Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Parenting
ParentingMothersSingle ParentsStep ParentsAdoptionTwinsSpankingChildren's Health
Pregnancy
PregnancyBreastfeeding
Marriage
MarriageDivorce
FamilyKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Family Forum / Marriage / Marriage / January 2009



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

my wife won't have sex with me

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
soochullee - 08 Jan 2009 05:24 GMT
It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
that Webster's doesn't have.  I'm a 26 year old Christian guy who like
most am facing a painful subject.  Lack of sex in my marriage,  I have
been married 3 years nearing 4 in May and can honestly say I've made
love to my wife less than 100 times in three years.  We've talked
about it many times before and she knows that it is a problem but
still nothing changes.  I'm hitting a six month stretch since the last
time and by last time I mean one time.  Not even a night of passion
maybe an hour's worth and that's it for six months.  I've prayed and
done all I could think of and have read on.  i've had sex with my wife
three times in the last 12 months.  I've read online blogs where
people go on long stretches but there over 50 years old.  My wife and
i are 30 and 26 years of age with no kids.  We have privacy and time.
Just no desire.  I've been sweet, I've been loving, I've demanded,
I've begged, I've wished, I've prayed, I can't live in a relationship
where sex is nothing.  It's painful.

Last night was a painful thing for me lol.  My wife got home at about
8:00 at night.  She said she was tired and wanted to be cuddled and
held.  I refused.  She pouted and said that i should hold her etc.  we
went to bed and I gave in.  I was affectionate and held her and
cuddled her like she wanted.  I just can't refuse her when she needs
affection.

We've talked on the subject before and I'm just so angry and tired of
trying to initiate and being shot down.  I'm the dumb dog with the
shock collar on and just can't understand why I can't cross the
lawn.

Someone please reply with a comment of truth
bill.lee007@yahoo.com - 08 Jan 2009 08:06 GMT
Kat - 08 Jan 2009 08:45 GMT
> It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
> because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> Someone please reply with a comment of truth

A comment of truth??  Oooh kay...

Let me get this straight... If you say you've been married a little less
than 4 years, but in 3 years the sex has been less than 100 times?  I don't
know who keeps track of those kinds of things but...3 years is a little less
than 1100 days.  180 or so of those days in 3 years are probably what many
women feel as "off limits" where they are menstruating.  That leaves a
little less than 920 days in 3 years.  That is an average of about one day
with sex in every 9 or so days.  You said, though, something about 3 times
in the last 12 months.  So let's take a year off, and 3 times of sex, so
that's more like saying in 3 years, there's been 100 times of sex but the
last year was only 3 times.  That gives me, using quick math in my head, 730
days in 2 years (since we're excluding the last year as there's only been 3
times) take away 180 or so days of menstruation and that's 550 days that are
more likely for sex... For an average of sex every 5ish days, excluding this
last year but including 2 years before.
That doesn't seem like poor you being so neglected sexually...
Xorra - 08 Jan 2009 12:37 GMT
>> It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
>> because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 46 lines]
> every 5ish days, excluding this last year but including 2 years
> before.  That doesn't seem like poor you being so neglected sexually...

First, your math is all screwy and wrong, and second, while it's common
enough for sex to be more frequent at the start and then get less frequent
as time goes on, it's not at all typical for there to be a 6 month stretch
of no sex in less than four years.  My husband and I have been together 20
years, have almost divorced, including me moving out for awhile, and we've
never even come close to a 6 month sexless stretch.

Soochullee, how is your marriage otherwise?  Are you happy?  Is she?  Do you
think she could be suffering from depression?  When you talk and tell her
how hard it has been for you, what does she say?  Do you think she'd be
willing to talk to a doctor about the problem?  A counselor?  A priest or
preacher?

And if the frequency of sex doesn't improve, what are you willing to do?
Will you resign yourself to this life forever?  Seek sex outside the
marriage?  End the marriage?  It's worth thinking about this, because she
needs to understand how important this is to you.

Xorra
Erin - 08 Jan 2009 13:06 GMT
> >> It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
> >> because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 66 lines]
>
> Xorra

I am amazed at the presumption that Western culture has about
marriage.
Marriage is not about sex every night.  And anyone who thinks so, may
indeed
need a doctor to explain the social aspects of this union and the
phases and
alterations that any couple goes through.

Erin
Doug Anderson - 08 Jan 2009 15:32 GMT
(snip)

> I am amazed at the presumption that Western culture has about
> marriage.
> Marriage is not about sex every night.

What a strange response.

First, there is no set of rules about what marriage is about.

Second, when someone is unhappy about having sex 3 times in the last
year, why would you try to denigrate him by telling him "marriage
isn't about sex every night?"
SamIAm - 08 Jan 2009 15:59 GMT
> (snip)
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> year, why would you try to denigrate him by telling him "marriage
> isn't about sex every night?"

I was thinking the same thing!!!
Michael A. Ball - 08 Jan 2009 16:53 GMT
>> What a strange response.
>...
>I was thinking the same thing!!!

So was I! I laughed out loud, when I read, "What a strange response."

________________________
Practice safe eating - always use condiments.
Erin - 08 Jan 2009 17:06 GMT
> >> What a strange response.
> >...
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> ________________________
> Practice safe eating - always use condiments.

Sex is a private matter between two people; marriage
is a social institution.  Personally, I do not believe
marriage counselors should intrude into such private
affairs; nor do I think the DSM has done a proper thing
in including sexual behaviour (frequency or homosexuality)
as part of  the therapist's job, unless the rights of the
SO are imposed upon, e.g. rape, or abuse.

Erin
Doug Anderson - 08 Jan 2009 17:12 GMT
> > >> What a strange response.
> > >...
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> as part of  the therapist's job, unless the rights of the
> SO are imposed upon, e.g. rape, or abuse.

Again I find this sort of bizarre.

