Is there any way of knowing if a woman will keep her strong libido over time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes. The way to determine this is to first determine whether the man will continue to make her feel desirable and continue his interest in her as a human. Determine whether he will stay fit, take on half the mental load in their relationship, and see her as a human being and enjoy growing together with her.

Correct.
Every woman however will go through menopause and will not be like in their 20s no matter what you do.

HRT begs to differ.

What is your exact argument? That every woman will not go through menopause? Yes, they will. That every woman will not be like in their 20s? No, they won't. Because you leave your 20s. HRT does nothing to prevent either of these things taking place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, almost everyone's hormones fall off a cliff at some point.

If yours don't, you need a sex doll, not an actual woman. Or, you need to date / marry a desperate poor young woman.

If your hormones fall off, you still have an obligation to meet your husband half way and fulfill your marital duties. It is your responsibility to figure it out instead of leaving your husband hanging. For one partner to unilaterally declare the marriage celibate is cruel.

Meeting your husband half way does not make you a sex doll; it makes you a loving and caring partner. Compromise is part of marriage, it is common sense.

Maybe it's just a phrasing thing, but the idea of my wife "fulfilling her marital duties" makes my skin crawl. I want to keep having sex, but I want her to be an enthusiastic participant. If she's not, it's - at *best* - an unnecessarily complicated form of masturbation. I know I've heard wives around here say that "wanting her to want it" is expecting too much; but that's exactly what I want.

That was my point. If wife doesn’t feel like having sex, it is her responsibility to figure out the cause of lack of desire and fix it. So she can enthusiastically have sex. If you don’t see it as your responsibility then you will never put in the effort to fix your issues. And that is cruel to your husband

And if the cause of lack of desire is that the husband is a lazy piece of crap who does nothing around the house, and leaves all childcare, cooking and cleaning to her, is he going to step up? Or is he just going to keep demanding sex and potentially tell her to get on drugs so he can f*** her? It's like you've never spoken to a real wife before.

Eff this mess. Her fault for staying in a relationship she doesn't want to be in. If you're that unhappy, you leave. If you stay because you want the perks, the money, the house, whatever, then you do your job as a wife. The woman in this pathetic example isn't a "real wife" she's a whiny wannabe victim of her own crap decisionmaking.

God, I hope you’re a troll, because otherwise, how embarrassing for you.

I've never needed to be told to do my job as a partner, so I'm not embarrassed at all. Sorry you suck at being a spouse, I guess?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, almost everyone's hormones fall off a cliff at some point.

If yours don't, you need a sex doll, not an actual woman. Or, you need to date / marry a desperate poor young woman.

If your hormones fall off, you still have an obligation to meet your husband half way and fulfill your marital duties. It is your responsibility to figure it out instead of leaving your husband hanging. For one partner to unilaterally declare the marriage celibate is cruel.

Meeting your husband half way does not make you a sex doll; it makes you a loving and caring partner. Compromise is part of marriage, it is common sense.

Maybe it's just a phrasing thing, but the idea of my wife "fulfilling her marital duties" makes my skin crawl. I want to keep having sex, but I want her to be an enthusiastic participant. If she's not, it's - at *best* - an unnecessarily complicated form of masturbation. I know I've heard wives around here say that "wanting her to want it" is expecting too much; but that's exactly what I want.

I 100% agree. The men who want their wives to have sex with them out of "duty" when they don't want to sound so creepy. Why do you want to have sex with someone who isn't enthusiastically into it? These men see women as a series of holes to fulfil them, not as human beings. It's extremely rapey.

Sure, it’s selfish to expect someone to have sex with you out of duty. The point is, if a woman actually loves her husband, but has no desire to have sex with him, it’s her responsibility to work on herself and figure out why. Could be medical, could be mental, or could be a combination. To just say sorry, not interested, and that’s that, is selfish.

People are allowed to decline sex. Just because you feel like it doesn't mean that she has to.

