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

[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.

How about this: if sex is that important to you, don't get married. Seriously. Since time immemorial, sex lives have cooled off in the marriage context. If that's a dealbreaker for you, don't get married

[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.

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.

How about this: if sex is that important to you, don't get married. Seriously. Since time immemorial, sex lives have cooled off in the marriage context. If that's a dealbreaker for you, don't get married

DP.

If sex is not important, why are you bothered that your spouse having sex with someone else?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

How about this: if sex is that important to you, don't get married. Seriously. Since time immemorial, sex lives have cooled off in the marriage context. If that's a dealbreaker for you, don't get married

DP.

If sex is not important, why are you bothered that your spouse having sex with someone else?

Because the spouse still expects sex with their own spouse, and therefore exposes them to diseases. Because sex with another person leads to unplanned pregnancy, which isn’t fair on the illegitimate child or the original family. Someone might not find sex “important” but not want to live with herpes their whole life, or pay to raise their spouses illegitimate child.

[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.

LOL liars who don’t prioritize their children and endanger their wives aren’t heroes. Divorce isn’t about sex, it’s about lying, endangering the spouse, and not prioritizing their children. Regardless of what you tell yourself, that’s what a cheater is doing. A hero doesn’t need to lie about their behavior.

[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.

Nothing “moral” about a male slut who is always looking for a new hole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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).

Pretty clear why the women in your life don’t want to fvk you.

[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.

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.

How about this: if sex is that important to you, don't get married. Seriously. Since time immemorial, sex lives have cooled off in the marriage context. If that's a dealbreaker for you, don't get married

[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.

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.

How about this: if sex is that important to you, don't get married. Seriously. Since time immemorial, sex lives have cooled off in the marriage context. If that's a dealbreaker for you, don't get married

I see the Coven of Bitter Divorcées has shown up.

[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.

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.

How about this: if sex is that important to you, don't get married. Seriously. Since time immemorial, sex lives have cooled off in the marriage context. If that's a dealbreaker for you, don't get married

+1

No one wants to have sex with an immature jerk with unrealistic expectations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

How about this: if sex is that important to you, don't get married. Seriously. Since time immemorial, sex lives have cooled off in the marriage context. If that's a dealbreaker for you, don't get married

DP.

If sex is not important, why are you bothered that your spouse having sex with someone else?

No one said "sex is not important," and regardless, fidelity and honestly are also important.

But if sex is SO important to you that you would cheat/lie/divorce if you aren't getting enough of it, then don't get married.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

How about this: if sex is that important to you, don't get married. Seriously. Since time immemorial, sex lives have cooled off in the marriage context. If that's a dealbreaker for you, don't get married

DP.

If sex is not important, why are you bothered that your spouse having sex with someone else?

Because the spouse still expects sex with their own spouse, and therefore exposes them to diseases. Because sex with another person leads to unplanned pregnancy, which isn’t fair on the illegitimate child or the original family. Someone might not find sex “important” but not want to live with herpes their whole life, or pay to raise their spouses illegitimate child.

Ah yes, the “all sex leads to gruesome disease and pregnancy” religious school health teacher.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

How about this: if sex is that important to you, don't get married. Seriously. Since time immemorial, sex lives have cooled off in the marriage context. If that's a dealbreaker for you, don't get married

DP.

If sex is not important, why are you bothered that your spouse having sex with someone else?

No one said "sex is not important," and regardless, fidelity and honestly are also important.

But if sex is SO important to you that you would cheat/lie/divorce if you aren't getting enough of it, then don't get married.

DP If you marry and not having sex because your partner will not have sex it is the same as being cheated on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

How about this: if sex is that important to you, don't get married. Seriously. Since time immemorial, sex lives have cooled off in the marriage context. If that's a dealbreaker for you, don't get married

Or have an affair, which is really the solution from time immemorial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

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.

How about this: if sex is that important to you, don't get married. Seriously. Since time immemorial, sex lives have cooled off in the marriage context. If that's a dealbreaker for you, don't get married

DP.

If sex is not important, why are you bothered that your spouse having sex with someone else?

Because the spouse still expects sex with their own spouse, and therefore exposes them to diseases. Because sex with another person leads to unplanned pregnancy, which isn’t fair on the illegitimate child or the original family. Someone might not find sex “important” but not want to live with herpes their whole life, or pay to raise their spouses illegitimate child.

Ah yes, the “all sex leads to gruesome disease and pregnancy” religious school health teacher.

+1. The honesty and fidelity arguments resonate a lot more with me than the disease and pregnancy ones.

But, of course, this is doing f**k all to help OP or address her question.

[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.

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

Um, No. When sex is off the table, fidelity goes right with it.