You think marriage counselors should stay out of private matters?

What is the point of having a marriage counselor then, I wonder?

OK - maybe you think marriage counselors are a bad idea altogether.
What if a couple has marital problems they are unable to solve on
their own?  Why wouldn't they go get help?

And finally, none of this explains confusing "no sex for 6 months"
with "wanting sex every night."
Erin - 08 Jan 2009 17:22 GMT
> > > >> What a strange response.
> > > >...
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>
> You think marriage counselors should stay out of private matters?

I think they should stay out of sexual matters-- that may be the
domain of a doctor in cases of sexual disorders.

> What is the point of having a marriage counselor then, I wonder?

Personally, I would prefer a lawyer or a physician if I need
counselling
in marital abuse, child abuse, or health problems.

> OK - maybe you think marriage counselors are a bad idea altogether.
> What if a couple has marital problems they are unable to solve on
> their own?  Why wouldn't they go get help?

They are not children; surely they got married with some adult ideas
in mind, and can solve their problems in a like manner.

> And finally, none of this explains confusing "no sex for 6 months"
> with "wanting sex every night."

A doctor might be good.  But some people have a naturally higher
sex drive than others, or according to hormonal changes (e.g.
pregnancy), or stressful times in their life, or lack of harmony or
conflict.  A counsellor may be helpful if he or she enters the
relationship
intimately, and sleeps or lives with the couple to see what is wrong.
Otherwise, it is an academic exercise.

Erin
Doug Anderson - 08 Jan 2009 17:27 GMT
> > > > >> What a strange response.
> > > > >...
[quoted text clipped - 25 lines]
> counselling
> in marital abuse, child abuse, or health problems.

But the OP is not having any of those problems.

> > OK - maybe you think marriage counselors are a bad idea altogether.
> > What if a couple has marital problems they are unable to solve on
> > their own?  Why wouldn't they go get help?
>
> They are not children; surely they got married with some adult ideas
> in mind, and can solve their problems in a like manner.

Perhaps they can.  And yet they haven't.  So at some point whether
they "can" or not,  if they haven't solved their problems, the _adult_
thing is to get help.

The _non_ adult thing is to continue without trying to solve the
problem, or to give up.

> > And finally, none of this explains confusing "no sex for 6 months"
> > with "wanting sex every night."
>
> A doctor might be good.

Do you think a doctor could help you stop confusing "no sex for 6
months" with "wanting sex every night?"

That is your issue, not the poster's.
Michael A. Ball - 08 Jan 2009 18:08 GMT
>...I think they should stay out of sexual matters-- that may be the
>domain of a doctor in cases of sexual disorders.

Erin, I am pretty sure that most sexual problems are mental--not
physical. I've heard/read that more than a few times. This is a good
point to note that poor technique can cause physical/mental
complications. Sadly, there is a fair chance that's how this problem
began.

I endorse a thorough physical exam. If nothing is discovered, that
pretty well puts the problem in the domain of the counselor/therapist.
Doesn't it?

>...Personally, I would prefer a lawyer or a physician if I need
>counselling in marital abuse, child abuse, or health problems.

For now, we don't know of any health problems, and the abuse victim
seems to be the OP.
>...
>They are not children; surely they got married with some adult ideas
>in mind, and can solve their problems in a like manner...

Oh, Erin, please, don't even think like that. Being old enough to be
adults doesn't guarantee anything. The OP admitted withholding cuddling,
at least once, for selfish reasons. That's not love, and it is not
maturity. And before anyone takes a shot at me, yes, the OP is in a
tough situation and I can easily see why providing cuddling would be
repulsive sometimes. However, sometimes we must go above and beyond!

________________________
Whatever it takes.
Erin - 08 Jan 2009 18:15 GMT
> >...I think they should stay out of sexual matters-- that may be the
> >domain of a doctor in cases of sexual disorders.
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
> ________________________
> Whatever it takes.

Well, it's a *touchy* subject for sure. :-)

Erin
Stephanie - 08 Jan 2009 17:25 GMT
>>>> What a strange response.
>>> ...
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
> Erin

In what way do counselors intrude when a couple or person goes to them for
help?
Michael A. Ball - 08 Jan 2009 17:38 GMT
>Erin wrote:...

>> Sex is a private matter between two people; marriage
>> is a social institution.  Personally, I do not believe
>> marriage counselors should intrude into such private
>> affairs...

>In what way do counselors intrude when a couple or person goes to them for
>help?

Picky, picky, picky. I know what you mean. Its not an intrusion, when
you have an invitation, is it.  :-)

___________________________
Don't sweat the small stuff--and most of it is small stuff.  :-)
Erin - 08 Jan 2009 17:41 GMT
> >>>> What a strange response.
> >>> ...
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
> In what way do counselors intrude when a couple or person goes to them for
> help?

I don't know personally, but I consider it something that
two people know about each other because it is a close
thing, that nobody else knows as much, including counsellors.
That's just my opinion.

Erin
Michael A. Ball - 08 Jan 2009 18:33 GMT
>...I don't know personally, but I consider it something that
>two people know about each other because it is a close
>thing, that nobody else knows as much, including counsellors.
>That's just my opinion.

"Close"? Unfortunately, in multiple ways, they're becoming more distant
each day.

Things aren't always the way that seems logical or reasonable. No sort
of intimacy guarantees a good sex life: it is more than intimacy. Just
look at how primitive, unsophisticated and lacking sex is among teens!

My wife had many, many times the sexual experience, at least partners,
that I've had. You'd think she'd know everything about sex, right? Well,
it wasn't so. Our physical relationship progressed in a way that left
her seeing sex as a new experience.

I'm not bragging. Essentially, I put her needs first; helped her
discover things about her self; and pushed her in ways that were new.

It is possible the OP needs some guidance in technique. I can't say.

