We are no longer in the "newlywed" stage...need help with the transit

[EasterJoy]

Stress will kill anyone’s sex drive. Stress hormones counteract the hormones that inspire intimacy. That is a known scientific fact. That is also why many women loose interest after chasing around kids. Very stressful!

Also, you said you did it everyday. That is not possible unless you were on artificial birth control. That is a no no in Catholic teaching. In many ways NFP teaches couples to throttle their sexual desire so you are not a slave to it. Sounds like you have grown dependent on the dopamine and oxytocin jolt you get after sex.

When you have mastered basic biology we can have a real conversation about this. Science can be used to deductively reason if a sin is being committed. Forensic science does it all the time. I never said doing it every day was a sin. I said one would be reasonably assumed to be using artificial birth control if they were fertile and wanted to have sex everyday. Reread my first post and subsequent one.

Are you saying that before birth control was invented, it was impossible to have sex every day? You’re out of your mind. Are you saying that everyone who has sex every day always gets pregnant? You’re very much ill-informed. Couples trying to have a child and not having success will probably be told, in fact, to use NFP to get pregnant, and that also involves…abstinence! Yes, they will be advised to abstain in the days leading up to the fertile days!

There are people who think that any couple who does not have children and isn’t using NFP to avoid conception must be using birth control. They are guilty of rash judgment, plain and simple. You may as well guarantee every couple that if they have sex frequently enough, they are guaranteed to conceive within a year. That is not true. As a matter of fact, very frequent sex can be expected to lower sperm count, because testes cannot usually manage an on-the-dime “turn-around”. This is why sperm banks require donors to abstain from activities that lead to ejaculation two to three days before their “donation” day, and this is why NFP is worthwhile to know as much for how to get pregnant as for how to delay pregnancy.

There you go, a less-known scientific fact!

So, getting-ready-for-marriage couples, even if you want a dozen kids or more than that, it is worth your while to get yourselves to a NFP class!!

 

[silentfactor80]

Are you saying that before birth control was invented, it was impossible to have sex every day? You’re out of your mind. Are you saying that everyone who has sex every day always gets pregnant? You’re very much ill-informed. Couples trying to have a child and not having success will probably be told, in fact, to use NFP to get pregnant, and that also involves…abstinence! Yes, they will be advised to abstain in the days leading up to the fertile days!

There are people who think that any couple who does not have children and isn’t using NFP to avoid conception must be using birth control. They are guilty of rash judgment, plain and simple. You may as well guarantee every couple that if they have sex frequently enough, they are guaranteed to conceive within a year. That is not true. As a matter of fact, very frequent sex can be expected to lower sperm count, because testes cannot usually manage an on-the-dime “turn-around”. This is why sperm banks require donors to abstain from activities that lead to ejaculation two to three days before their “donation” day, and this is why NFP is worthwhile to know as much for how to get pregnant as for how to delay pregnancy.

There you go, a less-known scientific fact!

So, getting-ready-for-marriage couples, even if you want a dozen kids or more than that, it is worth your while to get yourselves to a NFP class!!

Have you seen the numbers of people that use birth control? Reports show 89-98% of Catholics alone use it. If I had a 89-98% chance of winning the lotto I would happily spend a year’s salary on tickets. Whether a couple’s odds of getting pregnant are high or not statistics shows A LOT of people use birth control especially for contraceptive purposes.

 

[EasterJoy]

Have you seen the numbers of people that use birth control? Reports show 89-98% of Catholics alone use it. If I had a 89-98% chance of winning the lotto I would happily spend a year’s salary on tickets. Whether a couple’s odds of getting pregnant are high or not statistics shows A LOT of people use birth control.

Hmmm…tell me, what business is it of yours to go around guessing who is the most statistically likely to commit what sin? Why would you risk hurting a couple who would very much like to have a child by your rash accusations? Do you have any idea what it is like, to want to conceive and not be able to do it? Would you like to be going through that and then be accused of having refused to be open to the blessing you wanted more than anything in the world? How would that feel? Is this what you would have said to Elizabeth? To Hannah? Is that how you would have wanted to treat a saint?

I will remind you, too, that there are couples out there who are only pregnant because they resorted to immoral means to get pregnant. After all, there are homosexual couples who have children they did not adopt…how do you suppose they did that? Would you assume they must be acting like good Catholics: that is, until you found out that the pregnant woman’s “spouse” was another woman? Even in that situation, you do not know that the pregnant woman did not become pregnant against her will, by a rape, and yet elected to have the child instead of getting an abortion. Most of the time, it pays to keep our mouths shut, my friend…most of the time it pays to keep our mouths shut. Yet we know by the testimony of others what means are out there for the infertile couple, means that the faithful Catholic couple may not use!