Breaking news - women are people too! Not just animated sex dolls!

It's like you went out of your way to miss PP's point. She should decline sex if she doesn't feel like it. But she should also make an effort to figure out why she doesn't feel like it and try to fix that. Like PP said, maybe it's medical, maybe it's mental, maybe it's a combination. (And, I'd add, it could be something her partner is or is not doing -- but not always, and that shouldn't be an assumption that crowds out the other possibilities for why she's not feeling it.)

Or maybe she just doesn't feel like it. It isn't always some sort of medical issue. You are the person that would tell your wife to go on drugs to "fix" her so you could have a hole to f***, arent you.

If she just doesn't feel like it - no particular reason - and that lack of interest is causing damage to her marriage, then (assuming she loves her husband), she should put a little effort in trying to figure out why and whether there is any way to make her libido more consistent with her husband's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, almost everyone's hormones fall off a cliff at some point.

If yours don't, you need a sex doll, not an actual woman. Or, you need to date / marry a desperate poor young woman.

If your hormones fall off, you still have an obligation to meet your husband half way and fulfill your marital duties. It is your responsibility to figure it out instead of leaving your husband hanging. For one partner to unilaterally declare the marriage celibate is cruel.

Meeting your husband half way does not make you a sex doll; it makes you a loving and caring partner. Compromise is part of marriage, it is common sense.

Maybe it's just a phrasing thing, but the idea of my wife "fulfilling her marital duties" makes my skin crawl. I want to keep having sex, but I want her to be an enthusiastic participant. If she's not, it's - at *best* - an unnecessarily complicated form of masturbation. I know I've heard wives around here say that "wanting her to want it" is expecting too much; but that's exactly what I want.

I 100% agree. The men who want their wives to have sex with them out of "duty" when they don't want to sound so creepy. Why do you want to have sex with someone who isn't enthusiastically into it? These men see women as a series of holes to fulfil them, not as human beings. It's extremely rapey.

Sure, it’s selfish to expect someone to have sex with you out of duty. The point is, if a woman actually loves her husband, but has no desire to have sex with him, it’s her responsibility to work on herself and figure out why. Could be medical, could be mental, or could be a combination. To just say sorry, not interested, and that’s that, is selfish.

People are allowed to decline sex. Just because you feel like it doesn't mean that she has to.

Breaking news - women are people too! Not just animated sex dolls!

It's like you went out of your way to miss PP's point. She should decline sex if she doesn't feel like it. But she should also make an effort to figure out why she doesn't feel like it and try to fix that. Like PP said, maybe it's medical, maybe it's mental, maybe it's a combination. (And, I'd add, it could be something her partner is or is not doing -- but not always, and that shouldn't be an assumption that crowds out the other possibilities for why she's not feeling it.)

Or maybe she just doesn't feel like it. It isn't always some sort of medical issue. You are the person that would tell your wife to go on drugs to "fix" her so you could have a hole to f***, arent you.

If she just doesn't feel like it - no particular reason - and that lack of interest is causing damage to her marriage, then (assuming she loves her husband), she should put a little effort in trying to figure out why and whether there is any way to make her libido more consistent with her husband's.

I should add that, if there's not any reasonable way for her to increase her attraction to her husband, then that's just the way it is. But if she never puts any effort into figuring out whether or not that's the case, it's the lack of effort that makes her a bad spouse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, almost everyone's hormones fall off a cliff at some point.

If yours don't, you need a sex doll, not an actual woman. Or, you need to date / marry a desperate poor young woman.

If your hormones fall off, you still have an obligation to meet your husband half way and fulfill your marital duties. It is your responsibility to figure it out instead of leaving your husband hanging. For one partner to unilaterally declare the marriage celibate is cruel.

Meeting your husband half way does not make you a sex doll; it makes you a loving and caring partner. Compromise is part of marriage, it is common sense.

