Lost my sex drive, what to do to get it back?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Start working out. It increases sex drive, makes you healthier, and makes you happier.

Yup, 100% this.

But I’m also now intrigued by Come As You Are…

It's a good book. I asked my wife to read it but she wouldn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you love your spouse and want to keep him, schedule it once a week.

Once every 3-4 months is close to no sex. It's not sustainable.

I'm not sure exactly what you're suggesting here, but making yourself have sex when you aren't actually enjoying sex is a good way to make your sex drive tank even further. That's the opposite of what OP needs to do.

Not the PP to whom you're responding but you're wrong.

Do a little research. Scheduling sex is a technique many, many sex therapists, sex advice columnists and people on DCUM recommend. When one has young kids it is extremely difficult to find times to have sex.

And for some couples, if they have the right mindset, scheduling can actually become part of the fun, creating anticipation that can develop into arousal as the "date" gets closer.

Some say that scheduling times (and places) to have sex "kills the spontaneity" but it does not have to unless you let it. How we think about sex really does matter. Turning from "It feels like pressure, it's not spontaneous" to "I'm already thinking of things I'd like to do...." can happen. But both partners have to make an effort. To OP-- talk about scheduling sex not as a chore or obligation but as a couples time, and mention to your DH things you want to try (and want him to try). Experiment with toys or new lingerie or whatever works. Get your minds into the game, in advance.

You all know that sex while you were dating was scheduled as well, right? You knew you were having a date, so you planned on having sex. You bought condoms. You shaved your legs. You made sure your underwear was the good/clean/not the ripped stuff. What makes spontaneous sex so great, anyway? I like the PP's thoughts above about ANTICIPATION. That is what makes sex good. Not the fact that you can do it whenever. It is that you WANT to do it, you are anticipating how great it is going to be.

I think the difference is the fact that you didn’t just schedule sex— you scheduled dates. You were going to be the center of one another’s attention. You were both going to make an effort to be your most attractive. You were both going to make an effort that the other person was enjoying themselves. You kicked out the roommates. You were going to flirt and make eye contact and touch unnecessarily. And THEN in a conducive atmosphere of anticipation and privacy you had sex. People talking about not liking scheduled sex mean they don’t like that what’s scheduled is intercourse like it’s another chore, not scheduling the hours for their spouse to impress and seduce them that took place during dating.

Spouses who take hours impressing and seducing each other don’t need to schedule sex.

Your dates were a little different than mine. For my spouse & I, the most common date was for us to go to a bar, eat wings, and played trivia. Then we went home and had sex. If you want to call that "impressive and seductive," then I guess I'm your man!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op, give a lot of BJs and try to get some arousal from that.

Lolololololol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you love your spouse and want to keep him, schedule it once a week.

Once every 3-4 months is close to no sex. It's not sustainable.

I'm not sure exactly what you're suggesting here, but making yourself have sex when you aren't actually enjoying sex is a good way to make your sex drive tank even further. That's the opposite of what OP needs to do.

Not the PP to whom you're responding but you're wrong.

Do a little research. Scheduling sex is a technique many, many sex therapists, sex advice columnists and people on DCUM recommend. When one has young kids it is extremely difficult to find times to have sex.

And for some couples, if they have the right mindset, scheduling can actually become part of the fun, creating anticipation that can develop into arousal as the "date" gets closer.

Some say that scheduling times (and places) to have sex "kills the spontaneity" but it does not have to unless you let it. How we think about sex really does matter. Turning from "It feels like pressure, it's not spontaneous" to "I'm already thinking of things I'd like to do...." can happen. But both partners have to make an effort. To OP-- talk about scheduling sex not as a chore or obligation but as a couples time, and mention to your DH things you want to try (and want him to try). Experiment with toys or new lingerie or whatever works. Get your minds into the game, in advance.

You are correct about all this, and I am also correct that having unwanted sex kills desire (which you can do some research on too). If you have a responsive desire, that is desire and that means you want to have sex.

