something to lose her trust. Things were sailing on smoothly until mid 2013, including the sex. 

She was involved in our sex, happy to please and be pleased. Then she wasn't. Almost overnight. Noticeable difference. She just was no longer engaged in our sex. It wasn't "duty sex", but whatever passion she had seemed to be gone, and she was going through the motions.

The best way I can describe this was that prior to whatever it is that happened, she was very "into" our sex. To put not too fine a point on it, she screwed my brains out, I screwed her brains out. Very mutual, very reckless abandon type sex. She'd talk, she'd moan, she'd get loud, she'd go to town on me, and I her.

Then, as I said, seemingly overnight she was no longer as passionate or engaged. She still did the same things, but without the abandon and passion she had for the past ~5 years.

I noticed it almost immediately, but said nothing for about 2 months. Maybe she was going through a phase, or tired, or stressed or something. I didn't want to add any pressure.

So when we sat down and I brought this up to her, she initially denied any lack of passion, that she still did the same things in bed, etc etc etc. She was still into it, she said. But I knew better, there was no hiding it. She WAS still doing the same things, but it was obvious she was going through the motions. You can just tell.

Then a little while later came the asexual bomb. And a few months later, she tells me she HATES giving oral sex and always has. (that's a whole other thread...) Leaves me wondering what happened. 5 years of clearly wanting to rock my world (even it was for my sake alone) and 5 years of oral sex EVERY time we have sex, always as foreplay, sometimes to finish up. She's good at it, was passionate about doing it, swallows, and would sometimes hold me there to finish me, even if I wanted to finish another way.

I've asked her what happened. She doesn't know. I've wracked my brain trying to figure out if *I* did something, and can't recall anything. I've asked her if I did something, or there's something I can change, do differently, not do anymore, whatever. Nothing. She swears up and down it's her, not me.

So to sum up, I don't care if she's asexual or not. I would tend to agree with her self assessment, and she's adamant about it. Fine. Grey asexuals are capable, and often willing to have sex and do have orgasms. It's not a physical thing. It's 100% mental. Grey asexuals just do not -think- about sex, require it, desire it, need it. Fine with me. That didn't get in the way for the first 5 years. She was thinking about ME, obviously, and my needs were important to her, and therefore things happened, and she was passionate about it. Now, not so much.

THAT'S what the issue is. What happened? She can't/won't tell me. I have no idea. Together we can't seem to figure it out (provided she actually doesn't know).

This isn't a case of the first 6-12 months being awesome and passionate then the honeymoon phase ends and things even out. This was 5 years.

So, I'm at the point where I don't trust her in this regard. I can't imagine "nothing" happened and that she doesn't know. I have not AT ALL even hinted that I don't trust her about this. I have never said I think she's lying or hiding anything from me. I have only, imo, been welcoming and open with her about this. She should feel comfortable talking to me.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

4x4 said:


> Pretty much what Marduk posted. I had to leave my wife for her to finally "get it". She's turned it around since then. I won't go back to anything close to a sexless marriage again.


I AM getting closer and closer to this. I'll know the time is right when I know it. And I'm not making excuses to delay doing this. It'll happen when it happens.

And I'm very sad that it will likely get to that point, too.

The pride part of me says that if that's what it takes to get her to care, then is it really worth it in the first place? Maybe I'm old school that way, but love shouldn't have to be given under threat.

Which is likely why I'm not just up-and-leaving and trying to work on this. When I get to the point of leaving, I don't think I'd go back, even if she "changes her ways" or whatever. To require THAT to give a damn isn't appealing to me.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

GettingIt said:


> Again, I think the "short hand" version of standard "man up" advice might be getting in the way.
> 
> It is not that she he should not listen to to what his wife says, and then do what he wants with no regards to her feelings. He should listen to his wife, and try to understand her. However, when it comes time for him to show her what he wants, he shouldn't approach it like this: "I'd like to have sex with my wife tonight. Let me think back to all the things she's said that she likes and doesn't like and try to use them to manipulate the situation so that she has no reason to say no."
> 
> ...


You are absolutely correct about all of this.

However the issue is, and always has been, how did we get here?

I'm telling you, it wasn't like this for a good 5 years. Then it was.

As I said 2 posts ago, I don't know what happened, and if she does, she's not telling me. Which is how we're at this point right now. I tend to give her the benefit of the doubt when she says she doesn't know, either. But part of me doesn't believe that, fwiw.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Alex- I think you've got the right attitude in your last post here. You have a need. She isn't meeting it. That is the bottom line. It's not like she's physically incapable. It's a choice for her and she CHOOSES not to meet your need. 

I think you need to take a step back from her and just let this fact sit there between you for a while. It's a known issue at this point. The only question is what will you do about it?

Right now, my sense is she sees you climbing the wall and trying to pull her over to your side. 

What if you just let her sit on her side? Don't say anything, don't strategize, discuss, convince, etc. Just let her sit there and feel the weight of a detached, affectionless marriage.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Anon1111 said:


> Alex- I think you've got the right attitude in your last post here. You have a need. She isn't meeting it. That is the bottom line. It's not like she's physically incapable. It's a choice for her and she CHOOSES not to meet your need.
> 
> I think you need to take a step back from her and just let this fact sit there between you for a while. It's a known issue at this point. The only question is what will you do about it?
> 
> ...


This is pretty much what I've inadvertently done these last couple of days - and not on purpose. I'm not the passive aggressive type.

I can't say I've been cold to her, but I've also not been my usual self, and I think she's noticed. I don't think I actually kissed her yesterday, which is unheard of. And I didn't consciously do that.

And I haven't done this on purpose, I've just somewhat detached myself I guess. Save from coming on TAM and writing, I haven't really thought about things throughout the day, my mind is elsewhere.

The irony is, is that I'm probably treating our day-to-day life the same way she's treating our sex life. It's not that I'm NOT doing the things I usually do (ie. I'm not avoiding her, or sulking somewhere or being purposefully snippy), I'm just not putting an effort into it. And not on purpose. Reading your post is what actually made me realize this.

For example, she gets home from work an hour or two after I do. I usually make a point of giving her a kiss and/or hug and asking her how her day was. Look her in the eyes, show her I actually care how her day was. Yesterday, she came in the door and I kept doing whatever it was I was doing, and simply said "have a good day?" "yep" "good".

And that's kind of the irony. I'm still acknowledging her needs, as it were, just not with the passion or importance I usually have. Kind of like how she's approached sex the last year and a half.

And seriously, I didn't do this on purpose.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

I pretty much doubt she doesn't know what's going on... she's been honest with you to a certain extent, although rather naively...

She knows, but doesn't want to hurt your feeling further... or, it's not _that_ important to her... otherwise, she would act on it...

Or... she doesn't understand why you don't accept it, since you now know she's been "faking" it...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> Alex's constant mental gymnastics about how to seduce his wife on her terms are, IMO, a huge turn off to her. And they must be exhausting for him.


I agree that he is all over the map trying to please her, and for the sake of his own sanity needs to stop. And tbh, I agree that it would be off-putting to notice my SO playing all these different tricks on me to get me to put out. It would make me feel like a lab rat and reinforce my sense of being seen as a defective human that needs to be "fixed". 

I think a lot of the advice on this thread, in particular that to be true to himself, is very good advice indeed.

But the man up advice isn't realy about that, even in all its complex glory. It is, actually, the very opposite to what you have been advocating here about transparency. It is all about telling a man that he should not listen to what his wife says at all because she is just ****-testing him and incapable of rational thought and communication. She doesn't know what she wants and needs him to tell her. And he should never, ever let her see him be weak, vulnerable, in any circumstance less than total composure and charge because that will kill her sexual attraction forever.

The irony is that it basically says don't listen to what your wife says, listen to a bunch of half-baked theories and do what they say.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> What IS a deal breaker (and I am quickly getting to the point of no return) is her inability/unwillingness to bring things back to where they were at for the first ~5 years of our 6 years together.
> 
> She is clearly capable of having that type of relationship with me.
> 
> If it is my fault in some way, then she needs to communicate this to me. I have invited her to do so, and in a welcoming manner.


As for what happened: maybe she realized she no longer wants to live a lie, and wants to be known for her real self! maybe she's reflecting on her past and regretting that she did so much for others without expressing her real self, maybe she's afraid that she is becoming too close and too dependent on you, and is pulling back to protect herself.

So many possibilities, and really it's up to her to tell you.

I can't help but wonder though: when you talk to her about these things, have you asked her why she was so willing to please you even though she wasn't feeling it? I mean, I know you've asked what went wrong, what changed, what did I do, but have you talked about why she spent 5-6 years doing things she didn't like?

Does she *want* to go back to the way things were? Or does she want a new status quo?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Your staying in the marriage basically comes down to your being pleased with your sex life, Alex? That is pretty much the bottom line?


----------



## A_DelVeccio (Jan 13, 2015)

foolscotton3 said:


> You must have missed, "intimacy, transparency, and basic need to trust."
> 
> Why do I need to read the bible?
> As long as I am not worshiping Baal, I'm faithful to Christ.
> Or, are you suggesting faithfulness requires more?



My comment about reading the bible is just a starting point for you and your wife to read and understand how to treat one another. Yes, sex is part of a successful marriage however it goes deeper! The bible states husbands are supposed to love their wives as Christ loved the church. (Yes I know it states things a woman should do also) But God always starts with the husband.. the head. It may not change over night but its a great starting point! I also understand that a man's need for sex is different than a woman's need. But as a woman, with experience... if there is something else "off" or "broken" in the marriage. Maybe she is depressed, stressed, or you have marital issues outside of sex. It is definitely a contributing factor to her desire. Men don't seem to understand that sex to a woman can be fun but more so its a desire to feel loved and be close to her husband. If as you say "trust" is an issue that I can guarantee is a factor in this subject.

If trust has been broken between you and your wife, it takes a great deal of time to rebuild. You cannot rush your wife’s responses. Prayer and time may be your best friend here. And don’t do it alone! Have her join you!! Let the prayer be about your relationship as a whole. 
Showing that you value your wife as a whole person is the best way to become irresistible to her. That means wanting HER,respecting her, not just her body.
Learning your wife’s love needs may change things between you significantly. It’s worth your effort to do so... Have you taken that quiz?


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

always_alone said:


> But the man up advice isn't realy about that, even in all its complex glory. It is, actually, the very opposite to what you have been advocating here about transparency. It is all about telling a man that he should not listen to what his wife says at all because she is just ****-testing him and incapable of rational thought and communication. She doesn't know what she wants and needs him to tell her. And he should never, ever let her see him be weak, vulnerable, in any circumstance less than total composure and charge because that will kill her sexual attraction forever.
> 
> The irony is that it basically says don't listen to what your wife says, listen to a bunch of half-baked theories and do what they say.


Are you sure that is what it means to GI, though? 

I am a vegan and am very skeptical about low carb diets. I understand there are short term gains, but I am concerned about the long term risks. 

But some people find them a way to get off a very unhealthy pattern of eating junk food and drinking soda. They start eating vegetables every day for the first time. They adopt water as their primary beverage. They get off sugar and dairy and start feeling a lot less mucousy.

In other words, for some people it is a big improvement over what they had before. And if they encounter problems, they might be open to further changes. 

I don't use words like man up, and I don't recommend MMSLP. I recommend 7 Habits, and active listening. And I also focus on men, because I think men's influence over women is significant. When you get a man on a healthier path, his wife and children are almost guaranteed to benefit.

Remember that post Blonde made, about how Gottman found that while women almost universally are open to the influence of men, the opposite is not nearly as common? And he said it is one of the factors in success in marriage, iirc, that the man accept to be influenced by the woman.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Hold on...
> 
> The best sex of my marriage was when we were so harried.... Try writing a dissertation while keeping two preschoolers busy so she could get her dissertation written... Talk about earning bonus points....
> 
> Late night romantic discussions about empirical probabilistic models, the benefits of Diaper Genie, and the like. Rarely a fight.


That's my point John. 

If two people really want to screw each other's brains out, they will find ways and excuses to do that, instead of the opposite. 

Case in point. Young kids, wife is into me. On vacation. Sleeping in the same room... Somehow we manage to do it (quietly under the covers) even tho the kids are right there. 

Flash forward a couple years. On vacation. Kids asleep in next room with the door closed. I initiate. Wife says "no, we can't, the kids are in the next room and might hear". 

What's changed?

How much she wants to have sex with me. It's not about the kids.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

And it was just because you had gained weight, marduk?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

jld said:


> And it was just because you had gained weight, marduk?


Many things, but that was a part of it.

It's all interconnected. When we met I was slim 'n trim and muscular. It's part of what attracted her to me.

So if that goes down, she goes from (let's say) attracted to me 90% to attracted to me say 75%.

Then add in the fact that as you gain weight and lose muscle mass, your testosterone goes down. So I'm less confident, assertive, and more complacent with the same old kind of sex we always would have.

So, let's say, attraction now goes down to 60%.

Instead of saying to me "honey, can you lose the gut and do X and Y more" she says "honey, I know you want to do it tonight, but the dishes and the kids need doing..." because maybe she can't admit to herself or to me that she's not as attracted to me any more. And doing the dishes and helping with the kids just frustrate her more, because she's still not attracted to me and maybe doesn't understand why.

And I do less fun stuff just for me -- focused on work, focused on making the wife happy...

So we're now down to the crucial 50% attraction level, maybe. Where any little thing that goes wrong with her day or any little thing I do wrong means that sex is off the table, for, say a week.

And the cycle just keeps going.

So, for me, it started with fitness. Working out provided me structure, discipline, confidence in myself because I could reshape my body. Plus it made me eat better, upped my T, and cleared my head so I could focus.

Plus I was so horny all the time that I was like a doberman chewing through the drywall to be let out. So when we did have sex I was very, very into it.

For me, that's what changed the cycle. Other guys it may be different. 

I think there's wisdom tho, in changing your diet and exercise first. Number one, it's relatively easy. Everybody knows the right basic things to do. Number two, your brain exists in your body. All your thoughts and emotions live in a chemical soup that you give it. It can be a positive one, or not. And number three, it's structure and discipline. You can't change your partner, but you can change your body.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

jld said:


> Remember that post Blonde made, about how Gottman found that while women almost universally are open to the influence of men, the opposite is not nearly as common?


JLD,

I've got an observation and an honest question. 

Years ago, one of my children got mixed up with a high control group, (i..e A cult) and I ended up knowing way more about this subject than I ever wanted to.

Young women are more effective at proselytizing for these groups than are young men. If joining the group is a hurdle an "Unbelieving" man must get over to win her affection, common sense and caution are often tossed aside. Some of these groups even have colloquialisms for this phenomenon. 

Conversely, young men are more easily extricated from these groups under the influence of a female, "Unbeliever" and most of them preach regularly and often about how dangerous it is to date women on the outside.

So as an observation, I would say that a woman shouldn't underestimate her influence. It may be subtle, but it's powerful. 

As an honest question though; Maybe that's a problem in and of itself? In other words, if the prospect of sex makes a man too compliant and willing to stand on his head if that's what it takes, maybe he's shooting himself in the foot from the get go?


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

A_DelVeccio said:


> My comment about reading the bible is just a starting point for you and your wife to read and understand how to treat one another. Yes, sex is part of a successful marriage however it goes deeper! The bible states husbands are supposed to love their wives as Christ loved the church. (Yes I know it states things a woman should do also) But God always starts with the husband.. the head. It may not change over night but its a great starting point! I also understand that a man's need for sex is different than a woman's need. But as a woman, with experience... if there is something else "off" or "broken" in the marriage. Maybe she is depressed, stressed, or you have marital issues outside of sex. It is definitely a contributing factor to her desire. Men don't seem to understand that sex to a woman can be fun but more so its a desire to feel loved and be close to her husband. If as you say "trust" is an issue that I can guarantee is a factor in this subject.
> 
> If trust has been broken between you and your wife, it takes a great deal of time to rebuild. You cannot rush your wife’s responses. Prayer and time may be your best friend here. And don’t do it alone! Have her join you!! Let the prayer be about your relationship as a whole.
> Showing that you value your wife as a whole person is the best way to become irresistible to her. That means wanting HER,respecting her, not just her body.
> Learning your wife’s love needs may change things between you significantly. It’s worth your effort to do so... Have you taken that quiz?


Perhaps I'm not understanding your point of view correctly, but it seems you are coming from the mindset that men typically are only interested in getting their rocks off and are completely separated from the emotional content of a sexual relationship?

Do you believe that it's solely a man's responsibility to set the right conditions for a sexual relationship (i.e. meeting the conditions of respecting her mind, not just her body, etc) or does a woman have any responsibility to meet some conditions as well, like clear and honest communication for example?

Does a woman in a similar situation where her husband will not meet HER sexual needs (and there are lots of them) bear the sole responsibility? Or is it a matter of her husband just needs to put out because she's already doing XYZ for the relationship?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I think a lot of the advice on this thread, in particular that to be true to himself, is very good advice indeed.
> 
> But the man up advice isn't realy about that, even in all its complex glory. It is, actually, the very opposite to what you have been advocating here about transparency. It is all about telling a man that he should not listen to what his wife says at all because she is just ****-testing him and incapable of rational thought and communication. She doesn't know what she wants and needs him to tell her. And he should never, ever let her see him be weak, vulnerable, in any circumstance less than total composure and charge because that will kill her sexual attraction forever.
> 
> The irony is that it basically says don't listen to what your wife says, listen to a bunch of half-baked theories and do what they say.


I think you misunderstand.

The man up advice is really just as simple as actions speak louder than words.

By striving to be your best self, you send a strong message with your actions about the value you bring to the relationship.

By focusing on your wife's actions, rather than her words, you can more clearly evaluate what she brings to the relationship.

Actions, not words.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> As an honest question though; Maybe that's a problem in and of itself? In other words, if the prospect of sex makes a man too compliant and willing to stand on his head if that's what it takes, maybe he's shooting himself in the foot from the get go?


Sounds true. If you just have one true bottom line, then I guess you're held hostage to whatever's going to deliver that bottom line.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

jld said:


> Sounds true. If you just have one true bottom line, then I guess you're held hostage to whatever's going to deliver that bottom line.


"He who can destroy a thing, controls that thing."
- Paul Atriedes, _Dune_

Or,

"Poor is a man who's pleasures depend on the permission of another."
- Lenny Kravitz (sung by Madonna)


----------



## 4x4 (Apr 15, 2014)

alexm said:


> I AM getting closer and closer to this. I'll know the time is right when I know it. And I'm not making excuses to delay doing this. It'll happen when it happens.
> 
> And I'm very sad that it will likely get to that point, too.
> 
> ...


Part of the Talk and later discussions was that I wasn't interested in her upping frequency just for me. It needed to be a mutual experience. Sure, on any given encounter one or the other may be more or less in the mood than the other but I'm speaking on the whole. 

I just put it on the table that desire/sex are an important part of marriage to me and why, that I have a high drive and what I considered my needs to be, and that I was only interested in an equally enthusiastic partner. I wasn't interested in a wife that would have sex with me, only a wife that wanted to have sex with me. We also talked a lot about what the lack of desire and sex does to the marriage and to ourselves.

Now our situations are vastly different in that my wife never really had a HD period in the relationship nor had she ever faked or otherwise showed a whole lot of interest in sex, quite the contrary. I think we are the same in that eventually have to put your needs/wants/desires on the table and let your partner know when you are reaching your deal breakers in the marriage. I hope you can get there without resorting to separation or worse. It's not a fun ride.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> By striving to be your best self, you send a strong message with your actions about the value you bring to the relationship.
> 
> 
> 
> Actions, not words.



Subject to your value system being aligned with hers. 

Today I had a glimpse of exactly how fvcked up my wife's value system is. Two weeks ago she sprained her lower back and has been moaning on occasion (not from that ). She refuses to use analgesic creams (they will mess up the bed sheets) or massage )). She called the doc and he wisely said to wait it out for a few weeks.

So today she wakes up, not much food in her, have to keep our size 6 / 4, takes a shower and on the way down blacks out from low blood sugar and bumps her knee falling on the stairs. A couple steps only ;(

An hour later she's on her conference call and after some real food drove to work. She liked all dead before I told her not to go to work but revitalized herself in time.

When you have a value system that values work more than your own safety then you could be GQ material and she ain't snapping out of her fog.

Substitute work for kids, exercise, TV, food, etc and you can see where this is going. Jedi mind tricks of the "fix thyself" variety work to the point that she cares for said Jedi mind tricks. Otherwise...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

john117 said:


> Subject to your value system being aligned with hers.
> 
> Today I had a glimpse of exactly how fvcked up my wife's value system is. Two weeks ago she sprained her lower back and has been moaning on occasion (not from that ). She refuses to use analgesic creams (they will mess up the bed sheets) or massage )). She called the doc and he wisely said to wait it out for a few weeks.
> 
> ...


OK, but as has been mentioned many times, the improvement benefits you most of all.

Maybe she doesn't care that you are awesome.

But if you know by any objective standard that you are, then it's her problem.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Substitute work for kids, exercise, TV, food, etc and you can see where this is going. Jedi mind tricks of the "fix thyself" variety work to the point that she cares for said Jedi mind tricks. Otherwise...


John,
You're planning on leaving her, so bettering yourself isn't just a good idea, it's a _great_ idea.

Because you are, perhaps, about to re-enter the sexual marketplace and need a good bargaining position, there.

And even if you aren't, you'll need strength for the days ahead.

And... her ignoring you is a good thing. You're in stealth mode right now. This allows you to get your ducks in a row without interference.

So, it's kind of the situation you want to be in right now, no?


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

jld said:


> Sounds true. If you just have one true bottom line, then I guess you're held hostage to whatever's going to deliver that bottom line.


Thank you. I think a lot of men would probably object at least mildly to the term, "..one true bottom line" but the fact that it is so often perceived that way cannot be ignored either.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Of course it's her problem. All I am saying is that the model of improving oneself to influence someone else does not work as well as people may want to believe....

Improving yourself in meaningful - for her - ways is what it's all about, assuming there's an intersection of values. If not...


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

alexm said:


> I've asked her what happened. She doesn't know. I've wracked my brain trying to figure out if *I* did something, and can't recall anything. I've asked her if I did something, or there's something I can change, do differently, not do anymore, whatever. Nothing. She swears up and down it's her, not me.


Look into what happened in your life for the year leading up to this change. You and your wife are not static. What worked for her (or what she could give) changes with time, whether due to age, illness, change in circumstances, loved one, whatever. Think whether there are events that could have changed her outlook.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

alexm said:


> This is pretty much what I've inadvertently done these last couple of days - and not on purpose. I'm not the passive aggressive type.
> 
> I can't say I've been cold to her, but I've also not been my usual self, and I think she's noticed. I don't think I actually kissed her yesterday, which is unheard of. And I didn't consciously do that.
> 
> ...


A critical component of turning down the thermostat is kind honesty in what you are doing. When she asks, be gentle but clear that since she is not willing to work to meet your needs, you need to focus more of you and that means less time for her. Do the stuff that needs to be done to keep the household functioning, but pull back in what you do for her. Then start working on yourself.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> Of course it's her problem. All I am saying is that the model of improving oneself to influence someone else does not work as well as people may want to believe....
> 
> Improving yourself in meaningful - for her - ways is what it's all about, assuming there's an intersection of values. If not...


Improve yourself for you.

If she notices, great.

If she doesn't, great. Someone else will, and so will you.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> Thank you. I think a lot of men would probably object at least mildly to the term, "..one true bottom line" but the fact that it is so often perceived that way cannot be ignored either.


Why would they object?


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

jld said:


> Why would they object?


Because they're being portrayed in a simplistic black and white way that fails to really explain what's happening.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

WorkingOnMe said:


> Because they're being portrayed in a simplistic black and white way that fails to really explain what's happening.


Okay, what is really happening then?


----------



## A_DelVeccio (Jan 13, 2015)

Fozzy said:


> Perhaps I'm not understanding your point of view correctly, but it seems you are coming from the mindset that men typically are only interested in getting their rocks off and are completely separated from the emotional content of a sexual relationship?
> 
> Do you believe that it's solely a man's responsibility to set the right conditions for a sexual relationship (i.e. meeting the conditions of respecting her mind, not just her body, etc) or does a woman have any responsibility to meet some conditions as well, like clear and honest communication for example?
> 
> Does a woman in a similar situation where her husband will not meet HER sexual needs (and there are lots of them) bear the sole responsibility? Or is it a matter of her husband just needs to put out because she's already doing XYZ for the relationship?



My comment was made for the gentleman that was complaining about his wife saying he wants sex all the time, but she may not feel good and he gets mad. He then said she didn't trust him, etc... Then another said he wants sex every day and if she doesn't give it to him he gets mad and when they finally do have sex he doesn't enjoy it. So my comment is towards those two.

But couples have a responsibility to each other. Since there are usually deeper issues than just denying sex. My suggestion was merely to approach life/marriage at a higher level.. a deeper level to gain connections, trust, and open communication.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

WorkingOnMe said:


> Because they're being portrayed in a simplistic black and white way that fails to really explain what's happening.


Not a judgement call on other men, but I found the simpler I thought about things, the easier it was to understand.

And the more I acknowledged that I am driven by my maleness and sexuality, the more I understood it, and both the troubles and the goodness that it drove me to.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

jld said:


> Your staying in the marriage basically comes down to your being pleased with your sex life, Alex? That is pretty much the bottom line?


Good lord, no. There are SO many other things to marriage, and THIS marriage.

This isn't about sex. It's just being manifested THROUGH sex. I see that now, and have for some time.

This isn't my first marriage. My ex wife and I did have about 6 or 7 GREAT years together, and the sex was okay, at best. Just an incompatibility there that we never really figured a way around, nor did either of us particularly care to. More a physical one than anything. Enough said. But everything else was, seriously, fantastic.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> ...but have you talked about why she spent 5-6 years doing things she didn't like?
> 
> *Of course. The answer is generally vague, but along the lines of "that's what you do in a relationship." "Well why did it stop?" "I don't know"*
> 
> ...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

alexm said:


> ...but have you talked about why she spent 5-6 years doing things she didn't like?
> 
> Of course. The answer is generally vague, but along the lines of "that's what you do in a relationship." "Well why did it stop?" "I don't know"
> 
> ...


To paraphrase Spock from The Wrath of Khan:
There are two possabilities: she is unable to respond, or she is unwilling to respond.

Your strategy is kinda the same, either way, I think... and would be served well by not giving too much credence and thought to non-answers.

Sometimes, you're never gonna get the answer.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

marduk said:


> Case in point. Young kids, wife is into me. On vacation. Sleeping in the same room... Somehow we manage to do it (quietly under the covers) even tho the kids are right there.
> 
> Flash forward a couple years. On vacation. Kids asleep in next room with the door closed. I initiate. Wife says "no, we can't, the kids are in the next room and might hear".


I laughed at this, because this EXACT thing has happened to me. I'm sure we're not alone...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

alexm said:


> I laughed at this, because this EXACT thing has happened to me. I'm sure we're not alone...


Then I suspect it may have to do with similar issues that we had...


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

jld said:


> Why would they object?


Because few people are truly that shallow. If sex were the one true bottom line, then people would not put up with sexless marriages at all. They wouldn't remain faithful to a spouse who, for whatever reason, withholds for months or years at a time. The wouldn't lay awake at night puzzling over what is wrong. They wouldn't read books on the subject; get counseling or come to forums like this.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

4x4 said:


> *I wasn't interested in a wife that would have sex with me, only a wife that wanted to have sex with me.* We also talked a lot about what the lack of desire and sex does to the marriage and to ourselves.


This this this.

She knows this. She knows this isn't about frequency, or hell, even quality. It's about my desire, ANYBODY'S desire, to feel important, wanted, etc.

The being desired part is a non-issue for me. She says she's asexual. Okay. I accept that. This means she has no DESIRE for me, or anybody else. Okay. I accept that. It is what it is.

What I do NOT accept is a partner who has no interest or desire to meet my needs, ESPECIALLY when she was clearly, clearly able to do so before.

As I said above, my ex wife and I had a mediocre (at best) sex life. We just didn't "fit", so to speak. Yet she, and I, still wanted it, needed it, and yes, desired it. Throughout our good period, I couldn't have cared less about the frequency (within reason) or the quality of our sex. The sheer fact that SHE came to ME just as often as I came to her was enough. It was the emotional aspect of it that satisfied us both. Knowing that we each desired each other in that way was enough.

We worked around our physical incompatibilities and limitations and still managed to please each other, or ourselves the vast majority of the time. Did we screw each other's brains out and go all porn star on each other? No. Simply wasn't possible. But we did our absolute best to pleasure each other in other ways and ensure that each of our needs were being met.

My wife knows this. She knows this isn't a frequency discussion, or even a quality discussion. This is entirely centered around the sudden lack of regard in meeting this need. 

Theoretically, this could be anything, it just happens to be sex. Which is rather unfortunate, because it's not simple to work around or fix.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

So the main thing is to get her desiring you again? Even if for some reason you could not have sex again, just knowing that she desired to have it with you would be satisfying?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> I think you misunderstand.
> 
> The man up advice is really just as simple as actions speak louder than words.
> 
> ...


I think I understand pretty well actually. All of the man-up advice is consistent in content, tone, and reinforcement of specific gender stereotypes.

If it was just as simple as "actions not words", it wouldn't take 50+ pages to point out that not all women (or men, for that matter) are the same, and so the same advice won't wash for all.

If the advice is just be the best person you can be, and either your partner will dig it or they won't, then I'd say it probably applies across the board, to both women and men. But it's not exactly earth-shattering.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

alexm said:


> This this this.
> 
> She knows this. She knows this isn't about frequency, or hell, even quality. It's about my desire, ANYBODY'S desire, to feel important, wanted, etc.
> 
> ...


How often do other women flirt with you or turn their heads when you walk in the room?

Not trying to be shallow. Trying to baseline.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I think I understand pretty well actually. All of the man-up advice is consistent in content, tone, and reinforcement of specific gender stereotypes.
> 
> If it was just as simple as "actions not words", it wouldn't take 50+ pages to point out that not all women (or men, for that matter) are the same, and so the same advice won't wash for all.
> 
> If the advice is just be the best person you can be, and either your partner will dig it or they won't, then I'd say it probably applies across the board, to both women and men. But it's not exactly earth-shattering.


I think it takes a lot of discussion/thought for it to sink in because it is hard to reconcile on an intellectual level that people will consistently say things that do not reflect their true desires (whether conscious or unconscious). 

When the standard relationship advice for men is you should "listen more" and "be better communicators", it is hard to accept that there is a different approach that may be better. 

I do think the advice should ideally apply across the board. Relationships would be great if everyone gave their best selves and had clear boundaries.

I can imagine a philosophy that women could adopt that could be roughly the same, play to male stereotypes and be wildly successful.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> Of course. The answer is generally vague, but along the lines of "that's what you do in a relationship." "Well why did it stop?" "I don't know"


Okay, but you are going straight to "why did it stop", "why did it change?"

I'm wondering if focusing on how it felt to just do "what people do" for the past 6 years (and probably her whole life before) might yield some insight. Never mind why it stopped (for now), why did she do this in the first place, and how did it make her feel?

She might want some opportunity to really be herself, and to be accepted as that. In which case "going back to the way you were" is just you being happy with her.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

ocotillo said:


> Because few people are truly that shallow. If sex were the one true bottom line, then people would not put up with sexless marriages at all. They wouldn't remain faithful to a spouse who, for whatever reason, withholds for months or years at a time. The wouldn't lay awake at night puzzling over what is wrong. They wouldn't read books on the subject; get counseling or come to forums like this.


There's a difference between being a bottom line thing, and the bottom line thing.

For me, it's sex + love + respect = happy marduk (for the most part).

When one goes below a given threshold, I'm not happy. The more it goes down, the more unhappy I am, and the more it's "the" issue. And the less likely I am to reciprocate those things back to my wife, of course, but that's me.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> I can imagine a philosophy that women could adopt that could be roughly the same, play to male stereotypes and be wildly successful.


