Disinterested Partners: The Flip Side

[kaycee217]

Wow what a fascinating thread, I love to learn about psychology like this. Makes me want to write a romance novel where the couple conquers a sexual disinterest issue.

I don't think I really have anything to contribute - I did at one point decide I wasn't happy with the relationship I was in and had to take a firm stand and not give in when that person tried to tempt me into sex any more, but that's kind of the opposite thing, I wanted sex but was becoming somewhat repulsed by having it with him because I was realizing more and more that he was just the wrong partner for me.

Does that mean you find it difficult to experience sex purely as a physical sensation, like scratching an itch?

 

[sunandshadow]

Does that mean you find it difficult to experience sex purely as a physical sensation, like scratching an itch?

I don't believe in sex without romance, no. I have no trouble masturbating but it's all about the story in my head, if I can't get my mind into a hot story I would have a lot of difficulty getting to an orgasm. I think it's wrong to screw a guy while ignoring him in favor of my imagination because he's not attractive to me.

 

[kaycee217]

I don't believe in sex without romance, no. I have no trouble masturbating but it's all about the story in my head, if I can't get my mind into a hot story I would have a lot of difficulty getting to an orgasm. I think it's wrong to screw a guy while ignoring him in favor of my imagination because he's not attractive to me.

Fair enough

 

[lennythelion]

I'm resurrecting an old thread I just found because I think it's perfectly applicable today and some might find it useful.

Thanks for resurrecting this. I have read all of it and it has made me think so much. I already knew a lot about our dynamic, but it has helped me to be so much more honest with myself, and has brought me relief. I know now that the things I blamed myself for were not my fault. I have a clearer picture of how it went down, and that is what will help me to move on.

is there ever a situation where cheating on your significant other is justified? I know it's never right, but before spending time on Lit, I felt that no one ever had an "excuse" to cheat. But after spending time on Lit, I've come to the understanding that maybe it's at least understandable.

I'm going to set myself up to be knocked down: I had cancer. I had a total hysterectomy, via laperotomy, which means I was split open from my pubic bone to my ribcage. I lost a lot of weight with the hospitalisation and then the chemo. And of course I lost my hair. I looked in my full-length mirror about two months into my chemo and I saw a concentration-camp internee.

I'm not saying it was easy for my husband. He was never the strong one in our relationship, but I really needed him to be strong then and he just wasn't. I felt I had to be strong for him as well as strong for me, and I didn't feel I had enough strength to go around. So I concentrated on me. Our sex life had been flailing before then, and stopped all together while I was ill. Not especially because I didn't want sex (though I really wasn't thinking about it), but mostly because each of us had withdrawn into ourselves. I think this was the beginning of the end. But I hadn't yet given up hope.

When it was over and my hair was growing back, I found myself in a situation where a man obviously desired me. I didn't do anything about it, but I really, really wanted to. In fact, I realised afterwards that I needed to - I needed it in the deepest part of me. And then I found myself in another situation (I had opportunity), with an ex-lover. I didn't plan it. He didn't plan it. It just happened, but I suppose that deep down inside, it was because it was him. I wrote a story about it that's posted here. It's called "Liberation". It helped me to retrieve my lost positive self-image, and therefore to try and rekindle the flame with my husband. (If you're wondering, I was never able to, so I gave up trying and carried on for years, with no other affairs, until I decided that I could not spend the rest of my life like that. Now, I am technically "cheating", because I'm still married and we're still co-habiting, but he knows it is over and if I am not open with him, it is out of respect.)

Is any of it justified? In the first instance, probably not; in the second, yes, because my affair keeps me sane and stops this separation from becoming a battlefield. Is it understandable? You tell me.

 

[kaycee217]

...

I'm going to set myself up to be knocked down: I had cancer. I had a total hysterectomy, via laperotomy, which means I was split open from my pubic bone to my ribcage. I lost a lot of weight with the hospitalisation and then the chemo. And of course I lost my hair. I looked in my full-length mirror about two months into my chemo and I saw a concentration-camp internee.

