# Was sex important enough to dissolve your marriage?



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Short background: You've heard it before. Girlfriend who doesn't believe in pre-marital sex becomes wife who turns out to be monumentally inhibited in the bedroom. Fast forward 27 years - kids are grown, nest is empty, sex life is unchanged and probably unchangeable. Fighting over the issue is no longer interesting because deep down after this much time you see the abject futility of it. Mate is otherwise a caring, loving person with similar beliefs and overall a good fit.

Now it's time to make a decision. Do you make the one thing you can't change important enough to end the relationship before age removes any chance of enjoying a fulfilling sex life? Or is the grass not only not greener, but perhaps not even grass? 

I'm interested in hearing from those who chose either way and what they think about their decision. Regrets, satisfactions, compensations, thoughts, whatever.


----------



## RandomDude (Dec 18, 2010)

In my case, non-sexual intimacy was important enough to dissolve our marriage


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

In my humble opinion, yes, it's important enough to divorce. In fact, it was important enough to divorce 26 years ago. But since you didn't, it's still important enough to now. Just with the added side benefit of paying alimony for the majority of the rest of your life.


----------



## Cre8ify (Feb 1, 2012)

There are a few of us here like you Cletus. I am also interested in what this decision looks like in the rear view mirror. There are no guarantees and you could end up alone...could live with that. The prospect that scares me is ending up with the same frigid situation after the honeymoon.


----------



## sharkeey (Apr 27, 2012)

I'm several years post divorce.

Sex was always good, even up to and including the divorce but the point being that the women I've met in the post marriage years have a stronger sex drive than I do, and we're talking women from 40-50s.

If you want it, and you aren't getting it, then get out and go get some, it's waiting for you.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

I am a woman but ended my marriage that was sexless. In my 40's, was married 17 years, a few kids. Ex and I were great in every other way.

But in the end the lack of sex was not about sex, it was about him saying he loved me but then doing nothing to give me the intimacy and sex life that I needed.

Don't think that divorce is an easy option, it isn't. It hurts, it costs and it is one of the hardest things I have ever done.

But it was worth it, oh yeah. Kids aside and all that goes with their issues, it was the best thing I could have ever done. I got sick of waking up every day thinking "is this it? Is this the rest of my life".

IME though, don't do it just for a better sex life. Do it because you want to be true to yourself and you want to grow as a person. Learn who you really are, why you ended up in this situation and take responsibility for how your life has turned out.

Grow and learn then get back out into the world cos it is a bloody brilliant world out there.
In my case I did not date for 12 months post separation, I used that time to get drunk and let go. Then did some online dating and had a ball. I learnt that I am in fact a gorgeous woman that men are very attracted too.

I am a woman that loves sex and intimacy, I was deprived of that for many years. I have since met the most wonderful man that I am incredibly compatible with in all areas of life. 

There is an amazing life out there, I am now on the other side and have never felt more alive. 

All the best OP


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

Holland said:


> I am a woman but ended my marriage that was sexless. In my 40's, was married 17 years, a few kids. Ex and I were great in every other way.
> 
> But in the end the lack of sex was not about sex, it was about him saying he loved me but then doing nothing to give me the intimacy and sex life that I needed.
> 
> ...


One of the best posts I have _ever_ read on this board.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Interesting so far. I've always figured that having a spouse who was lousy in bed was in some sense hitting the "jackpot" of spousal shortcomings. She could be a compulsive gambler, an alcoholic, a spendthrift, or an arson. The corollary of course is that in trying to fix the problem, you wind up looking over your shoulder and wondering why you ever left paradise, such as it was. 

So far I'm not hearing anyone who regrets their decision, even if it was difficult. That's mildly surprising.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

Cletus said:


> So far I'm not hearing anyone who regrets their decision, even if it was difficult. That's mildly surprising.


What do you think the chances are that someone who left their wife and ended up alone and unhappy would be on a marriage website? If you ended up alone, you probably aren't on a website seeking advice about sex in marriage.


----------



## Amyd (Nov 12, 2012)

Cletus said:


> Interesting so far. I've always figured that having a spouse who was lousy in bed was in some sense hitting the "jackpot" of spousal shortcomings. She could be a compulsive gambler, an alcoholic, a spendthrift, or an arson. The corollary of course is that in trying to fix the problem, you wind up looking over your shoulder and wondering why you ever left paradise, such as it was.
> 
> So far I'm not hearing anyone who regrets their decision, even if it was difficult. That's mildly surprising.


How can you be lousy in bed? Sex isn't that hard.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

WorkingOnMe said:


> What do you think the chances are that someone who left their wife and ended up alone and unhappy would be on a marriage website? If you ended up alone, you probably aren't on a website seeking advice about sex in marriage.


Yeah, that thought crossed my mind too.


----------



## Cosmos (May 4, 2012)

Holland said:


> But in the end the lack of sex was not about sex, it was about him saying he loved me but then doing nothing to give me the intimacy and sex life that I needed.


I can totally identify with this post. Whilst sex isn't the B all and end all of a relationship, it IS the cement that keeps it together.

I gave up on my 6 year sexless marriage and never regretted it - despite the hardship of raising a child on my own.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Amyd said:


> How can you be lousy in bed? Sex isn't that hard.


Apparently it is for some. If I'm being accurate, she's not lousy in bed, but we're fatally mismatched. I'm sure there are plenty of guys out there who would be happy with once-a-week vanilla missionary sex. Anything else is, for her, very hard. 

Sadly, I'm not one of them.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

Thanks jaquen, very humbling. 

It has been very therapeutic for me to post and read on TAM. I have learnt so much about what a healthy relationship should look like.


----------



## Amyd (Nov 12, 2012)

Cletus said:


> Apparently it is for some. If I'm being accurate, she's not lousy in bed, but we're fatally mismatched. I'm sure there are plenty of guys out there who would be happy with once-a-week vanilla missionary sex. Anything else is, for her, very hard.
> 
> Sadly, I'm not one of them.


OK. That is pretty vanilla. Sorry


----------



## diwali123 (Feb 17, 2012)

You could post in the life after divorce section...
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Michael A. Brown (Oct 16, 2012)

For me, sex is one important spices in couple's marriage.


