|
Post by lonelyhubby on Oct 1, 2024 7:11:43 GMT -5
I have asked - I believe it is hormonal. She isn't messing around, she has just withdrawn to isolation. She is naturally an avoidant because of how her f*cking Mother was an abusive narcissistic cold fish who showed zero affection - so when she burned out from the 5 kids, me working 80-90 hours a week and hit perimenopause, she shut down. Her Father was one of those uncomfortable with anything except the occasional hug also - His Mother was a browbeating pain in the ass who showed little to no affection - and the cycle continues.
We talked about all of this before getting married - it wasn't either of our first marriage and we discussed this would not be an issue - but here we are.
She has also gained about 75 lbs. in the last 15 years and I also believe she has body image / acceptance issues - when I walked in on her having "self care" she commented afterwards that she needs to lose weight and it bothers her. so a lot of factors playing into this. If we can just get the hormones balanced out, I believe the rest will fall in line and be workable.
|
|
|
Post by isthisit on Oct 1, 2024 9:35:48 GMT -5
I have asked - I believe it is hormonal. She isn't messing around, she has just withdrawn to isolation. She is naturally an avoidant because of how her f*cking Mother was an abusive narcissistic cold fish who showed zero affection - so when she burned out from the 5 kids, me working 80-90 hours a week and hit perimenopause, she shut down. Her Father was one of those uncomfortable with anything except the occasional hug also - His Mother was a browbeating pain in the ass who showed little to no affection - and the cycle continues. We talked about all of this before getting married - it wasn't either of our first marriage and we discussed this would not be an issue - but here we are. She has also gained about 75 lbs. in the last 15 years and I also believe she has body image / acceptance issues - when I walked in on her having "self care" she commented afterwards that she needs to lose weight and it bothers her. so a lot of actors playing into this. If we can just get the hormones balanced out, I believe the rest will fall in line and be workable. It sounds very difficult for your wife, and I am sorry to know about her background. I hope she can get some therapy and support with coming to terms with her emotionally challenging family history. For her, and also for you, as it isn’t fair to make her issues a burden for you and your quality of life. I’m still unconvinced she can claim no desire while self-servicing though. There is desire, but other stuff is getting in the way which makes more sense. I hope it works out for you. Regarding your reference to her weight gain, this is an issue often raised here by men with avoidant wives. It’s really sad that women fall for the myth that women can only be sexually attractive under a certain weight/dress size/body shape. It seems to me from comments made here that very many men retain their attraction to, and desire for, their spouses despite large weight gains.
|
|
diode
Junior Member
Posts: 78
|
Post by diode on Oct 1, 2024 18:03:16 GMT -5
It sounds very difficult for your wife, and I am sorry to know about her background. I hope she can get some therapy and support with coming to terms with her emotionally challenging family history. For her, and also for you, as it isn’t fair to make her issues a burden for you and your quality of life. I’m still unconvinced she can claim no desire while self-servicing though. There is desire, but other stuff is getting in the way which makes more sense. I hope it works out for you. I'm going to suggest that there's room for disagreement on the point that you raised above, isthisit. Decades ago, before things fell apart for me (possibly even before I got married), DW and I discussed her history of self-service. She stated that it was purely a physical act geared at reducing a physical sense of urgency but that it was otherwise completely uncoupled from any sexual context.
|
|
|
Post by isthisit on Oct 2, 2024 3:47:37 GMT -5
I'm going to suggest that there's room for disagreement on the point that you raised above, isthisit . Decades ago, before things fell apart for me (possibly even before I got married), DW and I discussed her history of self-service. She stated that it was purely a physical act geared at reducing a physical sense of urgency but that it was otherwise completely uncoupled from any sexual context. Yep, there is almost always room for a range of views on most topics here, after all, none of us look through exactly the same lens. This place is at its best when differing perspectives are cordially discussed and debated. I simply disagree with your wife. For me, “physical sense of urgency” (to masturbate) is always part of a “sexual context”. I can’t wrap my head around a division of these concepts, but that’s my lens, and my normal libido, at play.
