|
|
Post by beachguy on Oct 30, 2016 7:34:39 GMT -5
I realize this technique is not for most already self-identifying as a "sexless marriage". The wife has to WANT to give the beads to the husband; she has to honor when they are redeemed. (Exceptions allowed for true medical issues and the like.) What do you mean "sadly, [you'd] have many left"? You mean that you wouldn't have redeemed them? Yes and no. Technically, she wouldn't have redeemed them despite my attempts to "cash in". I'd theoretically put the bead in the bowl, 24-48 hours would pass, I'd have to ask why she didn't acknowledge my "romantic" request, the wife would make one or more excuses, including a claim that she didn't notice the bead in the bowl, without honoring the arrangement, then the bead would go back in the pouch. Good concept in theory, but still puts all responsibility on the husband to initiate and gives all control with the wife. For that reason, I don't like it, but hey whatever works. I like the concept of the OneExtraordinaryMarriage approach better, which goes something like the following. Sunday, Monday and Tuesday are his days to initiate on any ONE day, her days are Wednesday, Thursday or Friday to initiate on any ONE day, Saturday is a bonus day for either to initiate (or not). Simple and easy to remember, plus both spouses share the responsibility for initiating. Add in an occasional creativity, and it sounds like a fool proof plan. That is unless you are roommates with a fool! I'm amazed at all these creative ways to try to get someone that doesn't want you, to want you. Fools errands all. |
|
|
|
Post by JonDoe on Oct 30, 2016 7:52:07 GMT -5
I'm amazed at all these creative ways to try to get someone that doesn't want you, to want you. Fools errands all. These are not going to convince someone to want you, but they may help some couples that don't find time or make time for physical intimacy. If the problem is identified and solved soon enough, it might save a few otherwise decent marriages. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 31, 2016 18:43:14 GMT -5
Yes and no. Technically, she wouldn't have redeemed them despite my attempts to "cash in". I'd theoretically put the bead in the bowl, 24-48 hours would pass, I'd have to ask why she didn't acknowledge my "romantic" request, the wife would make one or more excuses, including a claim that she didn't notice the bead in the bowl, without honoring the arrangement, then the bead would go back in the pouch. Good concept in theory, but still puts all responsibility on the husband to initiate and gives all control with the wife. For that reason, I don't like it, but hey whatever works. I like the concept of the OneExtraordinaryMarriage approach better, which goes something like the following. Sunday, Monday and Tuesday are his days to initiate on any ONE day, her days are Wednesday, Thursday or Friday to initiate on any ONE day, Saturday is a bonus day for either to initiate (or not). Simple and easy to remember, plus both spouses share the responsibility for initiating. Add in an occasional creativity, and it sounds like a fool proof plan. That is unless you are roommates with a fool! I'm amazed at all these creative ways to try to get someone that doesn't want you, to want you. Fools errands all. All these "strategies" are so damn complicated! Good lord it's like an algebra test. Why can't you just say, "Let's fuck until our brains turn to grits on Saturday," and then leave it open ended for the rest of the week? When I think of scheduling sex I don't mean like a Taco Bell shift roster, or building an abacus on your beside table. Of course you can't leave it open ended because then you'll only get duty sex once a week, as opposed to getting duty sex twice a week. I'm preaching to the choir though. I think most of us here know we're too far gone for this stuff to be of any benefit. |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jan 28, 2017 2:24:30 GMT -5
Took me quite a few years to wake to the fact that I was in the same marriage, doing the same work, getting just as tired and busy, and I still wanted to have sex with my wife. Bit of a game changer, that realization - because so much is "help" is built around making life easier so sex is less onerous.
Then, you get to the realization that sex is onerous for your spouse, but not for you. And, you take the meaning of that - and your realize it isn't the scheduling that's the problem - it's upstream from that.
|
|
|
|
Post by beachguy on Jan 29, 2017 3:04:17 GMT -5
If you're here your spouse is sex averse. At least for you. No sex help idea can fix that.
