[raindancer]

There is plenty of fault in your scenario. First, "A" should have communicated his/her issue at the first sign and "B" should have been perceptive enough to to see that "A" was losing interest.

I've taken the liberty of putting in red the flaw of your argument. In my humble opinion, the one no one has to agree with.

Should/Could/Would... these are all ways to talk about something that wasn't done. I understood you think the fact they weren't done is some kind of proof someone was at fault.

At first sight, one wants to agree with you. However, it goes against findings in neuroscience. We don't make decisions based on reason. Men and women make decisions that are emotional. That's how we make decisions. You can reason as much as you wish, but the moment you have to make a decision, your emotions will dictate it. Don't believe me. Research about the matter.

A won't communicate his/her needs, because A wants B to act from her/his own devise. If A would decide what to do, upon not being satisfied, from reason, make a rational decision about the course to follow, A would surely dialogue about it with B. But A will decide with emotions. So, A will wait B to do what A needs.

We can extrapolate that A will continue doing something else we, reasoning, rationally, know it's not a good idea: act as if everything was OK. A loves B. A doesn't want to give B a bad experience, or a bad impression of her/himself. A also doesn't want B to feel inappropriate, incompetent in love making, etc.

How can we set blame, when we know how we make decisions? Looking at it coolly, as the outsider, we see the problem as a problem of communication. But the reason communication isn't working, is because the course of action from both A and B are being decided emotionally. And that is true for both men and women.

Now, should/could/might/would... it's past. The fact is, it didn't happen. We can blame, or we can move forward. If we blame, we're ignoring the science behind decision making. Pick a side. I won't blame.

Second, the notion that one party to the marriage "can't find a reason to go through with the moves" indicates the beginning if the end to the marriage. Asexual marriages aside, intimacy is one of the key components of a healthy marriage...
...if A truly loves B, he or she needs to find a way to rekindle the spark. If A thinks that a healthy sex life with his or her spouse is akin to being violated, A needs to be the one to file for divorce.

Wow, you have your mind set on what marriage should be. Textbook-wise, OK. But look around yourself. How many of these perfect marriages are there? And anyway, would this thread exist at all, should all marriages be like this?

There are plenty of marriages out there between loving partners who go on with "dysfunctional" sex arrangements. And there are many considerations to be taken into account before one files for divorce. What if sex is bad, but there is companionship, there are children, grandchildren.

You'll perhaps feel like arguing keeping a marriage without perfect sex life going is bad for the children. But can you really affirm that's the case for all such arrangements?
____

You go on to say what people should do, or should have done. Well, they didn't do it. I believe when they say they've tried. It didn't happen.

What should they do? Only they know... no, they don't really know.

All I'm doing is proposing one point of view. One point of view that may, or not help people to understand their situation. Even when it doesn't apply directly to a particular couple, the fact of thinking of a situation from different perspectives, sometimes gives one an EUREKA moment. We're all trying to help.
____

I'm going to insist on the decision making process. I've told you it is emotion-guided, as opposed to rational. For men and women. We're all from Earth on this matter. I'm repeating that, because there is this myth of communication as a panacea.

We may talk as much as we want. It helps (sometimes it doesn't!). But it doesn't necessarily solve problems. Why? I give an example from another thread. A loving couple, with very open dialogue, super communication going on, has the following problem: C wants more sexual experiences. D wants exclusive relationship. D understands C and they talk openly about options. But D is jealous and can't just accept C having sex with other people.

They've talked! But there is a real difference in expectations and emotions are involved (jealousy).

Now, I don't understand jealousy. But who cares what I understand? She's jealous.

Who's at fault? C? C is being open about his/her feelings. Can we control our desires? We can control what we do about them. C can forever renounce to sex with others. But C has that desire. C wishes he/she didn't feel this way. But C does.

That's just an example to show that perfect communication still can't solve problems.

In the case of A and B, the problem is there and the problem is real. And very, very difficult to solve. I didn't say it can't be solved. How would I know?

It's difficult to solve. I suggested a course of action in my second post. B should use whatever opportunity that arises for sex, may it be in two months, to give A something unexpected. Something very good. Something A will want to try again. And, mainly: something A never asked. A surprise.

I've used programmers talk to explain that: when a routine doesn't work, when it has a bug, one tries to debug. That can be quite difficult, to find a fault somewhere. It can take a lot of time, in some cases.

Well, instead of debugging, why not write a new routine? A brand new one?

The new routine would be the surprise, the unexpected. Something that would be so good, A would want more. Something 100% giving, 0% receiving. I'm not saying it should always be self-sacrificing. But to start a new routine afresh, it should pass by that stage.

Happy people want to give back. Happy people are generous. A happy A would want to go back.
__________________

Does it apply for everybody? No, surely not. But if it could help, isn't it worth a try?

[raindancer]

So will B's not nagging for sex and hide their sexual needs over time make A more interested? Or are there other tips or clues that anyone can give when A's not even willing to talk about sex?

