Sex therapy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: .... No one is owed sex, just like no one is owed anything

For example, a sexless wife is not owed his fidelity.

I strongly object to you deleting the rest of my post to try to make a point I said explicitly I was not making. If you'd like to respond to what I said, respond to it, but not not self select a line and make it seem like I said something I didn't. You could have made your point without distorting the meaning of mine.

Sorry PP your post was excellent and I agree with almost everything you said. However it was soooo long and my point is for the contingent who scream (rightfully so) “nobody is entitled to sex” needs to also recognize the corollary “nobody is entitled to fidelity”.

I disagree with you. When you get married you don't say I vow to always have sex with you, but you do make a vow to fidelity. I would say no one is entitled to have someone stay married to them if they are not meeting their end of the bargain. But as we learn in Kindergarten, two wrongs do not make a right.

Oh you want to pull out the vows? They are bi directional. To have and to hold. Forsake all others. It means I won’t have sex with anybody except you (... because we will be having sex with each other). And once you stop meeting your partner’s sexual needs, there can be no continued expectation of them forsaking all others. It’s not a case of two wrongs making a right, there just is no other possible way to stay married except to have sex elsewhere. Like you said, if that bothers you, simply divorce.

And again...two wrongs and all that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No one has answered OP’s question.

Yes they have. I mean not the answer she wants but the true answer. Which is that she needs to figure out why they're not having sex, maybe a sex therapist will help, maybe they won't, probably depends on why they aren't having sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: .... No one is owed sex, just like no one is owed anything

For example, a sexless wife is not owed his fidelity.

I strongly object to you deleting the rest of my post to try to make a point I said explicitly I was not making. If you'd like to respond to what I said, respond to it, but not not self select a line and make it seem like I said something I didn't. You could have made your point without distorting the meaning of mine.

Sorry PP your post was excellent and I agree with almost everything you said. However it was soooo long and my point is for the contingent who scream (rightfully so) “nobody is entitled to sex” needs to also recognize the corollary “nobody is entitled to fidelity”.

I disagree with you. When you get married you don't say I vow to always have sex with you, but you do make a vow to fidelity. I would say no one is entitled to have someone stay married to them if they are not meeting their end of the bargain. But as we learn in Kindergarten, two wrongs do not make a right.

Oh you want to pull out the vows? They are bi directional. To have and to hold. Forsake all others. It means I won’t have sex with anybody except you (... because we will be having sex with each other). And once you stop meeting your partner’s sexual needs, there can be no continued expectation of them forsaking all others. It’s not a case of two wrongs making a right, there just is no other possible way to stay married except to have sex elsewhere. Like you said, if that bothers you, simply divorce.

And again...two wrongs and all that.

But neither side is acting (intentionally) to “wrong” their spouse. Both parties are doing what they need to do without any specific intent to harm/wrong the other. So your cliche does not apply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's preventing you from having more sex with your husband?

What in your mind cold be done to bring sex up to at least once a week, even if you had to schedule it in?


Once a month is pretty low even with 3 young kids.

I would rather be on DCUM. I only check it once or twice a day...

Is this you OP?

If it is, is it because sex with husband is painful? boring?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: .... No one is owed sex, just like no one is owed anything

For example, a sexless wife is not owed his fidelity.

I strongly object to you deleting the rest of my post to try to make a point I said explicitly I was not making. If you'd like to respond to what I said, respond to it, but not not self select a line and make it seem like I said something I didn't. You could have made your point without distorting the meaning of mine.

Sorry PP your post was excellent and I agree with almost everything you said. However it was soooo long and my point is for the contingent who scream (rightfully so) “nobody is entitled to sex” needs to also recognize the corollary “nobody is entitled to fidelity”.

I disagree with you. When you get married you don't say I vow to always have sex with you, but you do make a vow to fidelity. I would say no one is entitled to have someone stay married to them if they are not meeting their end of the bargain. But as we learn in Kindergarten, two wrongs do not make a right.

Depends on your vows. Some “have and hold” and “forsake all others.”

It's a sin. Adultery is a major sin in many religions...so if marriage was between two people in a religious ceremony of a religion that views adultery as a sin (as the majority do)---YES--STAYING monogamous to your partner was part of the deal.

