Question about a sexual intimacy problem

[TheRealJuliane]

Have you read The Five Love Languages? www.5lovelanguages.com/

I found this book to be extremely helpful in my relationships - it looks at our needs when it comes to expressing love.

Touch, Gifts, Affirmation, Acts of Service, Quality Time.

So, if your wife’s love language is Quality Time, but yours is Acts of Service, she is sitting on the sofa waiting for half an hour of your undivided attention, while you rush round putting the kids to bed, putting out the trash, mopping the kitchen floor, etc. Then at the end of it you get a cold shoulder - she thinks you’ll do anything rather than just sit and listen to her, and you think she is an ungrateful woman after all you’ve done for her. Once you know each other’s Languages, you’ll know the Act of Service she most needs is that Quality Time handhold on the couch while she tells you what is on her mind, and she’ll know that what you will like best, as an Acts of Service type, is that she finally got round to sewing the buttons back on your favourite flannel shirt, then one she doesn’t like you to wear.

There are tests online to determine which is your Love Language - you may have more than one - mine is Touch/Affirmation, with Gifts right at the bottom with hardly a mention.

I am blessed to be matched with a man with the exact same Languages as mine.

There is also The Five Love Languages of God, and one for children too - I haven’t read those.

This is SO helpful, I can’t believe I didn’t mention it! Of course, ideally, we’d speak ALL of those love languages to our loved ones every day, since we all desire each of them…But since time is limited, the idea is to hit the top 1 or 2 and maximize your results. I know my younger son’s top two are Gifts and Words of Affirmation, although he says it’s Physical Touch. He’s one who soaks up ANY attention whatsoever, so pretty much anything works with him. The older son is harder to figure out and he hasn’t done the test yet, so I stumble around with him, but I think it’s Words of Affirmation. I am always doing Acts of Service, but I tested and came out with Words of Affirmation. Maybe it’s because actually speaking words of affirmation is difficult for me, since I had very little of those growing up? And nearly impossible for hubby. Yet I hunger for that which I did not have…I’d say Words and Acts are my top 2.

These tools are only as good as the interest of the individuals - so if one person does all the work, it’s not going to help as much, since the flow is still one-way.

 

[hurting]

Yeah, I can see why it was a huge problem in his marriage. Wow.

To be clear, you are implying that the problem in my marriage derived from my expectation that my wife would honor her vows and exchange with me the one thing that she was under obligation to share with me exclusively.

The idea that a spouse may refuse to exchange the marital embrace with his/her partner due to insufficient romance or low levels of libido is analagous to a Catholic refusing to attend Mass because the homilies were boring or the organist made a few mistakes now and then. Mommarree essentially described her view of the act as akin to the obligation to attend Mass. Is her view malformed?

The double standard on this topic from a male/female perspective and relative to other duties within marriage is indeed saddening. When a wife posts to these forums complaining of a husband’s failure to honor his vows by contributing to the household by way of gainful employment or domestic chore production, the chorus rains down in unison with calls for chastising and/or shaming to get the man to get his act together.

For the record, I did not wield the ‘debt’ concept as a sword in my marriage. I did all of the things that could reasonably be expected of a husband and father, including preparing for the role at a very young age (cultivating a solid work ethic, getting an education, deferring gratification). I worked high stress jobs that required long hours so as to provide a materially comfortably life for my wife and children and so that she could work part-time and concentrate her energies on the home. I contributed mightily to the domestic household by way of performing all of the ‘husband’ chores and more than my share of the ‘wife’ chores (I did essentially all of the laundry) and still found time to set an example of service to others to my family by volunteering as a coach, scout leader and in countless other ways in my parish and community and in innumerable small gestures of kindness to neighbors in need. I made sure that our household was as safe and stable as I could to include what would have been (as far as can be assured in today’s turbulent times) a relatively comfortable retirement. I scrupulously avoided even the remote occasion of sin with regard to interaction with the opposite sex and never once in my marriage denied my wife the gift.

I’ll readily admit that I probably fell short in the romance department at times as defined by the worldly view of today, but it’s not supposed to be a quid pro quo.

What I would ask of you and all who would challenge my view is to consider how you would respond to some like the OP’s wife who came to you wife with concerns about her refusal. Would you refer her to a dozen books on how her husband could do even more to romance her? Or would you in charity remind her of her obligations? When you propagate the view that somehow a spouse has to earn the intimacy of his partner by way of romance or by minimizing the explicit obligation in this area that spouses owe to one another in this regard, you are harming marriages in a far greater way than even a direct appeal to the ‘debt’ view ever could.

