Recurring Problem

[tall73]

I think Jeff already stated that overall their relationship is good, they converse quite a bit, she does not express overall dissatisfaction with either their sex life or life in general together.

Some indicated that the problem was his expression of frustration toward the end of what he sees as a cycle. Certainly angry outbursts are not good. However, I don't think this is the key issue here.

If it was the angry outbursts causing the lack of sex then we wouldn't see the pattern here that he has presented.

It goes with her cycle. She wants it more than me for one week, we're good (platonic) friends for one week, we're roommates for one week, then she genuinely hates me for one week. And so it goes.....

Note that the time she "wants it more than me" is right after the time he usually gets frustrated. If she was refusing because she felt he was not loving in their relationship we would expect to see this right after his expression of frustration.

However, instead we see the opposite. She is most receptive right after that time. What changed? Hormonal cycle. I realize it does not explain everything, and as I noted when I posted the scholarly article initially, it certainly does not mean women never want sex outside of the time of peak fertility. But there are biological reasons that women are more easily aroused around the time of peak fertility in the cycle.

This is exactly in line with what he is describing. And it makes more sense of the data than that she is upset when she has not indicated (through what he said anyway) dissatisfaction with the relationship or with sex in the generic.

It does not mean women are slaves to their cycle, or cannot have sex outside of that time, or anything of the sort. It just means what the article I posted indicated, that there are biological reasons women are more aroused at a particular point in the cycle.

It is still a good idea to work on all the relational aspects of their marriage. It is certainly still a good idea to further talk about her attitude toward sex, his desire etc. as this seems like a stopping point on mutual agreement about sex.

 

[OK Jeff]

This is the way it looked to me. I didn't mean to suggest her to be a slave to her hormones, but it certainly appears to influence her. The timing of it all is exactly as you described. I backed off earlier as I didn't want to alienate those who were here to help.

 

[OK Jeff]

I might add that this doesn't mean no responsibility on my part. It only means I need to put more effort toward her when she not as easy to interest.

 

[Dave-W]

If you are curious about what he would say about your situation, what was your situation?

I was going to answer this earlier, but the thread got closed.

So here goes.

My wife was raised in a very strict Victorian/Holiness/Gothardite household where any mention of sex was strictly forbidden. At church she heard how evil sex (before marriage) was. Couple that with being sexually abused frequently by a teen age relative from age 8 to 12. (which she could not say anything about)

So at age 12 when the first pangs of desire hit her she knew it was evil; and killed it.

So the first person she told was me. About 2 months after we were married. She came into the marriage hating the very idea of sex, and saw me wanting her that way after we wed as a "pervert" and "sex addict." (her words) Then she got VERY angry that I re-awakened (to a small degree) her own desires.

Harley had nothing on that at all.

 

[Endeavourer]

My wife was raised in a very strict Victorian/Holiness/Gothardite household where any mention of sex was strictly forbidden. At church she heard how evil sex (before marriage) was. Couple that with being sexually abused frequently by a teen age relative from age 8 to 12. (which she could not say anything about)

So at age 12 when the first pangs of desire hit her she knew it was evil; and killed it.

So the first person she told was me. About 2 months after we were married. She came into the marriage hating the very idea of sex, and saw me wanting her that way after we wed as a "pervert" and "sex addict." (her words) Then she got VERY angry that I re-awakened (to a small degree) her own desires.

Harley had nothing on that at all.

I'm so very sorry this happened to her, and for the problem you were blindsided with.

You're right that this specific issue is not addressed in his more general book about marriages. He writes about some of his work in helping couples overcome sexual aversions, but in your case, as you pointed out, your wife needed more help than a general book because she wasn't accepting the premise that sex is a beautiful, blessed and connecting component of a marriage.

This situation likely needs some individual, private and professional discussions with the wife to help her understand better God's plan and blessing for passion in marriages, and how to leave the past behind.

If it's still of interest, pm me and I'll give you one link about aversions as well as an email address where he often gives advice away for free for specific issues not addressed in the more general materials.

May God bless you and your wife, and may He bless your wonderful commitment to your marriage,
Endeaveror

 

[Endeavourer]

Regarding the Gothard movement:

I was reading a book this weekend (not specifically about Gothard) but the author was talking about all of the fences Pharisees put around the law.

They would take a few steps back from the actual sin the Bible was cautioning us against and start making extra-Biblical thou shalt (not)" rules there that become accepted, engraved in stone, "Biblical" counsel.

One example he gave to deepen his illustration was dancing, and how so many people loathe dancing (he didn't specifically call out the Gothardites, but does the shoe fit!).

