Does marriage kill sexual passion?

[Beaches]

It sounds cheesy but he's actually found books that give you ideas on cheap dates and things you can do to have the one on one time and not forget why you fell in love.

 

BINGO! You've just explained how a long-term, intimate, monogamous relationship has the potential to stay alive. Because when one person forgets what it was that made him/her choose this person for a lifetime relationship, it all goes south.

 

and the point you made is actually something the team that lead our Marriage Encounter weekend made, that you have to remember what it was that brought you to the table, and ways you can keep the spark going.

 

beaches, I think the two of you will have a highly successful relationship because you've already decided to make the commitment beyond The Commitment! :love:

 

 

Thank you

 

Honestly he's made me realize a lot of things I needed to change about myself and he didn't ask me to change he just brought it up in way for me to understand and the key to it was is that I wanted to change, not because he wanted me to but because I want to be a better wife and person to him. He does the same for me...and that's why I'm marrying him. So if both have an understanding of each other wants and needs and communicate...I think any marriage can be ok and survive.

[luna3]

You obviously didn't read my post very well. I said you don't desire it to the same EXTENT. Generally speaking, that is a fact. If you are an exception so be it, there is an exception to everything in life.

 

and still i say, bull****! (on the comments, not on you as a person).

 

although i'm horribly dense, and so could have misread you, the ability to sublimate something better does not imply or even prove that women desire sex less. it doesn't matter what our needs and motivations surrounding sex are, or that they are different. women need sex, and "healthy" women want sex just as much as men do.

 

one can't take as proof that there are so many millions of prostitutes as opposed to gigolos, or say that men in the past had this or that. men in the past also bought and paid for the sexual loyalty of their women, with some very stiff repercussions for those women if they strayed. a woman's whole sexuality in the past was a commodity: her parents guaranteed that she was not used-goods when they handed her over and took the dowry. after that, she was a possession. he would continue to provide her food and a roof over her head (and bear him children, and keep the house) only as long as she kept her orifices for his exclusive use. after that, hanging was too good for her.

 

with much, but not all, of the political and financial power, men could then do as they pleased on the side. not so for women. they either got adept at hiding their desires, turned to masturbation, had extremely discrete affairs, or they realized that they had little choice in any of it, but the kids and laundry kept coming and did not stop just because someone has an unsatisfying sex life. ****stains and bedpans wait for no one!

 

i don't want to get into the blaming game of whodidwhattowhom over that, but thousands of years of history, buttressed or brought about by a difference in biology is not overcome by one sexual revolution and one feminist movement. we're all still living with the pattern today, and that is probably the root behind many problems behind who expects what in marriages and relationships even now.

 

don't kid yourself, many women need much more out of sex than just an scratching an itch. doesn't logically follow that they need it somehow "less" because of all that baggage. not to have a pissing contest between the sexes, but i suspect that many women need the entire package that the sexual connection represents even more. i would hazard a guess that there would be many more gigolos in the world, and extremely well paid ones at that, if there were sufficient men to provide the services and we could get over our "hangups".

[fral945]

and still i say, bull****! (on the comments, not on you as a person).

 

although i'm horribly dense, and so could have misread you, the ability to sublimate something better does not imply or even prove that women desire sex less. it doesn't matter what our needs and motivations surrounding sex are, or that they are different. women need sex, and "healthy" women want sex just as much as men do.

 

Ok, I will just have to agree to disagree with you. Motivation matters. It's more physical for men and more mental for women. The number of husbands that complain about lack of sex far outweighs the number women that do.

 

one can't take as proof that there are so many millions of prostitutes as opposed to gigolos, or say that men in the past had this or that.

