Matter of Opinion

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-03-2005
Matter of Opinion
10
Fri, 01-06-2006 - 10:10am
My bf of a year and a half and i have lived together a little over a year. We got a new place in Dec and I moved out the 1st of the New Year. We both have totally different reasons as to why we have problems. The only thing that he really complains about is sex and the lack of it. My thing with that is that its hard for me to want to share ANY kind of physical contact with someone who I'm angry with. When things are good between us, I never have this problem. He says in retort to that, give me more sex and then I will make you happy. Just can't seem to get him to understand where I'm coming from. I have really been feeling lately that I can't be with someone who doesn't cater to my emotional needs. When it comes to him dealing with the fact that I'm emotional he will a)ignore me, b)yell at me to stop or c)distance himself from me. In the beginning it was okay because I fell so hard for him and I still had male friends who were my emotional support. There have been several occasions when I have tried to cut my male friends off so that I could try to get everything I needed just from my bf. Time and time again, it has completely failed. He just cannot understand why I don't want sex all the time. His #1 statement is in the beginning, we had a very active sex life. My protest to that is before, we didn't share bills, and I never worried about you and your habit interfere with the light bill being paid. Other factors also weren't there like me and my happiness. When we had no issues it was a lot easier to share myself. But time, arguments, and words that can never be taken back have began to take a toll on my sexual drive. Now that I've moved out, he says that things will go back to normal because like when we 1st met, I will feel that I have to compete with other women, so I will be more prone to sleep with him more in hopes that some other woman won't. Just can't seem to get him to understand that there is more to sex than the physical. Am I off base?
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-28-2005
Fri, 01-06-2006 - 11:01am

Are you off base? Yes and no.

It sounds like that you knew you two didn't share values, standards, goals, definitions of a great life and how to achieve it when you started living together. Maybe you thought that you providing the "upgrades" as you view it to his life - the conveniences or whatever - would make him appreciate you, and change what he does.

That doesn't work.......or as my dad used to say "aisle/altar/hymn is the schedule of the marriage ceremony - but marriage is not "I'll alter him".

So take marriage out - put cohabitation in in your case, and you get the point.

Cohabitation is impactive. Dating is about staring into the eyes of the beloved, sharing specific events and timeframes together -and in that period of time there is "nothing in the world but us two people and our feelings and our enjoyment".

Living together is about sharing space, allowing each of you to be the individuals that you always were, while enjoying each other as you did - while still eing personally responsible and focused on success - like you always were but it didn't involve having to consider or include this person to do it.

So basically, when he was making you feel really good about yourself (when you had much less impact due to non-cohabitation) you were all about having sex.

His complaint is that you don't want to have sex like you used to.

You used a key phrase when you mentioned how he doesn't make you happy - so now you don't want to have sex like you did beofre.

So in reality, you were having that level of involvement and that amount of sex 'because of how he made you feel about yourself".

And he was NEVER having sex with you becuase of how your attention or involvement iwth oyou made him feel about himself.....he was having sex because the option was there, and he wanted the option. In short, had you required yourself to be happy and complete within yourself and having sex with him "becuase you admire and respect him" - it really doesn't sond like you'd have been having much sex at all. and he'd have dumped you - he wants someone with a sex drive that is NOT attached to "her emotional state".

Those women do exist, but you're not one of them. That's not a bad thing, provided tha tyou are not ONLY having sex because of "how they make you feeel about yourself".

If the only reason that you ever desire sex with anybody is bcuase of how thier attention makes you feel about you - then you've got sex attached to self-confidence and you associate it iwth "love/security" - and that is a problem. Sex is a physically pleasurable activity with an experienced and caring partner.....but it doesn't require an emotional bond, it diesn' inspire the desire for commitment to your well-being and best interests.

So in his case...he wasn't having sex to "get" something...he was having sex becuase what he wanted was already there.

In your case, you owere having sex because of what it represented that you thought he thought about you - that he loved you, wanted the best for you, was going to be considerate of your needs and goals in equality with his own.

Now that the facts are in, nd there's no denying that he's not doing that by your definitions and standards - you have no desire for sex with him.

What kept it going so long is that you had other "male friends" - toget the type of flirtatious or sexually based attraction attention that "turns you on" - so you'd get turned on by them "being there for you" emotionally - and then you'd go to home and have great horny sex with him as a result.

Somewhere in your subliminal mind, kudos on this, you figured out that you shouldn't be having these emotional affairs with other men, and then going home and being the hot babe in bed with your man...and so you turned to your man and wanted all the emotional needs met.

