Sexually frustrated Husband

[Brightling]

It seems I'm married to one of those men who gets very moody when their intimacy needs aren't being met as often as they would like.

We've been married a significant amount of time. When we first met my sex drive was average and a few years and very young children later it's pretty much dwindled. I'm all touched out by the children. I am very unhappy with my post multiple pregnancies body. I'm tired. All I want is to be able to go to bed and sleep without being propositioned. It's not every night but it happens frequently enough for it to be considered badgering. Actually what I would like also is for the "no I'm not up for it tonight" to be received with "ok let's sleep" rather than him raise his voice tell my I've got a problem, I need to see a therapist, I should stay off those websites (such as MN) and what's he supposed to do about HIS sexual needs as it sounds like he's supposed to have an affair if I'm not interested. He says he can't even cuddle me if I've said no as he finds it too difficult. Whenever I say none turns his back on me and I feel like I'm being punished for saying No.

I get that he is frustrated but I am not prepared to lay back and think of England. Sex is a privilege not a right. It's my body and if I don't want to I don't have to. Even though he says that he doesn't want me to do it for the sake of it I think he's BS'ing me. He tells me he's a nice person, a good partner, a good dad and that other couples are all having sex though he always refers to sex as making love.

When we are having an active sex life he is ridiculously happy and helpful and affectionate.

I can't stand the sulking behaviour when he's frustrated. He is a hands on father and he does pull his weight round the home. It's just the sex pressure pushing me away. It's getting to the point where I don't want to be intimate with him at all as any contact he sees as a green light to progress a cuddle or whatever is then met with a sulk when I say I don't want to continue.

He does make lots of effort making meals but I'm so cynical that All I can think about is that there is an expectancy at the end of the night which puts me on the defensive and then I end up causing an argument simply to avoid the strop that he will pull when I say I don't want to be intimate because it's only when I get cross about it that he will let it drop and quit going on and on and on about it.

I'm know my sex drive isn't what it was but the sulks and date nights are not helping one bit. I dread any meal or date night. I'm not even sure why I'm even posting.

marathon it might surprise you but the feeling that is predominant for my DH is worry. You know that thing called empathy and being worried about your partner's health rather than thinking about yourself and how hard done you are because you can't have sex....

I mean are you saying you would feel hard done and unhappy if you couldnt have sex because your partner is getting treatment fur cancer for example? Really???
If this is the case, I'm quite happy NOT to be married with someone like you ....

Btw read the thread again regarding sex and NEED.
Sex is not a need. It's a want and personal pleasure.

Sex is not a need. It's a want and personal pleasure

I could just as easily say that QualityTime is a want and personal pleasure, not a need. Should a married partner whose primary love language is QualityTime have any expectation that his/her partner will continue to invest QualityTime into the relationship? If you started out dating and early marriage having lots of mutual fun QualityTime, then 1 partner decided to stop doing that, having other priorities, should your partner just go on happily, because QualityTime is not a need, just a want/personal pleasure?

Cancer treatment is a pretty extreme example, is that really a fair comparison to Brightling's situation? In any event, I would never "blame" my wife if she could not do certain things due to cancer treatments. I would have empathy for her situation. And I would hope she too would have empathy for my situation, meaning we might look for some forms of intimacy she could comfortably partake in. In extreme case, if she could not do anything at all, I would hope she might understand that and offer me a hall pass. I would certainly do the same for her if I were being treated for cancer. Again though this is a very extreme example, not applicable to the thread.

Ideal - I am not at all surprised by your DH.

DW went through a period of life threatening illness and treatment. I was utterly bereft with worry and we had sex once at her insistence.

That was 18 years ago and marked to the beginning of what is for her now a fragile low libido. Mine is 'normal' high.

I have only ever spoken to her very gently about it twice in all that time. I never ever initiate now for fear of putting pressure on her. A lot of the time she does not want physical contact. When we do hug it is only a hug. I am extremely careful to make sure it is never misinterpreted.

However, I do not agree it is a 'want and a physical pleasure'. I can handle the physical need but I miss the emotional connection. If we have a long gap, I struggle and slowly slip in a subdued state of sadness. I have never ever sulked or got angry with her. Its just overwhelming sadness but I am very careful to hide it from her.

Ah, it all makes sense now. Because you don't sulk or get angry, you refuse to accept that the OP's partner is doing so. You can't even imagine it.

Excellent projection.

AnotherEmma -you have ever been in this situation. You know nothing.

Projecting?

Well no, I'm not projecting, since I haven't been in the situation. Your post makes no logical sense but then none of them do

Actually I have some relevant experience but the way this thread has gone, there is no chance in hell I'm sharing it here.

Well if you have never been in the situation I cant see how you have relevant experience.

I am also unsure why you are being so vile to me for no reason.