----------



## CrazyGuy (Dec 30, 2011)

It was important enough when I thought that I was going to get consistent sex when engaged and getting married. You can always still be friends just like now.


----------



## sweaty teddy (Nov 13, 2012)

Amyd said:


> How can you be lousy in bed? Sex isn't that hard.


selfish people are usually poor lovers!


----------



## MaritimeGuy (Jul 28, 2012)

They say you more often regret the decisions you don't make than the ones you do. Staying in an unfulfilling marriage having given up on trying to fix it is the equivalent of not making a decision.


----------



## justbidingtime (Sep 25, 2012)

How about asking that you have an open marriage or that she allows you to search for a sexual partner???? She doesn't care enough or won't let go of her pre-concieved notions about sex, so would that be an issue with her??? 

Of course it would, but then she'd be the one making the decision. Obviously you are still desirous of her...... But she just can't or won't.


----------



## Runs like Dog (Feb 25, 2011)

27 years is a long time. I know in my case that being in this horrid marriage for so long has I think ruined me for being in any sort of normal adult relationship. So if I leave this one, and that's the plan, it won't matter anyway since I fully expect to be alone after that. All I want from other people is to be left alone for a few years of peace and quiet. THAT alone is going to be worth it whether or not I ever have sex again.


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

In my marriage, no, it wasn't enough to cause me to divorce. I left in the end, but for several reasons all adding up into a big enough problem that I left.

That said, the reason sex wasn't enough for me to leave is that I was nieve. I had a preconceived understanding that sex in marriage dries up and goes away. You see it all over the place, from jokes (There's one food proven to make a woman stop having sex... it's called Wedding Cake) to TV shows, to movies. Most of them, if they show any sexual tension between couples, show the man practically begging a clearly annoyed wife to have sex. It's rare on TV when I was growing up to see a woman hit on a man, unless she was single. Even my own parents showed little affection in front of us kids, so I assumed that sex for my parents was infrequent at best. I walked in on them once, and that is the only experience I ever had with my parents that led me to know they were sexual at all. My parents loved each other, but rarely kissed in front of us, no hand holding, hugging, that sort of thing.

So with that background, I didn't think sex was an issue people divorced over because, well, it sucked in all marriages. None of my friends discussed their sex life either, so I didn't have anything to compare it too. It was only in the latter stages of my marriage that I was able to get on the internet and check out studies done on sex in marriage and understand just how good sex could be (in terms of frequency). By that time though, so many other issues came up that I left over other stuff, not the sex per say.

Now that I have become awakened so to speak to the issue of sex in marriage, I can say that yes, sex would now be a grounds to dissolve any future marriage I may have. When the sex goes sour, it can cause big issues in other areas. Simply by putting you into a sad, depressed, disappointed or even angry mood, the lack of sex and the repeated rejection can affect how you lead your life and as a result affect how you approach other areas of the marriage. If you are upset and having a bad day because you just got rejected for the third time that week and haven't have sex in two weeks, you're not likely to be as forthcoming with agreeing to go on dinner dates with your wife, or start spending more time away from her and visiting with friends. We've also seen many times were sex issues in a marriage cause someone to look outside the marriage for what they want.

In my opinion, sex should be the easy part of marriage. It's free, fun, special, intimate and reserved for only that special someone. In that sense it is, as another poster put it, the glue that binds a marriage. How can that not be viewed as a huge area of importance in a marriage? And, as a result, how can it not be viewed as something to break up over if sex is lacking significantly for one or both people?

Without sex, your partner becomes your best friend and/or roommate. I love my best friend, but I'm not going to marry him.


----------



## Elk87 (Oct 8, 2012)

Sex wouldn't ever be the sole reason for me ending my marriage, which by the way I don't see happening, unless something like this:

Lack of sexual interest/intimacy, followed by little interest in changing that on her part. The second part is HUGE. I can understand if there are things going on that are impacting my W to not feel sexual, but if she is completely apathetic about it, all the while knowing how important it is to me, then I have a major problem because I will question her love, dedication, honesty, interest, priorities, etc. 

I don't want to be with someone who doesn't give a **** about my needs, or dismisses them as petty.


----------



## JustAnotherMan (Jun 27, 2012)

Well Cletus, now that you have reached the end of your emotional rope are you really ready to give the wife an ultimatum? I know I would be. 

Yes, sex is important enough to end the marriage over. I commend you for hanging in for as long as you have without cheating. 

Some spouses never really realize just how important sex is until they are threatened with divorce. 

So my friend, if you have come to the conclusion that this is worthy of a divorce then you are really just starting another phase where your wife may try to win you back. 

Good Luck


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

monkeyboy said:


> I don't want to be with someone who doesn't give a **** about my needs, or dismisses them as petty.


Now this is a tough question, probably the one that I have struggled with the most of all.

Getting her to do more in bed is low-grade abuse. She has a visceral negative reaction to most sex acts. As an example, a friend got her to pick up "50 Shades" and give it a read. I was there when she got to the first instance of oral sex, when she threw the book down and said "Oh hell, no".

Apathy would be an easy out. It's a lot more complicated when you know that satisfying your needs amounts to making your spouse throw up just a little in their mouth. 

She is not asexual, however. She's the most orgasmic woman I've ever met, as long as it's face-to-face PIV. I think I probably spoiled her by learning to be successful early on with one tool in her toolbox. I need more, and I'm always caught vacillating between who I think is to blame for what's clearly just a simple case of mismatched styles.


----------



## SimplyAmorous (Nov 25, 2009)

I would end a good marriage over







- If my husband no longer desired me, wanted me, pushed me away one too many times... I would grow frustrated, angry, bitter, lonely, resentment... I'd start dreaming of everything I am missing and simply have to leave or I would be ripe for falling into the arms of another. 

It's that simple.... happens to many.... after being rejected time after time after time.... so it's best to get out /exit a DRY affectionless marriage ...before it reaches that point. So you can continue to look yourself in the mirror everyday. 

Life is too short, it is to be enjoyed with passion & JOY with someone who loves & cares enough to Please & bring us sexual fulfillment.... Find happiness with another.