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Oct 2, 2024 11:35:20 GMT -5
I can't even type this without wanting to yell it. There are no "new" problems here. She DOES NOT WANT you. She hasn't, she doesn't, and she never will. She's flaunting it on her fucking car to the world that she doesn't want you. SAVE YOURSELF. Please, for the love of God. Save yourself from this. You're right. And I know it. I was able to delude myself with the progress that we'd made. The fact that she was willing to do some things, at least demonstrated that she cared if I was happy or not. But the pride flag just is the constant visual reminder that she doesn't really want to. Ya. It sounds like you are starting to get the point I've been trying to articulate. If you gauge performance on the appearance of sexual activity - people can enact sexual practices that they don't desire. For example, a straight man can perform sexual activities in prison in return for not being beaten or for other favours. The presence of some elements of sexual acts does not address the upstream issue of whether or not someone DESIRES them, or is repulsed by them, and why that might be, and what that means. It isn't necessarily "progress" at all.
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Oct 2, 2024 12:09:51 GMT -5
I'm going to suggest that there's room for disagreement on the point that you raised above, isthisit . Decades ago, before things fell apart for me (possibly even before I got married), DW and I discussed her history of self-service. She stated that it was purely a physical act geared at reducing a physical sense of urgency but that it was otherwise completely uncoupled from any sexual context. Yep, there is almost always room for a range of views on most topics here, after all, none of us look through exactly the same lens. This place is at its best when differing perspectives are cordially discussed and debated. I simply disagree with your wife. For me, “physical sense of urgency” (to masturbate) is always part of a “sexual context”. I can’t wrap my head around a division of these concepts, but that’s my lens, and my normal libido, at play. There was a long time when I was avoidant with my then-partner, but continued to feel "physical urgency" which was indeed always part of a "sexual context". I did have physical urges though and handled them alone typically, and occasionally with my neglected partner, who likely viewed it as "progress" in fits and starts. I was either averse to her - something intuitively not sitting right with me - or to the situation of being invested in a fulsome relationship with "my best friend" at the time and the responsibility and permanence that meant. After a several years, I had what I can only describe as an epiphany moment and came to see her, and myself, and my future differently. I wanted to build a future with her, invest in us, and see it through with her. When I did that - when I chose to lean into the relationship and finally "arrive" and take on the mantle that had been offered - my desire for her strengthened and became very strong and remained that way for decades - seemingly impossible for me to uproot even when I found myself in a place where I desperately needed to. Because - I found this out later in life - another layer of tragedy here was that many people choose an improbable, or implausible relationship (eg. an affair, a long distance relationship, a relationship with someone who has incompatible values or lifestyle, a relationship with someone who doesn't quite seem them that way), it's because they, themselves also don't want to choose to lean into something permanent. They seek baked-in external limits. Since that time, I've noticed that many people have a wedding, but not as many actually have both partners show up for the marriage. For those people who find themselves "married" to someone when they haven't truly embraced that person and that life, the marriage is a state of imprisonment. It's something to endure, to survive, to transact on, or to eventually escape from. The person they married becomes their jailor. So, my point in this sprawl of observations and anecdotes is that it seems plausible to be sexually avoidant in a marriage while still being highly sexual, IF you either haven't embraced your partner or the circumstance of being married and everything that means.
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Oct 2, 2024 18:53:49 GMT -5
I'm going to suggest that there's room for disagreement on the point that you raised above, isthisit . Decades ago, before things fell apart for me (possibly even before I got married), DW and I discussed her history of self-service. She stated that it was purely a physical act geared at reducing a physical sense of urgency but that it was otherwise completely uncoupled from any sexual context. Yep, there is almost always room for a range of views on most topics here, after all, none of us look through exactly the same lens. This place is at its best when differing perspectives are cordially discussed and debated. I simply disagree with your wife. For me, “physical sense of urgency” (to masturbate) is always part of a “sexual context”. I can’t wrap my head around a division of these concepts, but that’s my lens, and my normal libido, at play. "Responsive desire" is, we're told, a decision to attempt romance, and allowing physical touch to induce desire; prime the engine. It seems we have some wives who potentially see the value of physical release but want the emotional closeness to precede sexual intimacy (a common cause of dead bedrooms). Emotional closeness resulting from sex is seen as "cheating". You're supposed to care deeply first, and sex is the reward. When physical drive mounts, one needs to disperse the craving lest one bestow upon one's spouse the reward they have not earned. The emotional closeness of sex must build upon an existing threshold painstakingly built before bodies unite. Emotional closeness born from physical closeness is an animal, hormonal shadow of the cerebral, conscious, deliberate ties forged beforehand and where such efforts fall short, libido must be staved off lest the incentive to unite spiritually is dulled and never wielded to the task of a union of souls. If love isn't set to difficulty level 9, I mean, what's the point? Is it even love then?
