Trialbyfire Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 I have taken a more assertive role. Through my research I have found a new medicine for her which restored some of her interest in sex. She had a lot of muscle aches, depression, and more. A new thyroid medicine a year ago changed most of that. She now does more than she used to do. And a year ago I had "the talk" with her. I told her exactly my feelings regarding our lack of sex. For four and a half months, things changed completely. We did have sex at least once a week. Then almost a year ago, it changed back to now maybe twice a month. What changed? I don't know. She says I haven't. She lost interest in sex. And boy, has that hurt. But this has actually given me hope since one solution did bring results...others may, too. So, Woman, this man has gambled and "nutted" up. And yes, she knew at that time I was serious. The 2 am talk brought a new woman to my house the next door. She said be patient with her..she was going to change. And she did. But as many ultimatums do, it brought temporary change. Now I am looking for the change that will bring more permanent. We have a host of issues that can be the basis for the low libido...so there are a number of stones to turn over. Should I do another "nut up and gamble" talk? (That is a rhetorical question...no need to answer). That is what I ask myself, but the fact remains that this will bring another ultimatum type talk and temporary change. Have I lost my self-worth? Not at all. I have lost weight this year...twenty pounds. I have done many things that have satisfied me and fulfilled. I can say that overall I am happier now than I was a year ago...even when I was having more sex. So, why do I talk about self-esteem? Because a man's self-esteem AS IT RELATES TO WOMEN is effected. That is all. And only she can fulfill that...because I gave her that "power" when I said "I do" so many short years ago. All I can say is that this is your choice. You've taken on the responsibility of her behaviours and she's letting you control her. When she feels it's too much, she withdraws again. What's her personality type on a normal basis? Is she proactive or passive-aggressive? I think I can guess.
CynicalP Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 Wifes, surrender to your husband . I don't want my wife to surrender to me, just want to have a relationship where each partner is sensitive to the others needs and attempts their best to satisify those needs when reasonably possible.
Mr. Lucky Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 Why aren't you still in your original marriage? My wife lost interest in sex after our son was born. After 3 years of trying to fix (or at least address) the issue, I withdrew emotionally from our relationship. She used that as justification to (ironically) have an A with a co-worker. I then left the marriage... Mr, Lucky
Author ntocitilop Posted July 7, 2007 Author Posted July 7, 2007 I have been silent reading the string for quite awhile. It appears from my perception that there has been some misuderstanding in part. I have a link that has at time been considered controversial but I had the opportunity to speak face to face with the professor who wrote this article for an Australian Men's organization. Few men really understand this and even fewer woman do. Here is the link: http://www.mensconfraternity.org.au/?page=p79 I hope this can clear up some confusion. I am not trying to anger anyone or piss anyone off, just honestly shed some light on the situation.
Storyrider Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 Interesting article. Women can have the same type of effect when they are lactating. The sight of a baby or the sound of a baby crying can make milk run out of their breasts.
Trialbyfire Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 I found the article biased. It's simplified the process, glossed over the portion associated to brain activity and doesn't discuss the affect of testosterone levels associated to this process.
Author ntocitilop Posted July 7, 2007 Author Posted July 7, 2007 I will put it simply, it is common knowledge that from the man's side of the sexual ledger, a man must ejaculate. Now, that is not just a physical act but there is a load of hormonal, emotional, and psychological mechanisms that are connected to that. I can say this and any other men on here who wish to confirm or deny anything I say, please jump in. Anyway, I can tell you that first, if you cannot have that very physical relase of seman through ejaculation, it can (at least with me) be physically discomforting and in some cases, mildly painful. Yes, there is what many of us guys call "the Rosey Palm sister"...(the hand), but that is not very fulfilling and very empty. There is a drive to relase that fluid that is wired when a man sees a woman, hears her voice, even thinks about her. Even seeing a female form can set those parts of the brain off. When a man is aroused, the seman production kicks into overdrive and it is a wonder more guys do not cheat if denied over a long period of time. NOW, understand...I am not saying it is right or trying to gloss over bad behavior, it is just a fact that every man has to face.
