Bettina Arndt on sex starved husbands

[stinkcat_14]

I’m sorry, but this example has gotten extreme.

What kind of selfish person is so scared and repulsed by sex but goes ahead and marries anyway (selfish mistake #1) and then refuses to get any sort of help and gets angry and her husband for seeking it out on her behalf? She sounds like a very entitled, spoiled person with mental health or personality disorder issues unrelated to past trauma.

Yes, she is a victim of sexual abuse, and that’s terrible. But she should NOT have married in this sort of mental and emotional state, and if she didn’t recognize this until after marriage when she tried it, she should be bending over backwards to get help.

In this case, divorce and annulment are more than appropriate.

Being a victim of sexual abuse doesn’t entitle you to marry, and it certainly doesn’t obligate someone else to jump through years worth of coaxing and timid begging for what is an inherent and integral part of marriage out of fear of making the person “feel” revictimized.

I say all the time on these boards that not everyone is cut out for marriage, usually in reference to someone who is too scared or selfish to do the basics like merge finances. But it applies here too; if you are not mentally capable of engaging in sex with your spouse, then you simply shouldn’t marry.

I think you hit the nail on the head. She runs him ragged, yet won’t even acknowledge that there is a problem. Nobody is suggesting that she should have sex with him in her current state, but she does not have the right to give him verbal abuse when he brings up the subject. She doesn’t have the right to refuse to do anything about the problem.

 

[Xantippe]

A good wife would acknowledge that there is a problem. That is really what he is asking for, an acknowledgement and a commitment to work on the issue.

When somebody is terrified of something, rationality flies out the window.

(I have had many opportunities for studying this in other contexts.)

 

[Xantippe]

I think you hit the nail on the head. **She runs him ragged, yet won’t even acknowledge that there is a problem. ** Nobody is suggesting that she should have sex with him in her current state, but she does not have the right to give him verbal abuse when he brings up the subject. She doesn’t have the right to refuse to do anything about the problem.

He can say no to unreasonable or unfair requests.

Again, “Boundaries in Marriage” is a fantastic book.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Or, flipping this around, sex must sound really terrible to her if she’s willing to take the risk of being an overworked, poverty-stricken, lonely divorced single mother who doesn’t get to tuck her kids in every night, rather than put in a perfunctory effort at The Wifely Duty.

Sex must be really traumatic for her to take that risk.

Speaking as a married middle class mom, single motherhood is virtually a fate worse than death. Heck, we’ve got a huge insurance policy on my husband and I still think, “Please don’t die and leave me with three kids to take care of by myself!”

Really? C’mon, people get divorced for less all the time. And honestly, we don’t even know if she realizes the risk this could put her marriage at.

People do foolish things all the time that cause them to risk single motherhood or crushing child support payments for 18+ years, sometimes to multiple women. What sounds terrible and insane to you and me often goes right over the heads of people with less planning and foresight. Hence the divorce rate, out of wedlock birth rate, college drop out rate, high consumer debt in the US, etc.

I truly don’t care how bad sex sounds to her, she owes it to her husband to aggressively tackle the issue because sex is much more an integral part of marriage than family vacations or nights out are. Sex in marriage crosses every socioeconomic, cultural, racial, and religious boundary. People in hiding during the Holocaust and those in Syrian war zones don’t have the luxury of nights out, but they understand sex between husband and wife. She is in the wrong here and she absolutely has the responsibility to try. There is nothing about her feelings that would absolve her of this - not morally, religiously, or intellectually.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Really? C’mon, people get divorced for less all the time. And honestly, we don’t even know if she realizes the risk this could put her marriage at.

People do foolish things all the time that cause them to risk single motherhood or crushing child support payments for 18+ years, sometimes to multiple women. What sounds terrible and insane to you and me often goes right over the heads of people with less planning and foresight. Hence the divorce rate, out of wedlock birth rate, college drop out rate, high consumer debt in the US, etc.

I truly don’t care how bad sex sounds to her, she owes it to her husband to aggressively tackle the issue because sex is much more an integral part of marriage than family vacations or nights out are. Sex in marriage crosses every socioeconomic, cultural, racial, and religious boundary. People in hiding during the Holocaust and those in Syrian war zones don’t have the luxury of nights out, but they understand sex between husband and wife. She is in the wrong here and she absolutely has the responsibility to try. There is nothing about her feelings that would absolve her of this - not morally, religiously, or intellectually.

What I find absolutely interesting is that the husband is being treated as an ogre here for wanting nothing more than to have her acknowledge the problem and commit to jointly working towards a solution.