Yes, sure, a few may be wildly successful. Very many would not be.

But the point remains that gender stereotypes are of limited value. Believe it or not, not all men respond to the same hints in the same way either.

Indeed there is more variation within genders than there are between them. So some women could treat their men in exactly the same way that Alex is being told to treat his wife -- and be wildly successful. Or just as unsuccessful as he was when he tried those things.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Oco,
That is the universal common denominator here. 

You can only be long term sex starved if you allow it. 

There's a continuum of responses as they relate to your partner:
1. Divorce
2. Insisting on an open marriage
3. Cheating (I didn't say they were all ethical choices)
4. Accepting it - and rebalancing the marriage - while remaining monogamous/semi-celibate
5. Engaging in a soul destroying scavenger hunt where the rules are ever changing

Each person has to live with their choice. 




ocotillo said:


> Thank you. I think a lot of men would probably object at least mildly to the term, "..one true bottom line" but the fact that it is so often perceived that way cannot be ignored either.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

MEM, do you think this thread, and most similar ones on TAM, are in the #5 category?


----------



## vellocet (Oct 18, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I think I understand pretty well actually. All of the man-up advice is consistent in content, tone, and reinforcement of specific gender stereotypes.


AA.....man up.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Indeed there is more variation within genders than there are between them.


Depends on what you are talking about. 

There are some very consistent things that men share the world over and throughout history. Same with women.

So women like broad shouldered men. Women like men with high status and wealth.

Men like women with obvious signs of fertility. 

Are there outliers out there? Of course. 

But this idea that gender is not a meaningful designation and is just some artificial social construct is false.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

jld said:


> if for some reason you could not have sex again, just knowing that she desired to have it with you would be satisfying?


Aren't the two mutually exclusive? 

If you mean specifically something physical (god forbid) that prevented us from ever having sex again, then I would accept that. Knowing she wants to, for ANY reason, I'd be a pig in... poop.

This is how it used to be. I knew she had a lack of true physical desire long before. (as in, sex isn't necessary, for her, physically speaking). But it was necessary for us. Not me, US. Thus, she had the desire to do it.

Whether you choose to believe what I say or not, here goes: sex, to me, is pointless without two people involved. It is mutual, it is give and take. It is not, nor ever has been, for me simply "getting off". I have tried that before, it does nothing for me. While all my friends were out getting laid, I had no desire to. I was happy on my own, or in a relationship. If I had a physical urge, I took care of it.

I have had sex for the sake of having sex and I genuinely got nothing out of it, positive or negative. Other than a fleeting desire for me, I suppose.

I just don't have the need for that, sex for sex's sake. Meanwhile, I completely understand that people do, and why.

Therefore, it's extraordinarily difficult for me to wrap my brain around having sex with my wife for the sake of having sex. I have no desire to use her like that, even if (and when) she's the one offering.

Prior to this all happening, she was involved and it was important to her, not just to me or us. While she didn't have the physical urge to have sex with me, she saw the great benefit of it for US, and she reaped the benefits of this, as well. Not just "keeping me happy" as it were. It made HER happy too.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

marduk said:


> How often do other women flirt with you or turn their heads when you walk in the room?
> 
> Not trying to be shallow. Trying to baseline.


I see where you're going with this 

When I did the 9-5 thing, fairly often. Wedding ring or no. I'm not some super-stud, I promise you, but I'm a decent looking guy, carry myself well, height weight proportionate, and am confident. I wouldn't say I've ever turned heads. I'm more an average Joe, who once you get to know is attractive, if that makes sense. I'm good with women and always have been. They just have to know me first. I'm one of THOSE guys.

The last 7 or 8 years I've been self-employed. My interactions with people are much more limited than they've ever been, so while I do have human contact, it's not consistent to where somebody can get to know me. I do get the occasional flirty behavior thrown my way, but likely no more than anybody else.

Yes, I realize that this subconsciously makes my wife feel safe and she doesn't have to mate guard me. But this is my reality, and I'm not about to switch careers to specifically make my wife jealous


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,

It's way more about connecting than cumming

Same here

M2 wants to connect because I enable her to disconnect whenever she likes. 






alexm said:


> Aren't the two mutually exclusive?
> 
> If you mean specifically something physical (god forbid) that prevented us from ever having sex again, then I would accept that. Knowing she wants to, for ANY reason, I'd be a pig in... poop.
> 
> ...


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Wow Alex, getting caught up since your post about pulling out the sex cards. After reading that post, and reading Farside's response, I just wanted to add Ditto to Farside's response. At that moment in time the stars aligned and she wanted sex but you made her think, and thinking, at that moment in time, was counterproductive to actually having sex. I'll get more into this in a moment.

Then I read what Octillo posted, a wise intelligent man who always posts well reasoned responses and found myself absolutely agreeing with him about what a woman in her mid to late 40's might respond to compared to a younger woman in her early to mid 30's. So ditto on that one too.

Then TAG posted, (where have you been dude?) and his point about where your boundaries lay is also a ditto for me.

GettingIt, as always, nails it for me so her posts are always a ditto for me. MEM as well.

What I wanted to add, and I hate to complicate this further, is that you can't force emotional honesty from your wife and until she can give you that emotional honesty your marriage won't go anywhere. For whatever reason, she is hiding. She isn't being honest with you and probably not even with herself.

You made her think. You ask her to think. She doesn't like that at all.

I thought back to our sexless days during the early years of me figuring out my sexuality and healing and learning ...there were many times I turned away from sex or found a way to sabotage it. Sometimes I blamed him, sometimes I had some ailment, sometimes I blamed the kids...all to get out of having sex. I don't have huge insight because it was a long time ago and I didn't spend time, at the time, trying to understand why or what I was doing. I just know that the very expectation of sex; the "this is it its time right now" would send me off into anger/anxiety and I HAD to get out of it. I recognize a little of what your wife is doing in terms of her hot/cold.

What works for me now might not have worked then, as Octillo points out.

Do not accept the constant change in her mood regarding sex as something you've done or failed to do, though being open about it as a possibility is good. Looking back, if my husband had called me out on my hot/cold I don't think I could have given him an answer and would have no doubt invented something he did. For that reason, I don't think you should ask for or even expect an answer from her. Whatever it is that's going on, you've ably demonstrated your concern, care and interest. Stop beating this horse. 

But pointing out when it happens is something that *might* in time prompt her to look for some honest insight.

"You led me to believe you were interested in sex, now signs point to a big no. Okay then."

No pouting, no anger don't look for ask for or wait for any explanation at all. In fact, if you can make yourself busy doing anything else do it. Just make a verbal note of the change each and every time it happens. My hope, guess, is that she will begin to silently examine her own behavior. It may get worse as she tests her theories and your boundaries.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Oco,
> 
> There's a continuum of responses as they relate to your partner:
> 1. Divorce
> ...


You forgot one: 

6. Coming to a mutually acceptable compromise.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> Depends on what you are talking about.
> 
> There are some very consistent things that men share the world over and throughout history. Same with women.
> 
> ...



Oy vey, just shoot me now. 

Somehow I just knew you were going to come back at me with the word "outliers". I almost added a plea not to in my last post.

We're not at all talking about outliers when we talk about variation. We're talking about all of us.

Gender stereotypes are shorthand, but provide very little insight.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

always_alone said:


> You forgot one:
> 
> 
> 
> 6. Coming to a mutually acceptable compromise.



Aka both unhappy.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> How often do other women flirt with you or turn their heads when you walk in the room?
> 
> 
> 
> Not trying to be shallow. Trying to baseline.



Again... This is dependent on social and work circles. If 99% of my life is work on a 95% male engineer office and living in a conservative community with lots of good looking ladies by necessity, the question is irrelevant. If I'm in a university teaching, likewise. If I'm a student, different story.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

I was very blunt with M2 on this topic. 

I very much dislike this 'last minute' not in the mood events. 

If we make plans: a date, meeting friends for dinner, etc. There is no way I would casually bail out last minute. 

I don't accept the notion that sex is exempt from the same sense of fair play and consideration that govern our other behavior. 









Anon Pink said:


> Wow Alex, getting caught up since your post about pulling out the sex cards. After reading that post, and reading Farside's response, I just wanted to add Ditto to Farside's response. At that moment in time the stars aligned and she wanted sex but you made her think, and thinking, at that moment in time, was counterproductive to actually having sex. I'll get more into this in a moment.
> 
> Then I read what Octillo posted, a wise intelligent man who always posts well reasoned responses and found myself absolutely agreeing with him about what a woman in her mid to late 40's might respond to compared to a younger woman in her early to mid 30's. So ditto on that one too.
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Yes - they are category 5 threads. 

The difference between love and need is subtle, but profound.


[/B]


jld said:


> MEM, do you think this thread, and most similar ones on TAM, are in the #5 category?


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Oy vey, just shoot me now.
> 
> Somehow I just knew you were going to come back at me with the word "outliers". I almost added a plea not to in my last post.
> 
> ...


How many people are really outliers is the point.

Not many.

Maybe you are one of them.

I bet you way more people think they are outliers than there are actual outliers though.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> How many people are really outliers is the point.
> 
> Not many.


You really can't see any difference between women?

It isn't just cup size and hair color, you know. Some of the differences are really quite profound.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> I was very blunt with M2 on this topic.
> 
> I very much dislike this 'last minute' not in the mood events.
> 
> ...


I hope you understand that while I agree with you, at the time and in the moment I had no insight and only knew I had to NOT have sex. Intentions be damned, the anxiety hit and I had to put the brakes on. Not suggesting anyone be "okay" with this.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

I didn't forget. My post was targeted at those folks who are here because they've chosen a path that allows their partner total control over an important part of their life.


QUOTE=always_alone;11513954]You forgot one: 

6. Coming to a mutually acceptable compromise.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Yeah. THOSE people.


Hmmph.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

AP,
That's different. So in that type situation - the husband who is paying attention realizes there's something going wrong. Ideally he helps you with it. 





Anon Pink said:


> I hope you understand that while I agree with you, at the time and in the moment I had no insight and only knew I had to NOT have sex. Intentions be damned, the anxiety hit and I had to put the brakes on. Not suggesting anyone be "okay" with this.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

always_alone said:


> You really can't see any difference between women?
> 
> It isn't just cup size and hair color, you know. Some of the differences are really quite profound.


Sure, I see lots of differences between women. I also see lots of similarities.

Cup size is a profound issue for me, personally.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Anon1111 said:


> How many people are really outliers is the point.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The other way around I think.. Most outliers think they're not. Witness the TAM sexless threads. Few think something profound is happening...


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I agree that he is all over the map trying to please her, and for the sake of his own sanity needs to stop. And tbh, I agree that it would be off-putting to notice my SO playing all these different tricks on me to get me to put out. It would make me feel like a lab rat and reinforce my sense of being seen as a defective human that needs to be "fixed".
> 
> I think a lot of the advice on this thread, in particular that to be true to himself, is very good advice indeed.
> 
> ...


I see the "man up" advice very different than you do. I do see how that the way men talk about it, particularly among themselves, could lead you and others to see it the way you describe it here. 

I see the "man up" advice being more about finding a path to personal happiness and fulfillment that isn't so reliant on the approval of a wife. (This "man up" advice, incidentally, can work in dynamics in which the woman is over reliant on the approval of her man for happiness, although this configuration seems to show up a lot less on the forums.) 

The "man up" advice is often given to correct a dynamic in which the husband is jumping through hoops of his own making trying to make his wife happy so that she gives him more sex, or sex that lives up to some standard that he has set as necessary for him to feel fulfilled. 

The basic advice is to stop jumping through the hoops and just be honest in your words and in your actions. Many men are so far gone down the "Nice Guy" route that they are left not even knowing where to start. Fine, so they are to get in shape, focus on their interests, weed out bad habits, get out with friends, etc. Easy enough. But then the "Nice Guy" wants to more coaching. He wants to get back to not being so affected by his wife's demeanor, but the bad dynamic has been going for years, it's complex, it's not so easy to change. So in comes the more detailed instructions on how to detach, on how not to allow the wife's emotions to become his own, on how to stay focused on the path of self improvement. And this advice includes things like learning to recognize "sh!t tests"--a handy term for emotional behavior from a spouse that we don't understand and are prone to react badly to. But learning how to handle a "**** test" is not about teaching your spouse a lesson for exhibiting that sort of behavior--it's about learning the skill of staying balanced and true to your own emotions while your spouse works through emotions of their own. _And its about eventually learning to support that spouse while they work through those emotions._ Yeah, those emotions might be ABOUT you, but so what? You don't have to feel them too, and you don't have to fix them.  You have to learn that part first . . . before you can move on to learning how to support a spouse who is exhibiting emotions that trigger you to get angry, or withdraw, or start jumping through hoops.

I don't think you're wrong for seeing the "man up" advice the way you do, Always Alone. But I don't think it's being given to Alex in this thread in that spirit at all. No one wants him to punish his wife, or to make assumptions about her, or to disregard what she says. However even you have noted that perhaps she really doesn't know what the problems is. And that is perfectly fine--sometimes we don't understand our own inclinations (AnonPink points this out really well in her post). 

But Alex's wife's change in behavior has affected Alex, so it is reasonable for him to examine the situation to try and understand it, and think of things that he can do to be happier. The happier he can keep himself, the longer he'll be able to ward off resentment--and the more time he can buy without resentment, the better change the marriage will have. It would be best if they could figure this out together, but if she's just shrugging her shoulders and not coming up with any ideas, then Alex shouldn't just sit around becoming more and more unhappy. Trying the "man up" advice (as laid out by my more benign understanding of it) can't hurt.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

alexm said:


> I see where you're going with this
> 
> When I did the 9-5 thing, fairly often. Wedding ring or no. I'm not some super-stud, I promise you, but I'm a decent looking guy, carry myself well, height weight proportionate, and am confident. I wouldn't say I've ever turned heads. I'm more an average Joe, who once you get to know is attractive, if that makes sense. I'm good with women and always have been. They just have to know me first. I'm one of THOSE guys.
> 
> ...


OK you've just calibrated your baseline. You're a little bit invisible, sexually, is the sense I'm getting?

What I can't do is help you with the emotional connection. I haven't figured out those fixes, myself.

But what I can do is help with attraction issues, even for no other reason than to discount them. If you want.

And, exactly to the point GI. I'm not advocating "manning up" in any d-bag PUA sense. I'm advocating steps in a journey that I took, that solved my particular issues with attraction, and how I then related it back to how I have dealt with women in my life in general, and my wife in specific.

And, at the end of the day, if he's the exact same dude, but healthier and more self-confident, that is success in and of itself.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

alexm said:


> Of course. The answer is generally vague, but along the lines of "that's what you do in a relationship." "Well why did it stop?" "I don't know"


If your wife said, no holds barred:

"Because I'm tired of faking 'it,;'" it being a wildly passionate crazy abandoned woman...

what would that mean to you?


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

GI,

YES^3

I hereby dub you: GetsIt!!!

Because you DO get it. 







GettingIt said:


> I see the "man up" advice very different than you do. I do see how that the way men talk about it, particularly among themselves, could lead you and others to see it the way you describe it here.
> 
> I see the "man up" advice being more about finding a path to personal happiness and fulfillment that isn't so reliant on the approval of a wife. (This "man up" advice, incidentally, can work in dynamics in which the woman is over reliant on the approval of her man for happiness, although this configuration seems to show up a lot less on the forums.)
> 
> ...


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> GI,
> 
> YES^3
> 
> ...


I was lucky enough to have a husband who allowed me on the "inside" of his journey. He "gets it" from my perspective now, too. I understand men so much better, and he says he finally understands women. 

I think the genders are incredibly different in ways that matter very much in long term relationships. I don't think the genders are different in ways that justify different treatment in society. But inside a relationship, if it is going to endure for twenty, thirty, forty, fifty years? Yeah, you've got to see, understand, and appreciate the differences.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> You really can't see any difference between women?
> 
> It isn't just cup size and hair color, you know. Some of the differences are really quite profound.


Wow, I totally agree with you here. But also agree with Anon.

See, when I started, I looked very carefully at the gender generalities, and what an 'average' woman digs. Physically, if you read the literature (as much of a shambles as it is) it's things like height, shoulder:hip ratio, displays of wealth and power, etc.

Now, in general, most women will find most of these things attractive... everything else being equal.

But when I looked at my wife in the specific, I found that everything else was quite _unequal_, and the variations that turn people on are quite broad.

For example, person A might like mr studly mcmuslebuilder. Person B might like mr waifish bookworm. Person C might like something completely different.

What _is_ pretty common tho, are displays of health, of self-confidence (not ****iness), ability to provide, that kind of stuff. So while not every woman might like Brad Pitt vs Channing Tatum, they'd all usually take either one over Fred Flintstone, you know?

My point being is that there's kinda generalities that point you in the right direction, but then you really gotta pay attention to what drives your partner. For my wife, muscles matter, as an example.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Gettingit really gets it.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Am I the only one wondering about the ability to provide part? Visual displays of muscle? Are people that superficial? 

A look around my neighborhood says they are...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Ability to provide is not superficial.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> Ability to provide is not superficial.



If used as one part of the decision process, agreed. But if it's most of the decision process...

I won't deny that I am looking very carefully at DD22's significant other's ability to provide. After all, it takes a while to find a job in her field. But after getting burned with my own super provider  I'm not going to worry too much about it in the long run.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

john117 said:


> Am I the only one wondering about the ability to provide part? Visual displays of muscle? Are people that superficial?
> 
> A look around my neighborhood says they are...



The people who are know this is superficial and might weasel around it, making life miserable for themselves and maybe their spouses.

Because really, who wants to be called superficial?


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

All I know is that M2 DEFINITELY got turned on by me showing physical courage at a carnival (doing double flips on a trampoline / slingshot contraption)

And she seemed wholly unaffected (sexually) by a commission check that exceeded my entire aggregate income the first four years after graduating college with a computer science degree. 

And my reaction to M2's total lack of response to all that cash: pure admiration 









john117 said:


> Am I the only one wondering about the ability to provide part? Visual displays of muscle? Are people that superficial?
> 
> A look around my neighborhood says they are...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> The people who are know this is superficial and might weasel around it, making life miserable for themselves and maybe their spouses.
> 
> Because really, who wants to be called superficial?


I don't get what you mean...splain?

I don't care about the superficial aspects of my attraction to my husband. They are real and raw and most definitely have to do with his biceps and eyes as deep as the sea. 

Though his physical attractiveness would have no power over me if I decided I hated him for something, or there was too much pain or resentment of certain types. We do have pain and resentment in our marriage, but not of the type that destroys our sex life. Also we are both naturally HD, and this is a pretty big deal as far as the "whys" go, like "why are we still so hot for each other and still have an active sex life?"...answer, genuine physical attraction + both HD.

Some of you took a sexlessness survey I did for my blog...I am still working on a couple of posts about it, but this is the one I published first, FWIW to this discussion.

I Married a Sex God: Why Do Some Relationships Become Sexless?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM, I'm talking attraction before / during courtship... Not years into marriage.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

FrenchFry said:


> If your wife said, no holds barred:
> 
> "Because I'm tired of faking 'it,;'" it being a wildly passionate crazy abandoned woman...
> 
> what would that mean to you?


Deal breaker (and heart breaker) for me, unfortunately.

To find out the person you love has been faking it for x number of years, not good. It's basically lying to someone for that long.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

alexm said:


> Deal breaker (and heart breaker) for me, unfortunately.
> 
> To find out the person you love has been faking it for x number of years, not good. It's basically lying to someone for that long.


Do you think this reaction from you might have something to do with her possibly not being completely upfront and honest with you?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

alexm said:


> Deal breaker (and heart breaker) for me, unfortunately.
> 
> To find out the person you love has been faking it for x number of years, not good. It's basically lying to someone for that long.


Not sure... I think she was doing it for you... so, in a way it's an expression and manifestation of her love for you... what would have been the alternative? Now she's come clean... I think you need to adjust and consider whether this "new her" is what you want... anyway, she never said she hated it... just that she wasn't _that_ interested in it...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Anon Pink said:


> What I wanted to add, and I hate to complicate this further, is that you can't force emotional honesty from your wife and until she can give you that emotional honesty your marriage won't go anywhere. For whatever reason, she is hiding. She isn't being honest with you and probably not even with herself.
> 
> You made her think. You ask her to think. She doesn't like that at all.


On that note, she was open and somewhat concerned last night over my behavior the last couple of days. (ie. I've been there, but not really "there") so she and I were able to talk it out without it seeming forced.

So here's the nutshell version, NOT verbatim, and with a fair amount left out, so don't quote me, or say "you said WHAT to her??" 

I told her straight up this isn't about sex. It's just that it's manifested through sex. She agrees (but is also tired of talking about sex. Me too.)

I brought up the walls she has up, and always has with me. She doesn't deny they're there.

She finally, FINALLY, admits she's protecting herself. I ask her from what. She says from being hurt. I don't ask what happened to her, but she tells me enough to figure it out. I know just enough about her past relationships (a few of them, anyway) to put 2 and 2 together.

Nutshell version of this: As some of you know, she and I dated when we were teenagers. 3 years. She broke up with me, and we went our separate ways. I met my ex wife soon after (6 months or so), she spent the next year single and free. Then met a guy who she spent 3 years with.

Apparently it was this guy who really hurt her, or caused her to not trust or otherwise shy away from fully letting go in relationships. I didn't pry about this, but there was no physical abuse, fwiw (she says, and I have no reason to not believe her). But she admits that she truly let go with him, allowed herself to love him fully, but it was not returned. She said something about it basically being entirely sexual for him. (something she realized after it was over, I guess. They were young, like 18, 19, 20). He apparently cheated on her repeatedly, etc. was a general jerk, and it took her 3 years to realize this and broke up with him. And since then, she has not allowed herself to fully let go like that with anybody else.

I let her speak, and I did not pass judgement nor pry further. This is as open as she's been with me, so I wasn't about to spook her and make her feel unsafe.

Here's the thing, and I am absolutely ashamed to admit this, but I have a hard time believing that this is it. That she, or anyone, can't open up ever again because of a bad (and she didn't even make it sound that bad) relationship when she was 18 and 19.

I DO believe her, but basically that this was the beginning, and because she didn't have any success in other relationships, it's all snowballed to here. She was speaking as though that relationship was it, not that it was the beginning.

For my part, I told her that I can emphasize with her. I didn't belittle her feelings in the slightest. Mostly because I understand. She knows my story with my ex wife, and she knows that I opened up fully with her and got burned. She also knows that this happens to everybody (she said that herself).

She knows that this is silly (her words) and that by being like this it hurts not only me, but herself.

Everything any of you will say here about this subject, she already knows. She's not under the illusion that this is actually protecting her from anything, let alone being hurt. That the walls are doing more harm than good. She knows this.

All I did was listen. I didn't ask questions. I only reassured her without being condescending or a know-it-all.

Really the only thing I said to her on the subject was that everybody has had a bad relationship (or two, or three), including me. That putting up walls only hurts you more, which is the opposite of what one is actually trying to do by putting these walls up. That putting up walls hurts your partner. And by doing so, you're allowing your past negative experiences to invade your current, otherwise positive ones.

The one thing I said that seemed to make her take pause was that when people do this to protect themselves, they're essentially allowing whoever this person was to stay with them throughout their life and surreptitiously be a part of any future relationships. That rather than moving on, learning from the experience and leaving this person behind, that they're instead allowing them to hang over their shoulder every step of the way in the future.

That this guy is basically the devil on her shoulder telling her "do this" or "don't do that" and laughing maniacally.

My weak moment in this, and I'm not ashamed to admit it, is that the whole time I was thinking "this was 19, 20 years ago. After you had dated me for 3 years. If this was the first, and so far only, guy you've ever let yourself fully embrace, then I feel like second fiddle." Even if he was a jerk, there was obviously an intense attraction to him that you didn't feel before (with me, sigh) or since (with anybody else, including me again). I know that's ridiculous. I'm certain that if she didn't have these walls up, she'd let herself go fully with me and *I* would be "the one". But I'm not. Not yet, anyway.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Looks like she is in need of some serious therapy... now, that would be the deal-breaker if she refuses...


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

Faithful Wife said:


> ...I am still working on a couple of posts about it, but this is the one I published first, FWIW to this discussion.
> 
> I Married a Sex God: Why Do Some Relationships Become Sexless?


Well done, FW.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Alex, it sounds as if you handled that pretty well. I especially liked this part:



alexm said:


> The one thing I said that seemed to make her take pause was that when people do this to protect themselves, they're essentially allowing whoever this person was to stay with them throughout their life and surreptitiously be a part of any future relationships. That rather than moving on, learning from the experience and leaving this person behind, that they're instead allowing them to hang over their shoulder every step of the way in the future.


This has been my battle cry for years. 

"I will not allow you to interfere with my happiness a moment longer. You Don't Matter To Me."

It's the first step in taking responsibility for the person you are, are meant to be and want to be, rather than allowing someone else's behavior to shape you.

The second step is to recognize every time your reaction is to hide and instead decide to respond. Understanding the difference between react and respond.

The second step takes a LONG time.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> Well done, FW.


:iagree:

Sometimes our purpose in life is to serve as a warning to others.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

That sounds really sad, Fozzy.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

dude, it sounds like she's really starting to open up to you, kudos.

Be careful tho, what she's describing is her baggage and her stuff to fix, not yours. You can support her but you can't fix it for her.

And there's a vast chasm between being sensitive to what she's been through, and paying the price for what some other dude did to her.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Hey Alexm-- this recent news is really interesting.

I am going to offer a different interpretation than your wife offered you. Maybe I am way off base here, but I think it is worth considering.

She had this intense experience with this really alpha guy. She gave up everything for him. However, to him, she was just a sex toy. 

He was a jerk. She still wanted him.

He didn't care what she thought. She still wanted him.

He cheated on her. She still wanted him.

Finally she had enough (she says). But do you really believe SHE ended it? Who was really more invested in that relationship? I would be skeptical of this detail. 

Now compare that guy to you. 

You're the opposite. 

You care what she thinks. You care about HER. You priortize her needs over yours. 

And-- this is the really hard part -- SHE DOESN'T WANT YOU.

Now, I am not saying you should go ahead and treat her like dirt, but the comparison between who she really let go for sexually and who she goes through the motions for when she really feels she has to is quite telling.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> Hey Alexm-- this recent news is really interesting.
> 
> I am going to offer a different interpretation than your wife offered you. Maybe I am way off base here, but I think it is worth considering.
> 
> ...


This is a great post. QFT.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> Hey Alexm-- this recent news is really interesting.
> 
> I am going to offer a different interpretation than your wife offered you. Maybe I am way off base here, but I think it is worth considering.
> 
> ...



I knew this was coming...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Ouch, Anon111. Maybe say a little more softly . . .


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> That sounds really sad, Fozzy.



More like a Public Service Announcement..


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

jld said:


> Ouch, Anon111. Maybe say a little more softly . . .


It needed to be said. But the point is that he needs to strike a balance. He needs to stop prioritizing her over him, and take care of himself. 

She is already starting to notice, and look what it brought out?

The point is, that this is what is, but not what it could be.

I think his current trajectory will work.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

And that's why you're getting all kindsa man up or up your alpha or become more attractive advice. 

Imagine a scenario. She was super hot for this a-hole, but not safe with him. So, great sex, bad relationship. 

So she pics you. Maybe a bit of the opposite. Longer, more successful relationship (she married you after all), but no sex. 

Now, imagine if you could give her everything that dude could, and retain the safe long term relationship....


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

MEM11363 said:


> I was very blunt with M2 on this topic.
> 
> I very much dislike this 'last minute' not in the mood events.
> 
> ...


Consider that this cycle is an attempt to lessen her guilt. She knows that sex is a problem, so she promises that tonight will be different (and very likely means it). But it isn't, so she comes up with an excuse. She feels guilty, so promises herself (and you) that the next night will be different. Repeat.

If accurate, the best way to deal with this was right away. So when she starts to make plans (again), gently but firmly note that based on her behavior in the past, you are unwilling to make plans that won't be kept.

As MEM notes, this is no different than dealing with a person who consistently bails out at the last minute on other activities.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

jld said:


> Ouch, Anon111. Maybe say a little more softly . . .


I am not trying to hurt the guy.

I actually think it's a major breakthrough that his wife told him this.

I am sure it is very hard to think about how that jerk got so easily what alex struggles so hard to get.

But if he can look through the hurt, I think there is some very valuable information there.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> I am not trying to hurt the guy.
> 
> I actually think it's a major breakthrough that his wife told him this.
> 
> ...


As harsh as it was, I think it makes sense...


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

I hope it is a breakthrough. I'm afraid she knows why she's holding back and just doesn't want to say. Maybe last night was as close to open and honest as she dared go.

I like the idea that Alex could reinspire her. If he can take your criticism, and not get defensive, I agree there is a chance he could turn this around. 

Please be humble and listen, Alex.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Once again y'all are missing the possibility that A2 simply wants to get even with mankind - paints Alex and the rest of mankind with the same brush.

Coming to the possible realization that "all men are a-holes" could have dawned on her at a random point as opposed to building up over time. 

This is serious therapy material. Alpha-omg up could have the opposite effect, remind her of her old guy...

Just a theory.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

john117 said:


> Alpha-omg up could have the opposite effect, remind her of her old guy...
> 
> Just a theory.


This is also true, imo...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

john117 said:


> Alpha-omg up could have the opposite effect, remind her of her old guy...
> 
> Just a theory.


Agree, this is a risk.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Anon1111 said:


> Agree, this is a risk.


But only a risk in that the stakes are a relationship in which he is dissatisfied. 

So how much of a risk?

Additionally, for him to go "all alpha" would be a _huge_ mistake. Balance. Balance.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I also don't think it's a criticism of alex.

I wish more woman preferred the nice, caring guy on a sexual level.

It's so much nicer to be nice and caring to people and have that returned to you.

It is very hard to figure out how to maintain enough of an edge without sliding into full @sshole territory.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> I see the "man up" advice very different than you do. I do see how that the way men talk about it, particularly among themselves, could lead you and others to see it the way you describe it here.
> 
> I see the "man up" advice being more about finding a path to personal happiness and fulfillment that isn't so reliant on the approval of a wife. (This "man up" advice, incidentally, can work in dynamics in which the woman is over reliant on the approval of her man for happiness, although this configuration seems to show up a lot less on the forums.)


We actually see this dynamic quite often with women posters, but it's never called out as such. Indeed quite the opposite: women as a rule are encouraged to show their men just how much they need him. Why is that I wonder? 

GettingIt, your posts are always thought-provoking and insightful. Please do not think I'm calling you out just to be disagreeable. I'm just trying to get at what's underneath some of this stuff, to understand it all better. 

And I get what you're saying, about the man-up dynamic. And I get that telling someone to get fit, instead of letting themselves go, and not allow every passing emotion to crumble their world to be very good advice indeed. I've said as much.

But I started to be vocal in this thread because what I saw was a bunch of people leaping to the man-up mantra, and providing all sorts of alpha advice -- and this is the key -- because *that's what women find attractive*. So even if the wife fails to fall for it some other woman will.

How is this any less outcome-dependent than asking "why won't my wife have sex with me"? All of it is really about getting laid and being happy.

On top of that man-up isn't just what men need to do to fulfill their authentic happiness, it is chock full of assertions about what women want and how we behave. Assertions that largely paint us as children, ruled by our emotions and desperately in search of someone to take care of us, and who cannot stand the sight of weakness. 

And it is chock full of assertions of what men are. And basically tell men that they can't be their authentic selves. Farsidejunky for example literally said that he has sacrificed his transparency to be this Better Person (tm)* that *his wife needs* him to be. MEM too said something similar. They are happy with this, so that is fine, but do we really want to say that all men should fit a particular mold because "that's what women want"?