 

[mommamaree]

Isn’t having sex supposed to be a romantic interaction in itself?
This is what confuses me about what is happening in marriages today…
Why is there a need for seduction? It is incredibly important for a husband to lovingly prepare his wife’s body to receive him, and to work to ensure she is pleased, but that all is an aspect of foreplay. Maybe I am just not a “romantic” soul…
I dunno. But no matter how much my husband behaved poorly out of ignorance or hormones over the years, the notion of surrendering to my husband because he wants me has always been extremely…well…romantic. I mean, he could be completely boorish or piggish and I still found myself drawn to give.
But maybe that is because he and I had been virgins? I knew he had never asked any other woman for that, and I had never shared myself with any other man. Not for lack of opportunities, because both of us had dated other people.
I found for a while that he was neglecting to give me affection, and he even confessed he found it “boring”. This was in early years of our marriage when his hormones made him think if it wasn’t gonna lead to sex then it wasn’t worth his time. I internalized the message that my body was only good for him if I was supplying him with a constant source of pleasure. Very painful and damaging.
But through it all, I never attached my need for affection to my readiness to make love. That connection just didn’t happen within me. Though later, I became mature enough to be able to express how affection leads to readiness for me, and suddenly affection made sense to him. It still is rather rare, unless you include “post” sleepy cuddle time. Kids take up so much time!
I have been married 15 years now, so I feel that my views on married sex can’t be that naive or uninformed. But I just think that the act of sex itself is already so exciting and romantic, that it doesn’t take much for me to think happily about an upcoming opportunity. One other consideration though is that I have always been very vocal about what feels good and what doesn’t, what I want to try and what I don’t, what makes me feel loved and what makes me feel used. Just as I have an obligation to be receptive of my husband’s advances, he has an obligation to makes lovemaking truly loving and enjoyable to me. Once we both better understood both aspects of these obligations, and internalized them, it became easier to lovingly fulfill those obligations without a sense of ‘have to’ instead of a sense of ‘want to’.
And I credit the teachings of the Catholic Church for making the last of those pieces fall into place in our thinking so that we were better equipped to love each other in the marital act!

 

[TheRealJuliane]

To be clear, you are implying that the problem in my marriage derived from my expectation that my wife would honor her vows and exchange with me the one thing that she was under obligation to share with me exclusively.

The idea that a spouse may refuse to exchange the marital embrace with his/her partner due to insufficient romance or low levels of libido is analagous to a Catholic refusing to attend Mass because the homilies were boring or the organist made a few mistakes now and then. Mommarree essentially described her view of the act as akin to the obligation to attend Mass. Is her view malformed?

The double standard on this topic from a male/female perspective and relative to other duties within marriage is indeed saddening. When a wife posts to these forums complaining of a husband’s failure to honor his vows by contributing to the household by way of gainful employment or domestic chore production, the chorus rains down in unison with calls for chastising and/or shaming to get the man to get his act together.

For the record, I did not wield the ‘debt’ concept as a sword in my marriage. I did all of the things that could reasonably be expected of a husband and father, including preparing for the role at a very young age (cultivating a solid work ethic, getting an education, deferring gratification). I worked high stress jobs that required long hours so as to provide a materially comfortably life for my wife and children and so that she could work part-time and concentrate her energies on the home. I contributed mightily to the domestic household by way of performing all of the ‘husband’ chores and more than my share of the ‘wife’ chores (I did essentially all of the laundry) and still found time to set an example of service to others to my family by volunteering as a coach, scout leader and in countless other ways in my parish and community and in innumerable small gestures of kindness to neighbors in need. I made sure that our household was as safe and stable as I could to include what would have been (as far as can be assured in today’s turbulent times) a relatively comfortable retirement. I scrupulously avoided even the remote occasion of sin with regard to interaction with the opposite sex and never once in my marriage denied my wife the gift.

I’ll readily admit that I probably fell short in the romance department at times as defined by the worldly view of today, but it’s not supposed to be a quid pro quo.

