|
|
Post by bballgirl on Feb 1, 2017 15:23:52 GMT -5
With much respect I'm questioning your analogy. Conversation - Communication and Sex - Connection are foundations and fundamental in a marriage. Board games are an interest and that is fair in a relationship to have different interests and to do those interests with different people. Agreed. The analogy whilst good is somewhat floored by virtue of the fact that sex is reasonably assumed when entering a relationship. Playing cards or other games is never a reasonable assumption. If someone genuinely doesn't like sex from the outset of a marriage they should be honest and give their partner the opportunity to make an informed decision as to whether they want to continue. Unfortunately what happens is people also assume the right to decline sex as in today's society we are taught from a very early age that you must respect yourself by participating in sex only if you fancy it. Whilst I agree with this in part it has been taken to an extreme in many relationships and what ends up happening is the lower libido person will end up inadvertently using their partner as a sexual partner when and only when they fancy a fuck. It is not unreasonable to ask for more in my opinion. I know for a fact that if I was with a woman who's libido was significantly higher then mine, I would never ever assume the right to limit sex to when I want it. It smacks of selfishness to me. That's because the bottom line is people are either givers or takers and takers who are low libido are selfish and unempathetic to the higher libido spouse's libido. That would not be acceptable for my life ever again, next time around I will have relationships only with givers. If the giver turns into a taker then I will take them right out of my life. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 1, 2017 17:53:53 GMT -5
Amen BBG! Me too.
As for the thought experiment - I'm screwed. H won't talk or have sex!
He will, however, unload the dishwasher and ferry kids around. He's likely an acts of service guy. But that's not enough.
But I agree, givers should marry givers.
|
|
|
|
Post by DryCreek on Feb 2, 2017 2:23:36 GMT -5
But I agree, givers should marry givers. I do think the "giver" trait is crucial; there will *always* be some degree of libido mismatch, especially over time. A giver who is low libido will still give willingly, even if not as frequent as desired. That's a workable situation where a compromise should be possible; there's empathy, there's love, and it's a whole lot different from a spouse who refuses outright or does it grudgingly. Good thing your H is picking up some domestic skills! |
|
|
|
Post by solodriver on Feb 4, 2017 16:32:55 GMT -5
OK, an interesting analogy as far as thought experiments go. Maybe it may inspire some members to think "you know, I would DEFINITELY leave that relationship... and sex matters as much as conversation, so maybe I should consider leaving my SM, too." So, props for that. But here's where it misses the mark for me. Let me change it to something true in my marriage: I love games. Card games, board games, word games. This has been not only been a lifelong pastime of mine, but a central part of my family life growing up and one of the main ways I socialized in college. My wife doesn't care about games, neither the intellectual stimulation nor the socializing that comes with it. Sigh. I have a "gameless marriage". The good news is: I can get my "game itch" scratched just fine outside my marriage.. and it is socially acceptable. I can play bridge or go to game nights at a local Meetup. I can got to Magic the Gathering nights with my kids. I can invite friends over for "game nights" at my house. All of this is socially acceptable. And even acceptable for my wife! However, dealing with my SM, it is NOT socially acceptable for me to do that with sex. THERE'S THE RUB. Back to the "he's a lousy conversationalist"... well, I agree that ZERO communication with ones spouse sounds bad. But it IS socially acceptable to get your talky-talk in from your girlfriends/buddies, workmates, family members, neighbors, etc. In that sense, the hypothetical "conversationless marriage" has a BETTER chance of allowing a someone to stay in the marriage if they so choose. Not saying they should; saying there ARE socially acceptable alternatives. Dan my wife is the same way; HATES games. When we were first married, we would play games with other couples, and we would play games with her mom, her daughter and my granddaughter. We even had an "Erotic Fantasy" game that we played when we were having sex. Then, strangely, at the same time the sex stopped, so did the games. When I mention it to her, she either ignores me or says she's not interested. I think it's part of that whole "refuser interaction" behavior. As a result I started enjoying game playing on the computer and this past Christmas bought myself a Club Pogo membership. I enjoy games each night now to relax, since the wife wants to just watch TV in the bedroom. I get a chance to talk to other people and I've made some new friends as well.
Maybe we need to start another group "I Live In A Gameless Marriage". 
|
|
|
|
Post by McRoomMate on Feb 15, 2017 11:50:48 GMT -5
Here's the thing that I've learned since I've been out of my SM. It's not the sex that most people want here on the forum it's the connection in the relationship and sex is a part of that. BINGO - Direct hit. Bulls Eye. |
|
|
|
Post by bballgirl on Feb 15, 2017 14:30:23 GMT -5
Here's the thing that I've learned since I've been out of my SM. It's not the sex that most people want here on the forum it's the connection in the relationship and sex is a part of that. BINGO - Direct hit. Bulls Eye. Yes on the dating apps that has not been so successful for me because the men just want sex. They don't want to take a woman out. I tell men that I want a man that wants to do things inside as well as outside the bedroom but the majority just want a hook up not a real connection. |
|
|
|
Post by McRoomMate on Feb 15, 2017 16:26:40 GMT -5
BINGO - Direct hit. Bulls Eye. Yes on the dating apps that has not been so successful for me because the men just want sex. They don't want to take a woman out. I tell men that I want a man that wants to do things inside as well as outside the bedroom but the majority just want a hook up not a real connection. Oh gosh, I am sorry to hear that bballgirl I have heard Tinder is pretty much a meat market. Maybe try a "Christian" dating ap (I am not very religious personally but just desperately trying to think of something) or maybe start going to a Church functions. Bars/Night Clubs - ok bad idea generally. I met girlfriends there once or twice I sort of had relationships with - this goes back decades. Keep trying. I am sure he is out there somewhere - just a question of when. I have no doubt. |
|
|
|
Post by bballgirl on Feb 15, 2017 18:16:00 GMT -5
Yes on the dating apps that has not been so successful for me because the men just want sex. They don't want to take a woman out. I tell men that I want a man that wants to do things inside as well as outside the bedroom but the majority just want a hook up not a real connection. Oh gosh, I am sorry to hear that bballgirl I have heard Tinder is pretty much a meat market. Maybe try a "Christian" dating ap (I am not very religious personally but just desperately trying to think of something) or maybe start going to a Church functions. Bars/Night Clubs - ok bad idea generally. I met girlfriends there once or twice I sort of had relationships with - this goes back decades. Keep trying. I am sure he is out there somewhere - just a question of when. I have no doubt. Thanks yeah I'm definitely a preserverant person and whether I find a man or not, I'm journaling about each experience and I'll either have a great stand up comedy routine or a best selling book turned movie. |
|
