|
|
Post by javba on Aug 25, 2018 18:11:47 GMT -5
Look she's done all trying she can. I'm really not into sex with people who don't want to but have to have sex.
So I couldn't do that. It is hard cause I'm so empty, but I have been unable to reciprocate the forced sex she'd forced upon her.
|
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous Steve on Aug 26, 2018 10:37:26 GMT -5
What you described isn't guilt/duty sex. It is an intentional effort to make sex happen despite the pressures of life getting in the way. You said yourself that your W needs sex from you to feel that you love her. That is immensely different than duty sex because it has feeling behind it. It starts from a place of love and not obligation. It is a recognition that sex is vital to marriage and not just a chore to be tolerated in order to prevent divorce. Um, no. It's an intentional effort to make sex happen despite feeling no desire for it whatsoever. I remain hopeful that eventually something approaching desire will return, but we've been doing this for a while and it hasn't to date. But that's the point. The motivation for a partner to commit to something like this is going to be fairly complex in reality. There is no neat dividing line. A very small part of my wife is motivated to do this because she has a long term self-image of being a sexual person in a healthy marriage. Some of it comes from the cold rationalization that she wants to be sexual, she has no choice but to be sexual with me. Most of the impetus comes from guilt, shame and fear that I will leave her (I have never threatened this). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2018 11:41:28 GMT -5
The discussion here between Anonymous Steve and h brings up, to me, an interesting question: Is there an "observer effect" for married sex? For the non-physics geeks, the observer effect is the theory that simply observing a situation or phenomenon necessarily changes that phenomenon. With so far a majority of people answering "no" in this poll I am wondering (again being myself biased by recent events) whether sex that a partner forces him/herself to engage in can turn into meaningful, intimate sex? There have been some magazine articles about couples who were in a little rut forcing themselves to have sex every day for a month (or more.) In most of those cases the act itself made the couple want more sex. That seems to apply to normal couples where there is no major problem or hang-ups around sex to begin with. But could it also happen with people stuck in the dregs of an SM? Obviously both partners need to be willing to try to begin with, which makes this a moot point for many/most. But for the others, if you and your partner could force yourselves to give it a shot, could it build something - or would it seal the coffin? |
|
|
|
Post by saarinista on Aug 27, 2018 3:42:17 GMT -5
@shynjdude maybe you should add a third choice for "uncertain."
|
|
catsloveme
Full Member
Dwelling in the possible
Posts: 207
|
Post by catsloveme on Aug 27, 2018 10:26:55 GMT -5
Obviously both partners need to be willing to try to begin with, which makes this a moot point for many/most. But for the others, if you and your partner could force yourselves to give it a shot, could it build something - or would it seal the coffin? For me, it would depend on how it goes. If it’s an earnest effort to restore physical intimacy, then I think it would be something to build on. Even if it isn’t “good” per se, if the intent is good, honest, loving... then giving it a shot could build something. |
|
|
|
Post by twotimesone on Aug 30, 2018 12:08:43 GMT -5
My W is willing to do it on a somewhat regular schedule, once a week or once every other week. But there is no real intimacy, no hugging, kissing, snuggling, etc. I stay, but I still outsource.
|
|
|
|
Post by lifeinwoodinville on Sept 13, 2018 1:42:42 GMT -5
I don't know if I would want sex from my wife now. Her idea of sex is to lay there and let it happen, if that's the plan then no, I'm not interested. If, suddenly, she wanted to be an interactive partner, then yes, I would jump at the chance to have sex with her.
|
|
|
|
Post by michael on Sept 13, 2018 6:51:29 GMT -5
How about sex just once in awhile? At any rate, I’m looking forward to a time when she wants sex. Whenever that may be. I have never rejected her, but this time is going to be different. Just a little taste of what I’ve put up with for years and years. Bitch. Or maybe I could go along, but just lie there like a dead log until she gets bored and gives up. That might be funny too.