 

Why not? It's still true today as it was then. There hasn't been a surge in gigolos since the women's movement started. I would have guessed if sex really was as much of a need for women they would start to pay for good sex. Why not? It's a free country. The only conclusions I can come to are: a) Women don't need sex as much or b) Women have easy access to the sex they need more than men (which was one of my previous points)

 

 

don't kid yourself, many women need much more out of sex than just an scratching an itch. doesn't logically follow that they need it somehow "less" because of all that baggage. not to have a pissing contest between the sexes, but i suspect that many women need the entire package that the sexual connection represents even more.

 

You keep proving my point. It isn't just a physical need for a women. It is for a man. There is more to it for a woman. That's why you read all the women on here having problems with the FWB thing.

 

i would hazard a guess that there would be many more gigolos in the world, and extremely well paid ones at that, if there were sufficient men to provide the services and we could get over our "hangups".

 

And what services would you need?

[Woggle]

Not my marriage but I am fully aware that my marriage is not the norm these days.

[lovestruck818]

I've been taking this stand in several posts here, and mulling over it at the same time. Is it even possible to keep the sexual fires burning for each other in a long-term marriage? I don't think it is. The very nature of a long-term relationship with someone kills whatever desire there might have been to begin with. Passion between two people isn't built to last.

 

This doesn't seem to bother W's as much as it does H's. I believe that most W's do not value sex in their marriages... at least not like they do all the other things that they keep running in the marriage - kids, household, cooking meals, pets, extended family members, etc. etc. etc. They get more fulfillment out of other activities besides sex. But we all know men are not the same way.

 

I see so many MM (cheating or not) who act almost like the Walking Dead around their W's. The light has gone out of their eyes. Everything they do is drudgery, unless it involves doing a "guy" thing like watching football (then they perk up a little). And they're totally different people when they go out with their "guy" friends. But around their W, it's shoulders slumped, slack-jawed, eyes half-closed, like they're carrying around a 100-lb. bag of rocks.

 

It's like these MM (the ones who don't cheat, anyway) are resigned to the inevitability of the death of their sexual side, in return for being taken care of, security, and social acceptance. It's a trade-off for them.

 

The ones who DO cheat are fighting that inevitability tooth and nail.

 

Am I wrong? Do you believe it's possible to keep those home fires burning when you've been married a long time to the same person?

 

I think the passion and sexual desire for eachother would actually INCREASE the longer the marriage lasts. Logically it makes sense. The more you love someone, the better the sex, passion, lust, desire etc. etc. is for that person. At least that's how it is for me. The more I am with my boyfriend, the more & more I fall for him and the sex just gets better every time.

[silktricks]

I've been taking this stand in several posts here, and mulling over it at the same time. Is it even possible to keep the sexual fires burning for each other in a long-term marriage? I don't think it is. The very nature of a long-term relationship with someone kills whatever desire there might have been to begin with. Passion between two people isn't built to last.

Yes, it is possible to keep the "sexual fires burning". Creativity is more fun, frankly, in a long-term relationship where both people feel safe to allow the other to see the real "you". But not all people are interested in creativity or change or variation. They prefer the "tried and true". I personally would find that excruciatingly boring - but that's me.

 

This doesn't seem to bother W's as much as it does H's. I believe that most W's do not value sex in their marriages... at least not like they do all the other things that they keep running in the marriage - kids, household, cooking meals, pets, extended family members, etc. etc. etc. They get more fulfillment out of other activities besides sex. But we all know men are not the same way.

:lmao: :lmao: if you get as much fulfillment out of cooking meals and taking care of pets as you do sex, then more power to you. You get the cooking detail, I'll take care of the bedroom "chores".

 

IMO this is hogwash. The problem is that women keep getting told that they don't value/need/want sex as much, so women who have strong libido's just get quiet. (But I've noticed that men can quiet often tell which women have that strong sexual drive....)

 

I see so many MM (cheating or not) who act almost like the Walking Dead around their W's. The light has gone out of their eyes. Everything they do is drudgery, unless it involves doing a "guy" thing like watching football (then they perk up a little). And they're totally different people when they go out with their "guy" friends. But around their W, it's shoulders slumped, slack-jawed, eyes half-closed, like they're carrying around a 100-lb. bag of rocks.

