Am I being selfish?

[Els]

 

What if I'm just not as into sex as him? I don't need it all the time. Just because I can't keep up with his sexual requirements doesn't mean I should be bullied or blackmailed into something I don't want to do.

 

There are things that can be done to increase sex drive (and no, I don't mean female viagra).

 

- Obviously, your R needs to be in a better shape. But I won't rehash my previous post there

- Consciously take some time out to pamper yourself. If you are affluent, then why not hire a babysitter/nanny a few times a week to allow this? It might feel to you like you are 'slacking', but really, some R&R time is essential to a good sex life IMO, which is in turn essential to a good relationship

- Take some time to go out on dates with your husband, where you can flirt with each other and have fun just like when you were dating in the past. This can awaken desires for him (of course, point #1 still stands)

- Work with him to make sex better for you. Talk to him about what makes you feel good

 

But yes, obviously bullying/blackmail should be out of the question.

[SolG]

Hi CR ☺ I don't think either of you are being selfish, just both being misunderstood by the other to a certain extent.

 

I think we can see from your posts when your H feels most attracted to you and wants to have sex. But what about you? When do you feel most attracted to hubs AND want to have sex? And have you had a convo with him about how to achieve both simultaneously?

 

I remember being a new Mum and despite thinking my H was sex on toast, having the desire sucked out of me by context. And I didn't have twins!

 

When you're exhausted and touched out by kids it does become difficult to act on latent desire. So get less exhausted and touched out. Get your H to understand that's what you need, and come up with a plan together. Make him understand that it's a mutually beneficial investment.

 

Get a nanny and/or housekeeper once a week. Have that space. Tell him a word or note of appreciation goes a long way. Get your nails done, have adult time over lunch with a gf. Do whatever it is that recharges your battery and makes you feel sexy and desirable. And then show him how fabulous and sexy you feel when you work together on this. Key point... work TOGETHER on this.

 

How do you together create a new context where you're mutually empathetic and accommodating? You two are the the only ones that can answer that question.

[JHandy]

Why do men think I'm deliberately depriving, or playing a game where I'm leveraging off his sexual urges to win some kind of power struggle? They would be hurtful comments, save for the fact that we're all a bunch of strangers on the net making generalisations.

 

You sound like you want to be a victim. All is awful terrible men are saying is talk to your husband and get on the same level play ground with him. There is a lot of terrific advice here from women and us terrible men. Talk to him and see where the compromise is. Your husband loves you and is very attracted to you. You already have much more than most women here have. Enjoy it.

 

The thing you'll hate the most is when you finally convince him to back off for good.

 

It's not all about you or him. It's all about you both having a long and happy marriage. That includes sex.

 

Try to find out where the middle ground is. He will have to back off a little, but you will also have to accommodate more. But in talking to him, you can let him know what he needs to do to be with you more.

 

He's not the enemy and us awful men aren't either.

 

You two are just a little out of sync right now.

[elaine567]

I used to be like this but then I almost got divorced. If you do not give your husband sex or BJs, they get very unhappy and will treat you poorly. You will complain all the time and not know how simple the answer is. Sex once a day and a BJ once a week. If you just do it, they will treat you like a goddess. It is really all they want, honestly. 10 minutes tops.

 

Like Nike said, Just Do It.

 

I usually would not agree with this as I feel sex should be a spontaneous act between two people who desire each other and actually want to have sex, and this "recipe" kind of rubs me up the wrong way,

BUT Renée, having read some of your other threads you probably need to do this if you want your marriage to have any chance of working out long term.

By what you write, your husband is a powerful man, who is used to ordering people about and getting his own way.

He is a manipulative, entitled, controlling, arrogant man who basically lacks empathy and I guess is narcissistic in his tendencies.

He has apparently been spawned by a "nasty" most likely "narcissistic" and "self absorbed" rigid woman who has no doubt passed many of her genes and attitudes onto him and shaped exactly who he is today.

 

YOU have got yourself into a situation where you love the power of being the wife of a wealthy man, you love the gifts, you love your children, you love the man, but he has not turned out to be exactly the man you thought you had.

