Sex IS a need, for some.

[JaneFW]

I need to not take part in these threads, that's pretty obvious. This is not a theory to me, it's a reality, and so I can't afford to read that a marriage without sex is dead, or it's a rejection of marriage by the other spouse. I'm barely holding on some days, so that I don't need - although other people are welcome to their theories about how it would be for them without sex, obviously.

I just have two quick thoughts:

I don't believe that God imparts any greater strength or grace to people whose spouse has become disabled, than he gives to anyone who asks for strength and grace for any reason, at any time. It's always available. He doesn't pick and choose.

Secondly, the Corinthians scripture is not the only scripture about marriage. In fact, the Bible tells us constantly to love and forgive *always* - "the greatest of these is love" "love is patient, love is kind" - these are just off the top of my head. We are to apply all scriptures always, in our dealings with everyone - including our spouse. It's no good loving our neighbors, then despising our spouse because we don't feel satisfied.

I better stop here, because I feel like I'm lecturing, and that's not my intent. I don't think that anyone is wrong to feel the need for sex and to find it vital, I just think that it can also be lived without. If someone chooses to do so - or if that's just the "cross" they have been given to bear!

I'm really leaving it there - so I won't be back to respond to any comments, so don't anyone think I'm being rude if I don't answer a question or comment.

 

[Conservativation]

Actually I agree with you about God giving some special strength to folks stuck with a disabled spouse. For that matter I dont think its some special "burst of strength" in any of the situations where that is stated about handling emotional trauma....its always there, the ability, some can tap and other have a harder time. Some are just pragmatic and say this is how it is, and sweat that which can be changed, not dwell on that that cannot....that may be the biggest strength of all

 

[Conservativation]

How many folks in this thread have ever had their spouse openly demand sex and use scripture or duty to buttress their demand?

 

[roseread]

C2W, if you became "emotionally and physically broken" that would be your choice.

Several of us live with that scenario without being broken or the marriage being dead. You're not alone in feeling that sex "goes beyond physical pleasure", it does for me too. I mean, I feel like sometimes you believe that you couldn't bear it because it means so much more to you than anyone else, but that simply isn't true. I feel very very strongly about sex, and I know only too well how important it is, but yet I choose to be stoic because the alternatives appall me. It doesn't make me a wonderful person, but I'm just sayin' that it's not the end of the world or a marriage - or it doesn't have to be. It's a choice. As a Christian, you can choose to be destroyed, or you can choose to continue to fight.

I have not had a chance to finish reading this thread, had to work a late shift last night.

I strongly disagree with this. Maybe some can loose the sex in their marriage and not feel broken or in a dead marriage, but I am not one of them.
I am not a stoic, and for me my marriage is dead. I have been going through the motions and wearing a happy mask for my son and for the world, but I am starting to feel that it wont last much longer. Each month, each week feels harder and harder to put that mask on. I don't know how it will end, but I have a feeling it will end with in the next few years. A great deal of me just doesn't care anymore about it all.

That hardest part really isn't so much the lack of sex, it is that my husband has shown so little care for my needs that he replaced me with a tv set, a ball game, or his mother. His disregarde for my needs in the marriage makes me feel like I'm compeltetly replaceable, completely undesirable, and not good enough for him. Every day I go to bed with my heart and soul crushed.

 

[roseread]

That isn't really what I meant.

Just to be clear, I am not promoting sexless marriages, but as Jane has pointed out...when one is on the receiving end (or non-receiving end, really) of that.....OR if the things like trust, respect, communication, and love are missing in a marriage.........then, it is natural (IMO) for sex to die of natural causes.

When someone says, "sex is one of the foundations of marriage"...it just makes me question the relationship of those other ingredients. If you have anything else added into the mixture of that foundation....something for instance that DESTROYS the other ingredients....then sex is going to be destroyed as well. It's not immune from destruction....it IS more than physical in marriage. I suppose two people can have an understanding that their marriage is going to be about sex---I'm just not too sure how long that lasts. Does anyone have any experience with that one? I am not qualified to speak on that. I got married for different reasons than just to take care of lust.

You can have an absolute dream house, it has excatly the right number of rooms, the windows all look out over this amazing scenery. The rooms are just the right shape, there are electrical outlets where ever you need them. It has never had any flooding isuses, the roof is solid and doesn't leak, the whole place is energy efficient, it is just an amazing house. Except it doesn't have any bathrooms. No bathrooms at all, not even chamber pots.

Would you still buy that amazing house?

That is how I view sex in marriage. It is not the whole marriage, but take it away and it makes the marriage almost unlivable.

