I started a new thread because I believe the combination of my recent success and my return to the BB with fresh eyes after being away for awhile have resulted in a sort of Eureka theory that will explain everything about the desire issue.
Assumption 1: There are no inherently LD or HD people. It's all relative.
Assumption 2: For the purposes of my Grand Unified Theory of Desire, I will consider desire to be for the most part a psychological rather than a biological state of being. I make this assumption because there is little that can be done about biology and also due to the evidence of such behavior as LDH's who MB rather than having sex with their HDWs and LDW who do experience high drive during courtship periods.
Grand Unified Theory of Desire
Your partner's level of desire is increased by the "value" you add to the relationship and decreased by the "validation" you seek (and offer)in the relationship.
Therefore, if you are the HD partner and you wish to increase your partner's desire (as opposed to simply increasing frequency of sexual encounters) you must either add value or decrease validation or both. For example, if I make my H his favorite dinner I am increasing value. If I say "Do you love me?" I am increasing validation. If I make my H his favorite dinner and say "I made you your favorite dinner because I love you." I am actually increasing the level of validation even more by linking the value of the dinner to it. I recently noticed that my real life behavior has unconsciouly changed for the better in alignment with this principle. For instance, if I make my H his favorite dinner, I don't draw attention to the fact and if he thanks me for the effort I'm likely to respond by saying something like "That's what I do.".
If a HD individual asks their LD partner "What can I do to increase your desire?" or "Why don't you want to have sex with me?" or "Why do you go all stiff on me when I try to give you a hug?" etc. etc., it is very likely that the answer they will get is either a straight-forward request for more value or a confusing request for less validation. Requests for less validation are confusing to the HD partner for several reasons. Firstly, because it's hard to offer validation without asking for it yourself and it can seem "mean" to not offer your partner validation. Secondly, only the world's most self-aware LD partner is going to give an unambiguous message about needing less validation in order to feel more desire because everyone needs/wants validation to some extent. Finally, the message will be confusing because it's hard to draw a clearcut line between value and validation. So much depends on motivation or assumed motivation. If every request for sex is viewed by the LD partner as a desperate plea for validation no matter what the circumstances or actual mindset of the HD partner might be then what's a HD to do?
Schnarchian philosophy is based on the premise of increasing desire by boldly reducing validation. IMO based on my own experience trying to apply his advice it will always work but only to the extent that you recognize your own value in the relationship because you will only be able to "hold on to yourself" to that extent. Most relationship books other than Schnarch are based on the concept that increasing value will increase desire.
So how do you get around the paradox that you will increase desire by increasing value but if you increase value in order to increase desire you will thereby exhibit an increased need for validation and therefore make the situation even worse? I think what it comes down to is relying on yourself or objective standards in determining your value within any relationship. However, that doesn't mean that you can't try to add value to your relationship in the particular way that your partner would appreciate. For instance, I can go by a personal or objective standard when valuing my cooking skills but I can also go by a personal or objective standard when it comes to valuing my skill in adapting my cooking to the particular needs/wants of my H. I'm never dependent on hearing "Mmm..that was yummy" in order to validate my cooking skills. The fact that I know that most people would find it yummy and/or the fact that I know that I did make an effort to cook something my H would find yummy is enough for me to self-confirm my value as a cook in the relationship.
So, if your goal is to increase your partner's psychological desire, the approach I would recommend is to ratchet your way upwards by increasing value and decreasing validation while staying self-aware. There is absolutely no reason to be angry at your LD partner. You would behave in a similar fashion in any situation in which you had a partner who either did not offer value in the relationship or didn't have the self-esteem to recognize the value that they did offer unless you were self-aware enough to recognize what was going on and stop the cycle from your end. It' harder for me to get a grip on what the LD partner needs to do to stop the cycle but clearly one thing would be to recognize the true value the HD partner is offering beneath the distraction of desire killing validation needs before it's "too late" and the value disappears along with the need for validation.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
Quote: I'm not clear on the definitions of value and validation.
If your wife is turned off because you are unemployed and 40 lbs. overweight than she is LD due to the low value you are bringing to the relationship. If you are handsome and rich and your wife is turned off because you tell her she's pretty every 5 minutes and you are willing to massage her feet for 1 hour in order to get 5 minutes of sex than you are giving too much validation. Obviously, there is a confusing "eye of the beholder" middle ground so that is why I suggest ratcheting back and forth between reducing validation and adding value. I should note that the point of reducing the amount of validation you offer your spouse is to reduce the amount of validation you need, not to get sex by using a stick instead of a carrot. For instance, if you feel a compulsion to say "I love you" to your spouse recognize that it's only a nice thing to do to the extent that you aren't saying it because you need to hear it in return. Maybe it would be a nicer thing to do to repress your desire to say "I love you" so that your spouse might actually get to feel the desire to say it to you without feeling compelled to do so.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
This is interesting and parallel I think to the Passion Trap argument. Assuming the HD is the same as the one-down (the one-down being the partner who is more keen to have the R continue).