The punchline of his paragraph was that the reason so many churches are vehemently against premarital sex is because it might lead to dancing!

I thought it was a great illustration of how these non-Biblical, extra-Biblical "fences" can become more important than the Bible itself. The Gothard movement is a great example of so many fences that the "allowed" life of a Christian can become a burden that others (in this case, Gothard himself) are not willing to bear for themselves.

As we know now, apparently Gothard himself never married (thus was never subject to all the family extra-Biblical fences he was making up) and he personally was living in sexual immorality the entire time. Allegations were made that he had also molested teenage girls, but I didn't follow the story to find out how that resolved, so I can't verify exactly whether that proved to be true.

 

[Dave-W]

The punchline of his paragraph was that the reason so many churches are vehemently against premarital sex is because it might lead to dancing!

Yeah - that is a VERY old joke. Still makes me smile, though!

 

[Dave-W]

I thought it was a great illustration of how these non-Biblical, extra-Biblical "fences" can become more important than the Bible itself. The Gothard movement is a great example of so many fences that the "allowed" life of a Christian can become a burden that others (in this case, Gothard himself) are not willing to bear for themselves.

Gothard was a product of Victorianism and the Holiness movement. He had his own twist on it with a very reactionary teaching on submission.

As we know now, apparently Gothard himself never married (thus was never subject to all the family extra-Biblical fences he was making up) and he personally was living in sexual immorality the entire time.

IMO this is an example of legalism being the strength of sin. 1 Cor 15.56 Nomos can be translated either Law or legalism. By being so legalistic, he fell into sin.

He actually WAS subject to his own teaching; that of being in submission to his parents. He taught that if someone did not marry, he was to live with his parents and even if he was 70 years old, had to obey them like he was a 5 year old. Clearly he was in violation of that.

 

[Endeavourer]

Gothard was a product of Victorianism and the Holiness movement. He had his own twist on it with a very reactionary teaching on submission.

There is a large community of women who have been grievously harmed by this teaching. I seriously question whether someone with such a devilish doctrine and enormous misunderstanding of the grace and liberty found in Christ for all (including women) was himself a born again believer.

IMO this is an example of legalism being the strength of sin. 1 Cor 15.56 Nomos can be translated either Law or legalism. By being so legalistic, he fell into sin.

This was beyond legalism, though. It was a doctrine of perpetration. It created SO much abuse, misery and then by extension, stress health issues for many women. There is a large community of women who have been so scarred by the abuse they suffered under his devilish doctrines that they turned away from Christ.

He actually WAS subject to his own teaching; that of being in submission to his parents. He taught that if someone did not marry, he was to live with his parents and even if he was 70 years old, had to obey them like he was a 5 year old. Clearly he was in violation of that.

Unless he lived with them and they ordered him around like a child (like he taught wives should allow their husbands to do), he was all hat and no cattle. Plus, as you say, proof he didn't walk his own talk was his molestation of 30 women and teenagers.

 

[Endeavourer]

Yeah - that is a VERY old joke. Still makes me smile, though!

Ha! This was the first time I'd heard it.

 

[Dave-W]

There is a large community of women who have been grievously harmed by this teaching. I seriously question whether someone with such a devilish doctrine and enormous misunderstanding of the grace and liberty found in Christ for all (including women) was himself a born again believer.

I have read about a lot of people (both men and women) who were seriously injured in their walk (and many left the faith) by the next generation of this mess - the "Purity Culture" promoted by Joshua Harris. I will not link to the articles due to language, etc; but do a google search on "Purity Culture Dysfunction."

Back in the 1980s I read a couple of books by Christian therapists (Dr) Cliff and (nurse) Joyce Penner. One of the books "A Gift for all Ages" had a story about a 12 year old girl who committed suicide over the masturbation issue. In her note she said she could not understand why God gave her such strong desires and then condemned her for responding to them.

IMO it is a very dangerous thing to go beyond what is explicitly spelled out in scripture.

 

[Endeavourer]

I have read about a lot of people (both men and women) who were seriously injured in their walk (and many left the faith) by the next generation of this mess - the "Purity Culture" promoted by Joshua Harris. I will not link to the articles due to language, etc; but do a google search on "Purity Culture Dysfunction."

OK, that was quite upsetting. ENORMOUS extra-Biblical and very abusive doctrines, and I was already familiar with the movement and the damaged lives it left in its wake. I didn't realize the extent of emotional cleansing of sexuality it demanded of women. I stand by the description of it being literally a devilish doctrine. Not even a small seed of that doctrine is found in the Bible.

