|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Called to marital celibacy?
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
This arises from Erroneous Monk's post in Hell and my and Quetzelcoatl's responses to it.
So, questions for discussion: what, if anything, should one do if in a marriage where desire for sex on the part of your partner has evaporated, for whatever reason that might be? Is it - should it be - a deal breaker? Is your partner in breach of his/ her vows to have you and hold you? Etc, etc...
[ 05. January 2015, 21:05: Message edited by: Kelly Alves ]
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
rhflan
Shipmate
# 17092
|
Posted
If something horrible happened to my wife and she was in a coma, we obviously wouldn't be having sex. Would I leave her? No.
If something horrible happened to my wife where she weren't in a coma, but for some reason literally could not have sex, would I leave her? No.
If my wife randomly woke up one morning and said that she was never going to have sex again, would I leave her? No. Would I be confused? Yes.
I think that a lot of it depends on the 'why' part of the question. Is the no sex because of some sort of health issue? Is the no sex b/c your partner is pissed at you and wants to punish you? My reactions to those two scenarios would be very different (though I personally wouldn't leave my wife for either scenario).
--------------------
www.twitter.com/rhflan
Posts: 135 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
I think it's almost always a symptom of something else being wrong--often, in my experience, a loss of trust on someone's part, but it might also have physical causes too.
I don't think I'd go so far as to say it's a breach of marital vows--but I suppose that might depend on other circumstances, say if the desire-less spouse were using porn or conducting flirtatious & emotionally intense friendships outside the marriage, etc.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Poptart22
Shipmate
# 17096
|
Posted
I'm with rhflan on this, she's told me many times what she just posted. I feel the same way. However, I'd miss sex, just as anyone would, and I'm sure if it was a physical thing, we could just get creative.
Before we were seriously dating, she posted something on facebook about celibacy in marriage and I totally flipped out. I wouldn't get into a relationship or a marriage knowing beforehand they never had plans of sex. It's important to me emotionally as well as physically for lots of reasons, and it's an integral part of my relationship. I don't think it would be a breach in vows, but if you've already decided that sex is OK, I'd need some sort of explanation and we'd have to make new boundaries and learn to trust (it took a lot of trust to have sex to begin with).
So going into a marriage, no, within a marriage, it's not a dealbreaker but it's something that needs a *lot* of discussion and total agreement about said boundaries. I certainly don't love sex more than my wife, but it's good for our relationship to have it.
--------------------
http://bibuddhistrn.blogspot.com/
Posts: 67 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mockingale
Shipmate
# 16599
|
Posted
"Marital celibacy" seems a tad redundant.
Posts: 679 | From: Connectilando | Registered: Aug 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Triple Tiara
Ship's Papabile
# 9556
|
Posted
Would it not be more problematic when sexual relations are not by mutual consent? In other words, when sexual relations amounted to marital rape.
--------------------
I'm a Roman. You may call me Caligula.
Posts: 5905 | From: London, England | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Matt Black
Shipmate
# 2210
|
Posted
Well, exactly. At the risk of getting personal and providing TMI, Mrs Black is no longer 'up for' sex. A variety of factors: the usual waning of desire to which Leo alludes, three pregnancies and births plus anti-depressant medication. I in turn have made it clear to her that I don't want it if she doesn't want it. So it doesn't happen. Doesn't mean that I'm not frustrated as heck at times but I consider that the loving way to behave.
--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)
Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anyuta
Shipmate
# 14692
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Triple Tiara:
Would it not be more problematic when sexual relations are not by mutual consent? In other words, when sexual relations amounted to marital rape.
yeah, but there is a lot of ground in the middle there between mutually DESIRED sex, and sex without mutual consent. I don't know about anyone else, but I know that I've willingly consented to something without desiring it. I don't' think it was rape in any sense of the word. I've also been in a situation (before marriage) where I consented to something I didn't desire, and it might indeed be considered a form of rape (coercion rather than physical force). I don't equate the two situations at all.
what would I do if my spouse lost all interest in sex? well, it would depend a lot on the reason (and whether he was dealing with the reason and trying to fix it if fixable). It would also depend a lot on what he was willing to do to compensate. There is a lot that is short of actual "sex" which would be quite sufficient substitute for me. if the issue was loss of all desire to be intimate at all, then I'd seriously consider a breakup. because it would signal to me that there was something very seriously wrong in that case, that went beyond a simple loss of libido. but even then, it would greatly depend on the specifics of the situation.
