# Put out or get out.



## wranglerman (May 12, 2013)

Simple.

My good buddy has been married for 4 years, and whilst chatting about marriage and how his has become rather lacking I jokingly said tel her "put out or get out" and after him taking the time to rearrange the finances and adjust the potential fall out in his favor he went and read MMSLP among other books I recommended and realized where it was going wrong.

Success, put out or get out worked for him, quite simply, he stated that anything less than twice a week was not on and if she made excuses she needed to pack her bags.

My instant question was "do you actually want to get divorced?" and he said that he would rather get divorced than to turn up here complaining about not getting any and suffering in silence for years like so many others.

He reports that she is now showing willingness to explore their intimacy further, not going there, he can do what he wants but I don't have to know LOL

Anyone else tried this approach?


----------



## ntamph (Apr 23, 2013)

My answer has the caveat of basically knowing nothing about your buddy's situation.

If he has continued to do the things that he did during the dating period and early in the marriage for 4 years, and she has simply decided to stop having sex and didn't want to do anything about it (dismissed his questions), then he has a right to go.

If he has been slacking on his end of the marriage then they are both wrong.

But yes, I do think that men AND women who find their partners stopping sex for no reason, who try to save the marriage only to be ignored, should just leave as amicably as possible. You can waste years of your life in a sham of a marriage if you are lazy and not careful and proactive.


----------



## wranglerman (May 12, 2013)

ntamph said:


> My answer has the caveat of basically knowing nothing about your buddy's situation.
> 
> If he has continued to do the things that he did during the dating period and early in the marriage for 4 years, and she has simply decided to stop having sex and didn't want to do anything about it (dismissed his questions), then he has a right to go.
> 
> ...


Since I was once stuck in one of those "shams" known as a rubbish sexless marriage with a passive aggressive wife I gave the best advice I could, he's a great guy and she knows he's a catch too, but for some reason she turned the sex switch to the "off" position and he was trying with the nice his way back into her pants and to no avail, brought him here a couple months ago to read some of the stories of woe, made him think hard!!!

And Frnech Fry, walk away spouse is better than being stuck in a dead end marriage where no matter how hard you try it just don't get any better!!! 4yrs is less than half what I endured in mine and he gets to turn it around and make it what it should be, we all get complacent at times but it sometimes needs a shock to the system to make us see what we are about to loose if things don't change!


----------



## Goldmember357 (Jan 31, 2012)

Agreed

No man should except less than the amount of sex he wants, comprise can be made. But the idea that you should have less than what you feel you need is absurd. 

You want it 6 times a week? A healthy marriage with a good wife, she should be able to comprise to at least 4 times NOT including blowjobs to completion. 

Come to think of it are there any healthy marriages in which people have sex less than 3 times a week? It just seems ludacris to me. From my own experience and from reading on here, it seems that when a woman really loves her man and is PHYSICALLY ATTRACTED TO HIM she will always feel blessed that she has him and will realize that most women in the world do not have what she has (which is a good partner). This will inevitably lead to her wanting sex A LOT more than a woman who is not emotionally connected or physically attracted to her husband.


----------



## ntamph (Apr 23, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> I don't think anyone should tolerate a sexless marriage, but while threats may work as a quick-fix solution, if the real issues underlying the sexlessness aren't fixed...it's a marriage still waiting to fall apart.


I wouldn't actually demand sex or a divorce. If my spouse simply refused to address basic issues in the marriage I would just walk away myself. I don't want duty sex. I was approaching the OP from the perspective of "at what point should you get out of a marriage?"

There would be no ultimatum from me. Simply ignoring your spouse and having 0 communication would destroy the marriage.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Goldmember357 said:


> Come to think of it are there any healthy marriages in which people have sex less than 3 times a week? It just seems ludacris to me.


You're kidding, right? 

Of course there are. At three times a week, you're talking every other day. There are plenty of people who just don't have that level of sexual energy.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

Goldmember357 said:


> Agreed
> 
> No man should except less than the amount of sex he wants, comprise can be made. But the idea that you should have less than what you feel you need is absurd.
> 
> ...


I don't think this is realistic. People never get everything they want. This way of thinking will only lead to chronic dissatisfaction and lack of appreciation for what we do have.

I doubt that you mean it to sound logia way but it comes across as entitlement. That does not work with sex. Such an intimate act cannot be mandated and controlled by one person. 

That's what many men say about their LD wives. They feel that their wives control the amount of sex. The workable response can't be to try to control it by mandates. A power struggle ensues and who wins? Nobody. 

What is workable depends on the relationship and the couple. The option of leaving should never be taken off of the table. It won't work as a threat but will as a solution if all else fails. 

If you say that demanding a certain amount of sex from your partner worked for you then I must believe you. I don't think it will work for other men or women in a sex starved relationship.


----------



## CallaLily (Jan 13, 2011)

She likely stopped putting out because she was no longer invested in him or the marriage. So his ever so wonderful words, " put out or get out" might
Get him a little sex for awhile, but I doubt it will last long. I'm sure resentments has or will set in and she will "get out" and free both of themselves.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Philat (Sep 12, 2013)

Goldmember357 said:


> Agreed
> 
> *Come to think of it are there any healthy marriages in which people have sex less than 3 times a week? It just seems ludacris to me.* From my own experience and from reading on here, it seems that when a woman really loves her man and is PHYSICALLY ATTRACTED TO HIM she will always feel blessed that she has him and will realize that most women in the world do not have what she has (which is a good partner). This will inevitably lead to her wanting sex A LOT more than a woman who is not emotionally connected or physically attracted to her husband.


Um...., er...... Exactly how old are you, Goldmember? Are you on any meds, by any chance? No? Didn't think so.


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

CallaLily said:


> She likely stopped putting out because she was no longer invested in him or the marriage. So his ever so wonderful words, " put out or get out" might
> Get him a little sex for awhile, but I doubt it will last long. I'm sure resentments has or will set in and she will "get out" and free both of themselves.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Sometimes put out or get out is the only way to unstick the situation. The sexless situation may be caused by a power struggle and not lack of attraction.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## CallaLily (Jan 13, 2011)

Yes it could be anything. Who knows, I doubt it will last long, but just my opinion.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## hackbornyu (Nov 2, 2013)

I doubt it will last long. I'm sure resentments has or will set in and she will "get out" and free both of themselves.


----------



## waiwera (Sep 8, 2009)

I wouldn't stay married to man who wouldn't put out either.

All the good/happy/healthy marriages I know of both in RL and online have high amounts of sex/physical contact/intimacy. 

Sex is the duct tape of marriage IMO.


----------



## KanDo (Jun 15, 2011)

hackbornyu said:


> I doubt it will last long. I'm sure resentments has or will set in and she will "get out" and free both of themselves.


*If it doesn't work out and she is resentful and leaves, so what?* The end result is the same. The marriage ends and the sexually starved spouse moves on with their life hopefully with a more compatible partner. And at least the importance placed on a sexual relationship was made clear by him.


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

KanDo said:


> *If it doesn't work out and she is resentful and leaves, so what?* The end result is the same. The marriage ends and the sexually starved spouse moves on with their life hopefully with a more compatable partner. And at least the importance placed on a sexual relationship was made clear.


That's the entire point
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## TikiKeen (Oct 14, 2013)

I'd totally walk if my H said that. That's just an ahole move, rude and disrespectful. If she wasn't resentful before, she sure would be after that.

And I say that as the potential WAW/sex-starved wife here.

The least he could do is have a little compassion. He's getting duty sex now, from someone who just knows "he wants this". What does your pal bring to the table?


----------



## hambone (Mar 30, 2013)

waiwera said:


> I wouldn't stay married to man who wouldn't put out either.
> 
> All the good/happy/healthy marriages I know of both in RL and online have high amounts of sex/physical contact/intimacy.
> 
> Sex is the duct tape of marriage IMO.


You can't build a marriage based solely on sex..
But, if it's missing, IMO.. your marriage is in trouble.

There is a bonding that happens during sex that you just can't get any other way...

Having regular sex will make a man overlook a whole lot of stuff...


----------



## SawbladeLily (Oct 26, 2013)

Sex is not a right, it's a reward! When you view it that way, you may get more. When a two people share in each other and are supportive of each other, the reward of that giving is getting something back. But to demand it just because you're married and you want it sounds like abuse to me.


----------



## wranglerman (May 12, 2013)

TikiKeen said:


> I'd totally walk if my H said that. That's just an ahole move, rude and disrespectful. If she wasn't resentful before, she sure would be after that.
> 
> And I say that as the potential WAW/sex-starved wife here.
> 
> The least he could do is have a little compassion. He's getting duty sex now, from someone who just knows "he wants this". What does your pal bring to the table?


Let me see if I can sum him up, ex college football type good paying job, provides everything for their lifestyle, good handy man and mechanic, dresses well and looks after himself, he is not an A-hole and remembers anniversaries and birthdays and makes plans for them too, what more can a guy do????? We ride out on a Saturday afternoon if the weathers not bad or we play cards for a couple hours "guy time" she just does not seem to see what she has in him!

Personally I get what I want and when I want it so not an issue for me but I really felt bad for him when it was close on 3 months and not a sniff!!!


----------



## KanDo (Jun 15, 2011)

SawbladeLily said:


> Sex is not a right, it's a reward! When you view it that way, you may get more. When a two people share in each other and are supportive of each other, the reward of that giving is getting something back. But to demand it just because you're married and you want it sounds like abuse to me.


