For Sex Addicts Only Community Group
For Sex Addicts Only is exclusively for individuals seeking support, information and recovery advice from fellow sex addicts. If not a sex addict, please do not join this group. The focus of this group is to support one another in understanding how one becomes a sex addict and achieving a successful recovery from our individual sex addiction. Sex addiction exists in...
The other day, i noticed the thread "To initiate sex or not" thread in the healing spouses topic board. And I was kinda moved by the amount of pain this initiating (or not initiating) thing has caused our beautiful wives. I have always thought that we men owned the whole feeling rejected thing regarding sex. And let me also appologize for eaves dropping.
Though my wife and I have many broken intimacy issues, initiating is not one of them, and I thought I would share my thoughts and see if we can sharpen each other in this area.
First some references;
The Bible is clear on this one >
1Co 7:3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband.
1Co 7:4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
1Co 7:5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
For those who dispise bible-thumpers;
Pia Melody - External sexual containment boundaries - 1, When an individual's containment boundary is functional, he always asks and gets permission before becoming sexual with his partner.
2. When and individual's external containment boundary is a wall, he never makes sexual approaches to anyone.
3. When an individual does not have an external sexual containment boundary he makes sexual advances without permission or in the face of the other person's refusal.
External sexual protective boundaries are functioning properly - he decides who, when, where, and how someone is going to be sexual with him. As someone approaches him, he figures out if he wants to be sexual, and if he chooses to, he decides when, where, how he will do it. (Wall and no boundaries are listed after this in her book)
Doug Weiss - High level description of the sexual child, adolescent, and adult.
The Sexual Child
- does not accept or see themselves as sexual.
- Will not initiate sex
- talk about sex is always inappropriate.
The sexual addolecent
- sex is for them mostly
- Is not aware of their spouses sexual needs
- angry whe they do not get their sexual needs met
- sexual conversation seems to feel cheap and not about intimacy.
The sexual adult
- Accepts themselves sexually
-accepts the sexuality of their spouses
- has intimacy during sex
- maintains sexual integrity.
As I sinthisize this and other information, I ultimately come to the conclusion that the psycho-stuff is a faded view of what the bible says. LIving with our wives in an understanding way, gently caring for them as the "china tea cup" or weaker vessle. And removing any fear of sexual rejection by committing to always saying "yes" and dying to or disregarding our own anxieties, fears, even our shame, or our needs for control, by committing to saying "yes" every time, seems to be the simplest way to affirm, and support their self esteem, fears of their beauty, their sexuality or worth not being enough, and nurturing sexual trust and ultimately intimacy.
As I read Weisses descriptions of child/adolescent/adult, I realize that my wife and I (moslty by her gracefullness) have most often been sexual adults. And I periodically dip into adolescence. And here is how it works;
In countless moments of my pathetic whining about my addicts broken expectations. I have been humbled over and over by my dear wife and her gracious and God honoring obedience to the above verse. In the last 18 months, I can only specifically remember 2 times and there have only been maybe 10 at the most, she has not responded to my sexual requests. Having said that, during that time I have only 2 times "implied" that I wanted to be sexual instead of intentionally asking her in a timely fassion early in the day. So it goes like this;
Sometime in the late morning or early afternoon, I tell her that I would like to be sexual with her, and ask if that is OK with her. She says many things, but never "no" Sometimes she says "can we do it in the morning" sometimes she says "Sure" sometimes she sais "Maybe" and flirts. But without fail we have been sexual either that night or in the morning.
The other part of this is that I NEVER ask two days in a row, and typically skip 2 days between asking. I also am careful not to initiate when she is sick, or exhausted. I do however respond to her if she initiates on "the day after".
This approach, I came to by reading responses by SOs on this board in an ephiphany where I realized that when I pester her sexually the day after we are sexual, I had always thought she would feel desired, attractive, and appreciated. These fine DS women taught me that she was actually thinking (or feeling more than thinking) "Was last night not enough for you, is my sexuality not fulfilling enough for you that it leaves you craving for more the very next day?." So I committed to skip at least that day and often two or three. And I can tell it affirms her.
The other part of this is that I never say "no" to her. Recently, I was flirting with her during the day, but did not explicitly ask her. In my mind I was not initiating, and was not intending to be sexual that evening. We got in bed and she asked if I wanted to. I really had not considered it and was ready to go to sleep. But I responded, with my focus being completely content on taking care of her needs.
I do not even begin to understand the anorexic side of the addiction. But I have had several discussions with others that are anorexic and know it causes alot of anxiety, discomfort and pain for them and their wives. So it is easy to see that my next sugestion may be too black and white to work in all situations. Also, the closest thing to anorexia that I experience is passive agressiveness.