Posts: 764 | From: USA | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
teddybear
Shipmate
# 7842
|
Posted
Boy, can I relate. However, I'm the one in the relationship that doesn't want sex at the moment. I am in end stage kidney disease. I barely have enough energy to walk up the stairs from my car to my flat. At this time I have absolutely no interest or desire for sex. My partner is a very virile 30 something male who is always ready. But he also knows that my loss of desire is not related him, but my medical issues. He is very kind, understanding and loving. We do cuddle and share physical signs of affection and I make a large effort to let him know I still find him attractive and desirable. I am so hoping that once I get my transplant, the desire will return. But if it doesn't, I have told him from day one that if I can't fulfill his sexual needs, he is free to meet them other means. So far, he hasn't taken me up on the offer out of respect to me. Also, he just happens to be a one man man and I'm that man. If anything, I think this forced celibacy has made us closer in some ways.
--------------------
My cooking blog: http://inthekitchenwithdon.blogspot.com/
Posts: 480 | From: Topeka, Kansas USA | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
I'm divorced so have no real relevant direct personal experience and am in no position to give any advice. (*) But if all the married men I have met who have confessed/complained/whinged to me that they no longer have sex with their wife were laid end to end, they'd probably be a lot happier than they are. And it is more often "confess" than complain. It is seen as a failure, a fault, an embarrassment. Something not to be revealed in public. A little shameful.
(*) Would you want a teacher who failed to pass the exam?
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
It was a deal-breaker for me. I married a woman who didn't like sex all that much, which of course, raises the question, why did you marry her? Partly because I was terrified of sexual desire, probably.
Anyway, we got divorced, and eventually I married someone else, with whom I am much more compatible.
I still see sexual desire as a kind of 'maniac whom I am chained to', that is, a kind of incessant caterwauling noise going on somewhere, and sometimes I curse it.
Getting older does have this advantage, that it diminishes a bit, although I still wander round as a randy old man.
I also realized at some point that sex can mean so many things, and that we eroticize many things, for example, creativity, loneliness, fear, and so on.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChaliceGirl
Shipmate
# 13656
|
Posted
Dealbreaker? Not for me. I'm asexual. I belong to an online group for asexuals- people who lack sexual desire and are OK with it. I think I'd do well in a non-sexual marriage. I'd rather have friendship, and an occasional kiss and cuddle now and then.
--------------------
The Episcopal Church Welcomed Me.
"Welcome home." ++Katharine Jefferts Schori to me on 29Mar2009.
My KJS fansite & chicksinpointyhats
Posts: 710 | From: Philadelphia, PA, USA | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
In Jewish weddings, don't the partners specifically promise to respect and try to meet each other's sexual needs?
Things would be a lot clearer if this were the rule in Christian vows as well.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
In Jewish weddings, don't the partners specifically promise to respect and try to meet each other's sexual needs?
Things would be a lot clearer if this were the rule in Christian vows as well.
In the Book of Common Prayer there's the line: 'With my body, I thee worship.' I always assumed this was about valueing each other sexually. But I could be wrong.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
In the Book of Common Prayer there's the line: 'With my body, I thee worship.'
I agree. However, it's not even in every version of the BCP, let alone anything of the kind being usual in other denominations.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mark_in_manchester
not waving, but...
# 15978
|
Posted
Ken said:
quote:
But if all the married men I have met who have confessed/complained/whinged to me that they no longer have sex with their wife were laid end to end, they'd probably be a lot happier than they are
I'm in the position to have had this conversation with two friends - both of whom are effectively maritally celibate. Adding me, that's 3/3.
Which reminds me of a song...'I want you, I need you, but there aint no way, I'm ever gonna **** you' ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
So don't be sad...