|
|
|
Post by lonelytiger on Oct 2, 2024 19:05:55 GMT -5
Mine claims hers is responsive desire which is why I must initiate all the time.
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Oct 3, 2024 6:18:38 GMT -5
To be clear, Dr. Psych Mom speaks of low-libido/refusing spouses initiating some of the time once they know that responsive desire is a potential result.
This might call upon the refused to be ready to have them break off, saying the responsive desire is a "no-show" some of the time. (I added that part, I don't know if PsychMom would agree). She doesn't speak to sexless marriages much. She tends to talk about improving sub-optimal partnerships.
|
|
|
Post by lonelyhubby on Oct 3, 2024 6:51:54 GMT -5
She does a great job of justifying Women's no libido issues, but RARELY puts it in context as a problem that Women need to address. Always makes vague statements like "Never having sex is not good.." But never says that that doesn't mean once a year, or once a month..... Or once every 9 years... But men, they have to CONTSANTLY date, be romantic, switch things up, work to please, etc... It's exasperating
|
|
|
Post by lonelyhubby on Oct 3, 2024 6:52:21 GMT -5
Mine claims hers is responsive desire which is why I must initiate all the time. That's just an excuse.
|
|
|
Post by isthisit on Oct 3, 2024 13:06:19 GMT -5
Mine claims hers is responsive desire which is why I must initiate all the time. I am not much keen on that response. Primarily, because this focuses only on what is important to her, at the expense of what is important to you, which is not what a marriage is supposed to be about. Also, the human race has survived because we have evolved to learn from our experiences. How hard is initiating for your benefit if she has learned that she gets into it fairly quickly? Your wife is plain, old selfish.
|
|
|
Post by isthisit on Oct 3, 2024 13:12:20 GMT -5
She does a great job of justifying Women's no libido issues, but RARELY puts it in context as a problem that Women need to address. Always makes vague statements like "Never having sex is not good.." But never says that that doesn't mean once a year, or once a month..... Or once every 9 years... But men, they have to CONTSANTLY date, be romantic, switch things up, work to please, etc... It's exasperating Not so sure it’s just men who make a fuck-ton of effort for no improvement. My H would have said just the same as your wife, with the same notion of time scales. And yep, it was exasperating.
|
|
|
Post by lonelyhubby on Oct 3, 2024 14:27:04 GMT -5
Fair enough, I was referring to what Dr. Psych Mom says. She does give some male supportive articles and posts, but all in all - very excuse after excuse about justifying Women's drop in libido and minimizing accountability - Men have to keep dating and romancing, but also saying that Women's libido goes away almost to zero after marriage and that's Ok, you still have to romance, etc..
|
|
|
Post by isthisit on Oct 3, 2024 14:48:04 GMT -5
Fair enough, I was referring to what Dr. Psych Mom says. She does give some male supportive articles and posts, but all in all - very excuse after excuse about justifying Women's drop in libido and minimizing accountability - Men have to keep dating and romancing, but also saying that Women's libido goes away almost to zero after marriage and that's Ok, you still have to romance, etc.. I never listen to the snippets of psycho-babble posted here. It’s all pseudo-science aimed at a customer base, in this case male customers in a SM. I can assure “Dr” Psych Mom she is quite wrong that “women’s libido goes away to almost zero after marriage”. Some, possibly, but not all which is an important distinction to omit. And credible science does not omit that which does not suit. Could be she is just churning out shit her customers want to hear to keep them coming back for more and making a nice few bob on those clicks. *edit: There are some recommendations of highly credible references to the work of authors such as Mark Manson who talk a lot of sense.
|
|