Maybe it's just a phrasing thing, but the idea of my wife "fulfilling her marital duties" makes my skin crawl. I want to keep having sex, but I want her to be an enthusiastic participant. If she's not, it's - at *best* - an unnecessarily complicated form of masturbation. I know I've heard wives around here say that "wanting her to want it" is expecting too much; but that's exactly what I want.

I 100% agree. The men who want their wives to have sex with them out of "duty" when they don't want to sound so creepy. Why do you want to have sex with someone who isn't enthusiastically into it? These men see women as a series of holes to fulfil them, not as human beings. It's extremely rapey.

Sure, it’s selfish to expect someone to have sex with you out of duty. The point is, if a woman actually loves her husband, but has no desire to have sex with him, it’s her responsibility to work on herself and figure out why. Could be medical, could be mental, or could be a combination. To just say sorry, not interested, and that’s that, is selfish.

People are allowed to decline sex. Just because you feel like it doesn't mean that she has to.

Breaking news - women are people too! Not just animated sex dolls!

It's like you went out of your way to miss PP's point. She should decline sex if she doesn't feel like it. But she should also make an effort to figure out why she doesn't feel like it and try to fix that. Like PP said, maybe it's medical, maybe it's mental, maybe it's a combination. (And, I'd add, it could be something her partner is or is not doing -- but not always, and that shouldn't be an assumption that crowds out the other possibilities for why she's not feeling it.)

Or maybe she just doesn't feel like it. It isn't always some sort of medical issue. You are the person that would tell your wife to go on drugs to "fix" her so you could have a hole to f***, arent you.

If she just doesn't feel like it - no particular reason - and that lack of interest is causing damage to her marriage, then (assuming she loves her husband), she should put a little effort in trying to figure out why and whether there is any way to make her libido more consistent with her husband's.

Or her husband can put in some effort to make his libido more consistent with his wife's libido.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, almost everyone's hormones fall off a cliff at some point.

If yours don't, you need a sex doll, not an actual woman. Or, you need to date / marry a desperate poor young woman.

If your hormones fall off, you still have an obligation to meet your husband half way and fulfill your marital duties. It is your responsibility to figure it out instead of leaving your husband hanging. For one partner to unilaterally declare the marriage celibate is cruel.

Meeting your husband half way does not make you a sex doll; it makes you a loving and caring partner. Compromise is part of marriage, it is common sense.

Maybe it's just a phrasing thing, but the idea of my wife "fulfilling her marital duties" makes my skin crawl. I want to keep having sex, but I want her to be an enthusiastic participant. If she's not, it's - at *best* - an unnecessarily complicated form of masturbation. I know I've heard wives around here say that "wanting her to want it" is expecting too much; but that's exactly what I want.

I 100% agree. The men who want their wives to have sex with them out of "duty" when they don't want to sound so creepy. Why do you want to have sex with someone who isn't enthusiastically into it? These men see women as a series of holes to fulfil them, not as human beings. It's extremely rapey.

Sure, it’s selfish to expect someone to have sex with you out of duty. The point is, if a woman actually loves her husband, but has no desire to have sex with him, it’s her responsibility to work on herself and figure out why. Could be medical, could be mental, or could be a combination. To just say sorry, not interested, and that’s that, is selfish.

People are allowed to decline sex. Just because you feel like it doesn't mean that she has to.

Breaking news - women are people too! Not just animated sex dolls!

This is absolutely true and a marriage doesn’t just grant you carte blanche access to your partner’s body. I’m a DH and honestly, I don’t want sex with someone who doesn’t want me and isn’t into it. I guess that’s the issue here - its not WANTING your partner thats tough. Duty sex sucks for both people but I guess if you want stay connected and meep the relationship alive its something people do.

In dead bedroom marriages its really tough for the high libido partner. Its like you married me and I’m a high earner, but, I really start to resent the stress of my job and its not healthy for me. I decide without agreement from you partner that I’m done working, or I just quiet quit. It's a major change to our relationship and you ptobably would divorce me.