--------------------
"We are punished by our sins, not for them" - Elbert Hubbard
(so good, I wanted to see it after my posts and not only after those of shipmate JBohn from whom I stole it)
Posts: 1596 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
In the Book of Common Prayer there's the line: 'With my body, I thee worship.'
I agree. However, it's not even in every version of the BCP, let alone anything of the kind being usual in other denominations.
Its in St Paul though. (The idea, not the exact words) I think he trumps the ECUSA liturgical revision committee.
[ 09. May 2012, 18:14: Message edited by: ken ]
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
PaulBC
Shipmate
# 13712
|
Posted
Doersn't this negate the reason for marriage the extension of the species. NOT pleasure.
--------------------
"He has told you O mortal,what is good;and what does the Lord require of youbut to do justice and to love kindness ,and to walk humbly with your God."Micah 6:8
Posts: 873 | From: Victoria B.C. Canada | Registered: May 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Okay, I'm an outsider to all of this, but one thing amazes me.
As someone interested in history, I wonder about Georgian and Victorian couples, who had far harder lives than ours, very few books, magazines and specialists to help them with their 'problems', far less leisure, yet they managed to have familes of 8, 10, 12, 14+ children. They didn't have one or two kids and then complain about how tired they were and how they'd lost all interest in sex. So why does that seem to happen to couples these days?
Some people say it's due to all the chemicals people are ingesting now in one form or another. Maybe so.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
In the Book of Common Prayer there's the line: 'With my body, I thee worship.'
I agree. However, it's not even in every version of the BCP, let alone anything of the kind being usual in other denominations.
Its in St Paul though. (The idea, not the exact words) I think he trumps the ECUSA liturgical revision committee.
Heck, Paul is much more explicit than the BCP - as you'd expect.
--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)
Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
BessLane
Shipmate
# 15176
|
Posted
My former husband and I did not have sex for approximately five years before the end of our marriage. His lack of desire, NOT mine. In the beginning of our relationship, we had been like proverbial rabbits, then things sort of calmed down, but there was still a nice amount of physical intimacy. Then it just slowed down to a trickle, then stopped all together. I finally got tired of trying to initiate sex only to be rebuffed time and time again. I felt like I had done something wrong, that it was somehow all my fault and that if I could just fix whatever it was that had broken, then I could have that part of my life back. It turns out I couldn't fix it, it wasn't my fault, and that he was far more interested in fertile, nubile, younger women. Not that he was cheating on me, it was just that my 40 year old, sterile self wasn't what he decided he wanted.
That ended up killing our marriage. I wasn't willing to become celibate. My sex drive has always been fairly healthy and I was finding myself becoming more and more tempted to cheat on him with someone else. (I'm not 22 and a size 3, but I'm still no slouch either ![[Biased]](wink.gif) ). In the end, we parted as friends, which is basically what we had always been anyway and I have since married someone who not only loves me but lusts after me as well. It's pretty nice.
So, for me, it was a deal-breaker. I didn't agree to a celibate marriage. He unilaterally made a decision that impacted both of our lives and I was not willing to live with his decision.
--------------------
It's all on me and I won't tell it.
formerly BessHiggs
Posts: 1388 | From: Yorkville, TN | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
So why does that seem to happen to couples these days?
Because women are relatively less poweless in society, and can earn relatively more than they used to outside the home.
So the economic downside of a woman choosing to have another child is greater, and her ability to enforce her choice not to is also greater as well. Its usually men who want more kids - as long as they don't have to wipe their bums too often.
That and the Pill. I suspect that many, maybe even most, married women have never willingly had frequent intercourse with their husbands other than for the purpose of having children. Leaving aside the first few months of marriage and the occasional aftermath of a drunken party.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
I'd strongly recommend exploring marital or sexual therapy - or at least reading Relate's Guide to sex in a loving relationship - rather than just hoping the problem will sort itself, or resigning yourself to never in a blue moon.