I'm not saying it was easy for my husband. He was never the strong one in our relationship, but I really needed him to be strong then and he just wasn't. I felt I had to be strong for him as well as strong for me, and I didn't feel I had enough strength to go around. So I concentrated on me. Our sex life had been flailing before then, and stopped all together while I was ill. Not especially because I didn't want sex (though I really wasn't thinking about it), but mostly because each of us had withdrawn into ourselves. I think this was the beginning of the end. But I hadn't yet given up hope.

When it was over and my hair was growing back, I found myself in a situation where a man obviously desired me. I didn't do anything about it, but I really, really wanted to. In fact, I realised afterwards that I needed to - I needed it in the deepest part of me. And then I found myself in another situation (I had opportunity), with an ex-lover. I didn't plan it. He didn't plan it. It just happened, but I suppose that deep down inside, it was because it was him. I wrote a story about it that's posted here. It's called "Liberation". It helped me to retrieve my lost positive self-image, and therefore to try and rekindle the flame with my husband. (If you're wondering, I was never able to, so I gave up trying and carried on for years, with no other affairs, until I decided that I could not spend the rest of my life like that. Now, I am technically "cheating", because I'm still married and we're still co-habiting, but he knows it is over and if I am not open with him, it is out of respect.)

Is any of it justified? In the first instance, probably not; in the second, yes, because my affair keeps me sane and stops this separation from becoming a battlefield. Is it understandable? You tell me.

Hi lennythelion, thanks for sharing.

I'm not going to condone what you did, but hearing "the other side" does make me (and I hope others) think.

I don't know if they were rhetorical questions, but I'll give you my opinion.

I don't think any of your affairs were/are justified, but I do think they are understandable and there's a chance I would have done the same thing or a similar thing as you. I also believe many others in your situation would have done the same or similar thing, even if they don't admit it.

I think that someone who cheats in a situation like yours shouldn't be compared to some arrogant college kid who has the "why, because I can" attitude and cheats while on spring break.

What I'm curious about is how you tried to work things out with your husband before ultimately having your initial affair. What conversations did you have with him? How did they turn out (not well, obviously, but I'm still interested)?

 

[lennythelion]

What I'm curious about is how you tried to work things out with your husband before ultimately having your initial affair. What conversations did you have with him? How did they turn out (not well, obviously, but I'm still interested)?

At first, I tried to seduce him. On several occasions, I bought sexy underwear and arranged nice weekends away in neutral places. When that didn't work, I figured it was too intimidating and tried something more low-key, just cuddling up to him and letting my touching become more amorous. The thing is, I feel that my efforts mostly very nearly worked, that there was a response. I don't even know how the attempts failed; all I know is that I would find myself alone, frustrated and he would have run away. I was so hurt that I couldn't talk about it immediately.

Talking - about anything - has always been difficult. My husband is the sort of person who starts to say something, then stops, then starts to say something else, then stops. Then says nothing for a long time. I believe that actually he is having the "conversation" in his head. It's like he's playing chess, trying to work out all possible moves and their consequences before opening his mouth. Only, I'm not in his head. Anyway, after the seduction plan, I tried talking. It was very hard to bring the subject up. My attempts ended in pretty much the same way as my seduction attempts. He would reply, "I thought you didn't want me anymore". This was a phrase which I could never explain to myself, and the more I heard it, the less I could explain it. I was confused, spent lots of time trying to figure out how I could have given him that idea. I know, I should have asked him.

We went to couple therapy. That came after his father died and he said that he realised that their relationship hadn't been that great and he didn't want to lose me without trying. Our communication improved, but the sex thing had become an elephant in the room and we never talked about it with the therapist. And then life took over, and I just accepted that that was my lot (I am somewhat fatalistic). I would occasionally raise the question, but it is true that it tended to appear during a "talk", when it was probably just one more thing that I needed to air.

