Throwing husband a bone?

[Anonymous]

It's unfortunate that this thread hasn't included much discussion about the whys of an imbalance in desire. There seems to be an assumption that it's always about being tired or some sort of a hormonal imbalance, when in reality, there could be all sorts of other issues that are contributing to the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's unfortunate that this thread hasn't included much discussion about the whys of an imbalance in desire. There seems to be an assumption that it's always about being tired or some sort of a hormonal imbalance, when in reality, there could be all sorts of other issues that are contributing to the problem.

Barring low testosterone or something medical, a man's loss of attraction is frequently fairly superficial and straight forward - sex is routine, wife isn't enthusiastic, wife doesn't try to keep up her appearance.

Women's lack of attraction can also be medical or due to appearances; but I think it can also be more subtle - as in when they aren't attractive to a man who has become safe, stable, reliable, and weak. They want those things because then the guy is more likely to stick around and provide; but they also don't want those things because he isn't exciting and isn't arousing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure what thread people are reading, but this discussion has been almost entirely about how the spouse with less interest should be more accommodating.

That could well be a function of the fact that the low drive spouse has the most direct control over the sex life. The entire period the high drive spouse wants sex but isn't having it is, in effect, an accommodation.

That's fine. Both sides should be accommodating. But, the fact is, the low drive spouse is in a position to ignore the accommodation of the high drive spouse and pretend like s/he isn't giving anything up by not having sex.

This is not always the case. Let's say I want sex once a month and my partner wants it every other day. If we compromise at once a week, he is controlling the situation just as much as I am.

Not really because the compromise is still far in your favor. You wanted it once a month, he wanted it 15 times a month, you compromised at 4 time a month. Still much closer to what you wanted than to what he wanted.

Fair enough, but the point still stands. In a true compromise, the partners meet halfway, which means each is giving something up. The wife (or whomever has the lower libido) is giving up just as much control as the husband.

Lower libido is giving up more control because (assuming no rape) the lower libido spouse had most of the control in the first place.

[Anonymous]

My husband is cooking dinner right now and I'm getting the bone tonight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure what thread people are reading, but this discussion has been almost entirely about how the spouse with less interest should be more accommodating.

That could well be a function of the fact that the low drive spouse has the most direct control over the sex life. The entire period the high drive spouse wants sex but isn't having it is, in effect, an accommodation.

That's fine. Both sides should be accommodating. But, the fact is, the low drive spouse is in a position to ignore the accommodation of the high drive spouse and pretend like s/he isn't giving anything up by not having sex.

This is not always the case. Let's say I want sex once a month and my partner wants it every other day. If we compromise at once a week, he is controlling the situation just as much as I am.

Not really because the compromise is still far in your favor. You wanted it once a month, he wanted it 15 times a month, you compromised at 4 time a month. Still much closer to what you wanted than to what he wanted.

High libido spouse here. Before DH got his medical condition figured out and was only up for it once a month whereas I was up for it every day/every other day, I would have happily compromised at 4 times a month. And let's face it. Low libido spouse is likely going to have it a little favored towards them if the reason for their low libido is stress, tired, etc.

Right you would have compromised at that, but would you have felt you were then the one controlling your sex life?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's unfortunate that this thread hasn't included much discussion about the whys of an imbalance in desire. There seems to be an assumption that it's always about being tired or some sort of a hormonal imbalance, when in reality, there could be all sorts of other issues that are contributing to the problem.

Barring low testosterone or something medical, a man's loss of attraction is frequently fairly superficial and straight forward - sex is routine, wife isn't enthusiastic, wife doesn't try to keep up her appearance.

Women's lack of attraction can also be medical or due to appearances; but I think it can also be more subtle - as in when they aren't attractive to a man who has become safe, stable, reliable, and weak. They want those things because then the guy is more likely to stick around and provide; but they also don't want those things because he isn't exciting and isn't arousing.

Well now there is a very sexist perspective! Men are superficial and shallow. Women are deep and subtle.

How about the reasons can be complex and multi-faceted for both sides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not sure what thread people are reading, but this discussion has been almost entirely about how the spouse with less interest should be more accommodating.

That could well be a function of the fact that the low drive spouse has the most direct control over the sex life. The entire period the high drive spouse wants sex but isn't having it is, in effect, an accommodation.