Also, the immediate assumption is that men are the proverbial Nice Guy (tm)* who is falling into this common dynamic, and good luck trying to deny it. Alex's objections to this characterization of himself were, and still are, completely shouted down by cries that yes of course he is that guy, snap out of it, look at all the behaviours you are doing that are "signaling your weakness". All because he wants to know why his wife doesn't want to have sex with him.

Huh? :scratchhead: 

I mean, yes, I can see that he really wants her to start enjoying sex with him again, and is willing to try pretty much anything that might make that happen. Maybe in so doing he is a little too focused on her, and how she reacts, and needs to take a step back and realize that human relations aren't simple cause and effect, and there is a very good chance that her actions and reactions have nothing to do with any particular thing he does. But this doesn't have much to do with man-up either.

Indeed the man-up logic is oddly contradictory because it says on one hand that you need to find your own happiness independently of your wife, and you need to do this by doing everything that a wife supposedly finds attractive, and nothing else. Again: Huh? :scratchhead:

As for ****-tests, these are about much, much more than simply emotions a person feels. ****-tests are *tests* of love, of worthiness. When we live with someone, anyone, we will always have times when we need to deal with their emotions, and it's not like it's just women who get angry, hurt, jealous, or what have you. But ****-tests are a different beast altogether, and assuming that all women are doing them whenever they happen to have a feeling that their partner finds unpleasant is, I think, extremely counterproductive. 

So while I do agree that the non-sexist watered down version of man-up contains some useful advice, I think it is also often muddied by some really, really, really bad and potentially harmful ideas.



*thanks john, for this useful shorthand.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> Agree, this is a risk.


I think you need to take a broad approach to risk when you're lookng at stuff like this.

Sure, its a risk. So make sure you take baby steps, and continually monitor the situation. Change course if needed.

But, in my opinion, the risk of staying put is higher than the risk of trying, and failing.

Your marriage isn't working, dude. If the risk is that you make this happen sooner rather than later, so be it. But the upside is huge...


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> I also don't think it's a criticism of alex.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Very good observation. Can't argue with success. It sucks but it's what works. They "say" they don't like it...as they drop to their knees...


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Anon1111 said:


> I also don't think it's a criticism of alex.
> 
> I wish more woman preferred the nice, caring guy on a sexual level.
> 
> ...


Hey, if being a nice guy got men laid, the world would be composed of nice guys.

Nice guys get women as friends and get married. Assertive, attractive guys get laid.

Nice assertive, attractive guys get laid by their best friend when married.

And, isn't that an awesome marriage?

Nice and assertive and attractive aren't mutually exclusive.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

WorkingOnMe said:


> Very good observation. Can't argue with success. It sucks but it's what works. They "say" they don't like it...as they drop to their knees...


Massive opening of the kimono, but when I started on this journey, my wife would just often say "no!"

When I was about halfway thru trying to improve myself, getting in better shape, being more assertive, outcome independent, all that... an interesting thing happened. My wife would say "no!" and then get naked and climb on top of me. And then be like "wait, I thought I said no?" and honestly be confused. Not mad, confused.

Now, maybe this is a commentary on my wife as much as anything, but does kind of describe a situation where one part of her is attracted, and one part of her is saying no...

And which one is stronger depends a lot on what I was doing, I guess. And it made me think a lot about my dating life, where women would say they thought I was a jerk, and then end up in my bed. And be mad at themselves, and sometimes me. No question I was a jerk, that's not what I'm saying, I'm an a-hole when dating, and a nice guy in marriage.

But, I found it enlightening.

And trying to put the two together, in a conscious and constructive way, made her a lot happier in the sack, anyway.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

marduk said:


> Massive opening of the kimono, but when I started on this journey, my wife would just often say "no!"
> 
> When I was about halfway thru it, an interesting thing happened. My wife would say "no!" and then get naked and climb on top of me. And then be like "wait, I thought I said no?" and honestly be confused. Not mad, confused.
> 
> ...


Confidence is a man's best friend. 

I have found myself doing things that I, too, did not think I wanted to. And ended up enjoying them. 

And just talking would not have brought them out. But assertive action did.

Always alone, a part of me hates the power that my husband has over me. It makes me mad that I'm so vulnerable to him.

But he is a safe person to be vulnerable with. And Alex is, too. 

The advice these men are giving him is not going to hurt him. And he's free to refuse it. But knowing that his wife was really attracted to a more assertive guy is actionable intelligence for him.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

marduk said:


> I think you need to take a broad approach to risk when you're lookng at stuff like this.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You need to examine the information density of manning up. If you man up and she withdraws further then you have your answer that she's simply fleeing from the previous relationship. That's your confirmation right there.

That by itself is all the information you need because you've tried the entire beta to alpha and back spectrum and nothing came of it. So.....


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

Anon1111 said:


> I am going to offer a different interpretation than your wife offered you. Maybe I am way off base here, but I think it is worth considering.


Maybe I'm way off base here too and maybe Alexm elaborated on this in other threads and I just haven't read it.

I didn't catch the part about this man necessarily being "Alpa." Other than the fact that Alexm's wife opened up to this man and he cheated on her repeatedly, I didn't see much else at all. 

Was he handsome? Was he smart? Was he ripped? Was he strong? Was he a leader? Did he have an assertive personality? Did other people respect him? Was he hung? Was he even good in bed?

The only solid fact I took away is that he was an immoral jerk and for reasons we can only speculate on she was attracted to him.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> Really the only thing I said to her on the subject was that everybody has had a bad relationship (or two, or three), including me. That putting up walls only hurts you more, which is the opposite of what one is actually trying to do by putting these walls up. That putting up walls hurts your partner. And by doing so, you're allowing your past negative experiences to invade your current, otherwise positive ones.


Yes and no. Walls are put there for a purpose. Arguably, they are harmful, but they also serve a function: "I'll never be stupid enough to do that again."

And we see evidence of people letting these walls affect them deeply all of the time:. From those who say they will never be in a committed relationship or get married again, from those who say they will never date xyz type of person again, from those who are determined that their future choices will serve their needs.

Very important to remember that walls are not just about letting another person control your behaviour, but about the verynsorts of things being advocated here: looking out for yourself.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Always, I love what you're saying but I think the risk is in absolutes. I see it, because I'm guilty of that a lot. 

I think you can be a vulnerable attractive guy to a lot of women, when done in the right way. Saying something once, confidently, and owning it is a lot different than (in my case) blathering on and on about it. 

One is going to be ok, and attractive in and of itself, even. The other is going to get to be pretty lame pretty fast, I think. 

And - for me - a lot of the outcome independence stuff was about being passionate about life. Finding things other than having sex with my wife that I enjoy. No fixation, less attachment, less expectation, and less of a burden, I think. It's a win-win. 

And, again for me, I think we are all children inside. I'm emotionally a 5 year old, and my sexual response is millions of years old, and highly instinctual. I don't get to choose if I like x vs y feature. I just do. 

And, the really really fun sex for me has been really childish in terms of playfulness and with a sense of wonder. 

In my mind, this view isn't insulting of my wife or women in general. It's a seeking to understand, and not just what's said -- actions can speak far louder than words. 

I may claim not to like that naughty thing over there, but my body may have other ideas. That doesn't make me a child, it makes me human. Same goes for my wife. She might not like finding x thing attractive, but it doesn't change the fact that she does. 

What I can do tho, is accept that, and find a way to create an environment or context where it can be leveraged to increase both of our happiness, and our marriage satisfaction as a whole.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

john117 said:


> You need to examine the information density of manning up. If you man up and she withdraws further then you have your answer that she's simply fleeing from the previous relationship. That's your confirmation right there.
> 
> That by itself is all the information you need because you've tried the entire beta to alpha and back spectrum and nothing came of it. So.....


1.this problem space is actually infinite, so you will ever be done. And it's a moving target, welcome to life. 
2. Some people will never be that into you. Again, that's real life.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

jld said:


> The advice these men are giving him is not going to hurt him. And he's free to refuse it. But knowing that his wife was really attracted to a more assertive guy is actionable intelligence for him.


I think it's possible that it will hurt him. Not necessarily, and of course, I could be wrong. If his wife is more like you than me, then maybe it's helpful. If she is more like me than you..


You call this actionable intelligence, but let's remember that we don't actually know if this guy is more alpha than Alex. We are simply assuming so because he cheats and used her. On top of that, Alex and her had great sex for 6 or so years. Are you positing that his alpha declined suddenly at year 6?


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> I think it's possible that it will hurt him. Not necessarily, and of course, I could be wrong. If his wife is more like you than me, then maybe it's helpful. If she is more like me than you..
> 
> 
> You call this actionable intelligence, but let's remember that we don't actually know if this guy is more alpha than Alex. We are simply assuming so because he cheats and used her. On top of that, Alex and her had great sex for 6 or so years. Are you positing that his alpha declined suddenly at year 6?


No matter what, eating right and exercising will make him feel better, think more clearly,and be more confident. 

No matter what. 

Secondary effects - particularly of lifting heavy things, having a high protein and fat diet, is increasing his testosterone and making him more assertive in his life. Which can have tertiary effects with his earning potentials, opportunities, etc. 

Paying attention to your appearance - hair, clothes, that kind of thing can open doors. Don't discount. And these only reinforce the above. 

No matter what. 

So I really really struggle with the risk side of the equation, and I have yet to see a wife ever that wished his husband wouldn't make sure that he stayed reasonably fit and reasonably attentitive to his appearance.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

always_alone said:


> I mean, yes, I can see that he really wants her to start enjoying sex with him again, and is willing to try pretty much anything that might make that happen. Maybe in so doing he is a little too focused on her, and how she reacts, and needs to take a step back and realize that human relations aren't simple cause and effect, and there is a very good chance that her actions and reactions have nothing to do with any particular thing he does. *But this doesn't have much to do with man-up either.*


Actually, it is.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

always_alone said:


> You call this actionable intelligence, but let's remember that we don't actually know if this guy is more alpha than Alex. We are simply assuming so because he cheats and used her. On top of that, Alex and her had great sex for 6 or so years. Are you positing that his alpha declined suddenly at year 6?


True. We don't.

I don't know what happened at year six. I would love to see Alex earn her trust enough that she would tell him if she does know. To me, earning her trust is the critical issue here. The sex will follow, imo.

Fwiw, Alex does not seem like an assertive guy to me. All of our encouraging him is unlikely to turn him into some kind of monster that she needs to fear. I just don't think he would ever be like that.

My hope is that he would become more confident in himself, earn her trust, and work through with her whatever issue caused the sexlessness, rather than hearing something that at face value might feel hurtful and then throwing in the towel.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

WorkingOnMe said:


> It sucks but it's what works. They "say" they don't like it...as they drop to their knees...


Yes, it's quite possible to manipulate people in this way. Women can do it too: I can be a bit cold, distant, alpha, and my SO will respond by being more solicitous.

Why? He wants to know what's going on and is seeking to reestablish the connection.

Making women feel this way will also get them to respond. Now this is what you might call success, especially if all you care about is getting laid, but I would suggest that it's actually a very unhealthy dynamic. Agreed that we shouldn't take our partners for granted, but playing head games like this to get them to "drop to their knees" can also backfire drastically by contributing to resentments and even a loathing of sex.

Look, for example, at alex's wife's reaction to this terrible relationship that you are suggesting men emulate: the longterm outcome was most certainly not positive, either for the relationship or her attitudes to sex.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> Maybe I'm way off base here too and maybe Alexm elaborated on this in other threads and I just haven't read it.
> 
> I didn't catch the part about this man necessarily being "Alpa." Other than the fact that Alexm's wife opened up to this man and he cheated on her repeatedly, I didn't see much else at all.
> 
> ...


I admit that I am speculating on some missing detail here.

It is a bit of circular reasoning, but one way to look at it is that he was alpha because she was so into him despite all of his obvious bad qualities.

If he was a fat, nerdy d*ckhead, would she really have been all over his jock?

Not to mention the fact that he was cheating on her the whole time. Outside evidence that other women liked what he was selling.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> So I really really struggle with the risk side of the equation, and I have yet to see a wife ever that wished his husband wouldn't make sure that he stayed reasonably fit and reasonably attentitive to his appearance.


This is but one piece of the man-up shtick. And agreed, there is no risk and only benefit to looking after one's health and appearance.

But let's face it, this wasn't 60+ pages of telling Alex to get fit and dress better.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> Yes, it's quite possible to manipulate people in this way. Women can do it too: I can be a bit cold, distant, alpha, and my SO will respond by being more solicitous.
> 
> Why? He wants to know what's going on and is seeking to reestablish the connection.
> 
> ...


I hear what you're saying, and mostly agree. 

The difference is that she was having sex with the other guy, of course. 

Everybody's a mixed bag of awesomeness and ****tyness. What you can do is keep your awesomeness, and learn from others to transform your ****tyiness into more awesomeness. 

Unless of course your ****tyness is part of your chosen self-identity... Then you have a hard choice to make. 

And what I would encourage is to see yourself thru others eyes, and decide which hills you're gonna die on. 

You can always pull the "I am who I am, take it or leave it card" which is cool as long as you really think you're the best you can be and like who that person is.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> This is but one piece of the man-up shtick. And agreed, there is no risk and only benefit to looking after one's health and appearance.
> 
> But let's face it, this wasn't 60+ pages of telling Alex to get fit and dress better.


Mine is. 

As a place to begin, not the place to end.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I don't think anyone here is advocating being an abusive, cheating do*chebag.

For "nice guys" though, it is a wake up call when they see that these types of men can be much more attractive sexually to their "nice girl" wife.

The idea is that you preserve your essential character as a good guy, while gaining the edge that creates the sexual tension.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

jld said:


> Fwiw, Alex does not seem like an assertive guy to me. All of our encouraging him is unlikely to turn him into some kind of monster that she needs to fear. I just don't think he would ever be like that.


And fwiw, I think alex is perfectly capable of taking what he finds to be helpful from these discussions and rejecting the rest. He knows best what applies in his situation. And my points here aren't about saying other people are wrong or shouldn't be doing what is working for them. Or that what they are saying will turn alex into a monster. All I really wanted to do was push the conversation beyond the standard man-up trope to really dig into what it is that we think make relationships work

And I agree with you that trust is huge, and makes a huge difference. I'm just not convinced that being more "alpha" is always the best way to gain that trust.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

marduk said:


> The difference is that she was having sex with the other guy, of course.


She was having sex with alex too, for 6 or so years. Apparently very good sex, from the reports. And I'm not sure we should be assuming that the sex with her ex was somehow better or more frequent. We have no evidence of this.


----------



## vellocet (Oct 18, 2013)

jld said:


> But knowing that his wife was really attracted to a more assertive guy is actionable intelligence for him.



Absolutely. But actionable intelligence for him to use......with someone else. (and no, not talking about cheating either)


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

always_alone said:


> She was having sex with alex too, for 6 or so years. Apparently very good sex, from the reports. And I'm not sure we should be assuming that the sex with her ex was somehow better or more frequent. We have no evidence of this.


I thought he always had to initiate even then, tho.

But good point.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

The evidence we have is she just told him that this ex BF of hers ruined her. She gave the details of how she let herself go to this man and it crushed her.

Unless I have misunderstood the story, she has separately indicated to Alex that she has never really given herself to him. She has said that she was simply putting on a performance.

The performance apparently was very good so Alex was satisfied.

Eventually, she got sick of performing.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> She was having sex with alex too, for 6 or so years. Apparently very good sex, from the reports. And I'm not sure we should be assuming that the sex with her ex was somehow better or more frequent. We have no evidence of this.


No, but we can infer from her own words that it was more heart-felt.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Fozzy said:


> No, but we can infer from her own words that it was more heart-felt.


Can we? I'm not so sure. Alex would be better able to speak to this, obviously, but I got the impression that it wasn't more heart-felt, but that she let herself be too vulnerable, too open, too dependent in, say, a similar way as jld describes her relationship with Dug ---but, again obviously, with a much less worthy, reliable man.

Pretty hurtful situation to trust in someone and have them trample all over you. 

Also, something that stands out for me is that she apparently has said that she has always felt different from others, and always had this sense that sex for her wasn't the same as for others.

This makes me think it likely that the sex with the other guy was just as performative, and what really caused her to build the walls was getting burned on her emotional investment. That is, basically she's afraid that if she allows herself to get that close, that vulnerable, to someone again, she risks having to face that same hurt again. And she doesn't want to have to do that.

Now some might say things like "alex is not that guy and wouldn't treat her that way", and "she should trust him.". But this is only half the battle; she also needs to trust *herself* that she can handle it if, for whatever reason, things go horribly awry. There are, after all, so many things that can get in the way of happily ever after.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Can we? I'm not so sure. Alex would be better able to speak to this, obviously, but I got the impression that it wasn't more heart-felt, but that she let herself be too vulnerable, too open, too dependent in, say, a similar way as jld describes her relationship with Dug ---but, again obviously, with a much less worthy, reliable man.
> 
> Pretty hurtful situation to trust in someone and have them trample all over you.
> 
> ...


Some good points. It's possible it was performative for him too, but I disagree that she made a mistake in allowing herself to get too vulnerable. He definitely took advantage of that, but allowing herself to be vulnerable is exactly what she SHOULD be doing. The mistake she's making now is precisely the opposite. She's not allowing herself to be vulnerable at all, else Alex wouldn't only now be learning about this prior relationship.

Which brings up the point of why he's now learning about it. She's opening up because she sees Alex turning down the temperature. It's an ugly truth that there's a lot of merit to some of the "man-up" stuff. It's ugly because of what you've already pointed out--the potential for it to be mis-used, and because of what Farside illustrated earlier, it can serve to undermine a man's own ability to just feel what he feels without the need to hide it.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

ocotillo said:


> Maybe I'm way off base here too and maybe Alexm elaborated on this in other threads and I just haven't read it.
> 
> I didn't catch the part about this man necessarily being "Alpa." Other than the fact that Alexm's wife opened up to this man and he cheated on her repeatedly, I didn't see much else at all.
> 
> ...


I know very little about this guy, and I don't require to know any more, to be honest (nor do I want to).

What I do know is only negative things she's mentioned here and there over our multitude of conversations over the years.

So, first things first, there were both in their late teens at the time. That says a lot right there. Immature and ready to start acting like adults.

I don't get the impression that he was an alpha male, as some things she has mentioned don't arc that way. He had an older brother, for example, and he basically idolized him and did whatever he said, and he eventually got in the way. The kind of guy that would just show up, say "hey let's go get drunk" and her boyfriend would just ditch her. Alpha? Not really. A-hole, definitely.

My best guess, and it's only a guess, is that she, at that point in her life did not have a whole lot of self-esteem or confidence in herself. She still does not. She has never been skinny, for example. He paid attention to her and wanted her, and she gladly accepted and hung on to him. I genuinely believe she allowed and justified him to treat her however it was that he treated her for fear of losing him. Teenager + chubby + self esteem issues = bad relationship choices.

I don't think this relationship did anything to boost her confidence, and obviously harmed it even further. Thus the walls. A case of "I'm never letting myself do that again". We all do it in some way or another in our lives.

What I'm saying is that I don't think (and I could be very very wrong) that it had anything to do with this guy in particular. I just don't get that feeling. I genuinely think it could have been anybody. Wrong guy, wrong time.

I just feel that this was the first guy she happened to really open up to, at a time in her life when she wanted to settle down perhaps, stop screwing around, etc.

One thing I know about my wife is this - she and I are very similar in that we both desired, from a relatively young age, to settle down and be comfortable with somebody. I know she wanted the fairy tale of meeting her true love at 23 or 24, marrying a couple of years later, having a career and a house and then starting a family. Her life didn't go that way, and I'm willing to bet that she tried too hard with this guy, at too young an age, with little experience to draw from, and got burned.

Age and circumstances and self esteem allowed her to put up these walls very very easily.

In essence, she tried once, failed, then quit. And has since protected herself from this ever happening again.

Unless she ever tells me otherwise, I don't think this guy was anything special, other than he just happened to be there, and the one to break her heart for the first time. Something she never wanted to repeat again.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

jld said:


> True. We don't.
> 
> I don't know what happened at year six. I would love to see Alex earn her trust enough that she would tell him if she does know. To me, earning her trust is the critical issue here. The sex will follow, imo.
> 
> ...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> Can we? I'm not so sure. Alex would be better able to speak to this, obviously, but I got the impression that it wasn't more heart-felt, but that she let herself be too vulnerable, too open, too dependent in, say, a similar way as jld describes her relationship with Dug ---but, again obviously, with a much less worthy, reliable man.
> 
> Pretty hurtful situation to trust in someone and have them trample all over you.
> 
> ...


My thoughts on this exactly.

This is about vulnerability, and allowing herself to be dependent on someone else. When we dated in school (prior to this guy), she wasn't dependent OR independent. (or rather, a little bit of both). This time around with her, she is fiercely AGAINST being dependent, and has even said this outright to me.

Again, I'm not convinced it was anything about this guy that allowed her to be dependent. I do think it was timing, self esteem and confidence, as well as age. My next relationship after her, I allowed myself to really let go and be dependant, in a way that I didn't allow myself to do when I was dating her. So I essentially did the same thing she did, with much the same result, I might add. I just didn't put up the walls and say "never again".

And for my part, there was nothing at all about my ex wife that made me let go like that with her. I loved her, yes, but I know for a fact that I didn't love her any more than I loved my ex before her.

That said, my ex wife was much more demanding and assertive than my ex. In order for me to keep her, I needed to modify my behavior, and ultimately sacrifice a bit of myself, which I did (ultimately too much). But again, it was nothing about her. She wasn't a better catch than my ex was.

I don't get the impression that this guy was like that for my wife, either. He just treated her in a way that allowed (or even forced) her to give up pieces of herself a little at a time, which often gives the illusion of one feeling as though the other is the be-all, end-all of men/women. I know this is how I ended up with my ex wife. She could do no wrong, even though it was SO clear she did, and often.

It's good and bad that we had our 3 years together before she shut down, as I saw (and remember) what she was prior.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

I think the high school boyfriend story is a red herring. She just doesn't really know why she feels the way she does so she's reaching for an answer. The boyfriend story is just one tiny portion of her sexual history and she's trying to piece it all together....but only because Alex is asking her to.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

What do you think her purpose was in telling you this, alex?

To get you to understand why she has a hard time opening up?

To communicate that she feels worried that you're going to hurt her the way that the other guy did?

And, you know your wife -- what does this have to do with your marital sex life? What's the connection there -- being open, sexually?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Faithful Wife said:


> I think the high school boyfriend story is a red herring. She just doesn't really know why she feels the way she does so she's reaching for an answer. The boyfriend story is just one tiny portion of her sexual history and she's trying to piece it all together....but only because Alex is asking her to.



But *I* was her high school boyfriend! Our firsts, and for 3 years. He came along just afterwards, when she was done her running around period and wanted to settle down.

So even though I was her first relationship, he was her first RELATIONSHIP, if that makes sense.

And she got hurt badly from it. That's the saddest part, is that she struck out on her first try and hasn't really come to bat again ever since, thinking she's just going to strike out again.

I'm lobbing whiffle balls at her, and she's only just starting to leave the dugout, so that's a positive, I guess.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Right I'm just saying her story about this guy really isn't the "reason" she is the way she is. It is just one tiny piece of the whole picture. She has just never asked herself what is going on for herself sexually before now...before you started insisting she give you a "reason" for this stuff. So she did her best by recounting to you something that hurt her.

But that's really not the whole reason. You cornered her for a reason and she gave you the best one she could conjure in the moment.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

How old is she now? How long has it been since she broke up with this guy? She is still suffering so much from it such that she can't let go sexually with her current husband?


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

alexm said:


> But *I* was her high school boyfriend! Our firsts, and for 3 years. He came along just afterwards, when she was done her running around period and wanted to settle down.


Why did you two break up the first time? (Apologies if you've already explained it.)


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

And... What are you willing to do to move the ball forward, Alex?

Today, right now?


----------



## 4x4 (Apr 15, 2014)

alexm said:


> My weak moment in this, and I'm not ashamed to admit it, is that the whole time I was thinking "this was 19, 20 years ago. After you had dated me for 3 years. If this was the first, and so far only, guy you've ever let yourself fully embrace, then I feel like second fiddle." Even if he was a jerk, there was obviously an intense attraction to him that you didn't feel before (with me, sigh) or since (with anybody else, including me again). I know that's ridiculous. I'm certain that if she didn't have these walls up, she'd let herself go fully with me and *I* would be "the one". But I'm not. Not yet, anyway.


Don't feel like second fiddle man, you're more like collateral damage. This could help explain the wall, but what triggered the wall years into the marriage with you? Is she feeling insecure about the marriage or life in general?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Fozzy said:


> Some good points. It's possible it was performative for him too, but I disagree that she made a mistake in allowing herself to get too vulnerable. He definitely took advantage of that, but allowing herself to be vulnerable is exactly what she SHOULD be doing.


I don't buy this for a second. There is nothing but hurt to be gained from becoming too vulnerable to a cheating, lying, a-hole who cares nothing for you. Hurt and a life lesson to look after yourself and avoid vulnerability.




Fozzy said:


> Which brings up the point of why he's now learning about it. She's opening up because she sees Alex turning down the temperature. It's an ugly truth that there's a lot of merit to some of the "man-up" stuff. It's ugly because of what you've already pointed out--the potential for it to be mis-used, and because of what Farside illustrated earlier, it can serve to undermine a man's own ability to just feel what he feels without the need to hide it.


I think this is an assumption on your part. Maybe it's true, but it's not obvious to me that her opening up at this moment is about temperature per se. She knows her relationship is at risk and if she doesn't do something she's likely to lose it. That in itself is pretty motivational, but not necessarily a solid foundation for a healthy relationship. Just a starting point for communication.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

always_alone said:


> She knows her relationship is at risk and if she doesn't do something she's likely to lose it. That in itself is pretty motivational, but not necessarily a solid foundation for a healthy relationship.


:iagree:

I would really like to see you take a breath and dial back the possible emotional reaction to hearing the truth, Alex. 

I think if you could hear the truth, and not leave her over it, but start working to inspire some genuine desire in her, you could have deeper, truer intimacy than you may have ever experienced.


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

jld said:


> :iagree:
> 
> I would really like to see you take a breath and dial back the possible emotional reaction to hearing the truth, Alex.
> 
> I think if you could hear the truth, and not leave her over it, but start working to inspire some genuine desire in her, you could have deeper, truer intimacy than you may have ever experienced.


Bingo. Nailed it. 

Now, she may tell with her actions, instead of words. Don't get hung up on this. 

The body usually tells the truth.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

always_alone said:


> I think this is an assumption on your part. Maybe it's true, but it's not obvious to me that her opening up at this moment is about temperature per se. She knows her relationship is at risk and if she doesn't do something she's likely to lose it. That in itself is pretty motivational, but not necessarily a solid foundation for a healthy relationship. Just a starting point for communication.


I would use that motivation to ask her to go to counseling with you (and perhaps on her own). Absent a traumatic event, most people are "created" by a combination of things. So while the ex is one factor, it is likely not the only one at play. She needs to unwind things and you two need to work to figure out where you want to go.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I don't buy this for a second. There is nothing but hurt to be gained from becoming too vulnerable to a cheating, lying, a-hole who cares nothing for you. Hurt and a life lesson to look after yourself and avoid vulnerability.
> 
> 
> .


I think you're misunderstanding what i'm saying on this point. In any serious relationship, leaving yourself vulnerable is part of what you're supposed to do. The fact that he was a lying cheating a-hole was probably not at the forefront of her mind when she made the decision to leave herself open to him. When that fact was made clear, that's when the walls went up.

Avoiding vulnerability should not be a life lesson. Fixing your man-picker should be.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

Fozzy said:


> Avoiding vulnerability should not be a life lesson. Fixing your man-picker should be.


Love this. QFT.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Faithful Wife said:


> Right I'm just saying her story about this guy really isn't the "reason" she is the way she is. It is just one tiny piece of the whole picture. She has just never asked herself what is going on for herself sexually before now..*.before you started insisting she give you a "reason"* for this stuff. So she did her best by recounting to you something that hurt her.
> 
> But that's really not the whole reason. *You cornered her for a reason* and she gave you the best one she could conjure in the moment.


But I didn't...

I asked her a loooong time ago, and she gave a vague answer about previous relationships hurting her and she doesn't want to be hurt again. We left it at that. She was much more specific this time, and I did not insist or corner her. She volunteered.

Also, I'm being told one thing by one group of people (find out if there's something from her past, there must be something, it's obvious) then when I do this I'm being told I'm cornering or trapping her.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

ocotillo said:


> Why did you two break up the first time? (Apologies if you've already explained it.)


Just end of high school, want/need to see other people. Typical teenage stuff.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Anon1111 said:


> How old is she now? How long has it been since she broke up with this guy? She is still suffering so much from it such that she can't let go sexually with her current husband?


Let's not focus on this guy. I've already stated that I don't at all feel that it has anything to do with HIM specifically.

She got hurt once, doesn't want to get hurt again. Has followed her through her adult life.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

alexm said:


> Let's not focus on this guy. I've already stated that I don't at all feel that it has anything to do with HIM specifically.
> 
> She got hurt once, doesn't want to get hurt again. Has followed her through her adult life.


OK, fair enough.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,

In college M2 met and fell for a classic bad boy. He was a townie - with a motorcycle. Made his living as a male dancer. 

And he broke her heart. 

On a pure hotness scale - no comparison between him and me. 

So what. There are no ghosts in my house. If I were you, I wouldn't sweat the other guy - at all. This isn't about him. 

For 5-6 years A2 was happy to make the effort to please you. You can't fake that. And she didn't. She wasn't faking. 

Honestly - I doubt she ever felt much raw desire for you. But you two had good social chemistry - and that's powerful. 

When you met you were younger and had just been fvcked over in your marriage. Those two things - gave you more edge. 

You are inherently kind - so it was a light edge. But it worked. 

You know - for a few years - I lost my edge. It KILLED M2's desire for me. We still had sex - but neither of us pretended she felt any passion. 

So I fixed me. There was nothing wrong with M2. I mean that, I'm not being sarcastic. A big part of what we BOTH loved about me had quietly left the building. 

I could have tried to make it about M2. About ghosts. About anything but me. That would have been me lying to myself. 

Two long years of no passion. I never thought of leaving M2. 

Early on during that time we had a very short conversation. I told her I could live with a once per five days schedule. She accepted that as a good faith compromise and she did her bit. It was a mutual show of commitment. 

And FWIW - M2 - never once said to me: You've lost your edge, and that's why I've lost my desire. Didn't think it was her place to tell me - how I should be. 

And during that time - M2 continued her normal pattern of seeking reassurance from me. Reassurance that I was committed to the marriage - still loved her - that my eyes weren't beginning to wander. 

And - I gave her the same level of reassurance I always do. Easy to do because it was true. 





Anon1111 said:


> I don't think anyone here is advocating being an abusive, cheating do*chebag.
> 
> For "nice guys" though, it is a wake up call when they see that these types of men can be much more attractive sexually to their "nice girl" wife.
> 
> The idea is that you preserve your essential character as a good guy, while gaining the edge that creates the sexual tension.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

alexm said:


> But I didn't...
> 
> I asked her a loooong time ago, and she gave a vague answer about previous relationships hurting her and she doesn't want to be hurt again. We left it at that. She was much more specific this time, and I did not insist or corner her. She volunteered.
> 
> Also, I'm being told one thing by one group of people (find out if there's something from her past, there must be something, it's obvious) then when I do this I'm being told I'm cornering or trapping her.


I don't think that was what was meant. You turning down the thermostat showed her that things had changed. She felt pressured (even if that was not what you were doing) to actually address some of your questions in hopes that you will go back to the way you were. She is likely doing so without really working things through. So you get this response from her, which while part of it, likely lacks a lot of the other reasons.