The few times that I fall off the rails with this is when I "imply" my needs, and she does not read my mind, and disregards my unspoken expectations. It is totally rediculous for her to not read my mind, so I get angry and refuse to initiate to punish her for not noticing my subtle inuindos that do not fit the normal "explicit" way I initiate. The problem with this is that she typically does not let this childish behavior last for more than a day or two. She often points it out, sometimes, appologizes for not noticing, and usually initiates within a day or two. How pathetic can I be!!!. And how graceful can she be in the face of my patheticism!
In fact, the last time this happened, I told her how much I appreciated her and how well she handles me when I am so immature. She said " Someone has to be mature, right?"
OK, my suggestion is this, everyone should simply agree always to ask explicitely, and never to say "no". If it is not a good time, then the answer can be "Yes, but can we do it tomorrow morning?" Or "Yes, I will come to you when I am ready" In these cases it is very important to trust, that you "own the ball" and fulfil your pormise to come back and to initiate if that is the deal you make.
This is pretty much what Paul was saying in that verse. We should not refuse our mates their sexual requests.
So what if I am so anxious that I can not get an erection? I have heard this. And the answer is that sexual intimacy is not predicated on an erection, though it is convenient. AND, a consistant trustworthy committment to "yes" would seem to clear up alot of the anxiety, especially if it is founded in fear of rejection or more deeply fear of abandonment.
One other notion is control. It is clear that this whole initiating or not thing gets discombobulated when we try to be in control. I think the wall or the no-boundaries that Pia describes are all about control. When I give up my control by committing to always saying "yes", she has control of my sexuality. When she does the same, I control her sexuality. And I think this is likely what Paul means when he says our spouses have authority over our bodies, and we thiers.
After these many months of trustworthiness between my wiife and I, my addict tries to lie to me and suggest I need more than I have, but the evidence to the contrary is clearly piling up in our covenant to each others needs in this area.
This seems pretty simple to me, but I am wondering how other guys feel about this? What bariers to this approach do you feel? is my "anorexic nievite" missing some real factors?
Though my wife and I have many broken intimacy issues, initiating is not one of them, and I thought I would share my thoughts and see if we can sharpen each other in this area.
First some references;
The Bible is clear on this one >
1Co 7:3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband.
1Co 7:4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.
1Co 7:5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.
For those who dispise bible-thumpers;
Pia Melody - External sexual containment boundaries - 1, When an individual's containment boundary is functional, he always asks and gets permission before becoming sexual with his partner.
2. When and individual's external containment boundary is a wall, he never makes sexual approaches to anyone.
3. When an individual does not have an external sexual containment boundary he makes sexual advances without permission or in the face of the other person's refusal.
External sexual protective boundaries are functioning properly - he decides who, when, where, and how someone is going to be sexual with him. As someone approaches him, he figures out if he wants to be sexual, and if he chooses to, he decides when, where, how he will do it. (Wall and no boundaries are listed after this in her book)
Doug Weiss - High level description of the sexual child, adolescent, and adult.
The Sexual Child
- does not accept or see themselves as sexual.
- Will not initiate sex
- talk about sex is always inappropriate.
The sexual addolecent
- sex is for them mostly
- Is not aware of their spouses sexual needs
- angry whe they do not get their sexual needs met
- sexual conversation seems to feel cheap and not about intimacy.
The sexual adult
- Accepts themselves sexually
-accepts the sexuality of their spouses
- has intimacy during sex
- maintains sexual integrity.
As I sinthisize this and other information, I ultimately come to the conclusion that the psycho-stuff is a faded view of what the bible says. LIving with our wives in an understanding way, gently caring for them as the "china tea cup" or weaker vessle. And removing any fear of sexual rejection by committing to always saying "yes" and dying to or disregarding our own anxieties, fears, even our shame, or our needs for control, by committing to saying "yes" every time, seems to be the simplest way to affirm, and support their self esteem, fears of their beauty, their sexuality or worth not being enough, and nurturing sexual trust and ultimately intimacy.
As I read Weisses descriptions of child/adolescent/adult, I realize that my wife and I (moslty by her gracefullness) have most often been sexual adults. And I periodically dip into adolescence. And here is how it works;
In countless moments of my pathetic whining about my addicts broken expectations. I have been humbled over and over by my dear wife and her gracious and God honoring obedience to the above verse. In the last 18 months, I can only specifically remember 2 times and there have only been maybe 10 at the most, she has not responded to my sexual requests. Having said that, during that time I have only 2 times "implied" that I wanted to be sexual instead of intentionally asking her in a timely fassion early in the day. So it goes like this;
Sometime in the late morning or early afternoon, I tell her that I would like to be sexual with her, and ask if that is OK with her. She says many things, but never "no" Sometimes she says "can we do it in the morning" sometimes she says "Sure" sometimes she sais "Maybe" and flirts. But without fail we have been sexual either that night or in the morning.