In theory that's healthy and correct, and in reality that's right to do - provided that the emotional needs you have are appropriate to put into a relationship and onto a partner to meet.

But it sounds like "his attention is supposed to make you like being you".....which means that you lack self-esteem and therefore you're putting alot of emotional needs for approval, acceptance, and affirmation of your worth as an individual on him - and you're equating his actions with whether you're a good person or not.....so when yu don't like the impact of what he does because it makes you worry about the light bill....and when you're not getting the flirtation and approval for "being like you are" - out of him - you're in a double whammy.

You got iwth him to like being you - that is not happening...nor do you like the reality based impact of being with him and his "habit" - whatever that may be.

this isn't a relationship in my experienced opinion - having been where you are alot.

It's a situation. YOu've tried to make it into a relationship because you want security and status and identity and happiness...but a relationship won't bring you that...and a situation sure as heck won't!

Erin
quickblade14@hotmail.com

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-03-2005
Fri, 01-06-2006 - 11:38am
I don't lack self-esteem and I don't think us having sex means that he loves me. What I am saying is that when we argue or there are issues concerning the both of us, that I am not in the mood to be intimate. I didn’t get with him to like being myself; I got with him because I fell in love with him. Like most couples, we have disagreements and maybe us “shacking up” was not the best idea for us. I just hate that now that I have more invested in him and he says and does something that bothers me it has more of an impact on how I react physically. When he comments on the “good ole’ days” I hadn’t entrusted him with my emotional side as of that time. It’s a gradual process, but I think at this point, if he can’t handle or doesn’t want to deal with the fact that I am an emotional person, then why should I care that he is a sexual person, and that’s what it seems to come down to. In other areas, as far as having each other’s backs, going out and spending time together, we have a great time just enjoying each other and we talk on the phone 4-5x a day. I would just like it if he could put more of an effort into being in touch with what I’m missing and I’d feel more inclined to give him what he felt was missing.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-28-2005
Fri, 01-06-2006 - 1:25pm

Okay, your post put a slightly different impression on it now.

So specifically - what emotional needs are you wanting him to meet? And how would it be evidenced?

And since that question is very broad....here's a way that might help you find the answer if you don't know already.

Most people tend to believe "this person in my life is doing what they do because it'll please or gratify me", at least to some extent they believe that.

That's generally very untrue...it's just that becuase you weren't in other relationships with them and thier other partners and parents and friends - you don't realize it.

They're doing what they want to do, what their values, principles and standards justify them doing, waht thier reasoning says is right to do - to get the result they want to get.

They develop the association string in other experiences in life - to get "X", I must do "Y".

So, is it possible that what you're wanting from him emotionally that'll have a physical manifestation is something he's NEVER done - with anybody - as in it's not his style, he doesn't have an affinity for it, nor a concept of it at all.

Or is what you're wanting him to do at the emotional level that'll have physical manfestitaton something he HAS done before - and specifically when you ask - he won't now.

Because it honestly sounds like you two communicate in two primarily different styles. He's visual/tactile.....if he can't see it or touch it in a manner that he interprets as being what he associates it with emotionally.....he doesn't think it exists.

And it sounds like you're "verbal" primarily......that you pay less attention to what is done unless it displeases you, and you want to "hear" from him what you want to hear and you can't get him to say it.

I get what you're saying about the investment aspect. But really, a relationship isn't about meeting needs.

A balanced relationship is aout two people who created great individuals lives becuase they know themselves well - and they retain that commitment to thier own great life.

They share similiar definition of great life as evidenced by the lifestyle they personally sought and maintained - and so together they have what it is in "bounty" what they always had and it met thier needs on an individual basis.

I'm not sure specifically what emotional need you're trying to get him to meet. I'd understand it you said you wanted to "feel" a particular feeling and had it associated with behavior that he refusese to exhibit despite you specifically outlining it for him.

But emotions and feelings are two separate issues. Your emotional status quo - he didn't set the standard for it - nor can he be a factor in it, not really. If you're a "happy" person in life - it's because you're happy being hte person you are, you like, love, appreciate, admire, trust, and respect yourself, you hold yourself accountable for your present and your future, you don't do anythihng or involve in anything that you believe is"wrong" at any level. To those people - they can be happy about being "who they are" - while in a situation that is sad (a death of a loved one), or anxiety-ridden (financial situations), or anything else. But the reason they're able to be happy while in those situations and having two what would appear to be "conflictive" set of feelings - is that only one set is feelings. Feelings are a result of need/want/expectation in light of situation. About the situation -they're not pleased. But because they trust themselves never to do wrong by tehmselves and always be responsible for themselves....they know that they're taking actions appropriately that are within their scope to control the outcome of this situation - not "get a guaranteed result" - but to take them out of the situation if indeed this has no resolution that is acceptable to thier standards.