What I have realised from this thread, is that you can get over it if the person who is disinterested really wants to. The "interested" partner will usually try then to be accommodating, to find a way to make it work. I tried. (I made that appointment for couple therapy. In fact, I suggested we went to couple therapy even though I thought - and he knew that - that he should really go to individual therapy, but I was willing to hold his hand, not demand that he did it alone.) What started me on my road to ending it was him telling me that he wasn't capable of making me happy and that maybe we should split. If I had ever wondered, I at least finally knew that he wasn't prepared to fight for me.

 

[kaycee217]

Thanks again for sharing, lennythelion.

Best of luck in achieving happiness and I hope it all works out.

 

[Ruku5]

My partner and i both go through cycles of not wanting to have sex, these cycles last from weeks to a few months. I feel that that is natural. I mean, in a "HEALTHY" relationship, people bicker, you get on eachothers nerves. All this adds up to not wanting to have sex. Let alone add the day-to-day stresses of life, i.e work, bills, finances, that stupid A-hole who cut you off down the road. At the end of a long arguous day, sex is the last thing that is on your mind.

But you DO need to find a happy medium. Talking through the issues you are having helps a lot also. I have never been good at communication, but i have been learning (and it is a hard thing to learn). I guess both parties need to learn to accept, that nobody can get what they want out of a relationship 100% of the time, and that both parties need to give a little leeway to the other person.

There are so many reasons why you may not want to have sex, or get intimate with someone. But you cant let those reasons control your relationship, problems can be worked on and fixed. No matter how big they are. It can be fixed if BOTH parties are wanting them to be fixed. It just takes time, and time is the hard part.

 

[iDentelle]

on being the disinterested party...

I am that party. I am so not interested in sex. No. I am not interested in sex with my husband. At all. We have two kids. That is not a reason, but rather, my excuse to continue to NOT have sex. And I have many. And he knows them all. Sometimes his anger and resentment make him blow up finally, and he will say something to me about it and want to fight it out. I have no desire to do so. At all. This is a serious problem.

I know now, because I am in therapy, where it really began to deteriorate. But long story short he hates it here in Memphis and resents being here and is still depressed about his inability to provide for us in the past when his focus could be on the here and now.

I am NOT faultless. I never said anything to him about any of this. I never let him know that I was annoyed and tired and sad. I did not put my best foot forward while carrying out family. We talked all the time, but never about any of this until about 2 years ago. And because of it, I could not muster enough interest to make love more than a few times a year. Literally.

This year I decided that I wanted to give our marriage a fighting fair chance. He is a nice guy and a good dad and because I love him and our kids maybe I can sacrifice me for their happiness. He was thrilled. And excited and we had sex three times in August. And he was ecstatic. And felt that all was right with the world. My attempt failed miserably. I could NOT stand myself. I cried during sex. It was NOT at all what I wanted. He did not notice and I said nothing. I got counseling and he refused to go because he was certain that a therapist would say we should separate.

And now, dealing with the ME of it all, I find that I should have spoken up sooner and that perhaps the outcome would have been different. I am almost ready to tell him I am completely done. Some days I waiver and think "one more try" but I know better. But I do know for sure that if and when I enter into another relationship, I will be cognizant of all of these things.

Moral of the story - Communication is the key.

 

[kaycee217]

I am that party. I am so not interested in sex. No. I am not interested in sex with my husband. At all. We have two kids. That is not a reason, but rather, my excuse to continue to NOT have sex. And I have many. And he knows them all. Sometimes his anger and resentment make him blow up finally, and he will say something to me about it and want to fight it out. I have no desire to do so. At all. This is a serious problem.

I know now, because I am in therapy, where it really began to deteriorate. But long story short he hates it here in Memphis and resents being here and is still depressed about his inability to provide for us in the past when his focus could be on the here and now.

I am NOT faultless. I never said anything to him about any of this. I never let him know that I was annoyed and tired and sad. I did not put my best foot forward while carrying out family. We talked all the time, but never about any of this until about 2 years ago. And because of it, I could not muster enough interest to make love more than a few times a year. Literally.

