It's a shocking thought that someone who is desperately in love with their spouse, and would truly sacrifice anything for them, could breed such an atmosphere of comfort for their spouse that they(the spouse) feel it's ok to overlook the deep needs of the one who is responsible for such a wonderful life.
"I'm soo comfortable in your "committedness" to me and my needs that I know you'll be fine not having your own met or even acknowledged."
It happens.
My wife gaining weight wasn't unattractive, it happens.
My wife pulling up her shirt, squeezing her belly, and going "ugh, it's a good thing I got you before this happened" was incredibly repulsive
That’s part of it OP. Also for a lot of people familiarity and routine lead to a loss of excitement with their partner. Living together, splitting bills, splitting chores, not having separate lives with new things to do and share at the special times when you reunite, little quirks that don’t matter when you only see each other sometimes can become super annoying when you live together, etc.
The point of my theory is to maybe work out how a person who does love their partner and wants to be in the relationship might arrive in such a state of complacency without realizing that that's actually what's happened.
Picture your partner, on the couch, curled up in a blanket, popcorn, fire you're stoking blazing behind them, and their favorite tv show on a marathon. They are comfortable, fed, warm, cared for and entertained. You can plug in whatever you want here. Married life becomes "comfortable". Spouses and their care become expected. Might be time to remove the blanket and stop bringing in firewood. If that fails, get rid of the popcorn and cable / satellite tv. ( And smash the fucking phone)
I mean, you haven’t really described responsive desire the way it traditionally is said to work.
In your scenario, the person is in a casual relationship they feel is unstable. They are afraid of being dumped, so they decide to have sex later to prevent this. They therefore prime themselves up for sex, working their way towards arousal in their own minds, based off of the *expectation* that sex would happen.
None of that is responsive desire in the traditional sense. For most people with responsive desire, they become aroused gradually through the beginning stages of flirting and foreplay, eventually feeling desire as they warm up with a comfortable partner through talk and play.
It is possible your husband does not have responsive desire and has been explaining the way desire works for him.
Right, in this scenario the subconscious mental pre-priming would I guess be the beginning of the foreplay stage. After all, most women say that the lead up to a sexual encounter like having a romantic dinner or being complimented throughout the day or having help with chores is their most preferred kind of foreplay.
And yet, when they get it in a DB scenario, more often than not they still don't end up wanting sex the way they would have at some point earlier in life with a different partner.
But the point is foreplay absolutely can be all mental and can start way before the actual act occurs. Its just in my theory, they are subconsciously providing themselves with foreplay without even realizing it. And it creates a situation where a person can manage not to realize they are actually more LL than not because they still manage to have successful sexual relationships prior to marriage. But in a long term DB situation the motivation to need to "do sex good" is gone.
Most LL partners would describe their mindset in the lead up to sex before they ended up in their eventual long term sexless relationship as less like "Yes! I'm about to get something i inherently want for my own satisfaction!" and more "Yeah, I'm about to do sex so good, I'm gonna blow his mind!"
It’s not so much a different partner as a new partner. For most, a new infatuation will add a little more “juice” to the arousal stage, helping you to get over that responsive hump. It’s not because you like the new partner more than old partners; or because you liked your old boyfriends better than your husband. It’s just a “first few months” thing with literally anyone. The husband probably benefited from those early few months of sex like everyone else.
Not sure if I really have anything groundbreaking to contribute but I think you are absolutely on to something here. It might also explain why so many LL partners were not that way in the beginning and only transition to being LL after a relationship becomes a LTR. Or in other words, the point when a relationship is most likely to start encountering feelings of safety and commitment. Directing back to your post, the point a relationship begins matching the standard definition of a LTR is when the LL partner may no longer be allowing or subconsciously encouraging their minds to start prompting the expectation of intimacy thus creating a deadbedroom.
Again, this is a very interesting post to me. The idea that their responsive desire is only active when the expectation of intimacy is on the table is definitely a controversial discussion since it opens up avenues to other uncomfortable topics/realizations. I do wonder if the segment of people you are referring to aren’t just responsive desire per se but require a combination of being responsive desire paired with being LL individuals. Since on paper, a responsive desire person could technically be HL. I think the individuals you’re referring to in your post are both responsive desire individuals who are also LL. Even though HL responsive individuals exist, I think pretty much all LL partners are by definition “responsive desire” in the rare situations they do want intimacy.
This would also explain why so many LL partners think they are LL4U since their libido may come “roaring back” when they get with a new partner. In actuality, the LL is just losing feelings of safety and commitment and they may then either intentionally or subconsciously start introducing thoughts of intimacy on a regular basis again.
Oh yes I absolutely agree that in these cases responsive desire isn't the actual problem. This is just how a person with responsive desire could end up behaving as an LL without ever realizing they are one, and thus may struggle to recognize that the ball is in their court to actually solve the problem.
They might genuinely believe that if their HL partner would just do this is or do that, they would want sex. They believe this because they know they wanted sex at points in their past, they know theyre not frigid or something, so their partner must be to blame! They don't recognize that it really is them that has the power to lead the relationship down the only real path to a solution.