So don't stop here.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> We actually see this dynamic quite often with women posters, but it's never called out as such. Indeed quite the opposite: women as a rule are encouraged to show their men just how much they need him. Why is that I wonder?


I guess I just don't recall seeing the dynamic with genders reversed here, where the man is feeling smothered and turned off by how much his wife wants to jump through hoops to please him, or in which a husband wishes his wife would emotionally detach a little and be more independent with her happiness. I'm not saying it doesn't exist. Perhaps if I'd see a thread like that, I'd tend to see different issues due to the gender reversal. As I stated in an earlier post, I do think that gender differences matter very much--or come to matter very much--in long term monogamous relationships. 

I think women are encouraged to show their men how much they need them because that is an emotional need of men. I'm not saying its not an emotional need for women, too. I think I under appreciated the importance of making my man feel loved in ways that mattered TO HIM. As a result, I'm now more likely to advise women to find ways to do just that. 



always_alone said:


> GettingIt, your posts are always thought-provoking and insightful. Please do not think I'm calling you out just to be disagreeable. I'm just trying to get at what's underneath some of this stuff, to understand it all
> better.


I haven't felt like that at all, so no worries. I think our different understandings of and attitudes towards the "man up" advice is really interesting. At the end of the day I *think* we advocate for a lot of the same stuff, even though we arrive at that advice by totally different routes. 



always_alone said:


> And I get what you're saying, about the man-up dynamic. And I get that telling someone to get fit, instead of letting themselves go, and not allow every passing emotion to crumble their world to be very good advice indeed. I've said as much.
> 
> But I started to be vocal in this thread because what I saw was a bunch of people leaping to the man-up mantra, and providing all sorts of alpha advice -- and this is the key -- because *that's what women find attractive*. So even if the wife fails to fall for it some other woman will.
> 
> How is this any less outcome-dependent than asking "why won't my wife have sex with me"? All of it is really about getting laid and being happy.


I think by the time "man up" is resorted to, the asking has been done (or at least the husband claims it's been done, ad nauseam.) The want to DO something at this point. They are often at a crossroads: do I stay or do I go? They feel like if they don't do something, the marriage is in jeopardy. Sure, they can keep asking, but as time goes on and they don't get an answer, or results when they try acting on an answer, they start to build resentment. They end up turning to strangers for help. By that time, it's beyond just asking "why won't my wife have sex with me." 



always_alone said:


> On top of that man-up isn't just what men need to do to fulfill their authentic happiness, it is chock full of assertions about what women want and how we behave. Assertions that largely paint us as children, ruled by our emotions and desperately in search of someone to take care of us, and who cannot stand the sight of weakness.


Meh, I see all that as mostly smoke and mirrors to get men motivated to do what they need to do. Doesn't really bother me. Fact of the matter is, women's desire doesn't work like a man's because we don't have testosterone to drive it. Life circumstances matter, relationship stuff matters, where we are in our cycles matters--hell there's a lot of stuff that goes into building our desire, nurturing it, keeping it strong. I think it's a lot more complicated than male desire. They need SOME way to frame it! 



always_alone said:


> And it is chock full of assertions of what men are. And basically tell men that they can't be their authentic selves. Farsidejunky for example literally said that he has sacrificed his transparency to be this Better Person (tm)* that *his wife needs* him to be. MEM too said something similar. They are happy with this, so that is fine, but do we really want to say that all men should fit a particular mold because "that's what women want"?


Farside and MEM's journeys were about themselves first, not their wives. They shifted their marriage dynamic by changing themselves. If their wives don't like it, they aren't powerless. They can tell their husbands to go pound sand, just like French Fry did when her husband pulled man up moves that were deal breakers for her. I tend not to see women as victims. 

Look, if a guy is unhappy with his marriage and trying to work WITH his wife hasn't improved things, then who am I to tell him that he's got to just sit tight and accept it? I'd give the same advice to a woman--the only person you can change is yourself, so get crackin'. Too many folks come here looking to lay blame on their spouse. Sometimes its nobody's "fault." You can tell who is willing to pull out all the stops and really work on themselves, and who just wants affirmation for their pain. 

As for Farside sacrificing transparency--didn't we talk about how we all choose our walls based on what we think our relationship can bear? 



always_alone said:


> Also, the immediate assumption is that men are the proverbial Nice Guy (tm)* who is falling into this common dynamic, and good luck trying to deny it. Alex's objections to this characterization of himself were, and still are, completely shouted down by cries that yes of course he is that guy, snap out of it, look at all the behaviours you are doing that are "signaling your weakness". All because he wants to know why his wife doesn't want to have sex with him.


The problems with Nice Guys isn't that they want to know why their wives want to have sex with them, it's that they jump though hoops trying to figure out what the problem might be, and trying to fix it, often making things worse (recall Alex's attempt with the sex cards.) Generally Nice Guys don't set good boundaries and end up reseting their wives, even though they weren't really honest about their feelings in the first place. I don't think Alex is being totally honest about his feelings, because he's posting things here that he's not comfortable his wife sees. Yes, he's made it clear that he has his reasons for this, but that doesn't mean it's honest, or that his wife would be okay with it. I think Alex exhibits Nice Guy behavior, but that's my subjective evaluation. Maybe he's too Nice Guy for me, but the pertinent question is: is he too Nice Guy for his wife? 



always_alone said:


> Indeed the man-up logic is oddly contradictory because it says on one hand that you need to find your own happiness independently of your wife, and you need to do this by doing everything that a wife supposedly finds attractive, and nothing else. Again: Huh? :scratchhead:


Finding your own happiness and not expecting your wife to provide it all (or a disproportionate amount of it) is attractive behavior--although YMMV depending on the tolerance of a spouse for "clinginess". It doesn't matter if you or anyone else thinks your behavior is clingy, if your wife does, then it's going to affect her behavior towards you. I do think men fall into this trap more than women do because they don't understand female desire over the long term, and end up hoop jumping to get more sex. 

Same goes for reverse dynamics in which the man feels his wife is too clingy and relies on his approval too much for her happiness. 



always_alone said:


> As for ****-tests, these are about much, much more than simply emotions a person feels. ****-tests are *tests* of love, of worthiness. When we live with someone, anyone, we will always have times when we need to deal with their emotions, and it's not like it's just women who get angry, hurt, jealous, or what have you. But ****-tests are a different beast altogether, and assuming that all women are doing them whenever they happen to have a feeling that their partner finds unpleasant is, I think, extremely counterproductive.


Yeah, but the designation of sh1t test is totally subjective. Sometimes my husband thinks I'm sh!t testing when I'm not, sometimes I'm totally sh!t testing and he doesn't even notice. A definite designation doesn't really matter--and isn't possible anyway--but the prescribed behavior when you *think* you are being sh!t tested is to remain calm and not let her emotions become your emotions, and I think that's always productive advice. If a husband triggers and starts becoming emotional right back, escalation is more likely. If he stays calm, there is a better chance she will be heard. 



always_alone said:


> So while I do agree that the non-sexist watered down version of man-up contains some useful advice, I think it is also often muddied by some really, really, really bad and potentially harmful ideas.


I don't disagree that some bad advice comes wrapped in the "man up" package, but I see it, on the whole, as useful advice with some crappy interpretations sometimes thrown in. 

Again, neither of us is wrong--we are coming at this thing from very different positions, or at least I get that impression. It's been a really useful and enlightening discussion for me. 


Okay--I've got to run out the door, so I'm going to post this without my usual pre-submit read through, so I apologize in advance for typos and errors!


----------



## Marduk (Jul 16, 2010)

Word, GI.

I'll say one more thing and then I'm bowing out.

Listen, Alex. You seem like a likeable guy. A likeable guy with a wife and kids and a decent life... but with a wife that's not exactly into you right now.

There can be all kinds of reasons driving that response from her, and all kinds of conversations you can have with her. Those conversations are good.

But what you can't do is just wrestle with the questions. Communications in long term relationships tend to have a bad signal:noise ratio; and in many it just goes down, not up, because you're past the "discovering each other phase." Which means that you may or may not ever understand what's going on.

But, what you can do, what you can fix, what you can improve, what you can control -- the only thing you can do that stuff to in the entire universe is yourself.

That's it. Look at yourself long and hard and ask yourself if you're the most awesome guy you can be. Not for her; for yourself. Then ask yourself if you're bringing that awesomeness to your marriage 100%.

Because if you truly loved her, you'd be doing that anyway. You'd already _be_ that dude. And if you are already that dude, more power to you. Then, maybe, you have to find someone you're more compatible with.

You can stay or go. You can influence her or not.

But what you can't do is hope for her to change without doing some change yourself.

Someone's gotta take the first step.

I wish you, your wife, and your kids all the best man. I believe in you, if that's worth something.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

alexm said:


> But I didn't...
> 
> I asked her a loooong time ago, and she gave a vague answer about previous relationships hurting her and she doesn't want to be hurt again. We left it at that. She was much more specific this time, and I did not insist or corner her. She volunteered.
> 
> Also, I'm being told one thing by one group of people (find out if there's something from her past, there must be something, it's obvious) then when I do this I'm being told I'm cornering or trapping her.


Alex...I don't mean you have been badgering her for an answer. I don't mean that you have poked her until she started bleeding.

All I meant by my comment was that it wasn't like she has thought long and hard on "why"...at least not in any way that she can articulate to you. She hasn't done a lot of self-exploration for "why", nor is she very self-aware about her own sexuality (many people aren't). She is slowly showing signs of becoming aware or at least peeking around doors. When you pulled back and then this talk started...and then she volunteered the information about this other guy and how it affected her sex life...I'm just saying that this is the first thing she touched on and it spewed forth. It is not "the reason" for how she feels or how her sexuality works. There is a lot more to it, I'm saying.

Look - if someone is like "hey, I want to be sexual but something is blocking me", and they then start buying books, maybe go to a sex therapist, start doing some exercises and finding out more about their own sexuality....THEN after doing this for while, if they told you "ok so for a long time I was non-sexual mostly because sex triggered x, y, z event...but then a, b, c event exacerbated it, and for a period of time I lost my sexuality...but then I dug into myself, worked on l, m, n and O, and now I feel I really know myself sexually and am happy where I'm at".....THEN obviously this person really knows themself, knows more about the "whys" of how their sexuality came to be the way it is.

Conversely, if you take someone who really doesn't want to look at those whys, but they occasionally do because they feel they "should"...and they aren't very honest with themself about some of it...and THEY start telling you "well, my first relationship yada yada yada"....do you see what I'm getting at yet?


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

GettingIt said:


> The problems with Nice Guys isn't that they want to know why their wives want to have sex with them, it's that they jump though hoops trying to figure out what the problem might be...


Without trying to derail Alexm's thread, (Maybe this would help him and others...) why is something so basic to the male psyche an apparent turn-off to so many women?

IOW, Many of us accept this on faith without truly understanding it.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> I guess I just don't recall seeing the dynamic with genders reversed here, where the man is feeling smothered and turned off by how much his wife wants to jump through hoops to please him, or in which a husband wishes his wife would emotionally detach a little and be more independent with her happiness. I'm not saying it doesn't exist. Perhaps if I'd see a thread like that, I'd tend to see different issues due to the gender reversal. As I stated in an earlier post, I do think that gender differences matter very much--or come to matter very much--in long term monogamous relationships.


This could describe the dynamic in my relationship.

It is also described in a lot of relationships on dating message boards.

They write lots of books for women who tend to pursue or try to smother or "mother" or push too much girly stuff on their men and chase them off.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

marduk said:


> Bingo. Nailed it.
> 
> Now, she may tell with her actions, instead of words. Don't get hung up on this.
> 
> The body usually tells the truth.


Let's say I watch a video of some bonobos having a group sexual ritual, and I get very physically aroused by it.

What "truth" is my body telling me?


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

Faithful Wife said:


> They write lots of books for women who tend to pursue or try to smother or "mother" or push too much girly stuff on their men and chase them off.


There's a young women in Texas (Laina Morris aka Overly Attached Girlfriend) who's practically made a career out of portraying this humorously.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

ocotillo said:


> Without trying to derail Alexm's thread, (Maybe this would help him and others...) *why is something so basic to the male psyche an apparent turn-off to so many women?*
> 
> IOW, Many of us accept this on faith without truly understanding it.


When people accept that sexuality is different for the genders, and then vastly different among individuals, these kinds of things won't be so painful. It is only because you (the general you) are trying to ask an unanswerable question that it doesn't make any sense....men and women don't get turned on the same. Period.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

Faithful Wife said:


> When people accept that sexuality is different for the genders, and then vastly different among individuals, these kinds of things won't be so painful. It is only because you (the general you) are trying to ask an unanswerable question that it doesn't make any sense....men and women don't get turned on the same. Period.


LOL - Thank you.

For many of us though, it's like a mosquito bite. We know we shouldn't scratch it. Sometimes you just can't stop yourself.

Hell - I'm even curious why reactions to Evo Psych seem to be so visceral among many women. I don't agree with much, if not most of it, but it doesn't bother me in quite the same way.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

jld said:


> : I think if you could hear the truth, and not leave her over it, but start working to inspire some genuine desire in her, you could have deeper, truer intimacy than you may have ever experienced.



As long as you have an objective view if the situation and can ascertain heather progress is made and sustained...

Otherwise you'll join the emotional graveyard like the rest of us


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Well folks - you heard it here first. 

GetsIt!!! - is the female version of Athol Kay. 

I read her stuff - like I read his stuff and I think - damn girl - you are completely inside my head and M2's head - AT THE SAME TIME.

And that is - like simultaneously being in two locations - nearly impossible. 

I do NOT mind that M2 needs me. Ok - I admit it - I LIKE that she needs me. 

M2 would hate it if I needed her. And she would leave me if I didn't love her. 

So we are very different. 

I'm not jealous. Almost dysfunctionally not jealous. M2 says the funniest - cutest - borderline homicidal things when she gets jealous. How do you spell P R I M A L. 

M2 is hot and all over me. Than she's cool/bltchy when she's had a bad day at work. 

She's hot, she's cold. She's complicated. Crazy and primal in bed. Classy and reserved in public. 

How do you have a hope of resisting that? You don't. I don't. 

And on the days she 'loves me not' I just go about my business - because - if I simply stay where I am - the warmth of Dawn is never that far away. 






GettingIt said:


> I guess I just don't recall seeing the dynamic with genders reversed here, where the man is feeling smothered and turned off by how much his wife wants to jump through hoops to please him, or in which a husband wishes his wife would emotionally detach a little and be more independent with her happiness. I'm not saying it doesn't exist. Perhaps if I'd see a thread like that, I'd tend to see different issues due to the gender reversal. As I stated in an earlier post, I do think that gender differences matter very much--or come to matter very much--in long term monogamous relationships.
> 
> I think women are encouraged to show their men how much they need them because that is an emotional need of men. I'm not saying its not an emotional need for women, too. I think I under appreciated the importance of making my man feel loved in ways that mattered TO HIM. As a result, I'm now more likely to advise women to find ways to do just that.
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM, what's the edge you speak of, in graphic details if possible , was it reciprocal, and was it caused by external or internal factors? 

Also you seem to agree with the idea of "losing the edge" equating to "complete loss of passion". This type of discrete black and white thinking troubles me...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

alexm said:


> Let's not focus on this guy. I've already stated that I don't at all feel that it has anything to do with HIM specifically.
> 
> She got hurt once, doesn't want to get hurt again. Has followed her through her adult life.


Confirmed earlier this evening that it has nothing to do with him specifically. I raised this concern in an open an comfortable manner. I believe her.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

> They can tell their husbands to go pound sand, just like French Fry did when her husband pulled man up moves that were deal breakers for her


I gotta correct you here GI.

I played manipulative head games until he got tired of me being as big of a ***** as he was an ******* and we sat down and honestly straightened stuff out. This is unfortunately my interpretation of a lot of the man-up stuff here as well and how it plays out.

I would never recommend what I did and would try to find healthier ways to change a marriage. Which is why I cringed hella hard when alexm's wife shared a personal story to him and the tone here was "well, duh, alpha up."

If she is in any way like me, and gets a whiff of this--life won't be just kinda bummerish for alex, it will be hell.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

The canary in the coal mine - is a leading indicator of the air going bad - yes? 

For a man - a loss of his sense of humor - his playfullness - this is the same leading indicator. 

And the reason for that is remarkably simple. A man who loves his wife and has faith that overall everything will turn out fine - for him. This man retains his sense of humor and playfullness. 

M2 NEEDS a certain amount of playful conflict. She needs this every bit as much as I need some amount of sex (from a physically healthy partner). 

So - as best I can describe this: edge is the absence of fear/anxiety - combined with love. Those two things produce a myriad of positive behaviors. 

For me, the absence of edge produced this response pattern: 
(Irritated / angry affect): Long legalistic type explanation of why M2's behavior was not acceptable to me. 

And the presence of edge: (smiling/amused) Someone is headed for quite the spanking.....

The former: tense, thin skinned and self righteous 
The latter: relaxed, dominant and sexual




QUOTE=john117;11532274]MEM, what's the edge you speak of, in graphic details if possible , was it reciprocal, and was it caused by external or internal factors? 

Also you seem to agree with the idea of "losing the edge" equating to "complete loss of passion". This type of discrete black and white thinking troubles me...[/QUOTE]


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Most people our age (50+) are not playful or humor laden. If nothing else they're tense, fearful, and would not know a good laugh if it hit them on the head Three Stooges style.

It also depends on the receptivity of your partner. Some are playful, some are not (try Cards Against Humanity for practice ). 

So, I would think your statement on "the edge" is dead on accurate if your spouse, ehem, plays along. If not you might as well be doing standup comedy during a funeral (which accurately describes Grandpa John's funeral a while ago...)

It's also cultural. Some peoples are pretty DOA at 50, others are not.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,
Agreed. You cannot play with someone who will not play. 

I will say that I have abstracted social chemistry down to three distinct dynamics:
- Assertion of SELF (solitude)
- Request for comfort/support/soothing 
And
- A desire for challenge/stimulation/excitement

At a glance I know which M2 seeks. And FWIW - at times she begins with a desire for solitude. 

So - as odd as it sounds - my very first goal (analogous to the doctors theme of: do no harm) is to avoid creating any sense of 'captivity' for M2. It's why that book - mating in captivity - made so much sense to me. 

My decision tree with M2 has three branches from the root, each corresponding to one of her core desires: 
- Excitement: she wants to play
- Comfort: she wants reassurance 
- Solitude: she wants space 

Often she follows a sequence. 
1. A desire for Solitude
2. Followed by a request for comfort
3. And then a prompt for excitement

Truly - I find this to be delightful. Like the famous quote: Without darkness, there is no light. 

As for you John - all I know is that you deserve far, far better than you are getting. And we both know that your situation was not predictable. 






john117 said:


> Most people our age (50+) are not playful or humor laden. If nothing else they're tense, fearful, and would not know a good laugh if it hit them on the head Three Stooges style.
> 
> It also depends on the receptivity of your partner. Some are playful, some are not (try Cards Against Humanity for practice ).
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

John,

This was the best question anyone has asked me in a long time. 

I am going to distill my prior response. 

What M2 wants from me is:
1. Freedom/independence 
2. Comfort/support
3. Adventure/excitement 

Other than fvcking other people - M2 can do whatever she wants. Even that (fvcking other people) is something she likely knows I would flex on if pushed to the wall - provided she accepted that I would do it also. Luckily - that's not something she seems to feel a desire to do (one advantage of marrying a Catholic girl who walks the walk).

So - I sincerely thank you John. As your question prompted me to think about this. 

I do genuinely feel bad for you. For a while - M2 did some of the stuff to me - that J2 does to you. It felt utterly awful. Like being kicked in the balls. 

And - being totally unfiltered here - if M2 was able to earn what J2 does - I might be sitting exactly where you are......





john117 said:


> Most people our age (50+) are not playful or humor laden. If nothing else they're tense, fearful, and would not know a good laugh if it hit them on the head Three Stooges style.
> 
> It also depends on the receptivity of your partner. Some are playful, some are not (try Cards Against Humanity for practice ).
> 
> ...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Disagree that having "edge" requires love.

Too many examples of women who go crazy for totally indifferent @ssholes to support that.

Edge is mostly having outcome independence.


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

john117 said:


> Most people our age (50+) are not playful or humor laden. If nothing else they're tense, fearful, and would not know a good laugh if it hit them on the head Three Stooges style.


Hey John, 

I'm in my 50's and am more playful and humerous than I've ever been. Many of our friends too. I would think most people get to a point where the think life can't be taken too seriously...

I just don't give a sh!t anymore about what other people think and am in a really good place right now. 

You only live once!


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

jld said:


> :iagree:
> 
> I would really like to see you take a breath and dial back the possible emotional reaction to hearing the truth, Alex.
> 
> I think if you could hear the truth, and not leave her over it, but start working to inspire some genuine desire in her, you could have deeper, truer intimacy than you may have ever experienced.


It may sound naive, but that's also me trusting not only her, but my gut, but - I don't think there IS a truth to be told. As in, this IS it. She's said in the past that she has walls up, just never anything specific. "got hurt, don't want to again". This was probably said 2-3 years ago.

I don't think I ignored it, but I obviously swept it aside. From my POV, everybody has been there, so it didn't really register with me as being all that important a piece of information.

Given that she was willing to open up a bit further on this, it's now registered with me that it IS the issue.

Again, from my POV, the WHY's of it all don't matter. What he did or didn't do to her don't matter. I asked whether it was physical or sexual abuse on his part, she said no, that's all I needed to know.

So that's where we're at now. There may be more, I don't know, and quite frankly, I don't think it really matters. She opened up her heart to somebody who trampled all over it and she didn't truly learn from it. Instead, she took the easy way out of it and built whatever walls she has.

Again, I think age and experience had a LOT to do with that situation. Perhaps if she had dated more, and this guy came along when she was 25 or 26, she'd have had a better idea of what to do, rather thank shrink into a turtle shell. This was how her 19 year old self knew how to deal with heartbreak, and the reaction was due to inexperience.

For most of us, we experience heartbreak earlier in life than that. My 14 year old stepson has already had a tough breakup, and they only dated for 4 or 5 months. This is why teenagers date - to learn, to experience and to begin to understand "real" relationships.

As I said earlier, she and I were our firsts. We were together when she was 15, 16, 17, then she broke up with me. No heartbreak for her. She didn't really date seriously for a little while, then met this guy. Together when she was 17, 18, 19.

So she had two relationships before she turned 20 that lasted 3 years each. That's generally unheard of, I think. Because of those circumstances, she had no clue (imo) how to handle heartbreak. When we were together, I was generally good to her. As good as a 16, 17, 18 year old can be.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

So if it doesn't matter, what is your plan moving forward?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Tall Average Guy said:


> So while the ex is one factor, it is likely not the only one at play.


Oh, that's absolute truth right there. He wasn't the only one. He was just the first.

Now whether any subsequent relationships were sabotaged by her, or by them, who knows? I tend to think a little bit of both, which is logical anyway. It's hard to have a proper relationship if you don't let somebody in.

A good example, her ex before me (about a year gap where she was single and celibate) is a pretty decent guy. He's in our life because he's my stepsons father. I actually kind of like him, to be honest.

They were together about 3 years. He had come out of a marriage in which his wife cheated on him. They had 3 kids together. So he was broken in that way, as one would expect.

From what she's told me about their relationship (which is not detailed, obviously) is that he was at fault for most of it. He eventually started to accuse her of cheating (which I truly believe she did not) because their sex life dwindled after having the baby. He invaded her personal space repeatedly, needed to know where she was, who she was with, what she was doing, etc. So you've got a guy who's leery of cheating and on the look out for it, and a woman who's got huge walls up and is about as independent as all get-out. Rock, meet hard place.

So that ended, and she swore off men for a while.

I think she's eventually started to realize over the years that it wasn't 100% him that screwed up that relationship, which is good. He didn't help, but she had a part in it, too. That's a big step into realizing that it's not always the other person's fault.

For my part, I haven't seemed to give her much in the way of an excuse to keep adding bricks to her wall, and she acknowledges that. It's part me being patient and mature, and it's part dumb luck. Given that my ex wife cheated on me, you'd have thought that I'd have been extra vigilant and on the lookout, too. I was, to some degree, but luckily I kept it to myself. I learned several years ago that those were MY walls, and I had to let go of them and just trust her. Whatever happens, happens. I can only prevent a repeat of my previous marriage by doing my best to love and care for my wife, as opposed to jumping all over her every time there's a trigger.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

jld said:


> So if it doesn't matter, what is your plan moving forward?


Well, I admit, I don't have a plan, per se. It seems to change, dependent on my wife... sigh. I know this isn't good, either.

So far, the playing it cool is what's working now. I am more 'eyes wide open' to this, so I intend to keep it up going forward, despite my brain telling me to do the opposite. It'll be a battle, but I've maintained it all this week. (pat on the back).

Over the past few days, there's been a comfort between the two of us that I haven't seen a long time. It's actually quite relaxing. Apart from me coming on TAM, I'm not over-thinking things, or trying to analyze her mood or actions or words the way I used to.

I get the feeling that there's been a (small) weight lifted off her shoulders. She seems a bit more relaxed lately than usual, as do I. One persons mood will play into the others, so if I'm anxious, she's anxious, and vice versa.

The one thing I'm wrestling with is not looking too far into the future. Not thinking "what am I going to say to her next?" and "what do I do when she regresses again?" I think she feels this, and is alternately relieved and also possibly a little bit scared, as this is what she expects from me. She may possibly be wondering why I haven't reverted back to the same old, same old as I normally do.

Everybody's different. From my POV, just letting go is the most beneficial thing for her and I. Not letting go of each other, I mean letting go of the details, and the "why's". I feel that in order to allow herself to open up with ME (and I don't mean about her past) I just need to be me.

I think that both of us letting go of the past, hers AND mine, is ultimately the best course of action. I don't see what value there is in having her talk and rehash events. She knows what her starting point was, how it's affected me, and more importantly, how it's affected her life since.

Just by her stating out loud what it was is huge. I don't get the impression she's ever told anybody specifically what this initial trigger for her walls was. When you say it out loud, it's real, it's not just in your head. When you say "I got hurt, and I don't want to get hurt again", that's vague. When you say "I got hurt because of this, at this time in my life, and I put up these walls", that's more specific.

I actually think that, at least at this point, it would be detrimental for her to go any further.

The thing is, she HAS moved on. From that guy, and other relationships. Just as I've moved on from my ex wife. The only thing remaining are the walls. She knows why they're there. I know why they're there. She knows they need to come down, and she will only do that with a combination of trust (in herself and me) and knowing that the reward is pretty sweet. She's no dummy.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> I guess I just don't recall seeing the dynamic with genders reversed here, where the man is feeling smothered and turned off by how much his wife wants to jump through hoops to please him, or in which a husband wishes his wife would emotionally detach a little and be more independent with her happiness. I'm not saying it doesn't exist. Perhaps if I'd see a thread like that, I'd tend to see different issues due to the gender reversal.


. 

But look at how you framed this: You're thinking a role reversal is necessary, and your expectation is that it would have to be the *man* complaining about the clingy wife.

So tell me: how many *women* do you see here complaining about how "too nice" their men are? Like, virtually none?

It's not the women whining about Nice Guy, it's the men who have decided they're too nice because they have watched guys they think are a-holes get laid more than them. The whole man-up idea is born of sexual jealousy in their formative years.

No, what women whine about in thread after thread after thread is lack of attention, care, emotional support and sex. They're not here pining for their guy to become more aloof, they're pining for him to notice her and meet her needs. 




GettingIt said:


> Meh, I see all that as mostly smoke and mirrors to get men motivated to do what they need to do. Doesn't really bother me. Fact of the matter is, women's desire doesn't work like a man's because we don't have testosterone to drive it. Life circumstances matter, relationship stuff matters, where we are in our cycles matters--hell there's a lot of stuff that goes into building our desire, nurturing it, keeping it strong. I think it's a lot more complicated than male desire. They need SOME way to frame it!


And so they choose the most sexist, condescending, and diminishing ways of doing so? Grand!

I think the way one chooses to frame things matters quite a lot, because of both the attitudes and treatments it engenders. The basis of much man-up talk is that women don't know what they want, and so need a man to tell them; women need to be led. Now it's true that people can be more or less self aware. Some of us have very little understanding of our emotions; some have a lot. This is, however, a human trait. And telling some guy that *he* somehow "gets it" by virtue of having a penis is to my mind a recipe for disaster. 

As long as the advice is the much more basic "don't be a doormat and let her walk all over you", I think we agree. It's hard to respect anyone who lets themselves be treated that way. Man or woman.

But once it gets wrapped up in all of these ideas about which gender should be the one to have more needs, or more love, or edge, or whatever, or which gender should have to sacrifice themselves and their authenticity, we start running into trouble. We all have these qualities in greater and lesser amounts --and so leaping to rigidly defined behavioral expectations is not helpful. Different things will work for different people, depending on their personalities, histories, proclivities and desires.

When he was younger, my SO had a couple of "alpha" friends that he was jealous of because they attracted all the women, lots of them. What happened to them? One is single and has given up on women (except for porn); one is married to a psycho woman who yells at him a lot and cheats every chance she gets. He's not jealous anymore.

I also think it's a mistake to assume that women's sexuality really is all that more complicated. Surely it seems that way sometimes, as so many men will say things like "always ready", "compartmentalize", "not affected by emotions, life circumstances etc.", but when push comes to shove, it turns out that a lot of that just isn't true. Closer to the truth is, I think, is that guys are often *very* uncomfortable admitting any weakness in their own prowess.

Indeed, I think a lot of this aversion to "weakness" in men is coming from the men themselves, NOT the women who love them.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

ocotillo said:


> LOL - Thank you.
> 
> For many of us though, it's like a mosquito bite. We know we shouldn't scratch it. Sometimes you just can't stop yourself.
> 
> Hell - I'm even curious why reactions to Evo Psych seem to be so visceral among many women. I don't agree with much, if not most of it, but it doesn't bother me in quite the same way.


I can explain my visceral reaction:

First off, t's utter nonsense, most of it, and people spouting nonsense who are pretending to know everything are irksome (to me).

More importantly, though, it is nothing more than the age-old sexism wrapped up in a pseudo-scientific cloak. All my life I have been told I cannot do or cannot be certain things because I am a girl. I had to be three times as good to receive a quarter of the acknowledgments. I have been condescended to, patronized, treated like a child ("quiet, girl, men are talking", or my personal favorite "don't you worry your pretty little head about that"). I can't tell you how many times I've been completely ignored when saying something, but when buddy at the end of the table repeats it, everyone gushes about what a great idea. 

When you spend your whole life struggling to be heard, to be yourself without someone telling you what a b1tch you are for being assertive, or what a slvt you are for having sex, or how incapable you are because of you physiology, then any further comments about how you were born to be weak, dependent, vulnerable are likely to piss you off royally.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

Don't you worry your pretty little head now....


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

**backs out slowly**


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I can explain my visceral reaction:
> 
> First off, t's utter nonsense, most of it, and people spouting nonsense who are pretending to know everything are irksome (to me).
> 
> ...


But don't you think it is only going to appeal to a certain segment of the population, and even then, only up to a point?

In other words, following some of that advice might attract a woman, but will anything other than genuine emotional intimacy keep a couple happily together long term?

And does it really matter what people think of you, especially people who have their own issues if they feel the need to say some of those things to you?

It's not like everything people say is objectively true. People who actually know you can see the truth for themselves. Trust in that, or even better, in your own knowledge of yourself.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Always...thank you for always being you. I love hearing your voice here. Please tell us more, and stay true to what you mean. Because your points are a light house in the fog of illogical ideas that get twisted into "advice" around here.

Good advice shouldn't have to include a lesson in pretend evolution. If it does, be suspect.