----------



## Elk87 (Oct 8, 2012)

Cletus said:


> Now this is a tough question, probably the one that I have struggled with the most of all.
> 
> Getting her to do more in bed is low-grade abuse. She has a visceral negative reaction to most sex acts. As an example, a friend got her to pick up "50 Shades" and give it a read. I was there when she got to the first instance of oral sex, when she threw the book down and said "Oh hell, no".
> 
> ...


My W won't even entertain the idea of looking at that book, no matter how many of her friends tell her she should check it out. Not that I want to start some S&M stuff up or anything, but the fact that she's too prude to even check it out for entertainment is a bit maddening. :wtf:


----------



## Cre8ify (Feb 1, 2012)

50 Shades was my wife's book club book and it laid on the nightstand all month and yet she refused to open it.


----------



## Elk87 (Oct 8, 2012)

What is wrong with these women that they want to dismiss an enjoyable part of life? Seriously???


----------



## Tango (Sep 30, 2012)

Monkey:

It's not just women. I have a H that refuses to touch me when I laying naked beside him !! I don't know if I could leave for a variety of reasons.


----------



## Elk87 (Oct 8, 2012)

Tango said:


> Monkey:
> 
> It's not just women. I have a H that refuses to touch me when I laying naked beside him !! I don't know if I could leave for a variety of reasons.


Equally sad. I'm sorry.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

monkeyboy said:


> What is wrong with these women that they want to dismiss an enjoyable part of life? Seriously???


What's wrong with these men that they stay with these women? Seriously.


----------



## Elk87 (Oct 8, 2012)

jaquen said:


> What's wrong with these men that they stay with these women? Seriously.


In my case, we had a great sex life to begin with, then had kids and it all went to crap after that. It would be very difficult to walk out with 2 little kids involved, but if things continue to deteriorate then I could see it happening. I'm hopeful that not all hope is lost.


----------



## Red Sonja (Sep 8, 2012)

Runs like Dog said:


> I know in my case that being in this horrid marriage for so long has I think ruined me for being in any sort of normal adult relationship.


^^ Yup, that's my problem, I just feel ruined. 23 years (of 26) of sex once every 3 months (or so) messes with your mind. 

Allegedly these sexual-zombies love us, right?


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

jaquen said:


> What's wrong with these men that they stay with these women? Seriously.


Hi Jaquen,

Some Men, including me, aren't willing to toss away a marriage over lack of sex. My wife and I have been together for 27 years and we've had plenty of rough patches. That includes years of not having sex as much as either of us would like. We pushed through it. Most of the time "life" got in the way. Whether it be work, children, personal problems, etc. We both knew there were external issues affecting what went on in the bedroom and accepted it for what it was. It's tough to get in the mood if you have a teenager that is acting out or a child that is very ill. We're empty nesters now and still have a lot on our plate, but we do love each other. Things have improved huge in the sex department! What if we just threw our hands up years ago and gave up? Threw in the towel? Got a divorce? We wouldn't be enjoying what we have now and at other times in our marriage. It's wonderful! Sometimes it's worth waiting and sticking it out if you truly love each other. The sex comes and goes and is definitely not what defines our marriage as healthy or not. Is it better when we are making love frequently, yes. Is it the end of the world when we are not, no.

Best,

T


----------



## DTO (Dec 18, 2011)

monkeyboy said:


> Sex wouldn't ever be the sole reason for me ending my marriage, which by the way I don't see happening, unless something like this:
> 
> Lack of sexual interest/intimacy, followed by little interest in changing that on her part. The second part is HUGE. I can understand if there are things going on that are impacting my W to not feel sexual, but if she is completely apathetic about it, all the while knowing how important it is to me, then I have a major problem because I will question her love, dedication, honesty, interest, priorities, etc.
> 
> I don't want to be with someone who doesn't give a **** about my needs, or dismisses them as petty.


Well, you've just hit on the important part in your last sentence.

As noted earlier, sex is not difficult at all. Barring serious defect, we are born with all the equipment we need to be _excellent_ sexual partners. The only other ingredient is desire.

So, if nearly everyone can do it if they want to, what's the problem? Lack of empathy and sympathy - the willingness to see things from the higher drive partner's perspective and act accordingly. In almost all cases, your refusing partner is simply selfish (also noted earlier); he or she isn't motivated to be with you and refuses to overcome that lack of motivation.

And, there's a wrinkle here. Selfish spouses are selfish all around I've found. They're needs come first where they feel necessary. So, your refusing spouse, being unwilling to meet your needs, generally will resist similar inattention to their own needs. So they complain about their unmet needs. Or they try to manipulate you / the situation so they are viewed as superior or your needs are viewed as trivial, excessive, or imaginary.

The root issue generally isn't sex. It is a respect, consideration, and maturity issue whereby the refuser simply chooses to not make an effort in any area perceived to be unimportant.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

T&T said:


> Some Men, including me, aren't willing to toss away a marriage over lack of sex. My wife and I have been together for 27 years and we've had plenty of rough patches. That includes years of not having sex as much as either of us would like. We pushed through it. Most of the time "life" got in the way. Whether it be work, children, personal problems, etc. We both knew there were external issues affecting what went on in the bedroom and accepted it for what it was. It's tough to get in the mood if you have a teenager that is acting out or a child that is very ill. We're empty nesters now and still have a lot on our plate, but we do love each other. Things have improved huge in the sex department! What if we just threw our hands up years ago and gave up? Threw in the towel? Got a divorce? We wouldn't be enjoying what we have now and at other times in our marriage. It's wonderful! Sometimes it's worth waiting and sticking it out if you truly love each other. The sex comes and goes and is definitely not what defines our marriage as healthy or not. Is it better when we are making love frequently, yes. Is it the end of the world when we are not, no.


Yes, but notice that this is a mutual decision. The two of you allowed life to get in the way, but you both were on the same accord. Sex isn't the end all, be all for _both_ you. 

That's what matters, that you two are pretty much aligned on the matter. I've said it before on this board, even if two people have a totally sexless marriage, it's perfectly fine and well to stay IF both parties are agreed on the sexlessness.