The one-up is contributing higher value in the eyes of the one-down. Either by being more attractive or by being more "together" or more exciting or whatever. The one-down is seeking validation and is wasting energy worrying too much about the R which could be usefully put to effect adding value.
Add value without seeking validation in return Give validation without expecting some in return
In other words become high-value low-maintenance and your partner will be crazy about you!
Fran
if we can be sufficient to ourselves, we need fear no entangling webs Erica Jong
Sorry, I don’t see how any of this would change things in my M. If I quit pursuing, quit validating my W, quit bringing value to the M, why should I think she would suddenly (or even slowly) become more desirous of me? What is her motivation?
Quote: Add value without seeking validation in return Give validation without expecting some in return
In other words become high-value low-maintenance and your partner will be crazy about you!
Not quite. In some ways making yourself low-maintenance is the equivalent of making yourself easily taken for granted. Perhaps, I should add a third component to my formula so that it would go: Add value, Reduce validation given and asked for, Ask for more value (But I would suggest that you don't start out by asking for more value in an area in which your spouse suspects you of seeking validation even if you don't feel like that is what you are doing. So think of something you would like more of in your relationship besides sex and ask for that.) So if you wanted to increase your H's desire you might start cooking all his favorite dishes, stop asking him for compliments on your wardrobe and start asking him to fix some things around the house. The quality of your relationship will ratchet upward as you both get more of some things you want from the relationship. Also, human nature is just plain perverse, the fact of the matter is if you start acting like you are seeking validation through acts of service or expensive gifts or mushy romantic gestures than you make it easier for your spouse to seek value from you sexually. Guess what else? You might even find out that you like all that other stuff more than you thought.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
OK, now you’re making sense to me. Without the “ask for” provision, I do not see what incentive there is for my wife to respond. I have personally experienced her ability to go months without sex and not blink an eye. She just masturbates, mechanically gets off and goes on. She talks of it as more a hindrance than anything else. So in my case, if I don’t push, or ask for something, it just won’t happen.
Without the “ask for” provision, your idea makes sense from a woman’s POV. In most relationships the man is the pursuer and the woman the avoider. So becoming “high-value low-maintenance” would be attractive in the man’s eyes. I can see that. But this also assumes he has a sex drive, but it is only in remission because of what he sees to be an intimidating environment. Warm up the environment and his drive will naturally re-emerge. Right?
But in my case, I am the pursuer, she the avoider. Making myself “high-value low-maintenance” does not help because she is not HD to begin with. Sex is just not on her agenda. She has sex with me only because she knows it is her part of the give and take obligation. She does so in response to the fact that I have “asked for” the sex and impressed upon her that there will be consequences if she does not comply. I prevent the build up of resentment in her by doing my part of duties around the house, being nice, trying not to argue, etc. My actions create a certain sense of guilt and obligation in her. So I think she has sex as much to relieve her guilt (i.e., to help herself) as she does to make me happy. In fact, I do not think making me happy enters her mind at all. Her focus is on her.
So if I did not ask for the sex, she would be happy to relieve her guilt and sense of obligation in some other non-sexual way. Her drive is just not powerful enough to overcome her fear of intimacy. Men are conditioned to stuff their fear of intimacy as a precondition to enduring the rejection that comes along with initiating. So you see, if women didn’t reject us as much, we would not have evolved to be so emotionally detached. Yep, just what I thought, you women did this to us!
Mojo, Fran is absolutely right-- I just started reading the Passion Trap at lunch today and within the first couple of chapters he says almost exactly the same thing that you are saying. He also makes the point-- as you did-- that we are too quick to pathologize our interactions, and judge ourselves as sick or dysfunctional, when usually the interpersonal difficulties are caused by shifting balances-- who is currently approaching, who is currently avoiding. In your words, who is bringing value or not, who is validating or not.
He says that whether you're from a totally happy family or a deeply dysfunctional one, balances in your R will change and make you nuts from time to time. He says that people from more stable, "healthy" backgrounds will probably not stay nuts, but will either bail and find a better sitch, or work with their partner to find a solution. The rest of us just keep looking for cheese in all the wrong places.
Again, no one should take my word for it, but should read the book and draw their own conclusions. It seems like a very worthwhile book to me. On amazon, it's only available from used booksellers, so don't expect to find it in bookstores.
