|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Mar 13, 2017 10:20:59 GMT -5
You chase the reason why your spouse avoids intimacy with you in the hope of correcting that reason, restoring the conditions that led to desire in the first place. At first, this seems like a reasonable proposition: reset to factory defaults and turn the box on again. Consider the notion that you could intentionally create desire for a person who you don't desire. What would happen within two generations of a society that could figure that one out? Desire would be something totally Celibate marriages would be restored. Arranged marriages might come back. Families could make sane decisions, advising their kids based on sage wisdom -physical attraction wouldn't matter anymore. Infidelity- gone. There would never be divorce, and people would never change partners. Spark wouldn't matter - maybe people would marry their best friends. That would be quite a thing, if you could intentionally create desire for a person who you chose rationally. If you could desire a person who made sense. And we would never grow. As attractive as a factory reset sounds in theory, painful or not I value freedom to choose more. Personally I can't think of anything worse than being reset to a depressed doormat which is what woukd happen if my STBX ever got her finger on the button. She wouldn't even need to fuck me. I was actually considering the perspective of your STBX, not you. Because if she could take that magic pill, then she would WANT to fuck you, and then neither of you would be staring at a divorce right now. |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Mar 13, 2017 10:26:38 GMT -5
The issue is that some people desire their spouses and make shitty decisions anyway. Desire alone won't solve all problems. People with super hot spouses, think celebrities, still cheat or just walk away. Relationships are hard and multidimensional. And let's be real, desire is based on more than physical characteristics. When someone acts like an asshole, they become less desirable, no matter how hot they are or how smart or funny or rich they are, or whatever other trait floats your boat. Based on my readings of this board over years, I would say the evidence suggests that cruelty, negligence, indifference, hostility, aggression, addiction, narcissism etc doesn't necessarily decrease desire for one's spouse. Nor does the absence of those characteristics increase desire among those who are intimacy-averse to their spouses. My point with the post wasn't to "be real". My point was to highlight how unrealistic it would be that an intimacy-averse spouse could begin desiring their spouse again, once off. |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Mar 13, 2017 10:29:19 GMT -5
The scenario that 1st comes to my mind is something along the lines of the Stepford wives or perhaps something like the movie where a giant seed pod is placed close to someone that is to be cloned/replaced. Sounds good unless you are the subject of the reset of amorous intentions gone wrong. So you are saying that it would be science fiction - fantasy. That it is unrealistic to imagine a person inventing or creating desire out of necessity or convenience. You can't just start desiring someone who makes rational sense to desire. Like, say, your spouse who is going to divorce you unless you start fucking them. |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Mar 13, 2017 10:33:58 GMT -5
To answer the initial question, I have a huge issue with the premise from a "free will" perspective. If feels to me like what's being described would amount to coersion, and that just really creeps me out. Virtuous, to be sure - and good on you establish for everyone to see that you are against coercing people to have sex with you - in case anyone wishes to promote that idea. In this case though, I was writing from the perspective of the perspective of an intimacy-averse spouse who is facing a divorce, though. So, this hypothetical game is about whether that spouse would or should do the magic thing that causes them to desire their spouse. |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Mar 13, 2017 10:40:27 GMT -5
This is very similar to "LOVE SPELLS" if you are into that sort of thing - alot of Occult practitioners will not touch Love Spells with a ten foot pole - nothing but trouble. Anyhow mere "Desire" is a bit on the lust heavy side. I think here folks are interested in the real deal and I mean INTIMACY and FALLING IN LOVE . . . I don't trust science enough to rely on a pill for this any more than a witch for a love spell. I will pass and if it ever comes to pass I will say "False Advertising" at best and a very bad case of "Sorcerer's Apprentice" if there would be any effects. A BIG NO THANK-YOU with all due respect. I'm not writing from the perspective of doing this to another person to make them want you. I'm writing from the perspective of the intimacy averse person who is facing a divorce and the destruction of her life, loss of home, breakup of a family etc. All because she does not desire her husband. There's an enormous amount of effort expended on this board chasing and quantifying reasons for the loss of desire. I presume that it is because we each wish to increase our spouse's desire. Everything is great except for the sex, right? So there appears to be an easy consensus that it is folly to think that one could or should seek or enlist in a process with the intent of creating desire for a person if that desire isn't present. |
|
|
|
Post by cagedtiger on Mar 13, 2017 10:55:15 GMT -5