Maybe you hang out with the wrong guys???

 

Actually I think a lot of men do turn into the walking dead. A lot of women, too. I don't, though, think it has to do with marriage per se. I think it has a lot more to do with the pressure of society and how we're "supposed" to act. And, of course, there are the people (both men and women) who get married and then figure - OK, now I'm done - and that really sucks for their partner.

 

It's one reason neither my husband or I watch TV, for example. The portrayals of relationships are sicko. The woman is little mrs. know-it-all and the husbands are these idiot chumps ---- or conversely the woman has a dustbowl for brains and the husband a swaggering swinging d*ck. The range of acceptable behavior in at least American society is so unbelievably small. You get to be "this" way, or you can be good at "that" thing.

 

But back to the matter at hand....

 

It's like these MM (the ones who don't cheat, anyway) are resigned to the inevitability of the death of their sexual side, in return for being taken care of, security, and social acceptance. It's a trade-off for them.

 

The ones who DO cheat are fighting that inevitability tooth and nail.

 

Am I wrong? Do you believe it's possible to keep those home fires burning when you've been married a long time to the same person?

You are wrong.. ..and thank God you are!

 

But I'm sure you are not wrong for all people. There is a HUGE range of people and behavior and reasons for behavior. Why would anyone think that there are simplistic behavior patterns or that any behaviors are easily isolated or explained?

[OpenBook]

You are wrong.. ..and thank God you are!

 

I hope to God I AM wrong, silk.

[highfive]

Am I wrong? Do you believe it's possible to keep those home fires burning when you've been married a long time to the same person?

 

Interesting Thread.

 

I believe it is possible to keep the passion alive but it takes work.

 

In my own case, I am married 20 years. My wife is a beautiful person and I am still very attracted to her. She is not as passionate as me, so I usually initiate the passion, and over the years I have tried new things to add some spark. Sometimes, especially lately, I get a little annoyed of always being the one to start "things", but that's just the way we are. Once things are started, she eventually gets into it, but I do find that it takes much longer to get her in the mood.

 

Bottom line: Yes, you can keep the passion alive if you are willing to work at it, and be willing to accept that one of you may have to do most of the "passion" work. Communication is very important. First you must have a honest and open relationship, with lots of communication and activities together outside the home. I believe that you must be best friends for intimacy to survive in the long-term.

 

Hope this helps.

[OpenBook]

Bottom line: Yes, you can keep the passion alive if you are willing to work at it, and be willing to accept that one of you may have to do most of the "passion" work. Communication is very important. First you must have a honest and open relationship, with lots of communication and activities together outside the home. I believe that you must be best friends for intimacy to survive in the long-term.

 

Hi highfive. Hi hi.:D Thanks for the insight! You sound like you have always highly valued your W as a person. Do you believe that the original reasons why you married her are still at play here? That those reasons are (in part) what is sustaining your M... or at least motivating you to keep working at it to make it successful?

 

I'm just searching for a little glimmer of hope here for the institution of marriage in my own mind.

[highfive]

Do you believe that the original reasons why you married her are still at play here? That those reasons are (in part) what is sustaining your M... or at least motivating you to keep working at it to make it successful?

 

 

Yes, the original reasons why I married her are still very much at play. Throughout our marriage we have grown as a couple, but also as individuals. I still feel the same about her, only much stronger and deeper now. I respect and honor her, and I know she feels the same about me. Sure, we have had our ups and downs but we are still together and still passionate about our marriage.