________________________
Percussion: a masterful mix of speed, force and finesse.
Erin - 08 Jan 2009 18:59 GMT
> >...I don't know personally, but I consider it something that
> >two people know about each other because it is a close
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> ________________________
> Percussion: a masterful mix of speed, force and finesse.

Hmmm; well some people have very high standards.

Erin
Stephanie - 08 Jan 2009 19:05 GMT
>> ...I don't know personally, but I consider it something that
>> two people know about each other because it is a close
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> Well, it wasn't so. Our physical relationship progressed in a way
> that left her seeing sex as a new experience.

There are SOOOO many possible ways in which sex can be made complicated by
experiential factors. I had a long string of really aholish boyfriends
before I met my now husband. I kinda bought the hype that all men are
aholes. Men are to get, not to like. Sex was one element of that weird thing
known as dating. One notable thing about a.sholes. They univerally suck in
bed. (I mean that statement very tongue in cheek. As one of the leaders of
the anti-generalization crusade, I recognize that my statement is  amassive
generalization and is almost certainly not true.)

Add to  that Catholic guilt. Add to that sensations ranging from discomfort
to pain, occaisional degradation that comes with dating a.sholes. What a mix
up!

> I'm not bragging. Essentially, I put her needs first; helped her
> discover things about her self; and pushed her in ways that were new.

One thing I have always said about DH, he never pushed me. DH will say
anytime he sought to nudge me, I jumped in. :) But in the early days, my
being comfortable was of paramount importance. The rest followed.

But in general, not knowing what is going on with the OP, I think the
opportunity for any numner of other factors that need to be dusted off and
examined is good.

> It is possible the OP needs some guidance in technique. I can't say.
>
> ________________________
> Percussion: a masterful mix of speed, force and finesse.
Michael A. Ball - 08 Jan 2009 19:23 GMT
>>... Essentially, I ...pushed her in ways that were new.

>One thing I have always said about DH, he never pushed me. DH will say
>anytime he sought to nudge me, I jumped in. :) But in the early days, my
>being comfortable was of paramount importance. The rest followed.

Exactly! The rest follows.

Please, don't think I was callous, forceful or anything like that. I
wasn't. It was always gentleness that did the magic.

As an example, during certain stimulation, she used to be afraid that
she was about to pee in the bed. I assured her that would be fine, but
it never happened. As a result she learned to enjoy more and more. "The
rest followed."

Stephanie, considering your early experiences, its a wonder you even
gave sex a second chance. Unfortunately, I fear many women have similar
experiences.

________________________
Whatever it takes.
Stephanie - 08 Jan 2009 19:42 GMT
>>> ... Essentially, I ...pushed her in ways that were new.
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Please, don't think I was callous, forceful or anything like that. I
> wasn't. It was always gentleness that did the magic.

I know. That was sort of the comparison I was making.

> As an example, during certain stimulation, she used to be afraid that
> she was about to pee in the bed. I assured her that would be fine, but
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> gave sex a second chance. Unfortunately, I fear many women have
> similar experiences.

Ugh. You have no idea. BUT. I had some positive assets in my camp too. My
Mom and Dad were really, really happily married. True love and all that.
Even as the youngest child in a house in which sex was never spoken, it was
easy to tell that an active sex life was part of the package. What WAS
demonstrated enough to be seen I think seeped in.

> ________________________
> Whatever it takes.
Michael A. Ball - 08 Jan 2009 17:48 GMT
>...Sex is a private matter between two people; marriage
>is a social institution.  Personally, I do not believe
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>as part of  the therapist's job, unless the rights of the
>SO are imposed upon, e.g. rape, or abuse.

Erin, no argument here: sex is a private thing. But what else do
distressed couples do, except seek outside help? If they lack the
mental/emotional resources between them, what other choice do they have?

I see you make some exceptions, and I can't help noting that the OP's
rights are being "imposed upon." We don't have much information, but I'm
not sure his wife isn't being abusive--even if unintentional.

I'm not up to speed on the DSM. I hasten to acknowledge that some
counselors/therapists are absolutely dangerous.
________________________
Experience is something you don't get--until just after you need it.
Erin - 08 Jan 2009 18:05 GMT
> >...Sex is a private matter between two people; marriage
> >is a social institution.  Personally, I do not believe
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> ________________________
> Experience is something you don't get--until just after you need it.

I don't think counsellors are dangerous.  I have no idea what they
would say if sex is a problem in marriage.  I would say, that there
are phases, and waves in a marriage or living-together situation.
I would say, wait until both people feel healthy, make sure you don't
burn out with work (we are a nation of workaholics), or find a private
means which does not interfere with the union -- such as legalized
prostitution.  If it is not the load of the work in the marriage that
is
the problem, but actually that you don't love the person anymore, the
decent thing to do is divorce.  Sex is not necessarily an expression
of love, but if sexual and emotional attachment is there but not for
your spouse anymore and somebody else, then I think the marriage
is over, unless you want to keep a mistress like Prince Charles until
the right opportunity comes up.  Otherwise, I think like many other
things in marriage, e.g. how much attention is paid to the kids, how
often a vacation is taken, how much house maintenance there is,
entertainment, family parties, work crises, etc. fluctuate and are
to be expected as a natural course of married life.

About the DSM -- yes, they still have some Freudian archaisms
about sex, especially for women, but i thin homosexuality is now
removed from the pathology list.

Erin
Michael A. Ball - 08 Jan 2009 18:14 GMT
>...I don't think counsellors are dangerous.  I have no idea what they
>would say if sex is a problem in marriage...

I really enjoy discussing things with you, but I need to wait before
saying much here.

Anyone who doesn't believe some counselors are dangerous is naive and at
serious risk. Does each one of us here have equally good advice,
expressed equally well, etc.? No--and neither do all counselors.

As for what they would say about a sexual problem, read the questions
Xorra asked.

