To think it's crazy that we hang our stability on sexual attraction?

[NoisyDenimShaker]

This post is about being married (or as good as married).

As I've aged, and seen entire lives blown up over sex, it's occurred to me how completely crazy it is that we organise our entire lives around something as fleeting, whimiscal, and delicate as sexual attraction.

Our life's finances, our children's sense of home and stability, our mental health, our very home, which should be our sanctuary, is all ultimately hung on sexual attraction.

It's. Crazy.

And I don't have a better idea. That doesn't mean our species' way isn't INSANE.

I know people might say, well it begins with sexual attraction but it develops into something more, a shared history, being family, being best friends, deep love. I agree wholeheartedly with that, and it's my answer, too. I'm someone who was made for commitment, and I get more bonded and interested in my partner as time goes on. I'm not someone who gets bored with commitment.

However, after many years together, my husband did not feel the same. The lure of the big wide world beckoned, other women seemed more attractive, and off he went. And he used to be so in love with me. The same thing happened to a good friend of mine. Her husband adored her, until he decided more sex was more important and went off seeking it.

And we've all seen the threads on here about runaway husbands.

YOU might be comfortable with longterm married/committed love, but we really don't have much control over the possibility of a restless or unfaithful partner. And so our entire lives can get blown up, easily, over sex.

The truth is that all our security and stability is hung on sexual attraction, and I think it's utterly insane.

I have no answer, but it does occur to me that the aristo way of doing things - marrying for business reasons - might be more sensible than our way, which is to organise things around often-fickle hearts.

I'm getting divorced after a very long separation and I'm determined that my home and security will never depend on a partner's sexual attraction to me again, so I guess I'm heading for a LAT relationship if I find someone I really like. (Living Apart Together.)

I really miss not having a life partner, but on the other hand, I'm glad that the stability and security of my home isn't built on the bedrock of marriage, which is - according to a divorce lawyer who wrote a book entitled IF YOU'RE IN MY OFFICE IT'S ALREADY TOO LATE (or something) - well, according to him, marriage is all about sex. I had thought sex was a part of it, but he reckons marriage is all about sex.

Well, I don't want my security and stability to be tied to sexual attraction. It's too fleeting.

Sorry for the essay. What are your thoughts?

It's not all about sex in every marriage, but it takes both people agreeing that there are more important things. If one person is fickle or cares more about sex than anything else, that's all it takes. We can only make an educated guess about what the other person will be like as they age.

For me, one of the most important factors in choosing a husband was finding someone who (seemed to) share my core beliefs and values. Of course, people can always lie, but you just do your best to find someone who believes that marriage is forever (barring something like abuse or infidelity). That's a lot less common these days than it used to be, with fewer people believing in God and the sanctity of marriage, not to mention less social pressure to stay together to avoid scandal. Obviously there's always been cheating and the breakdown of marriages, but it's just easier today to split up for any reason at all, with less worry over the consequences. It's been normalised, for better or worse.

I agree entirely.

And then some spouses throw it all away for sex. Often men, but not always. And so often with someone they wouldn't want to be married forever to, anyway.

If a young man has the choice between a decent sensible capable girl who adores him and a total hottie who is he going to choose to marry?! Honestly the smug “our relationship is so much more than that” ” posters are annoying missing the point and actually very naive.

But my post is about lives being shattered because of sex, which might mean a spouse leaving, but could also be the discovery of a past or present affair, or other ways in which one spouse makes sex a big deal - like silent treatment if the high-drive spouse doesn't get what they deem is enough. Or pressure for one spouse to do things they don't want to. There are lots of ways that sex can ruin your life apart from a spouse actually leaving, because we build our entire lives on a sexual relationship, and I'm just really really questioning this.

What you're describing is abuse, it's not really about sex. Like rape isn't about sex, it's about power and control.

Giving someone silent treatment because they won't do what they want is emotional abuse. Coerced sex is rape. Pressure to do something you don't want to do is abuse.

You're describing a relationship which is based on power and control, not sex.

Hi Noisy. Yes, perhaps many people do build their lives on a sexual relationship. I'm suggesting they didn't when our society was built on a foundation of religion. Religion - the opium of the masses... a spiritual booze. Since then, and the sixties revolution, there are no 'rules', and people are indulging in their base instincts. Living like pigs in troughs basically. I think a lot of people don't though. Especially as they get into middle age and older. The opium of the masses nowadays? Alcohol, porn, sex, mindfulness...