The other part of this is that I NEVER ask two days in a row, and typically skip 2 days between asking. I also am careful not to initiate when she is sick, or exhausted. I do however respond to her if she initiates on "the day after".
This approach, I came to by reading responses by SOs on this board in an ephiphany where I realized that when I pester her sexually the day after we are sexual, I had always thought she would feel desired, attractive, and appreciated. These fine DS women taught me that she was actually thinking (or feeling more than thinking) "Was last night not enough for you, is my sexuality not fulfilling enough for you that it leaves you craving for more the very next day?." So I committed to skip at least that day and often two or three. And I can tell it affirms her.
The other part of this is that I never say "no" to her. Recently, I was flirting with her during the day, but did not explicitly ask her. In my mind I was not initiating, and was not intending to be sexual that evening. We got in bed and she asked if I wanted to. I really had not considered it and was ready to go to sleep. But I responded, with my focus being completely content on taking care of her needs.
I do not even begin to understand the anorexic side of the addiction. But I have had several discussions with others that are anorexic and know it causes alot of anxiety, discomfort and pain for them and their wives. So it is easy to see that my next sugestion may be too black and white to work in all situations. Also, the closest thing to anorexia that I experience is passive agressiveness.
The few times that I fall off the rails with this is when I "imply" my needs, and she does not read my mind, and disregards my unspoken expectations. It is totally rediculous for her to not read my mind, so I get angry and refuse to initiate to punish her for not noticing my subtle inuindos that do not fit the normal "explicit" way I initiate. The problem with this is that she typically does not let this childish behavior last for more than a day or two. She often points it out, sometimes, appologizes for not noticing, and usually initiates within a day or two. How pathetic can I be!!!. And how graceful can she be in the face of my patheticism!
In fact, the last time this happened, I told her how much I appreciated her and how well she handles me when I am so immature. She said " Someone has to be mature, right?"
OK, my suggestion is this, everyone should simply agree always to ask explicitely, and never to say "no". If it is not a good time, then the answer can be "Yes, but can we do it tomorrow morning?" Or "Yes, I will come to you when I am ready" In these cases it is very important to trust, that you "own the ball" and fulfil your pormise to come back and to initiate if that is the deal you make.
This is pretty much what Paul was saying in that verse. We should not refuse our mates their sexual requests.
So what if I am so anxious that I can not get an erection? I have heard this. And the answer is that sexual intimacy is not predicated on an erection, though it is convenient. AND, a consistant trustworthy committment to "yes" would seem to clear up alot of the anxiety, especially if it is founded in fear of rejection or more deeply fear of abandonment.
One other notion is control. It is clear that this whole initiating or not thing gets discombobulated when we try to be in control. I think the wall or the no-boundaries that Pia describes are all about control. When I give up my control by committing to always saying "yes", she has control of my sexuality. When she does the same, I control her sexuality. And I think this is likely what Paul means when he says our spouses have authority over our bodies, and we thiers.
After these many months of trustworthiness between my wiife and I, my addict tries to lie to me and suggest I need more than I have, but the evidence to the contrary is clearly piling up in our covenant to each others needs in this area.
This seems pretty simple to me, but I am wondering how other guys feel about this? What bariers to this approach do you feel? is my "anorexic nievite" missing some real factors?
-
I need some plot development ideas for a book I'm writing. Here's the lead in:------@1630 she texted me, asking for gas money. "Are u at work? I have to work in a couple hours I don't have any gas barely I was wondering if u had 20$ by chance haven't been able to get any massages in I'm sorry to ask was just seeing"She agreed to meet me at the townhouse @1730. I asked her to call me before...
I think Paul might have a bias too masculine for most women. Seduction for sexual relations must still play a part in most marriages, hence the candle-light dinners, perfume and slow dancing are still an occasional necessity. Paul has no truck with such nonsense.
Once seduction has done it's work, skills in lovemaking and creating intimacy become important in order to keep the experience fresh,. and to sustain motivation for and commitment to maintaining sexual relations over the long term.
In retrospect I believe that because I was not willing to risk rejection, my SO too often felt unloved. Finding the right balance is difficult. For her part, needing sex enough to initiate made her feel like a slut, and eventually a lot of the passion just died of malnutrition.
It sounds like you have a good thing going.
I kinda think what I am saying is that sexual trust and communication is too important to leave to un-spoken inuindos and the resulting mis communication. She is not at all thinking that she is rejecting me but I take it hard. That is a mis-communication.
And BTW, Paul seemed to be a pretty passionate guy in regards to his thoughts on marriage. IMHO.