YOU thought you had a better man, one more suited to you, but he is who he is and now you will have to try to manage him or walk away.

 

He sounds to me to be exactly the type who if not getting sex at home will look elsewhere.

He is HD and will feel HIS needs need met and if you will not oblige he will look for someone else. (He is very used to hiring and firing people. If a person does not do the job to his standard then he will have to fire them and hire someone better.)

If he truly lacks empathy he will not even consider that you might be a teeny tiny bit upset about that, and even if you were upset, he knows you will probably not leave anyway as you would lose too much.

 

SO, you can make this a big deal, fight him all the way, build up a huge amount of resentment and build a wall around yourself.

He, then gets himself an ambitious OW, who would just love to take your place eventually, or a succession of sexy OWs as he is just not getting enough at home...

 

This is not the stuff of romance and love, nor equality, nor fairness but when there is such an unequal balance of real power, as there is here, SAHM vs business owner, then the woman has to weigh up her options and if doling out sexual favours to her husband and making HIM feel happy can get HER what she wants long term, then she may just have to do what she has to do...

 

 

(btw -I am not suggesting that all men cheat as they are not getting sex at home and that daily sex and a weekly BJ will guarantee fidelity, far from it, but with certain types of men, regular marital sex binds them to the marriage and their wife, and without that validation, they are far more likely to be open to other offers. It is what it is)

 

[elaine567]

I am also of the opinion that the more sex one gets the more sex one wants and that if the sex frequency is of the "few and far between " variety, then it is very easy to decrease the frequency even further as the "connection" can become tenuous and then lost.

[hammyy2k]

after few years you would be complaining, he doesnt want sex

[Els]

I usually would not agree with this as I feel sex should be a spontaneous act between two people who desire each other and actually want to have sex, and this "recipe" kind of rubs me up the wrong way,

BUT Renée, having read some of your other threads you probably need to do this if you want your marriage to have any chance of working out long term.

By what you write, your husband is a powerful man, who is used to ordering people about and getting his own way.

He is a manipulative, entitled, controlling, arrogant man who basically lacks empathy and I guess is narcissistic in his tendencies.

He has apparently been spawned by a "nasty" most likely "narcissistic" and "self absorbed" rigid woman who has no doubt passed many of her genes and attitudes onto him and shaped exactly who he is today.

 

YOU have got yourself into a situation where you love the power of being the wife of a wealthy man, you love the gifts, you love your children, you love the man, but he has not turned out to be exactly the man you thought you had.

YOU thought you had a better man, one more suited to you, but he is who he is and now you will have to try to manage him or walk away.

 

He sounds to me to be exactly the type who if not getting sex at home will look elsewhere.

He is HD and will feel HIS needs need met and if you will not oblige he will look for someone else. (He is very used to hiring and firing people. If a person does not do the job to his standard then he will have to fire them and hire someone better.)

If he truly lacks empathy he will not even consider that you might be a teeny tiny bit upset about that, and even if you were upset, he knows you will probably not leave anyway as you would lose too much.

 

SO, you can make this a big deal, fight him all the way, build up a huge amount of resentment and build a wall around yourself.

He, then gets himself an ambitious OW, who would just love to take your place eventually, or a succession of sexy OWs as he is just not getting enough at home...

 

This is not the stuff of romance and love, nor equality, nor fairness but when there is such an unequal balance of real power, as there is here, SAHM vs business owner, then the woman has to weigh up her options and if doling out sexual favours to her husband and making HIM feel happy can get HER what she wants long term, then she may just have to do what she has to do...

 

 

(btw -I am not suggesting that all men cheat as they are not getting sex at home and that daily sex and a weekly BJ will guarantee fidelity, far from it, but with certain types of men, regular marital sex binds them to the marriage and their wife, and without that validation, they are far more likely to be open to other offers. It is what it is)

 

 

It's really not "difficult" to cheat if a person wants to. Most people can "find" extramarital sex if they really want it, and being wealthy does not really set anyone apart in that regard. Many of the men I've heard of who had affairs were not particularly rich, and in many cases OMs can be poorer than husbands. Cheating is a choice, not a product of one's circumstances. Heck, if the OP wanted to completely ditch morality, she could likely find a man to give her back rubs if her husband doesn't want to, if we're going to go down that route...