We're all different and what works for one won't necessarily work for another. I'm only going to give you my opinions. Everybody is free to disagree. Here it goes.

Nagging for anything is a very bad move.

Insisting on talking about something that clearly annoys the other person involved isn't always a good idea, either.

How to solve this problem without dialogue, then? I wish I knew. I really do.

First, I'd like you to understand how difficult it is to have sex without libido. Having sex without desire is extremely difficult. It may seem simple. Lay down, open your legs, try to relax. Smile, to make your partner feel comfortable about the act. Caress him. Penetration. Bear it. Think of his good. It'll be soon over. It's done. Dry yourself. Go to sleep.

In reality, it feels like being violated. It is depressing, because you wish you'd feel desire. You love him. Nothing. Why does it feel like being violated? I don't know. But it does. Perhaps it comes from stories you hear, from the idea pee and sperm comes through the same canal and you're just another version of a toilet. I'm shocking in my language. I don't want to shock, nor hurt anyone feelings. I'm just trying to explain the unexplainable. But it is a fact I've heard women talk about themselves and their feelings about the act of sex in this way, when it is just a favor for the man. Do all women think like this? Of course not!

Anyway, it is very difficult to have sex without desire. When a person stops accepting sex, it's usually after a period of time she/he has actually had it without wanting it. For the sake of the other. So, after X number of times of having it just to please, it just doesn't pass anymore. It's just too "wrong", too unpleasant.

How to solve this problem? I don't know. Information is power.

She won't talk about sex. But she talks about other things. You can learn about a person talking about something else. If you understand how she thinks, in general, you can extrapolate to guess how she thinks about sex. Do you talk to her about her interests? About things that make her talkative? If all conversation if about superficial things, one doesn't really learn about his/her partner. So, if you can't talk about sex, talk about other things. Talk about her passions. Talk about things that interest her. Learn about her. Rekindle the relationship. Reinvent it, by creating new paths of closeness, new complicity.

Another approach is to make yourself desirable. Again, don't debug. Write a new routine. Be surprising, be new.

What I have in the back of my mind is an interesting fact. Both men and women who have gone out of sex with their partners, may still be hot as hell with a different partner.

It's desire coming from the novelty, from the surprising.

It demands patient and, mainly, creativity. Worth a try? Only you know.

I wish you good luck.

[effy2014]

At first sight, one wants to agree with you. However, it goes against findings in neuroscience. We don't make decisions based on reason. Men and women make decisions that are emotional. That's how we make decisions. You can reason as much as you wish, but the moment you have to make a decision, your emotions will dictate it. Don't believe me. Research about the matter.

I recall reading about Damasio's work (though I will admit that I have not read any of his authored materials) but you overstate his conclusions. While emotions have a role to play . . . even a significant role to play . . . in decision making, reason and rationality also contribute significantly in the process. I also believe that when people experience the behaviors of others, even by reading posts on this site, it affects the emotional side of their decision making as well. Would/should analysis is certainly helpful as a forensic tool so that others can alter their behaviors or new information can be applied to a new relationship.

My SO and her ex-husband did this dance for almost 20 years. B should be able to figure out what I need so why tell him. When B doesn't or can't or won't or simply looses the desire to do so, another marriage ends in divorce. Was the emotional pain of the divorce worth the cost of waiting for B to figure it out? Worse (in my view) because of children, grandchildren, finances or plain inertia, two bitter people coexist because neither would take the steps needed to fix things. I simply reject that married life has to follow this insanity even though it often does.

I also question, in the purely emotional world, why A would allow the reset or the new routine. After all, she feels violated by B's advances and doesn't wish to deal with sex as a topic of discussion. She has shut down. More than likely, B has found another outlet for his sexuality. Is that what A wanted or intended? It seems that a trip to the marriage counselor to learn communication skills is a better use of emotional resources.

How can we set blame, when we know how we make decisions? Looking at it coolly, as the outsider, we see the problem as a problem of communication. But the reason communication isn't working, is because the course of action from both A and B are being decided emotionally. And that is true for both men and women.

Rather than blame, I look at it as an assignment of responsibility. Both A and B are responsible for their actions and inaction. B should be more perceptive and A more communicative. Will communication work every time? Of course not. But it will work for some.

you have your mind set on what marriage should be. Textbook-wise, OK. But look around yourself. How many of these perfect marriages are there? And anyway, would this thread exist at all, should all marriages be like this?

I do indeed. There are not a lot of perfect marriages out there. However, when people come for advice, I for one would like both partners to strive for a better marriage. Some can't be saved . . . probably most. And I concede that the reason is because we are crappy decision makers when it comes to marriage. Too few of us, myself included, had a good idea of what we needed and wanted from a partner in our youth. The decision for A and B to get married was no doubt completely emotional and based upon characteristics that had nothing to do with long term happiness. These people need a skill set to keep them together.

You go on to say what people should do, or should have done. Well, they didn't do it. I believe when they say they've tried. It didn't happen.