I'll be back. :-)

________________________
Whatever it takes.
Erin - 10 Jan 2009 13:02 GMT
> >...I don't think counsellors are dangerous.  I have no idea what they
> >would say if sex is a problem in marriage...
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> ________________________
> Whatever it takes.

About counsellors being dangerous-- only in the sense that they
do not collaborate with physicians when there is a health problem.
Often there is a medical problem or a drug problem, and some
counsellor may be smart enough to look up the information that
is easily available.  But if they don't speak to the patient's doctor
about it, they may be leaving out pertinent information and
stray on the wrong path.  I think doctors and counsellors should
cooperate.  But maybe just the doctor knows exactly what
is going on and a counsellor is not necessary in such cases,
or necessary if given information about the medical problem.
Even then, I doubt the counsellor can do much as he/she does
not deal in medical treatments.   But I suppose they could be
sympathetic.

Erin
Michael A. Ball - 08 Jan 2009 20:43 GMT
>I don't think counsellors are dangerous.
 
Well, I don't have as much left to say as I'd thought. As you know,
there is good and bad every where. I consider some counselors dangerous,
and here is an example of why. Many years back, my wife agreed to meet
with her ex-husband and his counselor--for the good of their children.

The counselor advised her to spend more time communicating with the man,
spend more time in the presence of the children. Guess what/ The
ex-husband had never made any mention of how he had burned, tortured and
brainwashed my wife. I was so infuriated that it was only my wife's
intense urgings that kept me from reporting that counselor.

For the record, I acknowledge that there are counselors who are at the
other end of the spectrum: super!I have no idea what they

>I have no idea what they would say if sex is a problem in marriage.

Look at the many questions that have been posed to the OP. They are just
the tip of the iceberg, when it comes to what we need to know about the
OP, his wife and their relationship.

Because we're all human, certain principles apply somewhat universally.
However, because we are all different, it sometimes takes a lot of
probing, to get to the root of a problem. Sometimes, the problem will
look like one thing, but turn out to be something very different.

When a 30 year old person lacks a strong sex drive, something is really
wrong! Someone mentioned that the OP's wife might not know what is
wrong. That is such an important observation. It is very possible that
she isn't aware of what is wrong, or can't explain it, for some
reason(s). I feel sad for both of these people.

>I would say, that there are phases, and waves in a
> marriage or living-together situation...find a private means which
>does not interfere with the union
> -- such as legalized prostitution.

Granted, there are "phases," good and bad times, etc. Do my eyes deceive
me!? You advocate "legal prostitution?" Beyond a health card, what
difference does the "legal" label make? Its still sanctioned infidelity.
That seems like the wrong direction, to me.

_______________________
Play with fire! Zildjian drum sticks
Doug Anderson - 08 Jan 2009 20:52 GMT
> >I don't think counsellors are dangerous.
>  
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> brainwashed my wife. I was so infuriated that it was only my wife's
> intense urgings that kept me from reporting that counselor.

I'm sorry, I'm having trouble seeing where the counselor went wrong
here.

Given that she was meeting with the counselor and her ex, why didn't
_she_ mention this?

Counselors are no more mind readers than anyone else.  If their
clients withhold vital information it is hard to blame the counselor
for giving poor advice.  In this case your wife had information that
she should have shared.

> For the record, I acknowledge that there are counselors who are at the
> other end of the spectrum: super!I have no idea what they
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> When a 30 year old person lacks a strong sex drive, something is really
> wrong!

Why?  Or maybe "How do you know?"

Why can't sex drives just be like many other characteristics:  they
vary from person to person?

What _I_ think is wrong is that the disparity is harming the marriage.
That may or may not be fixable.  Possibly there are changes which
could make the wife more interested in sex,  possibly not.

> Someone mentioned that the OP's wife might not know what is
> wrong. That is such an important observation. It is very possible that
> she isn't aware of what is wrong, or can't explain it, for some
> reason(s). I feel sad for both of these people.

This I absolutely agree with.

But I don't think the assumption should be going in that there is
something wrong with a 30 year old with a low sex drive.  There
_might_ be.  There might not be.
Michael A. Ball - 08 Jan 2009 23:05 GMT
...
>> The counselor advised her to spend more time communicating with the man,
>> spend more time in the presence of the children. Guess what/ The
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>I'm sorry, I'm having trouble seeing where the counselor went wrong
>here.

The counselor advised putting a very vulnerable person into a working
situation with her former abuser/husband! Aside from all sorts of
verbal/emotional abuse, he had put out cigarettes on her. He used to
make her listen to Pink Floyd's "The Wall" through a headset, while he
said things like "I am your god." through a microphone mixed in.

That is how the counselor went wrong. Even with a chaperone, she would
have been at great risk.

>Given that she was meeting with the counselor and her ex, why didn't
>_she_ mention this?

It was *his* counselor. He surely brought back memories of their divorce
judge, who believed the lying witnesses her ex-husband had brought into
court. So, why would this counselor believe her?

Sitting in the presence of a man who had abused her so badly for years,
how can you expect her to have the courage to condemn this monster--on
his turf in front of his defender.

>Counselors are no more mind readers than anyone else.  If their
>clients withhold vital information it is hard to blame the counselor
>for giving poor advice.  In this case your wife had information that
>she should have shared.

Why would this piece of human waste admit that he'd been an abusive
monster. He wasn't in counseling to get well: he needed a certificate to
stay out of work! And yes, it would have been great, if she'd had the
courage to reveal this monster, but Rome wasn't built in a day. Their
divorce was only a few months back.

>> When a 30 year old person lacks a strong sex drive, something is really
>> wrong!
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>Why can't sex drives just be like many other characteristics:  they
>vary from person to person?

Touche. I shouldn't have made it sound like an absolute. Generally, but
not universally, 30-year-olds have a strong sex drive.