The trouble comes when men and women are in marriages where they desire, crave, and yearn for sexual connection, and the other partner has refused to fulfill that need in a frequent, satisfactory manner. If sex is vital to you in a marriage, and you're married to someone who doesn't honor that, and they have made it clear through their actions that they never will, then yes, it's time to move on.


----------



## Terry_CO (Oct 23, 2012)

Yes, the disappearance of intimacy was the main reason for my first marriage failing.

My ex had always used sex (or the denial of) to hurt me. She'd get some special pleasure seeing me needy, and refusing me. She was sick.

Eventually all affection disappeared, she removed personal effects from the bedroom and eventually moved into her own bedroom. Kissing disappeared from our relationship, hugs became something only I initiated, and she basically became a cold fish. She refused to go to a marriage counselor, claiming she didn't trust them, and the marriage became dead on the vine ...with no hope of saving it.

I initiated the divorce and she was stunned. She didn't think I had the cajones to leave her, I guess. "Buh-bye"


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

Terry_CO said:


> I initiated the divorce and she was stunned. She didn't think I had the cajones to leave her, I guess. "Buh-bye"


Did her behavior toward you change after she was served with the divorce papers?


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

jaquen said:


> Yes, but notice that this is a mutual decision. The two of you allowed life to get in the way, but you both were on the same accord. Sex isn't the end all, be all for _both_ you.
> 
> That's what matters, that you two are pretty much aligned on the matter. I've said it before on this board, even if two people have a totally sexless marriage, it's perfectly fine and well to stay IF both parties are agreed on the sexlessness.
> 
> The trouble comes when men and women are in marriages where they desire, crave, and yearn for sexual connection, and the other partner has refused to fulfill that need in a frequent, satisfactory manner. If sex is vital to you in a marriage, and you're married to someone who doesn't honor that, and they have made it clear through their actions that they never will, then yes, it's time to move on.


Hi Jaquen

It wasn't always a mutual decision. There was very little sex when I was going through this.

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/relationships-addiction/61362-i-feel-shattered.html#post1232564

I was very unattractive to my wife during these years. I knew it, accepted it, but it didn't stop my urges for her. She told me how she felt and I understood. What else was I to do? I knew I was in the wrong. We worked through it and I'm glad we didn't call it quits. 

Best,

T


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

T&T said:


> Hi Jaquen
> 
> It wasn't always a mutual decision. There was very little sex when I was going through this.
> 
> ...


In the end, it worked out for the two of you. Sure, I couldn't have done it, but you did, and you're happy with your decision.

I'm sincerely happy that you two found your way back to mutual ground.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

Why do we stay?

You'll get as many answers as there are respondents.

Divorcing is hard. It should be hard. Giving up on a lifelong commitment should not come easily. I've yet to meet a couple who didn't have a primary argument in their relationship. Sometimes it's money, or gambling, or intimacy, or chemical dependency, but it's always SOMETHING. Sex is just another of those "somethings" you either work around or which end your relationship. 

The HD spouse often has this nagging feeling in the back of his or her head that maybe deep down they're as much of the problem as the LD spouse. Maybe my demands really are excessive. Maybe it's me who needs to learn to be satisfied with what I have instead of always looking for something better. Why dissolve a relationship with someone with whom I am otherwise comfortable and compatible? 

If I knew for certain that I would find a relationship of otherwise high caliber and better sex than I have now, leaving would be much easier. I know that this is NOT certain. In fact, I suspect in the end that the fire would be worse than the frying pan, in the balance. Some would call that fear. I call it an honest appraisal of reality.


----------



## Cre8ify (Feb 1, 2012)

I would call that fear. The paralysis that fear causes could have prevented most of what we achieve in our lives if we allow it to. I am in your exact same shoes but tell myself if I am committed enough to find what I am looking for, I will find it.

Of course, I am settling for vanilla sex twice a week at the moment so probably better to evaluate my actions over my words. We are also not to the empty nest time either and I always knew I would not blow up our kids home over this.


----------



## Cre8ify (Feb 1, 2012)

To each their own. If you can live with yourself I guess that's all that matters...until your affair partners world blows up leaving the kids picking shrapnel out of places too deep to reach.


----------



## Cre8ify (Feb 1, 2012)

Too direct with that answer I guess. You have something important to offer to this conversation, please jump in when it feels right.


----------



## Elk87 (Oct 8, 2012)

DTO said:


> So, if nearly everyone can do it if they want to, what's the problem? Lack of empathy and sympathy - the willingness to see things from the higher drive partner's perspective and act accordingly. In almost all cases, your refusing partner is simply selfish (also noted earlier); he or she isn't motivated to be with you and refuses to overcome that lack of motivation.
> 
> And, there's a wrinkle here. Selfish spouses are selfish all around I've found. They're needs come first where they feel necessary. So, your refusing spouse, being unwilling to meet your needs, generally will resist similar inattention to their own needs. So they complain about their unmet needs. Or they try to manipulate you / the situation so they are viewed as superior or your needs are viewed as trivial, excessive, or imaginary.
> 
> The root issue generally isn't sex. It is a respect, consideration, and maturity issue whereby the refuser simply chooses to not make an effort in any area perceived to be unimportant.


:iagree:
Wow! So true!!! My W can be so incredibly selfish with so many things, and often acts childlike in regards to that. Sex is just the beginning! One example is that I'll be in our office paying bills, budgeting, working, or something like that, and she'll get frustrated with one of our kids and she'll send them up to me. WTF?! You think I'm not doing anything important??? At least have the common decency of shouting up, "Hey honey, if you're able to help me I could use it." Nope. Instead she just assumes that whatever I'm doing is unimportant and she can take over. 

Some of that is my fault though for being too darn "nice" for too darn long. It's time for me to shift the pressure back on to her. I'm reading _No More Mr. Nice Guy_ right now and hoping to figure out how to strike the balance between getting my needs met and doing what is best for me, and not being totally uncaring and unloving toward my family (particularly since I have 2 small children).


