Anonymous wrote:Divorced is way better than being in a marriage that makes me feel unloved and unwanted. What kind of existence is that?

The issue is the total betrayal felt when a formerly high drive partner decides for all involved that sex is no longer important.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You don't deserve to have your "emotional needs" respected because you don't have respect for your partner. Being required to have sex when you don't want to because the other partner is having an emotional meltdown about it and is throwing a temper tantrum isn't respectful of your low drive partner's needs.

If you can't come to compromise, then you are better off divorced and so is your partner.

As for me, I've been married 23 years in a marriage that ended up with very mismatched sex drives after the kids got here. We compromised and found a way to keep it together, with everyone putting in an effort to make it work.

First of all, your perpetually dismissive characterization of a spouse trying to get their sexual needs met as being childish (e.g. "whiny," "temper tantrum") reflects a huge blind spot. Because your sex drive disappeared, you seem to regard the needs of others in that respect as something trivial and foolish rather than a substantial and intrinsic part of the human experience - like a blind person sneering at art as so much doodling by people who really ought to be doing something more productive.

Secondly, your statement that your drives became mismatched after the children suggests that the lowering of your drive was the change in the sexual status quo. I don't know you and I'm obviously speculating, but it looks like your attitude about the sex drives of others may be sour grapes and/or an attempt to minimize your appreciation of how much pain the change in the status quo might be inflicting on your husband.

Compromising isn't a bad thing -- it might be the only alternative to divorce. Nobody can be blamed for their base line sex drive, only the effort they put into matching their drive to their spouses. But, if you regard the need for sex as childish, how motivated can you be to put forth that effort?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Spouses that are unwilling to put out for their partners don't deserve fidelity. Be honest about it, tell them that as far as you are concerned the marriage is open, then go out there and find someone like yourself stuck in a sexless marriage. Your marriage vows are not a vow of chastity.

This is what I did (woman here). H would never admit it because it's not manly but I think he was and is a tiny bit relieved. I don't take advantage of the open marriage very often but it really reduces the tension at home. Some men over 50 simply don't desire regular sex.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
You don't deserve to have your "emotional needs" respected because you don't have respect for your partner. Being required to have sex when you don't want to because the other partner is having an emotional meltdown about it and is throwing a temper tantrum isn't respectful of your low drive partner's needs.

If you can't come to compromise, then you are better off divorced and so is your partner.

As for me, I've been married 23 years in a marriage that ended up with very mismatched sex drives after the kids got here. We compromised and found a way to keep it together, with everyone putting in an effort to make it work.

First of all, your perpetually dismissive characterization of a spouse trying to get their sexual needs met as being childish (e.g. "whiny," "temper tantrum") reflects a huge blind spot. Because your sex drive disappeared, you seem to regard the needs of others in that respect as something trivial and foolish rather than a substantial and intrinsic part of the human experience - like a blind person sneering at art as so much doodling by people who really ought to be doing something more productive.

Secondly, your statement that your drives became mismatched after the children suggests that the lowering of your drive was the change in the sexual status quo. I don't know you and I'm obviously speculating, but it looks like your attitude about the sex drives of others may be sour grapes and/or an attempt to minimize your appreciation of how much pain the change in the status quo might be inflicting on your husband.

Compromising isn't a bad thing -- it might be the only alternative to divorce. Nobody can be blamed for their base line sex drive, only the effort they put into matching their drive to their spouses. But, if you regard the need for sex as childish, how motivated can you be to put forth that effort?

One of the best posts ever deposited in DCUM, IMO, of course. It is a lot easier to be dismissive of those things not important to us, and minimize the importance to the spouse. There are hundreds of these conflicts every day, but most of them are on a small scale. Sex, intimacy, and affection is a huge deal, though. Hard to accept that if you're the spouse being told your needs are childish and unimportant.

Anonymous wrote:Spouses that are unwilling to put out for their partners don't deserve fidelity. Be honest about it, tell them that as far as you are concerned the marriage is open, then go out there and find someone like yourself stuck in a sexless marriage. Your marriage vows are not a vow of chastity.