To answer the initial question, I have a huge issue with the premise from a "free will" perspective. If feels to me like what's being described would amount to coersion, and that just really creeps me out. Virtuous, to be sure - and good on you establish for everyone to see that you are against coercing people to have sex with you - in case anyone wishes to promote that idea. In this case though, I was writing from the perspective of the perspective of an intimacy-averse spouse who is facing a divorce, though. So, this hypothetical game is about whether that spouse would or should do the magic thing that causes them to desire their spouse. Ok that makes more sense to me. Let me rephrase. I was trying to suggest that it felt to me like it came down to try and force somebody into a box they may not necessarily fit into. Maybe this is my own things coming through, but the last couple of months my therapist and I have been working through how a lot of my demands for my needs have been coming through as days of controlling my wife - from her point of view. Basically, she's just not a sexual person, that's just how she's wired, and that's OK for her- it's not OK for us, and that's the rub. But it also wouldn't be OK for me to ask her to be something for us she's not comfortable being for herself. That was what I was trying to get at with my statement about coersion. JMX, that's an interesting point from the perspective of sales. I agree that a lot of life is subtle coercion in a way yes, but having also worked sales myself (though not nearly as long), when you're working on getting to that close, the client already has at least a slight need for a "something." If there's no need for a "something" it can be very, very difficult to identify the benefits of your "something" to a prospect. In my case, my wife see no need to try changing anything in our marriage until I was ready to just walk out the door. Then, the "something" that she felt the vague need for was only to maintain the status quo as it appeared. But that's just my own experience and thoughts. |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Mar 13, 2017 11:09:10 GMT -5
I was trying to suggest that it felt to me like it came down to try and force somebody into a box they may not necessarily fit into. On this board, everyone is doing that. We each come from the perspective that our spouse has sexual antipathy towards us that overrides their libidos. So the box is that they don't want to have sex with us, whereas the relationship format of "marriage" includes a sexual union. So to borrow the your metaphor, you are trying to fit into this box (marriage) but your wife doesn't really fit into it because she doesn't want to have sex with you. There are other boxes - like, not being married. Or being ex-spouses. Or platonic life partners. Those fit better. But if your definitions of marriage include desiring your partner - then marriage is likely not a box that fits. True. Sex with someone who doesn't want to have sex with you - even when it is willing and consensual - is bad sex. There's a few people I meet every day who I consider that I might want to have sex with who don't know me, and a few who do, who I'm sure don't consider having sex with me. It's totally ok - and I would never ask them. So if you and she agree that marriage is a sexual union, and you both agree that she doesn't want to have sex with you, then where does that leave you? Your experience is common, unfortunately. The minimum needed for any change in behavior is a clear and present threat to leave. Not a conversation about what might happen. And then, you will only get to possible compliance. But you won't get from that, desire. You can't. |
|
|
|
Post by shamwow on Mar 13, 2017 11:28:39 GMT -5
And we would never grow. As attractive as a factory reset sounds in theory, painful or not I value freedom to choose more. Personally I can't think of anything worse than being reset to a depressed doormat which is what woukd happen if my STBX ever got her finger on the button. She wouldn't even need to fuck me. I was actually considering the perspective of your STBX, not you. Because if she could take that magic pill, then she would WANT to fuck you, and then neither of you would be staring at a divorce right now. My marriage was a bait-and-switch. No gradual downward slope. Pretty much lockdown as soon the words "I do" were said...except for two VERY brief periods she needed me for procreation (apparently my seed is quite strong). Nah, she got exactly what she wanted. |
|
|
|
Post by McRoomMate on Mar 13, 2017 11:44:48 GMT -5
This is very similar to "LOVE SPELLS" if you are into that sort of thing - alot of Occult practitioners will not touch Love Spells with a ten foot pole - nothing but trouble. Anyhow mere "Desire" is a bit on the lust heavy side. I think here folks are interested in the real deal and I mean INTIMACY and FALLING IN LOVE . . . I don't trust science enough to rely on a pill for this any more than a witch for a love spell. I will pass and if it ever comes to pass I will say "False Advertising" at best and a very bad case of "Sorcerer's Apprentice" if there would be any effects. A BIG NO THANK-YOU with all due respect. I'm not writing from the perspective of doing this to another person to make them want you. I'm writing from the perspective of the intimacy averse person who is facing a divorce and the destruction of her life, loss of home, breakup of a family etc. All because she does not desire her husband. There's an enormous amount of effort expended on this board chasing and quantifying reasons for the loss of desire. I presume that it is because we each wish to increase our spouse's desire. Everything is great except for the sex, right? So there appears to be an easy consensus that it is folly to think that one could or should seek or enlist in a process with the intent of creating desire for a