Seriously, wtf?

I get some of the wishy-washy preachers you find on line, or homemade vows without a priest/preacher/rabbi, etc...but for centuries most marriages consider sex outside of the marriage a sin. Maybe that doesn't matter to you, but it matters to a helluva lot of people.

I am not in the camp of forcing people to have sex but if you are bringing religion into this, you are proving yourself wrong. Sex IS part of the entitlement in a religious marriage. Annulments can be obtained if you don't fulfill that part of the marriage...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: .... No one is owed sex, just like no one is owed anything

For example, a sexless wife is not owed his fidelity.

I strongly object to you deleting the rest of my post to try to make a point I said explicitly I was not making. If you'd like to respond to what I said, respond to it, but not not self select a line and make it seem like I said something I didn't. You could have made your point without distorting the meaning of mine.

Sorry PP your post was excellent and I agree with almost everything you said. However it was soooo long and my point is for the contingent who scream (rightfully so) “nobody is entitled to sex” needs to also recognize the corollary “nobody is entitled to fidelity”.

I disagree with you. When you get married you don't say I vow to always have sex with you, but you do make a vow to fidelity. I would say no one is entitled to have someone stay married to them if they are not meeting their end of the bargain. But as we learn in Kindergarten, two wrongs do not make a right.

Oh you want to pull out the vows? They are bi directional. To have and to hold. Forsake all others. It means I won’t have sex with anybody except you (... because we will be having sex with each other). And once you stop meeting your partner’s sexual needs, there can be no continued expectation of them forsaking all others. It’s not a case of two wrongs making a right, there just is no other possible way to stay married except to have sex elsewhere. Like you said, if that bothers you, simply divorce.

And again...two wrongs and all that.

Different PP: one wrong is the consequence of the other. I am a woman and i am low drive, but I would feel pretty responsible if i was withdrawing sex from my DH and he ended up cheating on me. I would have started it by making him unloved at home. Sex matters

[Anonymous]

so to add to my post above OP: yes work on it, accept the sex therapist, understand how to regain some libido. go with an open mind and try. You owe to your husband to at least try to work on your desire and to meet him halfway.

If that doesnt work, think about divorce and whether you want to divorce over this. If he is dragging you to sex therapy he has a clear message... Sex matters to him.

[Anonymous]

Start researching divorce attorneys

[Anonymous]

Sorry to hijack this thread but for the spouses who are saying that it needs to be at least twice a week or whatever frequency or the spouse will stray.....

I am genuinely curious. Before marriage, when single, did you pretty much go out and have sex with someone at that frequency? Like every week, you’d go out to find someone to have sex with or hire someone to have sex with?

[Anonymous]

Op here. All 3 kids are in single digits, but beyond diapers. After a full day I’m exhausted. I’ve had enough touching and at that point I don’t feel like being touched more is at all relaxing. Seems unnatural to force it and DH doesn’t seem to appreciate when I do it but I’m barely into it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No one has answered OP’s question.

Yes they have. I mean not the answer she wants but the true answer. Which is that she needs to figure out why they're not having sex, maybe a sex therapist will help, maybe they won't, probably depends on why they aren't having sex.

The answer is simply this: either she needs to find what it takes for her to get in the mood and ask her husband to get her there. Or, she does what a lot of women do and does it once a week to keep the peace (lie back and think of England). Alternatively, she turns a blind eye to cheating.

If a sex therapist can help her get to a good place on the first option, then sure, give it a shot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op here. All 3 kids are in single digits, but beyond diapers. After a full day I’m exhausted. I’ve had enough touching and at that point I don’t feel like being touched more is at all relaxing. Seems unnatural to force it and DH doesn’t seem to appreciate when I do it but I’m barely into it.

DH here, you will hate me but I will be honest- you are doomed. I did this for years, the constant chasing, her rejection, then I stopped chasing, we dwindled to once a month or less, then I cheated, and she caught me and we are in a really bad place.

In hindsight, I shouldn't have cheated. It's going to be really, really hard to repair this now.

Here's the part I never understood: how hard is it to carve out 30 minutes a week to be fully present with your DH sexually? I mean, tell him to take kids to the park, put them to bed, clean the whole house if you need it. Whatever it takes, he will jump through the hoop. I did, until it became clear it was a chore.