I wrote that comment because just saying "if you care about your marriage and want to keep your husband, schedule sex once a week" is the type of thing said by people who think that women should just have sex regardless of what they actually want. Like I said, I wasn't sure what PP was suggesting, but it's very important to note that having sex when you aren't enjoying it is a bad idea.

You might not mean to be doing so, but your post ends up equating scheduling sex with having sex one doesn't want.

No one's saying "women should just have sex regardless of what they actually want." When I talk about scheduling sex, I'm talking about scheduling sex because they both want it, but need to work on finding a way to do it. It's not a chore. I said exactly that. But if they don't make a specific effort to actually have sex...well, what do you suggest? Waiting until everyone's in exactly the perfect mood simultaneously is waiting for a unicorn, when there are long work days and little kids.

Not people explicitly on this thread, but people say this ALL the time. A ton of women have sex when they find it repulsive because they think that's the way to keep their sex lives intact. I know that you aren't suggesting that. I did not say not to schedule sex and said "I'm not sure what you're implying..." but I can see how I could have been more clear.

So, you are just generalizing. Great. Got it.

That was useless.

Saying that people shouldn’t have sex that they don’t want even though some people think they should is a generalization? I really don’t understand your hostility to these comments.

Literally nobody:

PP: BUT WOMEN SHOULDN’T BE FORCED TO HAVE SEX!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you love your spouse and want to keep him, schedule it once a week.

Once every 3-4 months is close to no sex. It's not sustainable.

I'm not sure exactly what you're suggesting here, but making yourself have sex when you aren't actually enjoying sex is a good way to make your sex drive tank even further. That's the opposite of what OP needs to do.

Not the PP to whom you're responding but you're wrong.

Do a little research. Scheduling sex is a technique many, many sex therapists, sex advice columnists and people on DCUM recommend. When one has young kids it is extremely difficult to find times to have sex.

And for some couples, if they have the right mindset, scheduling can actually become part of the fun, creating anticipation that can develop into arousal as the "date" gets closer.

Some say that scheduling times (and places) to have sex "kills the spontaneity" but it does not have to unless you let it. How we think about sex really does matter. Turning from "It feels like pressure, it's not spontaneous" to "I'm already thinking of things I'd like to do...." can happen. But both partners have to make an effort. To OP-- talk about scheduling sex not as a chore or obligation but as a couples time, and mention to your DH things you want to try (and want him to try). Experiment with toys or new lingerie or whatever works. Get your minds into the game, in advance.

You all know that sex while you were dating was scheduled as well, right? You knew you were having a date, so you planned on having sex. You bought condoms. You shaved your legs. You made sure your underwear was the good/clean/not the ripped stuff. What makes spontaneous sex so great, anyway? I like the PP's thoughts above about ANTICIPATION. That is what makes sex good. Not the fact that you can do it whenever. It is that you WANT to do it, you are anticipating how great it is going to be.

I think the difference is the fact that you didn’t just schedule sex— you scheduled dates. You were going to be the center of one another’s attention. You were both going to make an effort to be your most attractive. You were both going to make an effort that the other person was enjoying themselves. You kicked out the roommates. You were going to flirt and make eye contact and touch unnecessarily. And THEN in a conducive atmosphere of anticipation and privacy you had sex. People talking about not liking scheduled sex mean they don’t like that what’s scheduled is intercourse like it’s another chore, not scheduling the hours for their spouse to impress and seduce them that took place during dating.

Spouses who take hours impressing and seducing each other don’t need to schedule sex.

That's a good point. They are scheduling dates and anticipating sex. But the same thing can work here - I like the ought of spending time making an effort to BE with that person and to be at your most attractive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a married mid 30s women with a toddler. While I used to have a high drive in my 20s, it really started going down even in few years prior to having my child, and since then it's been non existent. I'm about 20 pounds over weight and I figure that probably doesn't help. My spouse an I are intimate maybe once every 3-4 months. It's ok but nothing mind blowing. Outside the lack of sex, I'm generally happy with my marriage, though there are a few things about my spouse that have been increasingly annoying to me. I think that part is more recent; the low drive started before the annoyances. I honestly could just go without but I feel like it would strengthen our relationship, which I think is important. What should I do to get back into it??