person if that desire isn't present. We are nose diving right to the heart of the matter indeed. In my experience (and I only can speak of my experience) - I found that the "SEXLESS" aspect was but the tip of the iceberg and a profound and scary path down the proverbial rabbit hole. I mean that what started as an assumption that the problem was a "Sexless Marriage" after in depth analysis both deep within my heart and my W's heart and all the myriad of considerations that the bad sex was a mere symptom of much more profound things. It is a matter of confronting my fears and boldly looking at this honestly what was revealed in my case were much more profound and powerful disfunctions of which the sexlessness was a symptom. Again, I speak only of my own experience. "Desire" is so deeply rooted IMHO going deep into the psyche if not the soul itself. So in my case I would say I initially thought "everything is great except for the sex" and after deep soul searching, praying meditations, research, and analysis - the bad sex was just the starting point. |
|
|
|
Post by lyn on Mar 13, 2017 12:53:16 GMT -5
I vote for Brussel Sprouts too. Roasted with olive oil, alone or in a salad. I really like them when the outer leaves get crispy. Yummmm. MMMM Brussel sprouts. I was just telling my son yesterday that I was afraid I was getting addicted to these little mini cabbages. He in turn replied, "You know, I've heard that people can become addicted to Brussel Sprouts. Experts believe they could be just a gateway to even more addictive things, like asparagus". Just a silly conversation we had yesterday on the way to the grocer - lol |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Mar 13, 2017 13:12:00 GMT -5
Interesting idea though apocrypha - from the Refuser perspective. If they are in fact human, and not some type of cyborg, one would think some of them at least would want to experience this magic. That's my point - that they are human, that they do feel threat and distress - but it is not a possible thing. They can't invent desire for a person they don't desire. Not any more than you can. I'm not trying to be "nice" or accommodating by imploring an empathic approach. I'm more interested in getting to a position of authenticity on what's being asked and the likelihood of the results. |
|
|
|
Post by eternaloptimism on Mar 13, 2017 13:12:33 GMT -5
I really like sprouts.. but this tickles me..  |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Mar 13, 2017 13:24:37 GMT -5
Hmmm... Did I desire brussel sprouts? Nope. Never. I made myself try them roasted with olive oil, salt and pepper. I now desire brussel sprouts. All the time. Seriously, the highlight of my day. My nephews, nieces and kids all beg for my roasted brussels sprouts - more than roast beef or turkey on the family occasions. So to bring the metaphor of the original point, my method of preparing and saucing the ingredient - adding and changing things around it - makes it more appealing to those who eat it. In the case of an intimacy-averse marriage, is the idea that one adds activities and enterprises to the marriage such that life is so fulfilling that the lifetime of celibacy is a fair trade-off? I'd warrant that this would be the position of intimacy-averse spouses (the "refusers") in marriages. |
|
|
|
Post by leifericson on Mar 13, 2017 13:37:08 GMT -5
I vote for Brussel Sprouts too. Roasted with olive oil, alone or in a salad. I really like them when the outer leaves get crispy. Yummmm. MMMM Brussel sprouts. I was just telling my son yesterday that I was afraid I was getting addicted to these little mini cabbages. He in turn replied, "You know, I've heard that people can become addicted to Brussel Sprouts. Experts believe they could be just a gateway to even more addictive things, like asparagus". Just a silly conversation we had yesterday on the way to the grocer - lol That's why they call Brussel Sprouts a gateway vegetable. |
|
|
|
Post by worksforme2 on Mar 13, 2017 14:32:44 GMT -5
The scenario that 1st comes to my mind is something along the lines of the Stepford wives or perhaps something like the movie where a giant seed pod is placed close to someone that is to be cloned/replaced. Sounds good unless you are the subject of the reset of amorous intentions gone wrong. So you are saying that it would be science fiction - fantasy. That it is unrealistic to imagine a person inventing or creating desire out of necessity or convenience. You can't just start desiring someone who makes rational sense to desire. Like, say, your spouse who is going to divorce you unless you start fucking them. I think it is just the way I read your post that put me in that frame of mind. But as you have expanded the tone of your post I think I see my response to the question as something along these lines. Perhaps one could bring about desire for someone or something but that seems to me to be more along the lines of coveting. Creating desire out of necessity or convenience (at least in a S/M) doesn't seem to come with a long life span. It's not sustainable if one has to continuously actively engage in the endeavor. And if I apply it to your example of bringing about desire to ward off a divorce I don't think it would be desire for the other spouse. Wouldn't it be a desire to avoid the negative aspects of the divorce rather than a desire to engage in a fulfilling emotional experience? On the surface it just seems to me that desire is an innate emotion. It simply cannot be conjured up. Perhaps it could be cultivated if other emotions were in play, like love, but I'm not thinking that one follows the other. PS....I wrote this before I read all the other comments and your explaining the intent was to speak from the refuser perspective. |
|
