So, two times in therapy with two different femal counselors, we have fundamentally agreed on all points of a sexual agreement except that we both must agree to say "yes" to each others initiative. And my wife was not willing to establish consequences for herself if she does not follow through with her agreemeent.

The benefits of guideline 1. Always say yes. In conjunction with guideline 3 - You can not ask when it is not your turn. Make for a great deal of benefit on both sides. (Typically) for the man
- not having to guess when sex will happen next reduces a great deal of anxiety.
- reducing the actual rejection of a request, significantly reduces the fear of that rejection, and as a result the need to manupulation, and use non-verbal games, and flirting to avoid the rejection by "testing the waters" become unnecessary, and commnuication and taking responsiblity for respectfulliy asking for his needs becomes the practice.
- Asking every day, in hopes that it will happen 10%,20% or 50% of the time is also not necessary. Making it more comfortable to wait longer for the next time,
-Reduces sexual chaos and increases sexual responsibility, and safety.
- Experiences respect regarding their sexual needs, and preferences.

For the woman. (typically)
- She can begin to practice deciding when she wants to be sexual within the limits of her agreed times to initiate. i.e. during he week or her 3 days she can decide when she wants to be sexual. Thus reducing the typical always reacting to his sexuality.
- During her days to initiate She can relax and enjoy her lovers kisses, hugs, and flirtation without feeling pressured that it is all about sex, or that she will have to be sexual because of them.
- Having enough time to decide when she wants to be sexual can give her time to emotionally and spiritually center hersdelf and get ready. She has plenty of advanced notice to plan her day around her sexuality.
- Reduces sexual chaos, and increases sexual responsibility and safety.
-Experiences respect for her sexual needs and preferences.

The downsides. For both.
-No longer able to use sex or withholding sex to control, manipulate, leverage or punish.
- removing sexal politics from emotinlal and spirutial intimacy.

OK here is why I have such a struggle leaving "No" on the table.

When I ask for sex, and am rejected. It is usually in a shaming way about my addiction or negative way, and seldom if ever comes with an agreement to meet at another time in the near future.

What I make up about that is that withholding sex is a way to punish me for being a sex addict. or as a form of 1-up protection. or a way of exerting sexual power because she does not "need" sex like I do.

My perception is also that these preceptions do not come from my wife most of the time, but that I "transfer" these perceptions onto her because of my childhood wounds and my fathers model of disrespect for women.

Finally my perception is that when she says "no" as an absolute without suggesting a relational alternative, or time in the future. she is disregarding my natural sexual appitite as a man, (Not my unquenchable appitite as an addict).

Finally, My perception is that if I acted exactly the same way with exactly the same words, then I would be accused as an abusive, unkind and disrepectful husband.

What I make myself feel is sad because without some real healing on my part, my reactions of disrepect are toxic to my relationship with my wife.

I also feel sad that my wife is truly not safe enough to respond in a kind way because both her and my lack of trust.

I also feel unimportant to her when she rejects my advances and disregards my sexual apitites and needs.

I also feel hurt and scared that these disfunctional ways of communicating have been on long longer in recovery than I expected them to.... but humbly not as long as my addiction was active.

I feel grateful that most of my complaining is clearly coming from within me and not because of my wife's behavior.

I feel honored and respected by my wife because in her core I believe that she endures some personal pain because she believes being available to me sexually is what God has asked her to do and she does it because she loves me.

My two reasons for wanting a sexual agreement is to avoid a very significant trigger, rejection. And secondly to reduce the emotionally negative chaos around how we decide to be sexual. This chaos seems to be an exhausting emotional distraction to other more important efforts like recovery, communication and nurturing.

I do not think an agreement is intended to control her or "my supply" of sex. It is really a set of clear safe boundaries to practice being adults about sex for a while. After a few months or maybe a year of keeping our words about what we agree on, I could imagine a much more intimate and safe relationship around our sexual dialoge. No more sex than is happening now, just more trust, and less chaos.



So, after all of this. the most compelling response as to why not to do it was "sex is sometimes mentally painful and you never know when or how long that will last.

Do you think that functioning inside a sexual agreement like this could reduce that pian?

Wouldn't it engender safety, trust and intimacy to watch your sex addicted husband following an agreeement like this carefully and shamelessly, following through with his self defined consequenses without being asked, and being free to kiss your neck in front of the kitchen sink without being accused of always wanting sex.