Sex is not a reward! it's part of the covenant of marriage. Without sex you don't have a marriage. To not give sex to the spouse you promised to love and cherish sounds like abuse to me


----------



## wranglerman (May 12, 2013)

SawbladeLily said:


> *Sex is not a right, it's a reward!*
> _When you view it that way, you may get more._


Are You kidding me!!!!

PULL YOUR HEAD OUT FROM YOUR AR5E!!!!!

I was once in a shizzy sexless marriage where sex was used as a lever or there was always an attempt to try to, now by that, my ex-wife used sex as the reward for doing X Y & Z, now where does that actually mean jack sh!t in a relationship? A reward, he tried to nice his way back into her pants, if it were deemed a reward he should have gotten plenty with the $100s each month in flowers chocolates and the chores he does around the house!!! She goes to work in the mall, comes back at 6:30 and that is it he was doing everything else, and earning more money than her, WTF, REWARD?????

Sawbladelily, your post above is about one of the most ridiculous posts I have read regards sex in marriage.


----------



## walkingwounded (May 7, 2011)

Goldmember357 said:


> Agreed
> 
> No man should except less than the amount of sex he wants, comprise can be made. But the idea that you should have less than what you feel you need is absurd.
> 
> ...


4 times a week for me including oral on me to completion? My H would laugh in my face. I cannot remember the last time we did that OR he did oral on me as a complete standalone act for me. Are there husbands out there that jump their wives and do that solely for their wife's pleasure because he knows she wants it but he is not in the mood himself? Men?

Edit: will post a separate post on this!


----------



## TikiKeen (Oct 14, 2013)

Other than gifts, a good job and being a hottie, what does you pal bring to the table intimacy-wise. Lots of men can give pretty standard gifts at an obligatory level. The secret is in the thoughtfulness behind the gift-giving. Is there a give-and-take in conversation? Does either dominate it? Do their values line up? Is he respectful of her and does he build her up in public? (And does she do this with and for him?)

Both motives and actions count. If he's giving gifts with the expectation that that's the clencher that will persuade her to put out or otherwise do what he wants her to do, then he won't be pleased. Are they grateful to each other for what they each do for each other? Gratitude matters too. It shows humility.

If these other things aren't being done, why would he expect to get his way with "You owe me"? That would be selfish.


----------



## clipclop2 (Aug 16, 2013)

Question... Why do guys say things like sex N times per week NOT including BJs to completion? BJs arent sex? That is Clinton thinking.

A guy sitting back getting blown is sex, and it is sex where she is doing the "work". That kind of attitude isnt going to make a wife who doesnt want a lot of sex want you more. 

Sex is a want, not a need. So you want sex and you decide how much you will or won't live with. And, you base your decision to stay or go upon that.

If you are clear and not unreasonable, the other person knows where they stand. 

It may result in more sex in the short term, but it wont last if the LD spouse doesnt really want it. And they are even damned if they do because then they get the complaint that nobody likes duty sex.

The number of times per week is only a number. Sex is a lot more than getting off.


----------



## trey69 (Dec 29, 2010)

If the husband has tried everything,and 100% knows he's not part of the problem, and if his words "Put out or get out" seems to not be working like he had hoped, then he can always "get out" himself. 
It sounds like it might be best for them both to get out. That way the wife is free to not have sex or maybe find someone who she wants to have sex with, and the husband can do the same.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

wranglerman said:


> Let me see if I can sum him up, ex college football type good paying job, provides everything for their lifestyle, good handy man and mechanic, dresses well and looks after himself, he is not an A-hole and remembers anniversaries and birthdays and makes plans for them too, what more can a guy do????? We ride out on a Saturday afternoon if the weathers not bad or we play cards for a couple hours "guy time" she just does not seem to see what she has in him!
> 
> Personally I get what I want and when I want it so not an issue for me but I really felt bad for him when it was close on 3 months and not a sniff!!!


Your automatic assumption that superficial appearance makes a man worthy of sex is common. It does not work that way. Women are likely to place equal value on what they do. You imply that her only value is sexual. 

Besides, you have no idea what goes on in their relationship. you have the full story. 

Men expect women to understand them but they seem very resistant to understand women. With all the evidence to the contrary, very few men seem to understand that employment and looking good has nothing to do with an intimate sex in marriage. You don't have to agree with it, but act on the principle that it is true. 

I don't fully understand why men take their wives sexual rejection as a sign that they are not loved. But I absolutely know that it is true and I act on my understanding. 

Women are expected to act on knowledge alone, why do you think men are not?


----------



## hambone (Mar 30, 2013)

SawbladeLily said:


> Sex is not a right, it's a reward! When you view it that way, you may get more. When a two people share in each other and are supportive of each other, the reward of that giving is getting something back. But to demand it just because you're married and you want it sounds like abuse to me.


That is WRONG...


"You jump through my hoops... do what I say... and MAYBE I'll give you some.."

And the guy jumps through the hoops and what happens? She moves the goal post... "Now, jump through this hoop"... 

"Now, jump through THIS hoop..."


Total BS...

You are using sex as a weapon... And that's not right...


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

SawbladeLily said:


> Sex is not a right, it's a reward! When you view it that way, you may get more. When a two people share in each other and are supportive of each other, the reward of that giving is getting something back. But to demand it just because you're married and you want it sounds like abuse to me.


Wow, seriously? If you consider sex a reward, then it goes both ways and the guy attending to his wife's needs is a reward too, right? Basically, each spouse just has to pull his or her 50% of the total load and everything else is icing on the cake?

Bottom line: adopting an attitude that sex is beyond the marital give and take is a recipe for disaster. If you read TAM regularly, you'll see that a huge source of resentment is where a person's (man or woman) spouse does not get the sexual need met and that person is supposed to give 100% regardless.

By saying that sex is a reward, you are perpetuating that precise problem. Saying sex is a bonus allows you to get the other aspects of marriage yet absolves you of responsibility for giving back. If you can't give abundantly out of love, then at a minimum you should consider sex as being earnable. If your husband gives you what you request, you give him what he requests. If you know in advance you won't want to give, don't ask or expect to receive.


----------



## aug (Aug 21, 2011)

It seems to me that how much sex to have depends on age, health, financial situation, etc...


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

TikiKeen said:


> Other than gifts, a good job and being a hottie, what does you pal bring to the table intimacy-wise. Lots of men can give pretty standard gifts at an obligatory level. The secret is in the thoughtfulness behind the gift-giving. Is there a give-and-take in conversation? Does either dominate it? Do their values line up? Is he respectful of her and does he build her up in public? (And does she do this with and for him?)
> 
> Both motives and actions count. If he's giving gifts with the expectation that that's the clencher that will persuade her to put out or otherwise do what he wants her to do, then he won't be pleased. Are they grateful to each other for what they each do for each other? Gratitude matters too. It shows humility.
> 
> If these other things aren't being done, why would he expect to get his way with "You owe me"? That would be selfish.


That may be true. But it's just as likely (if not more likely) that she has an air of superiority about her. Simply put, guys are providers and fixers (generally - nothing is 100%). If my partner tells me what she wants / needs to feel attracted, I'm going to do it. I'm not going to insist on getting mine then leaving her high and dry, because the average guy simply is not like that.

What I do see - pervasively - is that women have a tendency to value themselves (their sexuality in particular) higher than anything men bring to the table. They expect to have their needs met well. They expect their men to put the women on a pedestal and treat them as superior. Again this isn't everyone (or even a majority), but it's much more common than the boorish man who just wants his woman to bang him, bring him a sandwich, and then shut up.

It's overwhelmingly likely that if this guy is saying "you owe me", it's because he does what his wife wants (or what she says she wants from him). And, guess what? If he is doing what she asks, then she does owe him (cheerfully). If she's asking for stuff that isn't going to put her in a giving mood, she needs to rearrange her priorities. Never should she ask for more than she's willing to give back.

Just based on understanding guys (since I am one), if he had to get to the point where he says "put out or get out" then most likely he's been doing what she has requested without getting his needs met for a substantial length of time (not just some weeks or a few months).


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

Let me try it this way. The poster to which I was responding said that sex is a reward. This translates to it's an outcome and not an integral part of the give-and-take of marriage, as in "you do what I want and you might get some on the back end". 

The key here is that putting sex at the end of the sequence of events inherently (and improperly) deprioritizes it. Both spouses have responsibilities to each other and the relationship (and that includes the practical stuff like having a job or otherwise pulling your weight). My point is that sex is one of those needs, not a reward for hitting some targets or milestones.

The bottom line is that treating sex in that manner is harmful to the relationship. The correct advice is to recognize sex as equally important to other marital needs and wants, and to live it out by meeting each other's needs concurrently, not to deprioritize a need by making it the last thing in a sequence or even questioning it's status as a true need.


----------



## wranglerman (May 12, 2013)

I like it how it has been implied that I don't "know" my buddy or his relationship with his wife, hell of course I do, they have been friends of ours for years, my wife no longer see's eye to eye with his wife after them having a discussion about how Pete was complaining about not getting any and how she was "cold" in the bedroom, it was my wife who tried to talk to her about how bad things were between them and she got annoyed about it.

How would I describe her, she is slim, petite, nice body and well groomed, attitude wise, nothing is ever enough, the SUV is not new enough the new pool is not big enough the cleaning lady is lazy but she won't do it herself, if he tries to have some sort of physical contact in public, it could possibly turn nuclear by the end of the night, she will not do IC nor MC, basically she used to be fun but after the wedding and buying a house and her deciding to get a job it all went south in a big way, Pete says sex just dropped off and got to a point where any type of physical touching was not allowed, hence the "put out or get out", TBH it would have been so easy for him to have cheated on her with countless girls but that is not him and he just wants his happy ever after but with sex as often as possible.