So many men who post in this forum operate on the assumption that their major contribution to their marriages is income.

I make almost 3X what my DH earns and it wouldn't occur to me to think that my income is my major contribution to my marriage. Are people (men) really that transactional? Put in the work and the dollars, and get sex in return?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, almost everyone's hormones fall off a cliff at some point.

If yours don't, you need a sex doll, not an actual woman. Or, you need to date / marry a desperate poor young woman.

If your hormones fall off, you still have an obligation to meet your husband half way and fulfill your marital duties. It is your responsibility to figure it out instead of leaving your husband hanging. For one partner to unilaterally declare the marriage celibate is cruel.

Meeting your husband half way does not make you a sex doll; it makes you a loving and caring partner. Compromise is part of marriage, it is common sense.

Maybe it's just a phrasing thing, but the idea of my wife "fulfilling her marital duties" makes my skin crawl. I want to keep having sex, but I want her to be an enthusiastic participant. If she's not, it's - at *best* - an unnecessarily complicated form of masturbation. I know I've heard wives around here say that "wanting her to want it" is expecting too much; but that's exactly what I want.

I 100% agree. The men who want their wives to have sex with them out of "duty" when they don't want to sound so creepy. Why do you want to have sex with someone who isn't enthusiastically into it? These men see women as a series of holes to fulfil them, not as human beings. It's extremely rapey.

Sure, it’s selfish to expect someone to have sex with you out of duty. The point is, if a woman actually loves her husband, but has no desire to have sex with him, it’s her responsibility to work on herself and figure out why. Could be medical, could be mental, or could be a combination. To just say sorry, not interested, and that’s that, is selfish.

People are allowed to decline sex. Just because you feel like it doesn't mean that she has to.

Breaking news - women are people too! Not just animated sex dolls!

This is absolutely true and a marriage doesn’t just grant you carte blanche access to your partner’s body. I’m a DH and honestly, I don’t want sex with someone who doesn’t want me and isn’t into it. I guess that’s the issue here - its not WANTING your partner thats tough. Duty sex sucks for both people but I guess if you want stay connected and meep the relationship alive its something people do.

In dead bedroom marriages its really tough for the high libido partner. Its like you married me and I’m a high earner, but, I really start to resent the stress of my job and its not healthy for me. I decide without agreement from you partner that I’m done working, or I just quiet quit. It's a major change to our relationship and you ptobably would divorce me.

So many men who post in this forum operate on the assumption that their major contribution to their marriages is income.

I make almost 3X what my DH earns and it wouldn't occur to me to think that my income is my major contribution to my marriage. Are people (men) really that transactional? Put in the work and the dollars, and get sex in return?

No, the poster is making the point that changing something central to the marriage without agreement from both parties is being a bad partner. It could be many other things - deciding to stop helping with all household chores, becoming an alcaholic, start going out every night and party with friends instead being present in the home, stop talking to your spouse, etc.

If you both agree to the change thats fine but if its decided unilaterally thats not fair to your partner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, almost everyone's hormones fall off a cliff at some point.

If yours don't, you need a sex doll, not an actual woman. Or, you need to date / marry a desperate poor young woman.

If your hormones fall off, you still have an obligation to meet your husband half way and fulfill your marital duties. It is your responsibility to figure it out instead of leaving your husband hanging. For one partner to unilaterally declare the marriage celibate is cruel.

Meeting your husband half way does not make you a sex doll; it makes you a loving and caring partner. Compromise is part of marriage, it is common sense.

Maybe it's just a phrasing thing, but the idea of my wife "fulfilling her marital duties" makes my skin crawl. I want to keep having sex, but I want her to be an enthusiastic participant. If she's not, it's - at *best* - an unnecessarily complicated form of masturbation. I know I've heard wives around here say that "wanting her to want it" is expecting too much; but that's exactly what I want.