That is a very thoughful response, thank you.

I agree with your arguments in the absence of mental pain. Truthfully, I would be SHOCKED if my husband either followed through with the contract OR the consequences. And one of the things I would make from that in our particular situation is that sex is the only thing important enough to him that he actually pays attention to the schedule. But that's me, and it's my projection, and may not have any resemblance to how you and your wife interact.

You asked "Wouldn't it engender safety, trust and intimacy to watch your sex addicted husband following an agreeement like this carefully and shamelessly, following through with his self defined consequenses without being asked, and being free to kiss your neck in front of the kitchen sink without being accused of always wanting sex. "

Yes.

But I think the price is too high for me to agree to that while I'm still experiencing emotional pain from sex.

But I do see a compromise in there, and hear your anguish over feelings of rejection. And I just believe that there are ways to work on those feelings that would not be so potentially hurtful to her healing.

Total abstinance is a safe alternative. That would eliminate the fear of rejection for me because i would not ask, hope, amicipTe or agree to be sexual. It is interesting that usually the addict resists abstinence until the benefits are clarified then they are resolved. The spouses are all for it at first, but 6 or sonweeks into it they begin to seduce, get angry, blame, and fight for sex. Or in my delusional opinion they begin to realize the control sex gave them is slipping through their hands as they realize their sex addicts can actually resist their stratagems. Then what?! Oh my Gosh, my scapegoat is no longer available to blame for my stuff, so I guess I only have two choices, start taking responsibility for my own healing or get out of the relationship.

Sorry that was harsh. What I am suggesting is that a sexual agreement would be therapudically as effective as abstinance to turning down the sexual "negative energy" in the relationship.... Without creating distance like abstinence does.

All I know is that staying in the dynamic of me initiating and having chaotic results in an unpredictable range from unebthusiastic acceptance to outright shaming 1-up comments.

So either an agreement or abstinence is soon going to be necessary.

This has been a very thought provoking thread.

I assume that you've talked with her about this, and not gotten satisfactory results... It's odd that for my relationship, I'm not the addict, but I'm the one who typically initiates and the one that feels rejected when he refuses. I guess there are all kinds of models.

But I do think that it's natural for people to crave sex. It doesn't necessarily mean that it's a power trip or manipulation. I think, though, that for either of those agreements to work, both partners have to really be in agreement at the outset.

Apparently abstinence works unilaterally. Lots of spouses wothhold sex for months or even years in early recovery without the explicit agreement of tthe sa. This usually helps the addict anyway. "wow I never knew I could go that long without sex. I thought I would die."

If you are the initiator then he probably has imtimavmcy anorexia as well. It is very sad for the sa's to have the man they love. Being sexual with everyone but you. Real or in fantasy. This is typically how sa and anorexia work. It makes sense if you look at it spiritually. The addiction (deamons) have a single goal of seperating us from God. The easiest way to start is to attack our marriage. So it makes sence to turn our sexuality against us and our wives like this. It is a sure fire way to hurt everyone involved.

I would love to hear someone say they have successfully negotiated a sexual agreement that has created healing trust and growth, but so far everyone I know that has tried has abandoned it because
It did not work. I have not however discussed it with anyone in late recovery. I guess this is a red herring.

Hi All,

I'm quite new to this but the sexual agreement sounds like a good idea to me (going back to the original post).

I think it gets lost that both people in the relationship have needs and accepting initiation from the other on a scheduled basis sounds like a good compromise so that both are respecting each other.

Have you're agreements ever been more specific about oral sex, anal sex, etc?

One of the standards that doug Weiss says is important is that you list all hose behaviors, positions and even places. Each writes a yes no or only if I initiate for each behavior.

If both say no or yes then things are clear. If you disagree then you don't do it out of respect and find ways to discuss it to see if you can find agreement or compromise. So if you say no to oral sex and she says yes. Then you do not agree so it is off the table until you work it out together. Or never whichever comes first.

This leaves a few holes for one or the other to be devicive. But the idea is to be safe, adult and relational around sex rather than childish, controlling and let it be a power struggle.

Hi Choose,

I am surprised you have only heard bad things about the abstinence agreement. I have heard just the opposite. I have also heard many psychological things come up when you are no longer able to distract yourself from the pain with sex. I thought Pat Carnes also advocates this precisely to show the addict he will not die wo sex.