[waleen]

[sIZE=2] Information that kills relationships refers to an outcome that happens when you just learn terms and facts without a meaningful context -- it is the passive reception of information. [/sIZE]

[sIZE=2]I call this content-focused learning and it kills passion in the bedroom and neuters any self-improvement effort. In content-focused learning, actions are completed without understanding the relationships between the terms and facts. [/sIZE]

[sIZE=2]Think of robotic actions - when sexual health is approached through content focused learning it will always fail to produce any lasting passion or improved sexual health. The classic example to illustrate this danger is the plethora of books on sexual techniques to improve sex life[/sIZE]

[Lonestar]

I disagree. Loyalty and honesty may be the foundation for a successful LTR (whether it's with best friends, or a marriage, or a family member) - but I don't think those traits have anything to do with passion.

 

Then it's a good thing you and I are not in a relationship. Loyalty and honesty breeds trust. Deep trust in another makes it easier to open up your heart and mind to someone. Opening up your heart and mind leads to no sexual inhibitions. Without any inhibitions sex and passion are ignited because no one is holding anything back. It's my logic, I'm wise, and I'm always right

[foreverinlove]

Then it's a good thing you and I are not in a relationship. Loyalty and honesty breeds trust. Deep trust in another makes it easier to open up your heart and mind to someone. Opening up your heart and mind leads to no sexual inhibitions. Without any inhibitions sex and passion are ignited because no one is holding anything back. It's my logic, I'm wise, and I'm always right

 

You are absolutely right. I didn't know how to say it before, but there is total trust in our marriage and therefore no sexual inhibitions, which keeps the excitement alive. Without deep trust that would not be possible. Recentment is one of the major intimacy and trust killers. That's where communication is so important. If you have a complaint voice it and don't let it build up, resolve it if need be by compromise. Otherwise it'll just fester until over the years intimacy is killed and it's so hard to get it back, if ever.

[OpenBook]

Then it's a good thing you and I are not in a relationship. Loyalty and honesty breeds trust. Deep trust in another makes it easier to open up your heart and mind to someone. Opening up your heart and mind leads to no sexual inhibitions. Without any inhibitions sex and passion are ignited because no one is holding anything back. It's my logic, I'm wise, and I'm always right

 

:lmao: I hear and obey, O Wise One.

 

But here's what I really think.

 

I agree that deep trust in another encourages the opening up of heart & mind, and that it's great for freeing up sexual inhibitions. FOR A WOMAN.

 

For a man, it's totally different. Familiarity is an enemy of their sexual passion. For them, familiarity breeds contempt. They want strange. That's why porn caters to men. They're the ones who want it. Strange, new, unexplored territory.

 

I would think that in a LTR with a man, a woman would be wise to keep him on his toes a little, keep a little bit of mystery, not share everything with him. Staggeringly hard to do (maybe even humanly impossible) when you're living with someone day in and day out.

[Lonestar]

:lmao: I hear and obey, O Wise One.

 

But here's what I really think.

 

I agree that deep trust in another encourages the opening up of heart & mind, and that it's great for freeing up sexual inhibitions. FOR A WOMAN.

 

For a man, it's totally different. Familiarity is an enemy of their sexual passion. For them, familiarity breeds contempt. They want strange. That's why porn caters to men. They're the ones who want it. Strange, new, unexplored territory.

 

I would think that in a LTR with a man, a woman would be wise to keep him on his toes a little, keep a little bit of mystery, not share everything with him. Staggeringly hard to do (maybe even humanly impossible) when you're living with someone day in and day out.

 

Very good, OpenBook, very good

 

There is definitely truth to men wanting the "strange" and fantasizing about it. I agree with that. But men ALSO need trust in a woman to open up their deepest fantasies to them. Otherwise they engage in those fantasies alone while pulling their peter. If a man can trust his woman enough to tell her everything that turns him on, and then she in turn helps him experience those fantasies through sex either by role-playing, dirty-talk, porn, etc., does that not make the passion between them burn fierce????

 

There are many men who need to be kept on their toes by a woman who keeps them guessing, but I don't want a man that stays with me because he wonders about me. I want a man to be deep in my psyche. It helps me to have mind-blowing orgasms, which in turn makes me want him even more.