I eye rolled too when I saw the initial responses.

straight in to blame the woman for bad choices 🤦‍♀️

The whole point OP is making is that you can choose someone due to shared financial goals and emotional and intellectual connection, but there is ZERO guarantee that your partner won’t walk away from it if his head is turned! And the chances of it happening over time just increase.

I agree with you OP- in fact you’ve articulated my thoughts exactly.

our entire society and family structure is based around 6-24 months of intense physical attraction. I suppose it’s better than the alternative which is an arranged marriage- on the face of it, it’s the more sensible thing to do, but seems to lead to just as much heartache.

I think we should all live in tribal groups- with less reliance on a relationship to provide financial stability

In my parents generation( dad dead ,mum now 85) you got married and you stayed married until death and that was that . My exhusband left because he no longer fancied me and didn't fancy being a dad to our 2 small children.Years before he'd have had to suck it up. In modern times he didn't have to. The good thing Iis that women don't have to remain in misery either

People of your parents' generation may not have divorced as readily as people do now, but of course they didn't have to "suck it up". My parents, who would both be in their 90s were they still alive, had been divorced for years, and it wasn't that uncommon.

You hit the nail on the head. It’s pretty much a lottery.

of course, you’ll get some where the relationship was never healthy.

But I’ve been really surprised by some of the marriages that have exploded among my friends. There’s nothing different about their relationship ( to the casual observer) than others who stay together.

and the wronged partner is often blindsided

I agree. And having an affair is also abuse, as is shattering someone's life and heart into a million pieces to go off with someone else.

I agree that having an affair is abusive. It often involves gaslighting and can lead to PTSD. It's a very cruel thing to do to someone.

I've been surprised that way too. A really loving couple I knew are no longer together after he had a mid-life crisis and changed beyond all recognition many years in. But another couple, one half of whom was known to be a serial cheater from way before they got married and had kids, are still together. It makes no sense. I would never have predicted those outcomes. Sometimes I wonder if it's the least romantic/sentimental people who are more likely to remain together, because they're more practical and perhaps aren't led by their feelings and their romantic dreams/ideals as much.

It's a total lottery and the whole thing just seems stupid. Marriage is so unstable these days that I'm beginning to think its only use is to have children.

Yes, all manner of things held marriages together in the old days. Women having not much education or income, strong community groups, religion, lack of other options, shorter lifespans, and too much hardship to be thinking about what an amazing life you could be having if not for your boring old spouse.

Most of those barriers to damn well pleasing yourself have been removed. Stats say that we're at 42 percent divorce rate in 2022, but that hardly captures the full range of heartache in marriage, considering many people stay through a lot of marital troubles.

The divorce lawyer I mentioned upthread is called James Sexton, and he's written two books, HOW TO STAY IN LOVE and IF YOU'RE IN MY OFFICE, IT'S ALREADY TOO LATE.

I read the latter book, and he tosses out that marriage is about sex. That made my eyes widen. I was quite shocked. To me, marriage was about so much more than sex. But then I realised that, in a material sense, he's right. It's literally the only thing that differentiates marriage from all other relationships. I once read about a couple who went for premarital counselling with the vicar, who asked the couple why they were getting married. The groom listed, as one of his reasons, "To have sex," and the article said that the bride's face was a picture. I've also read that grooms see the walk down the aisle as the start of sex on tap, which is, obviously, not really how women see it - generally. Point is, marriage is built more on sex than I had realised. Like many on here, I also considered it as a small part of a much bigger pie. Seems that's quite a female way of viewing it.

Anyway, Sexton obviously has huge experience of divorcing couples, and has given the matter much thought. He gave an in-depth interview on what he's learned about sex, marriage, and divorce, and it's pretty interesting.

Ignore the clickbait thumbnail; the interview is deep, thoughtful, and moving. If it's too long, skip to 1.03, the chapter entitled Is Sex the Biggest Cause of Divorce?

s

I agree it makes no sense to base any major life decisions on sexual attraction, and it seems illogical. I am asexual and only experience romantic attraction, meaning that I can fall in love with someone based on their personality but sexual attraction doesn’t come into it because I don’t experience that at all. I believe this has actually helped me to find a “good” partner. I was able to choose my DH based on his lovely personality and his ambition without worrying about whether or not I’m sexually attracted to him (because I knew I wouldn’t be). If I was limited to dating people who I happened to find sexually attractive it might have been a lot more difficult to find a suitable partner. DH is sexually attracted to me but doesn’t have a particularly high sex drive either (he struggled with doing it regularly when trying for a baby). I’m happy to have sex a few times a month for him. I get nothing out of sex for myself but I love him and like giving him pleasure.