Storyrider Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 I found the article biased. It's simplified the process, glossed over the portion associated to brain activity and doesn't discuss the affect of testosterone levels associated to this process. I agree that the term "need" is somewhat biased. A strong biological urge and a biological need are not synonymous. Also, I don't see the point of quoting the radical feminists at the top. The juxtaposition of those extreme (and mostly outdated) quotes with the seemingly scientific information below seems calculated to inflame rather than inform.
Trialbyfire Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 I agree that the term "need" is somewhat biased. A strong biological urge and a biological need are not synonymous. Also, I don't see the point of quoting the radical feminists at the top. The juxtaposition of those extreme (and mostly outdated) quotes with the seemingly scientific information below seems calculated to inflame rather than inform. Agreed. Fundamentalism is always over the top. It's like quoting a feminist site and saying OMG, look at all the scientific facts...
Storyrider Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 Agreed. Fundamentalism is always over the top. It's like quoting a feminist site and saying OMG, look at all the scientific facts... Let me add that I already believed mens' emotional needs are more strongly tied to sex than are womens' emotional needs. I think this article offers a helpful description of the biological clockwork behind that.
Trialbyfire Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 Let me add that I already believed mens' emotional needs are more strongly tied to sex than are womens' emotional needs. I think this article offers a helpful description of the biological clockwork behind that. No doubt sex is a driving force for men. What it negates is that it's also a driving force for women, although many women require the element of emotional connection first... The genders validate in different ways. As for this article, it's spin-driven, thus biased.
Author ntocitilop Posted July 7, 2007 Author Posted July 7, 2007 No matter what the article says, and I do realize it is controversial, and I was not trying to anger anyone...really, but the fact that a man has that physical need to ejaculate, it adds a sense of urgency to his sex drive. You can find this with any medical text on male physiology from a medical background that a man's sex drive is 10 times more on average than that of a woman. I think, at least from my own personal prospective, it is that way due to that physical mandate. combine that with the testosterone, you have a live wire there.....
Nemo Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 I agree that the term "need" is somewhat biased. A strong biological urge and a biological need are not synonymous. Also, I don't see the point of quoting the radical feminists at the top. The juxtaposition of those extreme (and mostly outdated) quotes with the seemingly scientific information below seems calculated to inflame rather than inform. Brilliant summation. Juxtapose me, baby.
Herzen Posted July 7, 2007 Posted July 7, 2007 This Thread's subtext is that sex differences matter and gender differences matter even more. We're men, not pale imitations of women. A lopsided libido marriage is bad for the frustrated spouse (FS) regardless of gender. But it's all but intolerable to most men. If that makes us crass, insensitive and selfishly unacceptable to the Oprah's, Dr. Phil's and Lifetime Channel viewers, tough sh#t. We're men, and we won't sacrifice our sexuality in the name of some politically correct abstractions or tyrannical Hallmark card sentiments like "love" and "fidelity." Simply put, if the wife/gf doesn't want to fu#k us, they have no claims on us in the relationship. If they don't like that, they can leave or get the divorce. That's only fair because it was their sexual boycott that created the mess in the first place. Get on your back, or get out.