What I would ask of you and all who would challenge my view is to consider how you would respond to some like the OP’s wife who came to you wife with concerns about her refusal. Would you refer her to a dozen books on how her husband could do even more to romance her? Or would you in charity remind her of her obligations? When you propagate the view that somehow a spouse has to earn the intimacy of his partner by way of romance or by minimizing the explicit obligation in this area that spouses owe to one another in this regard, you are harming marriages in a far greater way than even a direct appeal to the ‘debt’ view ever could.

No, it was the spirit of anger and bitterness that I was responding to. That’s never going to work, not from the husband, not from the wife. THAT, I can guarantee.

 

[mommamaree]

No, it was the spirit of anger and bitterness that I was responding to. That’s never going to work, not from the husband, not from the wife. THAT, I can guarantee.

I agree, TRJ. Anger and bitterness spoil the love with which spouses should be giving to each other. Another big problem is a sense of entitlement. Even if in a situation it might be sinful for a spouse to refuse, it is NEVER okay to cajole, coerce, threaten or force the reluctant spouse into relations. The Lord wants us to be free to give out of love, or even out of a sense of “I know I should, for my good and the good of my spouse, and plus it can feel good if I just get into it”. But it is horrible to turn the sexual relationship into a battleground where one spouse is demanding or taking and the reluctant spouse feels used or degraded. It takes what God designed to be beautiful and twists it into something ugly. It is so sad. I will say a prayer for Christian marriages and for Christian couples, so that the joys of the marriage bed will be taught, practiced, and celebrated once again.

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

What I would ask of you and all who would challenge my view is to consider how you would respond to some like the OP’s wife who came to you wife with concerns about her refusal. Would you refer her to a dozen books on how her husband could do even more to romance her? Or would you in charity remind her of her obligations? When you propagate the view that somehow a spouse has to earn the intimacy of his partner by way of romance or by minimizing the explicit obligation in this area that spouses owe to one another in this regard, you are harming marriages in a far greater way than even a direct appeal to the ‘debt’ view ever could.

Well, since you ask, I’d do neither…

If my husband and I had a sex life that was not satisfactory to one or both of us, for whatever reason, we would be in face-to-face counseling with a professional therapist ASAP. We would dig at it until we got to the root of what was causing the discord, and we would remain in counseling until the problem was excised.

I know this works for us because we’ve done it before, just not with sexual issues. It’s oftentimes painful, slogging work, but it was necessary work for us to have the marriage we enjoy today.

The words debt and obligation would not likely enter the discussion. While they may be part of Catholic teachings on married sexuality, neither my husband nor I are the kind of people who want to be having sex with anyone who’s only doing it out of a sense of duty. Our sexual enthusiasm for each other comes out deep well of love, compassion, and respect we have for one another, not the sense that it’s a debt we’re paying off.

I trust my husband implicitly. If he tells me he’s not feeling sexual, I know it’s because he’s not feeling sexual. I know he’s not being passive-aggressive or manipulative or trying to play some game. He’s simply not in the mood. I respect that because I respect him. And just as importantly he feels the same way about me. If I’m not feeling it, so to speak, I have no problems telling him. There is no resentment or hard feelings from either of us.

Because I trust my husband I have no problems initiating sex or communicating my sexual needs to him. I know he’s not intimidated by female sexuality, and I know he’s not going to somehow think less of me for being the initiator. If he tells me that he’s not in the mood, I do not feel rejected. I know I can try again in the morning or whenever, and he’s not going to get exasperated and annoyed or tell me to stop bugging him.

And frankly, if I had known that my husband framed sex as a debt or an obligation, we wouldn’t not have gotten married. If he ever started framing our sex life as one of debt and obligation, I would take that as a sign that something was deeply wrong in our marriage. And if my husband every waylaid me with a priest who tried to tell me of my sexual debt and obligation to him and the sinfulness of my level of libido or how I was expressing myself sexually with my husband, my trust in my husband would be seriously damaged. I would feel spiritually violated and deeply betrayed. Just sitting here I can’t think of how that could not cause deep and lasting harm to our marriage. I don’t know how we would come back from something like that.

 

[hurting]

No, it was the spirit of anger and bitterness that I was responding to. That’s never going to work, not from the husband, not from the wife. THAT, I can guarantee.

You ascribe motivations of bitterness and anger to my forthright direct communications. Seems like attacking the messenger to me.