There are well understood causes to loss of libido, and there are effective strategies for changing the situation. Likewise, health professionals know there are sexual side effects to some medications, and there are some ways of tackling that too - *if* you tell the prescriber there is a problem.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I've been with the same wonderful woman for 32 years. In the seasons of our lives, we have gone through times of summer where sexual energy just oozed from us, times of winter where one or both of us just couldn't and in between times of spring and autumn. It has been a process from the beginning to get our seasons into synch. We can both 'tell' when the other is, to coin the phrase, 'up for it', and this is mainly and usually the reason the other is also.
That said, there is nothing wrong with asymmetrical sex, where for one partner it is "The Joy of Sex" and for the other the "The Job of Sex". That's happenned occassionally, but it doesn't work so well. It is my job to be in synch with her needs and desires, not mine to represent my self-centred wants. I vowed to take care of her needs, and by God, I meant it. But you certainly have to talk about, and there is nothing in the realm of coercion, rather the opposite. We have gone for some lengthy periods without any interest on either of our parts, and I guess this is what I mean by 'in synch' - this has been situations of deaths, of trauma within the family, of high stress.
I would encourage any and all with troubles in marriage to go to a good pastoral or other counsellor for help.
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by PaulBC:
Doersn't this negate the reason for marriage the extension of the species. NOT pleasure.
When did extension of the species become THE reason for marriage? Whenever it was, it was considerably later than the creation of Eve.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Trisagion
Shipmate
# 5235
|
Posted
As my ever-present pedantry reflex takes control, could I please for the use of correct terminology. Being " celibate" means being unmarried; "chastity" is the practice of conforming sexual practice to state of life (sex within marriage: no sex outside it); "continence" is the practice of abstaining from sex. Matt's OP is, therefore, not about celibacy within marriage, but of continence.
I'll get me coat.
--------------------
ceterum autem censeo tabula delenda esse
Posts: 3923 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yerevan
Shipmate
# 10383
|
Posted
Matt, sending you lots of sympathetic vibes!
To give a woman's point of view, I'm (hopefully) coming to the end of a period of marital celibacy which started somewhere mid-pregnancy and continued after the birth of our son because I was worn down with sodding sleep deprivation (son is only 5 months, so its not that bad). I also don't think I had any idea how much babies trash a woman's body. There is nothing like a saggy stomach, leaky breasts, and stitches in 'interesting' places to make one feel about as attractive as a roadkill. It takes time to think of yourself in a 'sexual' way again, even if you actually have the energy for sex. I think a lot of women never quite think of themselves in that way, which is very sad for everyone involved ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Anyway, I think I could just about live without sex in marriage long term provided there was still physical closeness and affection (hugging, kissing, holding hands, whatever). I can't imagine going without any kind of physical intimacy whatsoever though. It would be unbearably lonely.
Posts: 3758 | From: In the middle | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Timothy the Obscure
Mostly Friendly
# 292
|
Posted
As others have said, it depends a lot on the reason for one partner going off sex. Physical disability is one thing, along with mental health issues like depression or PTSD related to sexual trauma (though in the latter case I do think the affected partner has as much of a duty to work hard at recovery as the other does to be supportive and accepting of their needs).
However, since for almost everyone, part of the decision to marry (only part, but not an inconsiderable part) is the conclusion that "this is someone I'd like to have sex with on a regular basis for the rest of my life," the complete loss of desire in the absence of physical or mental illness is more problematic. If the implicit marriage contract assumed mutual desire and a commitment to meeting each other's sexual needs, then what the would-be celibate is asking for is a fundamental renegotiation of the marriage. It's not something they are entitled to impose unilaterally. If Mrs. O told me "I don't ever want to have sex with you again," that would mean to me that she was saying "I don't want to be married to you any more," because whatever she might want would not be marriage by my definition, even if she wanted something that she chose to define as marriage. It would really mean starting from scratch to figure out what kind of relationship we were going to have and what the terms and commitments would be.
--------------------
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion.
- C. P. Snow
Posts: 6114 | From: PDX | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Yerevan
Shipmate
# 10383
|
Posted
I just wanted to add that being married to a woman coming to terms with the physical fallout of childbirth can be a bit of mindfield. On the one hand we want to know that our other half still finds us sexually attractive. On the other we get upset if we feel that we're being pressured for sex before we're ready. I expect a lot of men feel they can't win...