----------



## TikiKeen (Oct 14, 2013)

My questions are wondering if OP is really as awesome as he thinks. Many fall into the "but I'm such a nice guy!" trap. Yes, Nice Guys (vs nice guys) are manipulative and feel entitled to sex as not only a reward, but as an obligation just for showing up and doing the basics.



> If she's asking for stuff that isn't going to put her in a giving mood, she needs to rearrange her priorities. Never should she ask for more than she's willing to give back.


We don't know that because we don't have the whole story. We know what he did, not what she asked of him. I guarantee that when I've asked for more from my H and he whined or griped about it, he got nothing. Nada. None. I don't want to have sex with a guy who complains like a brat. That works both ways, btw.

If a spouse undermines a request from a partner by complaining, he/she cannot be surprised when a negative response ensues. It's called half-assing it.

ETA this response to wrangler (cross posting, sorry I missed it).

Ok, the gal has issues. But to tell her to put out or get out is wrong. What she needs to hear is "Get help or I am leaving." She's avoiding intimacy and sex, not just sex. You friend lacks empathy as much as she lacks an emotional connection and understanding of her materialism.


----------



## CuddleBug (Nov 26, 2012)

wranglerman said:


> Simple.
> 
> My good buddy has been married for 4 years, and whilst chatting about marriage and how his has become rather lacking I jokingly said tel her "put out or get out" and after him taking the time to rearrange the finances and adjust the potential fall out in his favor he went and read MMSLP among other books I recommended and realized where it was going wrong.
> 
> ...



A co-worker told me the same thing when he first got married. He's in his early 60's now.

He told me, he said to his wife, I need sex on average 3x week. If I get that, I am happy and you will have no issues from me. She does this for him and to this day and they are very close, always go out and travel and love each other. But he did tell me, if the sex was hardly at all and she got very fat, like her mom, he would divorce her and find another woman. She knows this....and has stayed in shape. Sad it took him telling her these things, because he shouldn't of had to. He is in very good shape by the way for a 60 year old.:smthumbup:


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

DTO I did not mean my post to be an attack on you. My intention was to offer a counterpoint to your post. If I thought you would take it that way, I would not have posted it. I will delete it, I meant you no harm.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

Catherine602 said:


> DTO I did not mean my post to be an attack on you. My intention was to offer a counterpoint to your post. If I thought you would take it that way, I would not have posted it. I will delete it, I meant you no harm.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Not a problem, no need to remove it, I'm sure someone less obtuse than me will get it in the spirit in which it was intended.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

DTO said:


> Not a problem, no need to remove it, I'm sure someone less obtuse than me will get it in the spirit in which it was intended.


I appreciate your understanding. I took it down anyway. Reading it over again I thought it was a smart alec post. I don't like smart alec's. 

Upon reading your post again, I realized I am the dense one. You did not exclude any particular gender's needs. If I understand you correctly, you were referring to one particular need among many. I got it.


----------



## MEM2020 (Aug 23, 2009)

Catherine,
This type exchange is reason number 999 your H knows he is a very lucky man. 




Catherine602 said:


> I appreciate your understanding. I took it down anyway. Reading it over again I thought it was a smart alec post. I don't like smart alec's.
> 
> Upon reading your post again, I realized I am the dense one. You did not exclude any particular gender's needs. If I understand you correctly, you were referring to one particular need among many. I got it.


----------



## nuclearnightmare (May 15, 2013)

CallaLily said:


> She likely stopped putting out because she was no longer invested in him or the marriage. So his ever so wonderful words, " put out or get out" might
> Get him a little sex for awhile, but I doubt it will last long. I'm sure resentments has or will set in and she will "get out" and free both of themselves
> 
> 
> =1]_Posted via Mobile Device_[/size]



Perhaps. Notice though that you hit on something.
In many of these situations divorce is the best option for both partners. To be "free" again; free to seek a better 'lationship with someone else. So taking a stand Will at least force things toward a good outcome. (Better than an extended state of frustration)


----------



## wranglerman (May 12, 2013)

nuclearnightmare said:


> Perhaps. Notice though that you hit on something.
> In many of these situations divorce is the best option for both partners. To be "free" again; free to seek a better 'lationship with someone else. So taking a stand Will at least force things toward a good outcome. (Better than an extended state of frustration)


Bingo I suppose, the trouble is I know a sexless marriage will turn one or the other into the arms of another person for the personal attachment and comfort, couples are more than friends and at times they seemed to be barely speaking yet alone actually enjoying each others company.

I have asked him to read this thread and to join TAM and discuss for himself but he is embarrassed to speak openly about it but he does like the fact that so many people can relate to his situation. He did say he does not want to really divorce but is not content whacking one off in the shower anymore.

PS, he thinks I am loony for loving TAM, he just doesn't get it how I can bear my soul and risk being judged by others who do not know anything about me, but my character is stronger than his.


----------



## Sudra (Oct 16, 2013)

When I got married many years ago, my husband and I both worked full time. The minute we got married, cleaning the house, doing the laundry, grocery shopping and cooking all meals was immediately somehow my job. He didn't take care of the cars or the yard either. I had to deal with my car maintenance and we paid someone to mow the lawn. In short, my husband only had to work at his job. He had plenty of time for his hobbies. I was exhausted. I begged him to help and he always said my standards for "clean" were too high and that was my problem. He didn't care if the bathrooms were not cleaned for a few weeks. Trust me, this wasn't a issue with me being a neat freak. No one has ever accused me of that!

It wasn't long before I began to struggle with having sex with him. And no, this wasn't some passive aggressive reaction. I really lost my attraction to him. This really ticked him off. I tried to keep up the sex but I really resented being "forced" to have sex when I didn't want to and didn't feel loving towards him. Our marriage was in tatters. 

We went to marriage counseling and it helped a bit and our son was conceived (unplanned while I was on the pill). I still worked full time (until 8 days after my due date) and did all things home related. 

What he did do during my pregnancy was pay attention to me. He was home in the evenings and would spend some time with me. We also had a thing where he would rub cocoa butter on my belly at bedtime. We would talk about baby-related issues such as names, nursery, etc. I could not get enough of him. We had sex all the time. At the time I thought it was hormones. Now, many years and a lot of counseling later, I realize it was the attention he paid to me, not the hormones.

It's easy to say the LD spouse is playing games and not holding up his/her end of the marriage, but it's important to look at the entire marriage and see what the HD spouse might be doing to contribute to the sexual problems. Honestly, had we not both always blamed me for our sexual problems and looked at the marriage as a whole, we'd have fixed the issue so many years sooner.

Don't be so quick to judge.


----------



## ladybird (Jun 16, 2010)

I used the "put out get out" line before, It worked for an entire month and that was all.


----------



## hambone (Mar 30, 2013)

ladybird said:


> I used the "put out get out" line before, It worked for an entire month and that was all.


At the end of that month... did you tell him to "get out"?


----------



## DesertRat1978 (Aug 27, 2013)

I am on the verge of using the "Put out or get out" line. I am not sure how successful it will be. However, you never know until you try I guess.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

In general I believe that being a walk away spouse works much better than any ultimatum. It goes back to the actions vs. words thing. Read the posts from women and see how they react when their husbands just walk away. They come on here crying that he told her over and over and she just didn't get it but now she does. I've seen this multiple times. Compare that to the way they react when given an ultimatum. They dig their heels in, and grow resentful. 

I'm all for taking drastic measures, I just think that the ultimatum is a failing strategy. I understand the appeal. I mean, sure, words are much much easier than actions and if the man in question were a man of action this problem probably wouldn't exist in the first place. But at some point, even a guy who's all talk will have to be moved to action...and hopefully before it's too late.


----------



## Jung_admirer (Jun 26, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> I don't fully understand why men take their wives sexual rejection as a sign that they are not loved. But I absolutely know that it is true and I act on my understanding.


I guess we haven't done a good job explaining ourselves. When I initiate sex, I am expressing a need that I need her help to fulfill. I am making myself vulnerable to her rejection but trust that my needs are important. Rejection is fine as long as my wife makes what I call a 'repair'. A repair shows me that the rejection is not about me. ex. 'Honey, I'm bushed, can we dance in the morning?' If there's no repair, I feel like crap and I tell her about it. As you stated, I suggest (some) men are just wired this way.


----------



## wranglerman (May 12, 2013)

WorkingOnMe said:


> In general I believe that being a walk away spouse works much better than any ultimatum. It goes back to the actions vs. words thing. Read the posts from women and see how they react when their husbands just walk away. They come on here crying that he told her over and over and she just didn't get it but now she does. I've seen this multiple times. Compare that to the way they react when given an ultimatum. They dig their heels in, and grow resentful.


You see, the need to give the ultimatum arises from the communications not being fully comprehended, this is a show of power not a feeble "baby I want and would you mind giving?" this is as raw as it gets and she has to ask herself if it matters more to her to stay sexless and lacking in comprehension of her husbands needs or whether she wants to be a stubborn ass about it and keep her legs shut or she has door number 3 and get with the program and see what it takes to make a healthy fulfilled marriage, for now she is trying and things are better but she refuses MC and even IC to tackle the root cause.