People are a mystery sometimes aren't they

marathon miker Leaving aside the moral minefield of your "hall pass" comment it would be a hell of a lot more difficult for a woman to entertain this idea because of the different and more misogynistic way female sexuality is viewed.

And if there were a long-term health issue, I would need to work with my wife on some creative solution for my normal sexual needs. Otherwise, it would mean we had become incompatible for a successful marriage. "Creative solution" for YOUR sexual needs!!!

You don't sound sex obsessed, you sound selfish! Imagine your wife having a life altering injury/disability, most men would realise that certain aspects of their marriage change & would take care of their spouse...your only concern would be how you get to put your dick in a vagina!

I hope your wife realises what she married!

-less means none at all. This is how the English language works. Interesting that a few researchers have decided that they can just change meaning because it suits them, and a few people think that that makes it correct. It is not.

less does not and has never meant none. None means none, less is the opposite to much. You use less and much with uncountable nouns like sex, money or milk and you use few and many with countable nouns like kisses, coins and apples. Much and many means you have a lot and less and few mean you have a little. No one has changed the meaning. When doing research or writing papers it is important to use correct English or the work will not be published.

Anyway, the actual research terms mean nothing to people's lives. I'm sure the OP couldn't give a shit what sex definition category her marriage falls into.The research is currently the best picture we have of a large population sample, just that.

differentname - I also looked somewhat askance at marathomiker comment but on second reading I thought about two posts I read on MN by women that perhaps put in context what he means.

One post was by a woman who had a DH with a terminal illness and he eventually died. She recounted how her DH had insisted that his consultants find a way he could still give his wife a sexual relationship even though he was seriously ill. She recounted this story with obvious love and bittersweet humour.

The second post was by a woman who was a 24/7 carer for a severely disabled DH. She had found a man in the same positon looking after a severely disabled wife. Both clearly loved and cared for their respective spouses but as the MN woman put it for an afternoon every couple of weeks she could go out have lunch with a man, make love and feel whole again.

I would not judge anybody in that situation.

My comments on this thread have only been to challenge what I saw as deeply dismissive attitude to the DH by many posters.

The OP was from the original post appeared to be fixed on making her DH shut up and back down and was not prepared to discuss the matter hence his repeated questioning of 'why' this was happening. No man on earth is going to be happy with a wife partially or wholly withdrawing from sex and refusing to talk about it. She has said she has now started a dialogue which is the right response. It will be extremely difficult for both her and her DH. It takes love and understanding from both sides. No one knows how long the libido mismatch might continue. It could be for the rest of their lives together.

I do actually think we are responsible to some extent for the happiness of our spouse and that extends to all areas of a relationship.

dizzytomato
Re "-less means none at all", I'm pretty sure Boaty was referring to "-less" as a suffix and not "less" as a standalone word. For example: hopeless, childless, relentless.

And the dictionary definition of "-less" as a suffix is indeed none at all: www.dictionary.com/browse/-less

While I disagree that this thread bears any semblance to the hypothetical "spouse dying of cancer" or "life altering injury" examples, I will try to respond in a way that might actually apply to Brightling's situation.

There are people in this world who cannot (or will not?) live happily without an active sex life. In my opinion, this describes most men and the majority of women. You may quibble over "how many" of each gender are this way, but it's hard to dispute that SOME people are (for whatever reason) driven to want a regular sex throughout their lives. You might not be this way, but that doesn't change the fact that many (most?) people are this way.

If you are married, it's important to understand how your spouse feels about sex. Hopefully you discussed it before marriage, and reached a mutual understanding about the importance (or not!) of sex in the marriage. This is a critical area of relationship compatibility. It is important enough that many (most?) people would consider sexual compatibility to be a dealbreaker for any relationship. The standard marriage vows say this about sex: forsake all others (a pledge of monogamy); to have and to hold (a pledge of sexual availability, to the extent each couple may see fit). The vow of faithfulness comes with some reasonable expectation that the partners will work out a mutually satisfying sexlife.

My point is NOT that every married couple should have lots of sex or face divorce. My point is that sexual compatibility is essential to a lasting marriage. So if you have a "take it or leave it" attitude towards sex, and you are married to a "thrice per week" person, that is a mismatch over which many marriages fail. I would wonder why you ever married in the first place, since this should have been obvious much sooner.

I will point out Brightling's situation shows a large drop in sexual activity over the course of a marriage, and this is a big red flag that maybe they have grown incompatible. Don't just take my word for it, please research the role of sexual mismatch in divorce for yourself.

Oh like Fruitless or childless I get it. But when there are two categories and one is non-sexual then they cannot both mean the same thing, so I guess in this case you have to assume that sexless does not mean completely without sex. I suppose they should have put marriage with less sex. But they didn't.

I've just written a few answers but in short, they come down to

• stop being selfish
• use your empathy.