I'm sorry that it turns out that many men here still end up telling you the same old message...about men this, women that, you keep quiet now as you wouldn't understand, etc. However, that's exactly why you need to be here.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

always_alone said:


> I can explain my visceral reaction:
> 
> First off, t's utter nonsense, most of it, and people spouting nonsense who are pretending to know everything are irksome (to me).
> 
> ...


That is a terrible way to go through your formative years. 

But A_A, when you go through life "knowing" or "expecting" to find negative in people, I promise you will find it, whether it is actually there or not.

I am not a sexist person, nor has any of the advice that I have suggested Alex follow. But you have argued a sexist angle not only against my advice, but also against other people, both male and female, in this thread. They have all advocated different aspects of what "man up" really means, none of which included making the wife get back in the kitchen while she was barefoot and pregnant.

Which is more likely: That the multiple posters on here, both male and female, are sexist, with sexist advice? Or you are so colored by your experience that you see sexism because you _want_ to see it?

FWIW, you may notice I have put some likes on what you have said. That is because you have some amazing things to say when you are not being a hawk for sexism. As a matter of fact, I would love to see more of it. 

But until you acknowledge to yourself that you are judging the intent of what posters are saying rather than the words, you will continue to see sexism when it is not present.

Take care, A_A.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

Her having walls that do serious damage to her current marriage is not consistent with the idea that she has moved past her prior relationships.

Obviously, I am skeptical by this "walls" explanation to begin with. 

I think you've admitted this yourself, but what is the functional difference between having "walls" and her just not being that into you?

As long as you tolerate these walls, what's her motivation to pull them down?

On a positive note, I think you have more of a plan than you recognize. Your plan is to keep playing it cool. Build on that. Let her feel your absence.

If you do nothing else, it is a start. Then see if she has any motivation to address her own issues.


----------



## farsidejunky (Mar 19, 2014)

The walls are a red herring. I will refer you back to what Anon said a couple of days ago. That still rings true to me.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> Her having walls that do serious damage to her current marriage is not consistent with the idea that she has moved past her prior relationships.
> 
> Obviously, I am skeptical by this "walls" explanation to begin with.
> 
> ...


These are "games" to me... just sit her down and ask her what she is going to do about her "walls"... in a sympathetic way, obviously... the playing it cool won't work... she is going to get upset and her walls will get even higher...


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

I'm sexist. I don't think men and women are the same.

People are individuals, but men are still men and women are still women.

As for the "age old sexism" thing, do I think women should be property? No.

Do I think we've suddenly had a revelation and now truly understand men and women today when for thousands and thousands of years people all over the world got it wrong? No.

It's possible to be modern and enlightened and still recognize that men and women are different.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,

This post - is by far the most honest, insightful and useful bit - you have shared on ANY thread you have ever started. 

If I could like this 1000 times I would. 






alexm said:


> Well, I admit, I don't have a plan, per se. It seems to change, dependent on my wife... sigh. I know this isn't good, either.
> 
> So far, the playing it cool is what's working now. I am more 'eyes wide open' to this, so I intend to keep it up going forward, despite my brain telling me to do the opposite. It'll be a battle, but I've maintained it all this week. (pat on the back).
> 
> ...


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

always_alone said:


> I can explain my visceral reaction:


Wow, AA; you're on fire this morning. 

I hear you and wouldn't for a moment suggest that your visceral reaction is unjustified.

As it's applied to attraction between men and women evo-psych slights most men in a big way too. It tells them that eighty percent of women are only truly attracted to twenty percent of men; that a big, fat laundry list of things from the pitch of your voice to your chest to waist ratio to how tall you are all send out subtle signals of genetic inferiority that women pick up on.

It tells a man that while his wife may verbally profess to love them, she won't be able to bring herself to the (apparently) distasteful task of having sex with him if he even makes the mistake of being too solicitous when it comes to her likes and dislikes, which strikes me as hell and gone beyond cruel. 

Instead of saying, "Wait a minute...This doesn't even square with evolutionary theory itself" most men seem more than happy to flagellate themselves. 

I'm sure there's an evo-psych explanation for that too though.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> I'm sexist. I don't think men and women are the same.
> 
> People are individuals, but men are still men and women are still women.
> 
> ...



Are you talking to yourself?


----------



## vellocet (Oct 18, 2013)

Here we go again. Another thread turned into a gender issue when the usual suspects participate


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Now THIS is a perfect example of cross gender foolishness.

She's not avoiding sex because she has walls up. Alex has done nothing to break her trust. 

She's turned off by his chronic and low level anxiety. And if you read his latest post - it's starting to become clear to Alex - that the answer to this isn't inside some puzzle set between A2's ears. 

Alex has but to look in the mirror to see both the problem and solution. 




In Absentia said:


> These are "games" to me... just sit her down and ask her what she is going to do about her "walls"... in a sympathetic way, obviously... the playing it cool won't work... she is going to get upset and her walls will get even higher...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Now THIS is a perfect example of cross gender foolishness.
> 
> She's not avoiding sex because she has walls up. Alex has done nothing to break her trust.
> 
> ...


It has nothing to do with her walls, then... it's all Alex's fault...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Whew - what a relief. I never thought you'd figure it out. 




In Absentia said:


> It has nothing to do with her walls, then... it's all Alex's fault...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

farsidejunky said:


> I am not a sexist person, nor has any of the advice that I have suggested Alex follow. But you have argued a sexist angle not only against my advice, but also against other people, both male and female, in this thread. They have all advocated different aspects of what "man up" really means, none of which included making the wife get back in the kitchen while she was barefoot and pregnant.
> 
> Which is more likely: That the multiple posters on here, both male and female, are sexist, with sexist advice? Or you are so colored by your experience that you see sexism because you _want_ to see it?


Actually, I argued that evo-psych is sexist, which it is. 

I have not accused you or any other poster here of being sexist. What I have said is that the man-up advice is based in gender stereotypes that are very limited in their value.;

Now, maybe you got a lot of mileage out of those gender stereotypes. And that's great for you! And makes me see why you are so invested in them. But we can't then assume that because they have worked for you, they will also work across the board. 


And no, you have never suggested that women be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, but take a closer look at what you have said:



farsidejunky said:


> SHE WANTS YOU TO BE IN CHARGE OF SEX. GIVE HER WHAT SHE WANTS.
> 
> ETA: When she responded to your idea of the cards, you got your feelings hurt. That was so unattractive to her. You should have told her you weren't asking for her permission, rather just giving her an idea of what was to come, and just gone for it.





farsidejunky said:


> We have to be strong enough to handle the things said by a woman in the hottest of anger, or deepest level of hurt, in order to see the scared little girl behind the emotions that needs soothing.


In response to a man who claims his wife doesn't sh!t test:


farsidejunky said:


> Then she is either incredibly rare or you are naive.





farsidejunky said:


> This may not be you, but in my experience, the ones that I have met that are fiercely independent are normally using the guise of independence as armor to guard what they are hiding inside of their hearts: fear.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Seriously? Walls aren't important? It's up to alexm to just be so incredibly composed and strong, and it matters not a whit who or what she is?

Can we unpack some of the implications of this? Cuz it sure sounds like y'all have a pretty high estimation of yourselves and your role in a relationship. 

I'm betting that what's between her ears is also quite relevant to the success of the relationship.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> It has nothing to do with her walls, then... it's all Alex's fault...


Well, yeah, because *everything* is alexm's fault. Don't you know that?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

always_alone said:


> Well, yeah, because *everything* is alexm's fault. Don't you know that?


yes, I kind of got that...  he is not a leader, after all...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Whew - what a relief. I never thought you'd figure it out.


If this sarcasm, I don't get it, like you didn't get mine...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

ocotillo said:


> Wow, AA; you're on fire this morning.
> 
> I hear you and wouldn't for a moment suggest that your visceral reaction is unjustified.
> 
> ...


Oh, octotillo, I so agree with you on this. But for some reason, men seem to lap it up, rather than be offended by it. Do not for the life of me understand why.



ocotillo said:


> I'm sure there's an evo-psych explanation for that too though.


Oh yes, absoutely! Self-flagellation is what betas do. They're job is to be the one who is picked on by the alpha. Can't have a pecking order without someone to peck!


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

It actually is all alexm's fault. That's what sucks.

It's totally within his power to stop this mindf*ck.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Ocotillo...don't forget that Evo-psyche also teaches men that although women don't want to have sex with 80% of you, the natural order of things is that men just rape women anyway and then she's into it. So it all works out nicely in the end. Such a nice view of nature. Too bad it is bullchit.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Ocotillo...don't forget that Evo-psyche also teaches men that although women don't want to have sex with 80% of you, the natural order of things is that men just rape women anyway and then she's into it. So it all works out nicely in the end. Such a nice view of nature. Too bad it is bullchit.



A lot of that has been disputed tho; there is some basis for evo psych but not quite as much as it's proponents claim...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

I know john....that's why I constantly mock it, as in that post you quoted.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Anon1111 said:


> It actually is all alexm's fault. That's what sucks.
> 
> It's totally within his power to stop this mindf*ck.


Right. So it matters not a whit whether she is smart, stupid, sexual, asexual, hurt, happy, traumatized, healthy, self-aware, in self-denial, cold, warm, dependent, independent, crazy, sane, nice, hateful, selfish, giving, kind, mean, nurturing, challenging. 

The woman is interchangeable, and anything that ever happens is also the guys fault. And if it is bad, then it was cuz he was too nice.

Got it!


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Great social chemistry is predicated on providing your partner a healthy mix of: 
- Freedom
- Emotional support/soothing 
- Excitement/fun

If you frequently feel anxious, that anxiety disrupts all three of those things. 

And yes - Alex worries about stuff - often and out loud. 







In Absentia said:


> It has nothing to do with her walls, then... it's all Alex's fault...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

AA,

How many men have you dated - who were 'too nice'? I'm not poking you. It's a sincere question. 

And in the spirit of reciprocity. About half the women I dated were 'too nice' - for me. Doesn't mean they were too nice. Just too nice for me. 

And I only dated one woman who had too much edge. I liked and respected her. Very little laughter in our conversations. 







always_alone said:


> Right. So it matters not a whit whether she is smart, stupid, sexual, asexual, hurt, happy, traumatized, healthy, self-aware, in self-denial, cold, warm, dependent, independent, crazy, sane, nice, hateful, selfish, giving, kind, mean, nurturing, challenging.
> 
> The woman is interchangeable, and anything that ever happens is also the guys fault. And if it is bad, then it was cuz he was too nice.
> 
> Got it!


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

MEM11363 said:


> AA,
> About half the women I dated were 'too nice' - for me. Doesn't mean they were too nice. Just too nice for me.


Hey, MEM

Do you remember the old _Twilight Zone_ episode, The Chaser?

(A man buys a love potion for $1 and finds out it's too powerful. But not only does the reversal potion cost $1000, if it doesn't work on the first try it will never work at all. - LOL.)

When you say, "too nice" are you talking about a smothering, overly attached type of personality or something else?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Anon1111 said:


> Her having walls that do serious damage to her current marriage is not consistent with the idea that she has moved past her prior relationships.


You're right, she hasn't.

What I mean is she's moved on from THEM, those people, and I guess, this one in particular. But no matter how you slice it, almost all of us have had at least one bad experience that will stay with us forever. I sure do.

I have let go of my ex wife, on a personal level. I have not let go of what happened, nor will I likely ever. Because it was bad. It will be there with me for the rest of my life.

Whether I allow it to affect future relationships or not is the key.

Unfortunately, some people do this. I think all of us are capable of doing this, really, at least to some degree. We ALL put up walls due to our past experiences. It's how high these walls are to begin with that are the problem. And in many cases, high walls are built because of they, themselves, and not the person they were involved with.

I am not choosing to believe this for my sake. This is something I truly believe period. That it is not at all, in most cases, about the actual persons who hurt us. That it is about us, ourselves and how we handle things.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

MEM11363 said:


> Now THIS is a perfect example of cross gender foolishness.
> 
> She's not avoiding sex because she has walls up. Alex has done nothing to break her trust.
> 
> ...


What you're saying is logical, but the truth is that these walls were up from the beginning. They just weren't manifested on a sexual level, therefore I (typical male that I am) was rather unaware or unaffected by them. I clearly remember saying to myself that she's a tough nut to crack, she's independent, she's a feminist, etc etc etc. All things I could handle, happily.

For example, she is NOT romantic, and never has been. She is not a girly-girl. She is a tomboy, through and through. Or was.

When we met, she was no makeup, wore baseball hats, ripped jeans and old tshirts and swore like a sailor (but still very hot and sexy!).

6 years later, she has a drawer full of perfume, wears makeup and does her hair almost every day, wears more womanly clothes (even skirts!). She did not own a purse until about 2 years ago. Said she wasn't "that kind of chick".

The metamorphosis from day one to now is night and day. I joke with her that she might be mistaken for a lady!

I never said boo to her about any of that, this was purely of her own volition. I didn't even encourage it as it was happening. She did it for herself, I assume, not for me, as it was clear I found her beautiful and sexy and I loved her prior.

I could get all psychoanalyst about this and say that this was a wall she's managed to break down. Rather than just blend into the background and almost purposefully appear unsexy, she's now able to show her womanhood unfettered. In other words, she's comfortable being a woman now, if that makes sense. It almost appeared a though, when I met her, she was purposefully trying to hide this from the world, lest anybody be interested in her sexually or romantically.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> Well, yeah, because *everything* is alexm's fault. Don't you know that?


Ex wife? Is that you?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Anon1111 said:


> It actually is all alexm's fault. That's what sucks.
> 
> It's totally within his power to stop this mindf*ck.


Stop it, yes.

Fix it, no.

Guess which one I'd rather do? 

And not because I feel the need to fix other people, but because this woman is the love of my life. If it gets to the point of no return (tm), I'll call it and move on. Until then, bring it on.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

There is a fair amount of variation in the 'too nice' bucket. 

That said, some commonalities: 
- They often get fixated on fixing their partner
- They are conflict avoidant, so they sometimes engage in manipulative behaviors - this isn't a conscious thing - more of a coping mechanism 

Is Alex a classic smotherer? I don't think so. 

I believe that he is a classic worrier. And worrying is a turn off. 

And worrying - makes folks tense - which tends to make them inflexible. The thing with the sex cards. A little flexibility - different outcome. 

Notice that Alex came here to defend his attempted use of the cards. Read what he wrote. 

Anxious people have more of a need to be 'right'. Often at the expense of a desired outcome.....






ocotillo said:


> Hey, MEM
> 
> Do you remember the old _Twilight Zone_ episode, The Chaser?
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,

You ought to try IC. It might help you. 

As for your wifes clothing/style/femininity upgrade - I have an observation you won't like. 

The classic 'explanation' for someone cranking up their sex rank is: I'm doing it for me. 

Sometimes that's true. Often they are doing it because they LIKE the attention it creates. 

It's kind of disturbing that - she's cranking up her sex rank - being externally more sexual while at the same time cutting way back on sex with you. 





alexm said:


> What you're saying is logical, but the truth is that these walls were up from the beginning. They just weren't manifested on a sexual level, therefore I (typical male that I am) was rather unaware or unaffected by them. I clearly remember saying to myself that she's a tough nut to crack, she's independent, she's a feminist, etc etc etc. All things I could handle, happily.
> 
> For example, she is NOT romantic, and never has been. She is not a girly-girl. She is a tomboy, through and through. Or was.
> 
> ...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> AA,
> 
> How many men have you dated - who were 'too nice'? I'm not poking you. It's a sincere question.


MEM, not sure I understand the question, but here goes: none of the men I've dated have been too nice.

The greater majority of them treated me like the garbage they thought I was. Understand, though, it wasn't treating me like garbage that won me over; it was just the end result. I was just too stupid in those days to see through lies and "charm".

A few were very nice. Of those that I dumped, it was not because of their niceness. With one, it was because he never actually ever saw me. I was just there to fulfill a role in his vision of his perfect life with a wife, a white picket fence, 2.5 children. He had no idea how far this vision was removed from mine, and just assumed I'd be ecstatic to go along with it.

Another was because of cultural differences that I didn't think we could overcome. I was simply *not* willing to adapt to certain expectations of his culture, and he wasn't willing to give them up.

This last one is a bit relevant to this thread, as at one point, when we were breaking up, he started to cry, and he tried to hide this from me. He thought for sure I would despise him for it, for showing this "weakness", but really it was quite the contrary.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

AA,

That's sad. All of it. I'm glad the new guy seems like a keeper. 

I do think there is a lot of room for harmful misinterpretation of behaviors. 

Many nights - M2 is just about to go to sleep and she says to me: Do you want to connect? 

The fools interpretation of this is: it's a shlt test - because she is seconds from going to sleep

The truth couldn't be more different. This is a simple request for assurance. She wants to know I'm not mad we didn't have sex. 

Usually I just laugh. Angry folks don't laugh. 






always_alone said:


> MEM, not sure I understand the question, but here goes: none of the men I've dated have been too nice.
> 
> The greater majority of them treated me like the garbage they thought I was. Understand, though, it wasn't treating me like garbage that won me over; it was just the end result. I was just too stupid in those days to see through lies and "charm".
> 
> ...


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> .
> 
> But look at how you framed this: You're thinking a role reversal is necessary, and your expectation is that it would have to be the *man* complaining about the clingy wife.
> 
> ...


Being a "Nice Guy" isn't about being nice, though. You can be a nice guy, and not be a "Nice Guy". And you can be a "Nice Guy" and not be an a-hole. I don't know if you've read NMMNG, but it talks about a pattern of subverting your own wants and needs because you want to placate and please others in order to avoid conflict, among other reasons. The result is often simmering resentment, an inability to set good boundaries and communicate your needs effectively, and passive aggressive behavior--"Nice Guy." 

I'm sure there are some men who decide that the problem is that they are too nice and should be a-holes to get laid. But that behavior should be understood separately from men who are behaving in ways consistent with what is described in NMMNG and who have legitimate call to work on breaking the habit of subverting their own needs. 

I think that if a guy decides he's too nice and should be an a-hole to get laid, that he'll get what he deserves. But there is a difference between learning to assert your needs through respectful communication and acting like a jerk because you think being too nice has hurt your chances with the ladies. 

I also have to admit that I rarely think about "man up" and "Nice Guy" scenarios outside of how they can function in a certain type of long term marriage dynamic. The whole idea of them being used as PUA tactics is just not on my radar that much, and either I don't see the threads in which they are discussed in that manner, or I pass them by because they are train wrecks full of people just losing their cool and lobbing insults. 



always_alone said:


> . And so they choose the most sexist, condescending, and diminishing ways of doing so? Grand!
> 
> I think the way one chooses to frame things matters quite a lot, because of both the attitudes and treatments it engenders. The basis of much man-up talk is that women don't know what they want, and so need a man to tell them; women need to be led. Now it's true that people can be more or less self aware. Some of us have very little understanding of our emotions; some have a lot. This is, however, a human trait. And telling some guy that *he* somehow "gets it" by virtue of having a penis is to my mind a recipe for disaster.


I still don't see the same basis in the "man up" talk that you see--and truthfully probably never will. Again, I tend to see it primarily as a tool for men to look at themselves and start some positive change. I think that some men wind up in marriages with spouses who they are fundamentally incompatible with on several levels, and it leads to sexlessness which is a huge problem for the gent. MMSL is aimed at giving them a way to look at the dynamic and see some agency where they thought they had none. I think MMSL speaks to those types of dynamics (where one person feels without agency) more so than it speaks to gender, but perhaps my generosity is based on my having had the fortune of being treated respectfully and well by the men in my family, and by the men I've chosen to allow into my life as acquaintances and friends. I'm not saying I've not met d-bag misogynist pigs, but they don't get the time of day from me after they show their colors. And the times I've had to be around them (at school or work), I've dismissed them as people of poor character, not of representative of the male gender. 



always_alone said:


> . As long as the advice is the much more basic "don't be a doormat and let her walk all over you", I think we agree. It's hard to respect anyone who lets themselves be treated that way. Man or woman.
> 
> But once it gets wrapped up in all of these ideas about which gender should be the one to have more needs, or more love, or edge, or whatever, or which gender should have to sacrifice themselves and their authenticity, we start running into trouble. We all have these qualities in greater and lesser amounts --and so leaping to rigidly defined behavioral expectations is not helpful. Different things will work for different people, depending on their personalities, histories, proclivities and desires.
> 
> ...


I tend to spend a lot of time trying to understand the differences between men and women. It fascinates me, to be honest. I spent most of my life misunderstanding my husband because I didn't appreciate how different he is from me--not because he's a different individual, but because he's a man with social experiences and, yes, with different biology. It doesn't bother me at all that men try to understand women, and that they come up with ways to relate to them better (yes, including how to get more sex!) 

I might as well admit that I'm not at all turned off by the idea of how biology plays into how our desire works. I'm fascinated by evolution, and how there are these sexual systems in us that started developing billions of years ago. We are ancient almost beyond comprehension down deep in our building blocks. A few years ago, I started this practice of trying to "listen to my DNA." It's been silly and fun to try and willfully lay aside all social conditioning and try to figure out what my DNA "'wants." But it's led me to find ways to be insanely happy by laying aside things that I *thought* I had to do or believe. And much of what I've done with "listening to my DNA" with my sexuality has been within the confines of a very safe marriage dynamic. I would never choose to lay aside reason and act on what I imagine my DNA is telling me otherwise. And I wouldn't tell men that they should treat a woman based on their guesses about what her DNA is telling her. 

I do advise men and women, however, _to listen to their own true selves_, most particularly in relationships they wish to be long lasting and fulfilling. If sex is important, then don't be ashamed to communicate that. It is a legitimate need. Maybe the ability to embrace that need, for men, has become a problem due to social conditioning (don't let her think all you want is sex!), just as it's a problem for many women (don't let him think you're a ****!). 

I just don't see the need for a gender war around MMSL or NMMNG. We're all, as you point out, human beings.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> Without trying to derail Alexm's thread, (Maybe this would help him and others...) why is something so basic to the male psyche an apparent turn-off to so many women?
> 
> IOW, Many of us accept this on faith without truly understanding it.


I don't know what percentage of women it's a turn off to, Ocotillo. I think it's just one of many types of problematic dynamics that exist, and I think that it's particularly problematic when it develops at some point in a long term marriage. I think if this sort of mismatch is apparent early on, the parties are likely to go their separate ways and not wind up married in the first place. 

TAM (I think) seems to attract men struggling with this sort of issue in their marriage, which is why I think so much of the same advice gets drummed out here (MMSL and NMMNG.)


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Sexual behavior is embedded deep down into our genetic programming and the thought that it can somehow be manipulated by machinations like DIY books is not very reassuring... 

Think what would happen if someone wrote a "No More Mr. Nice Employee" book on the same lines...


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> Well folks - you heard it here first.
> 
> GetsIt!!! - is the female version of Athol Kay.
> 
> ...


God bless men who love their wives like you love M2. I sometimes wonder who tamed who . . . I wonder the same about my own marriage. 

As for being the female Athol Kay, I have to confess I'm not sure that's a hat I want to wear, especially given I've not read his book. MMSLP seems to be quite the lightning rod around here--mainly because it's so open to interpretation. I advocate not being an azzhole for everyone--men and women alike. If following MMSLP makes you an azzhole, then stay away from it!


----------



## 4x4 (Apr 15, 2014)

Words of an aspiring young TAM poster that I think apply to Alex.


GettingIt said:


> I've read so many posts on TAL in which husbands are frustrated with wives who claim they can do without sex--both in the bedroom and as a part of their being. Many posters talk about all the things they do to try and meet their wives' needs, or to man up, work on themselves, etc. One of the things I've not seen discussed much is how to get a woman to desire to be, to strive to be, a sexual being in her own right, and for reasons that don't have anything to do with pleasing her husband.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

4x4 said:


> Words of an aspiring young TAM poster that I think apply to Alex.


Word. Which is why I'm always badgering the men to bring their wives here so I can give them an earful. (Actually, AnonPink is better at that particular earful than I am.) 

But for one reason or another, the men mostly decline . . .


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

GettingIt said:


> I just don't see the need for a gender war around MMSL or NMMNG. We're all, as you point out, human beings.


NMMNG and (in my opinion especially) MMSL contain a lot of valuable information that can be misconstrued or misused if the person reading it already has an unsavory element to them, or is just looking for a "quick fix"

Remember, the bible was inspiration for both Billy Graham and Torquemada. Same source material, vastly different interpretations.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

As I have often opined, those books are pretty useful for a narrow spectrum of couple sex issues but tends to be used "off label" because people match symptoms without worrying about root causes...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

MEM11363 said:


> Alex,
> 
> You ought to try IC. It might help you.
> 
> ...


I didn't say she was being or dressing more sexual. I said she was dressing more _feminine_. That doesn't = sex appeal or sexiness. I should have said dressing "better", I guess. Nothing sexy about the way she dresses (as in tight fitting clothes, low cut tops, short skirts, etc.)

I mean she went from baseball hat, ratty jeans, old tshirts and sweaters and no makeup to what you'd expect a mid-30's wife and mother to dress like.

I'd like to think it was because she felt better about herself and wanted to be more presentable, rather than look like she was out puttering in the garden every day.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

GettingIt said:


> I don't know what percentage of women it's a turn off to, Ocotillo. I think it's just one of many types of problematic dynamics that exist, and I think that it's particularly problematic when it develops at some point in a long term marriage. I think if this sort of mismatch is apparent early on, the parties are likely to go their separate ways and not wind up married in the first place.
> 
> TAM (I think) seems to attract men struggling with this sort of issue in their marriage, which is why I think so much of the same advice gets drummed out here (MMSL and NMMNG.)


I may have missed this, but I don't think the "bad boy" is only relative to women. We men also like fast and loose women, we just don't want to marry them. Any more than women want to marry the bad boy.

Face it, those people are fun.

The problem arises when you think there's more to this personality type than there appears. Or you think you can change/tame them.

Men don't want to marry the fast woman any more than they want to marry the nice woman. We want a bit of both. Just like women want a bad boy mixed with a nice guy. When you figure out how to balance both perfectly, then you're set.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

4x4 said:


> Words of an aspiring young TAM poster that I think apply to Alex.
> 
> Originally Posted by GettingIt:
> One of the things I've not seen discussed much is how to get a woman to desire to be, to strive to be, a sexual being in her own right, and for reasons that don't have anything to do with pleasing her husband.


I promise you guys, this is what I'm doing. I've even used these very words to her. I swear to god.

I have said, and I quote: "I want you to be sexual for YOU, not for me. This isn't about me. I am sexual, and I know what you are missing out on. This in turn causes US to miss out on the intimacy we could be having, which in turn causes us to miss out on the relationship we could be having. I don't want you to do things FOR me, I want you to do things WITH me."

This originally came about when she would tell me, defensively, "hey, I'm having sex with you, isn't that what you want? Do you want it every day?" and I, rightly or wrongly, inquired about her motives for doing so. Was it for me? Or for her? Or for us? The answer, as you can imagine, was a combination of me and us. But not "her". When asked why she didn't include herself in this: "I don't need sex, but you do, so I'll happily have it for you to better the relationship."


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,
Than that is not a red flag. 





alexm said:


> I didn't say she was being or dressing more sexual. I said she was dressing more _feminine_. That doesn't = sex appeal or sexiness. I should have said dressing "better", I guess. Nothing sexy about the way she dresses (as in tight fitting clothes, low cut tops, short skirts, etc.)
> 
> I mean she went from baseball hat, ratty jeans, old tshirts and sweaters and no makeup to what you'd expect a mid-30's wife and mother to dress like.
> 
> I'd like to think it was because she felt better about herself and wanted to be more presentable, rather than look like she was out puttering in the garden every day.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Alex,

I'm going to leave you with two last thoughts - and hope they resonate. 

The single hottest thing that M2 does with me to begin the ignition sequence - is smile at me. It's a big - full face smile of happiness. 

And the thing that turns my desire totally off is seeing her tense or anxious. That doesn't mean that her acting that way turns me off to her as a person. Because it doesn't. 









GettingIt said:


> God bless men who love their wives like you love M2. I sometimes wonder who tamed who . . . I wonder the same about my own marriage.
> 
> As for being the female Athol Kay, I have to confess I'm not sure that's a hat I want to wear, especially given I've not read his book. MMSLP seems to be quite the lightning rod around here--mainly because it's so open to interpretation. I advocate not being an azzhole for everyone--men and women alike. If following MMSLP makes you an azzhole, then stay away from it!


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> And the thing that turns my desire totally off is seeing her tense or anxious. That doesn't mean that her acting that way turns me off to her as a person. Because it doesn't.



Isn't that a wee bit unrealistic given the pressure of work and family and all that? Maybe M2 is not playing the high stakes corporate poker game some of us are but if she's a normal human being she'll be impacted by what's happening in the world around her...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

A couple nights a week she shrugs off the day to day emotional grime. 

The balance of the week - I do what I can to brighten her evenings. 

Last week she was having quite a bad time at work. And was definitely bringing it home 

She said the nicest thing to me after three days in a row of this. 

"You are my rock"







john117 said:


> Isn't that a wee bit unrealistic given the pressure of work and family and all that? Maybe M2 is not playing the high stakes corporate poker game some of us are but if she's a normal human being she'll be impacted by what's happening in the world around her...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> A couple nights a week she shrugs off the day to day emotional grime.
> 
> The balance of the week - I do what I can to brighten her evenings.
> 
> ...



I have been told the same in J2's more pre BPD days. When bad days at the office turned into bad months. And even during the worst of her BPD rages when a lot were work triggered. 

It felt sweet to be told that even during though the worst periods in our relationship. It made me feel better.

Then I realized it was enabling behavior. 

She wasn't growing emotionally if she came home pi$$ed off every night and couldn't self soothe. 

I first tried to be more attentive and use my skills to analyze and predict the behavior of people I've never met. It was eerie meeting her coworkers in person during the plentiful parties her employers threw and "knowing" them . Guess what. It didn't help her in the long term. It didn't help our marriage at all. It did help hone my skills and helped her wok situation immensely (she had the tendency to shoot her mouth thinking her job performance and superb education would shelter her - that's not how it worked)

Since then I haven't stopped it but have learned to triage it and only play the rock game (pet rock as my girls called it) on rare occasions where the wrong response could be catastrophic. 

And, of course, not to mention the R word (reciprocity). My own company went thru some bad spots in the Great Recession and many of my friends were laid off. We laid off around 40% of our staff. I had my concerns as well and expressed them on occasion only to be dismissed or ignored. Her rock turned into quicksand...


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

MEM11363 said:


> Alex,
> 
> I'm going to leave you with two last thoughts - and hope they resonate.
> 
> ...


I see what you're saying.

Have been more or less doing that all week, even when I wouldn't normally be smiling.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

john117 said:


> As I have often opined, those books are pretty useful for a narrow spectrum of couple sex issues but tends to be used "off label" because people match symptoms without worrying about root causes...


Yes, exactly. Virtually every man that ever comes here is diagnosed as the Nice Guy (tm), no matter what he says about his situation. It's like reading the DSM and saying "yep, got that, yep got that" and walking away convinced it's definitely a case of manic-depressive-borderline-narcissistic-schizophrenia with a dash of anti-social personality disorder and caffeine addiction.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> Word. Which is why I'm always badgering the men to bring their wives here so I can give them an earful. (Actually, AnonPink is better at that particular earful than I am.)


It is one thing to advocate for women to become in tune with their sexuality, and explore it for themselves, and quite another to assume that in so doing they will actually discover that their sexuality falls neatly into expectations

The former I would agree with absolutely, but what many self-aware and insightful women have discovered is that their sexuality does not conform to the stereotypes and required parameters.

And berating them to please their man because he needs pleasing becomes just a way to ensure that she is the one full of resentments instead of him.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> Being a "Nice Guy" isn't about being nice, though. You can be a nice guy, and not be a "Nice Guy". And you can be a "Nice Guy" and not be an a-hole. I don't know if you've read NMMNG, but it talks about a pattern of subverting your own wants and needs because you want to placate and please others in order to avoid conflict, among other reasons. The result is often simmering resentment, an inability to set good boundaries and communicate your needs effectively, and passive aggressive behavior--"Nice Guy."