If there are people who go around making wild guesses about what sins other people are committing who accomplish a bit of good by doing it, I cannot imagine what it is. If you know, do please tell me. Until then, well, try to think the best of others, instead. Statistically speaking, it is not that hard.

 

[KendraDZ1902]

Have you seen the numbers of people that use birth control? Reports show 89-98% of Catholics alone use it. If I had a 89-98% chance of winning the lotto I would happily spend a year’s salary on tickets. Whether a couple’s odds of getting pregnant are high or not statistics shows A LOT of people use birth control especially for contraceptive purposes.

That doesn’t mean you can go around assuming that everyone is using it! Especially in a thread where the OP didn’t mention anything about it. Good grief, dude. Apologize and move on.

 

[EasterJoy]

OP, the average frequency for married couples is in the range of a few times per week, not daily. Still, you might read up on literature out there for couples who have a big disparity in desire, as it is not an uncommon issue, sometimes from the very first day. Since you and your husband once had comparable levels of desire, though, I think this is your signal to do what you can to lower his stress levels and to get physical intimacy that is stress-reducing rather than stress-inducing. You’ll hardly find a tired guy who doesn’t like to have his feet rubbed! It is hard to content yourself with less when you really want more, but marriage is about paying at least as much attention to the needs of your spouse as to your own. I think with some mutual attention, you’ll find a medium that works well for both of you!

 

[Kelfa28]

Stress will kill anyone’s sex drive. Stress hormones counteract the hormones that inspire intimacy. That is a known scientific fact. That is also why many women loose interest after chasing around kids. Very stressful!

Also, you said you did it everyday. That is not possible unless you were on artificial birth control. That is a no no in Catholic teaching. In many ways NFP teaches couples to throttle their sexual desire so you are not a slave to it. Sounds like you have grown dependent on the dopamine and oxytocin jolt you get after sex.

You do realize that a very common side effect of birth control is reduced libido.

Therefore your argument does not hold water in most circumstances. The most common form of birth control is the pill…and one of the most common side effects of the pill is reduced libido.

By your statistics…a lot of people are NOT having sex every single day.

It’s extremely uncharitable to make wild accusations about people you know nothing about. The original poster mentioned absolutely nothing about whether she used ABC or not. For all we know…she is one of the so-called 20% of practicing Catholics that don’t use ABC.
For all we know she is infertile and cannot conceive.

To the OP:

My husband and I have been together for about 5 years. Not quite as long as you and your husband…but close.
I’d say it’s absolutely normal to “settle in” to marriage a bit and fall out of the honeymoon period.
Lots of things can contribute.

For my husband and I…we went from every other day to barely once or twice a week if we are really lucky.
We have a 14 month old, another on the way and we’ve moved in the past year, my husband was laid off, found another job (that is far more stressful and has much earlier hours) and is now looking to be deployed again.

Lots of changes in a very short period of time that has drastically cut down our intimacy levels and actual time to have marital relations.
It is frustrating at times…my libido is far higher then my husband’s libido and I would love to be able to go back to our honeymoon period again.

But…we try to find other ways to express our love…even if it’s as simple as me making his lunches the night before so he doesn’t have to in the morning. Or him doing chores around the house on his own…without asking me what needs to be done.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

Have you seen the numbers of people that use birth control? Reports show 89-98% of Catholics alone use it. If I had a 89-98% chance of winning the lotto I would happily spend a year’s salary on tickets. Whether a couple’s odds of getting pregnant are high or not statistics shows A LOT of people use birth control especially for contraceptive purposes.

In this case, I suggest dropping the issue. If you would read some of the OP’s posts in other threads, you might realize how utterly insensitive your comments are.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

When you have mastered basic biology we can have a real conversation about this. Science can be used to deductively reason if a sin is being committed. Forensic science does it all the time. I never said doing it every day was a sin. I said one would be reasonably assumed to be using artificial birth control if they were fertile and wanted to have sex everyday. Reread my first post and subsequent one.

One would reasonably assume that there are practicing Catholics out there that adhere to the teachings of the Catholic Church with regards to sexuality, and regardless of their fertility, could have sex every day without using ABC… I think you would be surprised at how many times you would be wrong by assuming that a person posting on here is using ABC.