 

[hurting]

Isn’t having sex supposed to be a romantic interaction in itself?
This is what confuses me about what is happening in marriages today…
Why is there a need for seduction? It is incredibly important for a husband to lovingly prepare his wife’s body to receive him, and to work to ensure she is pleased, but that all is an aspect of foreplay. Maybe I am just not a “romantic” soul…
I dunno. But no matter how much my husband behaved poorly out of ignorance or hormones over the years, the notion of surrendering to my husband because he wants me has always been extremely…well…romantic. I mean, he could be completely boorish or piggish and I still found myself drawn to give.
But maybe that is because he and I had been virgins? I knew he had never asked any other woman for that, and I had never shared myself with any other man. Not for lack of opportunities, because both of us had dated other people.
I found for a while that he was neglecting to give me affection, and he even confessed he found it “boring”. This was in early years of our marriage when his hormones made him think if it wasn’t gonna lead to sex then it wasn’t worth his time. I internalized the message that my body was only good for him if I was supplying him with a constant source of pleasure. Very painful and damaging.
But through it all, I never attached my need for affection to my readiness to make love. That connection just didn’t happen within me. Though later, I became mature enough to be able to express how affection leads to readiness for me, and suddenly affection made sense to him. It still is rather rare, unless you include “post” sleepy cuddle time. Kids take up so much time!
I have been married 15 years now, so I feel that my views on married sex can’t be that naive or uninformed. But I just think that the act of sex itself is already so exciting and romantic, that it doesn’t take much for me to think happily about an upcoming opportunity. One other consideration though is that I have always been very vocal about what feels good and what doesn’t, what I want to try and what I don’t, what makes me feel loved and what makes me feel used. Just as I have an obligation to be receptive of my husband’s advances, he has an obligation to makes lovemaking truly loving and enjoyable to me. Once we both better understood both aspects of these obligations, and internalized them, it became easier to lovingly fulfill those obligations without a sense of ‘have to’ instead of a sense of ‘want to’.
And I credit the teachings of the Catholic Church for making the last of those pieces fall into place in our thinking so that we were better equipped to love each other in the marital act!

Exactly.

 

[hurting]

Well, since you ask, I’d do neither…

If my husband and I had a sex life that was not satisfactory to one or both of us, for whatever reason, we would be in face-to-face counseling with a professional therapist ASAP. We would dig at it until we got to the root of what was causing the discord, and we would remain in counseling until the problem was excised.

I know this works for us because we’ve done it before, just not with sexual issues. It’s oftentimes painful, slogging work, but it was necessary work for us to have the marriage we enjoy today.

The words debt and obligation would not likely enter the discussion. While they may be part of Catholic teachings on married sexuality, neither my husband nor I are the kind of people who want to be having sex with anyone who’s only doing it out of a sense of duty. Our sexual enthusiasm for each other comes out deep well of love, compassion, and respect we have for one another, not the sense that it’s a debt we’re paying off.

I trust my husband implicitly. If he tells me he’s not feeling sexual, I know it’s because he’s not feeling sexual. I know he’s not being passive-aggressive or manipulative or trying to play some game. He’s simply not in the mood. I respect that because I respect him. And just as importantly he feels the same way about me. If I’m not feeling it, so to speak, I have no problems telling him. There is no resentment or hard feelings from either of us.

Because I trust my husband I have no problems initiating sex or communicating my sexual needs to him. I know he’s not intimidated by female sexuality, and I know he’s not going to somehow think less of me for being the initiator. If he tells me that he’s not in the mood, I do not feel rejected. I know I can try again in the morning or whenever, and he’s not going to get exasperated and annoyed or tell me to stop bugging him.

And frankly, if I had known that my husband framed sex as a debt or an obligation, we wouldn’t not have gotten married. If he ever started framing our sex life as one of debt and obligation, I would take that as a sign that something was deeply wrong in our marriage. And if my husband every waylaid me with a priest who tried to tell me of my sexual debt and obligation to him and the sinfulness of my level of libido or how I was expressing myself sexually with my husband, my trust in my husband would be seriously damaged. I would feel spiritually violated and deeply betrayed. Just sitting here I can’t think of how that could not cause deep and lasting harm to our marriage. I don’t know how we would come back from something like that.