This year I decided that I wanted to give our marriage a fighting fair chance. He is a nice guy and a good dad and because I love him and our kids maybe I can sacrifice me for their happiness. He was thrilled. And excited and we had sex three times in August. And he was ecstatic. And felt that all was right with the world. My attempt failed miserably. I could NOT stand myself. I cried during sex. It was NOT at all what I wanted. He did not notice and I said nothing. I got counseling and he refused to go because he was certain that a therapist would say we should separate.

And now, dealing with the ME of it all, I find that I should have spoken up sooner and that perhaps the outcome would have been different. I am almost ready to tell him I am completely done. Some days I waiver and think "one more try" but I know better. But I do know for sure that if and when I enter into another relationship, I will be cognizant of all of these things.

Moral of the story - Communication is the key.

Why do you think communication, if it comes too late, can't save the relationship? Is it because 1 or both of the parties closes themselves off?

 

[midwestyankee]

The disinterested party holds all the cards in these situations. That person is the gatekeeper and if the gate remains closed, it's not at all surprising that the other party starts looking around for a gate that's open.

I wonder how hard it would be to say to one's gatekeeper spouse: look, I can see that you're not interested in sex with me. I'm still interested in having sex with you, but barring any reciprocation on your part, I want your permission to discreetly satisfy my needs elsewhere. We would still be together, which seems to be important to you, but I need a good fuck every once in a while.

 

[kaycee217]

The disinterested party holds all the cards in these situations. That person is the gatekeeper and if the gate remains closed, it's not at all surprising that the other party starts looking around for a gate that's open.

I wonder how hard it would be to say to one's gatekeeper spouse: look, I can see that you're not interested in sex with me. I'm still interested in having sex with you, but barring any reciprocation on your part, I want your permission to discreetly satisfy my needs elsewhere. We would still be together, which seems to be important to you, but I need a good fuck every once in a while.

I think actually saying that and asking for permission would be too much. It's one thing to say "I've got to fulfill my needs elsewhere if you won't fulfill them yourself," but to ask for permission to do so? Somehow I think that's insulting.

Maybe that's just me.

 

[iDentelle]

Why do you think communication, if it comes too late, can't save the relationship? Is it because 1 or both of the parties closes themselves off?

I am certain that other couples have found a way to reconnect, and insure that as they proceed together they communicate better than they have in the past. And that is awesome.I do agree that both parties have to be willing to put in the work.

I was just speaking from my own personal struggle with this that had I communicated my frustration I could have possibly not have become so far removed. It is definitely something I am working on daily.

 

[midwestyankee]

I think actually saying that and asking for permission would be too much. It's one thing to say "I've got to fulfill my needs elsewhere if you won't fulfill them yourself," but to ask for permission to do so? Somehow I think that's insulting.

Maybe that's just me.

If you're in a committed relationship, don't you usually negotiate the big things? I say ask permission, but in fact this is a negotiation.

 

[kaycee217]

If you're in a committed relationship, don't you usually negotiate the big things? I say ask permission, but in fact this is a negotiation.

Well, now that you word it that way, I guess negotiation isn't so insulting.

Semantics schmantics

 

[midwestyankee]

Well, now that you word it that way, I guess negotiation isn't so insulting.

Semantics schmantics

To get back to the original question: if circumstances develop that make sexual relations between two partners impossible for a time, it's best to negotiate some kind of arrangement whereby the interested party can still find satisfaction. If two people love one another, they will want each other to be happy. While it may be difficult, allowing one partner to get his or her rocks off elsewhere may be a necessary element in that happiness. And if the disinterested party won't consider such an arrangement but will not offer up a reasonable alternative, then perhaps the relationship has lost its gravity and should be dissolved so that both parties can go on to lead happier lives.

Now, if those circumstances are more or less permanent, then the arrangement would have to be similarly long-lasting, wouldn't it?

 

[kaycee217]

To get back to the original question: if circumstances develop that make sexual relations between two partners impossible for a time, it's best to negotiate some kind of arrangement whereby the interested party can still find satisfaction. Now, if those circumstances are more or less permanent, then the arrangement would have to be similarly long-lasting, wouldn't it?