Posts: 3758 | From: In the middle | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
Well, I've learnt something new today. I always thought celibacy was about not having sex. And that 'unmarried' was the word for, well, being unmarried. Kind of mind-blowing to think that huge numbers of my (often extremely) sexually-active unmarried friends have been 'celibate' all this time!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
In Jewish weddings, don't the partners specifically promise to respect and try to meet each other's sexual needs? Things would be a lot clearer if this were the rule in Christian vows as well.
The idea of marital rights and dues/debts/obligations, respectively, is hardly something absent from Christianity. St Paul said it quite clearly "The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not rule over her own body, but the husband does; likewise the husband does not rule over his own body, but the wife does. Do not refuse one another except perhaps by agreement for a season, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, lest Satan tempt you through lack of self-control. I say this by way of concession, not of command." (1 Cor 7:3-6)
In Catholic moral teaching this has always been considered a key element of the marriage contract, with it being a matter of justice that one provides the other with reasonable "sexual access". A typical summary is given here, scroll to "V. OBLIGATION". But then of course the world is full on injustices, big and small, and Catholic marriages are not necessarily an exception to this...
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
rhflan
Shipmate
# 17092
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
So why does that seem to happen to couples these days?
Because women are relatively less poweless in society, and can earn relatively more than they used to outside the home.
So the economic downside of a woman choosing to have another child is greater, and her ability to enforce her choice not to is also greater as well. Its usually men who want more kids - as long as they don't have to wipe their bums too often.
That and the Pill. I suspect that many, maybe even most, married women have never willingly had frequent intercourse with their husbands other than for the purpose of having children. Leaving aside the first few months of marriage and the occasional aftermath of a drunken party.
I would also guess that, 'back in the day', it was much more socially acceptable for a man to rape his wife. I doubt that anyone even *considered* it rape.
--------------------
www.twitter.com/rhflan
Posts: 135 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Poptart22
Shipmate
# 17096
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no_prophet:
I've been with the same wonderful woman for 32 years. In the seasons of our lives, we have gone through times of summer where sexual energy just oozed from us, times of winter where one or both of us just couldn't and in between times of spring and autumn. It has been a process from the beginning to get our seasons into synch. We can both 'tell' when the other is, to coin the phrase, 'up for it', and this is mainly and usually the reason the other is also.
That said, there is nothing wrong with asymmetrical sex, where for one partner it is "The Joy of Sex" and for the other the "The Job of Sex". That's happenned occassionally, but it doesn't work so well. It is my job to be in synch with her needs and desires, not mine to represent my self-centred wants. I vowed to take care of her needs, and by God, I meant it. But you certainly have to talk about, and there is nothing in the realm of coercion, rather the opposite. We have gone for some lengthy periods without any interest on either of our parts, and I guess this is what I mean by 'in synch' - this has been situations of deaths, of trauma within the family, of high stress.
I would encourage any and all with troubles in marriage to go to a good pastoral or other counsellor for help.
I'd argue that what you refer to as asymmetrical sex (which is a pretty good way to describe it) can be harmful for some people. Having dealt with sexual trauma, I will never have sex when I feel like I *should*. It brings back a lot of memories of when I had to do things because I was dealing with an emotionally abusive boyfriend. So the thought of being around just for sex, where I'm not very involved, gives me the creeps. Sex with us is only when we are both feeling really into it, and I think that's part of why it is so good. This also means that there are periods where we have sex much less frequently, and although I grumble about missing it, I'm totally OK with this. For me right now, I'm still mourning the loss of my aunt and sex has been a less frequent on the whole the last 2 months for that reason. My wife isn't mourning, so she may want it more than I do right now (although at the present moment I have no idea). I guess the difference I'm making between my statement and yours is that I'm the one upset, she isn't.
Saying that I'm OK with that is the important point, though. This is something previously agreed upon, and I feel like "surprise" marital chastity is something that's "against" the agreed upon guidelines for intimacy. We're happy with our arrangement. And I hope everyone is happy with whatever they agree upon.