___________________________
Don't sweat the small stuff--and most of it is small stuff.  :-)
Doug Anderson - 09 Jan 2009 03:51 GMT
> ...
> >> The counselor advised her to spend more time communicating with the man,
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> The counselor advised putting a very vulnerable person into a working
> situation with her former abuser/husband!

But the counselor can't be expected to know that her husband was her
former abuser if your wife didn't tell her that.

Again: counselor is not the same as mind reader.

> Aside from all sorts of
> verbal/emotional abuse, he had put out cigarettes on her. He used to
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> judge, who believed the lying witnesses her ex-husband had brought into
> court. So, why would this counselor believe her?

Are you saying your wife told the counselor about her former husband's
abuse and the counselor didn't believe her?  Because that _would_ be a
problem if the counselor didn't at least take such a charge seriously.

But if your wife didn't tell the counselor at all (which is the
impression you've given me so far) then you can't fault the counselor
for not knowing this.

> Sitting in the presence of a man who had abused her so badly for years,
> how can you expect her to have the courage to condemn this monster--on
> his turf in front of his defender.

I have no way of knowing whether that is a reasonable expectation.

I think it is unreasonable to blame the counselor for not reading your
wife's mind through.

> >Counselors are no more mind readers than anyone else.  If their
> >clients withhold vital information it is hard to blame the counselor
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> courage to reveal this monster, but Rome wasn't built in a day. Their
> divorce was only a few months back.

If you are trying to convince me that your wife had good reasons to
withhold information, you are succeeding.

If you are trying to convince me that the counselor did wrong by not
reading your wife's mind, you are failing.

> >> When a 30 year old person lacks a strong sex drive, something is really
> >> wrong!
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> Touche. I shouldn't have made it sound like an absolute. Generally, but
> not universally, 30-year-olds have a strong sex drive.

Yes, I agree with this.  (Subject obviously to the fact that people
Michael A. Ball - 09 Jan 2009 20:30 GMT
>> The counselor advised putting a very vulnerable person into a working
>> situation with her former abuser/husband!
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
>Again: counselor is not the same as mind reader.

I don't expect anyone to be a mind reader. However, a couple usually
gets divorced because of a serious problem. The counselor should have
asked my wife, in private, if there were any reasons why she would be
ill advised to meet with the maniac she had divorced.

>Are you saying your wife told the counselor about her former husband's
>abuse and the counselor didn't believe her?  Because that _would_ be a
>problem if the counselor didn't at least take such a charge seriously.

I am certain she made no mention of his abuse; certainly not with him
sitting there! After 30+ years of being told that you are of no value;
having your children taken in a divorce, because his witnesses lied
under oath, she did not feel that she had a chance of being considered
credible. Therefore, she never tried to speak for herself.

Because getting custody of her children was paramount, she was willing
to meet with this monster, but not strong enough to let the counselor
know how horrifying it would be.

>But if your wife didn't tell the counselor at all (which is the
>impression you've given me so far) then you can't fault the counselor
>for not knowing this.

"First do no harm." Granted, she was not the patient.

The counselor was reckless and inept, but you don't have to take my word
for it.

________________________
Whatever it takes.
Erin - 08 Jan 2009 20:59 GMT
> >I don't think counsellors are dangerous.
>
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
> difference does the "legal" label make? Its still sanctioned infidelity.
> That seems like the wrong direction, to me.

Your wife was tortured?  I am so sorry to read this; i see your point,
but that must have been coercion to go the counselor and tell, under
the stress of not wanting to tell;

"Legalized prostitution" -- yes, i think men want sex more than
women and at some points it may make or break the marriage.
Some women would prefer to work as prostitutes if the government
protected them and treated them as respected citizens.  If you're
going to have marriage as a sanctified institution then you better
be realistic about its foundations needing more than romance and
religion.

Erin

> _______________________
> Play with fire! Zildjian drum sticks
Michael A. Ball - 08 Jan 2009 23:37 GMT
>.Your wife was tortured?  I am so sorry to read this; i see your point,
>but that must have been coercion to go the counselor and tell, under
>the stress of not wanting to tell;

Yes, she was tortured by her first husband. Her father had sold her
virginity to a black man, when she was 12. Her ex-husband used this to
continue the assault on her psyche. And he got far worse.

Because she had lost custody of her children in the divorce, she was
willing to do anything to demonstrate her suitability as their mother.
So, in a real sense, she was coerced into meeting with his counselor. I
believe there was only one meeting.

>...If you're
>going to have marriage as a sanctified institution then you better
>be realistic about its foundations needing more than romance and
>religion.

Premarital sex was condemned in another thread today, and I support
that, but post marital sex, with a different partner, is too much for me
to accept.  I can easily accept a porno collection and a toy collection,
but not a third person. I must say, you crafted an interesting
statement. I'll think about it.

________________________
"...Other people are weird, but sometimes they have candy,
so it's best to try to get along with them." Joe Bay
thillman1966@yahoo.com - 27 Jan 2009 00:04 GMT
> > >> It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
> > >> because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 78 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

Erin,

If you are so opposed to what you call "western culture" maybe this
isn't the right culture for you to live in.  Marriage is not a social
institute, it is a bond, even a legal one, between two people.  Sex or
an intimate relationship is something a couple, married or not,
doesn't have to share with anybody else.  Not the kids, not the in-
laws, not the friends, not anybody other then your significant other.
Therefore it is something that can be sacred or openly playful or
lustful or whatever both parties want/need, but certainly not
neglected by one.  I am starting to take on the viewpoint that unless
there is an obvious reason that both parties are "willing" to work
out, it is as much of a betrayal to deny intimate contact with your
significant other as it is to cheat.  I very much feel for those that
fell in love with a person with what seemed like a very simular
interest in sex/intimacy only to find it very different once the
honeymoon was over.  16 years later I am still just as confused,
frustrated and hurt as ever, but now my patience are far less.
Bill in Co - 27 Jan 2009 02:18 GMT
>>>>> It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
>>>>> because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 80 lines]
> If you are so opposed to what you call "western culture" maybe this
> isn't the right culture for you to live in.

