We were not mismatched at first

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-18-2010
We were not mismatched at first
87
Mon, 10-18-2010 - 11:29am

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-05-2006
Mon, 10-18-2010 - 1:38pm

Equity speech warning lol

Often, when party 1 (say you in this case) gives more than party 2 (her) gives back,

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-04-2006
Mon, 10-18-2010 - 1:56pm
I don't think the smart default answer to ML is for one partner to stop giving, or start withholding. I think he needs to look at a lot of factors, before he goes down that road, because she very well may feel abandoned and unloved if he changes in that way now. And she wouldn't be wrong for feeling that way.

He needs to try to "help" her uncover her own libido. If she lost her ovaries when she had her hysterectomy, then there can be some serious hormone imbalances going on, she needs to see a doctor asap, and persist until she feels better.

If it is not hormonal, he needs to try engage her in counseling or relationship building exercises (books, religious retreats, whatever) to try to find out what isn't working for HER in the relationship. He knows what isn't working for him, and most likely he's made sure she knows it too. What about the other way around? And just because she starts out saying "nothing" when he asks her what is wrong, doesn't mean it's true. I say "nothing" every time too, and we all know how big a LIE that is.

They've got to approach this as a team, avoid polarization and blaming, and get on the same page. I think that is probably the only real path to resolving/managing ML without blowing your relationship completely up.
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-05-2006
Mon, 10-18-2010 - 2:18pm

My read on the OP was so much more than a lack of sex or sexual desire but maybe I was reading more into it than what he intended?

Also, I don't understand how you can argue with a reduction which

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-16-2004
Mon, 10-18-2010 - 2:38pm

I agree with Glen.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-04-2006
Mon, 10-18-2010 - 2:39pm
I'm sorry, Glenn. I won't ever see the relationship between intimate partners to be the kind of "business deal" you do. I just don't operate that way. I give, because it brings me happiness to do so. I would hope that my partner would give to me for the same reason. Just because he doesn't give in the same way that I would, or in the way that I would prefer, does not mean that his giving is less, and that I should reduce my giving nature in response to it.

Intimate relationships are not "tit-for-tat" arrangements, and when the score keeping starts, the love is gone, imo.
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-04-2006
Mon, 10-18-2010 - 2:41pm

Magnaniman,

I think he has a better chance of getting the change he wants if he works WITH her to get it, instead of taking away from her in some bizarre attempt to manipulate the situation into "fairness and equity"

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-31-2010
Mon, 10-18-2010 - 2:44pm

Miranda wrote: "I won't ever see the relationship between intimate partners to be the kind of "business deal" you do. I just don't operate that way. I give, because it brings me happiness to do so. I would hope that my partner would give to me for the same reason. Just because he doesn't give in the same way that I would, or in the way that I would prefer, does not mean that his giving is less, and that I should reduce my giving nature in response to it.

Intimate relationships are not "tit-for-tat" arrangements, and when the score keeping starts, the love is gone, imo."

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-05-2006
Mon, 10-18-2010 - 3:01pm

Read up on 'tit-for-tat' before you judge it. The simple meaning of 'equivalent retaliation' doesn't quite do it justice.

From Wiki.

"Reciprocal altruism works in animal communities where the cost to the benefactor in any transaction of food, mating rights, nesting or territory is less than the gains to the beneficiary. The theory also holds that the act of altruism should be reciprocated if the balance of needs reverse. Mechanisms to identify and punish "cheaters" who fail to reciprocate, in effect a form of tit for tat, is an important mechanism to regulate reciprocal altruism."

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-04-2006
Mon, 10-18-2010 - 3:06pm
ugh, whatever, still not doing it.
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-31-2010
Mon, 10-18-2010 - 3:11pm

Tit for tat, that is a slippery slope.

Pages