But knowing what emotional needs he's supposed to meet would help...and do realize that by not putting those expectations and needs on him in the beginning, you taught him that wasn't what you wanted/needed from a partner, and it wasn't required of him in this partnership. That's the old "you teach people how to treat you by what you expect and allow in the beginning".

It doesn't mean that what you want him to do or meet is inappropriate - but it does mean if you're holding him accountable for meeting it - it's a standard he should have been meeting in the beginning - not thrown in as the relationship progresses. So now it's got to be negotiated vs. getting into a mexican standoff.

A relationship, in that it's not a goal, doesn't make you what you're not. You're not holding him accountable for your happpiness.....you're responsible for that. You should be holding yourself responsible for affiliating with someone ONLY if they share your standards and your principles.

Erin
quickblade14@hotmail.com

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-03-2005
Fri, 01-06-2006 - 2:08pm
Okay, so it seems you more so now see where I am coming from. And you are right, from the very beginning I should have laid certain foundation that I didn't, but didn't feel the need to at the time because certain events hadn't happened so I was unaware that he's be resistant to handle me at emotional stages. An example is, say something upsets me and I start to cry, he would say "shut the f---" up with that crying. Whereas, I, no matter how small or big somethin was that I was crying about, I just wanted to be held. Or times when I have confided in him about somethin, later, when convenient for him, he will use it against me. These kinda things are not what an emotional person like me needs. But you're right, I needed/need to find someone more in tune with the same things that I am. And I feel what you said when you commented on him never having to link physical and emotional so he cannot understand where I am coming from. But when I try to explain I get, “well I have been like this forever and I am not changing I am always gonna be the way I am.” To which I say, well if that’s the case, I should just move on. But when I say that, then he still wants to “work thru MY PHYSICAL issues” and downplay his lack of emotional support.
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-04-2003
Fri, 01-06-2006 - 2:18pm

It sounds like you need emotional intimacy and he's incapable of giving it to you. Women that are emotionally satisified and feel a certain level of intimacy --- out of that sharing emotional closeness, sex usually follows naturally.

::An example is, say something upsets me and I start to cry, he would say "shut the f---" up with that crying. Whereas, I, no matter how small or big somethin was that I was crying about, I just wanted to be held. Or times when I have confided in him about somethin, later, when convenient for him, he will use it against me.

This tells me 1) he's uncomfortable with your emotions because he isn't in touch with his own emotions - so when you display yours he's reacting not because of who you are and what you are doing, but rather because of the issues it brings up for him, 2) that he's emotionally unavailable, 3) that he doesn't care to understand you on an emotional level - basic incompatibility.

Reading material for a future relationship:

Relationship Rescue, Dr Phil - the tests in the book will help identify what you need from your partner on specific levels (physical space, emotional needs - i.e. when one of us arrives home after being gone, to feel welcomed in your space I need physical contact - hug and kiss to reconnect with you)

Five Love Languages, Gary Chapman - if you figure out which language you speak, which one you need, you will be able to share that with your partner.

Good luck to you on your healing path.


Carrie

iVillage Member
Registered: 11-28-2005
Fri, 01-06-2006 - 3:46pm

HEre's what I see as you're describing it.

When there was alot of sexual interaction - he was happy about it and that was all he wanted, there was nothing "wrong or missing" in the relationship. You knew that you had more expectations of him to "care" about your feelings but you weren't going to put them on him at that time.

In short, you don't regard your sex activity as your "crown jewel" - you'll share that because it's gratifying.

But you regard your "emotional state" as your soul and essence - and you weren't going to let him haev access to that until you were more ready to do it.

The problem would appear to be that you're using a backward gauge to determine if he should have "access" to your heart and soul.

You're going "the longer we spend together, the more I want to rely on you to care, and the more you should care "about" how I feel". Realize his actions don't cause your feelings - your perception of them do. And he didn't create your emotional/action association vocabulary that you're basing that perception on.

But what you didn't really take into account was if "how you felt" as a base issue not surrounding any particular situation but in general was a priority to him - he'd have been addressing it and asking about it and involved in it from the beginning.

people pursue what they want. To him a "great relationship" is one where you're very emotinoally self-reliant, and you enjoy spending time together and sharing activities and having sex, and sharing a bank account.