Anonymous wrote:Spouses that are unwilling to put out for their partners don't deserve fidelity. Be honest about it, tell them that as far as you are concerned the marriage is open, then go out there and find someone like yourself stuck in a sexless marriage. Your marriage vows are not a vow of chastity.

Anonymous wrote:I sympathize with the high drive folks, but you should never issue an ultimatum like that.

The difficult thing about this is that the more you nag about wanting more sex, the more the other person is going to want to push back.

The trick is to get them to a point where they can appreciate your frustration and hurt, and want to have sex, but without them feeling coerced into it. As soon as people feel pressured and coerced, they are going to push back.

I think the best strategy would be to express your feelings in terms of "this is how I feel" instead of "this is what you need to do."

Anonymous wrote:Probably not that dissimilar from the "how do I get my husband to do x, y, z, without being a nag" threads - which usually include some element of the idea that it's not enough merely that he do the things when asked but also that he actually think to do these things on his own. Except of course that sex is usually leaps and bounds more important to a marriage than the tasks that populate those threads.

Anonymous wrote:I sympathize with the high drive folks, but you should never issue an ultimatum like that.

The difficult thing about this is that the more you nag about wanting more sex, the more the other person is going to want to push back.

The trick is to get them to a point where they can appreciate your frustration and hurt, and want to have sex, but without them feeling coerced into it. As soon as people feel pressured and coerced, they are going to push back.

I think the best strategy would be to express your feelings in terms of "this is how I feel" instead of "this is what you need to do."

liamw wrote:I don't think it was on this thread, but look around some women say some pretty jacked up stuff on here.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do so many people think it is so easy to have sex when you have no desire to?

The question is why doesn't she have more desire, and why does he suddenly have more. Aside from the few people saying just do it more, the issue, as a PP addressed, is why has this situation arisen. As they also indicated, there's no way to know what happened to change the dynamic, so the thread turns into a man v woman thing; he a jerk, she's frigid. The solution to the conflict clearly lay in it's genesis, and until OP clarifies that, she's just looking for moral support.

I guarantee he doesn't suddenly want it more. Maybe he's hit a realization he's getting older. Maybe he doesn't want ED by the time his wife is ready to have more sex. Nobody is guaranteed to be healthy enough for sex their entire lives and it's a shame to waste the healthy years with a sexual dud. Honestly.

This is basically the dynamic that led to me rocking the boat in our increasingly sexless marriage. I didn't threaten infidelity or anything ham-fisted like that. But, when the sex dropped off steeply as my wife was pregnant and then with little kids, I didn't say anything because I figured that would be selfish -- pregnancy is hard, little kids are hard. But when our youngest was 6 and in school and the sex didn't get any more frequent, I told my wife I was unhappy about that. In the short term, I think that conversation made our sex life even worse because now she felt like she was being pressured into sex and that made her feel even less sexy. But, longer term, it's helped somewhat - I got a vasectomy, she got her hormonal IUD out. Intellectually, she thinks we ought to be having sex at least once a week. As a practical matter, that's the high end with most months being 2-3 times. And she seems to enjoy those times more than she was when it was a once a month event -- her enjoyment might come from me not being as much of a passive aggressive, grumpy piece of shit because I was only getting laid once a month and felt like I was an asshole for bringing it up.

My renewed sense of urgency had to do with aging - along with the fact that I'd let *plenty* of time go by due to respect for the difficulties of pregnancy and toddlers. Probably I will hit an age where sex becomes physically much more difficult. I want to get some good sex in before that happens. Fortunately for us, I'm not crazy high drive either -- I think 2x per week would be ideal for me. If we can hit her stated 1/week goal - with good, non-quickie sessions twice a month - I'll be pretty content.

Obviously I can't speak to OP's husband's state of mind. I think he crossed a line with the "I'll cheat" threat. But that ought to be at least a nagging, if unstated, concern of every spouse who isn't inclined to make efforts to accommodate their husband or wife's unmet, higher sex drive.