On another thread you advise the poster to seek counseling from a professional therapist conversant with Catholic teaching on sexuality. To the extent that one could find such an individual, and that said person would counsel presumably practicing Catholics to follow the teachings of the Church, what exactly would he/she say that would not involve the concept of debt/obligation? It would be patently impossible for any advisor (priest, therapist, friend) to provide such counsel without describing the matter in terms of obligation and remain consistent with Church teaching becasue that is, in fact , what the Church teaches.

 

[Marie1234]

To quote St. Paul:

It’s a great passage and can’t be more true. If either spouse holds out on one other it can lead to many sins. Pornography, masturbation, adultery… In marriage it must go both ways. Of course we can’t always constantly have sex with our spouses, but a spouse must be sensitive to their husband/wife’s sex drive. To have it so that the one with the high sex drive must always sacrifice for the one with the low sex drive is foolish and selfish. Just as the one with the high sex drive must have discipline and self control when the one with the lower sex drive isn’t in the mood.

However, one can only have so much discipline and self control. One could even say that if one spouse isn’t living up to their end of the bargain then once the higher sex drive spouse starts committing sexual sins, they have a hand in it.

I agree. I would never withhold sex from my husband just because I’m “not in the mood.” I would feel very selfish doing so and would worry it may lead him to sin.

 

[Marie1234]

Marie1234;10131001:

“It’s a very ancient saying, but a true and honest thought,
That if you become a teacher, by your pupils you’ll be taught”
(Anna in The King and I)

Ah, okay. I understand now.
Thanks for the clarification!

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

On another thread you advise the poster to seek counseling from a professional therapist conversant with Catholic teaching on sexuality. To the extent that one could find such an individual, and that said person would counsel presumably practicing Catholics to follow the teachings of the Church, what exactly would he/she say that would not involve the concept of debt/obligation? It would be patently impossible for any advisor (priest, therapist, friend) to provide such counsel without describing the matter in terms of obligation and remain consistent with Church teaching becasue that is, in fact , what the Church teaches.

Think what you like, hurting, but I know for a fact that therapeutic protocols call for more than just quoting to Catechism. Exactly how they manage this I do not know because it’s a field I wasn’t trained in, but they do because I have experienced it. Otherwise, a therapist would be little more than someone in a chair with a copy of the CCC in their hands. It doesn’t work like that.

Also, I would not turn a friend to serve as a marital adviser for something this sensitive. This isn’t like trying to get a spouse to pick up their dirty clothes at night. A friend can serve as a sympathetic ear and maybe could tell you what works in their marriage, but that isn’t the same as doing the work of therapy.

In my own experience, priests who do marriage counsel are the ones who’ve received targeted academic and pastoral training in marriage and family therapy. My current pastor, for example, as said outright that he does not do couple’s therapy because he’s not trained or licensed to do it. He refers parishioners to qualified therapists.

I’d just like to give you something to think about… The only times I encounter talk about the marriage debt and conjugal obligation are in theological discussions and when a layperson on CAF is in a marriage lacking in sex. Armchair theologians and unhappy CAF spouses. That’s it. I’m not sure why that is, but maybe - just maybe - it’s because spouses with at least Okay sex lives do not frame their sexual relations as debts and obligations. That’s not to say they aren’t, but spouses don’t think of them that way in their day-to-day lives, and they do not have that mindset in dealing with their husbands and wives. It’s at least worth consideration, hurting.

 

[KitSileya]

I haven’t had a chance to read the entire thread, and I’m certainly no expert, but I wonder… Could you separate the marital embrace and cuddling/“making out”? As in, tell her that for the next couple of months, she gets to decide when you make love, but that both of you can initiate cuddling time, or just kissing? Make it clear that unless she wants to, it goes no further than that, but that you want to keep on being intimate (not necessarily sexually intimate) with her because you love her.

From what I understand, many women need time to “get in the mood” at times, and her feeling pressure definitely will not get her in the mood. However, many women find themselves in the mood when they have relaxed and are physically near their husbands. The clue is, then, not to make her feel the least bit guilty if she decides cuddling is all she wants to do. I do realize that it will probably make it “difficult” at times for you, but who knows, it may help.