In short, he's not one to want to consider the "needs, feelings, and desires' of another person. He expects you at all times to be taking care of your "internal self" - he wants to enjoy your external self in activities that involve fun, excitement, sex of course too, etc.

What you're wanting is him to "care about you" - as a person...and he didn't get with you "because he cared about you as a person" - in terms of your feelings, needs, goals and priorities. He got iwth you because you uwere fun, sexy, sexual, and responsible enough with daily life so that he could have fun with you.

He's telling you the truth.....he's always been like this. and it might be easier to see from this perspective. His "feelings" are a mystery to him. He spends a ton of time in distraction, diversion, and at events and in interaction..........he really has no "feelings" that aren't totally related to a particular situation itself, and he's always seeking more involvements and diversions to create more feelings.

That's why he tells you to stop crying and says what he says. HE knows in his world if he's upset - he finds osmething "fun" t do and the upset goes away. HE doesn't take any "feelings" to be anything but like gum - chew it for 10 minutes, flavor gone, spit it out. Want more flavor - insert gum, will have flavor/feelings for a fe wminutes - spit it out.

So waht you're wanting him to relate to is you on a deeper level past external and superficial involvement....and he can't. He doesn't relate to himself beyond the 1" mark - so he's not familiar with swimming in the depths.

That's why he can't get why you can't just 'deal with your feeings" and get on with having sex. That's an action - it's a diversion, it's instant gratification - he's saying "don't you get it - do something fun and you'll feel better".

To you- you have your feelings attached to particular situations or events or activities - and so you have a particular "repetroire" of feelinsg that will result from that activity.

You know that the feeilngs you have attached to sex......will not result from sex with him when he's not meeting your needs. Rather than you destroying your association of the feelings you get as a result of sex with someone you trust, admire, accept, and love - you won't have sex. You don't want to develop an association with "sex/resentment" as an activity/feeilngs combination.

He has no activities/feelings combination associations. He is in perpetual and constant motion - as a reslt of wanting diversion and distraction from anything that isn't instantly gratifying.

that's why the light bill issue arises - while he might easily have the money to pay it on time, to prioritize doing that means he's having to forgo some fun.....and if he doesn't have ht emoney to do that without question no matter what else he spends..then that is why you're in such distress about his not paying the bill, or almost not paying it.

He's NOT going to make sacrifices for goals or to live up to standards.....all his resources (time, energy, money, abilities) are allocated stricted to diversion & distraction/instant gratifiatication - that's his only action/emotional association string. And it has no parameters or definitions - so it can run the gamut.

Erin
quickblade14@hotmail.com

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-03-2005
Fri, 01-06-2006 - 4:22pm
OMG-see we are so on the same page!! And hard as it is for me to admit it, I think you're right and that we will never see eye to eye. But thanks for taking out the time to break down the situation.
iVillage Member
Registered: 12-06-2004
Sat, 01-07-2006 - 12:57pm

Your emotional needs aren't being met, and his physical needs aren't being met. Both needs are legitimate, and both of you are going to have to work on meeting the other's needs if this relationship is going to workout.

How to work it out? That's more difficult. But I'd suggest sitting down and talking with him. Let him know that you are willing to work on meeting his physical needs if he commits to working on meeting your emotional needs. Discuss what this means. Lay out concrete acts that each can do. Then you both need to work on accomplishing those concrete acts.

Don't make it a tit for tat deal. But if you realize with time he's not making the effort you are (or if you realize you're not willing to make the effort), then it's time to reevaluate the relationship and decide whether you want to be in one at all with him.

Good luck!

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 01-08-2006 - 11:03pm

I don't know whether he used to respond to your emotional needs differently or if the situation hasn't presented itself until recently I don't know, but I do agree that if he's unable/unwilling to respond to your emotions this relationship is clearly not going to work, at least not to your happiness or satisfaction. He doesn't meet the your criteria of your wants and needs. And quite frankly, if my boyfriend's response to my tears was "shut the f** up", I'd be out the door without looking back faster than he could blink. No way would I stay around for another second.


And why would you consider dropping friends (male or female) for anyone???







~ cl-2nd_life

"You can't control the length of your life,
but you can control the width and depth."

~ Author unknown








"Ignoring the facts
does not change the facts"
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Thu, 01-12-2006 - 12:25pm

"My protest to that is before, we didn't share bills, and I never worried about you and your habit interfere with the light bill being paid."


This stood out to me for some reason...what do you mean by him and his habit interferring with the light bill being paid?


You have expressed in every way possible to this man what your emotional needs are.

Peace,

Di

***If you cannot define yourself, your circumstances will.***