 

[McScribe]

A lot of things can be lived without. I feel totally confused by some insisting that sex is not a need in a marital relationship.

Saying sex is a foundation doesn't mean, to me, that it doesn't have to have quality of being loving. One of the elements of it being a foundation is that it works along with the others.

So when for example my uncle devoted years of care and love to a wife who was totally debilitated by illness, unable to dress herself or have a basic conversation let alone any of the rest...was that a good marriage in the sense of any of his needs being met? No. She was completely incapable of meeting them. He considered her his wife and devoted himself to caring for her, and I believe that's love.

Now it seems to me that no one has said that you don't stay devoted and loving if you a not having needs met...you may have to adapt to it, pray to God for strength and help. But it seems to me that there is a different kind of hardship where you know it is not infirmity but attitude that affects the person withholding from you.

 

[McScribe]

On a more personal note, I'd like for my own future to have some understanding. According to some here if I marry again and my wife says "I don't feel like having sex, and I don't really want to do anything about it," I should just say "Oh well," and suck it up. According to what I'm reading this at least should not be an area of concern.

Is it the same, I wonder, if I decide suddenly that I don't feel like doing housework anymore? After all if she likes doing it more power to her, but that's not really a need, right?

And I have yet to hear clearly why I should be sexually loyal under such circumstances. I have yet to hear why sexual loyalty matters when it is not a need and is not a foundation of why you get married.

My ex for example needed me to speak softly to her, avoid rough language, smile more often. These things made her feel more relaxed and safe. So I did them. She probably could have lived without it. I did it because it was being good to her, and at first it was only having a good attitude that made it possible. What I'm reading here is that some think I would have been quite justified in thinking that it wasn't really a need, and could have disregarded it because I didn't like the fact that it was such an effort for her to communicate directly with me. But I didn't do that, I tried to lead the way so that she would feel happier. Whether she was more direct or not.

When I say that the reluctant partner needs to consider the possibility of seeing sex as something that helps holds up the relationship, they might find that it they did just try it they'd enjoy it more. It is not unthinkable and it does not degrade the act.

 

[mkgal1]

I have not had a chance to finish reading this thread, had to work a late shift last night.

I strongly disagree with this. Maybe some can loose the sex in their marriage and not feel broken or in a dead marriage, but I am not one of them.
I am not a stoic, and for me my marriage is dead. I have been going through the motions and wearing a happy mask for my son and for the world, but I am starting to feel that it wont last much longer. Each month, each week feels harder and harder to put that mask on. I don't know how it will end, but I have a feeling it will end with in the next few years. A great deal of me just doesn't care anymore about it all.

That hardest part really isn't so much the lack of sex, it is that my husband has shown so little care for my needs that he replaced me with a tv set, a ball game, or his mother. His disregarde for my needs in the marriage makes me feel like I'm compeltetly replaceable, completely undesirable, and not good enough for him. Every day I go to bed with my heart and soul crushed.

I feel as if anything I say is going to sound so trite and unfeeling. I don't have an answer for this, but I really wish I did. I'm hoping that Dreamer, since she has gotten to the other side of this, can offer some encouragement.

IMO.....it's not the lack of sex....you even said it....it's the lack of regard from the one person that vowed to love you until death parts you. You gave your heart & your life over to this man, that commitment (when honored) goes hand in hand with sex. When we love and trust, and that's returned, then that's when I believe sex is the natural result. When that was just a sham.....and it becomes apparent....that is the deepest betrayal known to humankind. The one you trusted the most---risked it all for---stabbed you in the back. That's separate from sex--and when it all gets bound up together, I think that's what confuses the topic.

What I mean is......two people can have sexual problems (for many reasons) but, can both still have the willlingness to love one another (hopefully as they are trying to figure out the issue w/o pressuring one another)....nurturing the relationship itself (which I have read that you are turning yourself into a pretzel trying---that tells me it isn't YOU.) It takes two. That still doesn't mean that one needs to walk out the door......there has to be a place in the middle where one can detach and still be holding out hope for restoration (and not grow bitter). I guess that's the million dollar question. Where....how is that done? God has gotten people through much more difficult things, and I agree with Jane....that's available to ALL who seek Him.

 

[mkgal1]

You can have an absolute dream house, it has excatly the right number of rooms, the windows all look out over this amazing scenery. The rooms are just the right shape, there are electrical outlets where ever you need them. It has never had any flooding isuses, the roof is solid and doesn't leak, the whole place is energy efficient, it is just an amazing house. Except it doesn't have any bathrooms. No bathrooms at all, not even chamber pots.