----------



## roostr (Oct 20, 2012)

I dont know, I think it depends on the reason, if its due to infidelity then its a no brainer, divorce. If its due to other factors, yet the marraige is good otherwise, you both love each other, then I would honestly have to say no. It wouldnt be enough for me to leave my wife. Im basing this on there being some effort at a sex life, dont get me wrong, if there is a non-existant sexual relationship in a marraige, I beleive this would in fact be enough to end it. Unless of course it was medically/physically related then I would stay married no question.


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

I think your question is meaningless. At 27 years, you have *HAD* your marriage. That is a very long time for an American marriage.

What is causing you to have second thoughts NOW and not do anything in the last, oh... *9861 DAYS*.


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

JCD said:


> I think your question is meaningless.


That's pretty harsh, no? He came here for help. I don't think he needs to be belittled...



JCD said:


> That is a very long time for an American marriage.


And that's very sad...What do you consider a successful marriage? 3 years? 5 years? 10 years? It's not easy to toss 27 years away with the same partner! He STILL loves her too! 

T


----------



## MaritimeGuy (Jul 28, 2012)

Cletus said:


> If I knew for certain that I would find a relationship of otherwise high caliber and better sex than I have now, leaving would be much easier. I know that this is NOT certain. In fact, I suspect in the end that the fire would be worse than the frying pan, in the balance. Some would call that fear. I call it an honest appraisal of reality.


The unequivocal response to that is yes you would find a higher caliber and better sex if you chose to look for it. 

If you choose to stay with your spouse choose to do so because you love her...not because you're afraid you may not find something better out there. No woman wants to feel like you're "settling" with her.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

MaritimeGuy said:


> The unequivocal response to that is yes you would find a higher caliber and better sex if you chose to look for it.


I have no doubt that I could find better sex, that I understand.



MaritimeGuy said:


> If you choose to stay with your spouse choose to do so because you love her...not because you're afraid you may not find something better out there. No woman wants to feel like you're "settling" with her.


We all settle, don't we? I have a partner who is a good mate, mother, and human being pretty much everywhere but in the bedroom. I could improve the one, most likely at the cost of one of the others. But holding out for perfection? That's a fool's game. A wiser approach would be to decide what I'm willing to possibly lose to gain a better sex life.

So I don't think it's a question of settling as much as a question as to which things we are willing to settle on. As soon as your children grow up and leave the house you get an opportunity to revisit that decision when the impact is, if not less, than at least spread out over fewer lives. 

Hence the question. As one of the responders suggested, I need to post this in a place where those who have actually gone down that road can answer - did "trading up" in this part of your life work out as well as you had hoped?


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

JCD said:


> I think your question is meaningless. At 27 years, you have *HAD* your marriage. That is a very long time for an American marriage.
> 
> What is causing you to have second thoughts NOW and not do anything in the last, oh... *9861 DAYS*.


"Not do anything" is not exactly right. How about "no longer willing to do things that have proven ineffective" during that time?

What's changed now is that I no longer have to break up an entire home if I decide to move on - though I do still have to cause grave harm to at least one other person. What's changed is that I can see the inevitable end of my sex life, not as a distant intangible but as something that is near enough to be feared.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

JCD said:


> I think your question is meaningless. At 27 years, you have *HAD* your marriage. That is a very long time for an American marriage.


Not really. The lastest info from census show that among first marriages that began around the time the OP was wed, roughly half are still wed.

27 years is not very long by American standards if half the marriages of similar length are still legally intact.


----------



## sharkeey (Apr 27, 2012)

jaquen said:


> Not really. The lastest info from census show that among first marriages that began around the time the OP was wed, roughly half are still wed.
> 
> 27 years is not very long by American standards if half the marriages of similar length are still legally intact.


Really?

I see a 50% attrition (failure) rate as very high.

Especially when you consider the statistics that show that of the remaining 50% of intact marriages, the majority of those couples are only still together because of finances, children, convenience, etc, not because of a successful union between the two spouses.


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

sharkeey said:


> Really?
> 
> I see a 50% attrition (failure) rate as very high.
> 
> Especially when you consider the statistics that show that of the remaining 50% of intact marriages, the majority of those couples are only still together because of finances, children, convenience, etc, not because of a successful union between the two spouses.


But this has no relevance considering the impetus for quoting the static has nothing to do with the overall state of marriage.

JCD stated that 27 years was a very long time to be married, for an American couple. He implies that reaching the 27 year mark is some kind of statistical rarity, so much so that he flat out states that the OP "had [their] marriage".

This is simply not the case when nearly half the marriages of that length are still legally intact. A 27 year marriage is hardly an anomaly "for an American marriage". 

Would you call a Black person a rarity in this country? A Hispanic person? Those racial/ethnic groups make up approximately 13% and 16% of the population, respectively. Yet nobody would call a Black person, or Hispanic person, a rarity in the US.

So how much more so is it odd to suggest that marriages of the OP's length are unusual for the US, even though marriages of comparable length still hover around the 46-49% range?


----------



## Cre8ify (Feb 1, 2012)

> What is causing you to have second thoughts NOW and not do anything in the last, oh... 9861 DAYS.


I could have answered this for Cletus. He would not hurt his children over it, in fact the reason would sound stupid. But when the man and wife are redefined as a couple more than parents, then some cracks in the foundation come to light.


----------



## happyman64 (Jan 12, 2012)

Wow Cletus I think your wife and my wife are twin sisters.

I find your thread interesting because my wife is the queen of straight missionary sex.

She was a virgin when we married and we dated for 6 years prior to marriage.

Married 20 years this month.

And she is a great wife, mother and friend.

I would not give her up for the world. I learned over all these years that our marriage was never based on sex, the frequency of sex or the different flavors of sex. She has never even given me oral sex. I watched her have that argument in her head a few times and she even tried on our honeymoon but could not bring herself over that hurdle.

I actually felt bad for her.

If I wanted that porn star sex i would never have married her.

What I wanted I got.

A woman that protects me, my children, our household and marriage with a fierceness that can be quite scary at times.

Maybe you married your wife for the wrong reasons or with the wrong goals, maybe not.

Weigh the good with the bad. Then decide.

But before you make that decision have you ever truthfully told your wife how you feel???

I hope the two of you have that talk....