 

So no, I don't think her husband being wealthy should make a difference in how she responds to tantrums, as a man/woman who wants to cheat will likely find a way to do so anyway.

[AriesDude]

"Why do men think I'm deliberately depriving, or playing a game where I'm leveraging off his sexual urges to win some kind of power struggle? They would be hurtful comments, save for the fact that we're all a bunch of strangers on the net making generalisations." The problem is not with the men here. Its your husband ey .

 

Every post here, no matter how read or phrased or stated leads back to one thing.

Your husband is pathetic. No offence.

-Assumes a little affection means he gets laid

-Cant see his wife just wanted some attention

-Not perceptive enough to see he said something stupid or could have implied he wanted sex in a nicer way

-Not man enough to apologize for being stupid

-Not perceptive enough to see he made sht awkward

-Clearly has anger issues

-Can't follow up on a really serious relationship situation.

-Expect a boner MUST be satisfied by wife...because....he has a wife?

....and I seriously never met the guy.

Yeah something tells me there's a lot of other things you don't know about him either.

[BettyDraper]

I usually would not agree with this as I feel sex should be a spontaneous act between two people who desire each other and actually want to have sex, and this "recipe" kind of rubs me up the wrong way,

BUT Renée, having read some of your other threads you probably need to do this if you want your marriage to have any chance of working out long term.

By what you write, your husband is a powerful man, who is used to ordering people about and getting his own way.

He is a manipulative, entitled, controlling, arrogant man who basically lacks empathy and I guess is narcissistic in his tendencies.

He has apparently been spawned by a "nasty" most likely "narcissistic" and "self absorbed" rigid woman who has no doubt passed many of her genes and attitudes onto him and shaped exactly who he is today.

 

YOU have got yourself into a situation where you love the power of being the wife of a wealthy man, you love the gifts, you love your children, you love the man, but he has not turned out to be exactly the man you thought you had.

YOU thought you had a better man, one more suited to you, but he is who he is and now you will have to try to manage him or walk away.

 

He sounds to me to be exactly the type who if not getting sex at home will look elsewhere.

He is HD and will feel HIS needs need met and if you will not oblige he will look for someone else. (He is very used to hiring and firing people. If a person does not do the job to his standard then he will have to fire them and hire someone better.)

If he truly lacks empathy he will not even consider that you might be a teeny tiny bit upset about that, and even if you were upset, he knows you will probably not leave anyway as you would lose too much.

 

SO, you can make this a big deal, fight him all the way, build up a huge amount of resentment and build a wall around yourself.

He, then gets himself an ambitious OW, who would just love to take your place eventually, or a succession of sexy OWs as he is just not getting enough at home...

 

This is not the stuff of romance and love, nor equality, nor fairness but when there is such an unequal balance of real power, as there is here, SAHM vs business owner, then the woman has to weigh up her options and if doling out sexual favours to her husband and making HIM feel happy can get HER what she wants long term, then she may just have to do what she has to do...

 

 

(btw -I am not suggesting that all men cheat as they are not getting sex at home and that daily sex and a weekly BJ will guarantee fidelity, far from it, but with certain types of men, regular marital sex binds them to the marriage and their wife, and without that validation, they are far more likely to be open to other offers. It is what it is)

 

 

I wholeheartedly agree with the bolded. The more status and power a man has, the more likely he is to stray because it is very easy for him. Cheating is also more of a possibility if a man is arrogant and lacks empathy.

 

These are just sad facts about human nature and relationships.

[kgcolonel]

Okay here's my take on this:

 

Many here have been happy to attack the guy so I'll be the one to suggest a different perspective:

 

If I know that when I do something that by cause of natural response will cause an undesirable reaction in my spouse, I can either avoid the initial action i.e. request a "back rub" or request said back rub but letting my spouse know that while i am not up for the follow on now, that I'd be willing to reciprocate at a stated later time. I also would understand if my spouse declined in the spirit that they were not in the mood for said back rub.

