He’ll just have to do without (sex)

[TeeJay1970]

Went out for a Christmas drink last Friday with a group of 40 something ladies. As the drinks flowed the conversation turned to sex.

One of my friends (48 years old) announced that she was done with and had no plans to have it again. This then begged the question of where this leaves DH (46 years old). Her words where, and I quote, “He’ll just have to do without.” In the following argument amongst the 7 of us two groups emerged. The first agreed with her that if she didn’t want it that was the end for the two of them full stop.

The other group, my group, felt this was just not fair on her DH. Now I fully agree that nobody should have sex if they don’t want to but is it really fair to wake up one day and say to your DH “Darling I’ve been thinking. Last night I decided that you’re never having sex ever again.”?

Can she really expect her marriage to carry on as before (he is a good DH and always has been)? On the other hand can he really expect her to have sex if she doesn’t want to?

One women suggested that she might agree to him having some form of “arrangement” to go elsewhere. Her response was “I’ll cut his balls off!”. Is it OK for her to tell him she wants nothing to do with his balls ever again but demand complete control over them?

I really can’t decide what’s right here.

Any thoughts?

Choosing celibacy for yourself is fine. Expecting it of a partner is bizarre imo, sex is a normal thing that adults do.

some people are missing the point that she hasn't even discussed it with him or seen it as something to be discussed. it's a unilateral decision that he will just have to put up with.

that's hardly a relationship is it?

It doesn't say anywhere that she hasn't discussed it with him, does it? She might well have.

I don't know of they have discussed it or not.

Juan I find your "love will find a way" argument a bit naïve. If he loves her he'll be happy to have celibacy imposed on him is not fair or realistic. This has more to do with making a marriage work than grand gestures of love. Making a marriage work is about BOTH partners having an awareness of the reasonable expectations of the other and should never be just, as you seem to imply, if you love me you'll just have to do without.

Both should be aware of the changing needs of the other but as most on here have said she can decide for herself that she never wants sex again but she does not have the right to make that decision for him.

Using the line "If you loved me enough" is emotional blackmail.

That is not what Juan said at all. She's saying she's [the wife] entitled to make that decision, he's entitled to say "In that case, I'm out". She's changed the terms so that would be a perfectly reasonable response.

They don't HAVE to stay married as your post implies. If they can't both be happy in the marriage then perhaps it's best they don't.

This is the phrase from Juan
"If they love each other, they will make it work without sex with each other"

This to me implies that Juan is saying love is enough and that the man doesn't love his wife enough if he leaves. Or that he isn't prepared to put the work in to make this marriage work.

Please don't forget that I know both of these people very, very well. He does love her (at the moment) he has made real efforts to make the marriage work and to be a good husband and father. He has supported her through thick and thin - good times and bad. He loves her enough to make a reasonable marriage work.

TeeJay - yes, I'm male.

But tbh, I really don't see how my gender has anything to do with this. My point was that one partner should not make such life changing, sweeping decisions without any consultation and blithely state that this is how it will be, deal with it.

To me, that is saying that one partner has literally no regard or respect for the other, which is totally wrong - irrespective of whether it's a female or a male instigating the problems.

Exactly as Bertie explained.

TeeJay I'm not sure why you infer from my neutral sentence about both parties, that any split would be the fault of the dh? I didn't say that. Either they love each other enough to make a celibate marriage work, or they don't and they can split up. Her allowing the dh to perform some occasional marital abuse (as your group of friends thought necessary) will NOT be the thing to save their relationship, at all. If anything, it would make it awful for both of them and make a split more likely - after all, who would want a relationship with a man who had sex with them knowing they didn't want it? I'm really appalled that people think a woman should have sex against her wishes to please her man.

My dh is 100% with me on this too. If for any reason I decided I wouldn't have sex again, but wanted him to remain faithful (unlikely btw!!) he agrees that the only solution would be to have a celibate marriage. There is no way he would want or could accept an offer of sex with me knowing I didn't want to be doing it or wasn't enjoying it. I'm shocked that anyone thinks otherwise tbh.

Obviously she doesn't have to have sex if she doesn't want to but she can't just expect that he will stay and accept a celibate life - he's only in his 40s, not exactly past it. He would not be unreasonable to consider this a dealbreaker. It would be one for me.

Juan you talk so much sense.

Juan i get where you are coming from and no one should be co erced into sex they dont want.

But "with my body i thee worship" is just as much a marriage vow as "forsaking all others"

He could think "well how come we are expected to keep some of the vows but not all of them!

I didn't see the earlier post and was going off Juan's post at 15:29, sorry. But I think the later clarification was fair.

It is terribly sad if two people who love each other reach a point where they cannot stay married because something has come between them, but equally no, I don't think that not wanting sex is something you can or should compromise on. Letting him seek sexual contact outside of the marriage, hmm, possibly. But it's emotive - I don't think it's particularly unfair to say that the terms of a relationship are I don't want sex with you but I don't want you sleeping with others either. The other person is free to take or leave the relationship knowing those terms.

The thing is sex is not a right bestowed by a relationship, even a monogamous relationship. Either party has the right to withdraw consent at any time, there is no discussion to be had! If you don't want sex, you don't want sex. What it does show, IMO, is a huge lack of communication beforehand - it's really unlikely that somebody arrives at suddenly "I don't want any more sex." If they had previously been enjoying it then they would probably miss it and want to get it back either medically or by regaining the emotional connection. If they weren't happy with only certain things about sex, frequency, technique, risk of pregnancy, etc, then you discuss that unless you can't or won't for some reason.

People don't just suddenly go off sex and not care about it. This would have been an issue for longer but she just hadn't spoken about it then (or perhaps they did, who knows, it's not any of our marriages.)