???   What, exactly, is "western 'culture'"??
And .. where is it??
SamIAm - 27 Jan 2009 16:41 GMT
>>>>> It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
>>>>> because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 87 lines]
> honeymoon was over.  16 years later I am still just as confused,
> frustrated and hurt as ever, but now my patience are far less.

AMEN
NewMan - 08 Jan 2009 15:32 GMT
I am a Christian. And I must say that there are still some things that
I do not agree with in the way that Christianity observed in practice.

One of the things that I do not agree with is "no sex before
marraige". Now, to be sure, don't get me wrong here. I do not believe
in indiscrimitate sex and the plethora of sleeze and debauchary that
goes on all to frequently in todays society. No. However, the FACT of
the matter is that in any long-term relationship there *is* a
physical/sexual component. To completely ignor that part of the
equation *before* marraige is utterly absured, in my opinion.

*Before* two people get married they have every right to experience
each other physically and sexually, and to know what they are in for
should they get hitched for the lang haul.

Too many "religious" types try to push the crap on us that #1) No sex
before Marraige, #2) Once married, sex is only for "procreation", and
3) as soon as you are married "When will you be making babies, babies
babies!!????" (ie: new members of the chruch that can increase it's
numbers and therefore the churches influence).

There are not may people who would buy a car without a test drive.

To make the decision to commit to a person, you need to know them -
and that includes in the biblical sense. WIthout knowing how you and
your prospective partner will be sexually, before marriage, is kind of
like marrying a stranger - just a bad idea. It askes you to make a
critical, life affecting decision, without all the facts and
information required to make an informed decision. It borders on
trickery and/or deceit. IMHO.

And, unfortunately, it has led you to your currect perdicament. And
this is a double wammy for a Christian because if you were to divorce
your wife merely on the fact that there is enough sex in the
relationship you are gonna likely take it on the chin - to the point
where you are likely going to have to go to another church, and
possibly switch Christian demoninations to get away from the
persecution that most certainly awaits you.

My first marraige failed, and for many, many reasons. But in the ashes
of my first marraige I learned alot of things. Generally there are 4
accepted reasons for a divorce - the "4 A's":

Abuse,
Affair,
Addiciton,
Abandonment

From the informaiton you provided, the first 3 do not apply. The 4th -
Abandonment - *may* apply, but based on what you said it is iffy.

A link on Christian Dhvorce:

http://christiandivorce.1hwy.com/

Just Google a bit and you will find lots of info.

As husband and wife, you have a duty to one another to consider and
cultivate each others happiness. If a couple learns to put each others
happiness first, then a lot of things just take care of themselves.
You have raised an issue, and by your own account even though you have
both discussed this issue, nothing has changed.

Many years ago I was in a relationship. This relationship was very
satisfying on all levels, and had the potential of going long-term.
However, there were 2 or 3 significant issues that needed to be
addressed. I discussed those with that woman 3 times over a 2 year
period. Despite all promises of how things were going to change, not
one thing changed. In the end, I had to realize that actions speak
louder than words. That woman had no intention of changing whatsoever,
and by saying one thing and doing another, she was duplicitous. I was
not prepared to take the relationship any further. I broke it off. And
it was the toughest thing I have ever done - it ripped my guts out.
But it had to be done.

This freed me to seek a better relationship. Indeed, I am now with my
soul mate! I am fortunate indeed.

God did not intend people to live an a shell of a marriage. The
marital relationship is supposed to be a haven of love and abundance
with God's blessing.

SO...

You have a lot of thinking to do. Are you prepared to be honest with
yourself - *painfully* honest? Are you prepared to do what it takes to
either make things work, or to end the marriage and move on? It is a
rough road either way. And it will test your faith.

To give you an idea, in my first marraige I knew there were problems
at the 7 year mark. I spent 6 additional years trying to make it work
before the marraige imploded. I take marraige seriously, and I do not
believe in "serial monogamy" to the continuous marraige - divorce -
remarraige ala Hollywood.

I gave it all I had. And when I was finally able to b e honest with
myself and see the real truth, it became obvious what needed to be
done. And oddly, in the end, it was less painful to divorce than it
was to stay in a very bad marraige.

God's speed.

>It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
>because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
>Someone please reply with a comment of truth
Michael A. Ball - 08 Jan 2009 17:21 GMT
>I am a Christian. And I must say that there are still some things that
>I do not agree with in the way that Christianity observed in practice.
>
>One of the things that I do not agree with is "no sex before
>marraige"...

Okay. Let's see, we have one Newman who will "split hell wide open," [as
I used to hear in church].   LLLLLOL I'm just kidding.

In all seriousness, I've never read a more sensible post. Exceptionally
well done.

At some point, I began to think just like you: it is utterly ridiculous
to await the wedding night to roll the dice on such an important aspect
of marriage. Wouldn't it be interesting to find out just how many
Christians/church goers/etc. secretly believe as we do.

Thanks for the http://christiandivorce.1hwy.com/  Just glancing at it
made me a bit misty eyed, but I think about divorce sometimes. My wife
moved to a different county, 12 years ago, and vanished. I'm no longer
good mate material, but I might encounter a woman my age who'd
occasionally like to share a meal or a hug as much as I'd like to.

________________________
Whatever it takes.
SamIAm - 08 Jan 2009 17:27 GMT
>> I am a Christian. And I must say that there are still some things that
>> I do not agree with in the way that Christianity observed in practice.
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> of marriage. Wouldn't it be interesting to find out just how many
> Christians/church goers/etc. secretly believe as we do.

I agree with this (sex before marriage is good).  But just because sex
before marriage is good and abundant, doesn't mean it will remain good
after 10 years, 3 kids, 25 lbs, etc.