I 100% agree. The men who want their wives to have sex with them out of "duty" when they don't want to sound so creepy. Why do you want to have sex with someone who isn't enthusiastically into it? These men see women as a series of holes to fulfil them, not as human beings. It's extremely rapey.

Sure, it’s selfish to expect someone to have sex with you out of duty. The point is, if a woman actually loves her husband, but has no desire to have sex with him, it’s her responsibility to work on herself and figure out why. Could be medical, could be mental, or could be a combination. To just say sorry, not interested, and that’s that, is selfish.

People are allowed to decline sex. Just because you feel like it doesn't mean that she has to.

Breaking news - women are people too! Not just animated sex dolls!

This is absolutely true and a marriage doesn’t just grant you carte blanche access to your partner’s body. I’m a DH and honestly, I don’t want sex with someone who doesn’t want me and isn’t into it. I guess that’s the issue here - its not WANTING your partner thats tough. Duty sex sucks for both people but I guess if you want stay connected and meep the relationship alive its something people do.

In dead bedroom marriages its really tough for the high libido partner. Its like you married me and I’m a high earner, but, I really start to resent the stress of my job and its not healthy for me. I decide without agreement from you partner that I’m done working, or I just quiet quit. It's a major change to our relationship and you ptobably would divorce me.

So many men who post in this forum operate on the assumption that their major contribution to their marriages is income.

I make almost 3X what my DH earns and it wouldn't occur to me to think that my income is my major contribution to my marriage. Are people (men) really that transactional? Put in the work and the dollars, and get sex in return?

No, the poster is making the point that changing something central to the marriage without agreement from both parties is being a bad partner. It could be many other things - deciding to stop helping with all household chores, becoming an alcaholic, start going out every night and party with friends instead being present in the home, stop talking to your spouse, etc.

If you both agree to the change thats fine but if its decided unilaterally thats not fair to your partner.

You cannot compare libido and it's changes over decades of marriage to partying with friends or forgoing household chores.

[Anonymous]

Women generally have a different, “responsive” arousal pattern than men do. The ones who are least likely to lose their strong libidos are the ones who have the male-type arousal pattern. They are out there, but are few and far between.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Women generally have a different, “responsive” arousal pattern than men do. The ones who are least likely to lose their strong libidos are the ones who have the male-type arousal pattern. They are out there, but are few and far between.

How do you recognize the male type pattern? What are the charcteristics of each?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, almost everyone's hormones fall off a cliff at some point.

If yours don't, you need a sex doll, not an actual woman. Or, you need to date / marry a desperate poor young woman.

If your hormones fall off, you still have an obligation to meet your husband half way and fulfill your marital duties. It is your responsibility to figure it out instead of leaving your husband hanging. For one partner to unilaterally declare the marriage celibate is cruel.

Meeting your husband half way does not make you a sex doll; it makes you a loving and caring partner. Compromise is part of marriage, it is common sense.

Maybe it's just a phrasing thing, but the idea of my wife "fulfilling her marital duties" makes my skin crawl. I want to keep having sex, but I want her to be an enthusiastic participant. If she's not, it's - at *best* - an unnecessarily complicated form of masturbation. I know I've heard wives around here say that "wanting her to want it" is expecting too much; but that's exactly what I want.

I 100% agree. The men who want their wives to have sex with them out of "duty" when they don't want to sound so creepy. Why do you want to have sex with someone who isn't enthusiastically into it? These men see women as a series of holes to fulfil them, not as human beings. It's extremely rapey.

Sure, it’s selfish to expect someone to have sex with you out of duty. The point is, if a woman actually loves her husband, but has no desire to have sex with him, it’s her responsibility to work on herself and figure out why. Could be medical, could be mental, or could be a combination. To just say sorry, not interested, and that’s that, is selfish.