FFS. There is no vow which says you have to provide sexual favours. (and not all vows are universal anyway, I didn't say anything like that).

"Worshipping with my body" could also mean - doing physical labour for the person, being respectful of their wishes, not touching them when they don't want to be touched, touching in a non-sexual way.

Either way consent can be withdrawn by anybody at any time. Nobody has the right to overrule that.

I totally agree that nobody should be required to provide sex, nor should they be required to agree that their partner can have sex elsewhere.

However, I don't think it would be at all fair to think negatively about someone who chose to leave a marriage when asked to keep to those conditions.

Ye gods!...she might aswell slap a male chastity device on him & throw away the key.

I presume this guy is already aware that there is zero sex and it may have been like this for some time. Some people can remain in sexless marriages and would prefer to do that rather than lose their homes, marriage, children etc.
if he was to seek sex outside of the marriage he would probably be taken to the cleaners in a divorce settlement.
It's all about communication but, quite often, there is a total shut down not only on sex but on any discussion regarding it. Unless he is happy to have no sex for the rest of his married life then he is in for a very difficult and frustrating future ahead of him.

I'm a lot like the wife in this scenario. I'm a lot younger, but would be very happy never to have sex again. I really don't get all the posts that see this as sad. Some people care about it, others don't. I just don't see it as a big deal.

I do agree that it's not fair to force celibacy on another person- she should have an open and honest conversation with her DH and give him the option of leaving or getting it elsewhere. But if he says that's not what he wants, what then? You're left with two people who want different things and it's incredibly difficult for either of them to change.

Bertie Botts i was merely trying to guess what he may be thinking.

She has a choice whether she wants to have sex again or not.

He has a choice whether he wishes to stay with her in spite of this or decide to leave and pursue a relationahip that includes sex.

Are they still intimate in terms of cuddles, hand holding, kissing?

Bertiebotts: "it's really unlikely that somebody arrives at suddenly "I don't want any more sex"

Perhaps it's unlikely for it to happen suddenly, but it's very easy for it to happen gradually over a period of time, especially when you factor in all of life's stresses (and differing libidos to start with). By the time you realize, the situation had existed for some time and it's not easy to talk about. Or, you can talk plenty but it doesn't change the underlying feelings.

"quite often, there is a total shut down not only on sex but on any discussion regarding it"

And why do you think this might be? Not because there is massive pressure from all sides to BE sexual, that if you can't/won't/don't want to have sex there is something seriously wrong with you, that women, especially, must keep their men happy or they will stray, perhaps? That they've been compromising and trying for a really really long time and finally they have hit their saturation point and broken?

I see this come up on these threads time and time again on mumsnet and I find it so infuriating. It's like the person who doesn't want sex is being massively unreasonable when they can't HELP the way that they feel, talking, discussion, isn't going to change anything, no they can't tell you when they will feel differently, maybe they don't want to do anything about it, maybe that's OKAY. Maybe they feel they have compromised and tried for too long and now it's their partner's turn to compromise and try to understand.

I'm not underestimating that it's massively hurtful when it happens whichever way around it is, but it seems that people want a nice tidy little answer "Oh yes of course it's perfectly alright if you get yourself a fuck buddy." or "Hmm, I think my sex drive will return approximately by May 2015." It's not as simple as that, quite often they don't know.

We are not very good at talking about sex. We have too many myths and fears and taboos about it. I think this will change and get easier as the generations get more open, but certainly, many many couples do not communicate at all effectively, if indeed much at all, about sex.

Oh yes, that was exactly what I meant that it happens gradually. If you're open and talk throughout this, then you can see the direction it's going in. It might not solve the issue - of course, sometimes it's just not solvable. But I think the realisation would be more likely to happen together rather than separately and suddenly meaning it would be easier to talk - if still painful - about ways to manage it and/or whether it's a relationship that both parties are still happy to remain in. When these things come out suddenly, especially since we are not used to talking about sex it's easy to feel it as a rejection on both sides. The higher sex drive partner feels rejected sexually and neglected, the lower sex drive partner feels rejected when their lover suggests going elsewhere. If the realisation had happened more slowly and together the higher sex drive partner would be more able to see the pattern of it not being them (though of course they may still feel rejection, they are human.) and the lower sex drive partner would be more aware of their partner's needs and possibly (but not necessarily) be more open to how they can help or what they are open to.

I don't think I am adding anything, though I am male.

she of course has the right to say no sex and say she isn't happy with any "arrangements". That might be perfectly fine with him (low libido all round) or imperfectly fine with him (he's not keen on the idea, but not keen on splitting either). If he isn't totally happy with it, he can either negotiate the "arrangements" and if that doesn't suit him, he can leave.

Personally, if I loved my partner but didn't want sex and she did, I would feel like I would have to concede an arrangement.

Well this took off, but....

Does everyone always believe what people say when playing to an audience and copious amounts of is featured ?

This woman could be shagging seven bells out of her husband every night of the week for all OP knows

Maybe you've been had...

If she was doing that AnyFucker then why wouldn't she be bragging about it and making everyone else feel like a useless failure in the sack???
I think BertieBolts you have taken used my quote out of context. I can fully understand why there would be little or no discussion due to embarrassment/having no solution/ just being too awkward or painful etc to discuss but in this case the lady in question seems to have had a long discussion, in her own head at least. She has decided he will HAVE to go without sex And she has also decided that if he dared go elsewhere then he would be parted from a certain part of his anatomy. I appreciate that the booze was flowing and people were probably exaggerating but I do hope that this lady can, in the real world, treat her husband with some respect and consideration in what amounts to a very difficult time in their lives/relationship,