Hmmmm

Maybe I'm cynical, but the dissatisfied party needs to just deal with it. Being exclusive with a person means there will be sacrifices. For example, just because your sex life isn't hunky dory at the moment, doesn't mean you have standing to negotiate finding another sexual partner. Maybe the disinterested party is going through a tough time, pregnant, medical issues, general drop in libido etc., but the dissatisfied party needs to do a lot of the accommodating.

But when circumstances are permanent or unreasonable long, only then do I think some arrangements or ultimatums may be warranted.

 

[midwestyankee]

Hmmmm

Maybe I'm cynical, but the dissatisfied party needs to just deal with it. Being exclusive with a person means there will be sacrifices. For example, just because your sex life isn't hunky dory at the moment, doesn't mean you have standing to negotiate finding another sexual partner. Maybe the disinterested party is going through a tough time, pregnant, medical issues, general drop in libido etc., but the dissatisfied party needs to do a lot of the accommodating.

But when circumstances are permanent or unreasonable long, only then do I think some arrangements or ultimatums may be warranted.

I don't disagree with you in principle, but your examples tend to put a moral weight on the situation that is not always present. Let's distinguish between two characteristics: willingness and ability. The four possible combinations are: a) willing and able, b) willing but unable, c) unwilling but able, and d) unwilling and unable. Clearly situation a is not under discussion here. Situation b seems to be the type of circumstance you're describing here. In this case, the severity of the situation might call for some kind of accommodation by the unable partner, particularly if the disabling condition can be expected to last a very long time. Situation c is the classic disinterested party. This is the case where the one person holds all the cards until the other partner calls the bluff by entering into a negotiation. Situation d is similar, though more made more poignant by the unwilling partner's inability to have sex. I would treat this situation in the same way as c.

 

[kaycee217]

I don't disagree with you in principle, but your examples tend to put a moral weight on the situation that is not always present. Let's distinguish between two characteristics: willingness and ability. The four possible combinations are: a) willing and able, b) willing but unable, c) unwilling but able, and d) unwilling and unable. Clearly situation a is not under discussion here. Situation b seems to be the type of circumstance you're describing here. In this case, the severity of the situation might call for some kind of accommodation by the unable partner, particularly if the disabling condition can be expected to last a very long time. Situation c is the classic disinterested party. This is the case where the one person holds all the cards until the other partner calls the bluff by entering into a negotiation. Situation d is similar, though more made more poignant by the unwilling partner's inability to have sex. I would treat this situation in the same way as c.

Thinking of the situation as having 4 combinations, easily represented in a grid is quite insightful; well done.

Situation A: You're right, clearly not an issue here

Situation B: Yes, arguably my previous post does talk about this situation. And I agree, depending on the severity, duration, and reasons for the inability, accommodations for the dissatisfied party may be understandable* or justified**.

Situation C: This situation can actually be very similar to Situation B if the unwillingness is a consequence of inability. But I will assume that the unwillingness is simply because the disinterested party is stupid, immature, angry with the dissatisfied party, annoyed with the dissatisfied party, flat out unreasonable, or something along those lines. Perhaps spite could be a motivation in this situation. I think this is the situation that most justifies someone to negotiate or find satisfaction behind their partner's back. This is a situation where I might actually see cheating as being justified in certain contexts.

Situation D: You're right, this is similar to situation c, although it's harder to justify why someone might cheat here, although it's still understandable why someone might cheat. This is because the unwillingness is harder to condone than inability.

*"Understandable" is being used with the idea that: "well, that's not the right thing to do, but I see where you're coming from."

**"Justified" is being used here with the idea that: "That's not the right thing to do, but I'm almost glad you're doing it."

 

[PertPerth]

The disinterested party holds all the cards in these situations.

Not true - the other partner can leave, and can use guilt, money or some other kind of power.


