First, an update on what is actually happening in my relationship before I launch another one of my theoretical essays.-LOL. My poor H has prostatitis and a macular edema. So, I've basically been playing Nurse Mojo for the last couple weeks. In a moment of idiocy yesterday morning my H told me that he had forgotten all about Valentine's Day but then he redeemed himself by buying me some flowers and chocolate. He wrote "To My Sweet Honey. Thanks for being mine." on the enclosed card.
If you combine that with the fact that on my recent Bday card he wrote that he "owed" me about 10 years of fun, you can kind of get the vibe of where our relationship is at the moment.
Now I will segue into my new theme/theory. I think that relationship-based LD (as opposed to essential LD) is linked to being the member of a relationship who feels least like the relationship is supporting their concept of an ideal lifestyle. Quite often when HD people join this BB they post things like "Everything about our marriage is great except no sex." which really means "I am desperately unhappy about the lack of sex and emotional intimacy in my marriage but I am unwilling to rock the boat because my other lifestyle needs are being well supported by this marriage.". Some "lifestyle" needs might be financial support, social network, religious beliefs, romantic ideals, child care, various forms of ego support etc.. If you close your eyes and picture an ideal scene of what your life would be like on a perfect day that is your ideal lifestyle.
The trap many HD people get themselves into is that they take on sole responsibility for "fighting" to include sex in the ideal lifestyle of their marriage or at least make it a much higher priority. Pretty much that is what makes them HD. IMO there are three ways to overcome this.
The first way is to accept and understand that your partner has different lifestyle priorities and to try and achieve a better balance by doing more to meet your partner's needs. For instance, in my relationship my H is more "comfort" oriented while I am more "fun" oriented. The reason why there is a tone of gratitude in his recent notes to me is that he understands that I have done a lot to meet his need for "comfort" rather than push for my own need for "fun". He knows that doing this is making me kind of depressed and LD and therefore throwing the balance of the relationship in the other direction.
The second way to "rebalance" the relationship is to "force" your spouse to recognize the lifestyle value inherent in the relationship that they are currently discounting. This is what saying "I will not stay in a sexless marriage." does. It forces your spouse to envision a lifestyle without you. This causes a rise in psychological sex drive proportional to the loss of lifestyle envisioned.
The third way to "rebalance" is to simply change your own concept of what you consider an ideal lifestyle. For instance, the simplest solution to no longer being unhappily HD is to tell yourself that you really don't care that much about sex. Delink sex from romance or love or security or self-esteem needs in your own mind. Most of the "formerly" HD women on this BB have chosen this option to some extent. For instance, both HP and I (probably the most formerly HD of the women on this BB) have at least gone so far as to tell ourselves that we know longer want to self-identify as HD and have chosen to stop initiating sex. Of course there all sorts of other variations of this. For instance, a HD guy could decide that his post-divorce "fantasy/nightmare" of living in a trailer with a HD woman after his wife took him to the cleaners in divorce court would be a preferable option to living in middle class comfort without sex.
IMO and experience, though each of these methods work, you can only go so far with each one. Using only method 1 will lead to you becoming LD for the relationship and perhaps sex. Using only method 2 would require superhuman will and bravery. Using only method 3 can cause you to mistake self-deception for personal growth.
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
The third way to "rebalance" is to simply change your own concept of what you consider an ideal lifestyle. For instance, the simplest solution to no longer being unhappily HD is to tell yourself that you really don't care that much about sex. Delink sex from romance or love or security or self-esteem needs in your own mind.
I can see that this might work with women, but as a HD man, I can't see this ever working. I understand that sex is a decision for some people (LD's) but for me, sex is NOT a decision. My body reminds me of sex 24/7, there is no way to turn it off without chemicals. So chosing to not be physical means being tormented by it forever.
Cemar, you are a very valuable member of this community simply because you consistently reinforce what I said about the dangers of going whole-hog for option 3. No one ever has to say "Cemar, to thine own self be true.". OTOH, the example that I gave was very simplistic. You, for instance, could decide that your ideal lifestyle would include having daily video web chat sex with anonymous women. You could adjust your morals rather than your hormones. Of course, you might have to adjust your style a bit too. For instance, if I were you I wouldn't come right out with that blow-job-neediness groove of yours. Good Luck!
"Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?" - Mary Oliver
Interesting points MJ. I think incorporating a little of all three ways is a possibility. I see a little of H and I in many of the things you noted. And yes, I see option 3 as being fairly successful for many of the HD women on this board. I disagree with Cemar that men cannot attain option 3. Ok, I'll give you the fact that men may be driven biologically more by sex than women but it's hardly opposite sides of the spectrum. If it was, we wouldn't have so many LD men out there. I also see HD people using the whole "but I can't control my needs/wants" idea as an excuse to stand firmly entrenched in their own viewpoint. And thus, make no M progress. Marriage demands some compromise.
