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

[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.

NP here: Look, these discussions here are never constructive because the nuance surrounding this issue is driven away by a few people taking very rigid and hard line positions. I hesitate to weigh in, for that reason. But this one I have to push back on, the idea that men who are unhappy with the lack of sex in a relationship are merely looking for a “hole to f***” is pretty toxic. For most men, sex is about way more than merely the physical sensation and release, it’s about connection and desire and is really fundamental to being happy and fulfilled in a marriage. So when that goes away, it’s pretty catastrophic, and it’s not something you can replace with a happy finish massage at an AMP or whatever. This is not to say that anyone should be having sex they don’t want, but it’s wrong to trivialize the loss.

[Anonymous]

It’s normal for libido to wane with age. This idea that a 60 year old woman needs to “fix” her waning libido is toxic especially if you are referring to PIV which can become painful with menopause. Women shouldn’t have to take drugs to “fix” a naturally occurring process to fit her partners demand that intimacy must include painful PIV.

[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 it’s decided unilaterally thats not fair to your partner.

Wow. So “I don’t feel like sex” is now equivalent to becoming an alcoholic?!

There is no way to take you seriously with this kind of hyperbole. Come back to reality.

[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.

NP here: Look, these discussions here are never constructive because the nuance surrounding this issue is driven away by a few people taking very rigid and hard line positions. I hesitate to weigh in, for that reason. But this one I have to push back on, the idea that men who are unhappy with the lack of sex in a relationship are merely looking for a “hole to f***” is pretty toxic. For most men, sex is about way more than merely the physical sensation and release, it’s about connection and desire and is really fundamental to being happy and fulfilled in a marriage. So when that goes away, it’s pretty catastrophic, and it’s not something you can replace with a happy finish massage at an AMP or whatever. This is not to say that anyone should be having sex they don’t want, but it’s wrong to trivialize the loss.

Is that what you tell yourself as you badger your newly postpartum wife for a blowjob? Gmafb.

[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.

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).

Seriously. If these men were good in bed and put their wife’s desires first this would NOT be an issue. All I’m hearing from these men is that they’re bad and selfish lovers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A small hint: for both men and women these are people who don’t drink, not mentally sick , don’t use weed, nicotine, any SSRI, not depressed or chronically tired, get good sleep, are slim, good dental hygiene, good skin, and are not tied up to exhausting careers /sitting at desk whole day. These would be usually people of certain SES who have time and means to take a good care about their overall wellbeing

+1

[Anonymous]

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.

Nothing gets me wetter than being told I need to fulfill my "marital duties."

[Anonymous]

I am a long term wife. Of a man. My desire waned after 50 but the emotional closeness and connection never has. I am pleased he wants me and happy to have intercourse, albeit with more lube and less physical pleasure on orgasm.

[Anonymous]

I haven't read the whole thread. But I'm pretty sure that if a husband is doing a great job pleasing his wife, there will be sex until the end of time. Needs change over time. But good sex is always dependent on good communication. And a man adapts accordingly.

If a 40 year old woman isn't that interested in sex, it's overwhelmingly because her partner sucks in everything related to sex. And maybe that was evident when they were young, but now it's really coming home to roost. Finding compatibility and connection in a partner is so important in a life partner. The women that marry for money earn every penny of it. And they deal with this as a consequence. Marry lovers, not paychecks.

[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?

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

Men engage in labor-digging. As soon as the wedding ring is on, they abdicate all of their life responsibilities outside of work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s normal for libido to wane with age. This idea that a 60 year old woman needs to “fix” her waning libido is toxic especially if you are referring to PIV which can become painful with menopause. Women shouldn’t have to take drugs to “fix” a naturally occurring process to fit her partners demand that intimacy must include painful PIV.

+1

Why isn't the onus on men to adjust?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s normal for libido to wane with age. This idea that a 60 year old woman needs to “fix” her waning libido is toxic especially if you are referring to PIV which can become painful with menopause. Women shouldn’t have to take drugs to “fix” a naturally occurring process to fit her partners demand that intimacy must include painful PIV.

+1

Why isn't the onus on men to adjust?

If PIV or ejaculation hurt them... interesting what they would do.

[Anonymous]

Yes, you need to get a plastic doll and her libido will never change.

[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.

A woman whose “job” is to fu*k someone is called a prostitute, nut a wife.

Good to know that in your mind the two roles are interchangeable.

Also, wife is a relationship, not a job title. The husband is not the manager.

[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.

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

Oh, please! It's women who get bored of boinking the same man first.