So, tell me again why we're convinced that Alex falls squarely into this category. He does not at all strike me as someone simmering with resentment or conflict avoidant. Sexually frustrated, sure. Questioning his relationship, no doubt. But simmering with resentment or unable to communicate his needs?

Sounds to me he has communicated about as clearly as one could expect, and is remarkably unbitter about his situation.

It's true that sex is billions of years old, but it doesn't mean that it has been static for this time. Also, it is molded by cultural expectations, social norms, personal experience, and personal variation and proclivity. I'm not so sure you can peel away all of these layers to get at the biological "truth" of sexuality.

And even if we could, biologically speaking, a lot more people than we realize are born intersex, but because of the social costs of being this way, the child is raised as one gender or another, whichever seems more dominant. Even the difference between xx vs xy is pretty darn small given the length and complexity of the DNA chain.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> AA,
> 
> That's sad. All of it. I'm glad the new guy seems like a keeper.
> 
> ...


MEM, sometimes you are too cryptic for me, and I have to say that I don't really understand your dynamic with M2.

One thing I don't understand, for example, is how you can be so certain that Alex shouldn't be wasting time trying to understand his wife, yet at the same time making it sound that the reason for your success is your thorough understanding of M2 and how to manage her. Why shouldn't alex also strive for such understanding?

Another thing I don't understand is how you conceive of "nice". Thinking on your question more, I can easily agree that I wouldn't want to be with someone who didn't challenge me. No sycophants please! This has never really been a huge problem for me because I scare the sh1t out of most guys, and so those who are not up for challenge wouldn't touch me with a 10-ft pole.

But challenge comes in many, many different forms. And for someone like me, who is quite fiercely independent and used to looking after myself, solving my own problems, someone who is open, vulnerable to me, who needs me *is* a challenge.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> It is one thing to advocate for women to become in tune with their sexuality, and explore it for themselves, and quite another to assume that in so doing they will actually discover that their sexuality falls neatly into expectations
> 
> The former I would agree with absolutely, but what many self-aware and insightful women have discovered is that their sexuality does not conform to the stereotypes and required parameters.


I very much agree--and my own experience bears this out loud and clear. And when a woman discovers that her sexuality doesn't fall neatly into expectations (either of society or of her partner), having the courage to share her discoveries is yet another hurdle. The group I've noticed the most judgment from has not been men, or society at large--but from women. It's like each group (men, women, society at large) have a set of acceptable parameters, and if you don't conform to the acceptable, then that group is the most vocal. 

But I assume when you refer above to not conforming to "stereotypes and required parameters" you are talking about those you see as being set by men? 

(Hmmm, then again I just realized that everyone's individual perception of a group's "required parameters" is probably different. See, this is why I'm a nihilist. )



always_alone said:


> And berating them to please their man because he needs pleasing becomes just a way to ensure that she is the one full of resentments instead of him.


Again, I agree--as a rule berating is not a productive tool. But I think that many women don't look too closely at what makes them tick sexually, even after their husbands have expressed how important it is is to intimacy for them. If we are functioning just fine with our sexuality unexamined, it can be hard to find motivation to do the work to find, accept, and nurture our sexual selves. I think many women brush this endeavor off too easily because they fail to really grasp how crucial it is to their husband's happiness in the marriage. We're busy with careers, kids, household, hobbies, friends . . . finding time to focus on something WE don't feel we need to be happy often isn't at the top of the list. 

I do hear what you are saying about resentment. Once it takes hold (in either partner), the marriage, and intimacy, is in jeopardy. I don't want to come across as someone who always holds the woman accountable for the demise of intimacy in a marriage. The door swings both ways--husbands need to learn to "get it" about their wives as much as wives need to learn to "get it" about their husbands. What either gender chooses to do with that information is up to them. I just want to make sure that each side is really "getting it." It makes me sad to see threads that dissolve into blaming one gender over another. There is always something we can do, and whichever partner comes to TAM . . . well that's who I'm going to "berate," to change, lol!


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> So, tell me again why we're convinced that Alex falls squarely into this category. He does not at all strike me as someone simmering with resentment or conflict avoidant. Sexually frustrated, sure. Questioning his relationship, no doubt. But simmering with resentment or unable to communicate his needs?


Are any of us sure he "falls squarely" into this category? I think its a distinct possibility that he's heading down that path. He seems to have a lot of anxiety about how his wife perceives sex--now and in the past--and he spends a lot of time analyzing it here. He's also described at least one time in which he spent considerable mental effort in trying to predict the conditions under which is wife was most likely to accept sex with him (the sex cards post). I would find that behavior a turn off--I'd rather my partner show me what he wants, then have him show me his guesses about what I want. Whether or not his wife finds it a turn off is the important thing, though. There isn't a universally recognized set of "Nice Guy" behaviors--it varies between individual and dynamics. 

Also, it's just one possibility for him to explore--like any of the advice here, he can discard it if he doesn't think it applies to his situation. I think it gets mentioned a lot because it resonates with a lot of men who have fallen into the trap of trying to "figure out and fix" instead of "listen, communicate, and accept" with their wives. 



always_alone said:


> It's true that sex is billions of years old, but it doesn't mean that it has been static for this time. Also, it is molded by cultural expectations, social norms, personal experience, and personal variation and proclivity. I'm not so sure you can peel away all of these layers to get at the biological "truth" of sexuality.
> 
> And even if we could, biologically speaking, a lot more people than we realize are born intersex, but because of the social costs of being this way, the child is raised as one gender or another, whichever seems more dominant. Even the difference between xx vs xy is pretty darn small given the length and complexity of the DNA chain.


Yeah, but see, its the challenge that makes it fun! Trying to peel away the expectations, norms, and experiences (personal variations can stay) to figure out what is perhaps innate and what is perhaps adopted or imposed is INTERESTING, I think! I'm not suggesting that you try to do it for someone else, but it's really allowed me to connect with myself on a level I hadn't considered look at before. And being able to play around with what I discover--or think I discover--with an interested and willing parter has been utterly consuming. I totally recommend going "full primal" with figuring out your sex and desire. And if you've got a safe environment for playing with what you find? Wow, its intense.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Yes, exactly. Virtually every man that ever comes here is diagnosed as the Nice Guy (tm), no matter what he says about his situation. It's like reading the DSM and saying "yep, got that, yep got that" and walking away convinced it's definitely a case of manic-depressive-borderline-narcissistic-schizophrenia with a dash of anti-social personality disorder and caffeine addiction.


I would bet my hat that it is not even usually about sexuality but the connection of other feelings like love, respect and admiration that contribute to lack of attraction to HIM. There was a post on here about how to not take it personally. TAKE IT PERSONALLY. Then you might be able to figure out the deal.

I often wonder if the women who are posting about how their husband's don't listen to them are married to guys who are posting that they don't have any sex.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

---Oh the irony....


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Always,
Alex posted that he has already told A2 that he isn't willing to 'live like this' open ended. 

Those type conversations only happen when someone has a lot of resentment. 







always_alone said:


> So, tell me again why we're convinced that Alex falls squarely into this category. He does not at all strike me as someone simmering with resentment or conflict avoidant. Sexually frustrated, sure. Questioning his relationship, no doubt. But simmering with resentment or unable to communicate his needs?
> 
> Sounds to me he has communicated about as clearly as one could expect, and is remarkably unbitter about his situation.
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> Always,
> Alex posted that he has already told A2 that he isn't willing to 'live like this' open ended.
> 
> Those type conversations only happen when someone has a lot of resentment.



Or when they're too pragmatic.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Empathy doesn't come naturally to M2 - except for babies and old folks - both of whom she treats great. 

I don't expect a lot of it and I sometimes have to gently prod her. 

As for whether I'm enabling her or being supportive - time will tell. 





john117 said:


> I have been told the same in J2's more pre BPD days. When bad days at the office turned into bad months. And even during the worst of her BPD rages when a lot were work triggered.
> 
> It felt sweet to be told that even during though the worst periods in our relationship. It made me feel better.
> 
> ...


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

GI,

The reason I put the lions share of the burden on the man is simple. During their high testosterone years men typically want to have a lot of sex regardless of the daily distractions / issues that can drain or upset us. 

Lacking that testosterone - it's much easier for many women to see sex as optional and/or something they are bored of. 

So my simplistic view is that it's mostly the hgh drive (man's) job to create an overall positive environment. And the woman's job to be honest - with herself and her H - and if need be brutally honest about turn ons/turn offs. 

From my reading on TAM it sure feels as if most sexually screwed up marriages run on avoidance, deception and outright deceit. 

And that is every bit as true regardless of whether the LD spouse is a man or woman.....





GettingIt said:


> I very much agree--and my own experience bears this out loud and clear. And when a woman discovers that her sexuality doesn't fall neatly into expectations (either of society or of her partner), having the courage to share her discoveries is yet another hurdle. The group I've noticed the most judgment from has not been men, or society at large--but from women. It's like each group (men, women, society at large) have a set of acceptable parameters, and if you don't conform to the acceptable, then that group is the most vocal.
> 
> But I assume when you refer above to not conforming to "stereotypes and required parameters" you are talking about those you see as being set by men?
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM11363 said:


> GI,
> 
> From my reading on TAM it sure feels as if most sexually screwed up marriages run on avoidance, deception and outright deceit.
> 
> ...



It's Mother Nature's way of keeping all those screwed up people from politics, public service, etc and put them in a situation where their machinations has little public impact.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

MEM11363 said:


> Always,
> Alex posted that he has already told A2 that he isn't willing to 'live like this' open ended.
> 
> Those type conversations only happen when someone has a lot of resentment.


Unhappiness, yes. But not all unhappiness is resentment.

Personally, I read bewilderment moreso than resentment.

Alex, what descriptor would you use?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

john117 said:


> It's Mother Nature's way of keeping all those screwed up people from politics, public service, etc and put them in a situation where their machinations has little public impact.


If that's the case, Mother Nature is an incompetent boob!


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> I totally recommend going "full primal" with figuring out your sex and desire. And if you've got a safe environment for playing with what you find? Wow, its intense.


Oh, I agree that exploration can be fun, but I look at these things a bit differently, I guess. 

I have just enough experience with animals, and have seen sufficient footage of our primate ancestors that I really don't find them a particularly compelling model of sexuality.

For one, the females are typically only interested for very short periods, when they are in heat. Otherwise, they just kick the male away.

Also, most of the time it looks pretty damn boring. The encounters are pretty short, the males are pretty much two-pump chumps, both look mostly bored or annoyed throughout the event, and pleasure does not at all seem to factor into it.

All in all, a big fat pass to animal or "primal" sex, thanks very much.

I get, though, that what we often mean by "primal" is losing oneself in the pleasure of touch -- and that is something I can get behind. But for me this has nothing to do with regressing to some "pre-evolved" state, but is rather transcendent. And to fully achieve this, we need to be the fully evolved, civilized, spiritual, emotional, and intellectual beings that we are.

Otherwise, it's just wham and bam.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> I often wonder if the women who are posting about how their husband's don't listen to them are married to guys who are posting that they don't have any sex.


I often wonder this too. I'm sure it's not a one-to-one, as women too can struggle with their own demons despite an attentive partner, but I'd bet the overlap happens much more often than acknowledged.

One reason why I cringe at advice that discourages men from worrying about "the puzzle" in their wife's brain and purports to tell them exactly what women want and like,


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

It's funny how people in sexless relationships get set upon on one side by those saying they're being too attentive and on the other side by those saying they're not being attentive enough.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Oh, I agree that exploration can be fun, but I look at these things a bit differently, I guess.
> 
> I have just enough experience with animals, and have seen sufficient footage of our primate ancestors that I really don't find them a particularly compelling model of sexuality.
> 
> ...


:rofl: Dang, Always Alone, that sure ain't what I had in mind! Human "primal sex" is not the same as animal mating behaviors. 



always_alone said:


> I get, though, that what we often mean by "primal" is losing oneself in the pleasure of touch -- and that is something I can get behind. But for me this has nothing to do with regressing to some "pre-evolved" state, but is rather transcendent. And to fully achieve this, we need to be the fully evolved, civilized, spiritual, emotional, and intellectual beings that we are.
> 
> I think that when the primal model of sexuality is talked about, it means more than losing oneself in the pleasure of touch. I think it means, in part, that you don't let the fully evolved, civilized, spiritual, emotional, and intellectual beings that we are get in the way of the parts us of that are driven by biology. Otherwise, it's just wham and bam.


There is a symbiosis between the two parts of our being that I think gets out of whack. Some people ignore/devalue one at the peril of the other. I lean towards believing that it's the biological that gets suppressed on a more regular basis (either consciously or unconsciously), but I'm sure others have their own beliefs about this. 

As for transcendent sex I don't think you can achieve it without the primal. Having a emotional, spiritual, and intellectual connection with your partner is part of it, but without that visceral, animalistic side it just lacks the same intensity. At least that has been my experience. 

Of course , the two sides do tend to feed off of one another. Having an intense physical relationship with another human enhances our emotional connection to them, just as having an intense emotional connection with another human enhances the physical connection we have with them. 

I think, for individuals who are interested in upping the intensity of their sexuality and sexual experiences, looking at ways to explore the primal within themselves is a good start. You don't need a partner to do this--it's something you can think about and practice on your own. 

I was telling my husband recently about having to consciously suppress the urge to bite him, or scratch him hard during sex. It's something I've always had to fight doing--I know intellectually that hurting him (non consensually) during sex isn't going to have a good outcome. And although we do often have gentle sex that is emotionally intense, my urges tend toward resistance during sex so that he has to use brute strength to control me physically. Anyway, he told me that there is a primal sex fetish group on Fetlife. I actually didn't know it was considered a kink until he told me that. It makes sense to me, though.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

GI,
The act of overpowering resistance - huge turn on for me. 

I have no desire to bite or scratch. Zero. 

Hair - as a means of control - a big yes
As a means of causing pain - a big no

M2,
Loves to bite and scratch. I tolerate the biting - she's careful not to break the skin. 

But I don't mind any amount of scratching. At the point M2 is scratching me I'm flooded with adrenaline and testosterone and - it doesn't hurt. 







GettingIt said:


> :rofl: Dang, Always Alone, that sure ain't what I had in mind! Human "primal sex" is not the same as animal mating behaviors.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

MEM11363 said:


> GI,
> M2, Loves to bite and scratch. I tolerate the biting - she's careful not to break the skin.


Mrs. Ocotillo is a horrible biter and although she's apologetic about it afterwards, she'll do it again the next time, sure as God made little green apples. :rofl:

Some days I think it's primal and other days I wonder if it at some level, maintains a measure of control.


----------



## Anon1111 (May 29, 2013)

the typical scenario is husband is not getting laid as much as he would like.

He tells his wife and she blows him off.

He then has two choices: divorce or try to fix it on his own. 

The guys who are the true " do-chebags" just drop her immediately.

The nice guys stay and try to work it out.

The dou-chebags have the more logical approach.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

Sounds kind of selfish. If genuinely working on themselves does not work, then I understand putting divorce on the table. But they would really have to take a long, honest look at themselves first, imo.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

gross oversimplification of a complex dynamic






Anon1111 said:


> the typical scenario is husband is not getting laid as much as he would like.
> 
> He tells his wife and she blows him off.
> 
> ...


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

MEM, there are cognitive processes that we have no problem acquiring or performing that make desire for sex look absolutely trivial by comparison. Reading or writing for example...

Eta: the complex part is only the overblown rationalization of why or why not...


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

Alex,

I think you need to have a foundational discussion with your wife so you both can really understand each other's views on the marriage so far and your expectations for the future.

You can say some form of:

* I very much appreciated the sex life we used to have. The frequency, variety, and passion level were good for me. Doing it for the bonding was fine for me and you were more than up to it.

* I am glad I made it so you felt comfortable telling me how you feel, and always welcome the truth in our relationship. 

* You probably thought the sex life would be a huge part of me agreeing to marriage, and you would be correct. In fact it remains essential to have that need met within marriage.

* Our marriage's survival depends on restoring my happiness in this area. From my perspective, we need to set upon a course of action with this as my goal.

And then you invite her to do the same. The key I think is for you both to be brutally honest with each other. Neither of you can decide how to proceed and until you understand each other's priorities for the future. In particular, you've said that not upping the sex is a deal-breaker. She needs to know so that she can get on board or suggest divorce - the current détente is not good for either of you.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> So, tell me again why we're convinced that Alex falls squarely into this category. He does not at all strike me as someone simmering with resentment or conflict avoidant. Sexually frustrated, sure. Questioning his relationship, no doubt. But simmering with resentment or unable to communicate his needs?


Here's the thing: I'm not sexually frustrated.

Believe it or not, my needs are relatively low. I consider myself conditioned to this, as my previous marriage wasn't exactly full of sex, either. It's not ideal, but this is the way things are. Would I prefer if my partner was a once-a-day kind of person? Sure, but it's not anywhere near the top of my list.

What I am, though, is emotionally frustrated. Because I'm a guy, the main way I get these intimacy needs met is through sex, and particularly when it is not initiated by me all of the time.

What I also am is left feeling that I am not meeting my potential as a partner/spouse, which is a shame for myself AND my wife. Back when there wasn't an issue with sex, I was a better partner to my wife. She knows this, and she knows why. It's not on purpose. I haven't spitefully given up on her needs because mine aren't being met. It's just the way it goes.

I think almost all of us here are on the same page about how men and women get their needs met within a relationship.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> It is one thing to advocate for women to become in tune with their sexuality, and explore it for themselves, and quite another to assume that in so doing they will actually discover that their sexuality falls neatly into expectations
> 
> The former I would agree with absolutely, but what many self-aware and insightful women have discovered is that their sexuality does not conform to the stereotypes and required parameters.
> 
> And berating them to please their man because he needs pleasing becomes just a way to ensure that she is the one full of resentments instead of him.


FWIW, I am completely aware that expectations vs reality are rarely one and the same. Again, my wife knows this. I have made it abundantly clear to her that she does not need to meet MY expectations, only hers. Thereby relieving (hopefully) some of the stress she may associate with this.

Whatever the results are from that, we/I will deal with them as they come, should we need to.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> Unhappiness, yes. But not all unhappiness is resentment.
> 
> Personally, I read bewilderment moreso than resentment.
> 
> Alex, what descriptor would you use?


I'm not sure I'd even say unhappiness at this point. Bewilderment is a good one, as I thought things were going just great for many years.

FEAR of unhappiness, yes. I would very much like to avoid that down the road, which is exactly what would happen if it never got addressed.

I felt much the same way as I did when I lost my job many years ago. I started out low on the totem pole at a large corporation in my early 20's, and worked myself up very quickly. Doubled my salary in 18 months and left many of my colleagues in the dust (including the friend I had who got me into the company in the first place).

By year 4 I was settled and comfortable. This was my career and I'd be with them until retirement. It wasn't just my confidence that told me this, it was how I was treated and appreciated while there.

Then, as is commonplace these days, re-org and lay offs started coming (even though this was, and still is, a multi-billion dollar corporation).

I was able to stay employed there, but I was demoted back to an area I was in 2 years prior - but they kept me at my pay grade, go figure. Thankful for that, I guess.

But it became clear after a year of that, that I was "stuck". There was no more moving up the food chain at that point, at least not at the speed I was moving at prior. I could have stuck it out another 5 or 6 years, but I'd likely only have advanced to where I had already previously been. So I resigned, mainly out of frustration. Best thing AND worst thing I've ever done. I was unsatisfied where I was. I had already been ahead of the game, then relegated back to "drone" status.

The similarities between this experience and my current marriage are there. I was ahead of the game (and happy) before I got demoted due to unforeseen circumstances.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

DTO said:


> Alex,
> 
> I think you need to have a foundational discussion with your wife so you both can really understand each other's views on the marriage so far and your expectations for the future.
> 
> ...


I don't disagree, but this is over simplifying things and putting too much of an emphasis on her to do the changing. To do it for me, for us. That's a lot of pressure to put on one person.

Besides, this is already clear to her. She knows what this has done, and what this will do to US (not me).

At this point, I need to have her believe me when I tell her that I'm in this WITH her, not just sitting back and waiting for her to figure it out. Without me being over-bearing, either.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> What I am, though, is emotionally frustrated. Because I'm a guy, the main way I get these intimacy needs met is through sex, and particularly when it is not initiated by me all of the time.


That's interesting, Alex. Have you ever tried finding other routes to emotional intimacy? You're not locked into the "sex only" model, just because you are a guy. And it might open some new doors and experiences for both of you.

I don't know what you're in to, but you could try things like couples massage, or learning erotic massage, or exploring some passion that you share in common. Or have an intimacy day - sometimes my SO and I will, for example, have a no clothes day, where we just hang around getting house, eat, drink, play games, watch movies.

Or go on a death-defying adventure of some sort. If they don't kill you, they're *very* bonding.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> The similarities between this experience and my current marriage are there. I was ahead of the game (and happy) before I got demoted due to unforeseen circumstances.


Well, one piece of advice then is just to remember that however frustrating, setbacks aren't necessarily terminal.

I was in a job situation somewhat like yours not so long ago, and I was freaking miserable, bored out of my tree, frustrated, beaten. Like you I just quit, and then took a huge risk and dove into a something different. I'm not yet at the end of that story, and so I can't tell you whether it all works out great, but either way I have no regrets. 

The challenge of LTR is that things *are* going to go wrong, and test the strength of that relationship. And there's always a gamble in knowing whether to hold 'em or to fold 'em, if you know what I mean. You've gotta trust your gut on that one.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> That's interesting, Alex. Have you ever tried finding other routes to emotional intimacy? You're not locked into the "sex only" model, just because you are a guy. And it might open some new doors and experiences for both of you.
> 
> I don't know what you're in to, but you could try things like couples massage, or learning erotic massage, or exploring some passion that you share in common. Or have an intimacy day - sometimes my SO and I will, for example, have a no clothes day, where we just hang around getting house, eat, drink, play games, watch movies.
> 
> Or go on a death-defying adventure of some sort. If they don't kill you, they're *very* bonding.


Yeah, we do a lot of things like that, and yes it goes part of the way to meeting those needs.

But the bottom line is that, generally speaking, we men get and give love through sex.

It's over simplifying things, but the intimacy women feel when their husband listens to them and makes them feel understood and important, for example, is what we guys get from a woman who pays attention to us in a physical way.

Having a husband who won't look away from the TV but still "listens" to how your day went is the equivalent of the wife who has duty sex with her husband.

Having to remind your husband to stop what he's doing and pay attention to you for 5 minutes is the equivalent of what I'm currently doing in my relationship. Your husband might follow through and actually listen and appreciate what you're saying to him and make you feel good, but you still had to remind him to do it.

It gets tiresome when one has to remind their partner to do the things they should be doing on their own in order for you to feel important.

A lot of people might say "well Alexm, at least your wife is giving you the attention, so what if you have to remind her to do it?" And I would say "that's all well and good, but I shouldn't have to be doing that in order to get my needs met, nor should she. We should each be important enough that we do these things on our own, because it's important to us."


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Alex, she's not into you or she's not into sex or she's not into sex with you or she's not into herself or she's not into anyone ... or ... or ... or ...

I think it is pretty clear to you. You "know" she's not into it, you just don't know why. Does it matter why? 

You said "We should each be important enough that we do these things on our own, because it's important to us."....but...you can't be into someone or into sex with them just because they are important to you. You can HAVE sex with them, but you can't make yourself be into it if you're not. (There are exceptions here, but hopefully you get what I mean).


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Faithful Wife said:


> Alex, she's not into you or she's not into sex or she's not into sex with you or she's not into herself or she's not into anyone ... or ... or ... or ...
> 
> I think it is pretty clear to you. You "know" she's not into it, you just don't know why. Does it matter why?
> 
> You said "We should each be important enough that we do these things on our own, because it's important to us."....but...you can't be into someone or into sex with them just because they are important to you. You can HAVE sex with them, but you can't make yourself be into it if you're not. (There are exceptions here, but hopefully you get what I mean).


I get you.

The thing I'm struggling with is that she is into it. I can't explain it, the how's and why's of it, she just is. I promise you I'm not seeing what I want to see, something that's not there but makes me feel better. I have no doubt in my mind she's into it.

What this all comes down to (at its most basic) is she has this block, these walls, that won't allow her to come forth and show her sexuality to me - until she's given a prompt to do so. Does that make sense?

We've figured out (with much thanks to TAM) that what she was doing before was "because she was supposed to".

But then, like now, once we got going, she was "there" and enjoying every minute of it and, most importantly, letting herself go.

Now, the easy response from my part is to take the reigns - which in part is true. I could take what I've learned here (about myself) and have sex with my wife 5 or 6 days out of 7. She'd be into it, it'd be good to great, etc etc etc.

But the thing is, it's not about sex. And it's not about me fixing her.

What it is about is the emotional intimacy I (and many men) require from their spouses in which they show us we are important, that they understand this is how we give and receive love. I absolutely believe she is 100% capable of this. With me, or with anybody else. I believe - as does she - that she has blocked herself from being able to do this because when she has in the past, it led to heartbreak and hurt.

It's circular logic at its worst. I liken it almost to how OCD sufferers (of which I was/am one) see the world. "If I do/don't do this, then this will/won't happen."

In her mind, she was once able to fully let herself go. Let herself be sexual. Let herself love with abandon. She was once able to recognize the benefits of being sexual. However she was taken advantage of. Her love was not returned in kind.

I believe that she wasn't so much hurt by anybody in particular as she was hurt by herself. As I said earlier, the person that did this damage to her did not break up with her. She broke up with him. Sometimes people in lopsided, or one-sided, relationships have the prescience to wake up and realize what it is and take action. The downside to this is that they feel stupid for having it taken that long to realize it. I had this moment after my ex wife left me. I felt stupid, with a capital "S".

One thing I know about my wife is that she HATES feeling stupid. She doesn't need to be the smartest person in the room, she just hates to be made to feel stupid. I've had to learn to not correct her, or at least pick my battles. This is a self-esteem thing, and nothing more.

What this all leads to is that I believe she went into this relationship (20 years ago, with this guy) short on self esteem. (teenage girl, chubby, two older brothers who always picked on her, etc.) and got burned by an a-hole. It happens, especially when the a-hole sees that he can get away with things and takes advantage.

I think this is MUCH less about her getting hurt by a specific person than it is about hating how it felt to be taken advantage of, hating herself for allowing this, hating herself for not seeing it while it was happening, and therefore protecting herself from this ever happening again.

I may be wrong about this, but I don't feel this has a whole lot to do with ME. As in she doesn't trust me, doesn't love me, etc. I think it has much more to do with not trusting herself. I think she's stuck in the mindset that if she allows herself to be herself, then I will take advantage, and she will feel stupid again.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

so, what's changed? And why? I know that she would still do it for you, but why her involvement has decreased? She's finally realised what was wrong with her? She is tired of pretending? Do you think she would have IC?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> I may be wrong about this, but I don't feel this has a whole lot to do with ME. As in she doesn't trust me, doesn't love me, etc. I think it has much more to do with not trusting herself. I think she's stuck in the mindset that if she allows herself to be herself, then I will take advantage, and she will feel stupid again.


I dunno, Alex. It sounds to me like you need to make up your mind about whether this is about you or her.

You say on one hand you could have wonderful sex, pretty much any time you want AND you keep telling me that you need this to give and express love.

Why isn't this good enough for you? What do you want from her?

You say you want her to be totally into you sexually, that "duty" isn't enough. You keep trying to pretend this is for * her * sake, but it isn't really, is it? If it was for *her*, you'd let her make her own decisions about how open, sexual, and into it she is.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

always_alone said:


> You say you want her to be totally into you sexually, that "duty" isn't enough. You keep trying to pretend this is for * her * sake, but it isn't really, is it? If it was for *her*, you'd let her make her own decisions about how open, sexual, and into it she is.


I get this... Alex wants to be loved and wanted, emotionally and sexually. I don't think it's a lot to ask in a marriage or from the woman you've married. Let's not turn Alex into a selfish monster. He is not. This is a normal need and it's normal to have it. Why should he be happy with a "half marriage"? Of course it's something to do with him, but it's not something extravagant. He wants a normal wife and a normal marriage, but he can't have it right now. This revelation has undermined him totally, as man and as husband, in a fundamental aspect of marriage. He wants to fix it, but he can't, because he can't fix his wife if she doesn't want to.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Alex again...it doesn't matter if it is about YOU or if it is about HER. When I'm saying she's not into it, you, herself, sex, whatever...that's my point...it is "something" she's not into and the result is what you are seeing and it doesn't really matter if it is you, her, whatever. It is what it is.

Is it a deal breaker or not? Assuming it doesn't matter what the real issue or block or lack of into-it is.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> But the bottom line is that, generally speaking, we men get and give love through sex.
> 
> It's over simplifying things, but the intimacy women feel when their husband listens to them and makes them feel understood and important, for example, is what we guys get from a woman who pays attention to us in a physical way.


Oh, how I wish people would stop using this awful analogy!!!!!

But I will bite back my rant, for once, and work with it. 

People fake listening too, pretending to care when they really wish you would shut up. Duty listening. People forget birthdays, anniversaries, many things important to their spouses all the time. All of these sorts of things give us the sense that we are not important, do not factor adequately into our their priority hierarchy. 

Now should we always be attentive/aware/act appropriately? Well, ideally yes. But fact is, we have different priorities, and conflicting needs. 

Let me ask you this: What importance do you place on her need to be herself sexually?


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> I get this... Alex wants to be loved and wanted, emotionally and sexually. I don't think it's a lot to ask in a marriage or from the woman you've married. Let's not turn Alex into a selfish monster. He is not. This is a normal need and it's normal to have it. Why should he be happy with a "half marriage"? Of course it's something to do with him, but it's not something extravagant. He wants a normal wife and a normal marriage, but he can't have it right now. This revelation has undermined him totally, as man and as husband, in a fundamental aspect of marriage. He wants to fix it, but he can't, because he can't fix his wife if she doesn't want to.


No one is saying Alex is wanting anything unusual...Always Alone was just pointing out that his effort in figuring this out is clearly about getting himself those very things that are natural in marriage, not in finding out what is really going on with her (there is a subtle difference)...which is good and fine but at what point do you just say "this really IS who she is, no matter what I thought I saw in her earlier"?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Faithful Wife said:


> No one is saying Alex is wanting anything unusual...Always Alone was just pointing out that his effort in figuring this out is clearly about getting himself those very things that are natural in marriage...which is good and fine but at what point do you just say "this really IS who she is, no matter what I thought I saw in her earlier"?


You are saying he shouldn't try? This is highly fixable, imo... he just needs to explain it to her and make her understand she should seek IC to save the marriage. She knows what's going on with her. At this point, engaging or not engaging in IC and maybe MC will be a deal-beaker for Alex. If she really cares about the marriage and Alex, she will try it...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> I get this... Alex wants to be loved and wanted, emotionally and sexually. I don't think it's a lot to ask in a marriage or from the woman you've married. Let's not turn Alex into a selfish monster. He is not. This is a normal need and it's normal to have it. Why should he be happy with a "half marriage"? Of course it's something to do with him, but it's not something extravagant. He wants a normal wife and a normal marriage, but he can't have it right now. This revelation has undermined him totally, as man and as husband, in a fundamental aspect of marriage. He wants to fix it, but he can't, because he can't fix his wife if she doesn't want to.


I am in no way accusing alex of being a monster. Just accusing him of equivocating. I get that he needs to be loved and wanted and appreciated. We all need that! 

