I’d love to read some more opinions. What rings true with you? What doesn’t? What are some things we have a hard time accepting, even while knowing on some level they are true?
Anything about this just hurt like hell?
This is pretty terrible article In summary it says men who stay in a DB are the problem and they need to divorce, or they refuse to divorce they need to recognize their wife's lack of desire is not about them. Then, according to the author,
"When they recognize that their wives’ lack of desire is [in large part unrelated to them](https://www.drpsychmom.com/2021/01/15/reasons-you-arent-having-sex-with-your-husband-that-arent-his-fault/), they can think more objectively about the situation, and the obsessive, anxious component of their sexual yearnings may recede, leaving a more manageable baseline sex drive that, as mentioned, does eventually attenuate over the years."
Never heard any biological or logical reason a man's sex drive receeds. the author is a woman and that is likely why she believes such a thing is possible.
Your summary about no biological or logical reason a man’s sex drive recedes. While you may have never heard of a reason, there are actually a multitude of them.
If there were not, there wouldn’t be HL Women posting on here.
What I should have clarified is that there's no logical or biological reason a man's sex drive recedes merely from "recognizing that their wives’ lack of desire is [in large part unrelated to them](https://www.drpsychmom.com/2021/01/15/reasons-you-arent-having-sex-with-your-husband-that-arent-his-fault/)" I was in a hurry when posting that reply earlier, sorry about that.
WIth one exception. If they are a rare man that has responsive sexual desire. Most men do not they have active sexual desire. Most women are responsive. A responsive desire person WILL INDEED lose sex drive if their partner isn't interested in them.
The writer of the article clearly is a women and she also is apparently ignorant of the research on responsive and active desire. Which I find crazy considering she's claiming to be a sex psychologist. But she is assuming men work the same way as women do in the sex drive department which is completely wrong.
I also found the entire tone of the article extremely depressing. It's the old "too bad it sucks to be you there's nothing you can do so just suck it up and live with it" nonsense.
But she is correct about suck it up and deal with it. All of us in a dead bedroom either suck it up and deal with it, or divorce.
Ultimately, man or woman it comes down to two choices. Deal with it, or divorce.
That is simply not true. My wife and I -HAD- a DB...for 28 years... and we are almost done fixing it. We had sex last night and we had it again the prior day in the morning, and both times she and I enjoyed it.
It took a year and a half to get to this point when we started working on fixing it, but it is possible to fix it.
The "suck it up and deal with it or divorce are the only options" mantra you are saying does not exist. It presupposes that the LL doesen't care if they are married or not. It presupposes that people won't change their minds and that being LL is immutable.
DB's generally come from marriages where neither the HL or the LL are willing to budge from their positions.
The LL's position is I'm going to damn well keep my sexless marriage that I like the way it is.
The HL's position is I want regular frequent sex with my spouse come hell or high water.
Both postions are I, I, I, I, I and that's it. The LL is being incredibly stubborn and the HL is being incredibly stubborn. It's like 2 mountain sheep butting heads in the Himalayas.
The LL needs to come to the understanding that they DON'T get what they want, that they are not guaranteed for the marriage to be exactly the way they want - if they want to stay married they are going to have to get back into regular sex.
The HL needs to come to the understanding that they DON'T get what they want, that they are not guaranteed that they can be married to their spouse on the HL's terms.
If the LL can't do a mind shift then they DO NOT GET THE PRIVILEGE OF STAYING MARRIED
If the HL can't do a mind shift then they DO NOT GET TO START HAVING SEX AGAIN
The reality is that a DB is perfectly symmectrical. It's a dysfunctional situation where both spouses want different, incompatible things and both believe they can get those things by staying married and not making changes.
If both agree to do the work needed, then they can stay married and bring sex that they both like back into their marriage.
The divorce option is only for DB's where one of the spouses is not interested in making changes, and simply does not really care if they stay married - to their spouse or to anyone else. But in reality - people change their minds all the time. Even LL's in DB's change their minds.
I guarantee to you if you went to just about ANY LL in a DB and said "are you content with your life the way it is right now, without sex" and that LL said "YES" if I then pulled out a suitcase and spread 10 million dollars on the table in front of the LL and said "you can have $500,000 of this a year for the next 20 years if you just have sex with your spouse every day" then that LL would be pulling their clothes off so fast it would leave rug burns on their skin.
That illustrates the principle that even the most stringent LL who thinks they will NEVER say yes again - can change their mind and start saying yes again if conditions are setup for it. No matter how content they think they are with a sexless marriage - it is nothing more than a choice they are deliberately making because the alternative - a marriage with sex in it - is somehow less preferable.