I too have witnessed first hand how things change when the cozy little blanket is whipped away, my wife now deems my needs and desires as very important, and why? Because she knows that if I am unhappy then the chances are that she gets asked to leave, whether it is down to her not wanting to give head or down to her making excuses as to why certain things are less important to her than me. I find it necessary to communicate my needs and to make it clear what I want, and then we discuss any reasons she has not to want the same, then a compromise is forged and then we can move forwards.

Unfortunately it is necessary to be harsh to press a point and Pete is more than prepared to carry through with his threat, a massive shame that it has had to get to this but how many times have you seen it in various threads about the lack of communication in general not just about sex, ending up in a marriage from hell sexless or riddled with infidelity due to a bad relationship where neither has enough substance to make the ultimatum/walk away or to actually constructively deal with the situation, and yes it does smack of immaturity but it is situations such as these where people learn to grow up.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

wranglerman said:


> I too have witnessed first hand how things change when the cozy little blanket is whipped away, my wife now deems my needs and desires as very important, and why? Because she knows that if I am unhappy then the chances are that she gets asked to leave, whether it is down to her not wanting to give head or down to her making excuses as to why certain things are less important to her than me. I find it necessary to communicate my needs and to make it clear what I want, and then we discuss any reasons she has not to want the same, then a compromise is forged and then we can move forwards.


How do you know if your wife truly desires you, or if she's just playing along to placate you (i.e. a type of duty sex)? Or does it not matter to you as long as her behavior reflects your expectations?

On TAM, I see men struggle with making the "put out or get out" demand due to the fear of "success" that is not motivated by their wife's sincere desire. In other words, the wife fakes it. 

Perhaps there are men out there who are willing to suspend their disbelief when the their wife makes changes under duress, but I think many husbands know better. And want better.


----------



## justonelife (Jul 29, 2010)

I find discussions like this fascinating in light of the thread about Libridos. Does anyone take into account the fact that science is starting to figure out that a woman's waning desire in a LTR/marriage is quite possibly completely normal? Is it possible that women aren't heartless and selfish. They really can't help it?

So what do they do if they simply experience a natural loss of desire through no fault of their own?


----------



## SawbladeLily (Oct 26, 2013)

wranglerman said:


> Are You kidding me!!!!
> 
> PULL YOUR HEAD OUT FROM YOUR AR5E!!!!!
> 
> Sawbladelily, your post above is about one of the most ridiculous posts I have read regards sex in marriage.


You didn't really READ the message. I don't mean reward for doing this or buying that.... it's the reward of having a connection and a marriage. You don't have a RIGHT to sex. And lets look at the covenant of marriage as you wanted to throw in there. The covenant is not to please your eff-ed up husband's primal urge no matter what an a-hole he is! Any man who thinks he deserves sex no matter what but can't invest in the EMOTIONAL part of sex and intimacy is a total f-ing loser. And that would be you....


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

SawbladeLily said:


> You didn't really READ the message. I don't mean reward for doing this or buying that.... it's the reward of having a connection and a marriage. You don't have a RIGHT to sex. And lets look at the covenant of marriage as you wanted to throw in there. The covenant is not to please your eff-ed up husband's primal urge no matter what an a-hole he is! Any man who thinks he deserves sex no matter what but can't invest in the EMOTIONAL part of sex and intimacy is a total f-ing loser. And that would be you....


Still an inane point of view.

Sex is a right in marriage. It is an obligation for both spouses to each other. Yes, there are other obligations. That doesn't mean sex isn't one of them.

As for the covenant of marriage, regardless of whether you mean legally or biblically, sex is formally recognized in both law and the Bible as a requirement for marriage.

I can forgive ignorance. It's just self-righteous, indignant ignorance that gets me.


----------



## wranglerman (May 12, 2013)

GettingIt said:


> How do you know if your wife truly desires you, or if she's just playing along to placate you (i.e. a type of duty sex)? Or does it not matter to you as long as her behavior reflects your expectations?


Well that is the thing isn't it, I can't say for certain that she is not placating me, but I can certainly say this, if she is not 100% then she must be 100% out and that means packing and leaving, there aint no grey areas in this marriage, there is our chosen path of compromise, we meet in the middle and whether one or the other is not entirely happy then so be it, wash it up and let it dry away as there are greater challenges in life than holding a grudge or turning your marriage/relationship into a power struggle.

The thing is, a lot of people find it dirty to think of "duty sex" but I would like to point this out, you have a duty to be part of your marriage, now if you are not into sex 5 nights a week then say so but do fully expect to compromise and give something back to the relationship, yeah we all get tired and stressed and sometimes work and social lives take over a little but where does it show love towards your spouse if he asks for a BJ and you give him a towel to dry the dishes??? How many guys come to TAM hacked off because their wife has gone LD but refuses to do duty sex and gets angry when he watches porn and whacks one off???

I communicate with my wife as much as I can to be as confident as I can be that we are on the right track, before now she was not really interested in anal play, now that there has been greater communication as to how far is allowed and that she has been encouraged to explore with me the idea is now not only on the cards but on the table and now there have been boundaries and conditions set up she will often gets the lube and toys for play time, not out of duty but out of love that she wants to see me happy and fulfilled in our sex life.

If more women went that little bit further towards satisfying their husbands then it would make a good marriage great, and that is the same roles reversed, but never should sex be held back or be used as a lever in a power struggle, and if communication does not work then bail or make it clear you want the other party to leave so you can carry on with a real life.

And update on this, she has now agreed to do MC as of last night as there has been a better connection between them since the sex started to get more frequent.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

wranglerman said:


> Well that is the thing isn't it, I can't say for certain that she is not placating me, but I can certainly say this, if she is not 100% then she must be 100% out and that means packing and leaving, there aint no grey areas in this marriage, there is our chosen path of compromise, we meet in the middle and whether one or the other is not entirely happy then so be it, wash it up and let it dry away as there are greater challenges in life than holding a grudge or turning your marriage/relationship into a power struggle.
> 
> The thing is, a lot of people find it dirty to think of "duty sex" but I would like to point this out, you have a duty to be part of your marriage, now if you are not into sex 5 nights a week then say so but do fully expect to compromise and give something back to the relationship, yeah we all get tired and stressed and sometimes work and social lives take over a little but where does it show love towards your spouse if he asks for a BJ and you give him a towel to dry the dishes??? How many guys come to TAM hacked off because their wife has gone LD but refuses to do duty sex and gets angry when he watches porn and whacks one off???
> 
> ...


I see. Sounds like you're happy with what your wife has to offer. Duty sex--even lovingly given--is not what all men go for, but when it works for both spouses, then I suppose it's a win for the marriage.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

justonelife said:


> I find discussions like this fascinating in light of the thread about Libridos. Does anyone take into account the fact that science is starting to figure out that a woman's waning desire in a LTR/marriage is quite possibly completely normal? Is it possible that women aren't heartless and selfish. They really can't help it?
> 
> So what do they do if they simply experience a natural loss of desire through no fault of their own?


Maybe this is hopelessly naive and idealistic, but I've always supposed that the finer aspects of human civilization, including marriage are largely about rising above our base natures.

Both the male fascination with the bodies of women of childbearing age as well as the female fascination with the glow of falling in love and the state of limerence that lasts for a few years into a relationship are primal desires that come from more primitive areas of our minds.

At some point in marriage, *all* of us have to rise above that. Those things don't last.


----------



## Jung_admirer (Jun 26, 2013)

justonelife said:


> I find discussions like this fascinating in light of the thread about Libidos. Does anyone take into account the fact that science is starting to figure out that a woman's waning desire in a LTR/marriage is quite possibly completely normal? Is it possible that women aren't heartless and selfish. They really can't help it?
> 
> So what do they do if they simply experience a natural loss of desire through no fault of their own?


OK sure, but both men and women are wired for emotional connection. Many men get that connection primarily from sex and should not have to apologize for pursuing that connection from their partner. In my mind, if the guy is actively working to meet the needs of his wife, she should do the same ... regardless of libido or anything else.


----------



## justonelife (Jul 29, 2010)

Jung_admirer said:


> OK sure, but both men and women are wired for emotional connection. Many men get that connection primarily from sex and should not have to apologize for pursuing that connection from their partner. In my mind, if the guy is actively working to meet the needs of his wife, she should do the same ... regardless of libido or anything else.


That's fine. But then you get duty sex. Women can't biologically FORCE themselves to have a higher sex drive than they naturally have. Yes, they can lovingly meet the needs of their husband but that doesn't mean they desire sex. It just means they want to be a good wife. Guys here often confuse sex drive and love. "If my wife loves me, she should desire sex with me." But it doesn't always work that way. Sorry guys!


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

justonelife said:


> That's fine. But then you get duty sex. Women can't biologically FORCE themselves to have a higher sex drive than they naturally have. Yes, they can lovingly meet the needs of their husband but that doesn't mean they desire sex. It just means they want to be a good wife. Guys here often confuse sex drive and love. "If my wife loves me, she should desire sex with me." But it doesn't always work that way. Sorry guys!



What do you think a practical solution would be? Perhaps an automatic expiration of the marriage agreement every five to seven years or so?


----------



## justonelife (Jul 29, 2010)

ocotillo said:


> What do you think a practical solution would be? Perhaps an automatic expiration of the marriage agreement every five to seven years or so?


Honestly, I'm not sure humans were really built to mate for life. But that's a whole other debate.


----------



## SurpriseMyself (Nov 14, 2009)

Goldmember357 said:


> Agreed
> 
> No man should except less than the amount of sex he wants, comprise can be made. But the idea that you should have less than what you feel you need is absurd.
> 
> You want it 6 times a week? A healthy marriage with a good wife, she should be able to comprise to at least 4 times NOT including blowjobs to completion.


