To think it’s perfectly reasonable to divorce over sex?

[scranonstrangler]

I see alot of threads on here about the shock of sexless marriages ending in divorce when they’re otherwise “happy”. But I just don’t understand the point in being married and not having sex.

Even if there’s some level of erectile dysfunction you can have intimacy. If your sex drive is completely permanently shot why is it a shock if someone goes elsewhere?

Having a baby didn’t change that for me and neither did bereavement.

Genuinely interested in explanations because I can’t fathom having 0 interest in sex.

I agree with you. I mean I don’t have a problem with people mutually choosing to be sexless if they want. But I can’t understand why someone would want to basically impose chastity on their partner and then remain married.

Marriage is hard enough without sacrificing one of its few perks. It makes no sense to me that you would put yourself through the grief of cohabitation with someone if you don’t get to have sex with them.

Well I’m breastfeeding and have no drive whatsoever. Maybe he should leave me?

As in a lot of things in life, 'it depends'. If, for example, your DH had had a heart attack and was worried about doing vigorous exercise including sex in case it brought on another attack, would you divorce him? Obviously there are other ways to get close. Maybe it depends on your definition of sex. OTOH if someone just goes off sex and doesn't want to find out why or be bothered to do anything about it you might feel justified in ending the marriage, but what if it's good in other ways and you still love them?
I don't think sex is everything. One other thing is that for me it has become less of a need than it was when I was in my twenties.
So YABU.

Exactly. This was the point I was sort of making with my post. Most [sane] people would think it’s totally unreasonable for a man to leave his wife because she has lost her sex drive due ti BFing. Obviously on the other end of the spectrum if one party ‘shuts up shop’ soft no reason that might feel unreasonable… who arbitrates on everything in between?

I think even avoiding vigorous action there’s some level of sexual intimacy that you can keep.

There are even leaflets handed out to people with COPD for sex that’s less stress on the lungs.

I think I can appreciate lulls for example soon after I had my baby but sex was just always on my mind. I just didn’t have the capacity for it as often as I wanted.

If both people aren’t interested in sex that’s fine but why expect someone to stay married when there’s no prospect of it changing. You could be best friends without the stress of mingled finances and arguing about the laundry etc

Sex is not essential. Intimacy is not just sexual.

Out of interest, why get married if you don't believe in the "till death us do part" bit? Surely if you don't see it as a life long commitment but want some legal certificate you just get a civil partnership nowadays?

I absolutely love living with DH. And sex is such a tiny part of that. It's not even 1% of the glue that holds us together.

I don’t agree when people shut up shop in terms of intimacy completely, that is unfair, as partners we need to be loving and affectionate with one another.

But OP you sound very arrogant in terms of these events not affecting your own sex drive, you may one day walk in another’s shoes. We literally have no clue what could be round the corner with our mind and bodies, I’m 42 and just had two years of shitty health and pain, it can certainly knock you for six and just because you have breezed through so far, doesn’t mean you always will.

I think intimacy is important, so I’m still doing everything with my partner because I want to, never against my will and I love being close to him, but my libido is so diminished to just a few years ago, it might happen to you and you may think a bit differently if it does.

You do realise that people don’t necessarily feel things the way you do don’t you, OP?

Bereavement and childbirth/ breastfeeding had a massive hit on my sex drive.

People can and do divorce for any reason they want to.

No-one has to stay in an unhappy marriage, no matter what the reason.

I don't think OP is talking about having periods of little to no intimacy, I think they are referring to those who choose not to be intimate full stop forever

I'm not sure where I personally stand on this, I'd like to say me and DH are in it for the good, bad and ugly but I think you never know what you'd do unless it happens. I do think I'd struggle from a confidence and self esteem point of view if I felt DH didn't want to be intimate with me ever again. I can deal with periods of something, but if he just had no drive at all with no plausible explanation I don't know how I'd feel or cope with that.

I guess I don't have a strong view on it, everything depends on the circumstances

I think it depends on the timeframe, reasons and the discussions involved. Sex drives will naturally rise and fall over time and I’d anticipate a little bit of patience on both sides. I think if one person expects no sex for an extended period with no attempts to remedy it’s ok for the other person to end the marriage. Well, it’s ok to end a marriage for any reason as long as done respectfully and not involving other people.