Also, please understand that there are people that are open and wanting a child, and have to deal with the cross of infertility. Assuming that these people are using ABC and that this is the reason why they don’t have children can be very hurtful for them. I’m not saying that ABC is not very common out there, unfortunately it is, and we need to do our part to help correct that, but it doesn’t mean that there aren’t other people out there that are following the Church’s teachings… because there are…

 

[silentfactor80]

I think ya’ll are getting carried away with my comments as usual. Have your fun everyday using only NFP and enjoy. I have better things to do than be attacked here. Talk about being uncharitable…

You know I usually defend people who defend the faith against secularists but sometimes the secularists are right. Many faith-only people don’t listen to or too uninformed to understand statistics and science.

 

[TheWarriorMonk]

I think ya’ll are getting carried away with my comments as usual. Have your fun everyday using only NFP and enjoy. I have better things to do than be attacked here. Talk about being uncharitable…

You know I usually defend people who defend the faith against secularists but sometimes the secularists are right. Many faith-only people don’t listen to or too uninformed to understand statistics and science.

A post from the OP from another thread:

Okay, so most of you know that we are almost entirely infertile. Without a miracle, pregnancy ain’t happening.

It might not be a great idea to accuse such a couple of contraception, then rail on about it for two pages. It might be insensitive, don’t you think?

 

[silentfactor80]

A post from the OP from another thread:

It might not be a great idea to accuse such a couple of contraception, then rail on about it for two pages. It might be insensitive, don’t you think?

As I said before, I do not stalk a users post history so I did not see that thread. I think it is rather uncharitable to expect me to read every post a user has made before I post myself.

 

[EasterJoy]

I think ya’ll are getting carried away with my comments as usual. Have your fun everyday using only NFP and enjoy. I have better things to do than be attacked here. Talk about being uncharitable…

You know I usually defend people who defend the faith against secularists but sometimes the secularists are right. Many faith-only people don’t listen to or too uninformed to understand statistics and science.

I can assure you I understand the science just fine. You are being corrected because your understanding of both the science and what the charitable admonishment of sinners means is wrong.

Willingness to defend the faith is good, but it does not mean you are above correction yourself. Take our objections seriously, please. If you don’t, you might really hurt someone’s feelings some day by committing the sin of rash judgment. We would not want your foot in your mouth with someone who actually knows you.

 

[EasterJoy]

As I said before, I do not stalk a users post history so I did not see that thread. I think it is rather uncharitable to expect me to read every post a user has made before I post myself.

It is entirely reasonable to expect you to withhold judgment when you ought to be fully aware you do not have all of the necessary facts. The possibility that the OP has experienced infertility ought to have occurred to you; it is not far-fetched.

 

[silentfactor80]

I can assure you I understand the science just fine. You are being corrected because your understanding of both the science and what the charitable admonishment of sinners means is wrong.

Willingness to defend the faith is good, but it does not mean you are above correction yourself. Take our objections seriously, please. If you don’t, you might really hurt someone’s feelings some day by committing the sin of rash judgment. We would not want your foot in your mouth with someone who actually knows you.

Less than 20% of all couples suffer from infertility (bodyandhealth.canada.com/channel_health_features_details.asp?health_feature_id=695&article_id=1698&channel_id=2048&relation_id=109615). Most couples are fertile. I made a bet with the odds in my favor and lost. It happens. It does not however change the fact that a majority do use ABC. If 100 people walk down a dark alley and 90 get mugged would you walk down it because 10 didn’t? Sure you may get lucky but there’s a good chance you won’t. That is how statistics work. Nothing is absolute.

 

[maryjk]

Less than 20% of all couples suffer from infertility (bodyandhealth.canada.com/channel_health_features_details.asp?health_feature_id=695&article_id=1698&channel_id=2048&relation_id=109615). Most couples are fertile. I made a bet with the odds in my favor and lost. It happens. It does not however change the fact that a majority do use ABC. If 100 people walk down a dark alley and 90 get mugged would you walk down it because 10 didn’t? Sure you may get lucky but there’s a good chance you won’t. That is how statistics work. Nothing is absolute.

The proper response when you make a bet about someone’s behavior and you lose, is to apologize. It is not to double down.

And by the way, you didn’t lose.

You were wrong.

Admit it and move on.