Author ntocitilop Posted July 7, 2007 Author Posted July 7, 2007 I do think the article I posted earlier could have left the comments out about and by the feminists. I do think it could have just stated the facts and it would have been fine. But the fact of the situation we men have with our sex drive cannot be swept under the rug nor ignored. It is real and I believe that our society and religion has tried to make men and women something we are not. It has messed up relationships and marriage. For those of you who have read my story that I posted earlier on another thread, my wife's illness had left us virtually sexless. I am not angry one bit at her, it was not her fault. After dealing with the situation for 13 years, I had to see a therapist and I did some research. I showed her the research. She really felt badly then and I was determined to do something different. It was she who decided that if it was necessary that I could find a female friend outside the marriage as long as I would stay and take care her as the condition got worse and that I would not tell her or our daughter what was going on. I love my wife ever more because she loved me so much to allow me to find another woman. There are people in a similar situation as me and often they hook up and meet eachothers needs sexually yet are even more committed to taking care of the ill or disabled spouse. Some of you folks who have a religious compunction may find this repulsive but it is not perfect but a reasonable alternative. FYI. Also, I do think a man or woman who has been deprived by constant refusal is in effect doing the same thing but the circumstances are different from the relationship standpoint. In a nutshell, sex is as much a biological mandate as it is an emotional one and there is a MANDATE that many people don't want to acknowledge.
Ladyjane14 Posted July 8, 2007 Posted July 8, 2007 In a nutshell, sex is as much a biological mandate as it is an emotional one... As much? I ask because you seem to be leaning toward the "biological" side of the issue. Now, if you want to tell me that men just use women as "repositories for their ejaculates"... I'm certainly open to revising my former opinion about male emotional needs. Hell, maybe I'll start a grass roots movement or something and get the word out to all my female compatriots. Are we just a bunch of patsies then? Are we misinformed and buying into a pretty sales job designed to get into our delicates? Because if that's NOT the case, how can you ignore the emotional aspects of your proposed "solution"??? Unless you're planning on utilizing hookers to meet your "repository" needs ... then it might be wise for you to have a good, long read in the OM/OW forum. YOU aren't the only one at risk in emotional terms. While I don't agree with what alot of those ladies are doing, their pain is palpable at times. A "friend"... oh hell, let's just use the proper vocabulary why don't we... a "f*ck-buddy" puts her emotions on the line. Ofttimes, she doesn't mean to, but still... that's the way it ends up. Further, a guy like you who hasn't had his sexual/emotional needs met in any kind of fulfilling way, is likely to get his fuses blown (in emotional terms) if you end up in a carnal relationship with someone who has the potential to meet your intellectual needs as well. You're on a path leading to marital destruction. Now, I have a friend who was diagnosed a few years ago with fibromyalgia. It's painful and somewhat debilitating, I recognize that. As you know, in essence, "fibromyalgia" means muscle pain... usually of unspecified origin. It turned out later, after additional symptoms appeared, that she had some orthopedic problems which could be surgically corrected. During recovery, while she was on prescription pain meds rather than the OTC medication she was wont to use, and even after she had finished her prescription... she noticed she wasn't experiencing the pain she'd had before. Her myalgia had all but disappeared. She had STOPPED taking ibuprofen. She didn't make the connection until weeks later when she popped a couple to treat a garden-variety headache and her symptoms reappeared. That's one story. It more than likely doesn't have anything to do with your wife's situation. But are you absolutely, positively sure that there's no medical solution to your wife's illness? You're about to break your vows, albeit with her permission... and there's no coming back from that. "In sickness and in health" will be yours to face 'the man in the mirror' with. Is that REALLY who you want to be? Men don't "NEED" women in order to ejaculate. Any 16-year old boy can tell you that.
Sevenmack Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 One has to wonder whether those who are in sexless marriages realized what they were getting into in the first place? When you meet a person and develop a relationship with them, you get to know a lot about how those people deal with sex. And you know, from dealing with other relationships, that those habits aren't only not going to change, they will be magnified over time. That's just how it works. If you have a girlfriend who's reluctant to dress sexy for you -- wear a thong underneath a dress and the like -- you know that she'll dress even worse for you as time goes on. If she's a once-a-week kind of gal, then she will eventually become a once-a-year kind of gal because that's who she is. Should she change? Yes, because sexless relationships don't really work; intimacy, sexual activity (of any kind) and touching are part of the building blocks of a relationship and the parts of a relationship that can sustain things even during troubled times. But she's not going to change unless she realizes that her way of seeing things is problematic. And most of the time, we continue to maintain habits and perspectives, good and bad, because they seem to make sense to us until they are called to the carpet. Forcefully. These sexless marriages don't happen overnight. The unhealthy attitudes about sex maintained by the neglectful spouse were present long before the wedding ceremony. Infatuation and the desire for love can obscure those realities, but they are always present. And the problem only gets worse as time goes on. From my end, I think if the sex issue is that big a deal to you, then it's better to just end the marriage altogether. Cheating merely delays the inevitable.