 

[fpt]

The notion of marital debt is coming from the sexed and sexual contract and is only useful that for explaining the rights, the duties and the obligations of each one, if and only if there are some moral issues and/ or some moral problems. The regime of natural moral order of marital debt is useful, ** when there are problems.** **That is the ultimate solve for protecting the contract, the institution, the rights, the obligations and the duties of each one. **

By essence, the rules are **pedagogical for each member of couple and are in favor of holyness of marriage. **They are the rules wanted by God for the marriage and for the **purification of each spouse. **Those rules are not negotiable. Two possible effects: if the day of wedding there is a great lack, the declaration of nullity, or only during the marriage, the immorality of acts by nature or in function of circumstances (sinful acts under particular conditions).

**The sexual efforts, the sexual sacrifices **in the positive way (to do, to let doing, to give, to let giving, to offer, to let offering, to receive, to let receiving, to ask, to let asking, to say yes, to let saying yes) or in the negative way (not to do, not to let doing, not to give, not to let giving, not to offer, not to let offering, not to receive, not to let receiving, not to ask, not to let asking, not to say yes, not to let saying yes) are elements of marriage.

 

[manualman]

What I would ask of you and all who would challenge my view is to consider how you would respond to some like the OP’s wife who came to you wife with concerns about her refusal. Would you refer her to a dozen books on how her husband could do even more to romance her? Or would you in charity remind her of her obligations? When you propagate the view that somehow a spouse has to earn the intimacy of his partner by way of romance or by minimizing the explicit obligation in this area that spouses owe to one another in this regard, you are harming marriages in a far greater way than even a direct appeal to the ‘debt’ view ever could.

People in emotional pain do need help and validation that their pain isn’t entirely their own fault. But human relationships are almost always flawed enough that both parties have some repenting to do. It’s almost never helpful to develop a scorecard of who has done the greatest harm, much less use said scorecard as a weapon against your spouse. Instead, it’s generally better to focus on working on your own flaws and doing your best to forgive the flaws of your spouse.

Objectively, you have a point in that wives contribute to marriage problems as much as men do. But your manner of presentation suggests that you feel that your problems are primarily her fault. I’ve never met anybody who had that attitude and succeeded in convincing his spouse of it. It may have happened somewhere, sometime, but it’s a rare bird.

I think it’s a recipe for failure to aim for a relationship in which there is a 50/50 split of love, care and effort. Humans are biased critters and will ALWAYS overestimate their own efforts and undervalue those of their spouses. I think christian love should seek to outlove the spouse and offer up ones own preferences willingly as often as possible (when it can be done out of love, not resentful obligation).

 

[hurting]

Think what you like, hurting, but I know for a fact that therapeutic protocols call for more than just quoting to Catechism. Exactly how they manage this I do not know because it’s a field I wasn’t trained in, but they do because I have experienced it. Otherwise, a therapist would be little more than someone in a chair with a copy of the CCC in their hands. It doesn’t work like that.

Also, I would not turn a friend to serve as a marital adviser for something this sensitive. This isn’t like trying to get a spouse to pick up their dirty clothes at night. A friend can serve as a sympathetic ear and maybe could tell you what works in their marriage, but that isn’t the same as doing the work of therapy.

In my own experience, priests who do marriage counsel are the ones who’ve received targeted academic and pastoral training in marriage and family therapy. My current pastor, for example, as said outright that he does not do couple’s therapy because he’s not trained or licensed to do it. He refers parishioners to qualified therapists.

I’d just like to give you something to think about… The only times I encounter talk about the marriage debt and conjugal obligation are in theological discussions and when a layperson on CAF is in a marriage lacking in sex. Armchair theologians and unhappy CAF spouses. That’s it. I’m not sure why that is, but maybe - just maybe - it’s because spouses with at least Okay sex lives do not frame their sexual relations as debts and obligations. That’s not to say they aren’t, but spouses don’t think of them that way in their day-to-day lives, and they do not have that mindset in dealing with their husbands and wives. It’s at least worth consideration, hurting.

Your last paragraph rests on huge supposition that is not supported in fact or evidence at hand. Indeed, on this thread alone, there are several posters who readily admit that they do recognize the obligatory nature of the marital embrace. It is every bit if not more likely that couples with satisfying sex lives enjoy that situation because both recognize their obligation.

Regarding the manner in which advisors of any stripe or training provide counsel in this area, it is simply nonsensical to suggest that the essences of the Church’s teaching in this area falls anything short of an obligation.

 

[mommamaree]

Your last paragraph rests on huge supposition that is not supported in fact or evidence at hand. Indeed, on this thread alone, there are several posters who readily admit that they do recognize the obligatory nature of the marital embrace. It is every bit if not more likely that couples with satisfying sex lives enjoy that situation because both recognize their obligation.