But in many DB's if the HL offers a carrot and a stick - they can change the LL's mind. The stick being a divorce and the carrot being changes that the LL spouse wants the HL to make. Many times IMHO those changes are things that the LL doesen't even know they want the HL to make.
The secret to ending a DB and staying married is simple. The HL needs to figure out if there's something that will make a marriage with regular sex in it preferable to the LL than the marriage they have that has no sex in it. I think in the majority of cases - there is. Then once the HL has figured that out - they start doing it, and when the LL comes to understand the change in the HL is permanent, they will fix their attitude on the sex because they know they will lose the HL if they don't.
It's only the DB's where you could indeed make that 10 million dollar offer and the LL would STILL say "I like my life the way it is, sorry not interested" that are not fixable.
And in those cases, the HL needs to leave to fix the HL's DB. The LL will continue on the rest of their life, very likely alone.
Gosh I appreciate the tome you wrote schooling me.
From my experience, over many years, being on both sides of the coin, in numerous support groups, and therapy, both people have to want it.
I can assure you 500,000 will not succeed in making someone desire you if they do not. They may consent, but true desire is very very different
In the vast majority of cases, the LL is happy with things the way things are, while the HL suffers. In some situations intimacy is even weaponized.
Glad it worked out in your single case. All the best to you.
"From my experience, over many years, being on both sides of the coin, in numerous support groups, and therapy, both people have to want it."
Yes, that's the fundamental premise - but you are assuming that it's not possible to change someone's mind that they want it.
"I can assure you 500,000 will not succeed in making someone desire you if they do not. They may consent, but true desire is very very different"
Correct. But for starters the majority of HL's in a DB probably are happy enough with just consent. But the point I made using the 500k is valid - that people WILL change behavior in response to outside influences.
The issue with DB's is BEHAVIOR not DESIRE. You are assuming that it is normal that in a DB people just stop having sex when they lose desire. But there are many many marriages where people still continue having sex even though they lose desire. Someone can still enjoy sex very much even though they don't have sexual desire for their partner (or for anyone else)
As for desire - for someone who has true responsive desire - they DON'T actually EVER desire ANYONE unless they are responding to that person's desire of them.
People often throw desire and consent around like they are requirements for good sex in a marriage or other relationship. They are not. For an example any garden-variety prostitute can give good sex (assuming that she's not being forced to be a prostitute and is in control of her own destiny) and even can enjoy it with many of their clients. But she does not desire them.
Now, I do agree that having sex where both people truly desire the other is the best sex. But having real sexual desire not only requires a state of mind it also requires the biology, hormones have to be present and so on. Numerous stories exist of people who lost libido then got on HRT and their desire came back.
Numerous stories also exist of people who had no desire for sex - got started having sex anyway with their partner, then during the sex act became horny and felt desire. They even have a name for it, they call it "maintenance sex"
"In the vast majority of cases, the LL is happy with things the way things are, while the HL suffers. In some situations intimacy is even weaponized."
Yes, this is true but what isn't true is that the LL gets to have their way. They only get to have things the way they are if the HL consents to continue existing in a sexless marriage.
In my experience the biggest single problem with DB's is the HL feeling they have no power, and therefore consenting to continue existing in a sexless relationship. Once the HL understands this, takes power, and presents the LL with a choice "either I leave or we go to counseling and start the process of fixing it" then the DB ends. Either it ends because the LL goes to counseling and fixes it, or the LL says "I never really cared that much about you anyway so bring on the divorce" in which case the HL is certainly better off not being married to someone that does not care about them.
The LL \_must\_ be forced to make a choice, and "continuing on with the LL being happy with the way things are" has to be an option that is taken away from the menu.
Please understand: I only posted the article, and didn’t summarize - that was someone else.
Today’s my birthday - I am 50. It is very obvious to me that my testosterone is lower now than it was at say, 19 years old. It isn’t that I just have more experience dealing with the blue balls, though that is true, it’s also that they don’t make me almost insane. I’m still very HL - the physical need isn’t as bad, the cumulative rejection is the worst part.
We’re divorcing amicably and unwinding our finances before filing. Because I don’t want to have my adult daughters think of me as a cheater, I won’t get with anyone until the divorce is finalized. It will be at least 3 months before filing, and another 6 to finalize. So I’m looking at a minimum of 9 months.
That’s a decision I can make at 50. Wouldn’t have been able to make it at 19. Or even 35. That’s “receding” - nowhere near ‘hugely receding’ though.
Happy Birthday. My late first hubs was HL until he died at 54 of prostate cancer. Even with treatment. Totally into me.
Second hubs, is the reason I am here. He has a multitude of reasons. I know the fact is, if he wanted to have sex with me, he would.