StayClose Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 Haven't you been paying atttention? Many couples in sexless marraiges WERE extremely sexually active before and immediataly following the weddings. I agree that a bf/gf you've been with for 6 months who is unenthusiastic about sex is a real bad sign, but a 6 month bf/gf who can't wait for you to come home and tear your pants off if no gaurantee of what it will be like in 6 years.
Ladyjane14 Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 If you have a girlfriend who's reluctant to dress sexy for you -- wear a thong underneath a dress and the like -- you know that she'll dress even worse for you as time goes on. Men are their own worst enemies sometimes... See, this is the beginning of how it happens. StayClose is right. You might have a fabulous sexual relationship with a woman, then.... you start pissing her off. Little by little, the emotional intimacy of the relationship erodes. Before you know it's a yawning chasm between you which seems impossible to bridge. In general terms, if a woman is mad at you... she's not viewing you as 'that charming man who used to turn her on'. Now, speaking for myself, if I was dealing with a man who expected me to go around with my underwear wedged up my butt... just for his own personal amusement... I'm not in the best of moods. Women aren't Barbie dolls. And a man who isn't loving the whole woman, rather than just selected bits and pieces of her, will inevitably step on his own dick where she's concerned, creating resentments, and widening the emotional intimacy chasm. A man who loves his woman WANTS her to be as comfortable and happy as she can be, and vice versa. A man like that is just tickled to be "in the know" that there are "granny panties" under that sexy dress. And his woman will be equally charmed by knowing that he can't wait to see them anyway.
Sevenmack Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 Sorry Ladyjane14, but that's a bunch of crap. There's are two reasons why we dress well: The first, because we want to look good. The second being that we want to look good for others, especially the men and women in our lives. That's why we dress up to go on dates or go to mixers where me meet other people. And that face is what draws our significant lovers to us. What happens is that at a certain point, people feel they can just 'let themselves go' and not do anything to keep up the good appearances and also to improve themselves. They let themselves get fat, look slovenly and just become sloths who don't go anywhere or do anything. Then they wonder why their spouses lose interest? You want your spouse to maintain interest? Do the things that got them interested in you and kept them there. This often starts with good old fashioned grooming. Or why wearing a thong isn't the worst thing for a woman to do for her man -- and a man should chuck that spare tire. Despite no longer being single, I dress up nicely for myself and the Little Lady, eat right, exercise as much as possible and keep myself well-groomed. If the Little Lady compliments me for wearing a goatee, I wear one because it makes her feel good and keeps the attraction up in the relationship. I'd expect -- and receive -- the same from her. Sure you want your SO to be as comfortable and happy as she can be. But you can be comfortable and sexy at the same time. You have no right to dress like crap for your significant other. Period. You have to do the things that got your spouse to get together with you in the first place in order to keep them. This not just goes for women; a man sitting in hole-littered boxers with 'skidmarks' in the rear area is being as crappy to their spouse as the woman who constantly wears just stained T-shirts around the house. The problem with some people is that they don't give positive feedback when their SOs do stuff such as wear a thong underneath the sweatpants or anything like that and make negative comments when they dress like crap. You have to give positive feedback in order to get positive results. That's the way life works. Now that I've gotten away from my original point of my first post, let's get back to it (and of the thong reference, by the way, showing that you, Ladyjane, didn't get the point): You didn't marry a woman or man who hated sex overnight; that person was like that in the first place. It's just that you likely ignored the evidence before you and stayed with this person in the vain hope that love will conquer all. It never has. And now you're angry about it. Instead of simmering in resentment or cheating on the spouse, just dump her (or him) and move on. Life's too long to remain in abject misery.