What should they do? Only they know... no, they don't really know.

On this we agree. I don't generally believe that couples know how to communicate. I am a lawyer and didn't have relationship communication skills until I learned them in therapy. Couples usually communicate by recrimination and defensiveness. No one listens. However, I think relationship communication can be effectively taught.

I give an example from another thread. A loving couple, with very open dialogue, super communication going on, has the following problem: C wants more sexual experiences. D wants exclusive relationship. D understands C and they talk openly about options. But D is jealous and can't just accept C having sex with other people.

They've talked! But there is a real difference in expectations and emotions are involved (jealousy).

Interestingly, I believe that communication has and will work in that example. Before they got married, the couple communicated their desires. She wanted to settle down in a monogamous relationship and he wanted to have sex with other women. They will probably split up. But they went through a very rational process and she will make a very rational decision. Communication will not keep mismatched couples together . . . hopefully in this case it will permit them both to find their way separately.

I suggested a course of action in my second post. B should use whatever opportunity that arises for sex, may it be in two months, to give A something unexpected. Something very good. ****************

Happy people want to give back. Happy people are generous. A happy A would want to go back.

Your suggestion was brilliant as I think that you are as well. No one has all of the answers. But your plan can keep happy people happy and may well provide the tools for B to work his or her way out of the conundrum. I plan to use your suggestion as another tool in my toolbox.

[chaya]

This thread may set a record for the most long.... posts. I've been reading it with interest. I won't comment on the subject because my feelings/beliefs are radical different from those expressed.

[DreamP346]

This thread may set a record for the most long.... posts. I've been reading it with interest. I won't comment on the subject because my feelings/beliefs are radical different from those expressed.

Please do. It is so important to hear from all different views. There is no one right way when it comes to matters like these.

[chaya]

Please do. It is so important to hear from all different views. There is no one right way when it comes to matters like these.

Suffice it to say that I believe in honoring the commitments made when we married. This extends to performing my "wifely duties" even though I frequently don't feel like it.

[raindancer]

Effy, I understand what you're saying, I think. But.

We're flawed. There are inherent weaknesses to the human condition. Even when we really try to be that best, the absolute best of what we can be, of what we can do, even when we put in the effort... we fail. We improve whatever feature of ourselves we were working on, but we don't get half the way to the point we actually were striving for.

Rather than hoping for the best and that the people we're talking about, the As and Bs, could actually achieve those skills people should have, I prefer to think of ways they can get somewhere, in spite of their weaknesses. At their present state, if you wish.

The flaws aren't even environmental. They're in the way our brain works, in the electrochemistry of our bodies. Environment, of course, adds to the problem, but the issue is deeper than that.

Very few people can work an algorithm for their lives and actually follow it. People are flawed, illogical. Even with the intention to do better, it is very difficult to change. And changes take a lot of time, when they do happen.

So, I look at people and accept them for what they are now. Not what they could be, should be, if only they'd improve to reach their ideal of themselves.

My own efforts to become a better person made me humbly realize change is slow and some things just can't be changed. We continue trying, working on it, but in the meantime, life goes on.

All of that is to say that, surely, people should be perfect, should communicate and act on what was discussed, find solutions and apply them. But that's not how it works. Of course marriages should be perfect. But they aren't, at least, a number of them. Surely when two people aren't a perfect match they should divorce and everybody, including their children should be thrilled the less than perfect relationship was over. It should be like this. But it isn't.

There is something else. On the one hand, perfect matches are statistically unlikely. On the other hand, people don't like to be alone. Some want families. Many need a companion, etc. Putting these two together, it is common to have dysfunctional relationships, one way or another.

First relationships usually happen between young people who are too immature to make it work. Second relationships happen between more mature people, but who'll hesitate to terminate the arrangement in case of trouble, because they don't want to be alone again. And failing a second time may make one think that's the way things are.

Nowhere I'm saying people should settle for less than perfection. But many will.

[raindancer]

Suffice it to say that I believe in honoring the commitments made when we married. This extends to performing my "wifely duties" even though I frequently don't feel like it.

I also think it is very important to have different opinions and I'm happy you've shared yours.

If you don't mind, would you share the reason why you frequently don't feel like it?

And I apologize for the long posts. It isn't my intention, but I find it difficult to express my ideas in a foreign language. I repeat myself a lot. Shame on me.

[chaya]

Don't apologize for the long posts, they make for good reading on long nights at work when nothing is going on.

I frequently don't feel like "it" because I don't get aroused. I've been to doctors and shrinks but no answers except that I'm diabetic since I was 3 years old. The first year of my marriage I couldn't get enough, then something happened and I almost never get aroused with my husband.

[effy2014]

Suffice it to say that I believe in honoring the commitments made when we married. This extends to performing my "wifely duties" even though I frequently don't feel like it.

I know that you have a very traditional marriage consistent with your culture. While no one should feel forced into having sex, I respect the way in which you honor your commitment. I also know that you have tried to communicate better with your husband.