People are allowed to decline sex. Just because you feel like it doesn't mean that she has to.

Breaking news - women are people too! Not just animated sex dolls!

This is absolutely true and a marriage doesn’t just grant you carte blanche access to your partner’s body. I’m a DH and honestly, I don’t want sex with someone who doesn’t want me and isn’t into it. I guess that’s the issue here - its not WANTING your partner thats tough. Duty sex sucks for both people but I guess if you want stay connected and meep the relationship alive its something people do.

In dead bedroom marriages its really tough for the high libido partner. Its like you married me and I’m a high earner, but, I really start to resent the stress of my job and its not healthy for me. I decide without agreement from you partner that I’m done working, or I just quiet quit. It's a major change to our relationship and you ptobably would divorce me.

So many men who post in this forum operate on the assumption that their major contribution to their marriages is income.

I make almost 3X what my DH earns and it wouldn't occur to me to think that my income is my major contribution to my marriage. Are people (men) really that transactional? Put in the work and the dollars, and get sex in return?

Have you met women? Gold digging is a trope for a reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, almost everyone's hormones fall off a cliff at some point.

If yours don't, you need a sex doll, not an actual woman. Or, you need to date / marry a desperate poor young woman.

If your hormones fall off, you still have an obligation to meet your husband half way and fulfill your marital duties. It is your responsibility to figure it out instead of leaving your husband hanging. For one partner to unilaterally declare the marriage celibate is cruel.

Meeting your husband half way does not make you a sex doll; it makes you a loving and caring partner. Compromise is part of marriage, it is common sense.

Maybe it's just a phrasing thing, but the idea of my wife "fulfilling her marital duties" makes my skin crawl. I want to keep having sex, but I want her to be an enthusiastic participant. If she's not, it's - at *best* - an unnecessarily complicated form of masturbation. I know I've heard wives around here say that "wanting her to want it" is expecting too much; but that's exactly what I want.

I 100% agree. The men who want their wives to have sex with them out of "duty" when they don't want to sound so creepy. Why do you want to have sex with someone who isn't enthusiastically into it? These men see women as a series of holes to fulfil them, not as human beings. It's extremely rapey.

Sure, it’s selfish to expect someone to have sex with you out of duty. The point is, if a woman actually loves her husband, but has no desire to have sex with him, it’s her responsibility to work on herself and figure out why. Could be medical, could be mental, or could be a combination. To just say sorry, not interested, and that’s that, is selfish.

People are allowed to decline sex. Just because you feel like it doesn't mean that she has to.

Breaking news - women are people too! Not just animated sex dolls!

This is absolutely true and a marriage doesn’t just grant you carte blanche access to your partner’s body. I’m a DH and honestly, I don’t want sex with someone who doesn’t want me and isn’t into it. I guess that’s the issue here - its not WANTING your partner thats tough. Duty sex sucks for both people but I guess if you want stay connected and meep the relationship alive its something people do.

In dead bedroom marriages its really tough for the high libido partner. Its like you married me and I’m a high earner, but, I really start to resent the stress of my job and its not healthy for me. I decide without agreement from you partner that I’m done working, or I just quiet quit. It's a major change to our relationship and you ptobably would divorce me.

So many men who post in this forum operate on the assumption that their major contribution to their marriages is income.

I make almost 3X what my DH earns and it wouldn't occur to me to think that my income is my major contribution to my marriage. Are people (men) really that transactional? Put in the work and the dollars, and get sex in return?

No, the poster is making the point that changing something central to the marriage without agreement from both parties is being a bad partner. It could be many other things - deciding to stop helping with all household chores, becoming an alcaholic, start going out every night and party with friends instead being present in the home, stop talking to your spouse, etc.

If you both agree to the change thats fine but if its decided unilaterally thats not fair to your partner.

You cannot compare libido and it's changes over decades of marriage to partying with friends or forgoing household chores.