Sounds like your issue isn't low drive, it's just that you're having bad sex. Nobody can get excited for that. I thought I lost my drive in my mid-30s, until I found a partner who actually prioritized my pleasure and was amazing in bed.

What would make it better? Is your H open to doing what you'd like?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a married mid 30s women with a toddler. While I used to have a high drive in my 20s, it really started going down even in few years prior to having my child, and since then it's been non existent. I'm about 20 pounds over weight and I figure that probably doesn't help. My spouse an I are intimate maybe once every 3-4 months. It's ok but nothing mind blowing. Outside the lack of sex, I'm generally happy with my marriage, though there are a few things about my spouse that have been increasingly annoying to me. I think that part is more recent; the low drive started before the annoyances. I honestly could just go without but I feel like it would strengthen our relationship, which I think is important. What should I do to get back into it??

Sounds like your issue isn't low drive, it's just that you're having bad sex. Nobody can get excited for that. I thought I lost my drive in my mid-30s, until I found a partner who actually prioritized my pleasure and was amazing in bed.

What would make it better? Is your H open to doing what you'd like?

Novelty is hot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you love your spouse and want to keep him, schedule it once a week.

Once every 3-4 months is close to no sex. It's not sustainable.

I'm not sure exactly what you're suggesting here, but making yourself have sex when you aren't actually enjoying sex is a good way to make your sex drive tank even further. That's the opposite of what OP needs to do.

Not the PP to whom you're responding but you're wrong.

Do a little research. Scheduling sex is a technique many, many sex therapists, sex advice columnists and people on DCUM recommend. When one has young kids it is extremely difficult to find times to have sex.

And for some couples, if they have the right mindset, scheduling can actually become part of the fun, creating anticipation that can develop into arousal as the "date" gets closer.

Some say that scheduling times (and places) to have sex "kills the spontaneity" but it does not have to unless you let it. How we think about sex really does matter. Turning from "It feels like pressure, it's not spontaneous" to "I'm already thinking of things I'd like to do...." can happen. But both partners have to make an effort. To OP-- talk about scheduling sex not as a chore or obligation but as a couples time, and mention to your DH things you want to try (and want him to try). Experiment with toys or new lingerie or whatever works. Get your minds into the game, in advance.

You all know that sex while you were dating was scheduled as well, right? You knew you were having a date, so you planned on having sex. You bought condoms. You shaved your legs. You made sure your underwear was the good/clean/not the ripped stuff. What makes spontaneous sex so great, anyway? I like the PP's thoughts above about ANTICIPATION. That is what makes sex good. Not the fact that you can do it whenever. It is that you WANT to do it, you are anticipating how great it is going to be.

I think the difference is the fact that you didn’t just schedule sex— you scheduled dates. You were going to be the center of one another’s attention. You were both going to make an effort to be your most attractive. You were both going to make an effort that the other person was enjoying themselves. You kicked out the roommates. You were going to flirt and make eye contact and touch unnecessarily. And THEN in a conducive atmosphere of anticipation and privacy you had sex. People talking about not liking scheduled sex mean they don’t like that what’s scheduled is intercourse like it’s another chore, not scheduling the hours for their spouse to impress and seduce them that took place during dating.

Spouses who take hours impressing and seducing each other don’t need to schedule sex.

Your dates were a little different than mine. For my spouse & I, the most common date was for us to go to a bar, eat wings, and played trivia. Then we went home and had sex. If you want to call that "impressive and seductive," then I guess I'm your man!

I’m the PP you’re responding to— husband and I still do this date sometimes. It means we have a babysitter, and we are dressed to go out (he WFH) and we both get to show off our absurd amounts of absolutely pointless knowledge. And neither of us cooks for cleans up. So yes it’s a great date compared to “scheduled sex” which means, for most women, maintaining all of their current responsibilities for childcare and household tasks but also being expected to have sex which makes it seem like another chore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you love your spouse and want to keep him, schedule it once a week.

Once every 3-4 months is close to no sex. It's not sustainable.

I'm not sure exactly what you're suggesting here, but making yourself have sex when you aren't actually enjoying sex is a good way to make your sex drive tank even further. That's the opposite of what OP needs to do.

