This is getting little interest on CE&P, but it caught mine.

[Wrath0fKuus]

What If Maintaining Desire Isn't a Major Goal of Your Marriage?

www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archive/2013/06/what-if-maintaining-desire-isnt-a-major-goal-of-your-marriage/276716/

How do you maintain desire in a long-term relationship? How can you keep that edge of excitement and danger through long years of monogamy, convention and familiarity? How do you keep rutting like horny adolescents when you're pushing middle-age?

Daniel Bergner, author of What Do Women Want? Adventures in the Science of Female Desire, is asking readers to contemplate such questions at Slate's Double XX. Specifically, he asked, "How can women maintain desire within long-term committed relationships?" In response, readers have written in with a series of predictably titillating responses from the familiar grab-bag of shocking alternative lifestyles and fetish. You've got threesomes, you've got costumes, you've got group sex, and so forth. As of this writing we haven't gotten to bondage or S&M yet, but presumably something along those lines will show up before we're done.

The almost ritual tour of kink suggests strongly that Bergner's question is less an interrogative, and more an excuse. The way the issue is framed—how to maintain desire?—makes the answers inevitable. This is, clearly, good copy—everybody likes to read about sex. But it seems like the predetermined nature of the exercise might, possibly, be leaving something out.

Specifically...is it necessarily true that everyone, in every marriage, wants to maintain desire? Obviously, pretty much nobody wants their sex life to completely roll over and die. But, on the other hand, one of the things that's great about marriage is that it frees you from the constant, incessant treadmill of sexual obsession. I was single for quite a while, and the worst part was not the lack of sex (since really you can have sex quite efficiently with yourself) but the waiting, the hoping, the crushes, the uncertainty, the self-doubt and self-loathing—in short, that thing that some religions call the wheel of desire. When Carrie Ichikawa Jenkins tells me that I could maintain desire by dating outside my marriage, all I can say is, hell, no. I hated dating. I was bad at it, it made me miserable, and I'm sure it wasn't particularly enjoyable for the folks who had to share my misery either. My wife rescued me from that, bless her. No way am I going back.

Bergner's book argues, in part, that women are worse at monogamy than men are. So, perhaps, he would reply to me by suggesting that while I may be happy enough with a marriage that is not flaming with desire, my wife is not. However, I do talk to my wife on occasion, and as far as dating being a hideous burden that we are well out of, we are in accord. Of course my wife is attracted to other people occasionally—but her reaction to such crushes is not exactly what Bergner seems to think it should be. On the contrary, the last time my wife was truly, thoroughly smitten at first sight by a dashing, androgynous indie hipster, she didn't want to have sex with him. She wanted to get away. "It's like being 18 again," she said. "Yuck."

Just to be clear, I'm not suggesting that any of the people who wrote into Slate are immoral, nor even that they are doing it wrong. I have nothing against threesomes or costumes or bondage or water sports or pretty much whatever consenting adults want to get up to behind closed doors. Marriage and monogamy aren't a suicide pact; as long as everyone's honest with themselves and each other, couples should be allowed to negotiate the boundaries of their relationship in whatever way makes sense to them. To the extent that Bergner and his interlocutors are showing people that they have options, they're providing a service.

But if Bergner is opening up some options, it sure feels like he's closing down others. Certainly, I read his essay and the responses and I feel like every possible lifestyle choice is validated—except that old, boring one, where you have sex occasionally with your wife and maybe go to Good Vibrations if you're in San Francisco, and generally enjoy your marriage in part because it means you don't have to place desire at the center of your lives. How many people will react to this essay by assuming that my marriage is less stable than I think it is, or by thinking that I'm missing out on real passion and real love and real life? The one sin left, it sometimes feels like, is not being sexy enough.

Hugo Schwyzer argued that Bergner's book is a feminist wake-up call—a declaration that women love sex as much as men, and that women, and especially men, need to throw aside traditional gender roles and fears and get out there and get busy. To which I say...well, maybe. But the demand that everybody self-actualize on the count of three sounds to me less like liberation, and more like the old, not especially liberating discourse of self-help, which demands that we all become better, more fulfilled, more unique individuals through the same Puritan work ethic of escalating effort and virtue. Desire doesn't have to be yet another way to assure yourself and others that you are climbing ever upwards towards success. If you want your marriage to be about an Olympics of kink, that's fine—but making it mandatory seems like it has the potential to be as cruel, and as restrictive, as the monolithic monogamy from which we are supposedly being liberated.