Yeah I can understand illness, new baby etc but I don’t understand shutting up shop.

Sex is such an important part of a romantic relationship but maybe people are okay with their marriage no longer having that aspect of romance. Could be wrong but keen to understand.

Do you think it had a hit permanently or has it returned a bit since?

Why get married if you dont believe in the with my body i thee worship bit

I mean, I think you should stop thinking so much about other people’s sex lives or lack thereof, OP. Why on earth do you care?

It depends on whether you're ok with not having sex. But basically, you cannot get sex outside the marriage (in a monogamous relationship), and it's the only thing. You can have many needs from your spouse but ALL of them you can morally find elsewhere, except sex/romantic intimacy.

So if you need more than it's possible to have with your spouse and it's likely to stay that way (and to the breastfeeding mother, it's possibly hormones-related and will change) and you're not ok with that, then yes. Divorce is absolutely reasonable.

I was "involuntarily celibate" for 10 years, because after marriage my ex turned abusive and refused sex because I wasn't behaving properly or being nice enough to him - and I believed him. We then had monthly sex when I was ovulating (sex, no intimacy) until I got pregnant. No hugs, no intimacy at all during pregnancy. Then once baby was 6 months he had sex twice with me, I got pregnant and then it was game over entirely. It absolutely destroyed me. He was abusive in general but being turned down for sex (or even a non-sexual hug) repeatedly broke me eventually. I have no self-confidence at all.

I would say that if your sex and intimacy drives are mismatched, for whatever reason, and it's something you/your spouse can't or won't change and are you are not happy with it, GET OUT. Divorce is horrible (I did that too) but it doesn't destroy your sense of self-worth in anywhere near the same way. I've had lots of specialised trauma therapy but the pain is so deep and so pervasive, that it doesn't really go. I'd love nothing more than someone to want me, even just to hold my hand, but it's now a dangerous thing for me because as soon as someone knows you're attracted to them, you're SO vulnerable, they can destroy you. I'm lonely but I won't ever put myself in that position again. I barely survived this, I wouldn't survive someone else doing this to me again.

I think I can appreciate lulls for example soon after I had my baby but sex was just always on my mind. I just didn’t have the capacity for it as often as I wanted.

I think you may have a higher sex drive than a lot of people. Immediately post baby, having sex constantly on one’s mind is fairly unusual. Nothing wrong with it, but it would explain why a sexless relationship is so unimaginable to you.

I enjoy sex very much, but I wouldn’t say it was the bedrock of my marriage.

So much this. OP it's really none of your bloody business. What are you doing wondering about this kind of thing? It's not your concern. Nothing to do with you. I couldn't care less if other people are at it like rabbits or living as friends. I find it so very odd that anyone would care about this. What on earth is wrong with you?

Was this inspired by this thread? https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5190336-to-think-its-crazy-that-we-hang-our-stability-on-sexual-attraction

I think I rather agree with that OP.

Bereavement is very recent and drive not back to where it was.

My loss has completely changed me in more ways than just this, I’m less patient now and feel very irritated easily. Hoping it’s not forever 😞

A bit that many people don’t have in their vows any longer. I didn’t.
Sex may be hugely important to you.
Its isn’t so much to many other people.
There is a myriad of reasons why sex and intimacy can become difficult or less wanted. People have differing libidos etc. For the first 6 months of our babies life I can honestly say that sex was absolutely the last thing I was interested in. In fact for several months it would have been physically impossible. Should my lovely DH have left me and our tiny baby?? Cos he wasn’t getting his end away.
If my DH broke up our family because he wasn’t getting as many orgasms as he thought he should I would lose all respect.

I’m committed and in love with my husband but it’s conditional. If he wasn’t a caring partner with whom I felt compatible then it wouldn’t work. The only love that is truly non conditional imo is parental love.

That’s probably right then. I think I waited 8 weeks but had been thinking about it from about 3/4.