Not the PP to whom you're responding but you're wrong.

Do a little research. Scheduling sex is a technique many, many sex therapists, sex advice columnists and people on DCUM recommend. When one has young kids it is extremely difficult to find times to have sex.

And for some couples, if they have the right mindset, scheduling can actually become part of the fun, creating anticipation that can develop into arousal as the "date" gets closer.

Some say that scheduling times (and places) to have sex "kills the spontaneity" but it does not have to unless you let it. How we think about sex really does matter. Turning from "It feels like pressure, it's not spontaneous" to "I'm already thinking of things I'd like to do...." can happen. But both partners have to make an effort. To OP-- talk about scheduling sex not as a chore or obligation but as a couples time, and mention to your DH things you want to try (and want him to try). Experiment with toys or new lingerie or whatever works. Get your minds into the game, in advance.

You all know that sex while you were dating was scheduled as well, right? You knew you were having a date, so you planned on having sex. You bought condoms. You shaved your legs. You made sure your underwear was the good/clean/not the ripped stuff. What makes spontaneous sex so great, anyway? I like the PP's thoughts above about ANTICIPATION. That is what makes sex good. Not the fact that you can do it whenever. It is that you WANT to do it, you are anticipating how great it is going to be.

I think the difference is the fact that you didn’t just schedule sex— you scheduled dates. You were going to be the center of one another’s attention. You were both going to make an effort to be your most attractive. You were both going to make an effort that the other person was enjoying themselves. You kicked out the roommates. You were going to flirt and make eye contact and touch unnecessarily. And THEN in a conducive atmosphere of anticipation and privacy you had sex. People talking about not liking scheduled sex mean they don’t like that what’s scheduled is intercourse like it’s another chore, not scheduling the hours for their spouse to impress and seduce them that took place during dating.

Spouses who take hours impressing and seducing each other don’t need to schedule sex.

That's a good point. They are scheduling dates and anticipating sex. But the same thing can work here - I like the ought of spending time making an effort to BE with that person and to be at your most attractive.

The bolded, I think, is the key . +100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you love your spouse and want to keep him, schedule it once a week.

Once every 3-4 months is close to no sex. It's not sustainable.

I'm not sure exactly what you're suggesting here, but making yourself have sex when you aren't actually enjoying sex is a good way to make your sex drive tank even further. That's the opposite of what OP needs to do.

Not the PP to whom you're responding but you're wrong.

Do a little research. Scheduling sex is a technique many, many sex therapists, sex advice columnists and people on DCUM recommend. When one has young kids it is extremely difficult to find times to have sex.

And for some couples, if they have the right mindset, scheduling can actually become part of the fun, creating anticipation that can develop into arousal as the "date" gets closer.

Some say that scheduling times (and places) to have sex "kills the spontaneity" but it does not have to unless you let it. How we think about sex really does matter. Turning from "It feels like pressure, it's not spontaneous" to "I'm already thinking of things I'd like to do...." can happen. But both partners have to make an effort. To OP-- talk about scheduling sex not as a chore or obligation but as a couples time, and mention to your DH things you want to try (and want him to try). Experiment with toys or new lingerie or whatever works. Get your minds into the game, in advance.

You are correct about all this, and I am also correct that having unwanted sex kills desire (which you can do some research on too). If you have a responsive desire, that is desire and that means you want to have sex.

I wrote that comment because just saying "if you care about your marriage and want to keep your husband, schedule sex once a week" is the type of thing said by people who think that women should just have sex regardless of what they actually want. Like I said, I wasn't sure what PP was suggesting, but it's very important to note that having sex when you aren't enjoying it is a bad idea.

You might not mean to be doing so, but your post ends up equating scheduling sex with having sex one doesn't want.

No one's saying "women should just have sex regardless of what they actually want." When I talk about scheduling sex, I'm talking about scheduling sex because they both want it, but need to work on finding a way to do it. It's not a chore. I said exactly that. But if they don't make a specific effort to actually have sex...well, what do you suggest? Waiting until everyone's in exactly the perfect mood simultaneously is waiting for a unicorn, when there are long work days and little kids.