That's fine. Both sides should be accommodating. But, the fact is, the low drive spouse is in a position to ignore the accommodation of the high drive spouse and pretend like s/he isn't giving anything up by not having sex.

This is not always the case. Let's say I want sex once a month and my partner wants it every other day. If we compromise at once a week, he is controlling the situation just as much as I am.

Not really because the compromise is still far in your favor. You wanted it once a month, he wanted it 15 times a month, you compromised at 4 time a month. Still much closer to what you wanted than to what he wanted.

High libido spouse here. Before DH got his medical condition figured out and was only up for it once a month whereas I was up for it every day/every other day, I would have happily compromised at 4 times a month. And let's face it. Low libido spouse is likely going to have it a little favored towards them if the reason for their low libido is stress, tired, etc.

Right you would have compromised at that, but would you have felt you were then the one controlling your sex life?

No, as the high libido spouse I felt like I had no control over our sex life. DH knew I wanted sex but I wasn't going to badger him about it or make him feel like crap because he wasn't in the mood. Was I happy about it? No. Did it cause some issues in our marriage? Yes. But when DH was struggling with his low libido, he had total control of our sex life. I could ask him every day for sex, I could ask him once a week for sex, unless he was in the mood for it, it wasn't going to happen. And I certainly wasn't going to try to force him

[Anonymous]

No, as the high libido spouse I felt like I had no control over our sex life. DH knew I wanted sex but I wasn't going to badger him about it or make him feel like crap because he wasn't in the mood. Was I happy about it? No. Did it cause some issues in our marriage? Yes. But when DH was struggling with his low libido, he had total control of our sex life. I could ask him every day for sex, I could ask him once a week for sex, unless he was in the mood for it, it wasn't going to happen. And I certainly wasn't going to try to force him.

My situation, as well, just gender reversed. DW only expresses interest about once a month, at best. When that happens, I'm very happy to indulge her, but I'd be a lot happier back on the frequency and level of spontaneity that we had before kids.

[Anonymous]

The point is that there needs to be some sort of examination of the underlying issues. If I'm physically repulsed by my husband because he's gained 150 lbs, the fact that I can close my eyes and pretend he's John Hamm may make him happy (assuming he doesn't realize what I'm doing) but it does nothing to address the underlying problem.

[Anonymous]

My husband acts like sex should be a porn movie every time we do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The point is that there needs to be some sort of examination of the underlying issues. If I'm physically repulsed by my husband because he's gained 150 lbs, the fact that I can close my eyes and pretend he's John Hamm may make him happy (assuming he doesn't realize what I'm doing) but it does nothing to address the underlying problem.

I'm repulsed by your shallow nature.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Barring low testosterone or something medical, a man's loss of attraction is frequently fairly superficial and straight forward - sex is routine, wife isn't enthusiastic, wife doesn't try to keep up her appearance.

Women's lack of attraction can also be medical or due to appearances; but I think it can also be more subtle - as in when they aren't attractive to a man who has become safe, stable, reliable, and weak. They want those things because then the guy is more likely to stick around and provide; but they also don't want those things because he isn't exciting and isn't arousing.

Well now there is a very sexist perspective! Men are superficial and shallow. Women are deep and subtle.

How about the reasons can be complex and multi-faceted for both sides.

Can be? Sure. Usually are? I doubt it. There is a reason men are the primary consumers of porn and women are the primary consumers of romance fiction. They are wired a little differently. Most men get aroused watching a hot chick doing filthy things. Women have different triggers. If a woman wants to get a man revved up, acting like a porn star is probably going to work. If a man wants to get a woman revved up, acting like a romance book hero is probably going to work.

[Anonymous]

If a man needs sex, he needs to handle that in the shower.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point is that there needs to be some sort of examination of the underlying issues. If I'm physically repulsed by my husband because he's gained 150 lbs, the fact that I can close my eyes and pretend he's John Hamm may make him happy (assuming he doesn't realize what I'm doing) but it does nothing to address the underlying problem.

I'm repulsed by your shallow nature.

Relax. It's called a hypothetical. If you would like to offer a different one, please feel free.

[Anonymous]

There is more to marriage than sex.