And what is so un-Catholic about suggesting to the OP that she think of some ways her husband can become more sexually attractive to her?
Gritting your teeth and forcing yourself to let your husband use your body to satisfy himself is hardly Catholic, not to mention that it wouldn’t be good for their relationship in the long term.
The OP and her husband need to work on making her want to have sex with him again. If the husband is a good man, I doubt he wants her to force herself to have sex with him,and would much prefer it if she wanted it as well. Some of the advice has been for her to pretend to like it. I just don’t think this can work, either she is a really good actress and will suppress her unhappiness (and possibly even revulsion) or eventually it will come out. In either situation she will be suffering.
In the end, only a very selfish man would want his wife to force herself to let him satisfy his physical needs.
Maybe her husband let himself go and is overweight and unattractive, maybe he doesn’t keep himself clean, doesn’t dress well, or engages in something that the OP finds repulsive (maybe he’s leaving dirty underwear on the floor for her to pick up for example), maybe he doesn’t help around the house or with the raising of their 7 children, maybe he doesn’t take her out frequently enough.
Maybe if he fixes some of those issues the OP will desire him again.
I think you’re maybe getting the wrong idea here.
Obviously, no woman (or man) should grit their teeth and allow someone to exploit them.
That’s not what I’m suggesting at all.
What I’m assuming is that the OP is still in love with her husband and he is in love with her. She still craves closeness, warmth, touch, caresses, kisses, and loving words with him. She didn’t say anything about being turned off or disgusted by him, which is another issue. I agree with you that weight, cleanliness, etc. can completely turn a woman off. But the OP didn’t talk about these issues.
She’s just tired and wrung-out from so much work with children, household, and school.
If my assumption about the OP and her husband is true, it should not be a “teeth-gritting” experience to allow him to make love to her.
Notice I said, "Make love,’ not “Bang her.”
What you possibly missed in my earlier posts is the description of most women’s physiology; namely, that they are generally not ready on demand as men are. They require time and foreplay to get ready for sex. And most women do not experience arousal just by looking at a man. (Men DO experience arousal just by looking at a woman.)
Many women mistakenly think that because they are not “ready on demand” that they have “no desire” and therefore, should not agree to have sex. THIS is a mistake that women need to correct.
You mentioned that the husband needs to work with the wife on helping her want to have sex with him again. I certainly agree, but I think you need to be very very careful to recognize that many women are never going to “want sex” with their husbands (except during ovulation). It’s not the same for a woman as for a man. Many women would be content to never have sex again. So if you wait for the woman to want to have sex, it will be seldom or never. And that’s not appropriate for a marriage.
Here is what needs to happen: More often than not, IF the woman will submit to the man and allow him to make love to her, the desire will develop, and she will find that she enjoys the act of love. Even if she doesn’t have an orgasm, she will at least enjoy the closeness of her husband and be glad for his climax.
So it isn’t a question of making himself more desirable to her. That’s not going to work. Many men are very desirable and handsome and clean and buff, but their wives still say “no.”
Instead, the woman needs to say “Yes,” even when she doesn’t feel like it. When she does so, she will usually discover that her desire grows as the love act commences, and by the end of the act, she will be glad that she submitted to her husband.
This is NOT what the world teaches, is it? Many of us women have been trained by Glamour Magazine and other feminist media to not ever submit to a man, especially when it comes to sex. We have been taught that this is exploitive, even abusive, towards us, and that any decent man has no right to expect a woman to do this. We have developed these attitudes, and we think that they are “Catholic” or “Biblical” because they sound kind of good.
However, there’s just one problem. The Church and the Bible tell us that women should submit to their husbands, and husbands to their wives. There’s nothing in there about saying, “No.” And there’s nothing in there about a man being free to rape his wife at will. It is a mutual submission. But it is a submission. The wife cannot use these verses to justify always saying “No” because she has no desire. God realized that women do not experiene desire in the same way a man does, and that’s why He tells us to submit.
I hope this makes things clearer for you. Again, I am NOT saying that a woman should lay back and take it. What I’m saying is that the woman should NOT rely on her feelings of desire to drive the frequency of sex, but rather, she should say “Yes” to sex even when she doesn’t have desire, knowing that once sex commences, she will often experience desire.
BTW, I’ve read some material on Catholic sex, and as far as I can see, it is a sin for a husband to have an orgasm outside of his wife’s vagina, but it is NOT a sin for a woman to have an orgasm before her husband has ejaculated, or after her husband has ejaculated. In fact, only a small percentage (around 18%) of women can have an orgasm from penetration and penile stimulation alone–that’s the way GOD made us. So, it seems to me that perhaps a Quickie could result in an orgasm for the wife if the husband was willing to stimulate her manually or orally. That isn’t a sin, at least, according to my understanding of Catholic sexuality. And that would be a mutually satisfying lovemaking experience for both spouses, even though it all takes place in a few minutes time. Please correct me if I am wrong about this.