> Thanks for the http://christiandivorce.1hwy.com/  Just glancing at it
> made me a bit misty eyed, but I think about divorce sometimes. My wife
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> ________________________
> Whatever it takes.
Erin - 08 Jan 2009 17:44 GMT
> >> I am a Christian. And I must say that there are still some things that
> >> I do not agree with in the way that Christianity observed in practice.
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> before marriage is good and abundant, doesn't mean it will remain good
> after 10 years, 3 kids, 25 lbs, etc.

Yes exactly.  Sometimes people get marital advice from
their priest or a wise relative, that marriage is not going to
be as rosy and erotic for an indefinite time.  Marriage involves
some unpleasant responsibilities which may tire both people,
especially with a family to raise and a life of challenges, work,
illnesses, etc.  Geeeeez, do we need a counsellor to understand
that?

Erin

> > Thanks for the http://christiandivorce.1hwy.com/  Just glancing at it
> > made me a bit misty eyed, but I think about divorce sometimes. My wife
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> > ________________________
> > Whatever it takes.
SamIAm - 08 Jan 2009 18:04 GMT
>>>> I am a Christian. And I must say that there are still some things that
>>>> I do not agree with in the way that Christianity observed in practice.
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> illnesses, etc.  Geeeeez, do we need a counsellor to understand
> that?

Apparently some people do.  In fact, I think I could use the help of a
counsellor with this exact topic.

> Erin
>>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>>> ________________________
>>> Whatever it takes.
Doug Anderson - 08 Jan 2009 18:46 GMT
> > >> I am a Christian. And I must say that there are still some things that
> > >> I do not agree with in the way that Christianity observed in practice.
[quoted text clipped - 24 lines]
> illnesses, etc.  Geeeeez, do we need a counsellor to understand
> that?

Good question.  If the couple copes with these things well without a
counselor, then no, they don't need one.

But if a couple is in a situation like the OP where they are not
coping well, then they probably do need a counselor.
Joy - 09 Jan 2009 04:26 GMT
>>I am a Christian. And I must say that there are still some things that
>>I do not agree with in the way that Christianity observed in practice.
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
> good mate material, but I might encounter a woman my age who'd
> occasionally like to share a meal or a hug as much as I'd like to.

Michael, in a case like yours it might be foolish NOT to divorce.  Why would
you stay legally bound to someone when you don't know what she's doing, who
she is with, or whether she could in any way create a legal entanglement
that you don't want?

Besides, like you say, maybe you might meet a good dinner partner.  But you
won't meet the dinner partner you're interested in if you a.) aren't looking
and b.) aren't available...
Michael A. Ball - 10 Jan 2009 00:45 GMT
>...Michael, in a case like yours it might be foolish NOT to divorce.  Why would
>you stay legally bound to someone when you don't know what she's doing, who
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>won't meet the dinner partner you're interested in if you a.) aren't looking
>and b.) aren't available...

Whew. I know you're right, Joy. "Foolish NOT to divorce." I've had
similar things said to me before. Even the lady at the bank advised me
to close our joint checking account, which I did. So, I know you're
right. I've had a do-it-yourself divorce kit for many months, but
haven't done anything with it.

Just this week, I found an address for her--two counties away. I don't
know if it is still valid, but I reckon I'll be finding out.

I'm not sure why I dread this so much. Even the reasons that come to
mind are not good reasons.

Thank you for your concerned response.

All things must pass--George Harrison {RIP}
Joy - 10 Jan 2009 00:56 GMT
>>...Michael, in a case like yours it might be foolish NOT to divorce.  Why
>>would
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
> Thank you for your concerned response.

Wouldn't it be something to find out she divorced *you* years ago?

At any rate, while it is never a good thing, sometimes divorce is the *best*
thing.  Honestly, yours seems like a perfectly clear example of just such a
case.  Might as well get it over with, then you don't have to dread it any
more...
Michael A. Ball - 10 Jan 2009 01:19 GMT
>...Wouldn't it be something to find out she divorced *you* years ago?

LOL It certainly would! I must admit, I'd love saving the expense!

>...Might as well get it over with, then you don't have to dread it any
>more...

I still sometimes feel bad about my first divorce--in 1975. I really
need to stop living in the past. Thanks for the nudge in the right
direction.

________________________
If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space.
Bill in Co - 10 Jan 2009 03:48 GMT
>> ...Wouldn't it be something to find out she divorced *you* years ago?
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> I still sometimes feel bad about my first divorce--in 1975. I really
> need to stop living in the past.

Oh, I dunno about that.    Sometimes it seems healthier, given the current
times.
Doug Anderson - 08 Jan 2009 15:42 GMT
> It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
> because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> Someone please reply with a comment of truth

Let me be transactional and stark about this.

1) Whether or when your wife wants to have sex is up to her.

2) Whether you want to stay married under the current circumstances is
  up to you.

That is, there is something wrong here, and your options are solve it,
leave, or live with it.

What is wrong is hard to say.  Maybe your wife dislikes sex, and maybe
that could be changed.  Maybe you "aren't doing it well" and that
could be changed.  Maybe it is something else.

You aren't going to have a very good chance of addressing this problem
unless you can talk about it, and this tends to be _very_ hard to talk
about, so almost certainly I'd recommend couples counseling.

You have to be able to say in a safe situation (this is part of what a
counselor can provide) that sex is important to you, and your not
happy being in a marriage where sex is so irregular.  Your wife needs
to be able to talk about what is going on with her, in such a way that
she has to think harder about what is going on than the knee-jerk
reaction "all you care about is sex."

If the two of you could work this out on your own, that would be very
surprising to me.

So if I were you (and I haven't been, but I've been in a somewhat
similar situation), I would talk to my wife about the need for couples
counseling, find a counselor, schedule an appointment and ask her to
come with me.