I don't understand attitudes like this. Why do you feel so entitled to something so intimate? If you really believe marriage is a contract in which your wife owes you X amount of times per week of sex, including blowjobs to completion, then you should get that in writing. I suspect you wouldn't gotten the ring thrown in your face. 

And if you could get it in writing, she should get to specify in the contract how many times per week you have to listen to her problems, stories from work, what she plans to wear to her sister's wedding--to completion--every week.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

justonelife said:


> Honestly, I'm not sure humans were really built to mate for life. But that's a whole other debate.


I do not think that is our evolutionary legacy, so would definitely agree with you on that. Like I alluded to farther up the thread, marriage for life is one of the trappings of civilization that requires us to rise above our base natures.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

The only solution is to take control of your own happiness. Leave. Stay and accept things. Stay and work on things. Stay and make your mate as miserable as possilbe until he/she decides to leave.

But expecting your partner to pony up the sex *just because you believe it's a right or a need* is futile as a game changer. 

There ARE ways to reach a LD partner, but soapboxes ain't one of them. 

Is it fair? Maybe not. But tantrums won't get anyone anywhere. (Although I know that venting frustration can help, so I take much of what is expressed here with a grain of salt.)


----------



## wranglerman (May 12, 2013)

GettingIt said:


> The only solution is to take control of your own happiness. Leave. Stay and accept things. Stay and work on things. Stay and make your mate as miserable as possilbe until he/she decides to leave.


But this is it, when things get to this kind of stale mate and there is a deciding move made and futures hang in the balance, what do you do?

I asked my wife how she actually felt about having sex 5 nights in a row this week, she just replied "exhausted, but I did buy squirty cream in the store for tonight!".

How does that speak to you?? Game on in my book :smthumbup:

But why can't people just communicate within their relationships? I know I have had to learn how to communicate better with my wife but I know why and how things got the way they did, but now we are back on track and our relationship is so much better for it.

So is it a case of sex goes off due to a lack of communication or more to it for the rest?


----------



## MaritimeGuy (Jul 28, 2012)

I don't see it as issuing an ultimatum. As in, I'm not interested in coercing my partner to have sex with me. However it is something I desire. I think I have every right...an obligation even...to let my partner know that I will not accept not having sex. As I'm not one to cheat that means by default it is the end of the relationship if she's not interested in having sex with me.


----------



## SurpriseMyself (Nov 14, 2009)

Generally speaking, if a woman can be said to have a biological drive, it is to have children, not sex. Sex is a means to that end. Once you've had kids, then the biological drive is not there anymore and so sex isn't desired anymore. 

Of course, there are exceptions to the above. But a large percentage of women don't want sex after becoming a mother.

Read this: Lets Talk about sex (after kids): Survey Results - Netmums


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

GettingIt said:


> There ARE ways to reach a LD partner, but soapboxes ain't one of them.
> 
> Is it fair? Maybe not. But tantrums won't get anyone anywhere. (Although I know that venting frustration can help, so I take much of what is expressed here with a grain of salt.)


I think men have a tendency to climb up on soapboxes here and express things in terms of obligation, reciprocity, basic human ethics, etc., (All turn-offs for women, apparently) because that is *exactly* how our own inner monologue and self motivation tactics work. 

With that in mind, it's not unheard of for a woman's libido to absolutely explode either right at or a little before perimeno. Some women experience the highest levels of desire they've ever had in their entire lives.

Unfortunately, this often happens not only at a time when a man's desire and ability to perform are starting to wane, but when his wife is starting to slip out of the unfair and unrealistic standard that is promoted by Western culture as attractive and sexy.

It's very, very tempting to climb up on a soap box and explain all the reasons why, "Sorry gal - It is what it is" would be a completely unacceptable response by almost any standard of human conduct that matters.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

wranglerman said:


> But this is it, when things get to this kind of stale mate and there is a deciding move made and futures hang in the balance, what do you do?
> 
> I asked my wife how she actually felt about having sex 5 nights in a row this week, she just replied "exhausted, but I did buy squirty cream in the store for tonight!".
> 
> How does that speak to you?? Game on in my book :smthumbup:


Speaks to me like you guys have a good thing. 



wranglerman said:


> But why can't people just communicate within their relationships? I know I have had to learn how to communicate better with my wife but I know why and how things got the way they did, but now we are back on track and our relationship is so much better for it.
> 
> So is it a case of sex goes off due to a lack of communication or more to it for the rest?


There are as many answers to these questions as there are threads in this forum.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> I think men have a tendency to climb up on soapboxes here and express things in terms of obligation, reciprocity, basic human ethics, etc., (All turn-offs for women, apparently) because that is *exactly* how our own inner monologue and self motivation tactics work.


Yes, this is something that I've learned about my husband . . .not from 24 years of being with him, but from complete strangers here on TAM. It's been hugely helpful to me to read men's point of view on sex in marriage. It's changed my marriage for the better, to be sure. 



ocotillo said:


> With that in mind, it's not unheard of for a woman's libido to absolutely explode either right at or a little before perimeno. Some women experience the highest levels of desire they've ever had in their entire lives.
> 
> Unfortunately, this often happens not only at a time when a man's desire and ability to perform are starting to wane, but when his wife is starting to slip out of the unfair and unrealistic standard that is promoted by Western culture as attractive and sexy.
> 
> It's very, very tempting to climb up on a soap box and explain all the reasons why, "Sorry gal - It is what it is" would be a completely unacceptable response by almost any standard of human conduct that matters.


There are plenty of women (at all ages) who have to make the same choice about sex in marriage that men have to make. Leave, stay, adapt, etc. At the end of the day, when communication fails and one partner or another has had enough, then it's decision time. 

And yes, NOT doing anything (i.e. living miserably while venting on internet forums) counts as making a decision.


----------



## walkingwounded (May 7, 2011)

My H puts out. Twice a week usually. He just told me that he does not get exvited or very bothered talking or thinking about sex. Now we have been together a few years, he says, he thinks as long as we are doing it twice a week, that is reasonable to expect.

This was in response to me trying to turn the heat up in anticipation of having some "time" later. He had no fire, no passion, no flirting. This is usual now. It is like he does it so he can say look... we have done it twice this week, what have you got to complain about?

This feels like the male version of duty sex. It sucks.


----------



## Jung_admirer (Jun 26, 2013)

justonelife said:


> That's fine. But then you get duty sex. Women can't biologically FORCE themselves to have a higher sex drive than they naturally have. Yes, they can lovingly meet the needs of their husband but that doesn't mean they desire sex. It just means they want to be a good wife. Guys here often confuse sex drive and love. "*If my wife loves me, she should desire sex with me*." But it doesn't always work that way. Sorry guys!


Who's asking her to desire sex? I am asking her to express loving compassion in helping me to meet my needs. I actively seek out her needs in the same manner. I absolutely disagree with the *bolded* statement above.

I don't think you understand the duty sex men complain about. Duty sex is disconnected emotionally, someone going through the motions. You do not have to have a libido to emotionally respond to your partner. Withdraw the emotional content and every 5LL action is just puppetry.

My experience has been duty sex is the response of a partner meeting the needs of the other, and resenting every minute of it. You do not get to chose the emotional pathways your partner needs you to strum, you just do it because you admire and love them.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Jung_admirer said:


> Who's asking her to desire sex? I am asking her to express loving compassion in helping me to meet my needs. I actively seek out her needs in the same manner. I absolutely disagree with the *bolded* statement above.
> 
> I don't think you understand the duty sex men complain about. Duty sex is disconnected emotionally, someone going through the motions. You do not have to have a libido to emotionally respond to your partner. Withdraw the emotional content and every 5LL action is just puppetry.
> 
> My experience has been duty sex is the response of a partner meeting the needs of the other, and resenting every minute of it. You do not get to chose the emotional pathways your partner needs you to strum, you just do it because you admire and love them.


WELL SAID!:iagree:


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

justonelife said:


> That's fine. But then you get duty sex. Women can't biologically FORCE themselves to have a higher sex drive than they naturally have. Yes, they can lovingly meet the needs of their husband but that doesn't mean they desire sex. It just means they want to be a good wife. Guys here often confuse sex drive and love. "If my wife loves me, she should desire sex with me." But it doesn't always work that way. Sorry guys!


Who says that a wife lovingly meeting her husband's sexual need is performing duty sex? Duty sex seems to be more of a situation where one's spouse makes it clear that he or she would rather be doing something else and your needs are inconvenient at best. Those are the spouses who complain beforehand and/or do the bare minimum during ("limp fish", no foreplay, etc.).

OTOH, a spouse with the mindset "I don't feel like sex that much, but I want to make you feel fulfilled in the way that matters to you" and thus provides the desired frequency and variety in a cheerful and loving manner (those are keys) is very much a good thing. Such a spouse is generous and doing their best, and that can only be a good thing.

I don't think that "if she loves me then she will lust for me". I do think that if I am a decent guy, she loves me, and she gets what she wants from the relationship, then she should be willing to give back in the way that makes me happy. And, i reject the assertion by some LD people (men and women) that such a request is unreasonable or impossible to fulfill.

