New to MB. Married 14 years and mostly happy with my lot in life. I've been studying Dr. Harley's material for a couple of months, and I like his approach. I'm hoping I can learn to implement many of his principles in my own marriage.

Anyway, the reason I registered was to get people's input on a concept that came up Monday on Rush Limbaugh's show. A woman called in to discuss her view on the pill (Link to transcript of the segment, if you really want to see the discussion in context http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_030909/content/01125109.guest.html ). The idea that really stood out to me was summarized in this part of the exchange:

RUSH: How does avoiding having sex help the relationship?

CALLER: Because I don't feel used. I don't feel like an object to him. I'm not objectified in the act of sex.

The thing that really struck me was the caller's "fear" of becoming a sexual object. So it got me thinking: in the context of a committed marriage, what does it look like when a husband "objectifies" his wife?

Perhaps a little background on me to set why this struck me. For the last several years I've struggled in a "sex-starved" (to borrow the term from Michell Wiener-Davis) marriage. Part of my struggle has been "validating" my need for sexual fulfillment. One of the things that first attracted to Dr. Harley's approach was when I randomly picked up Mom's Needs Dad's Needs at the library and read the section in there about the need for sexual fulfillment. From reading Dr. Harley's books, I can now accept that it is ok to desire my wife in this way, and we have a framework for figuring out how she can meet my need, and I can learn about her needs and how I can better fulfill them.

I suppose the reason the caller's idea of feeling like a sex object intrigued me is because I can now see that SF is most likely my top emotional need. Because it is such a powerful need for me, I'm trying to get a feel for where the boundary between "getting an emotional need fulfilled" and "turning a wife into a sex object" might lie. It seems obvious to me that a man who selfishly "demands" sex from his wife and makes absolutely no effort to understand and fulfill her needs could be said to "objectify" his wife. On the other hand, as Dr. Harley pointed out several times, I "have no other ethical choice" than to fulfill this need with my wife. So as long as this is my most important emotional need, I depend on her to fulfill it, which maybe feels a little "selfish" to me.

I've initiated this same discussion with my wife, to see if I can understand specifically for her what makes her feel "objectified", but I wanted to throw this out to this group, maybe in a more generic sense. How do you distinguish between healthy sexual desire for the woman (or man if the stereotype doesn't apply to you) you married and desires/behaviors that make her (him) feel like a sex object? What kind of things make you feel like a sex object?

For me, I felt objectified when H would ignore me all day long, and then climb into bed and, er, poke me. If sex is the only time he wants to spend with me, then yes, I do feel used, as a tool to fulfill HIS needs, while my needs for attention, affection, and conversation have been ignored.

I don't understand Fear of being objectified, though. I think you either allow yourself to be objectified, or you don't. No need to fear it. And heck, there are times I WANT to be objectified, lol. "Do I look like sex to you? Good!" lol

How I feel depends on how much effort my husband will put in to making sex what pleases me instead of just what he likes. Also how much we're talking to each other and being affectionate at other times.

Flamingo IS a Sex Object.

And I'm one to her.

We GET this Dr. Harley MB Stuff.

Mr Shorty:

There are any number of threads around here about WHY women do not feel that thier husbands do not have to give them SF.

Many of them focus on the fact that husbands haven't done ENOUGH for the wife to feel like it.

Which is just minimizing thier role, by making it HIS Fault.

If only HE would.... (Fill in the Blank) then.... But there is always another blank to be filled in.

Both Parties to the marriage have to get this MB stuff.

LG

It's my theory that the charge of being made to feel like a sex object comes mostly from women with low sex drives, especially if they are married to men with high sex drives.

There are many women with high sex drives, married to men with low sex drives, who would be elated if their husbands would treat them as sex objects every once in a while!

People in these types of clashing libido relationships tend to come up with an endless series of arguments about unmet needs, and endless attempts by the other party to meet them. They spend more time arguing about sex than having it.

I never really understood that idea, that people like to be sexual 'objects.'

I mean, I love it when my guy sees me as a sexual PERSON and I like it when he puts himself out there as a sexual PERSON, but that's way different from a sexual 'object' to me.

Sexual person = "Wow, you're hot! And I know just how to make sure both of us have a real good time!"

Sexual object = "Wow, you're hot! I'd 'hit that' and I can imagine just how good that would feel to me."

In my idea, 'turning someone into a sexual object' is just DJ-ing them in the sexual arena and not paying attention to the info they're giving about themselves.

And it's not just mismatched sex drives. Many women have been sexually abused, some when they were little girls by men they trusted (at least before the abuse), and others were raised in repressive families who essentially made them afraid of sex. Add to that subsequent experiences with guys who actually used them for sex and tossed them away afterward, and you end up with women who just don't like sex very much.

And for women like these, there's only so much their husbands can do. Sure, meeting emotional needs in a marriage is always a good idea, that's why you GET married, right? And I feel the pain of the wife who is ignored all day by her husband until they get in bed together and he suddenly "remembers" he's got a wife! I can imagine she'd be less than enthused about sex under those circumstances.