 

I am not suggesting that with holding affection is appropriate to get what either spouse wants but, knowing that at back rub will result in arousal and still asking for it, knowing you're not "in the mood" equates to getting mine, f...you on your's.

 

Communication outside the bedroom on topics like this and not on the fly should be conducted so the expectation can align with the responses.

 

Demonizing the guy IMO is biased and unproductive. Looking for solutions is productive and hopefully this is what the OP is truly looking for and not for a group of people with zero investment in her marriage to simply tell her "how right she is'.

 

KG

[AriesDude]

I just don't get it.

When did "sweety may I have a backrub or massage" turn into "sweety if you give me a backrub/massage i'll open my legs for you". What happened to make some men believe that that is a valued or realistic expectation from someone you love that asked you a little favor?

When did "I have a wife now so erections will always get taken care of and I can forget about my younger years(10-30+-) where I needed to constantly not flaunt the fact that i have one" become unrealistic when with a wife for a little while, unless she really took her clothes off.

When did giving backrubs (something which a lot of guys really dont wanna do) start giving guys erections? Clearly he had ideas in his head before even starting to rub....

Yeah I give up....sorry for commenting on this thread so much.

[Tamari]

Well, you certainly aren't being generous! You asked for what you wanted, he obliged, and understandably became aroused believing the physical activity was the prelude to sexual intimacy. Then when he was all primed and ready you're like, nah, I don't think so... how would you feel if the roles were reversed? Why do you assume that his needs are less important as yours? What would it have cost you to follow through... and what do you get out of rejecting him that way?

 

My take is that you feel entitled to limit his access to sex, that your needs come first and his are less important, that it should be perfectly okay to ask and receive without reciprocity. Would it not bother you the rest of the day that you got him primed and left him high and dry?

 

It feels like a power/control/entitlement thing to me, and that you take some kind of pleasure in the denial and putting him in the position of having to beg for it.

 

 

Regarding the bolded: what an assumption! Talking can be a good method of communication....

 

As another poster mentioned a bit further along this thread, as a woman I have also been in the reverse of this scenario... raring to go and ready, when all my hard-working man could manage is a cuddle-up. And that's fine, even though it may be frustrating for me physically, but... guess what? I RESPECT him and would therefore not want him to feel either under pressure to perform when not in the mood or less than good enough by me moaning about it.

 

The way I see it that is way more loving and respectful than expecting a 'tit for tat'. Love just doesn't work that way. On the other hand, if that is the way one views such an act then there are, of course, other options to choose from such as, for example, the pre-agreed and cold-hearted practice of paying for it. A relationship is much more than that.

[OneLov]

The way I see it that is way more loving and respectful than expecting a 'tit for tat'. Love just doesn't work that way. On the other hand, if that is the way one views such an act then there are, of course, other options to choose from such as, for example, the pre-agreed and cold-hearted practice of paying for it. A relationship is much more than that.

 

Exactly. Romantic relationships should not be transactional; love is given not exchanged. I asked my grandmother what was the secret to having a happy marriage that lasted over 50 years, her advice: Don't keep score. Obviously she assumed I had the intelligence to understand the difference between not keeping score and being taken advantage of.

 

I think the healthiest relationships are not equal (50/50 all the time) but equitable (fair). OP should not feel the need to exchange sex for a back massage just like OP's husband should not feel that he must provide a back massage to receive sexual gratification. Intimacy, whether emotional or physical, is voluntary. That is what makes it feel so special.

 

I did not get the impression OP would take issue if her husband did not feel like cuddling or whatever on a particular day nor did I get the impression that she frequently turns down her husband's requests for sex. Thus, I do not think she is being selfish; she is being human.

[salparadise]

The way I see it that is way more loving and respectful than expecting a 'tit for tat'. Love just doesn't work that way. On the other hand, if that is the way one views such an act then there are, of course, other options to choose from such as, for example, the pre-agreed and cold-hearted practice of paying for it. A relationship is much more than that.