You see spouses that argue "I can't have sex cheerfully if I don't want it for myself", and that's just B.S. It can be done if one is willing to worl at it.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

ebp123 said:


> Generally speaking, if a woman can be said to have a biological drive, it is to have children, not sex. Sex is a means to that end. Once you've had kids, then the biological drive is not there anymore and so sex isn't desired anymore.
> 
> Of course, there are exceptions to the above. But a large percentage of women don't want sex after becoming a mother.
> 
> Read this: Lets Talk about sex (after kids): Survey Results - Netmums


I totally agree with that. I think a part of it (at least for some folks) is that it was always nice to have if convenient, and the convenience goes away once the kids arrive.

But "want" is not the point - fairness is. I have yet to see a woman who cuts back on sex agree to a similar cut back in her own expectations. A better standard should be to give back to the other as much as you take from that other for yourself, regardless of circumstance.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

DTO said:


> But "want" is not the point - fairness is.


Careful there, DTO. You're getting dangerously close to maxims of ethical reciprocity like Rabbi Hillel's silver rule or Jesus' golden rule. :rofl:


On a more serious note, I do agree with you.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

GettingIt said:


> Yes, this is something that I've learned about my husband . . .not from 24 years of being with him, but from complete strangers here on TAM. It's been hugely helpful to me to read men's point of view on sex in marriage. It's changed my marriage for the better, to be sure.
> 
> Two thoughts:
> 
> ...


_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

GettingIt said:


> There are plenty of women (at all ages) who have to make the same choice about sex in marriage that men have to make. Leave, stay, adapt, etc. At the end of the day, when communication fails and one partner or another has had enough, then it's decision time.


I don't doubt this for a second, but what I was driving at is how the LD spouse (The husband in this example) might resolve the conundrum. (Or at the very least, why they might be motivated to try.)


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

DTO said:


> One, the concepts of fairness et. al. is really what this argument (and many others) boil down to. The problem with using the term "soapbox" is that it portrays the disadvantaged party as a whiner instead of merely trying to seek balance. I could easily flip it around and tell someone "explain why exactly it is appropriate to take without giving back.


I don't mean to be inflammatory by using the term "soap box," rather I meant to demonstrate that the logic that seems so reasonable to the HD partner DOES sound whiny to the LD partner when it boils down to, "I have a right to sex with you so put out whether or not you feel like it." If not whiny, then at least combative. There are much, much better ways to communicate need and desire than, "you owe me."



DTO said:


> Did your teacher ever say you don't play well with others?"


No, but it might please you to know that my third grade teacher marked "Talks when should be quiet" on the Conduct portion of my report card.



DTO said:


> Two, by the time a guy gets on the soapbox, everything else has been tried and failed. It might be better if the woman thinks not "he's just whining and venting" but as "my marriage is in trouble", because that is closer to the truth.


Yes, if the marriage is in trouble, this should be communicated. But not by continuing to say, "I have a right to sex, so put out whether or not you feel like it," but by saying, "The marriage is in trouble because I'm not happy, and here is why. Do you want to work on this? If not, then I'm worried that we're in danger of divorce." 



DTO said:


> Three, part of the problem is not the soapbox but that reciprocity is not the norm it used to be. Somewhere along the line it has become increasingly acceptable to do what is convenient for oneself - to take and not give back. And this is in many aspects of life.


Meh, I think this is as it has always been. I think the internet allows like minded people to gather and vent in densities that belie the true size of their demographic in society at large. 

I mean, isn't it just as easy to say that people are starting to get better at standing up for and taking responsibility for their own happiness, even if it means breaking up a marriage?

But I'm not a sociologist, and don't have a strong opinion one way or the other. Even if I did, I would suspect that I was seeing social trends through the lens of my own experience.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

DTO said:


> Who says that a wife lovingly meeting her husband's sexual need is performing duty sex? Duty sex seems to be more of a situation where one's spouse makes it clear that he or she would rather be doing something else and your needs are inconvenient at best. Those are the spouses who complain beforehand and/or do the bare minimum during ("limp fish", no foreplay, etc.).
> 
> *OTOH, a spouse with the mindset "I don't feel like sex that much, but I want to make you feel fulfilled in the way that matters to you" and thus provides the desired frequency and variety in a cheerful and loving manner (those are keys) is very much a good thing. Such a spouse is generous and doing their best, and that can only be a good thing.*
> 
> ...


If a woman has no physical desire for sex, and she lovingly has sex only to please her husband, after doing this repeatedly, every week, month, year while still not wanting sex, odds are she will start to feel resentful. Loving duty sex will become the dead fish duty sex over time.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

CallaLily said:


> She likely stopped putting out because she was no longer invested in him or the marriage. So his ever so wonderful words, " put out or get out" might
> Get him a little sex for awhile, but I doubt it will last long. I'm sure resentments has or will set in and she will "get out" and free both of themselves.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


:iagree: A while back we had a few arguments about lack of sex. At one time, it got so bad that I told my wife that I was leaving. I remember her saying something like, "You are willing to break up our marriage because you aren't getting enough sex?" and I told her YES, I wasn't willing to live like that anymore.

It improved but like you said above, it didn't last very long.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

Jung_admirer said:


> Who's asking her to desire sex? I am asking her to express loving compassion in helping me to meet my needs. I actively seek out her needs in the same manner. I absolutely disagree with the *bolded* statement above.
> 
> I don't think you understand the duty sex men complain about. Duty sex is disconnected emotionally, someone going through the motions. You do not have to have a libido to emotionally respond to your partner. Withdraw the emotional content and every 5LL action is just puppetry.
> 
> My experience has been duty sex is the response of a partner meeting the needs of the other, and resenting every minute of it. You do not get to chose the emotional pathways your partner needs you to strum, you just do it because you admire and love them.





DTO said:


> Who says that a wife lovingly meeting her husband's sexual need is performing duty sex? Duty sex seems to be more of a situation where one's spouse makes it clear that he or she would rather be doing something else and your needs are inconvenient at best. Those are the spouses who complain beforehand and/or do the bare minimum during ("limp fish", no foreplay, etc.).
> 
> OTOH, a spouse with the mindset "I don't feel like sex that much, but I want to make you feel fulfilled in the way that matters to you" and thus provides the desired frequency and variety in a cheerful and loving manner (those are keys) is very much a good thing. Such a spouse is generous and doing their best, and that can only be a good thing.
> 
> ...


It seems like all the threads that talk about "duty sex" eventually get to this point: What IS duty sex? Well, it appears that HD spouses define it differently. While it seems that quite a few men (like you two) would be happy to accept lovingly given sex (not motivated by sexual desire, but out of love), there have been numerous posts on TAM from men who say, "No way. I want desire. If I can't have desire, then I don't want the sex." 

My husband is of the latter camp. He hates "pity sex" as he calls it. He wants full and equal desire. He wants me to want him. This suits me, because if I'm not into it, it makes me feel dreadful. Nonetheless, during my LD phase, I _tried_ to provide for his needs when I had no desire. I've even tried _lovingly._ He always knew. 

Neither camp is right or wrong. You define what your needs are and communicate that to your spouse. Sometimes they flat out refuse to budge out of pure selfishness. Sometimes, however, even their best won't be good enough.


----------



## LongWalk (Apr 4, 2013)

ebp123 said:


> Generally speaking, if a woman can be said to have a biological drive, it is to have children, not sex. Sex is a means to that end. Once you've had kids, then the biological drive is not there anymore and so sex isn't desired anymore.
> 
> Of course, there are exceptions to the above. But a large percentage of women don't want sex after becoming a mother.
> 
> Read this: Lets Talk about sex (after kids): Survey Results - Netmums


Don't know if it is a good sample or a large enough sample, but it makes for depressing reading for most men.

The idea that marriage will give a good sex life, is that an expectation that most women have? Men hope it's true. I don't think that marriage vows say anything about sex, do they? People ought to be skeptical about marriage as a vehicle of happiness. Probably most people get married because they want to have kids, thus it is not surprizing that they select mates who appeal as a source of DNA.

People try to land the best partner that they they think they can pull based on their sex rank. But this is not a guarantee of passion. People rush to pin things down at 28 or 29, don't they settle with compromise partners often?


----------



## justonelife (Jul 29, 2010)

DTO said:


> Who says that a wife lovingly meeting her husband's sexual need is performing duty sex? Duty sex seems to be more of a situation where one's spouse makes it clear that he or she would rather be doing something else and your needs are inconvenient at best. Those are the spouses who complain beforehand and/or do the bare minimum during ("limp fish", no foreplay, etc.).
> 
> OTOH, a spouse with the mindset "I don't feel like sex that much, but I want to make you feel fulfilled in the way that matters to you" and thus provides the desired frequency and variety in a cheerful and loving manner (those are keys) is very much a good thing. Such a spouse is generous and doing their best, and that can only be a good thing.
> 
> ...


I agree with what you have said and I think most men would agree. There is a fairly large contingent on this board, however, who seem discontent with even loving "duty" sex. They want their wives to be hot for them 24/7 and I don't think that's realistic. THOSE are the men I was speaking of.


----------



## justonelife (Jul 29, 2010)

norajane said:


> If a woman has no physical desire for sex, and she lovingly has sex only to please her husband, after doing this repeatedly, every week, month, year while still not wanting sex, odds are she will start to feel resentful. Loving duty sex will become the dead fish duty sex over time.


I would agree with this, especially if the woman is not getting her needs met. If she has to perform this "chore" in order to meet his needs, then he had better make damn sure that her needs are being met also. If not, resentment will take over in a hurry. It's a delicate balance.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

LongWalk said:


> I don't think that marriage vows say anything about sex, do they?


I feel otherwise. To Me, the meaning of "to have and to hold" is pretty clear.