Good luck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: .... No one is owed sex, just like no one is owed anything

For example, a sexless wife is not owed his fidelity.

I strongly object to you deleting the rest of my post to try to make a point I said explicitly I was not making. If you'd like to respond to what I said, respond to it, but not not self select a line and make it seem like I said something I didn't. You could have made your point without distorting the meaning of mine.

Sorry PP your post was excellent and I agree with almost everything you said. However it was soooo long and my point is for the contingent who scream (rightfully so) “nobody is entitled to sex” needs to also recognize the corollary “nobody is entitled to fidelity”.

I disagree with you. When you get married you don't say I vow to always have sex with you, but you do make a vow to fidelity. I would say no one is entitled to have someone stay married to them if they are not meeting their end of the bargain. But as we learn in Kindergarten, two wrongs do not make a right.

Oh you want to pull out the vows? They are bi directional. To have and to hold. Forsake all others. It means I won’t have sex with anybody except you (... because we will be having sex with each other). And once you stop meeting your partner’s sexual needs, there can be no continued expectation of them forsaking all others. It’s not a case of two wrongs making a right, there just is no other possible way to stay married except to have sex elsewhere. Like you said, if that bothers you, simply divorce.

And again...two wrongs and all that.

But neither side is acting (intentionally) to “wrong” their spouse. Both parties are doing what they need to do without any specific intent to harm/wrong the other. So your cliche does not apply.

This actually gets to what I think is the problem here.

One wrong is a passive wrong. Sex rarely stops because one person thinks to themselves 'i would like to not have sex with my spouse anymore.' It is gradual and usually a symptom of other problems. That doesn't mean its not wrong, but it is not a single choice, it is a million choices made every day that end up with that result.

Cheating is a single choice and a single action and it is easily defined as wrong. I actually think this gives the low drive spouse room to hide a bit because it is so less able to be defined as wrong.

You are giving too much benefit to both sides. A person who withdraws from their spouse and doesn't do anything to fix it HAS done something wrong. Framing it as all about the sex is what is wrong, because the sex is just a symptom of the wrong.

A person has cheated has also done something wrong.

And it isn't a platitude it is a truth, doing something wrong just because someone wronged you is not right. Breaking up is a choice that is always available to both parties. When either side chooses to hurt the other instead, they have done something wrong, regardless of the reasons why and who started it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And again...two wrongs and all that.

But neither side is acting (intentionally) to “wrong” their spouse. Both parties are doing what they need to do without any specific intent to harm/wrong the other. So your cliche does not apply.

This actually gets to what I think is the problem here.

One wrong is a passive wrong. Sex rarely stops because one person thinks to themselves 'i would like to not have sex with my spouse anymore.' It is gradual and usually a symptom of other problems. That doesn't mean its not wrong, but it is not a single choice, it is a million choices made every day that end up with that result.

Cheating is a single choice and a single action and it is easily defined as wrong. I actually think this gives the low drive spouse room to hide a bit because it is so less able to be defined as wrong.

You are giving too much benefit to both sides. A person who withdraws from their spouse and doesn't do anything to fix it HAS done something wrong. Framing it as all about the sex is what is wrong, because the sex is just a symptom of the wrong.

A person has cheated has also done something wrong.

And it isn't a platitude it is a truth, doing something wrong just because someone wronged you is not right. Breaking up is a choice that is always available to both parties. When either side chooses to hurt the other instead, they have done something wrong, regardless of the reasons why and who started it.

Disagree. OP has stated (essentially) she does not view sex as a priority for her or the marriage. And I totally believe her! She is certainly NOT doing this to wrong/harm her husband.

Likewise, when he finds a sex partner elsewhere, he is simply taking his wife for her word: sex isn't important to his wife or to their marriage. So he cannot wrong or harm her when he does some unimportant thing with another woman.

[Anonymous]

I totally agree with PP, and I say that as someone who cheated and can admit I was wrong. Like they said, my spouse who stopped having sex with me. It wasn't just a libido issue. If there was love and respect, there would have been sex. Instead it was my spouses way of being passive aggressive and denying me something I needed to be happy.

We were both wrong.