I wish I could tell you from experience but being as we had gone as long as a year without sex in the past our T thought it would be pointless to tell us to abstain for 90 days.

I can relate to Girlygirl, although my H is much better after doing Doug Wiess' program for sexual anorexia. And you are so right about how painful it was to find out he had sex with so many outside of marriage when I was begging for it at home.... and the spiritual attack. During dicovery this is so confusing, baffling, confounding..ther really isn't a word for it.

Lorilou

Lori,

Maybe a mutually agreed time of abstinace where both of you are in agreement rather than one or the other negatively imposing it would render the intimacy and connection with God that Paul was describing in 1 Cor 7 "except for a time of prayer and fasting but then come together." Your year of abstinance was not a mutually agreed time to focus on God.

About the agreement. It dawned on me that avoiding an agrement to avoid pain, sounds a bit like using sex to avoid pain like addicts do?

What I am getting at is this. What is the difference between using sex to kill pain instread of facing the foundations of pain and avoiding sex instead of facing the foundations of pain?

Regarding the spycological benefits of abstinance. I do not see any other reason in the bible for withholding except for prayer and fasting. I may have to change this perception, but I am barely comfortable with going more than 40 days of abstinance because that is the longest any fast occurs in the bible. There may be some psycological benefits of 90 or more days, but I think they are probably foggy perceptions of man rather than spiritual realities.

I am open to other ideas, but I think long times like a year are probably devious ways of creating distance in a marriage, not intimacy, trust and service.

Just thinking out loud.

If 40 days feels right to you, and I totally understand why it does, then that's what's right for you.

You said "What is the difference between using sex to kill pain instread of facing the foundations of pain and avoiding sex instead of facing the foundations of pain?"

Those are two sides of the same coin, from what I can tell. That's the sexual annorexic side. However, I think that you are saying that when the spouse says that sex is painful, mentally or physically and asks to abstain from it, that it is a form of sexual annorexia.

I think that the key deciding factor would show in whether the underlying feelings are being dealt with or just allowed to fester.

Well I think you might ask Sober what he was covering up. the whole anorexia thing had me so confused but I believe it came down to anger and resentment.

And as far as 90 days goes you usually find this in psych literature from my understanding as it takes 90 days torewire the pathways in the brain. But if you have prayed about it and still feel 40 days is what God has called you to do than who am I to argue with God.

Lorilou

So I talked to Doug Weiss today and clarified his thoughts on the Everyone has to agree to say yes. I asked if anyone he knew actually was successful with this form of sexual agreement. He said thousands of couples.

So how do the women get to the place where they are willing to say yes to sex when they do not want to. His answer is the consequenses. If you do not agree to consequenses for not keeping your agreement then it is not an agreement and you can do what you want, when you want and noone can tell you what to do.

But if you agree to clean out the garage when you do not keep your agreement to have sex when it is your partners turn to initiate, then you are free to say no..... and clean out the garage. If you would rather clean out the garage than be sexual then you have that choice. His issue was that if you have no consequenses for not keeping your agreement then it is childish and unaccountable.

This makes more sense to me because it does not take each persons choice away.

Any thoughts?

Well, my question is "Does your wife agree to commit to this agreement? And even if she does do you think she will follow through?

That is the ultimate question I would think. As long as both of you agree and commit to this and Doug Wiess has tons of evidence that this works For the goal you are trying to accomplish then I would trust him.

Lorilou

Not yet. And after a month of abstinance from sex, I can see that she is not ready for this level of vulnerability and trust.

Since sex is only appropriate for adults to be involved in, I am beginning to be amaized at how childish most of us handle it. I have always been very childish about it. I want it, and I act like a brat when I don't get my way. She wants it but is too shy to ask. She doesn't want it and crosses her arms and gets angry and says "No, I don't want to eat my relationship carrots" I don't want it and do it anyway because I think all the "orgasm ice cream" is going to be gone if I don't get my share now.

Wow! Adults should be able to know themselves and be able to ask for what they need, and negotiate respectfully to get them met. Do non-sex addict couples work sex out this way? I wonder.

As for the sex agreement. Are any of the SOs who do not like the "always say yes" caluse, comfortable with the idea that with preestablished consequenses you actually are free to say no. By the way. YOU define YOUR consequenses, and HE defines HIS. It is not about punisment. it is about motivating yourslef to keep your own agreement.