Including his wife. And although he says he's not trying to "fix" her, I think he is. He doesn't like her walls, and he doesn't like her asexual or grey sexual tendencies. And it's starting to sound like no matter how hard she tries to make him happy, she still won't be good enough because she isn't initiating enough, or isn't abandoning herself enough.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

always_alone said:


> I am in no way accusing alex of being a monster. Just accusing him of equivocating. I get that he needs to be loved and wanted and appreciated. We all need that!
> 
> Including his wife. And although he says he's not trying to "fix" her, I think he is. He doesn't like her walls, and he doesn't like her asexual or grey sexual tendencies. And it's starting to sound like no matter how hard she tries to make him happy, she still won't be good enough because she isn't initiating enough, or isn't abandoning herself enough.


Somebody mentioned "mind-****" in this thread...  can't remember who... Obviously not you. 

Yes, I agree he comes across like he is trying too hard, but he has a point. He needs to find out if this is fixable or not, because his marriage is his future. He's looking for a normal marriage with normal needs. If his wife is unable to give it to him, then he will have to make a decision... it's not matter of not being good enough for him. It's a normal need.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> It's a normal need.


I dunno. Is it? He basically just said that he could have fantastic sex pretty much every night of the week, if he wanted. And that she loves him, trusts him, etc.

And the only thing he has to do is nudge her a bit, to remind her of just how much fun sex is and how important it is to him.

Yeah, sure it would be nice if she didn't need that, and I even get why he might view it as a deal-breaker. But compared to a lot of relationships, it doesn't really sound all that terrible or onerous --assuming, of course, that he can come to terms with loving her as she is.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

always_alone said:


> I dunno. Is it? He basically just said that he could have fantastic sex pretty much every night of the week, if he wanted. And that she loves him, trusts him, etc.
> 
> And the only thing he has to do is nudge her a bit, to remind her of just how much fun sex is and how important it is to him.
> 
> Yeah, sure it would be nice if she didn't need that, and I even get why he might view it as a deal-breaker. But compared to a lot of relationships, it doesn't really sound all that terrible or onerous --assuming, of course, that he can come to terms with loving her as she is.


I think it's a normal need... I never had this kind of need met in my life, not even by my mother, so I know how it feels... but this is not about me. 

And of course it's not the end of the world, but it's a basic need in a marriage, imo... maybe Alex is too idealistic (and I am too), but I understand where he is coming from...


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

always_alone said:


> And it's starting to sound like no matter how hard she tries to make him happy, she still won't be good enough because she isn't initiating enough, or isn't abandoning herself enough.


Maybe you're right, AA. I don't know. 

One of the single biggest sources of frustration in the HD/LD relationship (Speaking as someone who has lived it) is not sexual _per se_. 

It is being the rock bottom, last in line, lowest priority in your partner's mind. When it comes to a choice between *anything* and you, that thing will win; and not just some of the time either. 

I don't think they do this maliciously because in their conscious mind, they may truly believe that they love you dearly. It's like a weird form of emotional anorexia that in the end, hurts them and makes their lives unhappy too.


----------



## UMP (Dec 23, 2014)

Alexm,
I "think" I know how you feel. However, If you ditch your wife for someone else I'm not so certain you will ever find what you're looking for. My wife is very much like yours in the sense that she does not need to touch me, does not need me to tell her that I love her. She has many things on her plate including our 21 year old mentally handicapped daughter who needs to be with an adult 24/7.
My wife rarely if ever initiates. Her idea of an initiation is a wink. I have to be VERY aware to even notice something like this. The other thing I have learned is that talking about what I want sexually is a complete turn off for my wife. The less I talk about my sexual needs or wants, the better off I am.

I have learned to be happy in myself. I have learned to accept my wife for who and what she is. Granted, the sex has been great, but I think it's been great because I don't EVER badger her about it anymore, I don't force her to initiate and I take the lead, most always.

She was not always like this. Emotionally, when we first got married she was always touching, always doting on me. Then came child #1, #2, #3, problems, aging parents, etc. etc. etc.

I personally think you have something great and if you get rid of her, in time, you'll regret it.

Some may say, "he can't live like this." Well, maybe so, but I don't think there is a woman alive, over time, that will completely fill the void that you feel emotionally.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

Faithful Wife said:


> Alex again...it doesn't matter if it is about YOU or if it is about HER. When I'm saying she's not into it, you, herself, sex, whatever...that's my point...it is "something" she's not into and the result is what you are seeing and it doesn't really matter if it is you, her, whatever. It is what it is.


I think this assumes that the current situation is set in stone for all time. It may be, but it might not. People are fluid and their reactions and interactions change. What is true today may not be tomorrow.



> Is it a deal breaker or not? Assuming it doesn't matter what the real issue or block or lack of into-it is.


I agree with this, but would add that the time frame is part of the equation.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

In Absentia said:


> so, what's changed? And why? I know that she would still do it for you, but why her involvement has decreased? She's finally realised what was wrong with her? She is tired of pretending? Do you think she would have IC?


For her part, she has acknowledged that getting married made it seem "more real", thus scary.

For a commitment-phobe, I can imagine marriage would be difficult to reconcile.

For a person who has an almost obsessive fear of being hurt, having a marriage end would likely be 1000x worse than having a dating relationship end. I'm guessing.

The irony (of which there are SO many) is that our marriage should have brought these walls down, in terms of "okay, well we're married now, he's the one!" Instead, they've gone back up slightly... sigh.

I should mention that she wanted to get married, planned the wedding herself, was VERY excited by it all, showed up (yay!) and has shown no real signs of wanting out.

That said, I'm not sure she ever thought she'd get married. I know she wanted to, but unsure of whether she thought she'd ever find that person.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> I dunno, Alex. It sounds to me like you need to make up your mind about whether this is about you or her.
> 
> You say on one hand you could have wonderful sex, pretty much any time you want AND you keep telling me that you need this to give and express love.
> 
> ...


To use the example I used the other day:

There is a big difference between the husband who, at the end of your long, difficult day:

a) barely acknowledges you, let alone listens to you
b) drops everything to listen intently and react the way you need
c) has to be told to turn off the TV and hug his wife

C isnt THAT bad, but it's a hybrid of the two, which is not ideal. Yes, he will pay attention to you, but only ever when you prod him to do so. He may be the greatest listener ever. But the sheer fact that you have to "remind" him to do this, every single time, is challenging and would not make you feel the way you should.

If you don't "remind" him to do so, and he NEVER does on his own, this is always in the back of your mind.

Meeting one's needs should never be 100% on you to have to seek out. They should be coming to you. It should be balanced. I have no problem going to my wife for the intimacy I need, though I do have a problem that it's 100% of the time (or 99% of the time).

I have said here before that I would MUCH rather have mediocre sex if she came to me for it in a balanced way, than great sex which I have to seek out 100% of the time. I have also said that my ex wife was like this. The sex was often bad. But she came to me for it just as often as I did her. Huge difference.

It doesn't matter how much he pays attention to you, or how good he makes you feel. You have to to go to him for it at all times.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> I dunno. Is it? He basically just said that he could have fantastic sex pretty much every night of the week, if he wanted. And that she loves him, trusts him, etc.
> 
> And the only thing he has to do is nudge her a bit, to remind her of just how much fun sex is and how important it is to him.
> 
> Yeah, sure it would be nice if she didn't need that, and I even get why he might view it as a deal-breaker. But compared to a lot of relationships, it doesn't really sound all that terrible or onerous --assuming, of course, that he can come to terms with loving her as she is.


I could have fantastic sex every night of the week elsewhere, too, but that's not what this is about.

Eventually the nudging becomes tiresome and irritating. At some point, you have to sit back and say "why am I doing all the work here?"

Thing is, she's capable, and previously willing, of having done some of the work in this regard.

I hate to say this, but this thread is starting to go in circles. I don't think it should end, but we're starting to rehash page 3 and 5 and 22.

It's a lot like what's going on in my home right now...


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

alexm said:


> I hate to say this, but this thread is starting to go in circles. I don't think it should end, but we're starting to rehash page 3 and 5 and 22.
> 
> It's a lot like what's going on in my home right now...


That's because you still haven't fully embraced the actual reality of the situation. You're still struggling against it, thinking it doesn't have to be this way.

You're probably wrong in that.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

ocotillo said:


> Maybe you're right, AA. I don't know.
> 
> One of the single biggest sources of frustration in the HD/LD relationship (Speaking as someone who has lived it) is not sexual _per se_.


Ocotillo, I won't pretend to have the same experience as you or the many others here who face sexlessness. But, much like Alex, I know all too well what it feels like to (a) have your illusions about your relationship completely shattered and (b) to have the realization that I ain't all that -- that I am not desired by him in any real way. I know what duty sex feels like, and I get why no one loves it.

But, part of me tells me that I should just get over myself. Why should I, for example, expect that my partner will meet all of my needs? And why shouldn't his needs sometimes completely conflict with my own? And, given that they do conflict, why should I expect I'll get mine met in the way I want, and he's the one to be fixed? 

Trust me, I get why these issues are dealbreakers, and I get wanting ideals. I even get why sex needs end up overriding *all* of the other things our partners might do for us, so that we don't even notice them anymore. 

But I think we also have to realize that as much as we want them to change, to meet our needs, to understand and value us for who we really are --they too have exactly this same set of needs. They want us to see all that they give us, to understand their needs, and for us to appreciate them as well.

It's a two-way street.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> For her part, she has acknowledged that getting married made it seem "more real", thus scary.
> 
> For a commitment-phobe, I can imagine marriage would be difficult to reconcile.


Yes, exactly. For someone who values her independence , marriage isn't going to bring down any walls at all. It will raise them.

Why? Because it really isn't about being afraid of being hurt, per se. Or a lack of trust of that person. It's about preserving her sense of self, her autonomy. Marriage pulls that rug out from under you like nothing else.

My take is that your wife is fighting to keep that sense of self while trying to fulfill her dream of connecting genuinely to another. It's a tough struggle.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

alexm said:


> To use the example I used the other day:
> 
> There is a big difference between the husband who, at the end of your long, difficult day:
> 
> ...


absolutely...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

always_alone said:


> Yes, exactly. For someone who values her independence , marriage isn't going to bring down any walls at all. It will raise them.
> 
> Why? Because it really isn't about being afraid of being hurt, per se. Or a lack of trust of that person. It's about preserving her sense of self, her autonomy. Marriage pulls that rug out from under you like nothing else.
> 
> My take is that your wife is fighting to keep that sense of self while trying to fulfill her dream of connecting genuinely to another. It's a tough struggle.


well, I can see that... but what signal does it send to Alex? Marriage is made of two people... she should work towards resolving her issues, not raising the walls even higher...


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

alexm said:


> To use the example I used the other day:
> 
> There is a big difference between the husband who, at the end of your long, difficult day:
> 
> ...


Honestly, that is part of life. Accepting who your spouse is. It would not even occur to me to be bothered to have to remind my husband about something that isn't on his natural radar. .


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

Reification....


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

always_alone said:


> But, part of me tells me that I should just get over myself. Why should I, for example, expect that my partner will meet all of my needs? And why shouldn't his needs sometimes completely conflict with my own? And, given that they do conflict, why should I expect I'll get mine met in the way I want, and he's the one to be fixed?


AA, you strike me as a rationalist _par exellence_ (That's intended as a compliment) and I think this is by far the most sane and reasonable approach.

My only caution here is that we should beware of fooling ourselves into believing that primal emotions are ever complete subdued by reason. (On this, I agree with GettingIt, I guess.)

If I don't hold the record on TAM for the longest period of clinical sexlessnes in a marriage that held together, I'm probably close to it. Things I thought I had under control have proven difficult to deal with later in life.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

NobodySpecial said:


> Honestly, that is part of life. Accepting who your spouse is. It would not even occur to me to be bothered to have to remind my husband about something that isn't on his natural radar. .


I sort of feel like I'm Alexm's wife but instead of sex, this conversation is about cleaning in my house.

I'm sure one day my husband will get tired of reminding me to clean various things around the house. I'm sure one day he will feel like it is too much trouble for him to point out things to clean and ignore all the other major changes I have made to make an effort keep the house clean.

He will say "f it" and ponder leaving for someone who loves clean houses and finds joy and fulfillment out of cleaning. Because I know this is how he feels, I will never--_never_ let myself be in the position for him to totally pull the rug out from under me.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> Yes, exactly. For someone who values her independence , marriage isn't going to bring down any walls at all. It will raise them.
> 
> Why? Because it really isn't about being afraid of being hurt, per se. Or a lack of trust of that person. It's about preserving her sense of self, her autonomy. Marriage pulls that rug out from under you like nothing else.
> 
> My take is that your wife is fighting to keep that sense of self while trying to fulfill her dream of connecting genuinely to another. It's a tough struggle.


I couldn't have described myself better, AA. I protected my autonomy, my privacy, by sense of independent self fiercely, and to the detriment of intimacy in my marriage. It was a detriment not because of the fact that I was married, but because of who I was married to. Our intimacy needs clashed. 

It took me a long time to "take the plunge," but I did do it eventually. Part of my ability to do that was finally being able to empathize with my husband's feelings about always running into my walls. 

If your take about Alex's wife is correct, either they will have to compromise and find something that is acceptable to Alex, or one of them is going to have to "take the plunge" and see if they can shed things they believe to be "true" about their sense of self and their emotional needs. 

Altering your sense of self isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it can be pretty scary if you don't trust the person you are making those changes for, or if you don't trust that you will find happiness with that person once the changes are made.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

I'm kind of free-thinking here, but you know what would be awesome?

If my husband could just get over the fact that I hate cleaning, I will never do laundry on his schedule and leave me **** the alone about it.

The times that he manages to do that are the most pleasant times in the house. But then that little bug starts in his ear and he starts poking me about the laundry basket and it's like "why even bother?"


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

alexm said:


> I could have fantastic sex every night of the week elsewhere, too, but that's not what this is about.
> 
> Eventually the nudging becomes tiresome and irritating. At some point, you have to sit back and say "why am I doing all the work here?"
> 
> ...


I hope I don't come across as insensitive to you Alex, but I've felt like this thread has been going in circles for quite some time. You have really hung in there with all the posts and advice, but I've noticed that, to almost every observation or suggestion, you're reply has been to say, "No, trust me, it's not like that," or "But I am doing that, " or "No, really, I'm not like that at all," or "I'm sure that's not it, trust me." 

It's hard to pin down exactly what the problem is for you because I feel like the target keep changing. Early in the thread, I though you had said that she was not as enthusiastic during sex, that it wasn't as enjoyable for you (no more BJ's for example.) But now you say that sex is fantastic when you have it, and the problem is that she doesn't initiate. 

Quite honestly, your wife seems fairly normal to me. I don't think she is asexual, I don't think she has up an unusual amount of walls for an independent woman, and I don't think her past relationships have damaged her ability to "let herself go" with you. I think that, for her, your needs are the problem. She just cannot make you happy by being who she is comfortable being right now. 

If you can communicate to her just HOW much of a problem this is for you, she might be willing to do something to really meet those needs. But for now, you're not communicating this, and she's not "getting it." 

One other question, and you can tell me to go pound sand if I'm out of line: you mentioned you've struggled with OCD. Is rumination OCD part of the equation here?


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

GettingIt said:


> It's hard to pin down exactly what the problem is for you...


I'll take a stab at it and Alex can smack me upside the head with a 2 X 4 if I'm projecting too much 

Sex is simply not in his wife's field of vision. It's not that it doesn't happen when he pulls off a miracle and it's not that she doesn't enjoy it when it happens. It's not that he has mistreated her. It's not that he doesn't listen to her or value her opinion. It's not that he doesn't perform reasonably well. 

If he didn't attempt to move heaven and earth every damn time, they could probably go years without. 

And that stark fact is bothering him in a big way.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> I'm kind of free-thinking here, but you know what would be awesome?
> 
> If my husband could just get over the fact that I hate cleaning, I will never do laundry on his schedule and leave me **** the alone about it.
> 
> The times that he manages to do that are the most pleasant times in the house. But then that little bug starts in his ear and he starts poking me about the laundry basket and it's like "why even bother?"


He is a SAHD, right? Can he not do the laundry and cleaning he wants done, just the way he wants it?


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

jld said:


> He is a SAHD, right? Can he not do the laundry and cleaning he wants done, just the way he wants it?


We have a deal in place because he does laundry in a way that I hate, and I do laundry in a way he hates. We don't touch each others laundry. :rofl: But I have enough clothing that I don't really need to do laundry for...three months? And around two weeks, he gets antsy and starts making comments. "The washing machine is free..."

But really, it's



> She just cannot make you happy by being who she is comfortable being right now.


Myself being comfortable will always piss my husband off because I don't desire to do laundry naturally. I will never get mad if he asks me to do it, but if his goal is to find a way to get me to love doing laundry and doing it without him asking or feeling pressured to do it for me--not going to happen.

At this point, I've made that pretty clear. Now I just wait for the day he gets sick of asking.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

But my own conclusion is is if he (my husband,) can't get over the fact that he will have to ask me every single time to clean out the refrigerator, that he will have to "move heaven and earth," (thanks octillo) to get me to dust and he is slowly getting resentful about doing so--I hope he does me a favor and cuts me free sooner rather than later.

Don't gather moss alexm.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

It sounds like you know your deal breakers, FF.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

alexm said:


> I don't disagree, but this is over simplifying things and putting too much of an emphasis on her to do the changing. To do it for me, for us. That's a lot of pressure to put on one person.
> 
> Besides, this is already clear to her. She knows what this has done, and what this will do to US (not me).
> 
> At this point, I need to have her believe me when I tell her that I'm in this WITH her, not just sitting back and waiting for her to figure it out. Without me being over-bearing, either.


First, there is no onus on her to change. This is about stating the type of life you intend to lead and inviting her to be a part of it. She is free to choose whether to join you or not, with the assurance that if she is committed to your vision she will have your support.

Now if you have already told her all this, then that is that. Just be careful that in your drive to display consideration you don't look like you are not serious about this being a deal breaker.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

NobodySpecial said:


> Honestly, that is part of life. Accepting who your spouse is. It would not even occur to me to be bothered to have to remind my husband about something that isn't on his natural radar. .


I can accept her for who she is, but who she is seems to have changed, and suddenly, at that.

So I either try to figure it out - with her, not for her - or I walk.

Or I accept her for who she is NOW. And then accept her for who she is in 10 years. And on and on.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Cletus said:


> That's because you still haven't fully embraced the actual reality of the situation. You're still struggling against it, thinking it doesn't have to be this way.
> 
> You're probably wrong in that.


Ain't that a big bowl of kittens and rainbows! :smthumbup:

I haven't embraced it yet because I'm not a quitter. And there's nothing TO embrace.

I see a chance to get this back to where it was, and I'll take that chance.

Eventually, you may be absolutely right - nothing will change. I'll "embrace" it then. Or not. We'll see.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

GettingIt said:


> I hope I don't come across as insensitive to you Alex, but I've felt like this thread has been going in circles for quite some time. You have really hung in there with all the posts and advice, but I've noticed that, to almost every observation or suggestion, you're reply has been to say, "No, trust me, it's not like that," or "But I am doing that, " or "No, really, I'm not like that at all," or "I'm sure that's not it, trust me."
> 
> It's hard to pin down exactly what the problem is for you because I feel like the target keep changing. Early in the thread, I though you had said that she was not as enthusiastic during sex, that it wasn't as enjoyable for you (no more BJ's for example.) But now you say that sex is fantastic when you have it, and the problem is that she doesn't initiate.
> 
> ...


Fair enough. I am all over the place. Lots of things going on.

I try not to be defensive about this stuff, and I actually don't think I am, generally speaking. It's just difficult to get exactly my thoughts across in writing, and I tend to want to go back and expand (or contract) some things. I confuse myself sometimes.

I developed OCD due to my ex wife, when we were in our early 20's. It was new to her at the time, and we never figured out how or why it started at that point in her life, but it did. Being around somebody who had anxiety and OCD made ME very anxious as well, and I developed my own habits over time.

It's manageable, and always has been, but when it was at it's worst (about 15 years ago now) it was annoying and frustrating. Rituals, counting, tapping, and the placement of items. Almost stereotypical OCD behavior. The type of things people make jokes about when talking about OCD - that was me (and her). I'm at the point now, and have been for some time, that it's not even noticeable to those around me. I can hide it just fine, and can completely avoid doing them when there's somebody around.

I knock on wood a lot, though. I don't hide that! I also avoid the number 13 like the plague. Even typing it makes me anxious. Triskaidekaphobia. Google it.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> well, I can see that... but what signal does it send to Alex? Marriage is made of two people... *she should work towards resolving her issues*, not raising the walls even higher...


The problem with this type of thinking is that no one goes into marriage saying "And I promise to work toward resolving my own issues, for better or for worse, forever, amen". It just isn't what people do. Even people who think they know what marriage "should be" all decide upon their own issues to deal with, or not.

Marriage doesn't swipe away your free will nor impose any "shoulds" on you, even if others try to tell you it does, it does not. Unless YOU claim your own "shoulds", marriage will not encourage you to do anything at in WRT your own inner life.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> You are saying he shouldn't try? This is highly fixable, imo... he just needs to explain it to her and make her understand she should seek IC to save the marriage. She knows what's going on with her. At this point, engaging or not engaging in IC and maybe MC will be a deal-beaker for Alex. *If she really cares about the marriage and Alex, she will try it...*


No one gets to decide for anyone else what their actions "mean".

We don't know that SHE feels that she MUST "figure herself out" in order to show she really cares about Alex. We can't project upon her what we think WE would do or should do. Psychology just doesn't work like that.

Here's a comparison...my brother-in-law loved my sister soooo much, she was the love of his life. But he had some "stuff" he refused to work through or figure out...so she left him eventually. He never got over it and decades later still isn't, and holds a torch for her for the rest of his life...yet all that it would have took to stay with her was some real inner work on his "stuff". It was very complicated stuff, and he just could not even fathom unpacking it all. So he watched her drift away and will never EVER get over it...yet also will never, ever know all he had to do was work on HIMSELF to keep her.

There is no "should"...people do what they want and what they can. They sometimes do what they think they should, but not what you (the generic you) think they should.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Faithful Wife said:


> No one gets to decide for anyone else what their actions "mean".
> 
> We don't know that SHE feels that she MUST "figure herself out" in order to show she really cares about Alex. We can't project upon her what we think WE would do or should do. Psychology just doesn't work like that.
> 
> ...



I agree with this and I agree it's not easy. But in a marriage I believe you should try and resolve issues that are impacting on it. This is what marriage is all about. Nobody is talking about forcing someone to do what they don't want to do. But if Alex's wife is aware of the problem, she should at least try and have a go at it. If she is unable to, so be it.

I'm saying this because I'm in the same situation with my wife. She has issues, she is aware of it, she promised to solve them and then she didn't. She said she wasn't comfortable with it.

Ok, at first I was rather shocked, but then I got it. I appreciate her for who she is and I won't try and change her. Am I happy? No. This is not marriage to me. So, I've taken my own decision and won't be around for long.

Alex can only try. If his wife puts the barriers even higher and refuses to do anything about it, then he will have a choice: stick around and appreciate his _new_ wife for what she is or what she has become, or he can walk. I believe it's only normal to ask some for some input in a marriage which obviously has problems. Yes, it's only affecting Alex right now, but it can't be fun to live a life in a prison with high walls...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> But if Alex's wife is aware of the problem, she should at least try and have a go at it. If she is unable to, so be it.


Alex's wife is aware of the problem, but Alex is not. Or rather, he is aware of *his* problem. Hers is being discounted altogether. Hers is only understood as "bad" and "something to be fixed", while his is "normal". But sense of self and autonomy are normal needs too. 

Wanting to be loved for who you are is about as normal a need as it gets.

So, if this peanut gallery speculation has anything to do with reality, then basically alex is asking her to subvert her own needs for the sake of his without returning the favour. Indeed, by undermining her sense of self by identifying her as broken and wrong.



In Absentia said:


> ..
> but it can't be fun to live a life in a prison with high walls...


Walls are not a prison, they are a sanctuary. They provide that safe space where you can curl up and relax, where you know you can work things out, somehow. They provide the fortress to defend when the pirates come to invade. They provide he home base that you can return to after a tiring adventure. They provide stability, and protection from the elements.

It's true that they aren't terribly helpful to intimacy or to making other people happy. But I don't see that Alex is terribly keen to rip down his walls either...


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

always_alone said:


> Alex's wife is aware of the problem, but Alex is not. Or rather, he is aware of *his* problem. Hers is being discounted altogether. Hers is only understood as "bad" and "something to be fixed", while his is "normal". But sense of self and autonomy are normal needs too.
> 
> Wanting to be loved for who you are is about as normal a need as it gets.
> 
> ...


I'm pretty sure Alex is aware of his wife's problem, at least now. It was impossible for him to know before, since she never told him anything...

Sure, she has the right to have her walls up, but if this is defeating intimacy, then they should come down, at least a bit. His wife's needs is what is damaging the marriage. Alex's need is a normal need in a marriage. Having walls is not...

At the end of the day, it's up to Alex to accept it or leave. If she doesn't want to work towards making the marriage more satisfying for both, then she can't complain if he goes...

Sense of self and autonomy are generally fine if they are not pushed to an extreme. Marriage is all about compromising. Alex will have to compromise and his wife too... saying that having high walls is fine, well, is wrong to me...

Walls are walls... they stop you getting in and getting out, especially if they are very high...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> Altering your sense of self isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it can be pretty scary if you don't trust the person you are making those changes for, or if you don't trust that you will find happiness with that person once the changes are made.


We all (can) grow and change, but when it comes to sense of self, you (one) has to do it because you want to, not just because you *should* or just because someone else wants you to. Otherwise, you lose your sense of self altogether.

I get what you're saying about getting rid of ego structures that we don't really need, that are useless or outdated, or worse, self-destructive. But some are (at least for me) non-negotiable.

I will never be dependent, for example.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

ocotillo said:


> My only caution here is that we should beware of fooling ourselves into believing that primal emotions are ever complete subdued by reason. (On this, I agree with GettingIt, I guess.)


Oh, I agree absolutely. Indeed, I would take it one step further still and say that reason is driven by our emotions. I am fascinated by the "logic" of emotions, but I don't really think that humans are rational. Rather, we use our reason as a tool to get us where we want to go --or away from what we want to avoid.


----------



## jld (Dec 1, 2013)

always_alone said:


> I will never be dependent, for example.


Always, do these mean the same to you: "I will never be dependent" and "I will never trust." Sincere question.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

One of the issues is commitment. And it sucks. 

The more committed you are to the marriage, the less work the other spouse feels they need to do. If they know you aren't going anywhere, then they don't feel the need to change and ensure your needs are met.

My relationship changed for the better once I was willing to leave it. To tell my wife that I was not only willing to leave but that I had taken steps to actually do just that (started my own bank account, consulted a lawyer, etc.)

This is why some of the advice is to go out more. Even flirt a bit when you are out to show your spouse that you have other options. I hate this. I bet it does work to an extent, but I bet it also backfires a bunch of times as well. Going out and flirting can lead to affairs. It can lead to your spouse doing the same thing.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> I agree with this and I agree it's not easy. But in a marriage *I believe you should....*


Once again, Alex's wife gives no f*cks what YOU believe anyone "should" do in a marriage.

Neither does anyone but you.

This applies to each of us. 

We all get to decide what we "should" do. Trying to apply your "should" to anyone else is what gets people in trouble and rises resentment.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> I'm pretty sure Alex is aware of his wife's problem, at least now. It was impossible for him to know before, since she never told him anything...
> 
> Sure, she has the right to have her walls up, but if this is defeating intimacy, then they should come down, at least a bit. His wife's needs is what is damaging the marriage. Alex's need is a normal need in a marriage. Having walls is not...


I don't think you really understand the issue here.

Having a sense of self is very normal, and I've no doubt that you too would push back on someone who wanted you to be someone else because they think you should be that way, and it would make them happier.

I don't know your story at all, and so don't have a ready example to illustrate this point. But imagine, say, someone telling you that you were no longer allowed to be a [insert personal religion or philosophy here] because your wife disagreed and it made her deeply unhappy. Or, more to the point, you were told that your sexuality was itself a problem that you have to fix.

I'm guessing that in this case, you would decide again that *she* is the one who is being unreasonable and in the wrong?

Those are your walls.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

In Absentia said:


> At the end of the day, it's up to Alex to accept it or leave. If she doesn't want to work towards making the marriage more satisfying for both, then she can't complain if he goes...


This is it in a nutshell. 

Many have asserted that no one is allowed to provide a meaning to Alex's wife's decisions. I disagree. Those decisions are not made in a vacuum - they effect Alex. He has every right to decide what her decisions mean to him. 

She has every right to make them. But he has every to take action as he sees fit.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Faithful Wife said:


> Once again, Alex's wife gives no f*cks what YOU believe anyone "should" do in a marriage.
> 
> Neither does anyone but you.
> 
> ...


What's so difficult about working with your husband to resolve a problem? Even if that means accepting you have to change your behaviour a little bit. Nobody is telling her what she should do. These are suggestions to how they can improve their marriage. As I said before, a marriage is a contract signed by two people. If you don't want to work for it, then why get married in the first place? Of course she can do whatever she likes, but is this the right approach? If she wants to keep her high walls, fine... Alex is expressing his concern, especially after the sudden change. If she doesn't work with him, he'll walk... do you think this is what she wants?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

always_alone said:


> I don't think you really understand the issue here.
> 
> Having a sense of self is very normal, and I've no doubt that you too would push back on someone who wanted you to be someone else because they think you should be that way, and it would make them happier.
> 
> ...


You can have a sense of self which is not destructive... towards the marriage.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

jld said:


> Always, do these mean the same to you: "I will never be dependent" and "I will never trust." Sincere question.


I dunno, jld. Will have to mull that one over...

First reaction, though, is that when I say I'm independent, I am pointing to my resilience, my ability to look after myself, my ability to learn what I need to solve problems, and my ability to push myself against the odds. No one can take that away from me, nor do I want them to.

When I say I don't trust, I am pointing to my belief that my relationship could end at any time, or my SO (or anyone else) could decide at any moment that they are completely sick of dealing with me and my crap, and move on.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Tall Average Guy said:


> She has every right to make them. But he has every to take action as he sees fit.


No one is saying otherwise. 

My posts are strictly my opinion and offered only as attempts at providing insight because some of the things alex says about his wife resonate with me. They come with no guarantee that the insights are accurate, and no prescription as to how alex should feel or act in response.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

In absentia....I don't know why you ask "what is so hard about"...FITB. Do you not get my point? I'm not saying that I personally don't feel the need to FITB in marriage. I'm saying it doesn't matter to Alex's wife what I think or what you think. There is no "should". She is an adult with free will and is under no obligation to do what you think she "should" do. Don't you get that?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Faithful Wife said:


> In absentia....I don't know why you ask "what is so hard about"...FITB. Do you not get my point? I'm not saying that I personally don't feel the need to FITB in marriage. I'm saying it doesn't matter to Alex's wife what I think or what you think. There is no "should". She is an adult with free will and is under no obligation to do what you think she "should" do. Don't you get that?


of course... I get that... she has no obligation, but do you think it matters to Alex's wife what Alex thinks?


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

Faithful Wife said:


> Marriage doesn't swipe away your free will nor impose any "shoulds" on you, even if others try to tell you it does, it does not.


I'm lost. (Not unusual...) Are you using, "Should" in a limited or abridged sense?


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

always_alone said:


> No one is saying otherwise.


But in saying that one can't attribute any meaning to another's actions, it can be interpreted as saying don't do anything. Moreover, it does have meaning to Alex. To ignore that is to ignore his reality in favor of hers.



> My posts are strictly my opinion and offered only as attempts at providing insight because some of the things alex says about his wife resonate with me. They come with no guarantee that the insights are accurate, and no prescription as to how alex should feel or act in response.


And that may be valuable to Alex (to the extent you or I or anyone else has ideas on his situation). It is good that you provide that insight.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Tall,

I agree. That said, having read his stuff at length, my sympathies lie with A2. 