IMO it is a very dangerous thing to go beyond what is explicitly spelled out in scripture.

Amen and Amen!!!!

 

[Dave-W]

. I didn't realize the extent of emotional cleansing of sexuality it demanded of women.

It requires the same "cleansing" of men as well.

Apparently the Duggar family (19 Kids) ascribe either to Gothardism or Purity Culture; I think the latter. One of the early teen sons (about the same time that the older boy confessed to feeling up his sisters) was caught masturbating in the bathroom. He was whipped severely, and told he had to do all of his sisters' chores for the next few weeks in addition to his own. Outed in front of his siblings.

 

[Endeavourer]

It requires the same "cleansing" of men as well.

Apparently the Duggar family (19 Kids) ascribe either to Gothardism or Purity Culture; I think the latter. One of the early teen sons (about the same time that the older boy confessed to feeling up his sisters) was caught masturbating in the bathroom. He was whipped severely, and told he had to do all of his sisters' chores for the next few weeks in addition to his own. Outed in front of his siblings.

That's awful. So sorry for him.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Not going to lie, I read the first four pages and the last page because this whole thread was making me bonkers. When I got to the “my wife’s period makes her this way” stuff, I think I may have said “are you kidding me” only a bit more colorfully out loud.

The passive aggressiveness and gender-based stereotypes with the sprinkling of “how do I use the Bible to compel my wife to have sex with me?” is all symptomatic of the problem, not the solution.

I think when men slide off into commiserating on how women just don’t get it and that they NEED sex to feel loved, they NEED it done with enthusiasm order to feel appreciated, and they NEED it done at an entirely arbitrary frequency or else they will feel neglected, the collective groan from women is deafening. Maybe it isn’t that women don’t get that men NEED sex, it’s that men don’t get that women need sex too, or that men don’t get that intimacy primarily through sex isn’t conductive to an emotionally functional marriage regardless of how many times he says “read this study that says I’m right,” or that women feel that the standard of “provide physically fulfilling sex at my request on my timeline or else I will emotionally manipulate you until you do” isn’t exactly the most erotic of enticements.

Do you know as a wife how throughly demeaning and devaluing it is to hear a husband say “our relationship is so wonderful and perfect, except for this one thing, so I’m miserable a lot”? What she is hearing “no matter what you do, no matter how hard you work, no matter all you do for me and the family, if you aren’t cutting it in the bedroom I’m not happy.” Tell me, just how secure, happy, and sexual would that make you feel? It makes you feel like you serve one purpose. Then the snide “I don’t think you love me” emotional blackmail and passive aggressive snipe pout over not getting sex... I mean, come on... You want to talk about being and feeling devalued? Not only are you not appreciating your spouse, you’re actively undermining it. Just exactly how emotionally intimate do you think she’s feeling.

Even the “so I guess I’m going to take a libido decreaser” thing is just so passive aggressive, emotionally manipulative, and demeaning, especially when you use lust and love so interchangeably. Youre basically telling her that because she’s failing so badly at satisfying her, you’re going to medicate yourself to lessen your desire for sex with her because you simply can’t not want to have sex without being medicated out of the desire. It’s so silly.

What you’re doing is making her less inclined to want to be with you because you so extremely devalue her contributions beyond the bedroom. You’re saying sex is love and love is sex, you can’t feel one without the other, blame it on your biology because men are men and that’s how men feel, then hand all that baggage to her to deal with and fix, while criticizing her if she doesn’t do it or doesn’t do it well enough (“when it’s good it’s good but when she’s doing it for me but isn’t into it, it isn’t”).

Maybe instead of putting all the weight of sex and intimacy on her and then judging her ability to resolve it on her own tonyour satisfaction like it’s the Olympics and she’s trying to earn the marriage gold medal, try to be a bit accountable yourself. The fact is biology doesn’t state that as a man you feel more connected via sex because that’s the way you’re wired. The fact is biology states everybody enjoys great sex and it can build a great connection in certain conditions for both genders, but biology also dictates it’s not always in the cards and you have to achieve deep, fulfilling intimacy other ways. God gave us a thousand ways to be intimate, not just sex, and if sex is the only way you can feel connected, you need to ask yourself why and work on other connections, not tell your wife she needs to give you more. You need to work on you, not blame your wife’s hormones, theorize your wife is carrying out a secret plot to be in control of your libido, or accuse her of defying the Bible by not satisfying you sexually.