Would you still buy that amazing house?

That is how I view sex in marriage. It is not the whole marriage, but take it away and it makes the marriage almost unlivable.

A dream house built on sinking sand isn't too valuable.

However.....since you are using real estate. A dirt lot in the right location can be VERY valuable (like us being "grounded in God").......put a strong foundation on that valuable property, and you are off to a great start. Not much can destroy that lot......do you know what I mean?

 

[McScribe]

Also this link has in the spirit of things what I mean. I don't agree with all of it but I generally agree with the spirit of things when it comes to marriage at any rate.

Judaism 101: Kosher Sex

 

[mkgal1]

Now it seems to me that no one has said that you don't stay devoted and loving if you a not having needs met...you may have to adapt to it, pray to God for strength and help. But it seems to me that there is a different kind of hardship where you know it is not infirmity but attitude that affects the person withholding from you.

I believe that most of us got married expecting that would mean that the vows were lived out. We would expect something in return--at least I did, and am not ashamed to say. Love and devotion is what I expected, and that's difficult to really define the difference between a loyal heart and behavior....but, there is a distinction. There is such thing as empty actions....going through the motions.

When that isn't the reality....that is a different scenario than when it's only the sexual relationship that is showing the signs. Sometimes the attitude IS the affirmity---and maybe, just like in your situation, one couldn't immediately define the reason. Standing over someone....pressuring for an answer isn't going to make it come any sooner. I know that personally......if someone "catches me off-guard" and asks a question & wants an immediate answer.....I can sometimes not even give simple answers, like...."where were you born?"...simply because of the pressure. Not only that....but, it's the opposite of understanding and patience.

I read this awhile back about love, and it really means a lot to me:

Love freely given. One of the most misunderstood aspects of marital love is the fact that true love is totally voluntary, unforced, and free of manipulation or control. God declared that this was the way He loved His people when He promised, "I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely" (Hos. 14:4). The word freely in this verse means voluntarily. In other words, God is explaining that His love can’t be forced or manipulated by others and that He has chosen to love His people for His own reasons. Jesus said the same thing about the love that motivated Him to go to the cross. "Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself" (John 10:17-18). Jesus was declaring that no one was controlling His decisions. He was voluntarily giving up His life because He loved us.

Why is this aspect of your love so important to maintaining your relationship? Because many husbands and wives tell me that they have fallen out of love with their mate and at the same time declare that they have a controlling, manipulating, pressuring, nagging, jealous, or clingy spouse. All of these behaviors destroy the voluntary nature of love. Couples also relate to me that when they first dated and became engaged they did so out of a voluntary choice, but now all they sense is force or control strangling the desire to love

what hinders sacrificial love in a relationship? It’s selfishness. Living selfishly will always motivate a person to withhold love and seek his or her own benefit and ease. As you seek your own interests first it will inevitably lead to strife in your relationship (James 3:16).

 

[mkgal1]

According to some here if I marry again and my wife says "I don't feel like having sex, and I don't really want to do anything about it," I should just say "Oh well," and suck it up. According to what I'm reading this at least should not be an area of concern.

And I have yet to hear clearly why I should be sexually loyal under such circumstances. I have yet to hear why sexual loyalty matters when it is not a need and is not a foundation of why you get married.

My ex for example needed me to speak softly to her, avoid rough language, smile more often. These things made her feel more relaxed and safe. So I did them. She probably could have lived without it. I did it because it was being good to her, and at first it was only having a good attitude that made it possible. What I'm reading here is that some think I would have been quite justified in thinking that it wasn't really a need, and could have disregarded it because I didn't like the fact that it was such an effort for her to communicate directly with me. But I didn't do that, I tried to lead the way so that she would feel happier. Whether she was more direct or not.

When I say that the reluctant partner needs to consider the possibility of seeing sex as something that helps holds up the relationship, they might find that it they did just try it they'd enjoy it more. It is not unthinkable and it does not degrade the act.

Again.....what's the alternative? If your hypothetical new wife makes that declaration.....what other choice DO you have that you feel is a better choice than "sucking it up"? You are speaking from the "other side" of things, it seems. If someone isn't desiring sex (which is supposed to be about love, respect, honor, value, understanding).....then first.....why would you want sex from them? As it's been said quite a few times.....how is that communicating love and respect?

In this thread.....I thought we were speaking of sex....independant from all other things....it's difficult, isn't it? All other aspects come into the discussion....maybe because they are connected?