Because it's not enough for her to 'do'. He seems to need her to feel the way he wants. But he wants her to feel that way - without him doing anything different. 

And that - simply isn't going to happen. 





Tall Average Guy said:


> This is it in a nutshell.
> 
> Many have asserted that no one is allowed to provide a meaning to Alex's wife's decisions. I disagree. Those decisions are not made in a vacuum - they effect Alex. He has every right to decide what her decisions mean to him.
> 
> She has every right to make them. But he has every to take action as he sees fit.


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

MEM11363 said:


> Because it's not enough for her to 'do'. He seems to need her to feel the way he wants. But he wants her to feel that way - without him doing anything different.


One difficult thing to realize is that our spouses are not static. They change. What worked when we were dating (and living separately) may not work now. We all have to change and adapt and grow.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

always_alone said:


> I dunno, jld. Will have to mull that one over...
> 
> First reaction, though, is that when I say I'm independent, I am pointing to my resilience, my ability to look after myself, my ability to learn what I need to solve problems, and my ability to push myself against the odds. No one can take that away from me, nor do I want them to.
> 
> When I say I don't trust, I am pointing to my belief that my relationship could end at any time, or my SO (or anyone else) could decide at any moment that they are completely sick of dealing with me and my crap, and move on.


:iagree: And going with the above conversations about changing and compromising within the marriage, I know I have a certain limit as to how much I can and/or will change. 

So, relating this back to me and cleaning



> of course... I get that... she has no obligation, but do you think it matters to Alex's wife what Alex thinks?


Of course I care what my husband thinks, but me caring or acknowledging what he thinks doesn't mean that I will suddenly develop a need to spontaneously clean. I've done out the changes I'm willing to make, I've told my husband both directly and indirectly what needs to happen for me to clean *anything* and from there everyone is right--He can either take it or leave it.

Because I'm hard or difficult like this, because I'm not really willing to endlessly try to please my husband by changing myself, like a_a above, I'm not willing to be dependent to the point that if the rug gets pulled out, I'm unable to function normally.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

Tall Average Guy said:


> But in saying that one can't attribute any meaning to another's actions, it can be interpreted as saying don't do anything. Moreover, it does have meaning to Alex. To ignore that is to ignore his reality in favor of hers.


I don't think anyone is saying that we can't attribute meaning to another's actions. Rather, it's that all these *shoulds* (she should be vulnerable, she shouldn't have walls, she should prioritize his sexuality over her own) are meaningless.

I mean, we could equally say that all these things she *should* do are ignoring her reality in favour of his. And so he *should* stop being the person he is, with the needs he has.

How meaningful is that?


----------



## Tall Average Guy (Jul 26, 2011)

always_alone said:


> I don't think anyone is saying that we can't attribute meaning to another's actions.


Actually, it has been said, which is why I voiced my disagreement.



> Rather, it's that all these *shoulds* (she should be vulnerable, she shouldn't have walls, she should prioritize his sexuality over her own) are meaningless.


The only "should" is what Alex needs from her (and vice versa). From that, they need to see what, if any compromises they can make and what they can live with. And if there are any deal breakers.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

always_alone said:


> How meaningful is that?


It's meaningful to me, because I'd draw a sharp distinction between the abstract concept of free will vs. the concrete reality of our ability to exercise it freely. (i.e. Each and every one of us voluntarily abridges our free will in countless ways.) 

Thank you.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

FrenchFry said:


> :iagree: And going with the above conversations about changing and compromising within the marriage, I know I have a certain limit as to how much I can and/or will change.
> 
> So, relating this back to me and cleaning
> 
> ...


I don't like this analogy of cleaning, to this issue.

Seems to minimize the importance of sexual intimacy in a marriage.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

See, that's funny because in my house--this exact argument that alexm is having with his wife is what we have about cleaning. Sex isn't the issue here, we have knock-down, drag out fights about cleaning. Where my husband doesn't know why I don't like to clean anymore, where he hates having to remind me to clean certain things.

I'm not demeaning this at all--but the emotions in our house about this particular issue are just as strong as sex is for others. 

Which is why I relate to alexm's wife. I don't know what else to do about this situation, I keep hoping that my husband will get over it and let me be and keep reminding me to clean. It hasn't happened yet.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

In fact, it's one of those things I had to unlearn from here. Sex alone will not make my husband happy. Sex probably isn't his greatest emotional need nor does it create the strongest feelings of intimacy for him.

So, I'll reiterate that I'm not bringing sex down to the level of cleaning. Rather, I realize that cleaning is on the same level as sex is for alexm and the frustrations I am having where despite laying out all of my cards, I probably will not measure up in his eyes, ever.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

FrenchFry said:


> In fact, it's one of those things I had to unlearn from here. Sex alone will not make my husband happy. Sex probably isn't his greatest emotional need nor does it create the strongest feelings of intimacy for him.
> 
> So, I'll reiterate that I'm not bringing sex down to the level of cleaning. Rather, I realize that cleaning is on the same level as sex is for alexm and the frustrations I am having where despite laying out all of my cards, I probably will not measure up in his eyes, ever.


We are all different...


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

FrenchFry said:


> See, that's funny because in my house--this exact argument that alexm is having with his wife is what we have about cleaning.


I get little cards left at my door fairly regularly from people who are willing to come to my house two or three days a week and basically be the interior equivalent of a lawn service.

Everybody is different, but I'd do that before I'd bump heads with my wife over cleaning.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

FrenchFry said:


> In fact, it's one of those things I had to unlearn from here. Sex alone will not make my husband happy. Sex probably isn't his greatest emotional need nor does it create the strongest feelings of intimacy for him.
> 
> So, I'll reiterate that I'm not bringing sex down to the level of cleaning. Rather, I realize that cleaning is on the same level as sex is for alexm and the frustrations I am having where despite laying out all of my cards, I probably will not measure up in his eyes, ever.


You can just tell your husband to hire a housekeeper to fill his need for having a clean house. 

Typically, hiring someone to do what Alexm wants is frowned upon.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

always_alone said:


> We all (can) grow and change, but when it comes to sense of self, you (one) has to do it because you want to, not just because you *should* or just because someone else wants you to. Otherwise, you lose your sense of self altogether.
> 
> I get what you're saying about getting rid of ego structures that we don't really need, that are useless or outdated, or worse, self-destructive. But some are (at least for me) non-negotiable.
> 
> I will never be dependent, for example.


How do you know you'll never be dependent? 

I'm always curious when someone says, "I'll never . . . " because how can someone possible know with certainty what their future holds? I think someone's list of "I'll nevers" says a lot about where they are NOW in their lives, though. 

Having said that, "I'd never" stay in a marriage if I was afraid of being dependent on my spouse. But being dependent on someone doesn't have to mean that if the relationship ends, you can't get your independence back. I feel completely and utterly and decadently dependent on my husband for my happiness and security and sense of fulfillment in this marriage. If the rug gets yanked out from under me sure it would hurt like hell, but I would simply have to dust off my old sense of independence and self reliance. It's in storage, not gone for good. It's part of who I _am_--but I decide when and how much I need it. It doesn't control me, and I don't want it to limit my choices.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

SadSamIAm said:


> You can just tell your husband to hire a housekeeper to fill his need for having a clean house.
> 
> Typically, hiring someone to do what Alexm wants is frowned upon.


I appreciate your practical outlook.


----------



## FrenchFry (Oct 10, 2011)

GettingIt said:


> Having said that, "I'd never" stay in a marriage if I was afraid of being dependent on my spouse. But being dependent on someone doesn't have to mean that if the relationship ends, you can't get your independence back. I feel completely and utterly and decadently dependent on my husband for my happiness and security and sense of fulfillment in this marriage. If the rug gets yanked out from under me sure it would hurt like hell, but I would simply have to dust off my old sense of independence and self reliance. It's in storage, not gone for good. It's part of who I _am_--but I decide when and how much I need it. It doesn't control me, and I don't want it to limit my choices.


For you, this feels right.

I tried it, it never felt right. So unless a huge aspect of my personality shifts, this is an "I'll never."

I feel way happier not being dependent on my husband for all of my happiness, security and fulfillment. It's just who I am.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

GettingIt said:


> How do you know you'll never be dependent?


Hah! This is a funny question for me because I've always found that whenever I say "never", it somehow ends up happening.

Realistically, I probably will be dependent at times. I've had ailments, for example, where I've been immobilized and needed help, and surely as I get older, this type of thing will happen more and more. 

I'm human, I'm weak, I can't always do everything myself.

But I can't be anything other than what I am. I'm not sure how to explain it exactly, because I have grown and changed over the years. But my independence is not something I can just stick in a closet. I wouldn't even begin to know how to get rid of it, even if I wanted to. 

I mean, I probably could, if I set my mind to it, become more like I've always been told I *should* be, but the truth is it would make me feel miserable and caged, and then my head would explode.

.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

ocotillo said:


> It's meaningful to me, because I'd draw a sharp distinction between the abstract concept of free will vs. the concrete reality of our ability to exercise it freely. (i.e. Each and every one of us voluntarily abridges our free will in countless ways.)


But do you see the self as endlessly malleable by said free will?

Because it's one thing to tell someone to make a different choice and quite another to tell them to be a different person.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> We all (can) grow and change, but when it comes to sense of self, you (one) has to do it because you want to, not just because you *should* or just because someone else wants you to. Otherwise, you lose your sense of self altogether.
> 
> I get what you're saying about getting rid of ego structures that we don't really need, that are useless or outdated, or worse, self-destructive. But some are (at least for me) non-negotiable.
> 
> I will never be dependent, for example.


That's the interesting thing - correlating the behavior of letting someone in with dependence. I think that's the sticking point with my wife in all of this.

I very much get the feeling she wants to let me in, wholly and completely, yet the last time she did that (ie. showed any signs of dependence) she got burned. And that was 20 years ago.

I think, as I imagine many of us do, that marriage IS a dependence on one another. But that's the thing - it's not one person being more dependent on the other.

My wife, at one point, got herself into a relationship that was heavily weighed against her. She let herself go and be dependent upon him. (for example, he moved to a different city for a job, she came with him and sat around the house all day. Couldn't find a job there.) He was not dependent on her for anything, including sex and intimacy (he cheated many times). So even for the most base of needs, she was not "necessary".

It took her 3 years to wake up to this fact, dumped him, and never let herself "fall for it" again. All under the guise of independence. "I don't need anybody, I have myself. I'll look after myself".

That, to me, is broken. That's not maintaining one's sense of self, that's being stubborn and fearful, and quite frankly, selfish.

I like independence, trust me. But there are different kinds. I don't need subservience, or a wife who won't ever say no to anything. But I do need a wife who can be herself at all times with me. I don't have that. I have a wife who has turned herself into something that is not truly "her". But it's been so long, this IS her. But she (and I) know this isn't her. She remembers how she used to be, and she does not like who she is now.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> I dunno, jld. Will have to mull that one over...
> 
> First reaction, though, is that when I say I'm independent, I am pointing to my resilience, my ability to look after myself, my ability to learn what I need to solve problems, and my ability to push myself against the odds. No one can take that away from me, nor do I want them to.
> 
> When I say I don't trust, I am pointing to my belief that my relationship could end at any time, or my SO (or anyone else) could decide at any moment that they are completely sick of dealing with me and my crap, and move on.


That's kind of the way my wife feels about things, and in all honesty, I'm sad for her for feeling that way.

Every relationship she's had since the bad one, ours included, she's been aware that it could end at any time. In some cases, probably expecting it to.

From her POV, this is how her life has gone. Entering into a relationship or marriage with someone, all the while having it in the back of your head that it might end is not a great way to approach a relationship, imo.

You can be a realist all you want, but I would much rather take my vows with the woman I love and look forward to the future, not be fearful of it. Not prepare myself, however subconsciously, for the moment when I will be on my own again.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> From her POV, this is how her life has gone. Entering into a relationship or marriage with someone, all the while having it in the back of your head that it might end is not a great way to approach a relationship, imo.


Maybe not. But note that this is *exactly* the advice that we were talking about earlier re manning-up: outcome independence, don't be too needy, don't expect your partner to fulfill all of your hopes and dreams.

What makes this such great advice for a man, yet such a clear signal that a woman is broken, wrong, and selfish?

Some, maybe you, will no doubt jump in and say it's about balance. 

But what counts as "balance" will be different for different people. And from my POV, it absolutely is realism to place my sense of security in myself: I am the only one who both can and is willing to take care of me.

This is not about living in fear of the future. It's about recognizing the realities of (my) life.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

always_alone said:


> But do you see the self as endlessly malleable by said free will?


No, which is why I appreciated the clarification. Where I got lost was with the idea that free will trumps, "Shoulds" in a marriage.

Although that is true in an abstract sense, the reality is that there are a whole litany of "Shoulds" in marriage ranging from matters of criminal law (e.g. Should you respect your spouse's sexual autonomy?) to ethics (e.g. Should you say, "No" if an attractive neighbor shows up at your door with a bottle of wine in one hand and two glasses in the other when your spouse is out of town?) to simple manners (e.g. Should you apologize for stepping on your spouse's foot?) 



always_alone said:


> Because it's one thing to tell someone to make a different choice and quite another to tell them to be a different person.


Agreed.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

always_alone said:


> Maybe not. But note that this is *exactly* the advice that we were talking about earlier re manning-up: outcome independence, don't be too needy, don't expect your partner to fulfill all of your hopes and dreams.
> 
> What makes this such great advice for a man, yet such a clear signal that a woman is broken, wrong, and selfish?
> 
> ...


Take it or leave it, then... and be a man about it...


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> That, to me, is broken. That's not maintaining one's sense of self, that's being stubborn and fearful, and quite frankly, selfish.
> 
> I like independence, trust me. But there are different kinds. I don't need subservience, or a wife who won't ever say no to anything. But I do need a wife who can be herself at all times with me. I don't have that. I have a wife who has turned herself into something that is not truly "her". But it's been so long, this IS her. But she (and I) know this isn't her. She remembers how she used to be, and she does not like who she is now.


Well, truly, if she does not like who she is, or rather has become, that is a problem, and very sad.

That's one way I can't relate because, for all my faults and years of self-loathing, I always, always valued my independence and autonomy. It was always important to me to *be* me, even though lots of people were trying to convince me that I really ought to be someone else. 

So, while I did learn at a very young age that I couldn't rely on anyone but me to look out for my best interests, this realization is not the source of, or reason for, my independence.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

So, Alex shouldn't even suggest a bit of IC or MC to his wife? She is what she is... she doesn't need changing, although she doesn't like who she is herself, and Alex should accept it... or maybe she should do it to understand herself better, but not for Alex's sake?


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

ocotillo said:


> Although that is true in an abstract sense, the reality is that there are a whole litany of "Shoulds" in marriage


Ah! I see where you're coming from now.

And I think it gets at something important. It's easy to equivocate here, blame a spouse for being selfish or wrong, when really they are just being themselves. Not selfish, but different with different needs. 

And, I suppose the converse also: excuse behaviour that *is* selfish or wrong with "s/he doesn't really mean that" or "isn't really like that"


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> It took her 3 years to wake up to this fact, dumped him, and never let herself "fall for it" again. All under the guise of independence. "I don't need anybody, I have myself. I'll look after myself".
> 
> That, to me, is broken. That's not maintaining one's sense of self, that's being stubborn and fearful, and quite frankly, selfish.


Let me just say one more thing about this:

FW pointed it out earlier, but I think it bears repeating. I'm sure this bad relationship helped shape your wife's attitudes, but it doesn't explain her entire sexuality. If, as you once said earlier, she has "always felt different" from other women, and if she has asexual or grey sexual tendencies, this too *will* play a role in how she feels about sex and how willing she will be to initiate.

It may very well be that her reluctance in this regard has nothing at all to do with that relationship, other than an overall sense that the payoff for putting oneself out there isn't enough to make it worthwhile.

But the having sex because "that's what people do", and it not being at the forefront of her mind? That's a different kettle of fish altogether, IMHO.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

MEM11363 said:


> Tall,
> 
> I agree. That said, having read his stuff at length, my sympathies lie with A2.
> 
> ...


Disagree.

This is something she recognizes and wants to change for herself, not just me. We've worked together (apart from me being on TAM), not ME working on HER.

If she some day says "enough, I am who I am", then I will respect and (probably) accept.

As of right now, this is something I noticed and brought to her attention almost 2 years ago now, and we have worked together, as well as by ourselves.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

ocotillo said:


> It's meaningful to me, because I'd draw a sharp distinction between the abstract concept of free will vs. the concrete reality of our ability to exercise it freely. (i.e. Each and every one of us voluntarily abridges our free will in countless ways.)
> 
> Thank you.


This is the trap I believe so many "wall builders" fall into.

Is it actually free will, or are they acting within the limits they have set for themselves, consciously or subconsciously?

I see my wife struggling to maintain what her "norm" is, and wrestling with whether or not that is her true self. Only she can decide, ultimately, but she does not like the way she is. Is it comfortable? Yes. Does she realize there's a whole lot to gain outside of her little compound? Yes. Does she trust that it won't possibly be a negative to leave this fortress? No. Not yet.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> Maybe not. But note that this is *exactly* the advice that we were talking about earlier re manning-up: outcome independence, don't be too needy, don't expect your partner to fulfill all of your hopes and dreams.
> 
> What makes this such great advice for a man, yet such a clear signal that a woman is broken, wrong, and selfish?
> 
> ...


Right, and I can in no way disagree with how you FEEL about this. There is no right or wrong when it comes to our own selves.

Here's the dilemma: I have gone into two marriages with the utmost positivity, without a doubt that this is the person I will be with until I'm old and die. In neither case did I even entertain the thought that the marriage will end for some reason. Why would I do that?

I don't find that outlook has anything whatsoever to do about dependence or independence. It is about finding the person who is right for you and sharing your life with.

I don't depend 100% on my wife for my happiness, nor should I. She is not the be-all, end-all of ME, but she is exactly that as far as my love life is concerned. As she should be.

To go into a marriage with even a sliver of doubt that it will last is only shooting yourself in the foot. You're setting yourself up. There's a term for that (which I can not remember for the life of me), but it basically states that what you believe will end up being.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> So, while I did learn at a very young age that I couldn't rely on anyone but me to look out for my best interests, this realization is not the source of, or reason for, my independence.


Nor is it hers.

She has always been independent, mostly out of necessity.

But again, there is a marked difference between independence and not letting someone in. You can have both, and very successfully.

She tried the latter - once -, it blew up on her, she has used independence as a crutch ever since.

Independence doesn't mean "I don't need anybody but myself". or "I don't trust anybody but myself". That is fear, cowardice, selfishness. And I mean that in a nice way, I'm not calling anybody any names.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> Let me just say one more thing about this:
> 
> FW pointed it out earlier, but I think it bears repeating. I'm sure this bad relationship helped shape your wife's attitudes, but it doesn't explain her entire sexuality. If, as you once said earlier, she has "always felt different" from other women, and if she has asexual or grey sexual tendencies, this too *will* play a role in how she feels about sex and how willing she will be to initiate.
> 
> ...


Fully agree.

I have to admit that over the last few weeks, especially since this revelation of sorts, that I've gone a bit wishy-washy on the asexual thing as far as she's concerned.

The signs are there, no doubt, and she identifies as such. No argument.

However, I have wondered to myself if this is a red-herring of sorts. Remember, this relationship ended ~20 years ago, when she was still a teenager.

I would never, ever say this to her, but I wonder if she simply doesn't remember her sexuality prior to this guy. That it somehow defined her and has ever since. Similar to how she swore off true intimacy in relationships, perhaps she also consciously or subconsciously swore off putting her sexuality out there for others as well, given that it could be taken as some sort of weakness. An "I need you" feeling of sorts.

In fact, it's really the most raw form of dependence, when you think of it. There's no more blatant way of telling a man you need him, when you tell him you "need" him.

This is the crux of our (my) issue - that she isn't capable of ever showing me that she needs me, in any way. Not just sexually.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> I would never, ever say this to her, but I wonder if she simply doesn't remember her sexuality prior to this guy. That it somehow defined her and has ever since. Similar to how she swore off true intimacy in relationships, perhaps she also consciously or subconsciously swore off putting her sexuality out there for others as well, given that it could be taken as some sort of weakness. An "I need you" feeling of sorts.


I dunno, Alex. This sounds like grasping to me. I've been with my SO for 17 years and I have a crappy memory. But I still have a decent sense of what my sexuality was like all the back to before I even really knew what sexuality is. 

And to rewrite it that seriously just for one crappy relationship? Possible, but not likely. And then to "recover" into what you once described to me as a supremely sexy confident woman, only to revert back some years later? Less likely still.

There were a few posters here who thought that she isn't asexual at all, but didn't really say why (at least not that I recall). It would be interesting to hear from them on that point.

But personally, it strikes me that if you're going to take a huge emotional risk and tell your h something that may very well end the relationship forever, as well as expose something you've kept hidden for years...it probably has some level of truth to it.

But you were also there before this guy ever was. How good is your memory?


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

alexm said:


> To go into a marriage with even a sliver of doubt that it will last is only shooting yourself in the foot. You're setting yourself up. There's a term for that (which I can not remember for the life of me), but it basically states that what you believe will end up being.


I agree with much of what you've said in this and many other recent posts, but I don't about the bit I quoted.

Doubt is simply realization that reality isn't perfect, and neither we nor our potential spouse is perfect. Doubt is necessary to understand that there is room for improvement, and provides an incentive to do the work to make that happen. In my view, doubt is very healthy, and certainty is dysfunctional. Certainty sets you up for failure, because that certainty is inevitably going to be tested - repeatedly.

In our case, we had tremendous doubt about marrying, even though we already had a great relationship that had been tested by years together and some major problems. Would marriage ruin what we had? We expected that it would not, but we agreed we'd divorce if it did, and try to return to what we had before. Marriage as an institution is full of concepts we dislike and disagree with, and despite our views on it, the insidious social standards could still take hold in our minds and subvert our good intentions. Thankfully, we've avoided that and made the marriage what we want it to be, but we still have and discuss our doubts.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> Independence doesn't mean "I don't need anybody but myself". or "I don't trust anybody but myself". That is fear, cowardice, selfishness. And I mean that in a nice way, I'm not calling anybody any names.


Whenever something blows up in your face, you're going to revise your tactics. It's a fool's errand to do the same thing over and over again, expecting different results.

I agree with you that independence does not preclude letting someone in. But it does, or certainly can, limit how dependent you are willing to be on someone else. Is this cowardice? 

I can see why you might think so, as in fear of intimacy, fear of letting someone else see the inner workings of your mind and emotions. But it seems to me that this sort of "letting in" is much more about the transparency we were talking about earlier. And while you might want to say that *anyone* who isn't fully transparent is a coward, this is to my mind a bit harsh. That level of transparency, as GettingIt has said many times, requires a great deal of work and willingness on both sides to confront some ugly truths about themselves and their partners. 

An expectation of that level of transparency makes you a coward with walls too! And I also mean that in the nicest possible way.

When I say I can't be dependent or believe in happily ever after, though, I'm not saying that I can't improve communication, share my more intimate secrets, or that I'm not willing to work on achieving better connection. On the contrary, I've craved connection all my life.

But at the same time, I have to be smart about it. It was drilled into my head by my mother that a woman should always, for example, ensure her own financial independence. Why? So that she wouldn't have to endure an abusive or overly controlling relationship (like too many of her friends and acquaintances). I also learned early on that there are many people who just do not have your best interests at heart. It's important to look out for yourself.

And then, there's the lesson that if you show your true self to someone you love, it may very well scare them away. They may not actually like that person you are, deep down, or they may judge you as deficient, or broken, or worse. And the more invested you are in that person, in wanting them to still want you, the scarier that process is. And the more that you realize that you aren't "normal" or that those intimate secrets are likely to be hurtful or deal-breakers, or send your partner into a tizzy of wondering whether they can continue to live with that, the scarier it is.

So it's all very well to label people as selfish cowards. But at least recognize the level and depth of the risk you are asking. And all without taking a single one of your own.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

always_alone said:


> Whenever something blows up in your face, you're going to revise your tactics. It's a fool's errand to do the same thing over and over again, expecting different results.
> 
> I agree with you that independence does not preclude letting someone in. But it does, or certainly can, limit how dependent you are willing to be on someone else. Is this cowardice?
> 
> ...



You must have had a hard life if you think in those terms...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

alexm said:


> Here's the dilemma: I have gone into two marriages with the utmost positivity, without a doubt that this is the person I will be with until I'm old and die. In neither case did I even entertain the thought that the marriage will end for some reason. *Why would I do that?*


Why wouldn't you do that? If we ever go in thinking we'll never, ever be out...more than half of us will be even more disappointed than we would have been if we had just had more understanding that "things happen" instead of holding on to this dream of "that will never happen to me".

How about just checking the odds on second marriages lasting? That alone has to give you some kind of sense of reality here.

I don't think it is good to put ourselves into a mental area of which there is no getting out, even if that mental area is the place where you hold your most cherished other person in there with you. It is actually much more romantic to realize, they can leave you at any time but so far they haven't.


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

Faithful Wife said:


> Why wouldn't you do that? If we ever go in thinking we'll never, ever be out...more than half of us will be even more disappointed than we would have been if we had just had more understanding that "things happen" instead of holding on to this dream of "that will never happen to me".
> 
> How about just checking the odds on second marriages lasting? That alone has to give you some kind of sense of reality here.
> 
> I don't think it is good to put ourselves into a mental area of which there is no getting out, even if that mental area is the place where you hold your most cherished other person in there with you. It is actually much more romantic to realize, they can leave you at any time but so far they haven't.


See, this is where we differ (and other posters, as well).

I'm not saying I go into relationships (or my two marriages) -believing- this is it. I just figured it was, in both cases. No reason to not think like that. It's what marriage is supposed to be, after all.

I didn't go into either marriage thinking it could end, either.

I guess I just didn't spend any time thinking about either potential outcome. Neither side is better than the other.

But preparing yourself for it to end, right from the beginning, that's dangerous. There's nothing wrong with "hope for the best, prepare for the worst" in most aspects of life. I just don't think marriage has room for that.

And believe me, I think ahead. I'm a planner in most every other aspect of my life. (and also a ruminator!!!!!)


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

always_alone said:


> I dunno, Alex. This sounds like grasping to me. I've been with my SO for 17 years and I have a crappy memory. But I still have a decent sense of what my sexuality was like all the back to before I even really knew what sexuality is.
> 
> And to rewrite it that seriously just for one crappy relationship? Possible, but not likely. And then to "recover" into what you once described to me as a supremely sexy confident woman, only to revert back some years later? Less likely still.
> 
> ...


Yes, I was there, and it wasn't like this. Mind you, we were 15, 16, 17 years old and everything was shiny and new.

The thing that makes me think this way is that her memories of our first go round together are different than mine. I clearly remember her being MUCH more aggressive then she is now. She does not. I've had to jog her memory several times.

Mind you, it's been 20+ years since, and she's had far more experiences in between than I have, so the memories are more fresh for me.

I believe, though not 100%, that her memories have changed over time, as they often do. Things meld into one another, including people. Both she and I have placed each other in memories that involved other people, for example (then we laugh about it). It happens.

Life altering events also have a tendency to change the past, as well.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

alexm said:


> See, this is where we differ (and other posters, as well).
> 
> I'm not saying I go into relationships (or my two marriages) -believing- this is it. I just figured it was, in both cases. No reason to not think like that. It's what marriage is supposed to be, after all.
> 
> ...


It is less about preparing for the end, and more knowing that your own life is your priority. Her own life is her priority. And that's as it should be. So with that includes, marriage is a lower priority than either of our individual lives, and at any time, any of us can change our minds, have an affair, die, develop Alzheimer's, become disabled...

I think if we always assume we could lose it, instead of assume we "shouldn't" lose it, we will cherish it even more.

In the end, if your happiness depends on the actions of someone else, you are bound to be jerked around.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

alexm said:


> Yes, I was there, and it wasn't like this. Mind you, we were 15, 16, 17 years old and everything was shiny and new.
> 
> The thing that makes me think this way is that her memories of our first go round together are different than mine. I clearly remember her being MUCH more aggressive then she is now. She does not. I've had to jog her memory several times.


Memory is always fallible. And shaped by our intents and perspectives at the time. 

I wouldn't necessarily assume, though, that hers is the more faulty one or that she is just re-writing and not recalling.


----------



## always_alone (Dec 11, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> You must have had a hard life if you think in those terms...


Or maybe you have had an extraordinarily easy and privileged life? So luxurious that you have never been jerked around by anyone, or ever felt the need to keep some part of you private, to avoid being judged and rejected for it?


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

NobodySpecial said:


> Honestly, that is part of life. Accepting who your spouse is. It would not even occur to me to be bothered to have to remind my husband about something that isn't on his natural radar. .


I agree if the only issue is needing to remind her to have sex and the other pillars (frequency, variety, and enthusiasm). Maybe I'm misunderstanding the thread, but isn't part of the issue her lack of enthusiasm? That once she is actually in the act it is obvious she is just being mechanical?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

always_alone said:


> Or maybe you have had an extraordinarily easy and privileged life? So luxurious that you have never been jerked around by anyone, or ever felt the need to keep some part of you private, to avoid being judged and rejected for it?


I've had my share of problems... my life hasn't been "luxurious" or privileged, but overall I can say it's been ok... not great - it could have been a lot better - but ok. And I never felt the need to keep anything private, to be honest...


----------



## Fam06 (Feb 1, 2015)

badsanta said:


> This is compounded with stress that her family lives in another country and she could not be with them for the holidays.


I failed to mentioned on my post about another issue my exwife now had and that is she felt alone and being far from her families out of state. It was always stressful on her and that also caused tension and ultimately the end to my marriage. 

Curious could this be a big issue with yours too?


----------



## alexm (Nov 29, 2008)

DTO said:


> I agree if the only issue is needing to remind her to have sex and the other pillars (frequency, variety, and enthusiasm). Maybe I'm misunderstanding the thread, but isn't part of the issue her lack of enthusiasm? That once she is actually in the act it is obvious she is just being mechanical?


No, that's not it. It's close, though, but much bigger.

I have to remind her to be a wife, more than anything. That sounds stupid, but that's the general idea.

She's basically living her own life, and expects me to live mine with no dependence whatsoever from either of us, not just her. What she wants is to just have me there for her, and vice versa. She's happy to share things with me. Or not.

It's hard to explain, but it has nothing to do with me. Trust me, I went through that period of thinking it must be me. She's not into me. She's settling, etc. It's not that. This is just who she is, and how she's been with other guys.

With her other relationships, they've done the same thing I've done - the "what kind of relationship is this?" and they've ultimately fallen apart. They've either cheated on her, accused her of being unfaithful, or just drifted apart as a result. For her credit, with me, she doesn't want to lose me, and I believe her. The other guys, she's been fine (more or less) with losing, and they played their part in it, too. But she also realizes it's been her in the past, as well, not 100% them.

But for her, all she really wants is to have me around. She doesn't use me or take advantage of me. I'm not her for her amusement. She does love me very much, but she's not capable/interested in the type of relationship that revolves around the other person. Is not dependent on the other person for anything. Does not "need" the other person. This is fine, and I have no problem with that, as long as both people are like that. I'm not. I HAVE adapted in most other aspects, as in I am happy to just go do my own thing. My previous relationships were more normal, where we did everything together, with SOME time by ourselves. This one is the opposite. I'm fine with that.

When it comes to the intimacy (and yes, sex), however, that's the issue. It's a whole other animal. She treats intimacy and sex just like everything else in our relationship, which is a problem. She doesn't/can't let herself be dependent on me for it, and expects the same in return. That ain't right.

That's the one thing that two people in love should (no, HAVE) to share and be dependent on the other for). She can go out with her friends and have fun, I can hang out with the guys, we can do thing on our own. We can have these needs met with others or on our own. With intimacy and sex, neither of us can. We only have each other to meet these needs.


----------