HM64


----------



## ladybird (Jun 16, 2010)

Yes I do and I am getting there myself. Sex is a really important part of being married.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

happyman64 said:


> I would not give her up for the world. I learned over all these years that our marriage was never based on sex, the frequency of sex or the different flavors of sex. She has never even given me oral sex. I watched her have that argument in her head a few times and she even tried on our honeymoon but could not bring herself over that hurdle.
> 
> I actually felt bad for her.
> 
> ...


Did you discuss sexual expectations before marriage? I got what I wanted when I married too - with the single exception of the one thing a good Catholic upbringing doesn't allow you to discover before honeymoon night.




happyman64 said:


> Maybe you married your wife for the wrong reasons or with the wrong goals, maybe not.
> 
> Weigh the good with the bad. Then decide.
> 
> ...


The only thing I have never said is "I'm not sure if I can stay if this doesn't improve". Mainly because I'm not sure if that's the truth yet, and I don't have any desire to bluff or hurt for no reason. 

There have been many discussions about our differing expectations, attitudes, and approaches. It all boils down to the ick factor she associates with most sexual behavior (never had that blow job either, and I wrote that one off as a non-starter years ago). Apathy or disinterest you can work with. It's a lot harder to nibble around the edges of disgust.


----------



## happyman64 (Jan 12, 2012)

No.

We never had those deep sexual discussions before we married.

And like you I have tried to teach her new tricks but my wife is incredibly shy and self conscious of herself.

Her self esteem is precious to me so I decided to preserve that and not pressure her.

But I have not given up hope yet! 

And my wife is Catholic to the core. And raising 3, count them 3 young ladies (18, 12, 11) in our house with the full Catholic education has been very interesting.

As protective as she is of them, I still discuss the birds, the bees and the bad boys to all of them in an age appropriate manner.

No matter how Vanilla life is here I would not give her up for anything.

Maybe I was lucky to explore with others before I was married but I really think I respect her for her convictions.


----------



## CuddleBug (Nov 26, 2012)

An almost sex less marriage, no, counseling or divorce and move on. Life is so short. Too bad there wasn't a test or a way to find out in couples are sexually compatible before they get married. That would pretty much eliminate adultery and divorce.


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

Cletus said:


> "Not do anything" is not exactly right. How about "no longer willing to do things that have proven ineffective" during that time?
> 
> What's changed now is that I no longer have to break up an entire home if I decide to move on - though I do still have to cause grave harm to at least one other person. What's changed is that I can see the inevitable end of my sex life, not as a distant intangible but as something that is near enough to be feared.


Okay, what have you tried? Any advice given is wasted if it's something 'proven ineffective'.

Couples counseling?

Sex therapy?

A conversation which has the theme of 'I am DEEPLY dissatisfied with my sex life and since you no longer have to worry about an underaged audience, I'd like to know where I rate in your list of priorities'?

Getting her smashed next to some lube, strawberries and whipped cream?

Have you tried some erotic thrillers like 'Unfaithful'?

I think another important thing would be to understand YOUR goals. Some of the folks here would HAPPILY get once a week. Some have been without for months or (horridily) YEARS.

So...what are you looking for? What do you want and what do you NEED? Are you clear on that yet?

Has she spoken to any other older Catholic wives who might set her straight?


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

jaquen said:


> Not really. The lastest info from census show that among first marriages that began around the time the OP was wed, roughly half are still wed.
> 
> 27 years is not very long by American standards if half the marriages of similar length are still legally intact.


What is marriage for? It's to join two people. Religion, govenrment and biological imperative want 'marriage' to make new believers/taxpayers/replacements.

They did. So if they were struck by lightning tomorrow, they 'did their job'. At this point, it's all bonus.

But the main thrust of the point was that he's accepted the status quo for so long that this sudden urge to change seems a) slightly cruel to her. SHE hasn't changed, b) like he also sees he's done his job and is moving on to the next one, and c) curious to say the least.

But the most common answer seems to be that most people are happy they did, but then again, most people didn't wait NEARLY as long as the OP did.


----------



## T&T (Nov 16, 2012)

JCD said:


> What is marriage for? It's to join two people. Religion, govenrment and biological imperative want 'marriage' to make new believers/taxpayers/replacements


What does this have to do with this thread and the OP's questions? You really like to poke people with a stick don't you...


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

JCD said:


> What is marriage for? It's to join two people. Religion, govenrment and biological imperative want 'marriage' to make new believers/taxpayers/replacements.
> 
> They did. So if they were struck by lightning tomorrow, they 'did their job'. At this point, it's all bonus.
> 
> ...


Some of this I agree with.

But what does this have to do with my point?


----------



## jaquen (Mar 1, 2012)

CuddleBug said:


> Too bad there wasn't a test or a way to find out in couples are sexually compatible before they get married. That would pretty much eliminate adultery and divorce.


My wife and I were celibate before marriage. And we were together for many years before we married. And it wasn't "everything but penis in vagina" celibacy either. It was real, true blue, abstinence. 

Yet we knew we had explosive sexual chemistry from the first moment we kissed. It was like worlds collided. You can detect strong sexual chemistry with a person before you sleep together. The both of you just have to be real about it. Every couple knows, in their heart of hearts, whether they really have raw, powerful sexual chemistry together. And it doesn't take sexual intercourse to detect it.

We also discussed all of our expectations about sex. We understood going into the celibacy, and coming into the marriage, that we were both very sexual people, open to almost all sexual exploration, and that sex was vital, and imperative, to the health of our marriage. We talked about all of that.

Pre-marital celibacy is not an excuse to be sexually ignorant. It is not an excuse to not talk about sex. If anything people who chose to wait should be having more frank, honest, real talk about sex and sexuality than people who have sex prior to marriage.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

All these people who are staying because they think there are more important things in a marriage (I'm not talking about kids), I wonder how they've managed to keep the fire alive or even not to fall out of love without the bond and the intimacy sex brings... to me sex is not just sex. It's the deep bond you create with your wife. How can you create such a deep bond without sex? How can you stay married to a person you don't feel a spark with anymore? Am I being overtly naÏve? I see lots of posts by men deprived of sex stating they really love their wives and would never leave. Why? If she is totally healthy, then she is abusing you. How can you love a person like this? Curious...