[captainmel]

I find this interesting. I think the conclusion of the article is much more realistic than a lot of other relationship matinance articles. I also feel like the article skips a whole lot if things that maintain intimacy like affection and honest conversation and putting in effort and caring for each other.

[cuddlyevil]

ITA Mel.

[Wrath0fKuus]

It kind of depressed me.

[captainmel]

Sex is important but the article makes it seems like if you have good sex you have a good relationship and that's not real life.

[Wrath0fKuus]

No, but it's hard to have a good relationship without a good sex life for a lot of people.

[cuddlyevil]

I think it's focusing in too much on just one aspect of what keeps desire/connection alive in a marriage. Yes, sex is very important but there are other aspects that influence if you want it, how much you want it, and who you want to have it with.

When I started the conversation with DH over how distant we've been feeling, he tried to parlay it into "well having sex more often will help that." but he didn't even consider that there were other factors at work--like us actually talking and me feeling like he wanted to be around me for more than mealtimes or sex.

And where were they going with the "women are worse at monogamy than men" stuff?

[Deleted]

I think you can maintain desire, as long as you accept that desire will change as the relationship changes. I don't think it has to be an all or nothing kind of thing.

[Wrath0fKuus]

Jul 1, 2013 14:13:27 GMT -5 cuddlyevil said:

And where were they going with the "women are worse at monogamy than men" stuff?

It was a relatively recent study on women's arousal that indicated that women have a statistically significantly harder time than men getting turned on by someone they'd known for more than two years.

[Deleted]

Jul 1, 2013 14:17:17 GMT -5 Wrath0fKuus said:

Jul 1, 2013 14:13:27 GMT -5 cuddlyevil said:

And where were they going with the "women are worse at monogamy than men" stuff?

It was a relatively recent study on women's arousal that indicated that women have a statistically significantly harder time than men getting turned on by someone they'd known for more than two years.

That's an interesting study. 

[Wrath0fKuus]

Jul 1, 2013 14:17:48 GMT -5 doglove said:

Jul 1, 2013 14:17:17 GMT -5 Wrath0fKuus said:

It was a relatively recent study on women's arousal that indicated that women have a statistically significantly harder time than men getting turned on by someone they'd known for more than two years.

That's an interesting study. 

Yeah.  I read a review of it, rather than the primary literature, so I don't know how solid their conclusions are.

As someone who is currently frustrated by my lack of desire for the same old, same old, though, it rang uncomfortably true.

[tiramisu]

I agree with Mel also. I do like the author's focus on the fact that kink is not for everyone. I've long felt like it seems just being into "normal" sex isn't okay and is a reason to feel sorry for one's partner. As long as two people are well matched sexually, it doesn't have to be that way.

Kuus, any thoughts as to how the larger trends on which the author remarks might be linked with the "pornification" of society and the sex positive movement?

[captainmel]

I ignored the whole part about women being worse at monogomy than men because I didn't have words for it and it didn't make any sense at all.

I think good sex is a key component of a healthy relationship but I feel like the article isolates sex so much when I think there are so many other factors that are interdependent that this analysis completely ingnores.

[captainmel]

Jul 1, 2013 14:17:17 GMT -5 Wrath0fKuus said:

Jul 1, 2013 14:13:27 GMT -5 cuddlyevil said:

And where were they going with the "women are worse at monogamy than men" stuff?

It was a relatively recent study on women's arousal that indicated that women have a statistically significantly harder time than men getting turned on by someone they'd known for more than two years.

Link? I love a good study. 

I have a super hard time getting turned on outside of my emotional connection with Boyfriend. Sex outside of an emotional relationship is something to me that sounds.. Miserable.

[Deleted]

Have you talked to Mr. Kuus about your feelings?

[tiramisu]

Sex outside of an emotional connection doesn't appeal to me, but I also understand feeling low desire towards your partner and being more readily turned on by the visual of someone else. I too would be interested to read the research. I'm not surprised at the idea of women being worse at monogamy, honestly. Little surprises me these days, though.

I think a fulfilling sex life looks different to different couples, but I've always been bothered by the focus on link to maintain a spark, as opposed to the connection between the two partners. Maybe you do both want to try restraints, swings, wedges, etc. But I don't think that has to be incorporated to maintain spark. To me it's more about being present with one another mentally, emotionally, and sexually. Knowing each others' desires instead of a one-size-fits-all.cute of adding something specific.