The Ultimate Truth in 3 sentences or less.
|
|
|
|
Post by csl on Jan 29, 2017 8:07:07 GMT -5
If you're here your spouse is sex averse. At least for you. No sex help idea can fix that. The Ultimate Truth in 3 sentences or less. Well, I'll give you the first two. |
|
|
|
Post by beachguy on Jan 29, 2017 9:15:53 GMT -5
If you're here your spouse is sex averse. At least for you. No sex help idea can fix that. The Ultimate Truth in 3 sentences or less. Well, I'll give you the first two. Your recommended method is to enforce an expectation of sex in a marriage. And since your audience are conservative devout Christians you have the bible on your side. That is not the same thing as solving a sex aversion problem. And that was clear in many examples you give of your "success". |
|
|
|
Post by csl on Jan 29, 2017 16:39:20 GMT -5
Well, I'll give you the first two. Your recommended method is to enforce an expectation of sex in a marriage. And since your audience are conservative devout Christians you have the bible on your side. That is not the same thing as solving a sex aversion problem. And that was clear in many examples you give of your "success". Question - if YOU didn't have a reasonable expectation of sex in your marriage, then what are you bitching about? If you had no reasonable expectation of sex, then why are you so angry at your wife/ex? You seem to be saying that Christians who actually state that there is an expectation of sex in marriage are "enforcing" it, but you sure seem to be angry and upset that your expectations of sex in marriage weren't met. Other than Christians and Jews having expectations of sex written down, how are we different from you? |
|
|
|
Post by beachguy on Jan 29, 2017 17:42:09 GMT -5
Your recommended method is to enforce an expectation of sex in a marriage. And since your audience are conservative devout Christians you have the bible on your side. That is not the same thing as solving a sex aversion problem. And that was clear in many examples you give of your "success". Question - if YOU didn't have a reasonable expectation of sex in your marriage, then what are you bitching about? If you had no reasonable expectation of sex, then why are you so angry at your wife/ex? You seem to be saying that Christians who actually state that there is an expectation of sex in marriage are "enforcing" it, but you sure seem to be angry and upset that your expectations of sex in marriage weren't met. Other than Christians and Jews having expectations of sex written down, how are we different from you? Honestly, you are so angry with ME that you miss my point entirely. ETA: or perhaps you simply refuse to acknowledge the simple truth of my assertion. |
|
|
|
Post by csl on Jan 29, 2017 22:02:07 GMT -5
Question - if YOU didn't have a reasonable expectation of sex in your marriage, then what are you bitching about? If you had no reasonable expectation of sex, then why are you so angry at your wife/ex? You seem to be saying that Christians who actually state that there is an expectation of sex in marriage are "enforcing" it, but you sure seem to be angry and upset that your expectations of sex in marriage weren't met. Other than Christians and Jews having expectations of sex written down, how are we different from you? Honestly, you are so angry with ME that you miss my point entirely. ETA: or perhaps you simply refuse to acknowledge the simple truth of my assertion. you're the one who always makes the charge of "forced" sex, so yeah, I do get upset. And you didn't answer my question. do you, did you have an expectation of sex or not. if you did then why do you bust chops of religious folk for having the same expectations? is it that you think that somehow, if she doesn't put out, the wife loses her bingo card or something? i will say that you have no idea of the dynamics that were used/not used in the turn-arounds i've spoken of. in point of fact, i've read of more than one on that xforum where the wife has realized the wrongness of her actions and changed. but go ahead, just keep on making your assertions with no knowledge. |
|
|
|
Post by beachguy on Jan 30, 2017 8:36:09 GMT -5
Honestly, you are so angry with ME that you miss my point entirely. ETA: or perhaps you simply refuse to acknowledge the simple truth of my assertion. you're the one who always makes the charge of "forced" sex, so yeah, I do get upset. And you didn't answer my question. do you, did you have an expectation of sex or not. if you did then why do you bust chops of religious folk for having the same expectations? is it that you think that somehow, if she doesn't put out, the wife loses her bingo card or something? i will say that you have no idea of the dynamics that were used/not used in the turn-arounds i've spoken of. in point of fact, i've read of more than one on that xforum where the wife has realized the wrongness of her actions and changed. but go ahead, just keep on making your assertions with no knowledge. Once more, you present no evidence to refute my assertion, aside from vague suggestions that I'm too stupid to understand. You cannot refute the message so you shoot the messenger. A classic defense of an indefensible