I'd the 'disinterested' partner - currently single, but have been dumped several times for not jumping into bed with a guy soon enough. When I say I'm not interested - I mean I have vulvodynia/vaginismus - it hurts to have penetration. I also have low hormones, so rarely get 'horny' (but when I am, it'll last a couple of weeks! ) I've not had sex for about a year and a half, and it's not killing me. I'm rather self conscious of my body (tiny boobs, celulite, acne) so getting naked is always a big thing for me. I don't like the idea of being promiscuous - I'm not one for showing my boobs and bum in tiny dresses.

Having said that, I've always been interested in sex - sex is everwhere. Everyone wants it, talks about it, sings about it, makes movies about it. It's important! So, being the nerd that I am, I've studied it as best I can and have learnt to be interested in (rather than want) sex.
To me, intimacy is FAR more than sex. If the sex goes, so be it, if the intimacy leaves, so will I.

I've gone through having physiotherapy and surgery to be able to have sex (penetration). It is still painful, but not nearly as much as it used to be - and I don't tear any more (which is fantastic!)
I've not been in a relationship since the operation...so I know that things will be different next time. Even though my last relationship (lasted a year) I only said no once (because I was too sore - we had sex 2 times in the last 24 hours) and we had a HUGE fight about it. Apparently because I was in pain, it was causing him to not enjoy sex as much. (My fault)

As for cheating - it's not a good enough excuse for me (and I'd never give him permission). It might work for other couples, but it shouldn't be done in secret.

I know people get busy, and days blur into another. There is always time for things which are important - even if it has to be written in the diary and an alarm set!

 

[PhilGarlic]

Pert perth

You have made me look at this subject in a totally different way, you have a mature outlook on sex and hope you find someone that understands and adores you (if thats what you want)
The nub of you're post was the bit about intermacy and of course love I guess goes along with it?
Thanks for making me think out of my box
Phil.

 

[lennythelion]

Devil's advocate (but no flames please)

Being exclusive with a person means there will be sacrifices. For example, just because your sex life isn't hunky dory at the moment, doesn't mean you have standing to negotiate finding another sexual partner.

So much to think about in all of these posts. Thankyou all.

I believe that the notion that two people in a "committed permanent relationship", i.e who are "exclusive", should be "faithful" is perhaps fallacious from the outset. Even in my parents' day, we forsook all others, but nowadays we don't. Many people don't even get married, and therefore make no promises to each other whatsoever. I personally did get married, in a civil ceremony, and all I promised to do was to contribute equally (financially or in any other way) to the household and the raising of any children.

And, to be honest, when I decided I wanted to marry this man, fidelity was not a conscious thought. I did not say to myself, I want to be faithful to this man until death us do part. I did say to myself, I see myself growing old with this man and I want us to make each other a promise that we will make a life together, grow together, do whatever it takes so the other is fulfilled. I may be wrong, but I think that most people think in this way.

So I ask you, if there is a "dissatisfied party", isn't the onus on the one who is not doing the satisfying? Why do we assume that "sex is not that important"? Why should the dissatisfied party have to do without the fulfillment of this physical need, and indeed the intimacy that goes with it? (Sorry PertPerth, I think sex is a subset of intimacy; if there's no sex, there's significantly diminished intimacy.)

Of course, what of the fulfillment of the disinterested party? Having sex would, for whatever reasons, not fulfil them. Being obliged to acknowledge their "failure" to satisfy their partner by giving them their blessing to seek solace elsewhere would also not make them happy.

Therefore, I conclude, as the devil's advocate, that a discreet affair would satisfy both parties to a greater extent. (But then we get back into the intimacy question.)

 

[kaycee217]

So much to think about in all of these posts. Thankyou all.

I believe that the notion that two people in a "committed permanent relationship", i.e who are "exclusive", should be "faithful" is perhaps fallacious from the outset. Even in my parents' day, we forsook all others, but nowadays we don't. Many people don't even get married, and therefore make no promises to each other whatsoever. I personally did get married, in a civil ceremony, and all I promised to do was to contribute equally (financially or in any other way) to the household and the raising of any children.