 

 

Sure, you can see it as decidedly wrong for the husband to have any expectation if that's the way your bias leans. I'm not surprised that opinions seem to be divided mostly along gender lines on the question of who has the right by default to control sexual frequency in a marriage. Some women see this as the sole source of their feminine power, along with having an ongoing need a need to leverage it.

 

Let's keep in mind a few things that have since come to light... he is high drive and desires frequent sex, and she has him down to once or twice a week. So let's say the request for a back rub comes after she hasn't granted him sex for about a week... she initiates/requests a sensual physical activity while in bed. I'd say it's perfectly normal that he'd see it as a prelude and become aroused as he generously provides the sensuous physical activity she requested... absolutely reasonable for him to be looking forward to an opportunity for sex... and not merely accommodation, but enthusiastic in light of the circumstances.

 

I don't see it as a tit-for-tat transactional thing, I think it's more along the lines of her not giving a flip that she got it started, got what she wanted... and then got what she wanted again in turning him down when he was in that state. If there isn't resentment built up already, it's just a matter of time. As I said previously, I suspect there's more to this than her just not being in the mood. She's exercising power/control and taking some kind of sadistic pleasure in getting him primed and nonchalantly declining... "eh, I don't think so, take care of it yourself"

 

I know how it works and how it feels. I was married to a woman with similar control predilections, although I don't think she every went so far as to request a back rub to put an exclamation point on it. And then my most recent relationship was the diametric opposite, so i know what that feels like too. Guess which one I don't want to every have to deal with again?

 

OP has said enough by now that we can all see what's going on. I don't have to spell it out. But I guess it does depend on what lens you choose to view it through.

Edited August 8, 2017 by salparadise

[knabe]

I'll be crass and bold here. My fiance and I have sex multiple times a day. Every day. We BOTH are very high drive. We grab each other; booties in the hallway. We flirt. We are very...well, let's just say we both like each other.

 

BUT

 

If I thought he was incapable of touching me without needing to penetrate, it would turn me off big time. And I LOVE sex.

 

So this whole misogynist (shame on anyone for making me use the word I hate to hear women use because most of them are just whining) "thing" might seem cool.....it's NOT manly to beat your chest and say "Me hug - you put out!"

[BaileyB]

For me, it's about consideration and compromise.

 

Consideration, such that if you know asking for a back rub will cause him to become aroused... and perhaps, you don't want to make the request if you are not interesting in taking things further - assuming that is what he will want to do.

 

And compromise, such that he should understand that not all touching needs to lead to sex. Hugs, back rubs, and kisses can and should be done - without the expectation that sex will immediately follow...

 

I do agree that there seems to be an interesting power dynamic in this relationship, which makes this more complicated. Add two small children to the mix, a tired mama, and rather arrogant and entitled husband and... it gets even more complicated.

Edited August 8, 2017 by BaileyB

[Tamari]

Sure, you can see it as decidedly wrong for the husband to have any expectation if that's the way your bias leans. I'm not surprised that opinions seem to be divided mostly along gender lines on the question of who has the right by default to control sexual frequency in a marriage. Some women see this as the sole source of their feminine power, along with having an ongoing need a need to leverage it.

 

Let's keep in mind a few things that have since come to light... he is high drive and desires frequent sex, and she has him down to once or twice a week. So let's say the request for a back rub comes after she hasn't granted him sex for about a week... she initiates/requests a sensual physical activity while in bed. I'd say it's perfectly normal that he'd see it as a prelude and become aroused as he generously provides the sensuous physical activity she requested... absolutely reasonable for him to be looking forward to an opportunity for sex... and not merely accommodation, but enthusiastic in light of the circumstances.