[Woggle]

:lmao: I hear and obey, O Wise One.

 

But here's what I really think.

 

I agree that deep trust in another encourages the opening up of heart & mind, and that it's great for freeing up sexual inhibitions. FOR A WOMAN.

 

For a man, it's totally different. Familiarity is an enemy of their sexual passion. For them, familiarity breeds contempt. They want strange. That's why porn caters to men. They're the ones who want it. Strange, new, unexplored territory.

 

I would think that in a LTR with a man, a woman would be wise to keep him on his toes a little, keep a little bit of mystery, not share everything with him. Staggeringly hard to do (maybe even humanly impossible) when you're living with someone day in and day out.

 

This is so off it isn't even funny. Usually it's women who start to become antsy and start to lose attraction once they become too settled and content in a relationship. Reliability is often an attraction killer for a woman. Look at all these threads on her of faithful loving men who all of a sudden had their wives do a 180% on them and want out. Maybe I am different than most men but having a wife I can trust and that I can be myself is priceless. There is no way I would ever in a million years cheat because I doubt I would ever find another woman like this.

[angie2443]

:lmao: I hear and obey, O Wise One.

 

But here's what I really think.

 

I agree that deep trust in another encourages the opening up of heart & mind, and that it's great for freeing up sexual inhibitions. FOR A WOMAN.

 

For a man, it's totally different. Familiarity is an enemy of their sexual passion. For them, familiarity breeds contempt. They want strange. That's why porn caters to men. They're the ones who want it. Strange, new, unexplored territory.

 

I would think that in a LTR with a man, a woman would be wise to keep him on his toes a little, keep a little bit of mystery, not share everything with him. Staggeringly hard to do (maybe even humanly impossible) when you're living with someone day in and day out.

 

Is it possible that the people you attract (not just boyfriends, but friends) are the type of people that fit your view and that this enforces your view (that the men need the strange and new and women need security)?

 

I think everyone craves the strange and new from time to time. I notice that when my husband and I go on a weekend getaway together, we become more passionate than usually. I think that one thing that takes passion away from any long term relationship is when couples stop doing new, fun things together. I see this all the time. When the couple first meet, they go out together, try new things together, and this fuels the excitement of the relationship. After they settle in with each other, they turn to other people to do the new, fun things with.

 

Having said this, I don't think that most men past their mid twenties are craving strange, new sexual experiences all the time. Sometimes, yes, but if they have any kind of a life, there just isn't the time and energy to constantly go after the "strange and new".

[OpenBook]

Is it possible that the people you attract (not just boyfriends, but friends) are the type of people that fit your view and that this enforces your view (that the men need the strange and new and women need security)?

 

Sure, it's possible. Anything is possible. But this theory doesn't explain why more than 50% of MM will eventually cheat on their W's... nor why porn caters to men... nor why prostitutes are predominantly female.

[marriedwithtwo]

*I* think you can keep the home fires burning – really, really hot, at that – if you dedicate yourself to keeping the marriage fresh and just being there for your partner. ...

 

The key here is that BOTH partners need to want the fires to keep going hot, and BOTH partners need to make the effort, and BOTH partners need to be there for each other.

 

In my case, and in (I suspect) a huge percentage of marriages, one partner wants to keep things hot, and the other could care less (or can't make the effort, or choose any other excuse). Of course this is a downward spiral, the less one spouse is "there" for the other, the more the other one wants it, and so on.

 

Since nearly all marriages have one partner less interested in keeping is going, the answer is YES, the passion will go away (unless your spouse is in the 0.0001% minority).

 

 

Also, I don't believe that familiarity breeds boredom. When I fantasize, it is about my wife. I only want her, and the deeper sharing and exploration that (should) comes with a deep relationship. Lots of the things I would like to have, can only be had with someone who knows me intimately, my desires, etc.