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

jaquen said:


> Some of this I agree with.
> 
> But what does this have to do with my point?


Clarifying my point. I wasn't quibbling about statistics as much as saying the purpose is finished.

I also see this as coming late to the 'orgy' no matter how many years he still has left in his marriage. As stated, it's never been a deal breaker before.



T&T said:


> What does this have to do with this thread and the OP's questions? You really like to poke people with a stick don't you...


Jaquen was puzzled by my comment in light of statistics. I was clarifying my reasoning which was NOT based on statistics.

He's had a full, albeit low sex, life which he hasn't seemed to regret heretofore. His wife is going to resent it if he wants to turn on the turbo drive now...unless there is a LOT of discussion.


THAT certainly impinges upon his choices regarding staying or going in his low sex marriage.

And I don't use a pointy stick.


----------



## Cre8ify (Feb 1, 2012)

She will most certainly feel the change is unfair and I speak from experience here. Why after 27 years should she have to develop a sexuality is a hard question to answer. The reason is it is only because of changes in his perspective.

The reason this happened for me is my wife flippantly threw out the D word apparently at the same time I was going through a mid-life "evaluation". I saw a counselor who encouraged me to find my real true self and one of the elements of my life I was hiding, in a sense living dishonestly, was my sexuality. The idea of being independent/self-sufficient took me by surprise but was very empowering. I manned up, added beta skills like cooking, took charge of parenting, directed things and had an opinion on every question my wife asked me and got myself ready for single life. Of course, those things attracted her to me and everything got complicated.

Turning 50 is a big deal and there is a reason couples struggle as the kids move on and the house empties. And by the way, full Catholic credentials here as well.


----------



## Cletus (Apr 27, 2012)

JCD said:


> I also see this as coming late to the 'orgy' no matter how many years he still has left in his marriage. As stated, it's never been a deal breaker before.
> 
> Jaquen was puzzled by my comment in light of statistics. I was clarifying my reasoning which was NOT based on statistics.
> 
> He's had a full, albeit low sex, life which he hasn't seemed to regret heretofore. His wife is going to resent it if he wants to turn on the turbo drive now...unless there is a LOT of discussion.


Now why would anyone assume that this hasn't been an issue or an enormous regret in the past just because I never let it rise to the level of divorce before? I'm not asking for anything I haven't already been _very_ clear about wanting in the past. What's different now is my increased freedom of choice in deciding the consequence of continued failure. 

Our differing sexual attitudes has been, from our first night married together to today, the single largest source of friction in our relationship. Second place doesn't even comes close. 

Counseling was considered a decade ago. It was rejected on the basis that "a marriage counselor is only going to tell you to leave me anyway". 

It shouldn't be very hard to understand how putting the needs of others before your own, especially where children are concerned, can lead you to accept an otherwise intolerable situation. Changing circumstances allow you to reevaluate the cost/benefit equation.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Cletus said:


> It shouldn't be very hard to understand how putting the needs of others before your own, especially where children are concerned, can lead you to accept an otherwise intolerable situation. Changing circumstances allow you to reevaluate the cost/benefit equation.


Don't worry, I understand you exactly, having been myself in the same situation, although not as bad...


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

JCD said:


> But the main thrust of the point was that he's accepted the status quo for so long that this sudden urge to change seems a) slightly cruel to her. SHE hasn't changed.


I don't see it that way. Marriages are not designed to stay stagnant. Theya ren't a job where you show up and punch a clock, they are something that is in constant evolution. Children, mortgages, age and jobs all ensure that a marriage evolves. Marriage is just like life, except that two lifes are evolving as one, meaning that there should be even more change in a marriage than in any one individual life.

So that said, it is not cruel for your partner to change. People change jobs, take up new hobbies, make new friends, do different things in a marriage and none of that is deemed cruel. I see no reason why a sudden increase in sexual desire should be deemed cruel either.


----------



## Cre8ify (Feb 1, 2012)

> "a marriage counselor is only going to tell you to leave me anyway"


This is interesting. She makes no attempt to defend the indefensible. All she could count on over those many years is the depth of your integrity even though she knew she should have found herself outside the marriage having been unable to make your relationship a priority.


----------



## Cre8ify (Feb 1, 2012)

> Marriages are not designed to stay stagnant.


Who can do things the way they always have in this dynamic world and not be taking extraordinary risks. Change is one thing we can count on to be sure. The challenge for a couple is to be connected enough to be turning in the same direction. This is how the empty nest results in heartache as all those twists and turns happen in a fog of kid schedules, frantic pace and abbreviated conversations. At some point the air clears and you can clearly see what you still have in common.

Cletus is just asking for his wife to have some faith and turn a corner with him. Straight ahead was good in their old context but it has been long enough.


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

Cletus said:


> Now why would anyone assume that this hasn't been an issue or an enormous regret in the past just because I never let it rise to the level of divorce before? I'm not asking for anything I haven't already been _very_ clear about wanting in the past. What's different now is my increased freedom of choice in deciding the consequence of continued failure.
> 
> Our differing sexual attitudes has been, from our first night married together to today, the single largest source of friction in our relationship. Second place doesn't even comes close.
> 
> ...


Fair enough. I did not get that sense of deprivation and need from your original posts.

So you HAVE had come to Jesus meetings with her on this...and she doesn't care. She can't even lie back and 'think of England'* at least twice a week?

I think that's your answer. 

*Some English Victorian marriage manuals or counselors used to tell women to 'lie back and think of England' as they put up with their husband's urges. How else to make more Citizens of the Empire?


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

JCD said:


> Fair enough. I did not get that sense of deprivation and need from your original posts.
> 
> So you HAVE had come to Jesus meetings with her on this...and she doesn't care. She can't even lie back and 'think of England'* at least twice a week?
> 
> ...


They could allow their husbands to "leave home and explore England" which is basically what a lot of women are doing by denying their husband regular sex.


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

JCD said:


> She can't even lie back and 'think of England'* at least twice a week?