 

I don't see it as a tit-for-tat transactional thing, I think it's more along the lines of her not giving a flip that she got it started, got what she wanted... and then got what she wanted again in turning him down when he was in that state. If there isn't resentment built up already, it's just a matter of time. As I said previously, I suspect there's more to this than her just not being in the mood. She's exercising power/control and taking some kind of sadistic pleasure in getting him primed and nonchalantly declining... "eh, I don't think so, take care of it yourself"

 

I know how it works and how it feels. I was married to a woman with similar control predilections, although I don't think she every went so far as to request a back rub to put an exclamation point on it. And then my most recent relationship was the diametric opposite, so i know what that feels like too. Guess which one I don't want to every have to deal with again?

 

OP has said enough by now that we can all see what's going on. I don't have to spell it out. But I guess it does depend on what lens you choose to view it through.

 

 

Yes, and from her post I don't see the OP's situation like that at all. Control predilections... really? By the same token, then, when my man is too tired to 'perform' even though I might be 100% in the mood, should I assume he's trying to control me?

 

I am not saying it's not possible for a man to do that... I have known one in my lifetime as it happens but - once again - that is not how relationships work. The ones that work have mutual respect and trust as the foundations, allowing sex/cuddling/laughing/sharing etc to be enjoyed freely without having to keep score.

 

The very thought... ugh.

[JuneL]

OP:

 

I answered your other thread regarding your hubby's road rage, and noticed that you were a bit defensive in that thread. I also just read your earlier thread about your controlling mother-in-law, and feel quite sympathetic to you about whole situation. I can see that you really love your hubby, and I don't believe that you're using sex as the power control, at all. My general impression is that your life has been turned upside down with the birth of your twins. As much as you love your babies, you also feel very trapped to be a stay-at-home mom having to deal with an overbearing MIL constantly and having to completely rely on your husband financially. I am just writing this to offer a few words of support. From another thread, it does sound like your situation (including your sex life) has improved. Very best wishes!

[knabe]

Yes, and from her post I don't see the OP's situation like that at all. Control predilections... really? By the same token, then, when my man is too tired to 'perform' even though I might be 100% in the mood, should I assume he's trying to control me?

 

I am not saying it's not possible for a man to do that... I have known one in my lifetime as it happens but - once again - that is not how relationships work. The ones that work have mutual respect and trust as the foundations, allowing sex/cuddling/laughing/sharing etc to be enjoyed freely without having to keep score.

 

The very thought... ugh.

Her situation is nothing like that. It's the typical boys club crap.

 

Healthy couples can touch without having to run to the bedroom.

[alsudduth]

Maybe you have things to earn about men. If you're not in the mood for sex then do not have him give you a back rub. Problem solved.

 

I wasn't melodramatic - but your response sure looks that way.

 

You were totally melodramatic.

 

 

 

OP - I totally understand what you are saying and asking on this post. Given that you and your H are active more than once a week most of the time, I do not think there is anything wrong to ask for physical affection without the obligation for sex. Based on how it seems your husband is though, I would be blunt and up front with him like "I am very tired, and had a long day with the kids. My back hurts more than usual tonight. I'm happy to do something for you tomorrow morning/afternoon/night to return the favor if you know what I mean, but do you think right now you could just really dig into my back for a few minutes??"

 

I know it still has a little connotation of you "owing him" for something, but in this context it may make it a little easier to give him what he would want to have HIS needs met and still get yours met.

[alsudduth]

Exactly. Romantic relationships should not be transactional; love is given not exchanged. I asked my grandmother what was the secret to having a happy marriage that lasted over 50 years, her advice: Don't keep score. Obviously she assumed I had the intelligence to understand the difference between not keeping score and being taken advantage of.

 

I think the healthiest relationships are not equal (50/50 all the time) but equitable (fair). OP should not feel the need to exchange sex for a back massage just like OP's husband should not feel that he must provide a back massage to receive sexual gratification. Intimacy, whether emotional or physical, is voluntary. That is what makes it feel so special.

 

I did not get the impression OP would take issue if her husband did not feel like cuddling or whatever on a particular day nor did I get the impression that she frequently turns down her husband's requests for sex. Thus, I do not think she is being selfish; she is being human.

 

I agree with this.

