How to respond to the “sexual compatibility” argument

  • Thread starter Thread starter Le_Crouton
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
dochawk said:
I was :roll_eyes:
Click to expand...
I solved that one early on in our marriage. I told her if she always rolled the toilet paper over the top, I would always put down the toilet seat after I was done.

It’s worked well since.

Now to figure out how to bring peace to the Middle East…
 
My point is simple, one does not need to have sex to determine if one is physically attracted yo a potential spouse. And if one is planning in having premarital sex, that test has been passed.
 
And they need to have premarital sex to determine that? Makes no sense at all.
 
I guess it depends on what is meant by compatibility. I agree that one needn’t have pre-marital sex to know whether one is attracted to another person. I think the question of compatibility is more along the lines of how the individuals express themselves, their attitudes, etc.
 
Whether or not things fit and frequency of interactions along with libido
 
Le_Crouton said:
Whether or not things fit and frequency of interactions along with libido
Click to expand...
If both are heterosexual and healthy, things will fit.

As for libido, my experience has been that it varies wildly throughout marriage, and current libido is a very poor predictor of future libido. Time of stress, childbirth, the menstrual cycle, illness, prostate issues, impotence, menopause and andropause and all manner of factors can affect libido and trust me will affect libido in a marriage.

It’s my take therefore, that if both are heterosexual and healthy, and are open to starting a family, and are considerate of the other’s needs or preferences, they are sexually compatible. Anything else is gravy,

Sexual compatibility at a time when a couple is young with raging libidos should not be the foundational element of a marriage. Because, one better hope that there’s more than sex holding a marriage together; there will be times when sex is difficult, impossible or unwelcome. For both partners. And as Murphy’s law would have it, not at the same time.
 
Last edited:
One more thing…have you really talked to men who have gone through such trial periods? Especially men who would have many choices of woman who they could marry? I have, and I’d recommend you do this. They have regrets. More than once I have heard something like “Do not put yourself in a position where you are married with children in a match that is not good.” Men talk about significant pressure to marry. Also, often they end up getting married because they had a child with a woman already.
 
Last edited:
Again, this goes back to my original point: the underlying fundamental isn’t “sexual compatibility”, it’s the capacity to die to oneself for the marriage. This isn’t just about sex, it’s about sex and everything else that can happen in marriage.

I will certainly have discussions about sexual matters with a prospective fiance and it may be that the discussions don’t turn up any red flags, but if I’m not detecting the capacity in her to die to herself for our marriage, I’m not marrying her. She should be looking for this in me too, not just talking the talk about sexual or other matters that we think are important. Because there will be times when either or both of us are not on the best terms and it is most especially in those moments when we must consciously choose love as an action, not a feeling. Kind of like getting up every single workday and going to work whether one feels like it or not. Gotta go, that’s commitment.
 
Last edited:
I agree completely. Moreover one does not need to “road test” as I’ve heard argued (“we road test a new car, why not a new spouse”?)

The whole problem with society these days is specifically that love has, indeed, been reduced to a feeling, hence the high divorce rate when the feeling is no longer felt, as it inevitably will happen in any marriage at various times.

Similarly when I no longer “feel” God, I have to continue doing my job, which in my case (especially as an oblate) is to pray the Divine Office and turn up at Mass every Sunday. If I left it up to a “feeling” I most certainly wouldn’t be turning up at Mass on many Sundays, especially sunny ones in summer that are perfect cycling days…
 
But surely feeling something IS a big part of dating. If people dated and got married without feeling anything I’d think that would be incredibly weird
 
Actually, dating is a new concept in the grand scheme of things.

Arranged marriages were the absolute norm for most of time, and are still common in many places on earth.

Romance and attraction came after marriage.
 
Are you advocating for arranged marriages?

I’m completely against them
 
Last edited:
I am saying that perfectly lovely, valid marriages may begin with an arranged marriage and have done so throughout the centuries.

It is not “weird” except to modern, western culture.
 
I don’t know. My grandparents had an arranged marriage. My grandmother said she was against them because she was given away to be married too early

I think autonomy is important.
 
Le_Crouton said:
But surely feeling something IS a big part of dating. If people dated and got married without feeling anything I’d think that would be incredibly weird
Click to expand...
Yes feelings no doubt have a role to play in the current Western scheme of things. But… feelings wear off. They come and go. They are incredibly fickle. What happens when the feeling wears off? That’s the $64,000 question. Unless we are taught that love is also a verb, not just a noun, a marriage based entirely on feeling is doomed to die.

As TheLittleLady points out, arranged marriages were once the norm, and are still the norm in many cultures. That doesn’t seem to fit our worldview anymore, nor do I advocate that we should return to them, but I think it is instructive to point out that yes, these marriages can be very successful and in fact where still practiced today, have a lower divorce rate, though there may be other cultural factors for that.

Still, they are usually successful, and the feeling part often grows over time.

One can build a very attractive home on sand. But it isn’t going to end well and will look rather decrepit when the shifting sand puts cracks in the walls, etc.

Or one can build a plain home on rock, and beautify it over time. It will last many generations, and gain in attractiveness.
 
Last edited:
Only been married for three months but I can tell you that sex while being a big part of marriage is also at the same time a very small part. You spend a lot more time doing other things with your spouse then just being in the sack.

Sexual compatibility… What a joke, honestly. Me and my spouse were chaste throughout our dating and engagement period. If the person is someone that you are marrying for good reason, then you two will always be able to talk about what you need, what you like what you don’t like and make it work. Imho.

Needing to see if you are sexually compatible is a excuse to act immortal and call ourself clever and wise for doing it.

Also, you can talk to your fiance about the sexual aspect of your marriage during the engagement period. Me and my fiance did this to make sure we were on the same page and it worked out fine. I think there is nothing immoral in doing that as long as it does not cause temptation and the talk remains pg-13
 
Last edited:
Would a trial period even last long enough for you to figure each other out? In my experience it wasn’t very good at first, but since we were already married we had the incentive to keep trying until it got good
 
As long as there is love and respect, a person can create her own compatibility with very different sort of people.
For eg, it is the case for people who have had successive relationships.

It is something that is build every day, in respect for the other person. Sexuality is the expression of love, not a performance with evaluation!
 
OraLabora said:
It’s my take therefore, that if both are heterosexual and healthy, and are open to starting a family, and are considerate of the other’s needs or preferences, they are sexually compatible.
Click to expand...
I mostly agree. But while I don’t agree that people should have sex before marriage, I do think there are instances where sexual preferences can affect a marriage.

Certain fetishes that the other spouse will never partake in, for instance. Certain physical features that may completely throw the other off.

Couples must talk about whatever deal breakers they have before getting married.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top