--------------------
http://bibuddhistrn.blogspot.com/
Posts: 67 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
George Spigot
Outcast
# 253
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
I suspect that many, maybe even most, married women have never willingly had frequent intercourse with their husbands other than for the purpose of having children. Leaving aside the first few months of marriage and the occasional aftermath of a drunken party.
Wait what?
--------------------
C.S. Lewis's Head is just a tool for the Devil. (And you can quote me on that.) ~
Philip Purser Hallard
http://www.thoughtplay.com/infinitarian/gbsfatb.html
Posts: 1625 | From: Derbyshire - England | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Poptart22
Shipmate
# 17096
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
I suspect that many, maybe even most, married women have never willingly had frequent intercourse with their husbands other than for the purpose of having children. Leaving aside the first few months of marriage and the occasional aftermath of a drunken party.
I'm not sure who you know, but I don't know anyone like that. Also, that's only referring to people who can conceive, and not same-sex partners or where one or both are sterile. In that case, sex is *only* had for pleasure (unless we get into the different sex drive debate). And married people who are fertile might not want kids, I see that happening more and more. So in those cases as well, the women are choosing to have non-procreative sex.
I'm not trying to jump on you, I'm trying to figure out your reasoning.
--------------------
http://bibuddhistrn.blogspot.com/
Posts: 67 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
comet
Snowball in Hell
# 10353
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Think˛:
I'd strongly recommend exploring marital or sexual therapy - or at least reading Relate's Guide to sex in a loving relationship - rather than just hoping the problem will sort itself, or resigning yourself to never in a blue moon.
There are well understood causes to loss of libido, and there are effective strategies for changing the situation. Likewise, health professionals know there are sexual side effects to some medications, and there are some ways of tackling that too - *if* you tell the prescriber there is a problem.
thank you thank you thank you, Doublethink! I was reading along getting more and more frustrated.
Between medical and psychological issues (and they're just two sides of a coin) there can be a lot going on.
I used to be the spouse who wasn't interested. I felt horrible guilt. it's not a character flaw. it could be a medical condition, it could be medications (which can often be tweaked!) it could be as simple as shift work or alcohol and pot consumption.
AND - the counseling thing is BIG. sometimes it's just miscommunications. don't give up!
--------------------
Evil Dragon Lady, Breaker of Men's Constitutions
"It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.” -Calvin
Posts: 17024 | From: halfway between Seduction and Peril | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Poptart22:
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
I suspect that many, maybe even most, married women have never willingly had frequent intercourse with their husbands other than for the purpose of having children. Leaving aside the first few months of marriage and the occasional aftermath of a drunken party.
I'm not sure who you know, but I don't know anyone like that. Also, that's only referring to people who can conceive, and not same-sex partners or where one or both are sterile.
My guess is ken was taking the long view. Historically, marriage has been a heterosexual arrangement, and I suspect ken's suspicion - that a lot of married women didn't used to willingly have regular sex - may be correct, since not having sex was their only reliable method of birth control. Some women would have been willing, others would have submitted, still others would have been forced. Those big families didn't come from nowhere.
But it does leave me wondering what prompted the pre-Enlightenment idea that women are more libidinous than men.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
I suspect that many, maybe even most, married women have never willingly had frequent intercourse with their husbands other than for the purpose of having children. Leaving aside the first few months of marriage and the occasional aftermath of a drunken party.
What an incredibly gloomy view of marriage! And I'm amazed that you feel qualified to speak for 'many, maybe even most' women. ![[Paranoid]](graemlins/paranoid.gif)
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
doubtingthomas
Shipmate
# 14498
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ChaliceGirl:
Dealbreaker? Not for me. I'm asexual. I belong to an online group for asexuals- people who lack sexual desire and are OK with it. I think I'd do well in a non-sexual marriage. I'd rather have friendship, and an occasional kiss and cuddle now and then.
It's not quite the same deal if he marriage is non-sexual from the start, though.