Also, consider that Christianity and Judaism have regular sex as a requirement of marriage. Yet married people of those faiths are not immune from these issues.

I think what generally happens is that people get selfish or go on power trips. The average person would agree intellectually that it's unreasonable to expect fidelity without meeting that need. But when it comes down to oneself being inconvenienced or vulnerable, that is when the excuses come out: "you should be satisfied already,sex is different".

It comes down to talk being cheap and action being what really counts. it isn't that much different than a workplace that says "our employees are like family" then pays poorly and works you long hours. You quickly figure out that the unspoken truth is "so long as doing so doesn't interfere with my priorities". IMO most of these issues are no different:you get a sanitized version of reality to get you in the door, then you find it's about "how are you benefitting me today" and being expected to provide more than you get back.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

norajane said:


> If a woman has no physical desire for sex, and she lovingly has sex only to please her husband, after doing this repeatedly, every week, month, year while still not wanting sex, odds are she will start to feel resentful. Loving duty sex will become the dead fish duty sex over time.


Is that a blanket statement? Does that include the wives whose husbands are similarly dutiful over time? I can see being resentful if the guy doesn't pull his weight; any sort of imbalance will drive resentment.

But, a woman with a decent, attentive guy who can't make him happy for a couple of hours a week needs a reality check. There will always be times when you have to work hard to support your marriage (sexually or otherwise). Someone (man or woman) who can't manage this probably will be largely unsuccessful at maintaining a relationship.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

DTO said:


> Is that a blanket statement?


No, it's something to keep in mind before issuing a "put out or get out" ultimatum because that happens often.


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

SadSamIAm said:


> :iagree: A while back we had a few arguments about lack of sex. At one time, it got so bad that I told my wife that I was leaving. I remember her saying something like, "You are willing to break up our marriage because you aren't getting enough sex?" and I told her YES, I wasn't willing to live like that anymore.
> 
> It improved but like you said above, it didn't last very long.


That's unfortunate, but not your fault. Beyond the sex, it sounds like she didn't respect your wants and needs as equal to her own. She could have said "I need to work on why I'm so sex averse that I would endanger my .marriage over a reasonable expectation like that" or "we need to figure out how it got so your needs don't really matter to me".

Sometimes you just marry A dud. It happens.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

norajane said:


> No, it's something to keep in mind before issuing a "put out or get out" ultimatum because that happens often.


I totally agree. Resentment might slowly build up, or the LD partner might just walk away on the spot. Either way, issuing ultimata should not be taken lightly.

I feel ultimata are issued as a last resort after all else has failed and the choice is to make that last effort or leave. I know I felt that way (although I chose to cut her out rather than make the ultimatum). The status quo was unacceptable and either of the choices above would have been better than no change at all.

Another consideration: the person might not care if the LD partner feels resentment. I believe in the spouse being uncomfortable not having sex - being concerned that you will leave if your needs are not met. In hindsight, if I had to choose between a content wife ignoring my needs or a somewhat uneasy and resentful wife putting forward a strong effort, I would take the second option - all day, every day.


----------



## norajane (Feb 7, 2012)

DTO said:


> I totally agree. Resentment might slowly build up, or the LD partner might just walk away on the spot. Either way, issuing ultimata should not be taken lightly.
> 
> I feel ultimata are issued as a last resort after all else has failed and the choice is to make that last effort or leave. I know I felt that way (although I chose to cut her out rather than make the ultimatum). The status quo was unacceptable and either of the choices above would have been better than no change at all.
> 
> *Another consideration: the person might not care if the LD partner feels resentment. I believe in the spouse being uncomfortable not having sex - being concerned that you will leave if your needs are not met. In hindsight, if I had to choose between a content wife ignoring my needs or a somewhat uneasy and resentful wife putting forward a strong effort, I would take the second option - all day, every day*.


And how long do you think an uneasy and resentful wife would put forth a "strong effort"? Only as long as it took her to figure out how to leave you.


----------



## Jung_admirer (Jun 26, 2013)

norajane said:


> If a woman has no physical desire for sex, and she lovingly has sex only to please her husband, after doing this repeatedly, every week, month, year while still not wanting sex, odds are she will start to feel resentful. Loving duty sex will become the dead fish duty sex over time.





justonelife said:


> I would agree with this, especially if the woman is not getting her needs met. If she has to perform this "chore" in order to meet his needs, then he had better make damn sure that her needs are being met also. If not, resentment will take over in a hurry. It's a delicate balance.


If meeting a partner's needs over time causes resentment, there are going to be huge problems with the relationship. Male or female, sex or quality time, needs are needs. My wife needs 30 min in the morning alone and an hour with me in the evening to talk about her world as much as I need sex. When one of us withdraws, the other responds. My love for her is not based on this dance, but our relationship is.


----------



## GettingIt_2 (Apr 12, 2013)

DTO said:


> I totally agree. Resentment might slowly build up, or the LD partner might just walk away on the spot. Either way, issuing ultimata should not be taken lightly.
> 
> I feel ultimata are issued as a last resort after all else has failed and the choice is to make that last effort or leave. I know I felt that way (although I chose to cut her out rather than make the ultimatum). The status quo was unacceptable and either of the choices above would have been better than no change at all.
> 
> Another consideration: the person might not care if the LD partner feels resentment. I believe in the spouse being uncomfortable not having sex - being concerned that you will leave if your needs are not met. In hindsight, if I had to choose between a content wife ignoring my needs or a somewhat uneasy and resentful wife putting forward a strong effort, I would take the second option - all day, every day.


As a spouse who lived with an unhappy HD husband for ten years, I can say that it was very uncomfortable in the marriage. My needs in the relationship, such as they were, were not being met because obviously he had checked out. But after a while I got used to it and moved on with the rest of my life. I guess you could say I did the 180 on him--I focused on my health, my friends, my hobbies, etc. I was happy, and I just accepted that my marriage was a functioning failure. It really didn't make me change how I felt about meeting his sexual needs. I figured we'd go on like this until we eventually divorced when one or the other of us found someone else or decided to just move on. 

In this case, I think I was much happier than my husband. 
Some people can accept living with the uncertainty about their marriage, and nothing will change because they find fulfillment in other areas of their life.


----------



## Jmom (Nov 8, 2013)

Sex is only one part of the puzzle. There needs to be a lot of casual ohysical contact as well. Husband and I went through a very bad period recently. 6 weeks into reconciliation, we make a point of holding hands, giving backrubs, sitting and touching while we watch tv, in addition to sex. It creates an intimacy and friendliness that changes the whole relationship. During the year we weren't having sex, we of course weren't touching in other ways either, and i think that was at least as damaging.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

LongWalk said:


> Men hope it's true. I don't think that marriage vows say anything about sex, do they?


They don't have to. Promises that are made to us almost always carry implicit obligations as direct ethical corollaries. 

Simple example: If as a precondition of marriage, your wife had to vow to only ever eat food that you personally provided, then you would have a _concomitant obligation_ to feed her. If you refused to honor the ethical corollary to that vow, she would be in a real pickle, as her options for meeting an important need would be reduced to starving, asking you to be released from the vow, breaking it behind your back, or getting it annulled formally. This is Ethics 101, week 1. It exists in every human relationship and it not simply a matter of perspective or one's way of looking at things. 

-------------------------------

I realize, this is horribly unromantic to some, almost to the point of being offensive and I have much better sense than to ever express things that way in a relationship. To be clear here, I'm not approaching this from the standpoint of a man with an LD wife; (Although I was in that boat for many years) I'm approaching this from the standpoint of an aging man with an extremely HD wife.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

norajane said:


> If a woman has no physical desire for sex, and she lovingly has sex only to please her husband, after doing this repeatedly, every week, month, year while still not wanting sex, odds are she will start to feel resentful. Loving duty sex will become the dead fish duty sex over time.


I would like to understand that better. There's all kinds of negative things that spring to mind from a facile reading that are probably very unfair, so I'm sure there is more to it.


----------



## LongWalk (Apr 4, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> They don't have to. Promises that are made to us almost always carry implicit obligations as direct ethical corollaries.
> 
> Simple example: If as a precondition of marriage, your wife had to vow to only ever eat food that you personally provided, then you would have a _concomitant obligation_ to feed her. If you refused to honor the ethical corollary to that vow, she would be in a real pickle, as her options for meeting an important need would be reduced to starving, asking you to be released from the vow, breaking it behind your back, or getting it annulled formally. This is Ethics 101, week 1. It exists in every human relationship and it not simply a matter of perspective or one's way of looking at things.
> 
> ...


If as a precondition of marriage, a husband had to vow to only ever intercourse and sexual contact with his wife, then she would have a _concomitant obligation_ to be sexually accessible. If she refused to honor the ethical corollary to that vow, the husband would be in a real pickle, as his options for meeting an important need would be reduced to celibacy, asking her to be released from the vow, breaking it behind her back, or getting it annulled formally.

This makes perfect sense but since this very logical and fair, why is it not written in any legal description of marriage, e.g., civil vows? Nor is there any mention of fidelity. So in fact modern marriage is going forward based on tradition and traditional expectations, but these expectations are not contractual, as evidenced by the high divorce rate.

Furthermore, given that marriage vows, both the non binding ones made in religious ceremonies and the binding ones defined by the state, are written by lawyers and clergy, how did it come that the contracts became implicit?