Not people explicitly on this thread, but people say this ALL the time. A ton of women have sex when they find it repulsive because they think that's the way to keep their sex lives intact. I know that you aren't suggesting that. I did not say not to schedule sex and said "I'm not sure what you're implying..." but I can see how I could have been more clear.

So, you are just generalizing. Great. Got it.

That was useless.

Saying that people shouldn’t have sex that they don’t want even though some people think they should is a generalization? I really don’t understand your hostility to these comments.

Literally nobody:

PP: BUT WOMEN SHOULDN’T BE FORCED TO HAVE SEX!

I agree. But men should't be forced to fidelity with a wife having zero sex drive and only says Yes 3 times per year (re-read the OP).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you love your spouse and want to keep him, schedule it once a week.

Once every 3-4 months is close to no sex. It's not sustainable.

Rest assured her husband is already going elsewhere for his unmet needs. OP: grant him an official hall pass so both of you can just stop pretending. If you ever do find your libido, then monogamy becomes a valid option once again.

If he’s already a cheater and a liar who endangers his family and doesn’t prioritize his child, why would she want monogamy with him? Divorce would be a better option.

Assuming he’s a man of integrity— and nothing in her OP suggests otherwise— they can work together to have a mutually satisfying sex life, if it’s important to both of them. If he’s the kind of gross person you suggest he is, all the sex in the world won’t make a good marriage with him.

But she does not want sex, therefore monogamy is not really an option for her. Why would she divorce over something so unimportant, that she does not even want, like sex? Obviously she is just fine staying married without sex.

If her husband is cheating, my advice is that she divorce her husband over being a liar, who doesn’t prioritize his young child and endangers his spouse. None of those behaviors have anything to do with sex or it’s relative importance, only a reflection on the kind of man who behaves that way.

He deserves a hero medal for prioritizing his marriage and young child by NOT getting divorced, and instead going elsewhere to meet his normal healthy sexual needs. Again WHY divorce over something unimportant like sex? Your argument makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you love your spouse and want to keep him, schedule it once a week.

Once every 3-4 months is close to no sex. It's not sustainable.

Rest assured her husband is already going elsewhere for his unmet needs. OP: grant him an official hall pass so both of you can just stop pretending. If you ever do find your libido, then monogamy becomes a valid option once again.

If he’s already a cheater and a liar who endangers his family and doesn’t prioritize his child, why would she want monogamy with him? Divorce would be a better option.

Assuming he’s a man of integrity— and nothing in her OP suggests otherwise— they can work together to have a mutually satisfying sex life, if it’s important to both of them. If he’s the kind of gross person you suggest he is, all the sex in the world won’t make a good marriage with him.

But she does not want sex, therefore monogamy is not really an option for her. Why would she divorce over something so unimportant, that she does not even want, like sex? Obviously she is just fine staying married without sex.

If her husband is cheating, my advice is that she divorce her husband over being a liar, who doesn’t prioritize his young child and endangers his spouse. None of those behaviors have anything to do with sex or it’s relative importance, only a reflection on the kind of man who behaves that way.

He deserves a hero medal for prioritizing his marriage and young child by NOT getting divorced, and instead going elsewhere to meet his normal healthy sexual needs. Again WHY divorce over something unimportant like sex? Your argument makes no sense.

This is a disingenuous argument, and I assume you know it. Fidelity is important even if sex is no longer appealing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you love your spouse and want to keep him, schedule it once a week.

Once every 3-4 months is close to no sex. It's not sustainable.

Rest assured her husband is already going elsewhere for his unmet needs. OP: grant him an official hall pass so both of you can just stop pretending. If you ever do find your libido, then monogamy becomes a valid option once again.

If he’s already a cheater and a liar who endangers his family and doesn’t prioritize his child, why would she want monogamy with him? Divorce would be a better option.

Assuming he’s a man of integrity— and nothing in her OP suggests otherwise— they can work together to have a mutually satisfying sex life, if it’s important to both of them. If he’s the kind of gross person you suggest he is, all the sex in the world won’t make a good marriage with him.