Still, if you're a woman with a low sex drive, sexual abuse history and/or FOO issues related to sex, then at some point it's on YOU to work on those issues, 'cause no matter how hard your husband works to fulfill your ENs, you're probably STILL not going to feel as fulfilled by SF as you might if those other issues were resolved. In other words, even if your hubby did a PERFECT job on your ENs, you STILL may not be able or willing to do as good a job fulfilling HIS need of SF if you've still got all the extra "baggage" of your past in the way.

And don't take this as me making excuses for anyone. Men, you'll still have a happier wife if her ENs are fulfilled than if they're not, and ladies, don't be so hard on your husbands of they're not always on the mark in fulfilling your other ENs-give him a break sometimes, and OWN some of YOUR issues that may not have anything to do with him.

After all, how many times have we seen on these boards the same wife who is reluctant to have SF with her husband going off to hump their AP like the proverbial rabbit? And the OM in these cases is often a MAJOR STEP DOWN from their husband in many ways! Yet he doesn't have to jump through even HALF the hoops the husband is required to-a major source of bitterness to quite a few BHs on these boards, especially the divorced ones.

Mr. Shorty: I applaud you and just wanted to affirm your manhood as a healthy, God-given gift to your wife; praying that she will see it in that light and be thankful that not only your affection but that your heart is set upon her.

Being valued as a person is the ONE thing that conquers any idea of being "objectified". A woman who is affirmed and secure and feels safe and loved in a marriage WANTS SF for her hubby and herself. It really seems to be a value and security thing for me and my dh (mr. dearheart) has been very demonstrative in working toward my ENs so that I do not have the opportunity to feel
"objectified"...THIS even more than sex drive differences must be eliminated to give you both fantastic SF. FYI; there may also be past sexual abuse that plagues her and is inhibiting her and not enabling her to show her love to you as you would like.


Value; as stated above. I appreciate my dhs healthy sexual desire...I LOVE IT!!! I have told my dh...One way to get into your wifes' panties is through her ears!!!" TALK to her; verbalize your desire of her, tell her how she looks and how you feel about her , compliment and give kuddos on other things apart from the bedroom as well. She may not have a low sex drive just a HIGH EN for affection and affirmation.

CWMI posted about not talking all day and then getting all hot and h in bed...grabby...you know what I mean? Men do not have to earn it but woman gladly give it when they feel cherished...they WANT to.

My point is that this is not true for ALL women. It may be true for many, and the advice gives people in troubled marriages something that can restore sex.

But many of the threads in this forum are from men who really have made their wives feel loved and secure, and they still are not interested in sex. You can't just keep giving that same advice to them over and over, as if the lack of sex is proof that the man is simply not trying hard enough.

It's kind of like telling a paraplegic that the reason they can't walk is that they're just not trying hard enough. I myself have gotten earsfull of advice in this forum about how I next need to move to plan B, to threaten my wife in some sense into have sex with me. As if that's going to work. When I described that we aleady went through a period where we lived separately for a while, I was told in this forum that I need to to it AGAIN, because I didn't do it the "right way" the first time around.

I have accepted that my wife lost interest in sex long ago, and is not likely to be interested again. Now, the question is only what do I do about that for myself?

Well, treating her like a sex object sure won't help, so what tips do *you* have for the topic starter to prevent that?

It depends on the woman. How is it that we so often talk about how different people are, and how we need to find out what turns them on, yet in this discussion it seems we are trying to work out a definition sexual objectification, which, if avoided, is going to work for ALL women?

The problem for some women (say, those who aren't interested in sex at all) is they feel like a sex object ANY time their man wants sex, no matter how loving and caring he is otherwise. Those other times are other times, and not now, when the man wants sex. And NOW she has to deal with it, and she can feel like a sex object in that moment because she doesn't see the point of sex. Some women like this get cynical and see all the other loving gestures as just manipulation to get them to have sex. It's a vicious circle. My point is, it depends on the woman. It is not a simple case of behavior A being sexually objectification, while behavior B is not. Some women may see them differently.

And add to that that women have all kinds of different fantasies. Some women want to be "taken" and physicall overpowered, with the man saying things like "I own you". Which would be interpreted as sexual objectification by some women. For other women, they love it. I guess the key part is the overall context -- it works when the man already knows that this is her fantasy, so he works it into his. So it's theater and there is lots of communication.

Likewise, being very polite, doing sexually only what the woman asks, with the man making no sexual demands of the woman (to avoid what might seem like objectification) could be a total turnoff for some women.

So perhaps that's the key -- lots of communication, both verbal and nonverbal -- and agreement and understanding.

So when some people say they would like to be a sex object sometimes, they might mean it in a context of mutual understanding. Which might be different from what you mean by sexual objectification, where there is no communication or mutual understanding at all, and the husband is just a stranger groping her. But even in that case, there will be a very few women who would want that.