Yes, you can. Hormones are not destiny. Ultimately, you control your actions, and your actions have consequences for the relationship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, almost everyone's hormones fall off a cliff at some point.

If yours don't, you need a sex doll, not an actual woman. Or, you need to date / marry a desperate poor young woman.

If your hormones fall off, you still have an obligation to meet your husband half way and fulfill your marital duties. It is your responsibility to figure it out instead of leaving your husband hanging. For one partner to unilaterally declare the marriage celibate is cruel.

Meeting your husband half way does not make you a sex doll; it makes you a loving and caring partner. Compromise is part of marriage, it is common sense.

Maybe it's just a phrasing thing, but the idea of my wife "fulfilling her marital duties" makes my skin crawl. I want to keep having sex, but I want her to be an enthusiastic participant. If she's not, it's - at *best* - an unnecessarily complicated form of masturbation. I know I've heard wives around here say that "wanting her to want it" is expecting too much; but that's exactly what I want.

I 100% agree. The men who want their wives to have sex with them out of "duty" when they don't want to sound so creepy. Why do you want to have sex with someone who isn't enthusiastically into it? These men see women as a series of holes to fulfil them, not as human beings. It's extremely rapey.

Sure, it’s selfish to expect someone to have sex with you out of duty. The point is, if a woman actually loves her husband, but has no desire to have sex with him, it’s her responsibility to work on herself and figure out why. Could be medical, could be mental, or could be a combination. To just say sorry, not interested, and that’s that, is selfish.

People are allowed to decline sex. Just because you feel like it doesn't mean that she has to.

Breaking news - women are people too! Not just animated sex dolls!

This is absolutely true and a marriage doesn’t just grant you carte blanche access to your partner’s body. I’m a DH and honestly, I don’t want sex with someone who doesn’t want me and isn’t into it. I guess that’s the issue here - its not WANTING your partner thats tough. Duty sex sucks for both people but I guess if you want stay connected and meep the relationship alive its something people do.

In dead bedroom marriages its really tough for the high libido partner. Its like you married me and I’m a high earner, but, I really start to resent the stress of my job and its not healthy for me. I decide without agreement from you partner that I’m done working, or I just quiet quit. It's a major change to our relationship and you ptobably would divorce me.

So many men who post in this forum operate on the assumption that their major contribution to their marriages is income.

I make almost 3X what my DH earns and it wouldn't occur to me to think that my income is my major contribution to my marriage. Are people (men) really that transactional? Put in the work and the dollars, and get sex in return?

No, the poster is making the point that changing something central to the marriage without agreement from both parties is being a bad partner. It could be many other things - deciding to stop helping with all household chores, becoming an alcaholic, start going out every night and party with friends instead being present in the home, stop talking to your spouse, etc.

If you both agree to the change thats fine but if its decided unilaterally thats not fair to your partner.

If your marriage is premised on never aging then that does not seem like a long lasting marriage.

The best way to tell is if the man actually knows how to reliably make his wife orgasm and knows his proper place in the relationship (to please her).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Women generally have a different, “responsive” arousal pattern than men do. The ones who are least likely to lose their strong libidos are the ones who have the male-type arousal pattern. They are out there, but are few and far between.

Yes, and men are generally not inclined to be monogamous, but they choose to change that behavior for the sake of a married relationship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women generally have a different, “responsive” arousal pattern than men do. The ones who are least likely to lose their strong libidos are the ones who have the male-type arousal pattern. They are out there, but are few and far between.

How do you recognize the male type pattern? What are the charcteristics of each?

I’m not the PP but my guess that would be women who are aroused by male body on its own, not attached to the person. Those same women who need to have sex even when not in a relationship , when men don’t treat them well, into one night stands and casual encounters etc.
The exact type most men would say they shouldn’t marry. They marry Madonnas not Whores and then get surprised why Madonna no longer wants sex
So dear men, don’t try to find a unicorn