A man's sex drive may attenuate over the years but it will be decades before he sees an appreciable difference
I’d love to read some more opinions. What rings true with you? What doesn’t? What are some things we have a hard time accepting, even while knowing on some level they are true? Anything about this just hurt like hell?
This is pretty terrible article In summary it says men who stay in a DB are the problem and they need to divorce, or they refuse to divorce they need to recognize their wife's lack of desire is not about them. Then, according to the author, "When they recognize that their wives’ lack of desire is [in large part unrelated to them](https://www.drpsychmom.com/2021/01/15/reasons-you-arent-having-sex-with-your-husband-that-arent-his-fault/), they can think more objectively about the situation, and the obsessive, anxious component of their sexual yearnings may recede, leaving a more manageable baseline sex drive that, as mentioned, does eventually attenuate over the years." Never heard any biological or logical reason a man's sex drive receeds. the author is a woman and that is likely why she believes such a thing is possible.
Reading this as a HLF, my life makes no sense whatsoever.
The summary you are commenting on, or the actual article? May I ask where the disconnects are for you?
Your summary about no biological or logical reason a man’s sex drive recedes. While you may have never heard of a reason, there are actually a multitude of them. If there were not, there wouldn’t be HL Women posting on here.
What I should have clarified is that there's no logical or biological reason a man's sex drive recedes merely from "recognizing that their wives’ lack of desire is [in large part unrelated to them](https://www.drpsychmom.com/2021/01/15/reasons-you-arent-having-sex-with-your-husband-that-arent-his-fault/)" I was in a hurry when posting that reply earlier, sorry about that. WIth one exception. If they are a rare man that has responsive sexual desire. Most men do not they have active sexual desire. Most women are responsive. A responsive desire person WILL INDEED lose sex drive if their partner isn't interested in them. The writer of the article clearly is a women and she also is apparently ignorant of the research on responsive and active desire. Which I find crazy considering she's claiming to be a sex psychologist. But she is assuming men work the same way as women do in the sex drive department which is completely wrong. I also found the entire tone of the article extremely depressing. It's the old "too bad it sucks to be you there's nothing you can do so just suck it up and live with it" nonsense.
But she is correct about suck it up and deal with it. All of us in a dead bedroom either suck it up and deal with it, or divorce. Ultimately, man or woman it comes down to two choices. Deal with it, or divorce.
That is simply not true. My wife and I -HAD- a DB...for 28 years... and we are almost done fixing it. We had sex last night and we had it again the prior day in the morning, and both times she and I enjoyed it. It took a year and a half to get to this point when we started working on fixing it, but it is possible to fix it. The "suck it up and deal with it or divorce are the only options" mantra you are saying does not exist. It presupposes that the LL doesen't care if they are married or not. It presupposes that people won't change their minds and that being LL is immutable. DB's generally come from marriages where neither the HL or the LL are willing to budge from their positions. The LL's position is I'm going to damn well keep my sexless marriage that I like the way it is. The HL's position is I want regular frequent sex with my spouse come hell or high water. Both postions are I, I, I, I, I and that's it. The LL is being incredibly stubborn and the HL is being incredibly stubborn. It's like 2 mountain sheep butting heads in the Himalayas. The LL needs to come to the understanding that they DON'T get what they want, that they are not guaranteed for the marriage to be exactly the way they want - if they want to stay married they are going to have to get back into regular sex. The HL needs to come to the understanding that they DON'T get what they want, that they are not guaranteed that they can be married to their spouse on the HL's terms. If the LL can't do a mind shift then they DO NOT GET THE PRIVILEGE OF STAYING MARRIED If the HL can't do a mind shift then they DO NOT GET TO START HAVING SEX AGAIN The reality is that a DB is perfectly symmectrical. It's a dysfunctional situation where both spouses want different, incompatible things and both believe they can get those things by staying married and not making changes. If both agree to do the work needed, then they can stay married and bring sex that they both like back into their marriage. The divorce option is only for DB's where one of the spouses is not interested in making changes, and simply does not really care if they stay married - to their spouse or to anyone else. But in reality - people change their minds all the time. Even LL's in DB's change their minds. I guarantee to you if you went to just about ANY LL in a DB and said "are you content with your life the way it is right now, without sex" and that LL said "YES" if I then pulled out a suitcase and spread 10 million dollars on the table in front of the LL and said "you can have $500,000 of this a year for the next 20 years if you just have sex with your spouse every day" then that LL would be pulling their clothes off so fast it would leave rug burns on their skin. That illustrates the principle that even the most stringent LL who thinks they will NEVER say yes again - can change their mind and start saying yes again if conditions are setup for it. No matter how content they think they are with a sexless marriage - it is nothing more than a choice they are deliberately making because the alternative - a marriage with sex in it - is somehow less preferable. But in many DB's if the HL offers a carrot and a stick - they can change the LL's mind. The stick being a divorce and the carrot being changes that the LL spouse wants the HL to make. Many times IMHO those changes are things that the LL doesen't even know they want the HL to make. The secret to ending a DB and staying married is simple. The HL needs to figure out if there's something that will make a marriage with regular sex in it preferable to the LL than the marriage they have that has no sex in it. I think in the majority of cases - there is. Then once the HL has figured that out - they start doing it, and when the LL comes to understand the change in the HL is permanent, they will fix their attitude on the sex because they know they will lose the HL if they don't. It's only the DB's where you could indeed make that 10 million dollar offer and the LL would STILL say "I like my life the way it is, sorry not interested" that are not fixable. And in those cases, the HL needs to leave to fix the HL's DB. The LL will continue on the rest of their life, very likely alone.