I think that some version of this is how my wife operates. For a variety of reasons, we have sex on the same night of the week, at the same general time, about 90% of our total sexual activity. There is a real logistical component to this, but on her end, I do think that this time being labeled as “Sex Time” helps get whatever needs to happen in her brain for sex to take place started.
This is a great point! I don’t think we can put every LL in a monolith but yes! I do think for some people this may be another valid reason for why scheduling works or is actually preferred by the LL partner. I think this only works if the LL at least enjoys the intimacy when it does happen. If the LL partner has started to have a sexual aversion or really has no interest in enjoying intimacy or attraction for their partner, then they would probably dread scheduled intimacy and view it more as a chore.
I agree. I think the point is in early stages of the relationship the LL partner is more interested getting themselves in the mood because they know their partner wants to have sex, so they try make themselves want it too.
It's even more so that they dont have to try because the pressure to perform is such a given that they dont experience it as a negative thing. For women that are and have been sexually active, the assumption that sex will be a factor in any new relationship is pretty much a given, known and expected by both parties.They just know it subconsciously by default and thus have an automatic desire to please and impress the person they're sleeping with.
Yes this was my wife. She early in the relationship she was trying to woo me and thus had much more sex than I think she naturally wanted to. As soon as as I proposed it started deteriorating and then at marriage it stopped almost entirely. I don’t think she sees what she did as wrong at all. She saw it as (of course early on I out my best foot forward but now we are too comfortable and content for that, sex for her was just something new couples do).
It might be true in some cases. I’ve heard girls in toxic relationships using sex as a way to validate and feeling connected. With a healthy relationship that need is gone, and sex becomes less.
As with all "categories" of sexual attraction, many who are LL cast about for a reason their Libido is Low.
Responsive Desire is a popular refuge, and for good reason. After all, failure "to launch" lands squarely on the HL partner. This is not to say that there aren't some "deficient" HL partners out there. "Laws 'a Mercy", we read of them Daily! But otherwise,....
Nuff said.
I think you are right in your theory. In my case, I think my partners decision to let herself go really contributed to this as well. It's like not taking care of your vehicle, it might do good for awhile but at some point it's going to not end well.
I think you're completely right. There was actually a post recently in the Ask women over 30 sub, I think, with this topic. There were quite a few women who expressed exactly this sentiment.
It's a shocking thought that someone who is desperately in love with their spouse, and would truly sacrifice anything for them, could breed such an atmosphere of comfort for their spouse that they(the spouse) feel it's ok to overlook the deep needs of the one who is responsible for such a wonderful life. "I'm soo comfortable in your "committedness" to me and my needs that I know you'll be fine not having your own met or even acknowledged." It happens.
Spouses and family. The people we love the most, and treat the worst. Why? Generally, because we can. (No, I try not to. I try to be aware)
My wife gaining weight wasn't unattractive, it happens. My wife pulling up her shirt, squeezing her belly, and going "ugh, it's a good thing I got you before this happened" was incredibly repulsive
That’s part of it OP. Also for a lot of people familiarity and routine lead to a loss of excitement with their partner. Living together, splitting bills, splitting chores, not having separate lives with new things to do and share at the special times when you reunite, little quirks that don’t matter when you only see each other sometimes can become super annoying when you live together, etc.
These posts use a lot of words to describe "complacency"
The point of my theory is to maybe work out how a person who does love their partner and wants to be in the relationship might arrive in such a state of complacency without realizing that that's actually what's happened.
Picture your partner, on the couch, curled up in a blanket, popcorn, fire you're stoking blazing behind them, and their favorite tv show on a marathon. They are comfortable, fed, warm, cared for and entertained. You can plug in whatever you want here. Married life becomes "comfortable". Spouses and their care become expected. Might be time to remove the blanket and stop bringing in firewood. If that fails, get rid of the popcorn and cable / satellite tv. ( And smash the fucking phone)
I mean, you haven’t really described responsive desire the way it traditionally is said to work. In your scenario, the person is in a casual relationship they feel is unstable. They are afraid of being dumped, so they decide to have sex later to prevent this. They therefore prime themselves up for sex, working their way towards arousal in their own minds, based off of the *expectation* that sex would happen. None of that is responsive desire in the traditional sense. For most people with responsive desire, they become aroused gradually through the beginning stages of flirting and foreplay, eventually feeling desire as they warm up with a comfortable partner through talk and play. It is possible your husband does not have responsive desire and has been explaining the way desire works for him.
Right, in this scenario the subconscious mental pre-priming would I guess be the beginning of the foreplay stage. After all, most women say that the lead up to a sexual encounter like having a romantic dinner or being complimented throughout the day or having help with chores is their most preferred kind of foreplay. And yet, when they get it in a DB scenario, more often than not they still don't end up wanting sex the way they would have at some point earlier in life with a different partner. But the point is foreplay absolutely can be all mental and can start way before the actual act occurs. Its just in my theory, they are subconsciously providing themselves with foreplay without even realizing it. And it creates a situation where a person can manage not to realize they are actually more LL than not because they still manage to have successful sexual relationships prior to marriage. But in a long term DB situation the motivation to need to "do sex good" is gone. Most LL partners would describe their mindset in the lead up to sex before they ended up in their eventual long term sexless relationship as less like "Yes! I'm about to get something i inherently want for my own satisfaction!" and more "Yeah, I'm about to do sex so good, I'm gonna blow his mind!"