Trialbyfire Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 For all you men who love thongs, I highly recommend you wear your wife's thong, push up bra and high heels for a day and then come back and preach necessity...
Ladyjane14 Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 Sorry Ladyjane14, but that's a bunch of crap. A bunch of crap??? Hmmm.... I don't wear thongs, and yet I'm having regular and satisfying marital sex. Go figure. My husband doesn't dictate what kind of clothing I wear, and yet he appears to love and respect me as well as to enjoy the aforementioned marital sex. How weird is that? Trial's got a good point. If a man is convinced that his partner 'wearing a thong' or any other such silliness, is the only acceptable proof of her love and devotion... by all rights, he ought to go first. Try having a vaginal yeast infection while you're at it. You know, those thongs are like a super-highway for contaminants. Dictating terms on your partner's femininity, (or masculinity in reversed cases), isn't accepting of them as an individual. Without respect for our unique qualities, we're just a means to an end, nothing special.
Sevenmack Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 And again, you don't seem to get it. It isn't about dictating what your spouse wears or allowing oneself to be dictated to by a spouse on clothing. It's all about doing things that keep each other interested. This doesn't mean suppressing your individuality. But individuality, as my mother always says, is overrated. Looking like a trash can may be individualistic, but it sure isn't pretty and you won't get a job or a spouse that way. Or keep them. And if you believe in God, that isn't too pleasing to the Holy Father either. The problem in many relationships is that everyone seems to think they can just be in a relationship and be 'comfortable' without consideration of the other person. Relationships aren't about you and you alone; the needs and desires of the other person must be considered, even if you don't always agree. This doesn't mean a spouse gets to bully another to wear something that they wouldn't otherwise wear. But if your husband likes to occasionally see you in something other than flannel PJs, then perhaps it may be a good idea to try something else. Guess what? You just might like it. And if you don't, you and your spouse can work things out in the middle; try the boyshorts instead of the thong or a two-piece suit sans tie instead of a three-piece model. Now you don't have to wear a thong. But no one has ever looked sexy in a pair of granny panties, at least in any objective sense. Your husband may love you anyway, but it doesn't mean that he's all that thrilled with the drab and sometimes the dirty. As it is, there's plenty of bodily functions we have to put up with each other doing; we could try to make the rest of the relationship life a little more pleasing. At the end, Ladyjane, it's your viewpoint and your right to believe it. I just don't concur with it and frankly, think it's an excuse for not taking care of the relationship business. No different than the excuses people give for not having sex with their spouses.
Trialbyfire Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 Exactly LadyJane. If I demand as my conjugal rights that due to my sexual needs I can anally rape my partner with a sizeable vibrator, I guess that would be okay too, regardless of his wishes... Btw, this is not my inclination. Just food for thought for men who feel women should put up or shut up.
Ladyjane14 Posted July 10, 2007 Posted July 10, 2007 If I demand as my conjugal rights that due to my sexual needs I can anally rape my partner with a sizeable vibrator, I guess that would be okay too, regardless of his wishes... :lmao::lmao: I hear ya. It's frustrating as sh*t to try to explain the other side of the story to some of these guys. I've posted with a lady in the Separation/Divorce forum over the past couple of days on low-libido issues, presenting the male POV, and she understood RIGHT AWAY what I was talking about. But you have these "ME-ME-ME" attitudes like this one from SevenMack and it's like they're minds are sealed against the female POV. We are NOT sexual objects. We're people. And we'll wear WHATEVER kind of panties we WANT!!!! Women of the world UNITE! Let's get that made into a bumper sticker. Ooooo... you remember the bra-burnings of the 1960's?. Let's torch up some thongs!!!! :bunny:
Recommended Posts