As a HD man, what can I do to control the desire for sex? Without chemicals, there is absolutely nothing that can lower the desire for sex. Asking a man to lower his sex drive is like asking him to stop breathing. There is no on/off switch for the sex drive. It is on full power at ALL times.
If there was some way to turn it off, I would LOVE to here it, it definitely would make life more bearable. Everything I have ever tried actually makes it HIGHER!
Barring the horror story of alter boys and such, priests and monks 'control' their sex drives for most of their lives.
I realize you didn't choose to be a priest or a monk, but that does not negate the fact that it can be controlled. What you are talking about is much akin to an addict or someone who is just taking on any new discipline... the moment you decide to go on a diet, you are hungry. The moment you quit smoking, all you want is a cigarette, etc., etc., etc.
And... let's face it... you can have sex whenever you want it. It's just not the kind of sex you desire... so really, what you are talking about is not sex... it's about being able to control another's desire... which is out of your realm of control. Which drives you nuts.
So really, you don't have a 'sex' problem. You have a 'control' problem.
Barring the horror story of alter boys and such, priests and monks 'control' their sex drives for most of their lives.
what makes you think that? don't you suppose that a low libido might be part of the reason that these men choose this avocation? They don't "control" it; they just don't have it. (or much of one). Most "thin" people aren't thin because they have superior self-disipline; they're thin because they don't have much of an appetite. Some of us have much more strongly developed famine avoidance instincts.
Quote:
I realize you didn't choose to be a priest or a monk, but that does not negate the fact that it can be controlled.
The only thing you can control is how you act upon it. you can't just blink and make it go away, any more than you can "control" hunger when you're on a diet. you can tolerate it...to a point. but 95% of diets eventually fail.
what makes you think that? don't you suppose that a low libido might be part of the reason that these men choose this avocation? They don't "control" it; they just don't have it. (or much of one).
I don't agree. There is an extensive evidence of Taoist/Buddhist practice that suggests otherwise. It is a re-channeling of sexual energy.
I don't know what priests do, but I think it is faulty logic to say that All priests don't have sexual desire, therefore, that is how they 'control' it.
Also, to say that "most 'thin' people are thin' because they don't have much of an appetite is equally erroneous logic. It simply is not true. There are a multitude of factors that go into this, and yes, some thin people ARE thin through superior self-discipline.
Quote:
The only thing you can control is how you act upon it. You can't just blink and make it go away.
Exactly. But Cemar doesn't have a problem with getting sex or even keeping testosterone levels down (say through MB). He has a very specific WANT of desire and affection from his wife.
That is a control (of another) problem. Not controlling his sexual desire problem.
...I think it is faulty logic to say that All priests don't have sexual desire, therefore, that is how they 'control' it.
I didn't say that. ("ALL") and it wouldn't be "control", any more than a basketball player can "control" his height. "gee, I'm 7 feet tall. maybe I should check out basketball. Its quite possible that I'd be well suited to that profession".
"gee, I'm really devoted to this faith, and I so enjoy helping people, yadda yadda yadda...and I don't like girls all that much..." OR..."but, I'm kind of a horn-dog, so maybe I should get married and make a bunch of kids instead"
iow: they find their avocations the same way that the rest of us do. I'm not pursuing an NBA career, at least in part, because of my height. its just who I am.
Quote:
Also, to say that "most 'thin' people are thin' because they don't have much of an appetite is equally erroneous logic. It simply is not true.
let me put it this way: their appetites generally match their metabolism. There's lots of data to support it; it isn't "erroneous" logic. The American College of Endocrinology has changed their assesment of what constitutes "normal" thyroid levels 3 or 4 times in the last few years...meaning, people who were told yesterday that they were simply 'undisciplined' are being told now, "oh, you have a metabolic problem".
Quote:
There are a multitude of factors that go into this, and yes, some thin people ARE thin through superior self-discipline.
sure there are. when I say "thin people", I mean people who were born that way, and always have been that way. amongst those who weren't, and attempt to change themselves, 95% of them fail. they can't *control* it. you can try to deprive yourself of basic instinctive bodily urges...some few may attain a mystical zen-like mastery over them, but that is the exception, and not the rule. Same goes for all those who (apparently) tried to use the priesthood to hide from their urges...didn't work out too well.
Quote:
But Cemar doesn't have a problem with getting sex or even keeping testosterone levels down (say through MB).
maybe our problem here is that we're bouncing between the figurative and the literal...but in the literal sense, that has nothing to do w/ testosterone levels.