[omgguineapigs]

Cuddlyevil - what are you guys doing about that? Sounds like we're in a similar boat. I thought I remember you remarking awhile ago about a smartphone addiction... was that part of it?

[tiramisu]

Also, hugs to you Kuus. I hadn't asked about things recently but have been wondering how things are going. I'm sorry to hear it's still a struggle.

[captainmel]

tiramisu has said everything I was trying to say but she actually makes sense. YOU'RE SO SMART TIRAMISU!

[tiramisu]

Thanks captainmel! I think you said it pretty well yourself.

[captainmel]

Jul 1, 2013 14:47:38 GMT -5 tiramisu said:

Thanks captainmel! I think you said it pretty well yourself.

I am blushing and twirling.

[Wrath0fKuus]

Jul 1, 2013 14:21:25 GMT -5 tiramisu said:

I agree with Mel also. I do like the author's focus on the fact that kink is not for everyone. I've long felt like it seems just being into "normal" sex isn't okay and is a reason to feel sorry for one's partner. As long as two people are well matched sexually, it doesn't have to be that way.

Kuus, any thoughts as to how the larger trends on which the author remarks might be linked with the "pornification" of society and the sex positive movement?

Yeah.  It does seem like "if you're not thrilled, try imitating some porn" (even though it isn't phrased that way) is the go-to suggestion and response for this kind of thing, and not only is play-acting what someone else thought would be visually appealing unlikely to be genuinely hot, but what if none of those scenarios even sound appealing?

[Wrath0fKuus]

Jul 1, 2013 14:33:47 GMT -5 doglove said:

Have you talked to Mr. Kuus about your feelings?

He knows.  Neither of us have much idea of what to do about it.

[Deleted]

Jul 1, 2013 15:09:13 GMT -5 Wrath0fKuus said:

Jul 1, 2013 14:21:25 GMT -5 tiramisu said:

I agree with Mel also. I do like the author's focus on the fact that kink is not for everyone. I've long felt like it seems just being into "normal" sex isn't okay and is a reason to feel sorry for one's partner. As long as two people are well matched sexually, it doesn't have to be that way.

Kuus, any thoughts as to how the larger trends on which the author remarks might be linked with the "pornification" of society and the sex positive movement?

Yeah.  It does seem like "if you're not thrilled, try imitating some porn" (even though it isn't phrased that way) is the go-to suggestion and response for this kind of thing, and not only is play-acting what someone else thought would be visually appealing unlikely to be genuinely hot, but what if none of those scenarios even sound appealing?

What DOES sound appealing to you when you think about it?

[Wrath0fKuus]

Jul 1, 2013 15:36:31 GMT -5 doglove said:

Jul 1, 2013 15:09:13 GMT -5 Wrath0fKuus said:

Yeah.  It does seem like "if you're not thrilled, try imitating some porn" (even though it isn't phrased that way) is the go-to suggestion and response for this kind of thing, and not only is play-acting what someone else thought would be visually appealing unlikely to be genuinely hot, but what if none of those scenarios even sound appealing?

What DOES sound appealing to you when you think about it?

Nothing too interesting or different, really... just at a time when we were actually hot for each other.  That, and things actually going smoothly, not "You're drifting left.  You're drifting left AGAIN.  WHY DO YOU KEEP DRIFTING LEFT?!"  Of course, I didn't mind that back when it didn't take such precise calculations to get even a small response.

Sigh.

[captainmel]

When Boyfriend and I have been in a rut before we have just done simple things like extra shoulder rubs, and extra affection. We have also used new vibrators which help me a lot and we've also tried scheduling sex to keep things more consistent for us. The other thing that helps me a lot is talking about our sex life outside of the moment of "do you want to have sex?"

Nothing on that list is very groundbreaking but it has helped us a lot in the past.

[Wrath0fKuus]

None of this has worked.

[Deleted]

I can see why you are frustrated.

[tiramisu]

Kuus, are you on hormonal contraceptives? BCP/OCP not only killed my libido, but also made it nearly impossible to orgasm.

[Wrath0fKuus]

The problem is really the foreplay. It's not fun. It does less than nothing for me. It used to, way back in the day - hell, it used to be a fun thing to do all on its own. Now, it's just that thing that delays sex, so that odds are higher that the original mildly good-sounding idea to have sex seems less appealing the longer the foreplay goes on. And it's not like I'm all THAT good to go in the first place, either. Ugh.