position. As to your questions, I have discussed repeatedly on this forum that I had a STRONG expectation of sex before my marriage, during my marriage and I still do. If fact, I made that clear to you the last time we went round and round on this very same issue. I fail to understand why you refuse to acknowledge it and use it as some sort of Red Herring to shoot the messenger. Is your position so weak? As far as my religion, you previously asked "Other than Christians and Jews having expectations of sex written down, how are we different from you? ". Well, csl , I am Jewish. I'm not Muslim, Buddhist, Agnostic or whatever else you are suggesting there. Not that it should matter at all. Do you have any other questions of a personal nature that are irrelevant to my assertion? Or do you now want to put my Jewishness on trial here to evade my basic assertion? Now back to my assertion, which you have challenged without any evidence so far. I asserted "If you're here your spouse is sex averse. At least for you. No sex help idea can fix that." You then refuted that last sentence. I then pointed out that a spouse complying with an expectation of sex does not FIX sex aversion. It just encourages the sex averse person to have sex. That apparently strikes a nerve with you, as you lash out at me in a personal attack. But you have, repeatedly, refused to address my assertion. I have previously pointed out to you that your claims are based on a 1.8% success rate, at best, depending on your accounting. Baza ran his own numbers based on your site participation and came up with a number well under 1%. It has never been clear to me why you think a 1.8% (or far less) rate of success is even worth talking about. You constantly phrase your point of view in terms of "I know at least one case where....". Yet you have never disclosed the details of those few (two?) anecdotal cases. Specifically if the previously refusing spouse was complying in order to meet a religious/cultural expectation of sex or if the spouse had truly solved their sex aversion, through religion or any other means. My assertion was clearly limited to sex aversion, not the fact that someone might have sex despite that. Two very clearly different issues that for some reason you refuse to address. |
|
|
|
Post by csl on Jan 30, 2017 9:08:08 GMT -5
Then I'll have to go back to your original statement and say that I don't give you 2 out of three, or maybe not even one out of three, depending on if we stick to the exact meaning of "averse" as "strong dislike". Some guys, yes, I'll give you your second point, "At least for you."
The reason I'll give you that one is that Dr. Corey Allen, of the Sexy Marriage Radio podcast, tells of a time in his marriage when, in counseling, his wife told him, "It's not that I don't want to have sex. I just don't want to have sex with you." In going to counseling, and listening to his wife's side of the story, he realized that he wouldn't want to have sex with someone like him either. He changed, he grew, and his wife opened up and responded. The problem wasn't his refusing wife, but her dickish husband.
Moral of the story: Not all refused are saints; some are dicks.
So, maybe one out of three of your "Ultimate Truths." But not two out of three, as your first premise is as faulty as your third.
|
|
|
|
Post by dancingbear70 on Jan 30, 2017 10:49:52 GMT -5
Then I'll have to go back to your original statement and say that I don't give you 2 out of three, or maybe not even one out of three, depending on if we stick to the exact meaning of "averse" as "strong dislike". Some guys, yes, I'll give you your second point, "At least for you." The reason I'll give you that one is that Dr. Corey Allen, of the Sexy Marriage Radio podcast, tells of a time in his marriage when, in counseling, his wife told him, "It's not that I don't want to have sex. I just don't want to have sex with you." In going to counseling, and listening to his wife's side of the story, he realized that he wouldn't want to have sex with someone like him either. He changed, he grew, and his wife opened up and responded. The problem wasn't his refusing wife, but her dickish husband. Moral of the story: Not all refused are saints; some are dicks. So, maybe one out of three of your "Ultimate Truths." But not two out of three, as your first premise is as faulty as your third. Interesting example. I have always believed that sex problems aren't always sex problems. Anecdotally, I have found very few examples where the rest of the marriage is fine except for sex. Many of those that come here and begin with that thought tend to begin to analyze their relationships and start to see the cracks. Sex is just such a powerful dynamic, and a physical act, that it is easy to observe and becomes the point of focus. |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Feb 1, 2017 13:52:21 GMT -5
In those instances in which "everything is great except the sex", I find it interesting to fast forward and imagine a conversation that happens maybe a day, or a year after the decision to separate.
The conversation would happen around the time the "sex-averse" partner is found to have a new partner.
|
|