In the meantime there are a couple of marriage books you might find
interesting/helpful.  I'd suggest Schnarch's "Passionate Marriage" and
Harley's "Fall in Love, Stay in Love."
Stephanie - 08 Jan 2009 16:16 GMT
> It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
> because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> Someone please reply with a comment of truth

Truth as I see it. There is likely a dynamic that has developed. And there
is not enough information to see what it is. It is likely that neither of
your conscious minds would be able to articulate what it is. Pwer struggle?
Resentment? Hidden sexual fears and issues? I do sense a tad of tit for tat,
you get the cuddle and I get some sex... But who knows.

So. Solution. Get thee to marital counseling. Ask her to come. Tell her you
love her, if that remains the truth, and want the best marriage in the
world. Tell her you want to find some help with this stuff before too much
resentment kicks in, if you can. (So she does not get defensive about you
taking off on her.) If she won't go, go alone.

Seek out counselors of repute at your church, if you have access to an
employee assistance program, a referral from yrou doc...

Best wishes.
Doug Anderson - 08 Jan 2009 16:33 GMT
> > It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
> > because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 33 lines]
> Resentment? Hidden sexual fears and issues? I do sense a tad of tit for tat,
> you get the cuddle and I get some sex... But who knows.

Except without the exchange.  She gets the cuddle and he doesn't get
any sex!

By the way, you are quite possibly right about this.  But there is
another explanation that works just as well for what the OP described.
He is so hurt by the feelings of (what he perceives as) rejection that
he finds it very hard to cuddle nicely.

It is sort of the opposite of tit for tat.  If you believe your
partner is avoiding doing what you feel like you need to be happy in
the relationship, it becomes harder to tend to the needs of your
partner.

> So. Solution. Get thee to marital counseling. Ask her to come. Tell her you
> love her, if that remains the truth, and want the best marriage in the
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> Best wishes.
Stephanie - 08 Jan 2009 16:51 GMT
>>> It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
>>> because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 38 lines]
> Except without the exchange.  She gets the cuddle and he doesn't get
> any sex!

Yah. That and a buck and half still won't get him a Starbucks.

Anyway, I don't find that tit for tat arrangements get anybody anything in
the long run. Which is the reason I mentioned it.

> By the way, you are quite possibly right about this.  But there is
> another explanation that works just as well for what the OP described.
> He is so hurt by the feelings of (what he perceives as) rejection that
> he finds it very hard to cuddle nicely.

Absolutely.

> It is sort of the opposite of tit for tat.  If you believe your
> partner is avoiding doing what you feel like you need to be happy in
> the relationship, it becomes harder to tend to the needs of your
> partner.

And who the heck knows!  Down the pike, those hurt feelings result in
grumping acquiescence to cuddling, which she then interprets as him not
wanting and loving her. She then wants sex less AND does not server his
favorite potato recipe. And then she begins to notice that he does not
really listen to her when she speaks, which had never been an issue for her
before. Then he starts to think, goddam all this nagging....

And you are left with a muddle that can be difficult to pinpoint while
thickly in it. Which is why I thought professional help before the muddle
got any muddier was a decent idea!

(Of course, I made up the connect the dots trail of resentment... some folks
might not get that.)

So. Solution. Get thee to marital counseling. Ask her to come. Tell
>> her you love her, if that remains the truth, and want the best
>> marriage in the world. Tell her you want to find some help with this
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>>
>> Best wishes.
Vickie - 08 Jan 2009 17:59 GMT
> It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
> because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> Someone please reply with a comment of truth

You say you have talked about it, but have you asked her *why* she keeps sex
so low on the priorities list?
Maybe she doesn't know herself and needs to find the reason so she can
figure things out.
If it winds up that she just has a lower libido than you and not something
else like self conscious body image, needing more romance, not happy with
the performance, etc, you both need to find a good medium and decide what
you can live with to stay married.

Vickie
Michael A. Ball - 08 Jan 2009 19:00 GMT
>...Someone please reply with a comment of truth

Please, answer Xorra's questions--which are some of the same questions
many of us would ask you.

Does your religious views? If so, how does she respond to her biblical
obligation to be submissive to you? Note: I Do Not accept that rule
nearly as literally as many church folks.

________________________
Whatever it takes.
Tai - 10 Jan 2009 06:42 GMT
> It's about 11:00 at night in the midwest and I'm writing to a blog
> because I'm lost, hurting, confused, depressed and more adjectives
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> Someone please reply with a comment of truth

I think your options are limited, unfortunately.

Do you know if your wife enjoys sex at all?  Does she orgasm when you do
have sex? It sounds like she feels affection and welcomes non-sexual contact
from you so clearly she doesn't dislike you - a fairly common reason for not
wanting to have sex with someone.

Did she ever have desire for you? Sometimes, even if desire is present
initially, it can be squashed by continually bad sex and, in effect, may
have been trained out of her where you are concerned.  Are you able to
communicate honestly enough with each other to rule that out as the reason
for her reluctance?

You say you have talked and we can guess what you've said to your wife but
what was her response to you?  If she simply lacks the desire for sex and
there aren't external reasons for that (work stress, health problems, past
trauma) then she's not actually broken, you two will always be incompatable
sexually.

Frankly I don't think you have much hope of ever having a satisfactory sex
life with your wife. Unless she is willing to see this as a problem for you
both and want to change your situation you don't have any chance at all.
Adding to my pessimism is that if this truly is a libido issue rather than
the inevitable result of several years of unenjoyable sex then making
herself available more often to accommodate you isn't going to work all that
well for either of you, given the disparity of your current sex drives.
You'll both know she's bored by the chore sex has become and you won't have
the sense of shared pleasure that is so important in an intimate
relationship.

See if you can get your wife to go to joint marriage counselling with you.
Trying to talk about this on your own hasn't been working for you but it
might help to have a neutral and trained third party guide your discussion
of this very sensitive problem.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2010 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.