Regarding the manner in which advisors of any stripe or training provide counsel in this area, it is simply nonsensical to suggest that the essences of the Church’s teaching in this area falls anything short of an obligation.

I have always had a strong sense of obligation, during periods of heightened interest as well as in periods of reluctant participation. I hated the words obligation, debt, duty for a very long time; however. The sense of obligation was there, even though the words were themselves distasteful. In fact, people here at CAF helped me to gain a fuller understanding of and appreciation for those terms.
But the fact remains that the sense of obligation was a vital part of why my hubbie and I are where we are today. We slogged through mountains’ worth of cultural garbage together, because we promised each other to keep only unto each other. If we have no other person with whom to share this aspect of ourselves, we knew we had better get it right and honor our promises. Now, I do happen to have an amazing husband, which makes it easier for me, but a good marriage and a good sexual relationship do not just happen. We have had to work hard, and remember our obligation to each other, but we did that hard work together, and every sacrifice and compromise was worth it. My husband has made some really tough sacrifices for my sake, too, and it made me see how much he loved me and truly wanted to make a gift of himself to me!

 

[Sillara]

I have been married for 15 years.
We have six children.
My husband is the only lover I have ever had. (No, he was not a virgin when we married, though.)
Our sex life is phenomenal, absolutely amazing.
I have never refused my husband sex in my life. Not once. (We have had to refrain a few times, due to my having had surgery, but he knew about that and did not ask, as it would have been physically impossible.)
The idea of a marriage “debt” or “obligation” is perfectly accurate, and I am quite happy to be reminded that I OWE my husband my body and my physical affection. I can guarantee that if my husband said to me, “Honey, I want my marital rights,” or “Time to collect on the ol’ marriage debt” I would laugh and drag him off to our bed (or the bath-tub or, if the kids are asleep, the living room sofa or the dining room table).
Whenever my husband asserts his authority over my body (and, by the by, I can assert mine over his, too! I will initiate sex at least as often as he does), it turns me on. As mommamaree has written, sex is itself a romantic act. Why must I be wooed into it?
We are not currently particularly avoiding children, so we have sex whenever. And it is a lot. I am not just writing cheerful blather because neither my husband nor I particularly want to have sex. We do. A lot.
I am familiar with the five love languages, and curiously, physical touch is NOT my love language. In fact, I dislike being touched in general. I have to make an effort to show physical affection to our children. But with my husband, I absolutely love being physical. I love being in contact with him in any way possible. When we watch a movie at night, I curl up beside him on the sofa, and we are tangled together all the time. I love my husband, and HIS love language is touch. I learned that one to the point that it is now my primary one in relation to him. (But I still dislike it otherwise. )

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

Your last paragraph rests on huge supposition that is not supported in fact or evidence at hand. Indeed, on this thread alone, there are several posters who readily admit that they do recognize the obligatory nature of the marital embrace. It is every bit if not more likely that couples with satisfying sex lives enjoy that situation because both recognize their obligation.

Regarding the manner in which advisors of any stripe or training provide counsel in this area, it is simply nonsensical to suggest that the essences of the Church’s teaching in this area falls anything short of an obligation.

I’m not the one with a bad sex life, hurting. None of this applies to me. Sorry.

The only marriage I can be accountable for is my own. The only sex life I need to worry about is the one I’m living. I simply do not have the time or the emotional energy to worry about how other couples view theirs.

I do wish you the best, hurting. It sounds from your posts that you truly are hurting. I hope your experinces haven’t made you bitter towards marriage, sex, and/or women. If you find yourself heading down that dark path, I hope you seek out help.

 

[hurting]

I’m not the one with a bad sex life, hurting. None of this applies to me. Sorry.

The only marriage I can be accountable for is my own. The only sex life I need to worry about is the one I’m living. I simply do not have the time or the emotional energy to worry about how other couples view theirs.

I do wish you the best, hurting. It sounds from your posts that you truly are hurting. I hope your experinces haven’t made you bitter towards marriage, sex, and/or women. If you find yourself heading down that dark path, I hope you seek out help.

Thank you for your well wishes. I am not bitter regarding marriage, sex or women and never have been. BTW, by offering advice to teh OP you were kinda involving yourself in another couple’s intimate affairs.