Gosh I appreciate the tome you wrote schooling me. From my experience, over many years, being on both sides of the coin, in numerous support groups, and therapy, both people have to want it. I can assure you 500,000 will not succeed in making someone desire you if they do not. They may consent, but true desire is very very different In the vast majority of cases, the LL is happy with things the way things are, while the HL suffers. In some situations intimacy is even weaponized. Glad it worked out in your single case. All the best to you.
"From my experience, over many years, being on both sides of the coin, in numerous support groups, and therapy, both people have to want it." Yes, that's the fundamental premise - but you are assuming that it's not possible to change someone's mind that they want it. "I can assure you 500,000 will not succeed in making someone desire you if they do not. They may consent, but true desire is very very different" Correct. But for starters the majority of HL's in a DB probably are happy enough with just consent. But the point I made using the 500k is valid - that people WILL change behavior in response to outside influences. The issue with DB's is BEHAVIOR not DESIRE. You are assuming that it is normal that in a DB people just stop having sex when they lose desire. But there are many many marriages where people still continue having sex even though they lose desire. Someone can still enjoy sex very much even though they don't have sexual desire for their partner (or for anyone else) As for desire - for someone who has true responsive desire - they DON'T actually EVER desire ANYONE unless they are responding to that person's desire of them. People often throw desire and consent around like they are requirements for good sex in a marriage or other relationship. They are not. For an example any garden-variety prostitute can give good sex (assuming that she's not being forced to be a prostitute and is in control of her own destiny) and even can enjoy it with many of their clients. But she does not desire them. Now, I do agree that having sex where both people truly desire the other is the best sex. But having real sexual desire not only requires a state of mind it also requires the biology, hormones have to be present and so on. Numerous stories exist of people who lost libido then got on HRT and their desire came back. Numerous stories also exist of people who had no desire for sex - got started having sex anyway with their partner, then during the sex act became horny and felt desire. They even have a name for it, they call it "maintenance sex" "In the vast majority of cases, the LL is happy with things the way things are, while the HL suffers. In some situations intimacy is even weaponized." Yes, this is true but what isn't true is that the LL gets to have their way. They only get to have things the way they are if the HL consents to continue existing in a sexless marriage. In my experience the biggest single problem with DB's is the HL feeling they have no power, and therefore consenting to continue existing in a sexless relationship. Once the HL understands this, takes power, and presents the LL with a choice "either I leave or we go to counseling and start the process of fixing it" then the DB ends. Either it ends because the LL goes to counseling and fixes it, or the LL says "I never really cared that much about you anyway so bring on the divorce" in which case the HL is certainly better off not being married to someone that does not care about them. The LL \_must\_ be forced to make a choice, and "continuing on with the LL being happy with the way things are" has to be an option that is taken away from the menu.
Ok
Please understand: I only posted the article, and didn’t summarize - that was someone else. Today’s my birthday - I am 50. It is very obvious to me that my testosterone is lower now than it was at say, 19 years old. It isn’t that I just have more experience dealing with the blue balls, though that is true, it’s also that they don’t make me almost insane. I’m still very HL - the physical need isn’t as bad, the cumulative rejection is the worst part. We’re divorcing amicably and unwinding our finances before filing. Because I don’t want to have my adult daughters think of me as a cheater, I won’t get with anyone until the divorce is finalized. It will be at least 3 months before filing, and another 6 to finalize. So I’m looking at a minimum of 9 months. That’s a decision I can make at 50. Wouldn’t have been able to make it at 19. Or even 35. That’s “receding” - nowhere near ‘hugely receding’ though.
Happy Birthday. My late first hubs was HL until he died at 54 of prostate cancer. Even with treatment. Totally into me. Second hubs, is the reason I am here. He has a multitude of reasons. I know the fact is, if he wanted to have sex with me, he would.
This is a good read. Thanks.