But she does not want sex, therefore monogamy is not really an option for her. Why would she divorce over something so unimportant, that she does not even want, like sex? Obviously she is just fine staying married without sex.

If her husband is cheating, my advice is that she divorce her husband over being a liar, who doesn’t prioritize his young child and endangers his spouse. None of those behaviors have anything to do with sex or it’s relative importance, only a reflection on the kind of man who behaves that way.

He deserves a hero medal for prioritizing his marriage and young child by NOT getting divorced, and instead going elsewhere to meet his normal healthy sexual needs. Again WHY divorce over something unimportant like sex? Your argument makes no sense.

Ok, PP. Keep telling yourself that you deserve a "hero medal" for cheating on your wife

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you love your spouse and want to keep him, schedule it once a week.

Once every 3-4 months is close to no sex. It's not sustainable.

Rest assured her husband is already going elsewhere for his unmet needs. OP: grant him an official hall pass so both of you can just stop pretending. If you ever do find your libido, then monogamy becomes a valid option once again.

If he’s already a cheater and a liar who endangers his family and doesn’t prioritize his child, why would she want monogamy with him? Divorce would be a better option.

Assuming he’s a man of integrity— and nothing in her OP suggests otherwise— they can work together to have a mutually satisfying sex life, if it’s important to both of them. If he’s the kind of gross person you suggest he is, all the sex in the world won’t make a good marriage with him.

But she does not want sex, therefore monogamy is not really an option for her. Why would she divorce over something so unimportant, that she does not even want, like sex? Obviously she is just fine staying married without sex.

If her husband is cheating, my advice is that she divorce her husband over being a liar, who doesn’t prioritize his young child and endangers his spouse. None of those behaviors have anything to do with sex or it’s relative importance, only a reflection on the kind of man who behaves that way.

He deserves a hero medal for prioritizing his marriage and young child by NOT getting divorced, and instead going elsewhere to meet his normal healthy sexual needs. Again WHY divorce over something unimportant like sex? Your argument makes no sense.

Ok, PP. Keep telling yourself that you deserve a "hero medal" for cheating on your wife

NP. Keep telling yourself it makes you more moral to divorce and rip your family apart because you want to have sex. Who is the "better" person: the one who marries and divorces 3 times, or the one who stays married for 40 years and has one or two transgressions but remains in their family? What life do you want? It's not so black and white.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you love your spouse and want to keep him, schedule it once a week.

Once every 3-4 months is close to no sex. It's not sustainable.

Rest assured her husband is already going elsewhere for his unmet needs. OP: grant him an official hall pass so both of you can just stop pretending. If you ever do find your libido, then monogamy becomes a valid option once again.

If he’s already a cheater and a liar who endangers his family and doesn’t prioritize his child, why would she want monogamy with him? Divorce would be a better option.

Assuming he’s a man of integrity— and nothing in her OP suggests otherwise— they can work together to have a mutually satisfying sex life, if it’s important to both of them. If he’s the kind of gross person you suggest he is, all the sex in the world won’t make a good marriage with him.

But she does not want sex, therefore monogamy is not really an option for her. Why would she divorce over something so unimportant, that she does not even want, like sex? Obviously she is just fine staying married without sex.

If her husband is cheating, my advice is that she divorce her husband over being a liar, who doesn’t prioritize his young child and endangers his spouse. None of those behaviors have anything to do with sex or it’s relative importance, only a reflection on the kind of man who behaves that way.

He deserves a hero medal for prioritizing his marriage and young child by NOT getting divorced, and instead going elsewhere to meet his normal healthy sexual needs. Again WHY divorce over something unimportant like sex? Your argument makes no sense.

Ok, PP. Keep telling yourself that you deserve a "hero medal" for cheating on your wife

NP. Keep telling yourself it makes you more moral to divorce and rip your family apart because you want to have sex. Who is the "better" person: the one who marries and divorces 3 times, or the one who stays married for 40 years and has one or two transgressions but remains in their family? What life do you want? It's not so black and white.

A cheating spouse is not remaining in their family. Cheaters check out mentally and emotionally