 

[silentfactor80]

The proper response when you make a bet about someone’s behavior and you lose, is to apologize. It is not to double down.

And by the way, you didn’t lose.

You were wrong.

Admit it and move on.

I did not double down and continue insisting on what I said applies here. What I did say was it is fair of anyone to assume a certain behavior given the data. This is lesson #1 in statistics. I have no personal stake in the OP’s life and I am not advocating or imposing any penalty against them. Just reiterating the Church’s teaching here. Not apologizing for that.

 

[Wampa]

Silent, I’ll pile on ever-so-slightly, then actually back you up

I think the problem here is that you didn’t need to “make a bet with the odds in your favor” and risk losing, especially when admonishing someone.

“That is not possible unless you were on artificial birth control. That is a no no in Catholic teaching.”

can so easily be…

“That is not possible unless you were on artificial birth control or infertile. The former is a no no in Catholic teaching.”

Why not just cover both scenarios rather than assume they are sinning? That way your correction is good if you’re right, and no harm done if you’re wrong. Something to consider next time…

While what you are saying is true, the majority of people are fertile and waiting to have a family usually by artificial means. Perhaps I made an assumption too quickly but these days people are so sex obsessed so I’m sure what I said applies to many. If it doesn’t to you then I apologize.

On the other hand, I don’t think people are giving you credit for apologizing way back in post #11. I realize the apology is less than full-throated (‘perhaps’ and ‘if this doesn’t apply to you’ might imply you don’t believe her), but it’s an apology. And it was made two pages ago. I think that covers it.

 

[EasterJoy]

I did not double down and continue insisting on what I said applies here. What I did say was it is fair of anyone to assume a certain behavior given the data. This is lesson #1 in statistics. I have no personal stake in the OP’s life and I am not advocating or imposing any penalty against them. Just reiterating the Church’s teaching here. Not apologizing for that.

Not only did you keep insisting, but you’re still insisting now.

No, it isn’t fair to assume, you are wrong, and you’re additionally wrong not to apologize. You can’t convict anyone on statistics, and if you could, a nearly 20% chance that you’re wrong is plenty of reason to give the benefit of the doubt, instead of insisting that it is impossible that you are wrong…and that would be if you were the judge, which is not your office here. When someone comes here and starts opposing Church teaching, then by all means correct them. When you’re guessing that* maybe *they have opposed Church teaching, keep quiet. Maybe you could have said, “if you had been doing such and so, that would have not been a good thing”, but you may not jump to the assumption that they have done anything wrong.

 

[EasterJoy]

Silent, I’ll pile on ever-so-slightly, then actually back you up

I think the problem here is that you didn’t need to “make a bet with the odds in your favor” and risk losing, especially when admonishing someone.

“That is not possible unless you were on artificial birth control. That is a no no in Catholic teaching.”

can so easily be…

“That is not possible unless you were on artificial birth control or infertile. The former is a no no in Catholic teaching.”

Why not just cover both scenarios rather than assume they are sinning? That way your correction is good if you’re right, and no harm done if you’re wrong. Something to consider next time…

On the other hand, I don’t think people are giving you credit for apologizing way back in post #11. I realize the apology is less than full-throated (‘perhaps’ and ‘if this doesn’t apply to you’ might imply you don’t believe her), but it’s an apology. And it was made two pages ago. I think that covers it.

Well, it is actually possible for an otherwise fertile couple to fail to get pregnant because they artificially lowered the man’s sperm count by engaging in too much sex in the days immediately before the fertile time.

He didn’t apologize for being rash, he said “oh, ignore my rashness in the case that what I said was impossible doesn’t apply to you”. He shows no sign that he would post differently, given the same circumstances. Otherwise, he wouldn’t still be posting in defense of his rash judgment, as if he had enough evidence for a court case, which he doesn’t.

 

[silentfactor80]

Well, it is actually possible for an otherwise fertile couple to fail to get pregnant because they artificially lowered the man’s sperm count by engaging in too much sex in the days immediately before the fertile time.

He didn’t apologize for being rash, he said “oh, ignore my rashness in the case that what I said was impossible doesn’t apply to you”. He shows no sign that he would post differently, given the same circumstances. Otherwise, he wouldn’t still be posting in defense of his rash judgment, as if he had enough evidence for a court case, which he doesn’t.

I’m just going to bow out of this nonsense. The OP knows what they did and did not do. I was being informative and deductive, not prescribing a punishment to them. It’s called discussion. God Bless!