[bazcam]

:lmao: I hear and obey, O Wise One.

 

But here's what I really think.

 

I agree that deep trust in another encourages the opening up of heart & mind, and that it's great for freeing up sexual inhibitions. FOR A WOMAN.

 

For a man, it's totally different. Familiarity is an enemy of their sexual passion. For them, familiarity breeds contempt. They want strange. That's why porn caters to men. They're the ones who want it. Strange, new, unexplored territory.

 

I would think that in a LTR with a man, a woman would be wise to keep him on his toes a little, keep a little bit of mystery, not share everything with him. Staggeringly hard to do (maybe even humanly impossible) when you're living with someone day in and day out.

 

 

This is very true. There is nothing more exciting than new flesh. A long term monogamous relationship can really dampen the eroticism of sex for a man because a lot of us do crave variety. However, very few men can actually get sex with a consecutive string of women, although women could easily get that from men, though they don't want it (thanks a bunch biology). Porn does help alleviate this urge for variety somewhat.

[Taramere]

I've been taking this stand in several posts here, and mulling over it at the same time. Is it even possible to keep the sexual fires burning for each other in a long-term marriage? I don't think it is. The very nature of a long-term relationship with someone kills whatever desire there might have been to begin with. Passion between two people isn't built to last.

 

This doesn't seem to bother W's as much as it does H's. I believe that most W's do not value sex in their marriages... at least not like they do all the other things that they keep running in the marriage - kids, household, cooking meals, pets, extended family members, etc. etc. etc. They get more fulfillment out of other activities besides sex. But we all know men are not the same way....

 

Am I wrong? Do you believe it's possible to keep those home fires burning when you've been married a long time to the same person?

 

I haven't been married, so I'm not really in a position to comment on that bit of it - but I'd like to participate in the thread regardless.

 

When I read your post, I instantly thought of one couple I've known for (oh my God) 17 years. In the early days of knowing them, there'd be times I was invited round for drinks, then they'd start pawing and groping at eachother while I stared uneasily round the room and wondered if it would be okay for me to switch the telly on...or if I was perhaps expected to dive on top and join in with the fun. Last time I saw them was a few years ago, and they were still at it...two kids and two affairs (one hers, one his) later. Possibly the exhibitionist thing helps to keep those home fires burning.

 

One thing that occurs to me is that the traditional wedding ceremony could well be a bit of a bad start to many marriages. Last year I was watching a friend walking down the aisle, arm in arm with her father - and wearing a virginal veil. In between wanting to laugh, I got the misty eyed "Awwww...." thing. Then as they were exchanging vows in God's house, I suddenly thought "How do they obliterate the memory of all this next time they want to be dirty?"

 

The whole ceremony is gathering of friends, parents, grandparents, siblings, colleagues, parents' friends etc etc all gathering together and giving the happy couple's sexual union their blessing. Fattening wedding cake, rosy cheeked brides' fathers telling hilarious anecdotes about their daughters. The worst I've heard to date is how the bride had been so overweight as a teenager that she once broke a wooden toilet seat.

 

I think I'd need some kind of follow-up counselling to get me back into the spirit of bedroom antics without having the spectre of fond elderly relatives smiling on at sweaty bedroom grapplings and saying "aren't they a sweet couple, and wasn't that a nice hymn they chose for the service? I was a bit unhappy that I got seated so close to that draughty door, though. It's awful for my rheumatism - and it's not as though that toaster I bought for them was cheap. I wonder what they thought of the sheets her granny bought. Did you see them at the gift shower? I thought they were a bit tacky myself...but they seem happy enough with them. Look at them go! That's right dearie, you thrust that pelvis my love. I was the same 50 years ago with my old Harold - God rest his soul."

[The Collector]

Sure, it's possible. Anything is possible. But this theory doesn't explain why more than 50% of MM will eventually cheat on their W's...

 

Where did you get this stat?

 

Women cheat as much as men.