[Els]

Sure, you can see it as decidedly wrong for the husband to have any expectation if that's the way your bias leans. I'm not surprised that opinions seem to be divided mostly along gender lines on the question of who has the right by default to control sexual frequency in a marriage. Some women see this as the sole source of their feminine power, along with having an ongoing need a need to leverage it.

 

I think you are extrapolating. The only person who keeps bringing up power and control is you.

 

Maybe in YOUR head you associate sex and consent with power and control. Trust me, that isn't the case for most people (even if they enjoy bedroom play involving that). On the rare occasions that my SO isn't able to have sex, I don't think "OMG what an *******, he's trying to control sexual frequency in our relationship, trying to leverage power over me by doing that, what a douche!". Nor would most normal and healthy people of any gender, from my experience.

[salparadise]

I do not think there is anything wrong to ask for physical affection without the obligation for sex.

 

I'm happy to do something for you tomorrow morning/afternoon/night to return the favor...

 

You see, these words reveal something important about the female perspective.

 

I think you are extrapolating. The only person who keeps bringing up power and control is you.

 

Maybe in YOUR head you associate sex and consent with power and control. Trust me, that isn't the case for most people (even if they enjoy bedroom play involving that). On the rare occasions that my SO isn't able to have sex, I don't think "OMG what an *******, he's trying to control sexual frequency in our relationship, trying to leverage power over me by doing that, what a douche!". Nor would most normal and healthy people of any gender, from my experience.

 

All of this does depend on one's experience, and it's also difficult to ignore subtle gender biases. When I say power and control, I don't mean sledge hammer type of power, I mean a more subtle implication that she is the one in this relationship who decides when sex happens and when it doesn't. She determines how much access he has to sex, and thereby she is in control of his sexuality.

 

This whole thread is about whether it's right (selfish or not) for her to exercise that control based on her own preference rather than considering his need, whether we're talking immediate need (the morning referenced in #1), or his overall need in terms of keeping a high drive man on the once a week plan.

 

I am not arguing that it's not within her "rights" (or his) to decline on any particular occasion for any particular reason, of course it is... what I'm saying is that there is more going on in terms of relationship dynamics than is being addressed from the "is she within her rights" perspective. Sure, if this example is a one-off kind of thing then perhaps it should not be seen as a big deal. But, if it's more symbolic and represents the assertion of who controls what in this relationship, then I guess she's still within her rights... so it's easy to "win" the argument by limiting it to the most literal interpretation, just like it's easy for her to limit his sexual expression and satisfaction by not being in the mood but once a week. If this were a woman wanting sex ten times a week, married to a man who is always too tired or just not interested in it more than once a week, everyone would be telling him to get his T tested and saying "hey buddy, you need to step up and take care of business."

[Tribble]

If this were a woman wanting sex ten times a week, married to a man who is always too tired or just not interested in it more than once a week, everyone would be telling him to get his T tested and saying "hey buddy, you need to step up and take care of business."

 

I do think this is quite true, there are gender roles here to consider. The issue would be to find out the problem. However, I think we are forgetting she has two very young children that can very much affect her libido. Many posters have addressed this: getting a cleaner/ babysitter, taking care of herself etc.

 

But more to the point, the OP's issue is not that her husband wants sex all the time and she doesn't and she's trying to get out of it and get sympathy. The issue is that the OP wants physical affection that does not lead to sex.

 

A few questions OP. Does your husband ever show you physical affection without it leading to sex? And does your husband complain about the frequency you have sex? I think these are critical questions.

 

Physical contact is one of the ways I express and feel love. Made all the more special because I'm not a touchy-feely person apart from with a romantic partner. Sex is a really big part of that. However, I would have a big problem if my partner only expressed physical affection when they wanted sex. No holding hands or snuggling on the sofa. It can feel like they aren't expressing love at all, that they just want to satisfy their sexual requirements.

[knabe]

you can see it as decidedly wrong for the husband to have any expectation if that's the way your bias leans.

 

Hyperbole and black and white thinking. No one anywhere on this thread has said a man should have no expectation. Your arguments lack credibility because they are so dramatic and extreme.

 

Your bias against all women is much more pronounced than any supposed bias in this thread of women against men.