|
|
|
|
Post by h on Sept 13, 2018 7:06:05 GMT -5
The discussion here between Anonymous Steve and h brings up, to me, an interesting question: Is there an "observer effect" for married sex? For the non-physics geeks, the observer effect is the theory that simply observing a situation or phenomenon necessarily changes that phenomenon. With so far a majority of people answering "no" in this poll I am wondering (again being myself biased by recent events) whether sex that a partner forces him/herself to engage in can turn into meaningful, intimate sex? There have been some magazine articles about couples who were in a little rut forcing themselves to have sex every day for a month (or more.) In most of those cases the act itself made the couple want more sex. That seems to apply to normal couples where there is no major problem or hang-ups around sex to begin with. But could it also happen with people stuck in the dregs of an SM? Obviously both partners need to be willing to try to begin with, which makes this a moot point for many/most. But for the others, if you and your partner could force yourselves to give it a shot, could it build something - or would it seal the coffin? Coming back to this thread, I think that a couple who forced themselves to have frequent sex could go either way. One thing is almost certain though, the SM would be resolved much more quickly. The increase in sex would either rekindle the bedroom fires as suggested, or expose the true nature of a dead marriage. If repair were possible, this could work. If the marriage was already too far gone, the forced sex would feel worse as time went on and it would force the honest feelings to the surface. Either way, the situation would be resolved much sooner than it otherwise would. |
|
|
|
Post by csl on Sept 13, 2018 8:27:36 GMT -5
Coming back to this thread, I think that a couple who forced themselves to have frequent sex could go either way. One thing is almost certain though, the SM would be resolved much more quickly. The increase in sex would either rekindle the bedroom fires as suggested, or expose the true nature of a dead marriage. If repair were possible, this could work. If the marriage was already too far gone, the forced sex would feel worse as time went on and it would force the honest feelings to the surface. Either way, the situation would be resolved much sooner than it otherwise would. Sorry for the quibble, but... "forced"? Maybe it's the ILIASM mindset, but it seems to me that, for a forum that decries sexlessness, there is a lot of negativity expressed around the topic of sex, a lot of pejorative language is used to denigrate sex. Yeah, I get the resentment that builds up, but still....... "A couple who forced themselves to have frequent sex..." Why couldn't that just as likely be said, "A couple who determined to increase sexual frequency", or "a couple who resolved to improve their sexlife"? I'm not much on happy self-talk, but neither am I big on assuming bad-will. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2018 8:51:33 GMT -5
Coming back to this thread, I think that a couple who forced themselves to have frequent sex could go either way. One thing is almost certain though, the SM would be resolved much more quickly. The increase in sex would either rekindle the bedroom fires as suggested, or expose the true nature of a dead marriage. If repair were possible, this could work. If the marriage was already too far gone, the forced sex would feel worse as time went on and it would force the honest feelings to the surface. Either way, the situation would be resolved much sooner than it otherwise would. Sorry for the quibble, but... "forced"? Maybe it's the ILIASM mindset, but it seems to me that, for a forum that decries sexlessness, there is a lot of negativity expressed around the topic of sex, a lot of pejorative language is used to denigrate sex. Yeah, I get the resentment that builds up, but still....... "A couple who forced themselves to have frequent sex..." Why couldn't that just as likely be said, "A couple who determined to increase sexual frequency", or "a couple who resolved to improve their sexlife"? I'm not much on happy self-talk, but neither am I big on assuming bad-will. You may not have read the original post: "There have been some magazine articles about couples who were in a little rut forcing themselves to have sex every day for a month (or more.) In most of those cases the act itself made the couple want more sex. " |
|
|
|
Post by h on Sept 13, 2018 12:21:58 GMT -5
Coming back to this thread, I think that a couple who forced themselves to have frequent sex could go either way. One thing is almost certain though, the SM would be resolved much more quickly. The increase in sex would either rekindle the bedroom fires as suggested, or expose the true nature of a dead marriage. If repair were possible, this could work. If the marriage was already too far gone, the forced sex would feel worse as time went on and it would force the honest feelings to the surface. Either way, the situation would be resolved much sooner than it otherwise would. Sorry for the quibble, but... "forced"? Maybe it's the ILIASM mindset, but it seems to me that, for a forum that decries sexlessness, there is a lot of negativity expressed around the topic of sex, a lot of pejorative language is used to denigrate sex. Yeah, I get the resentment that builds up, but still....... "A couple who forced themselves to have frequent sex..." Why couldn't that just as likely be said, "A couple who determined to increase sexual frequency", or "a couple who resolved to improve their sexlife"? I'm not much on happy self-talk, but neither am I big on assuming bad-will. I used the word "forced" because that's the wording used in the post I quoted. Nothing derogatory was intended. Any of your preferred wordings could be substituted and the meaning would be the same in terms of the situations described. |
|
|
|
Post by csl on Sept 13, 2018 13:10:59 GMT -5
Sorry for the quibble, but... "forced"? Maybe it's the ILIASM mindset, but it seems to me that, for a forum that decries sexlessness, there is a lot of negativity expressed around the topic of sex, a lot of pejorative language is used to denigrate sex. Yeah, I get the resentment that builds up, but still....... "A couple who forced themselves to have frequent sex..." Why couldn't that just as likely be said, "A couple who determined to increase sexual frequency", or "a couple who resolved to improve their sexlife"? I'm not much on happy self-talk, but neither am I big on assuming bad-will. I used the word "forced" because that's the wording used in the post I quoted. Nothing derogatory was intended. Any of your preferred wordings could be substituted and the meaning would be the same in terms of the situations described. I had to go looking, because you were responding to shynjdude and he didn't say anything about "forced". I see that it was from a post by Anonymous Steve. Yes, you are correct that my word substitutions do fit into the situations, but they aren't as pejorative, are they? They even give the idea that it is a positive development, rather than the the negative connotation of saying "they forced themselves to have more sex", doncha think? |
|
|
|
Post by h on Sept 13, 2018 13:33:23 GMT -5
I used the word "forced" because that's the wording used in the post I quoted. Nothing derogatory was intended. Any of your preferred wordings could be substituted and the meaning would be the same in terms of the situations described. I had to go looking, because you were responding to shynjdude and he didn't say anything about "forced". I see that it was from a post by Anonymous Steve. Yes, you are correct that my word substitutions do fit into the situations, but they aren't as pejorative, are they? They even give the idea that it is a positive development, rather than the the negative connotation of saying "they forced themselves to have more sex", doncha think? In all honesty, I never thought it was perjorative. Going to the gym regularly to exercise would be good for me, but I would have to force myself to do it. I don't think of force as inherently bad. Until something becomes a natural habitat, everyone has to force themselves to change bad behaviors. |
|
|
|
Post by Chatter Fox on Sept 13, 2018 21:09:57 GMT -5
I voted "yes" but it's only valid if I were TRULY convinced that she was TRULY interested in a regular sexual relationship with me.
...and that's a VERY tall order. I need a LOT of convincing that it's what she truly wants for us.
|
|