I think it's very easy to see things as if they are very one sided. One person with a lie libido, another that suffers.
The reality is more

• one person who is tired/ill/unwell for whatever reason (I would put young dcs, lack of sleep etc under that) and should deserve some empathy and support from their partner
• that person also happens to have low libido which is a strain on their partner
• but just as surely the partner with higher libido will also not be perfect and put some strain on their partner. It could be by being an arsehole (eg the OP), have issues of their own (my DH's undiagnosed SN) etc etc

The only way a relationship can work is for both partners to make an effort and show empathy.

I'd sex is such a deal breaker for some people, then I would expect them to have said so before starting said LT relationship or talking about marriage. Because it is clear that at some point, there will be a time when there will be less sex and after having dcs, it's certainly one of them. I personally would never and got involved with someone having that sort of attitude. Much too risky IMO to see said 'dear'H leaving with one or two young dcs becAuse he couldn't cope. And there is no way I would have taken the risk.
Now marathon have you ever discussed that with your DP before hand or would you be happy to just put the pressure on her and then make her responsible instead?

Perseus I think you are in a very hard position because what is missing from your relationship isn't sex as such. It's the whole intimacy and the physical touch (I'm thinking cuddles and kisses there). I would struggle too tbh.

I think the researchers who redefined "sexless" did so to fit their own agenda. They probably couldn't get a big enough sample size within the proper definition (no sex for a year) and they wanted to include couples who have infrequent sex, so they changed the definition for the purposes of their study. That's my theory anyway. All rather beside the point of course! As everyone will define "sexless" however they want to define it.

Btw marathon when you get married you might have the same level of libido but you sure cannot expect it to stay that way (ie exactly the same libido) for the next 50 years
Nothing is staying the same, thankfully. Since I got married, I've changed jobs, spirituality became important and a lot of other things. I've seen DH change too. His ideas and attitude, interests etc.
Accepting to live with someone for such a long time is accepting to see them change (whilst you change too). And that includes sex.

And btw, the OP has clearly stated that she doesn't see that as being a LT issue but she expects things to go back to normal as their younger DC is getting older.
So the issue isn't a clear mismatch in libido that will stay there for ever. It's how to juggle a short period with a mismatch (one year is a short time compare to 50 years together).

I realize that my own libido (my desire for sex) may vary over time. And that my wife's libido (her desire for sex) may vary over time. I'd like to point that alot of people experience "responsive desire" wherein one's own personal libido (desire for sex) may not preclude more frequent and mutually enjoyable sex.

I believe some guiding principles around how to deal with changes over time in one partner's desire level:

1. What defacto "baseline" of sexual activity has been established over the history of our relationship?
2. How does our frequency compare with other married couples?
3. How important is it to my partner?
4. How difficult would it be for me to match my partner's level of desire, even if this is not exactly aligned with my own desire?
5. Are there other creative solutions that could allow both partners to be happier?

What does it matter how often other couples are having sex? There will be such a variation amongst couples. Why the need to compare? It's irrelevant. Or do you need to keep up with The Joneses? Or is so you can tell your other half that she needs to up the frequency of your sexual relations because Derek and Denise are five times a week people.

Relationships and marriages change and evolve and have good and bad patches. It's normal. It's also normal to communicate like adults and work through these issues together.

If he feels the need to bail and leave me because he's not getting enough sex then so be it.

I did not ask for ways to make him shut up and put up. I was asking how to deal with the sulking and guilt tripping when I declined his advances. Funnily enough being asked "so when WILL we be having some fun?" on repeat until I chuck a day out there to get him to back off and stop the pressure is as bad as bullying or a whiney toddler going on about wanting sweeties in the hope that sooner rather than later you cave and give in. The lack of interest about why you might not be in the mood is completely absent because frankly he doesn't care and it's not even part of his thought process because why wouldn't you want sex whenever you fancied?

I think that, especially after a 5 week (and counting) abstinence, asking "when will we resume having sex" is a completely fair question. I hope you gave him a clear/direct answer. Or did you give only a vague response, mostly focused on how unsexy you find his sulking?

Please do the research on sexless marriage, because that is exactly where you are right now. And please let him read this thread, because you need to be honest with him about your priorities.

Here is what I predict will happen: he will eventually (probably quite soon) give you what you want. He will stop "pressuring" you for sex. He will back off entirely. He will internalize the rejection, and start detaching from you. This is what happens when you stop nurturing the relationship: like a plant, it will whither and die. This happens in millions of marriages every year.

Please do the research. Have you read the 5 Love Languages by Gary Chapman?
Or, persist with your current approach and see where that road ends.

Brightling - there is a really strong undertone throughout your posts that suggest you are indifferent as to whether your DH stays or leaves the marriage.

"If he feels the need to bail and leave me because he's not getting enough sex then so be it."

Are you sure mismatched libidos are the real issue or just a symptom?

marathon - "He will back off entirely. He will internalize the rejection, and start detaching from you."

I agree that process is now very likely to happen.