With this viewpoint, I see how it can lead to a great resentment. This thing which is so easy for the other to give, who wants to give, why won't the wife give it...
But then again, I thought this was the case where it wasn't going to happen because the wife was "gay"...
But even if she is "gay", she can physically accomidate the husband.
Don't know. Want to hear how this discussion goes.
I have to tell you that "physical accomodation" is not the kind of sex I find exciting. It can also lead to resentment and even sexual aversion on the part of the wife, especially if the husband wants daily sex.
I think if a man or woman knew they were being "accomidated" out of their spouses love for them, they should be wise enough to keep it limited to an amount that causes great resentment.
Now if the other spouse, really likes "accomidating" their spouse even though they have no feelings for it, it might not be a bad thing at all.
You have to look at it clinically -- loss of desire is often a clinical problem. If you look at it as love=sex, then you will feel resentment of course.
I think that's a rationalization -- unless there is a medical reason that precludes the physical ability to have sex, then not having it is a choice and a decision. Even without desire, you can still have sex for the benefit of your spouse. According to MWD, for women desire often follows action, so after you start you find you enjoy it. I believe she uses the analogy of jumping into a slightly cold pool -- you're not interested in taking the leap but once you're in and acclimated it feels good.
Part of the traditional "marriage contract" is that you will be faithful to your spouse, that you will not have sex with other people. Therefore, your only allowable source of sexual gratification is your spouse. If you are meeting their needs and they are comfortable in your relationship, but choose to deny you sex, that seems cruel and unreasonable, and cannot be excused by clinical lack of desire.
Married 18, Together 20, Now Divorced M: 48, W: 50, D: 18, S: 16, D: 12 Bomb Dropped (EA, D): 7/13/11 Start Reconcile: 8/15/11 Bomb Dropped (EA, D): 5/1/2014 (Divorced) In a New Relationship: 3/2015
Just to be clear, I think some people are okay with a sexless marriage, they are not tortured by it. If they are okay with it and find peace, then I have no issue with the dynamic at all. I only get fired up when one partner is deeply dissatisfied with their sex life and the other partner chooses to say "too bad". That seems to be your sitch, and I don't understand how you can find that maintainable.
Married 18, Together 20, Now Divorced M: 48, W: 50, D: 18, S: 16, D: 12 Bomb Dropped (EA, D): 7/13/11 Start Reconcile: 8/15/11 Bomb Dropped (EA, D): 5/1/2014 (Divorced) In a New Relationship: 3/2015
Just to be clear, I think some people are okay with a sexless marriage, they are not tortured by it. If they are okay with it and find peace, then I have no issue with the dynamic at all. I only get fired up when one partner is deeply dissatisfied with their sex life and the other partner chooses to say "too bad". That seems to be your sitch, and I don't understand how you can find that maintainable.
Agree. If one partner is being tortured by a reasonable and simple demand, then it is a problem. You can't just sweep it under the rug and not consider it.
No, that would not be maintainable. But in her case, she also developed a sexual aversion after all the pressure I put on her for such a long time. It's very difficult for her to talk about it. So yes, you could fault her for not being brave enough to go up a steeper hill. But my point is it's not just "too bad".
With this viewpoint, I see how it can lead to a great resentment. This thing which is so easy for the other to give, who wants to give, why won't the wife give it...
But then again, I thought this was the case where it wasn't going to happen because the wife was "gay"...
But even if she is "gay", she can physically accomidate the husband.
Don't know. Want to hear how this discussion goes.
I have to tell you that "physical accomodation" is not the kind of sex I find exciting. It can also lead to resentment and even sexual aversion on the part of the wife, especially if the husband wants daily sex.
I think if a man or woman knew they were being "accomidated" out of their spouses love for them, they should be wise enough to keep it limited to an amount that causes great resentment.
[/quote]
Should read "wise enough to keep it limited to an amount that DOESN'T case great resentment"
I did some research on it, it is often compared to social anxiety disorder, and everything I read said it is highly treatable with cognitive behavioral therapy, so I see no difference in my position, it's just a step removed.
If your W is not capable of having sex with you due to sexual aversion, then is she participating in at least weekly therapy to overcome her sexual aversion and recover the capability to function?
If she is not undergoing therapy, then once again that seems like a selfish decision and she's leaving you with a "too bad" attitude.
Married 18, Together 20, Now Divorced M: 48, W: 50, D: 18, S: 16, D: 12 Bomb Dropped (EA, D): 7/13/11 Start Reconcile: 8/15/11 Bomb Dropped (EA, D): 5/1/2014 (Divorced) In a New Relationship: 3/2015
You're trivializing the difficulty. Kind of like telling someone with severe OCD, "Hey, just snap out of it, OK?"
No your over analyzing it. Your wife does not lay with you because she doesn't want to. Where you the one who discovered his wife was gay? If she is gay and is not turned on by the male image or it disgusts her, that could be a good reason for something she "can't snap out of".