Posts: 266 | From: A Small Island | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
The responses to my comment assume that men almost always want sex more than women, and that in the past women would submit to pressure from their husbands, whereas today they don't have to.
I don't want to argue about any of that since others will do so more authoritatively, but I'm not sure that it answers my question.
Married women today don't have to worry so much about unwanted pregnancies. Also, sexual liberation has surely transmitted the message that women can usually enjoy sexual relations with a caring partner (and that they should keep looking until they find one). Only a tiny number of couples are virgins when they marry, so very few people have the excuse of sexual incompatability; many will be highly experienced. We all marry for love, not to acquire the funds to support the family business! Yet marriages still seem to be foundering due to sexual problems.
As for being called to marital celibacy for a particular spiritual reason, as per 1 Cor 7 v 5, it sounds a bit like fasting - one of those things that might sound good and pious, but I doubt that modern Western Christians have much truck with it.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
Again:
in a marriage, the responsibility for the other is your's, at the very least in goodly part. This means focussing on the needs of your partner. At least some of the time, preferably most of.
Objection:
sex that is merely a duty means that something is wrong, usually starting with basic communication, and broaching into issues such as self esteem, medical, life history, emotional health.
Objection 2:
marital celibacy that is a decision of only one person is quite troubling. It may connote selfishness in some situations, in the absence of the reasonable conditions that may exclude actual intercourse or sexual activity of any kind. Of course exclusion of intercourse does not mean that all sexual activity is impossible!
Echo:
yes, therapy or counselling.
Echo:
yes, therapy or counselling.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barefoot Friar
Ship's Shoeless Brother
# 13100
|
Posted
Two quick thoughts.
First, I was married to someone who wanted less sex than I. It wasn't quite down to nothing, but I was really lucky if I got it once in a couple weeks, where I wanted it quite a bit more often. ("Normal" was maybe once a month.) What really sucked, though, was finding out that she was having an affair. That really hurt, because it was a blow to my masculinity: I wasn't man enough to please her, obviously, despite my willingness to learn new things and keep things fresh. By the time we got to her third affair, I had figured out that no sex = seeing someone. I pulled the plug.
Second, there are going to be times when one partner sets aside his/her desire for the other. There are going to be times when one partner puts aside his/her disinterest and accepts the advances of the other. I think this will be especially true of couples where one partner has a markedly higher drive than the other.
I do agree with the idea that we go through seasons. The kalendar has taught me that. There are times when one or both partners need less or more than other times. I think, however, that if both partners will put aside their own wants and try to come to mutual agreement somewhere in the middle things will go a lot more smoothly.
For instance, if I want it really bad and she hasn't wanted any for weeks, I need to put aside my wants for her sake. But in all fairness, she should be more willing to help me out. We meet in the middle, both sacrificing something in order to compromise. It's not a case of one partner demanding of the other. I see too many binary couples when it comes to sex: Either they do it often because one partner wants it and the other just does it, or else they never do it because one partner doesn't want it at all and shoots down the one who does.* I think my marriage wouldn't have ended any better, but I can think of several just in my small circle of friends that would still be happily going on if both partners had simply given a little to find a compromise. I find this bleeds over to other areas of a relationship, too.
I have found a lady who loves me almost as much as I love her, and we both recognize that means making sacrifices for the sake of the other. I expect things to go a whole lot better for both of us.
_______________
*I know there are couples who both want it and do it and couples who neither wants it so they don't do it, but they're not the topic of discussion here.
--------------------
Do your little bit of good where you are; its those little bits of good put together that overwhelm the world. -- Desmond Tutu
Posts: 1621 | From: Warrior Mountains | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nicolemr
Shipmate
# 28
|
Posted
A dear friend of mine is in the situation of his wife having said no more sex. After several years of living without it, he found a solution: me. We get together once a month, his wife is aware of it and accepts it, and so far, two and a half years on we're all pretty happy with the arrangement.
Polyamory can work.
--------------------
On pilgrimage in the endless realms of Cyberia, currently traveling by ship. Now with live journal!
Posts: 11803 | From: New York City "The City Carries On" | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Only a tiny number of couples are virgins when they marry, so very few people have the excuse of sexual incompatability...