Now, can her libido be affected by life, hormones, emotions, and other factors? Of course it can. But let’s be real, 3 weeks of sporadic sex followed by one week of hugely active sex isn’t exactly sexual withholding or sexual neglect. It’s not so dire that you would say “our life is perfect except...” and it’s certainly not so infrequent as to say legitimately to her you don’t think she loves you anymore.

Seriously, this isn’t a problem of “why doesn’t she love me?” It’s a problem of “why is sex and how often I get it the barometer I use for love? Why is getting it not on my timeline enough to make me lash out at her? Why is love and sex so interchanagble for me?”

I mean, for real, if a woman came on CF and said “our marriage is great, except my husband won’t give me a full deep tissue massage that’s truly satisfying more than 2-3 times a month. Men don’t get women don’t feel loved unless we get a good, 20-30 minute full body massage 2-4 times a week and he’s just not doing it for me. Sometimes when he does do it, I can tell he’s not into it... I know he works hard 40+ hours a week and helps with the kids and the house, but without those long massages, I feel like I mean nothing to him, I worry I may go to other men for my full body massage needs... I can’t help it, I’m a woman, I need it...” I would die. People wouldn’t be able to tell her to get over herself fast enough. Some reason though, if it’s a man and sex, people talk about death less mournfully than they talk about not having sex.

 

[OK Jeff]

The fact that SHE is 100% unwilling to have any sort of conversation about any of this undermines everything you said. It also proves you've cherry picked your points. Nice try.
I'm getting helpful information from a choice few people. The rest have belched this type of useless, man hating, nonsensical rhetoric. It does not dignify further response.

 

[OK Jeff]

I will add, your comments are not helpful and not appreciated. Please don't post again.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

“Unhelpful” is not the same as “not what I want to hear.”

Seriously, we’ve heard everything from your wife’s devotion to her faith to her period to accusations of manipulation are to blame for your sex life not being what you like... Have you examined at all what your contributing behavior to the issue is? Because sex can be a barometer of both partner’s feelings of trust and intimacy... If she’s not giving it, it may mean there’s a disconnect for her going on that isn’t being addressed.

Since you say she says you make her feel like all you want is sex and that despite the fact your relationship is great otherwise, the lack of frequent, enthusiastic sex has you feeling miserable. I bet if you were to ask her she feels like the heavy emphasis on sex she feels is because the message you’re sending her is an otherwise great relationship isn’t enough to make you happy if she’s not pleasing you sexually.

And you have to admit, when you say the 90% of perfect relationship you have doesn’t offset the misery that is created by the 10% of not having the sex life you want, you are putting a huuuuuuuge emphasis on sex, and you’re putting 100% of the responsibility of fixing it directly on her shoulders.

To say that’s overwhelming is the understatement of the century, not to mention it’s not fair to her, nor will it make her secure and stable in your marriage, which makes her feel less intimately connected to you, which makes her less inclined to want to have sex.

Saying “hey, you have a role in the sexual health of your marriage too, when are you going to examine that” is hardly man-hating and certainly less gender stereotyped than saying “she’s probably on her period for three weeks which is probably why she’s not sexually available when I want her to be.” Though if the woman is having a period that lasts 3 weeks, she deserves a medal and a free pass to no sex, no questions asked.

 

[OK Jeff]

To those who actually care though....
The topic of sex has not improved. The only real change is my response. It still feels like rejection, and my initiating only increases this feeling. I've made strides in the quality time front, in fact we're on a week long getaway as I type this. I'm choosing to do my part with a positive attitude and I know it's not an instant fix. But nothing thus far. I do remain hopeful however. One thing i notice is she tends to limit one on one time packing as many activities into each day as possible. Right now she's in the other room reading. I'm good with giving her quiet time alone, but it's hard not to feel rejected. (To the man haters, I don't mean sex). To run hard all day, then fall asleep on the couch alone is not what I expected. I'm just disappointed.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

You’ve given it a week. Marriages don’t break in a week, they don’t fix in a week. And while she feels out your willingness to change and be there for her, her walls will still be up. Genuine expressions of intimacy outside of sex, free of expectation is what will earn her trust back. And doing it more than once. And doing it after she’s been not receptive. It’s called establishing a pattern and proving oneself in the pursuit of growth and change. It’s normal, not immediate, but a wonderful investment in your mutual relationship. Right now you’re still putting a quarter in the machine and waiting for a dollar to come back.

And while you’re complaining she’s ignoring you by reading a book, you’re on here subposting to me about how I hate men or something. So it’s not like you’re in there attempting a connection either, sexual or otherwise. One finger pointed at her leaves three to point back at you.

Now seems like a great time to say “so, I’ve been thinking about your point of view on this... Let’s hear it...”