So it really depends on the woman. Of course, that doesn't mean there isn't generic, bland advice which would apply to most women, like "be nice and communicate".

Thank you for all your responses.

I was thinking along the same lines, which is why I started this discussion: to get some insight into the mind, heart, and souls of low sex drive people to see what makes them feel "objectified" vs. "cherished" (or whatever term you want to put on it).

That's true, but in these relationships, how does he feel? When does she start treating him like a sexual object, and how does he feel about that?

I think that's a good contrast. Even I, as one with a strong need for SF, would feel "objectified" if some stranger off the street propositioned me in a way that I knew was only for their gratification and not out of any kind of care/concern/"love" for me and my needs. As dearheart indicated, the one thing that makes it meaningful is when you are valued as a person with thoughts/needs/feelings.

This is an interesting insight that has actually come up between my wife and I. If it's ok, one of the best expressions of this idea I've read came from Michelle Wiener-Davis's book (chapter 1) The Sex-Starved Marriage (which my wife highlighted and wrote "exactly" next to it): Put in MB terms, a person's love bank might be completely full with a good sense of getting needs met, and still have no personal need for SF.

This is almost certainly so true, and I probably expected that this would be the final conclusion of such a discussion: sexuality (and what makes one feel "objectified") is too personal a topic to define in one internet message board discussion. However, as you also noted, I'm hoping there is still some useful discussion that can take place on the topic.

Communication is certainly a key to understanding this. When I listened to Rush's caller, I remember wondering just how much communication has gone into that decision in that particular marriage. Does her husband POJA this part of their relationship, or is he "compromising" and secretly hurting inside because his wife won't acknowledge his need? Does she POJA everything about sex when it does happen so that she doesn't feel objectified?

Did I maybe just hit on another key to not "objectifying" someone: Dr. Harley's prominent Policy of Joint Agreement?

Same answer. A man with low libido is going to feel like a sex object when his wife wants sex a lot more often. He'll call her a "nympho", etc. A man with a high libido will love a wife who wants sex frequently.

If you'd ask me, that's exactly it.

If a couple only has sex when one controlling partner wants it, then they are using their partner as a sexual appliance. Just think about the couple that only has sexual relations 6 or 8 times a year, when the woman is "in the mood" - she is treating her deprived husband as a sex object just a surely as a man who badgers his wife to meet "his needs" twice a week is treating her as a sex object.

Retread, it is interesting that you used the word "control" in your response. This morning, when I woke up, the idea of control suddenly appeared very important to me.

I don't know how many read the transcript from Rush's show, but the conversation started with birth control (the Pill). At one point the caller expressed the opinion that "...for me to be on the pill and then beholden to having sex whenever my husband wants to have sex, um, how horrible a relationship would that be?..." In other words, she doesn't want her husband to have absolute, dictatorial control over their sexual relationship. Now, the conversation is way to shallow, and the husband isn't anywhere involved in this particular conversation to know if her fear is justified or anything, but it does seem a real element in our discussion.

An inanimate object doesn't get to say "yes" or "no" to how it is used. I don't remember where I read it, but there was at least one author who expressed how important it was for the wife/low libido partner to have the power to say "no" to sexual advances.

I find it really interesting how you point out that this applies to the other end of the spectrum as well. I've often found it interesting how people will talk about how damaging/abusive it is when a man exerts so much control over his wife that she can't say no to his sexual advances. As you point out, I think it can be just as harmful to the relationship when the woman (or low desire spouse if the roles are flipped) has absolute control over the sexual relationship and dictates when/where/how things unfold.

So, even though specific actions can vary from couple to couple, I think we've touched on some real key elements:

1) Being "valued": The wife seeing in her husband a willingness/desire to meet her needs, which helps her have a willingness/desire to meet his needs (which helps him have a stronger willingness/desire to meet her needs and so on and so forth).

2) POJA: Each spouse has an opportunity to "enthusiastically agree" to how the sexual relationship will play out.

This approach works as long as the libido discrepancy isn't too great. But what do you do when one person has high libido, and the other none at all? If one person wants sex 7 days a week, and the other person wants no sex, is the "compromise" 3-4 times per week?

How does POJA work when there's no acceptable compromise? Perhaps I need to reread the POJA definition, but I thought it said you do nothing if you can't agree. So that means no sex? If so, that it is what typically happens, according to the experts -- it's the person with the lower sex drive who essentially determines how much sex there is.

DS, if you've been here all this time and have never read what Dr. H writes about your specific situation, then I encourage you to poke around the site and reread HNHN.

I am curiously following this thread, primarily because there was no POJA in my stbx-M and I often wonder if there had been a way to implement it or not. Somebody did write once, however, that the POJA only works when BOTH parties are on board. In the example above, obviously somebody isn't on board - likely the low-libido partner but not necessarily.

Yeah, I reread what POJA says, and it's what I said. It's the person who wants no sex who gets his/her way. Because if they can't enthusastically agree, they do nothing. Which means no sex.