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

LongWalk said:


> This makes perfect sense but since this very logical and fair, why is it not written in any legal description of marriage, e.g., civil vows? Nor is there any mention of fidelity. So in fact modern marriage is going forward based on tradition and traditional expectations, but these expectations are not contractual, as evidenced by the high divorce rate.
> 
> Furthermore, given that marriage vows, both the non binding ones made in religious ceremonies and the binding ones defined by the state, are written by lawyers and clergy, how did it come that the contracts became implicit?


You are correct that there are aspects of marriage that are specific to law, religious beliefs and culture.

I'm speaking purely from the standpoint of ethics. Turning a cold shoulder on a spouse who is doing their best to please you while simultaneously expecting fidelity out of them is not an ethically defensible position. This goes just as much for men as for women.


----------



## wranglerman (May 12, 2013)

SadSamIAm said:


> :iagree: A while back we had a few arguments about lack of sex. At one time, it got so bad that I told my wife that I was leaving. I remember her saying something like, "You are willing to break up our marriage because you aren't getting enough sex?" and I told her YES, I wasn't willing to live like that anymore.
> 
> It improved but like you said above, it didn't last very long.


But tell me now where you are and who you are with? 

I bet you are still married and living a life as a man who has to masturbate?

Pete tells me MC is on the cards and she has had a bit of a wake up call as to how bad things are, but this is the beginning of their road.

If you have reached a dead end then you and your wife need to build a bridge to get further or turn in different directions to get where and what you want out of your life.

I knew a couple who had a marriage where she was allowed bed partners to satisfy her sexually, an open marriage, it worked for them, perhaps you could call your wife out on that one?


----------



## LongWalk (Apr 4, 2013)

ocotillo said:


> You are correct that there are aspects of marriage that are specific to law, religious beliefs and culture.
> 
> I'm speaking purely from the standpoint of ethics. Turning a cold shoulder on a spouse who is doing their best to please you while simultaneously expecting fidelity out of them is not an ethically defensible position. This goes just as much for men as for women.


I wonder how sustainable marriage is as an institution, given the weakness of legal contract and the erosion of social structure. Consider pornography. How can people have normal expectations when they begin watching Internet pornography in their teens. It is pretty impossible to block kids from watching it since they are more computer savvy than most parents.

And if boys and men have unrealistic expectations about female sexuality based on porn. Women absorb an enormous amount of garbage entertainment based on TV alpha males of all sorts. An intellectual woman might watch Richard Attenborough nature documentaries and feel her husband was a boring and unattractive in terms of mating. 

One thing that is guaranteed in modern marriage is that your spouse will probably investigate your negative aspects on the Internet. How many TAM CWI stories have a Facebook element?

It would be interesting to know how many people who are not having sex have looked the happy and attractive members of the opposite among their friends and friends of friends on FB and thought, "I wish my spouse looked like that and smiled like that"?


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

DTO said:


> I totally agree. Resentment might slowly build up, or the LD partner might just walk away on the spot. Either way, issuing ultimata should not be taken lightly.
> 
> I feel ultimata are issued as a last resort after all else has failed and the choice is to make that last effort or leave. I know I felt that way (although I chose to cut her out rather than make the ultimatum). The status quo was unacceptable and either of the choices above would have been better than no change at all.
> 
> Another consideration: the person might not care if the LD partner feels resentment. I believe in the spouse being uncomfortable not having sex - being concerned that you will leave if your needs are not met. In hindsight, if I had to choose between a content wife ignoring my needs or a somewhat uneasy and resentful wife putting forward a strong effort, I would take the second option - all day, every day.


I love this. So you'll take a relationship with a bit more friction and sex where she wants to do it good vs a good relationship with no friction but your need is ignored.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Sudra (Oct 16, 2013)

Jung_admirer said:


> If meeting a partner's needs over time causes resentment, there are going to be huge problems with the relationship. Male or female, sex or quality time, needs are needs. My wife needs 30 min in the morning alone and an hour with me in the evening to talk about her world as much as I need sex. When one of us withdraws, the other responds. My love for her is not based on this dance, but our relationship is.


Here's a post I can get behind. Most of the others do not discuss in any manner what the HD partner is doing for the LD partner. I feel if the HD's needs are not being met, it's very likely that the LD's needs (for something) are also not being met. Not in every case, but most, IMO.

And with respect to women not wanting sex after children, I suspect that this is biologically wired to be so for a period of time but not permanently. Babies require so much time and attention and deserve that time and attention. How much better if the man is supportive and not complaining. Even better if he pitches in and helps so she is not so tired. 

Maybe it's my age and men are more helpful now, but for me, having a child just added to the long list of jobs I already had - trial attorney, housekeeper, laundress, shopper, cook, schedule keeper, family coordinator, and then mother. All he had to do was work every day, which I also did. He came home and was done and I was just starting several other jobs. Yea, sex was pretty low on my list of needs for a couple of years, although I didn't want it that way either.


----------



## Jung_admirer (Jun 26, 2013)

There has been some interesting research recently published on this issue: 

How Often Should Married Couples Have Sex? - WSJ.com
...
A study published in the May issue of Social Psychological and Personality Science looked at sexual desire in long-term relationships and concluded that people are better able to sustain desire when they are motivated to meet their partner's sexual needs, even when these needs conflict with their own preferences.

Researchers call it sexual communal strength, and people who rate high in it are willing to engage in sexual activity with their partner even when it doesn't necessarily turn them on. They expect their partner will do the same for them, but it isn't an immediate quid pro quo.

The study followed 44 long-term couples with partners from ages 23 to 60. They answered questions about their sexual communal strength. And they kept diaries for three weeks recording how much sexual desire they had, reasons for having sex (if they did) and other details about satisfaction and feelings of closeness. Four months later, the researchers followed up to see what had changed.

The results indicate that people who rated high in sexual communal strength had more sexual desire and maintained it over the five-month study. People who rated low started out with less desire and it declined. There weren't significant gender differences. "*We think people higher in sexual communal strength are more focused on positive outcomes in their relationship*," says Amy Muise, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Toronto and lead author of the study. "*They are having sex to enhance intimacy and feel closer to their partner rather than to please themselves, and this is what leads them to feel higher desire*."

-------------------------------

I would suggest that "sexual communal strength" is merely a pseudonym for empathy. The good news is that empathy can be learned (sometimes with the help of a 2x4). The bad news is that empathy requires vulnerability, which is something not all partners are willing or able to extend. So we have come full circle yet again. Ask for what you need, tell your partner how it feels to have your needs met or rejected, evaluate their response.


----------



## momtwo4 (May 23, 2012)

I stopped coming to this board because, quite, frankly, it was depressing to me. I have a very low drive. That is just the way I'm wired. But I still initiate sex with my husband because I know it's important to him. Left alone, I could take it or leave it. I really have no physical desire for sex. If having sex with my husband because I love him isn't enough, then it's all over for me and my husband. 

I'm sorry, but ultimatums won't work long-term. And you can't force a woman with little drive to love sex. Issue an ultimatum, and you'll just send her the signal that she needs to start faking and "performing" better for him. 

On most days, I'm doing good to brush my hair and put on a little make-up. I have four little kids. I do all the housework, grocery shopping, finances, laundry, shopping, cooking, school activities, etc... And I also work about 15 hours per week teaching an online class from home. When I offer sex in a loving way and it's not enough, I literally feel like banging my head against the wall and screaming.

And I'll be the first to walk out the door.


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

momtwo4 said:


> I stopped coming to this board because, quite, frankly, it was depressing to me. I have a very low drive. That is just the way I'm wired....


My observation is that men who've been sexually cut off, sometimes for years at a time and who've tried everything and still struggle to even get a dry peck on the cheek come here either to vent, organize their thoughts, or get some advice and truly nice ladies like you who actually do love their husbands take it personally.

Don't


----------



## MaritimeGuy (Jul 28, 2012)

momtwo4 said:


> I literally feel like banging my head against the wall and screaming


That's probably exactly what he's hoping to achieve.. 

j/k...sorry couldn't resist.


----------



## SurpriseMyself (Nov 14, 2009)

GettingIt said:


> And yes, NOT doing anything (i.e. living miserably while venting on internet forums) counts as making a decision.


You are correct. And it hurts.


----------



## Cyclist (Aug 22, 2012)

Its a very interesting conversation.

If your partner is mature enough to know their needs and express them to you and you are accepting of that challenge and you meet those needs the relationship should be solid.

The book His Needs, Her needs explains this and is one of the best relationship books I have ever read.

But there is a common theme throughout this forum. It seems like the needs once met, or what you thought was your need that was being met, has changed. Or maybe in some cases "evolved"

The book explains that by far sexual satisfaction is on the top of the list for most men while for woman it could be affection, or communication, or admiration, or security.

It seems that while men have the same need at or very near the top of the list that the list changes with woman. If communication is not open enough between the two then a dis connect takes place in the relationship. Resentment starts, physical contact goes away, etc.

I liken this to the running of a business. Every year my staff and I get together and revue what happened during the previous year, what our strong points and weak points are, and what we have to do to move forward. Set new goals and move towards those goals.

It sounds like relationships need that same revue on a consistent basis. Therefore if someone in the relationships needs have changed the spouse understands and then works towards meeting those needs.

IE if I like chocolate ice cream and you continually bring me strawberry yet I did not tell you I like chocolate.....OR THAT I STOPPED liking chocolate....Get the picture?


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

ebp123 said:


> You are correct. And it hurts.


It more than hurts. To continue to play it through your mind or verbalize it, can make you appear pathetic to yourself. I could see if it was the past and the present is a rosy place and you are recounting the negative experience. If you have never got on or replaced what the affair took away, you will keep yourself there.


----------

