Reaching a sexual compromise

[Notfootball]

DH and I have been together 10 years and have two young DC. My sex drive has always been a fair bit higher than DH's and prior to DC we had regular ish sex, though not as often as I would like. Obviously it tailed off during the small baby days/sleepless nights but DC2 is nearly 4 and we have DTD less than 5 times a year for the last 3 or so, me always being the instigator. If I say that I understand that he has a lower sex drive but can we talk about it, he takes it as a personal affront and uses excuses such as him being lazy, tired or the bad situation with his father dampening down his sex drive.

I just want to reach a compromise where we have a bit more sex without me feeling like a bloody pest. How do I even start this discussion with him?

I'm not Helena, it's important to make the differentiation. If a marriage is sexless yes it's grounds for annulment. If a person is unhappy they can separate and divorce. But there should be no expectation of sex, consent has to be agreed each time.

Im not saying that. I agree consent has to be agreed each time Of course it does.

Legally there is a promise to have sex. No sex ever to seal the deal = marriage can be annulled.

The bits I've quoted ARE part of the vows, and can't be omitted. They're the explanation required to explain what you're agreeing to.

Furthermore, it's ALSO later on in the contracting words in the CoE.

It is the fundamental premise of 'husband' and 'wife' and has been for thousands of years, long before the church or state started regulating marriage.

I agree too that there must always be consent, by the way.

You do not give an overall consent when you get married to have sex whenever your partner demands it, of course not.

But you also do not get to unilaterally decide that your partner doesn't ever get to have sex or to ignore their unhappiness about it or refuse to deal with it.

No Tales, there is no legal promise to have sex.

The bits you have quoted are not part of the vows. They are part of the service. There is no vow where each person promises to have sex with each other.

Yes there is because the contract is voidable if you do not consummate the marriage. It is part of the legal contract. If you refuse to consummate a marriage, legally it can be considered as if the contract never existed.

I did quote part of the contracting vows which are said "with my body" and the service bits I quoted form part of the vows.

Marriage is a sexual relationship and you are being disingenuous. No-one here is saying that the marriage contract and promises mean that people don't have the right to refuse sex, of course they do.

Not sure if this is helpful this far down the thread as it seems to have moved on a bit but me and dp have a similar difference in sex drive. I always knew his was lower then mine and if you had asked me when we first got together what I thought the biggest challenge would be for us I would have said sex, or rather lack of it.

The difference for us is that dh is willing to try and I am willing to have less sex then I would ideally like. We have had times when it has dropped too low for me (once a month or less) and then we have had to tally about it and come to an agreement.

Over the 7 years that we have been together the way that had worked well for us is to agree a frequency in advance that we both feel we can live with. I know this sounds deeply unsexy but it has really got us out of a rut to the extent that dh has even initiated it a couple of times recently.

I think by agreeing to do it day once a week or even once every couple of weeks to start with it just takes the pressure of you both. He knows he can deliver and you know it's coming without anyone having to angst about it. Now we are both a bit more comfortable and it is all less stressed I have noticed things are even starting to get s bit more spontaneous.

I've read some of these. There is a lot of simpathy for mixed matched sex drive.
I've read threads when the woman has a lower sex drive. The replys are so different. Interesting

I haven't read the whole thread.

I know at least a dozen men - probably more - age 45-65, who have never married, no children, no obvious girlfriends. I am pretty sure all those men have a low sex drive. Men don't exactly boast about having a low sex drive, but I suspect it is more common than the usual public perception.

Can the OP and her DH agree on a couple of things: they will dtd 'x' number of times a week, month, whatever. And also, can they agree that for 'x' time a week, whether it is 30 minutes once a week, or whatever, they will spend some time mutually caressing, not necessarily to orgasm.

Not sure how helpful this is, OP, but this was the case with my ex-H. He used every excuse under the sun to not have sex, and when we did (a few times a year) he would stop without coming and say he was tired. Basically it was symptomatic of his not wanting to be in a relationship with me any more, as when DD was just over a year old he left me for another woman. The whole experience has left me with a really fucked up attitude towards sex and sexual rejection. I won't go into that now but it is damaging my ability to have a healthy relationship. I urge you to address it and not be fobbed off, and look at the deeper issue of your relationship as a whole. Sex is a human need and you mustn't feel like you are wrong for wanting it.

Btw, in case you're wondering I think DD was meant to be put on this earth! I said I wanted to try for a baby, he agreed, the next month we had sex twice on consecutive fertile days (baby making sex - the first time he had come for 5-6 years) and bobs yer uncle. Last time we ever did it...

With my body I the worship/honour is a promise to have loving sexual relations! And of course it's not legally enforceable, but neither is doing housework or childcare or not cheating! But any marriage can be ended if most of the above are not adhered to! Stop digging Fairnuff!

I also think it's odd that if the genders were reversed the replies would be supporting her right not to have her body violated if she chose! as in a recent thread No hum!

As for the OP she has to make her case absolutely clear to her DH that the present situation is not right for her. He has to at least explain his reluctance and seek some kind of help. Only when physical reasons like hormonal ones are ruled out, can they look at the psychological ones, and despite his reservations, it needs exploring. It's not fair of either partner to enforce celibacy on another without at least looking at ways to improve the situation and reach a compromise, even if that is an open marriage. The 'father' issue sounds more like any old excuse to avoid intimacy.

What the deal with his father?

Was there ever any issues at home with abuse of himself or his mother?

It seems a really strange thing to pin his sexual hang ups on otherwise.

My sex drive is lower than DH's. However, I don't think it is low per se; it is low because I'm in a LTR.

5 x a weeks sounds like 'a lot', 'normal' or 'not enough', depending on each person's unique vantage point.

If you're in a brand new relationship, 5 x a week wouldn't be enough. And therein lies the rub.

I don't think human beings were designed, sexually, to be in long term relationships. Yes, things can deepen and become more meaningful as the years, and decades, pass. But the most rampant sex is almost always in the throes of a new, lustful, all-consuming relationship.

So often, I don't think it is that one partner necessarily has a low/er sex drive, or is asexual, or would be happily celibate. I think the fire has just gone out of their loins for their partner.

Pure and simple.

I also think it's odd that if the genders were reversed the replies would be supporting her right not to have her body violated if she chose!

Me too Snappy. It's his body, he has the right for it to be left alone if that is his wish. And she has the right to leave the relationship if that doesn't suit her.

A marriage without sex is legal and does fill all the conditions of the marriage contract. If a couple choose to have a sexless marriage they are still in a perfectly legal relationship. If one of them does not choose that, then they are free to leave. That is where the law protects them. It stops them being tied into a sexless marriage, not the other way around. There is no legal right to sex in marriage.

And if OP were a man people would be telling him this.

HearMyRoar your solution sounds like a good one, or at least the most workable I've heard. Did you find it difficult not to feel like he was just performing an obligation at all? Also, was part of the agreement about initiation, or was it more that your DH would 'agree' (can't think of a better word, don't mean to make you sound predatory!) to sex on this schedule if you initiated it?

Roomsdoom I have wondered about that. DH is not keen on seeing a doctor, though he probably would if I insisted. Can you tell my anything more about it, or is Dr Google a good place to start?

Not sure why this thread has derailed on a random religious angle and PP's assume that the OP is 1) religious + 2) Christian + 3) gives a fuck what some doctrine dictates or not!!!