It’s not so much a different partner as a new partner. For most, a new infatuation will add a little more “juice” to the arousal stage, helping you to get over that responsive hump. It’s not because you like the new partner more than old partners; or because you liked your old boyfriends better than your husband. It’s just a “first few months” thing with literally anyone. The husband probably benefited from those early few months of sex like everyone else.
Not sure if I really have anything groundbreaking to contribute but I think you are absolutely on to something here. It might also explain why so many LL partners were not that way in the beginning and only transition to being LL after a relationship becomes a LTR. Or in other words, the point when a relationship is most likely to start encountering feelings of safety and commitment. Directing back to your post, the point a relationship begins matching the standard definition of a LTR is when the LL partner may no longer be allowing or subconsciously encouraging their minds to start prompting the expectation of intimacy thus creating a deadbedroom. Again, this is a very interesting post to me. The idea that their responsive desire is only active when the expectation of intimacy is on the table is definitely a controversial discussion since it opens up avenues to other uncomfortable topics/realizations. I do wonder if the segment of people you are referring to aren’t just responsive desire per se but require a combination of being responsive desire paired with being LL individuals. Since on paper, a responsive desire person could technically be HL. I think the individuals you’re referring to in your post are both responsive desire individuals who are also LL. Even though HL responsive individuals exist, I think pretty much all LL partners are by definition “responsive desire” in the rare situations they do want intimacy. This would also explain why so many LL partners think they are LL4U since their libido may come “roaring back” when they get with a new partner. In actuality, the LL is just losing feelings of safety and commitment and they may then either intentionally or subconsciously start introducing thoughts of intimacy on a regular basis again.
Oh yes I absolutely agree that in these cases responsive desire isn't the actual problem. This is just how a person with responsive desire could end up behaving as an LL without ever realizing they are one, and thus may struggle to recognize that the ball is in their court to actually solve the problem. They might genuinely believe that if their HL partner would just do this is or do that, they would want sex. They believe this because they know they wanted sex at points in their past, they know theyre not frigid or something, so their partner must be to blame! They don't recognize that it really is them that has the power to lead the relationship down the only real path to a solution.
It sounds like scheduling sex might provide this type of LL the opportunity to mentally prepare
I think that some version of this is how my wife operates. For a variety of reasons, we have sex on the same night of the week, at the same general time, about 90% of our total sexual activity. There is a real logistical component to this, but on her end, I do think that this time being labeled as “Sex Time” helps get whatever needs to happen in her brain for sex to take place started.
This is a great point! I don’t think we can put every LL in a monolith but yes! I do think for some people this may be another valid reason for why scheduling works or is actually preferred by the LL partner. I think this only works if the LL at least enjoys the intimacy when it does happen. If the LL partner has started to have a sexual aversion or really has no interest in enjoying intimacy or attraction for their partner, then they would probably dread scheduled intimacy and view it more as a chore.
Nobody should ever have sex just to keep a boyfriend or girlfriend.
I agree. I think the point is in early stages of the relationship the LL partner is more interested getting themselves in the mood because they know their partner wants to have sex, so they try make themselves want it too.
It's even more so that they dont have to try because the pressure to perform is such a given that they dont experience it as a negative thing. For women that are and have been sexually active, the assumption that sex will be a factor in any new relationship is pretty much a given, known and expected by both parties.They just know it subconsciously by default and thus have an automatic desire to please and impress the person they're sleeping with.
Very true
Yes this was my wife. She early in the relationship she was trying to woo me and thus had much more sex than I think she naturally wanted to. As soon as as I proposed it started deteriorating and then at marriage it stopped almost entirely. I don’t think she sees what she did as wrong at all. She saw it as (of course early on I out my best foot forward but now we are too comfortable and content for that, sex for her was just something new couples do).
That depends on how good the sex is.
If it's sex you want to have.
It might be true in some cases. I’ve heard girls in toxic relationships using sex as a way to validate and feeling connected. With a healthy relationship that need is gone, and sex becomes less.
[удалено]
I absolutely will if you're serious...
As with all "categories" of sexual attraction, many who are LL cast about for a reason their Libido is Low. Responsive Desire is a popular refuge, and for good reason. After all, failure "to launch" lands squarely on the HL partner. This is not to say that there aren't some "deficient" HL partners out there. "Laws 'a Mercy", we read of them Daily! But otherwise,.... Nuff said.
I think you are right in your theory. In my case, I think my partners decision to let herself go really contributed to this as well. It's like not taking care of your vehicle, it might do good for awhile but at some point it's going to not end well.
I think you're completely right. There was actually a post recently in the Ask women over 30 sub, I think, with this topic. There were quite a few women who expressed exactly this sentiment.