 

[mkgal1]

On a more personal note, I'd like for my own future to have some understanding. According to some here if I marry again and my wife says "I don't feel like having sex, and I don't really want to do anything about it," I should just say "Oh well," and suck it up. According to what I'm reading this at least should not be an area of concern.

If you marry again, and you hear those words.....what alternative choice do YOU see as a better choice? IOW....what do you feel you should do and say (since you don't seem to feel that the option of "sucking it up" is a prudent one.) BTW....my quoting that doesn't mean that I ever would condone those words or attitude to be present.

 

[mkgal1]

My edit button isn't working, BTW. Otherwise I would have condensed these posts.

 

[McScribe]

Again.....what's the alternative? If your hypothetical new wife makes that declaration.....what other choice DO you have that you feel is a better choice than "sucking it up"? You are speaking from the "other side" of things, it seems. If someone isn't desiring sex (which is supposed to be about love, respect, honor, value, understanding).....then first.....why would you want sex from them? As it's been said quite a few times.....how is that communicating love and respect?

In this thread.....I thought we were speaking of sex....independant from all other things....it's difficult, isn't it? All other aspects come into the discussion....maybe because they are connected?

They are connected. I have no alternative.

In fact I probably shouldn't post about this either, like Jane.

I feel like I'm not being understood. I don't mean sex independently of those things.

I dont know how else to put it.

 

[McScribe]

I don't want to be accusatory, but I feel like I'm being told I was being selfish even for wondering about it, or asking about it every so often. It is frustrating and I feel like I might as well never marry again if being attracted to my wife and hoping it is mutual is just being pushy and selfish.

 

[dallasapple]

How many folks in this thread have ever had their spouse openly demand sex and use scripture or duty to buttress their demand?

Well Im one that will admit it..my husband didnt use scripture just evoked the name of God period.

I have seen dozens of men proclaiming they have done exaclty that on a specific Chrsitan forum dedicated to Christian marital sex..recited Paul and told their wives they are in active sin and were called to "repent" immediately ..I saw many of them discussing to my horror contemplating the possiblilty of using the Matthew 18 process here

15 “If your brother or sister[b] sins,[c] go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’[d] 17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

I have seen people here use the scripture (oddly mostly men) to describe how they believe their wives are in sin..And seeing what I've seen ..I have ZERO doubt its been "pointed out" to the spouse..

Not to mention ..there is also less obvious "demanding' like passive aggressiveness.."joking" idle threats..etc that Im SURE go on plenty.

So how many people in this thread to me proves nothing..but theres at least one and its me.

Dallas

 

[Conservativation]

How many folks in this thread have ever had their spouse openly demand sex and use scripture or duty to buttress their demand?

Hmmm....

 

[dallasapple]

For me and Jason, neither of us has ever been pressured into having sex against our will. It's always been my choice to have sex with him, even if I wasn't in the mood. So in essence it's never really been a duty or obligation. It's been a choice, one that in our marriage was about selflessness. And yes, there have been times when we have also gone the other way and been selfless by going without sex if the other was sick, tired, etc.

Thats great ..but the only thing is C2W you have described your marriage thouroughly over the last year at least as both of ya'll having from the start sounds like a matching libido/ interest in sex..as well as based on your posts that you both put sex high up on your list of priortiy being that again you both have a what you have descibed as a high libido.As well as so far you havent had some of the "typical" life stresses like children for one to possibly have to share your attention /energies with.Or both of you putting in a 50 hour work week ..year in and year out along with children..

I hope ya'll are able to continue to be so selfless as the years go by ...You are definately off to a great start.

Dallas

 

[dallasapple]

I'm not understanding your question. Why be sexually loyal? Because sex IS about loyalty to one--our spouse. If the other person isn't interested sexually, and attempts to communicate about it lovingly have been made, and the cause is unknown (or not shared)...........then, what's the alternative to being sexually loyal?

I want to know what the alternative is too..because there is more than "sex" that is a strong desire for people..If I told my self I 'need" (not want need) a man that encourgaes me ..admires me (non sexual) is interested in me and expresses that through verbal communcation as to my MIND and personality..enjoys ME ..is protective of me and builds my confidence...and my husband is not forthcoming with that ...

Why be here?.Why talk to him?Why be in his prescence?.Why not have 'sex"(my obligation ) then pick up the phone..or get on the computer or go meet a man that seems to be interested in me and leave my husband here sitting alone but for fullfilling my sex duty?Why shoud I be a "loyal' companion and a prescence in his life at all but for sex?why shoudl I be here to listen to his worries and concerns about the different life stresses?Why should I bother Im not getting what I "need" ..(want)...?

Dallas