 

[stinkcat_14]

If your friend is a devout Catholic, I’d suggest he talk to his priest. This sounds like easy grounds for an annulment. You don’t marry someone, refuse sex, tell your partner you’ll be refusing indefinitely, and claim past abuse as some sort of absolution from present and future responsibility.

At a certain point, love for your partner and responsibility to your marriage must motivate you to overcome the past. If not, you shouldn’t have attempted to get married in the first place.

This is very important. As much compassion as she deserves for what she’s been through, there is still the issue of responsibility. Part of her problem is that she doesn’t go to Church, so she has nobody to suggest that there is a higher standard to which she needs to hold herself. In her mind, her husband is an insensitive, selfish ogre. She cannot comprehend that she is being selfish too. He may well leave her and soon. I know he did set up a meeting with his priest.

 

[EasterJoy]

Or, flipping this around, sex must sound really terrible to her if she’s willing to take the risk of being an overworked, poverty-stricken, lonely divorced single mother who doesn’t get to tuck her kids in every night, rather than put in a perfunctory effort at The Wifely Duty.

Sex must be really traumatic for her to take that risk.

Speaking as a married middle class mom, single motherhood is virtually a fate worse than death. Heck, we’ve got a huge insurance policy on my husband and I still think, “Please don’t die and leave me with three kids to take care of by myself!”

She may just not believe her good Catholic husband has the gumption to leave her. She may threaten divorce when he wants to go to counseling because she thinks he’s going to stick around no matter what she does. She wouldn’t be the first one to make that miscalculation.

If she refuses to admit any open discussion that this is a problem and not only refuses to so much as go to counseling to help her husband understand her position but verbally attacks her husband for bringing up the subject, I would not automatically believe she’s making anything like a good-faith effort to fulfill her marital duties to the best of her ability. If this is a true characterization of the situation, I don’t take that as evidence she’s afraid at all that he’ll divorce her. She may be presuming he will not.

 

[EasterJoy]

When somebody is terrified of something, rationality flies out the window.

(I have had many opportunities for studying this in other contexts.)

Yes, well, I have also seen people taking an irrational position as a way to gaslight their way out of a problem they don’t want to face.

A person can act like a victim because she’s a real victim, but even then she can also be a victim who is using her past as an excuse to avoid present expectations. It is also anything but unknown for someone who wants those excuses to pretend to be a victim. If she wanted to have sex but could not because of her past trauma, I’d really expect that she would show her husband a great deal more sympathy and express a great deal more regret than she does. Something does not add up. Maybe she’s really that traumatized, it is certainly possible, but it is also possible that she isn’t.

 

[Allegra]

This is very important. As much compassion as she deserves for what she’s been through, there is still the issue of responsibility. Part of her problem is that she doesn’t go to Church, so she has nobody to suggest that there is a higher standard to which she needs to hold herself. In her mind, her husband is an insensitive, selfish ogre. She cannot comprehend that she is being selfish too. He may well leave her and soon. I know he did set up a meeting with his priest.

Well, hopefully the priest will help him out.

 

[Xantippe]

Really? **C’mon, people get divorced for less all the time. ** And honestly, we don’t even know if she realizes the risk this could put her marriage at.

People do foolish things all the time that cause them to risk single motherhood or crushing child support payments for 18+ years, sometimes to multiple women. What sounds terrible and insane to you and me often goes right over the heads of people with less planning and foresight. Hence the divorce rate, out of wedlock birth rate, college drop out rate, high consumer debt in the US, etc.

I truly don’t care how bad sex sounds to her, she owes it to her husband to aggressively tackle the issue because sex is much more an integral part of marriage than family vacations or nights out are. Sex in marriage crosses every socioeconomic, cultural, racial, and religious boundary. People in hiding during the Holocaust and those in Syrian war zones don’t have the luxury of nights out, but they understand sex between husband and wife. She is in the wrong here and she absolutely has the responsibility to try. There is nothing about her feelings that would absolve her of this - not morally, religiously, or intellectually.

Middle class parents don’t divorce willy nilly. If they did, they’d stop being middle class parents pretty fast.

I mentioned family vacations and nights out just because they’re non-threatening ways to promote togetherness. Stinkcat says his friend’s wife is only interested in the friend as a fellow worker, and that’s one way to push the relationship outside of the “work” zone and into a more interpersonal and fun zone or, as other people would put it, to introduce dopamine into the relationship. From what Stinkcat has said, there’s not a lot of fun going on in this marriage.