I agree with your general point, but wanted to mention that actually, if somebody leaves you to chase sex, he didn't actually have the deep feelings for you that you thought he did and probably isn't capable of it. That is the behaviour of a shallow and selfish person. They fake those feelings in order to get you, and as long as you remain useful to them, they keep faking. Then you lose your usefulness to them as the order of their priorities change, and off they go.

That's cool and all, but your post is about your psychology and experience. Your husband could decide he wants more sex. And your life could implode. Your life, like any married person's, is still built on sex. Just because it's built on two people who want little of it, it's still a sexual agreement - i.e. that neither of you want much of it.

I don't know what the answer is to this societal conundrum. I'm just pointing it out.

So how do you explain the many years of deep, loving partnership and creation of families and shared histories that often precede affairs and other types of sex-based divorces?

As I said, when the spouse and the relationship is considered useful to his/her enjoyment of life, the person in question feels good about being with her/him and wants to stay. When he/she decides that a different life would be preferable, he/she is able to detach easily because the feelings were never that deep or about the person as a human being, but more about what he/she was getting out of the relationship.
Leaving/cheating isn't really about sex per se, but about novelty. The point is it's a newer, different partner who the person sees as being more useful at the time.
The exception would be when the spouse is no longer willing to have sex and you're not prepared to give up your sex life. Then you might leave over sex itself rather than for the novelty of a different partner.
Unfortunately, far too many people think getting a new partner will fix their personal problems. They blame their failures on their current spouse and assume a new partner will make it all better. It's similar to people who think a geographical change will fix emotional problems, so they move to a new place.

You're right, there's a chance he could one day decide that he wants more sex/sex with others and leave. Although I would be very surprised because that's not what our relationship is based on and he's never shown any interest in anyone else, but you never know for sure what's going to happen in the future. But honestly if he did leave me over sex I wouldn't want to be with him anyway. With such an abrupt personality change he would no longer feel like the man I married.

We don't really have a sexual agreement. I don't believe that he would leave if I stopped wanting to have sex altogether. We actually did stop for quite a while after I gave birth and he never even mentioned it until I brought it up. But I don't want to stop because it's something he enjoys and I'm happy to do it for him.

My thoughts, too!

I was infinitely wiser at 22 than later. I had a plan to earn well in the career I was studying for, get pregnant by some passing bloke with appropriate qualities, stay single and raise my child with paid help. This was quite brave of me in the mid-1970s with no support systems for single mothers, but rational.

At 24 I married the dickhead I was going out with, entirely due to social pressure.

The support systems and women's earning potential have improved dramatically since then - and the social pressures have eased, but they're still there! It's possible to resist them, and I wish more women would. Several configurations are available now: you can even have a stable, two-parent family setup without living in the same house all the time.

OP, you said It truly makes me wonder if the solution is discreet but open relationships. You mean be more French? Well, that leads to some spectacular dramas as well. At least it allows both men and women off the marital leash. Too much of this thread is all about men's "needs", while women have them too!

@Garlicbest You wrote "Too much of this thread is all about men's "needs", while women have them too!"

Actually, I've been very careful to use gender-neutral language like spouse, partner, etc. I think the instability of marriage can 100% come from either spouse, and easily happen in same-sex partnerships too.

You also said that the French approach can cause some spectacular dramas. I've never done the French approach and, as a lifelong romantic, I'm not sure I could handle it, but surely it would cause LESS drama since both parties are expecting infidelity and/or doing it themselves?

I think I'm just going to take up knitting and good causes.

I think there are huge problems with marriage, and particularly the nuclear family, in providing stability. Sexual attraction can be fickle and change over time and I can see why having it have such consequences for our lives is risky.

One approach would be to be more laissez faire about infidelity, but increase the financial penalties for leaving someone. I do wonder if that would lead to marriage that exists on paper only in any real sense, though.

Another would be to stop marrying (or partnering up) altogether. I was fascinated when I first read about the Mosuo society. A very different approach to stable society which allows for sexual attraction but doesn’t organize anyone’s life around it. Doesn’t fit with our current ideas about children branching out and becoming independent, though.

I honestly don't know what the solution is.

YY, @NoisyDenimShaker, I'm now in a monogamous relationship with myself 😂