[clears throat] I don't know about tiny. When the subject came up once, two of three in the room were virgins. But neither of us were the sort to discuss the matter without being asked point blank by a person who needed to talk.
I suspect there are many more virgins at marriage out there than you think.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barefoot Friar
Ship's Shoeless Brother
# 13100
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Only a tiny number of couples are virgins when they marry, so very few people have the excuse of sexual incompatability...
[clears throat] I don't know about tiny. When the subject came up once, two of three in the room were virgins. But neither of us were the sort to discuss the matter without being asked point blank by a person who needed to talk.
I suspect there are many more virgins at marriage out there than you think.
Well, and there's also the matter of bait and switch. Happened to me. Nasty trick, that.
--------------------
Do your little bit of good where you are; its those little bits of good put together that overwhelm the world. -- Desmond Tutu
Posts: 1621 | From: Warrior Mountains | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Poptart22
Shipmate
# 17096
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Padre Joshua:
Second, there are going to be times when one partner sets aside his/her desire for the other. There are going to be times when one partner puts aside his/her disinterest and accepts the advances of the other. I think this will be especially true of couples where one partner has a markedly higher drive than the other.
I wouldn't make that sacrifice. My wife understands. Now, it's probably different because we're two women, and so sex works differently in some ways and it is much less a simultaneous effort if you get what I mean. If she's disinterested at all, I would absolutely not ask for sex, because who wants to have it with a partner who's really not into it? Again, part of it may be that we're women and it's not like one of us can lie there motionless on the bed and have the other one do their thing. But sex is almost like a sacred thing and deserves a lot of respect and at least to us, respect includes us both being willing. We go through seasons. Sometimes hers is way up there and I'm sort of "eh" and sometimes it is the other way around. And I may get frustrated and say something about how long it has been (for the record, it has never been all that long), but it stops at my speaking my mind, it never translates into me asking her to give it to me when she isn't into it.
I wouldn't enjoy it at all. I just couldn't.
--------------------
http://bibuddhistrn.blogspot.com/
Posts: 67 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Only a tiny number of couples are virgins when they marry, so very few people have the excuse of sexual incompatability...
[clears throat] I don't know about tiny. When the subject came up once, two of three in the room were virgins. But neither of us were the sort to discuss the matter without being asked point blank by a person who needed to talk.
I suspect there are many more virgins at marriage out there than you think.
In my time no wanna-be red blooded pretend studly man (or kid in highschool) would acknowledge or even remotely suggest he wasn't getting it. We called them locker room stories. It is apparently a context where lying is the norm, at least about sex.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
rhflan
Shipmate
# 17092
|
Posted
Perhaps if I were married to a man, and all I had to do was lay there while he did his thing...then maybe I could see myself, at times, partaking in the 'job of sex' instead of the 'joy of sex'. Honestly though, if he was fine with just 'doing his thing' while I laid they, I'd prefer that he just take care of business by himself while I do the dishes.
--------------------
www.twitter.com/rhflan
Posts: 135 | Registered: May 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
Well, exactly. At the risk of getting personal and providing TMI, Mrs Black is no longer 'up for' sex. A variety of factors: the usual waning of desire to which Leo alludes, three pregnancies and births plus anti-depressant medication. I in turn have made it clear to her that I don't want it if she doesn't want it. So it doesn't happen. Doesn't mean that I'm not frustrated as heck at times but I consider that the loving way to behave.
The influential Reformed propagandist B.B. Warfield (1851-1921) married in 1876, and on their honeymoon his wife suffered some sort of breakdown when caught outside in a violent thunderstorm, which left her an invalid until her death in 1915.
During those thirty-nine sexless years,
Warfield devoted himself to her care and welfare in the midst of all the demands of his academic career.
As a thorough-going Arminian I have no time for Warfield's theology, but I have always had the deepest admiration for him as a person as a result of his treatment of his wife.
I thought of him when I read of your experience, MB.
[ 10. May 2012, 03:56: Message edited by: Kaplan Corday ]
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