BEL, you may not have reached this point yet, but at some point one needs to start being a bit more purposeful about making sure that the marriage is not all lawn-homework-laundry-dishes-cleaning-etc.

 

[pianistclare]

This is very important. As much compassion as she deserves for what she’s been through, there is still the issue of responsibility. Part of her problem is that she doesn’t go to Church, so she has nobody to suggest that there is a higher standard to which she needs to hold herself. In her mind, her husband is an insensitive, selfish ogre. She cannot comprehend that she is being selfish too. He may well leave her and soon. I know he did set up a meeting with his priest.

I hope he realizes that one doesn’t even need an annulment unless he is planning remarriage. I mean, your “friend” is going from just wanting to solve the problem to the chances of annulment rather quickly in this thread.

 

[stinkcat_14]

I hope he realizes that one doesn’t even need an annulment unless he is planning remarriage. I mean, your “friend” is going from just wanting to solve the problem to the chances of annulment rather quickly in this thread.

It takes two to solve a marital problem. This has been a problem for years, so it is not like he just asked her one day to work on the issue and the next day he is speaking to the priest about getting a divorce. I mean if she refuses to work on the issue for 2 years and this is not the first two year spell he’s been through, perhaps we might give him the benefit of the doubt and realize that perhaps he has suffered enough.

 

[Xantippe]

I hope he realizes that one doesn’t even need an annulment unless he is planning remarriage. I mean, your “friend” is going from just wanting to solve the problem to the chances of annulment rather quickly in this thread.

Plus, it’s unlikely to get from married to annulment in less than 2 years. Add in half a decade of terrible dating experiences and angry, struggling kids, and that will kill a decade pretty fast.

I think stinkcat’s friend needs to read Boundaries in Marriage and be kind, civil and firm.

Some ideas:

–no housework after 10 PM
–plan Saturday chores on Friday night–choose no more than three projects, then stop
–no unnecessary chores on Sunday
–do kids have too many activities? if so, trim down
–are kids doing enough to help out at home?
–can they afford to hire out the lawn?

Come to think of it, I really recommend the book How Not to Hate Your Husband After Kids, which has a lot of material on dealing with the rage-y wife.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

There are only two purposes for these threads.

1. To point out a spouse is cold, and a horrible person,
   or
   2 to think ones self is unlovable.

 

[Xantippe]

It takes two to solve a marital problem. This has been a problem for years, so it is not like he just asked her one day to work on the issue and the next day he is speaking to the priest about getting a divorce. I mean if she refuses to work on the issue for 2 years and this is not the first two year spell he’s been through, perhaps we might give him the benefit of the doubt and realize that perhaps he has suffered enough.

So, they did get out of the dry spell after a previous 2 years?

I wonder what did the trick last time.

 

[Allegra]

It takes two to solve a marital problem. This has been a problem for years, so it is not like he just asked her one day to work on the issue and the next day he is speaking to the priest about getting a divorce. I mean if she refuses to work on the issue for 2 years and this is not the first two year spell he’s been through, perhaps we might give him the benefit of the doubt and realize that perhaps he has suffered enough.

Only he can decide if the suffering involved in a divorce is going to be better or worse for him and his family than the suffering he’s enduring now. And as another poster pointed out, annulments aren’t guaranteed. If he walks, he may not be eligible to marry someone else. The choice to leave shouldn’t be based on whether or not he thinks he can get someone better.

 

[stinkcat_14]

There are only two purposes for these threads.

1. To point out a spouse is cold, and a horrible person,
   or
   2 to think ones self is unlovable.

I think you ought to try and avoid mind reading. I will agree that many here think my friend is a cold and horrible person. Whether he thinks he is unlovable is another question.

 

[stinkcat_14]

Only he can decide if the suffering involved in a divorce is going to be better or worse for him and his family than the suffering he’s enduring now. And as another poster pointed out, annulments aren’t guaranteed. If he walks, he may not be eligible to marry someone else. The choice to leave shouldn’t be based on whether or not he thinks he can get someone better.

Perhaps he is not interested in finding someone else. Perhaps he just want to escape the abuse? Like I said before, there is more going on that is irrelevant to this thread.

 

[Irishmom2]

Stinkcat, you sure know the intimate details of your “friends” life. It’s almost as if you are writing about yourself.

 

[Allegra]

Stinkcat, you sure know the intimate details of your “friends” life. It’s almost as if you are writing about yourself.

Irishmom, really? We were pretending not to know that. When someone says they are talking about a “friend”, the only polite thing to do is pretend you believe them and carry on.