_At least twice a week?_ What planet are you on? :scratchhead:


----------



## MrVanilla (Apr 24, 2012)

Sex was sort of important in dissolving my last marriage. There was no intimacy with my ExW. No hand holding or cuddling or necking, when she was 'in the mood' she let me know - even if I wasn't. She got a tad too persistent and if I was tired or not really in the mood, she'd just reach over and take matters into own hands... so to speak. I didn't feel like a husband, just something she pulled out of adrawer and used when she felt like it.

The other way that sex was important enough to dissolve our marriage was when she started having it with other men... that pretty much put an end to it. I didn't put up much of a fight...

Right now, considering the differences my LW and I are going through when it comes to sex... we're both too committed to each other, so we're making it work. We've even begun couples counseling because we can recognize that we're stuck. We can't figure out how to resolve things on our own, and we both know that although sex differences migh be an issue, it's hardly our entire relationship.


----------



## justbidingtime (Sep 25, 2012)

MrVanilla said:


> Sex was sort of important in dissolving my last marriage. There was no intimacy with my ExW. No hand holding or cuddling or necking, when she was 'in the *mood' she let me know - even if I wasn't. She got a tad too persistent and if I was tired or not really in the mood, she'd just reach over and take matters into own hands*... so to speak. I didn't feel like a husband, just something she pulled out of adrawer and used when she felt like it.
> 
> The other way that sex was important enough to dissolve our marriage was when she started having it with other men... that pretty much put an end to it. I didn't put up much of a fight...
> 
> Right now, considering the differences my LW and I are going through when it comes to sex... we're both too committed to each other, so we're making it work. We've even begun couples counseling because we can recognize that we're stuck. We can't figure out how to resolve things on our own, and we both know that although sex differences migh be an issue, it's hardly our entire relationship.


Long time no see MrVanilla..... I'm amazed at the threads you appear on and your insights..... 

I am even more shocked that you haven't made any strides in your marriage (now knowing that it was the exact same issues about sex that led to the dissolution of your first marriage) and that your wife puts up with it and hasn't left. When were you in the mood? I only ask because you just went approximately 10+ years without sex, so if I am cynical, please don't hold it against me.

Congrats that you are at least seeing a counselor, though I imagine from your other posts that there will be no movement on your part and it will all be in vain.


----------



## Holland (Aug 20, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> _At least twice a week?_ What planet are you on? :scratchhead:


What do you mean? Is twice a week too much or too little?


----------



## In Absentia (Aug 21, 2012)

Holland said:


> What do you mean? Is twice a week too much or too little?


If you having sex problems with your wife (i.e. she is withdrawing sex from you, for whatever reason), expecting your wife to have sex twice a week with you (thinking of England) is unrealistic and way too optimistic... she won't do it because she enjoys it. She will do it for you, as a chore. As a man, I don't want this. I want to be desired. So, you need to work on the relationship and bring her back to the "original status quo". She will then enjoy the sex. Any other way, it's just vaginal masturbation for you.


----------



## MaritimeGuy (Jul 28, 2012)

I think at the end of the day if you're not prepared to end your marriage over sex then you pretty much have to accept whatever sex you're having...or not having as the case may be. You're in a very weak bargaining position. If your partner was prepared to have more sex with you simply because you're asking for it you'd already be having more sex. 

You can try to make yourself more attractive. Physically, by hitting the gym and eating right. Emotionally, by being more attentive to her feelings. Financially, by going out and earning more. Personality wise, by being more assertive or being more mysterious or being funnier...whatever it is that turns his/her crank. However what if you've done all that and you don't get the response you are hoping for? 

You can try punishing him/her by taking away affection, money, or time. You can whine and mope. You can get angry. All any of these things are likely to do is cause more resentment and thus make you that much less desirable as a sex partner. 

I think sometimes people need to be brought to the brink to realize what they're about to lose...and other times people simply aren't a good match. Whatever compromise they arrive at one or the other is going to be resentful.


----------



## kingsfan (Jun 4, 2012)

MrVanilla said:


> Sex was sort of important in dissolving my last marriage. There was no intimacy with my ExW. No hand holding or cuddling or necking, when she was 'in the mood' she let me know - even if I wasn't. She got a tad too persistent and if I was tired or not really in the mood, she'd just reach over and take matters into own hands... so to speak. I didn't feel like a husband, just something she pulled out of adrawer and used when she felt like it.
> 
> The other way that sex was important enough to dissolve our marriage was when she started having it with other men... that pretty much put an end to it. I didn't put up much of a fight....


I'm sorry to hear this MrV. I think there's just to much of an assertion that men will be default want sex all of the time so as to make your wife's actions of 'taking matters into her own hands' valid. While many men would in fact like that, it's fine to be a man who doesn't want to have sex all the time. There is times when sex is just not on our radar. The problem is men are caught between a rock and a hard place on that issue, as social stigmas seem to state that any man who doesn't want sex the moment their partner reaches for their junk is somehow less of a man or something. Additionally, it causes huge problems often when a man turns down his wife, despite the fact that in most marriages the wife rejects the husband on at least a semi-frequent basis (at least a few times a month).

I don't blame you for how you felt regarding your ex-wife, even though I'm sure many men on here will chime in saying how you had it good by having a wife that was so persistent to have sex with you and how you were wrong for not simply hopping on top "and thinking of England." I hope that you and your current wife can find some common ground and have a very happy, healthy and fulfilling sex life for both of you.


----------



## JCD (Sep 2, 2012)

In Absentia said:


> If you having sex problems with your wife (i.e. she is withdrawing sex from you, for whatever reason), expecting your wife to have sex twice a week with you (thinking of England) is unrealistic and way too optimistic... she won't do it because she enjoys it. She will do it for you, as a chore. As a man, I don't want this. I want to be desired. So, you need to work on the relationship and bring her back to the "original status quo". She will then enjoy the sex. *Any other way, it's just vaginal masturbation for you*.


From the sounds of it, that's all she's been doing anyway. So if she's just going to lie there, she can just lie there twice a week if she has ANY feelings about her husband's needs.

But she obviously doesn't care a whit about THAT Need.

There is a lot in "His Needs, Her Needs". I'm not sure I agree with all of it, but you might start there.


----------

