Is leaving due to a lack of sex unreasonable?

[PlayOnWurtz]

Once a month is all we have at most. I've grown resentful and tired of him and how his lack of affection and desire for me makes me feel.

I know it's frowned upon to sulk and whinge when you get turned down but I've tried being nice and understanding and am finding myself getting quite vocally pissed off with him when he yet again says he doesn't want to be with me.

Even when conditions are perfect - a weekend away without the kids - we won't ever have sex.

I've absolutely reached the end of my tether with it. I would rather go without sex because I'm single than be with someone and go without sex. It's making me so so angry!!!

[jouu]

I would end it. I am female and my drive is such that once a day is a minimum. I wouldn't be able to live with what you describe.

I apply the same standards to men. There's no man on earth I'd advise to stay in such a relationship if his needs were not being met. Sexuality is a basic part of the human experience, if the desire is chronically unmet, it's miserable and isolating. Life's not meant to feel like that.

Equally, if I were married to someone who was pestering me and I knew I didn't want it as much as them, I'd not try to change them or myself, I'd end it. It's not something that can be changed or moderated, it's just how individuals are wired.

I think when you do see men taken to task re sex pestering on MN, it's not really the need for sex that's being critiqued. It's the pestering itself. Pestering does not lead to more sex, it's even bordering on cruel because it implies that someone can manufacture desire where there is none. When honestly the only real solution for mismatched drives is put up with it without complaint, or end it.

[squoosh]

Lovely mumsnet ladies, why do women get to leave their husbands for lack of sex but when men complain of a lack of sex most seem to think that sex is not a given and he shouldn't it be a pest. Surely it should be the same rules for both

Yes it should be.

But it all depends on the circumstances that have led to a lack of sex. If there's an illness, young baby, grief, other major life event in the mix obviously sex lives can take a dip and looking for sex in these scenarios may well be construed as pestering.

But if a spouse just takes sex entirely off the marital table, just because they don't want sex anymore well of course that's their right but I'd advise their husband/wife to leave them if they were unhappy with this scenario. I know I certainly would.

[PaintingByNumbers]

it isnt that men cant leave, its that they shouldnt use it as an excuse to sleep with prostitutes/have affairs/pressure their wives into having sex anyway. sure, they can choose to leave. i've not seen threads saying they have to stay.

[AfroBrown]

@squoosh, I hear what you are saying. I do think that sex being taken off the table should be a discussion before its done. In a lot of situations there is sex then it stops with no reason. If you go from a high sex drive to low tell your partner. If your partner is pissing you off and you don't want to be intomato let them know.

I think the big issue is that there is a lack of conversation about this as partners and this causes a lot of problems

[AfroBrown]

@PaintingByNumbers. What should men do if the women stops having sex with no excuse. Affairs, prostitues is not the answer but neither is denying your man sex without letting him know.

At times I think a lot of these post make the men seem like pest but in reality are they. What is pestering asking your wife for sex. Surely a women would rather her man annoy her for sex then go look for it elsewhere

[BluePeppers]

That's a lot of threads in that subject recently....

Is it ok?
Well I think it dends what you have personally signed for when you got married. It depends what you called 'for better, for worse'. In effect, it depends on your own ethical stance. (No judgement there, it's just that I know not everyone has the same stance there)

Personally, I think that little sex due to ill health is something I would accept the same I would acceot a disability.
Little sex that has always been little this surely has to be OK?
Little sex because there is no attraction and no intimacy is something to review.

What I do hear though is your anger. I'm wondering if it's something you can work through. Because if it isn't, TBH, your relationship will go down the pan just because of that. In which it might be kinder, for you and for your DH, to stop now before resentment etc sets in.

[PaintingByNumbers]

I guess the man could test that theory out by asking his wife if she would prefer him to find sex outside the relationship or to split up? much as the wife in this post could do. no different advice. just be open and honest.

[BluePeppers]

Fwiw I think the hard situation is when one person goes of sex and lose their libido.
Pestering for sex isn't never good (men or women).
Getting angry and frustrated will only make the relationship crap and unhealthy (and therefore doomed to fail).

Whether one can and will be happy to live with less sex has a lot to do with your frame of mind IMO. If you can do it 'happily' because your partner is ill/has become disabled, why couldn't you it if it's because they've lost their libido?

Little sex. Ecause there is little intimacy is a sign of a relationship issue and should be treate sin a totally different way.

[Rightpivotturn]

I sympathise OP, and am making preparations to leave my marriage because of this issue. It's heartbreaking because he's otherwise a wonderful husband, but this has become a horrible corrosive issue at the heart of our marriage and I want out. I don't mind if I'm not having sex if I'm single - at least that's honest, and I'd also be honestly open to a sexual relationship with someone after we've split. Where we are now is a horrible limbo and I've no wish to be unfaithful. We've been married for 20 years and to be honest, I wish I'd left sooner.