And, to be honest, when I decided I wanted to marry this man, fidelity was not a conscious thought. I did not say to myself, I want to be faithful to this man until death us do part. I did say to myself, I see myself growing old with this man and I want us to make each other a promise that we will make a life together, grow together, do whatever it takes so the other is fulfilled. I may be wrong, but I think that most people think in this way.

Hmmm, well technically, I guess you didn't cheat since you never vowed fidelity. My point (that you just quoted) is basically saying that exclusive relationships take effort. If you're casually sleeping with someone I generally believe you have the to "drop them" at the first time of trouble, discomfort, or annoyance. But if you're in an exclusive or otherwise serious relationship, I think you need to try to make things work instead of running at the first sign of trouble. I seem to think too many marriages end today because too many people don't understand it takes work and end up splitting up when they normally can bite the bullet and work things out. Or perhaps I'm just an idealist...

So I ask you, if there is a "dissatisfied party", isn't the onus on the one who is not doing the satisfying? Why do we assume that "sex is not that important"? Why should the dissatisfied party have to do without the fulfillment of this physical need, and indeed the intimacy that goes with it? (Sorry PertPerth, I think sex is a subset of intimacy; if there's no sex, there's significantly diminished intimacy.)

Of course, what of the fulfillment of the disinterested party? Having sex would, for whatever reasons, not fulfil them. Being obliged to acknowledge their "failure" to satisfy their partner by giving them their blessing to seek solace elsewhere would also not make them happy.

Therefore, I conclude, as the devil's advocate, that a discreet affair would satisfy both parties to a greater extent. (But then we get back into the intimacy question.)

Sometimes, yes I think the onus is on the person not doing the satisfying (the uninterested party), but it depends on the situation (see Situation C in one of my above posts).

The dissatisfied party should deal with being unfulfilled because disappointment and not getting what we want is a part of life. Of course, this doesn't mean we need to live the rest of our lives like this, but don't you think if there are some moments in life where you need to just deal with the discomfort or dissatisfaction? The issue then becomes how long must the dissatisfied party deal with it and how much should they put up with before they can renegotiate (as midwestyankee has talked about).

Yes, the fulfillment of the uninterested party does matter. The dissatisfied party needs to be patient and accommodate the uninterested party and do their part to make the uninterested party...interested. Perhaps the uninterested party is uninterested because the dissatisfied party isn't romantic anymore, doesn't help enough around the house, has become annoying, takes the uninterested party for granted, etc.

I'm no marriage/relationship expert, but I have my...perhaps idealistic ideas of what a long-term, exclusive relationship should be. I know that I know nothing...well, less than nothing (because if I knew nothing, that would mean I know something, called nothing), but I enjoy thinking about all this and learning from others.

 

[Eliphaz]

.....

 

[lennythelion]

the lack of communication thing is a big part of it. sex with my partner is awkward because neither of us is any good at communicating with the other. i don't think it's just a matter of one or the other person not being a "good communicator" because i've had other partners i could say or share anything with, and i imagine she has too. it's hard to stay enthusiastic when you try to find out what turns someone on and the answer is "oh anything" or "i don't have any special kinks" or "whatever you want" - and i don' t think the problem is that any of those are true, it's that she's not comfortable enough to open up and share. anyway, sorry. just venting.

Thanks for contributing, Eliphaz. Vent away. You're right, communication is such a big part of a continually satisfying sexlife, and it's not just about 'saying what you like'. It seems that plenty of couples have few problems communicating over the sharing of household chores or raising kids or managing money, but when it comes to sex, it's a completely different story.

I find it interesting though that you think your partner isn't comfortable with sharing, because that implies that she does know what she likes. I would hazard a guess that this is not so. If I had to be all positive-thinking, I'd have to say that living in a no-sex relationship was a good thing, because it enabled me to discover so much more about myself: what physically works for me through masturbation, and what mentally works for me through porn and erotica and online chatting. And, one of the things I've discovered is that I still don't like to give a laundry list because actually, I'm submissive, and I want you to take charge.

Worth thinking about...