in your world there's not, buy just b/c you can't doesn't mean another couple can...you're experience isn't the general rule.

The scenario you describe is exactly why we shouldn't let anyone but our spouse fill our EN. Even the non-intimate ones.

I have a friend who was a nanny. She is visiting the town where she was a nanny, but the families she nannied for will not let her see the kids, and she's really sad about it. But I totally understand.

Because she is drop dead gorgeous. And she was taking care of the kids. She did NOTHING at all inappropriate. But the wives are smart in not allowing a woman who is being paid to meet the need of FC/DS and can't help that she would be mmeeting the need for Physical attractiveness anywhere near their families. Personally I would never hire a gorgeous nanny. Because even a guy who is a complete saint with strong boundaries can't help but have his EN for physical attractiveness and Domestic Support/Childrearing met by someone like that. And it WILL make deposits. I feel bad for my friend, but I am VERY glad to know there are smart women out there who are willing to protect their marriages from smething that seems, and really is, very innocent on the surface.

Chris, your response to this is really reactive.

One of the best ways of diffusing anger and conflict is by reflective listening. That is, to listen (or read) what someone has said, and repeat it back tothem in order to reach a mutual understanding. I THINK that's what CFIO was asking you to do. I really don't think he was playing games or trying to be sarcastic (although I can see how one might take it that way).

I always thought that was something that was supposed to take place after the anger and hurt, i.e., once the couple has made up.

I think its pretty universal that most women DO NOT feel like having sex after a fight. A fight causes emotional detachment and a woman needs to feel emotionally close in order to have SEX.

You've had FOUR women tell you that on this thread, so maybe you should listen?

Chris....what do you mean at home? I thought you had to fly there and stay to do the weekend program.....please someone fill me in LOL!

Isnt that called "mirroring?" I have found that practice INFURIATING because it never fails that the person who repeats it back gets it wrong. We have some board members who do this and it always annoys me.

One of the things that was brought up WAY back ('cuase this thread is HOT today, ain't it!) is the idea of guys being "wired" for SF, and guys using it as an excuse or justification for their behavior.

One of the things that Loving Anyway says A LOT in her various posts is that we ought to seek first to understand, THEN to be understood. In the context of "Who Goes First?" that means that it is my job, as the one with a MB program, to seek first to understand my husband, what makes him tick, how he is wired. Not to excuse him. But to understand him. Because as I begin to understand, I cultivate compassion, and as I cultivate compassion I begin to WANT to meet his EN not just out of obligation or duty, but out of love. "I desire mercy, not sacrifice."

In doing this I help set the stage for making thoughtful requests of my husband to meet my emotional needs. I grease the wheels. I lubricate the relationship. He is more likely to say yes.

Now you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. (Thinking of coolaid again!) But he certainly isn't going to drink the coolaid if I don't even lead him to the coolaid by changing my own attitudes and actions.

It takes a LONG TIME after we have made up for me to feel emotionally close to him again. There is no rush into each others arms like in the chick flicks on A&E. It is a SLOW THAW.

Actually, to be the voice of dissent (because there's not enough of that on this thread today!), I DO want makeup sex, and I'm a woman. I think that is because I am willing to take the LBs of a fight if it means I also get O&H. It is the O&H of a good fight that would enable me to have SF in spite of LBs.

Well, you know me and my black and white thinking Sometimes I do things gradually. But I am also very reactive at times.

ITA....Melody has this one spot on! LOL

Thats ok, TTT! It is a generalization and a generalization defines the majority, not the exceptions. But the exception does not negate the rule.

It comes back to this simple truth, another generalization, that in order to want to have sex a woman needs 2 things, emotional closeness and the prospect of enjoyment. When a couple has a FIGHT, she doesn't feel emotionally close.

This is an interesting discussion. After reading the responses here I have the impression there is no absolute answer. It is a blend of things that make a relationship work. Just like some have different tastes in food, which require a variety of ingredients to construct. Expectations, culture, maturity, emotions, belief systems are part of the ingredient mix.

It seems to me MB is an attempt to encourage people to apply the ingredients in a manner that has been proven successful. Just like a favorite recipe can be adjusted for the intended audience, but as my grandma used to say, the most important ingredient is love.

If we love someone, and hopefully we do when we choose to construct a life together, we are open to bringing the ingredients necessary to make it an enjoyable experience. If the need of one of the partners is SF then we need to do our utmost to meet that need. If it is conversation then we need to work at meeting that need. If we don't put in the right ingredients then the result will be disappointing.

I have seen the discussion her that men feel on average that they have a high need for SF to be met. Just as women have indicated they want conversation and intimacy. It seems to me from this discussion both parties are right. Isn't the purpose of meeting each others needs to reduce the risk of our mate looking elsewhere to have those needs met? If we choose not to meet our spouses needs then we are accepting the risks associated. That may be suffering the wrath, or they may wander.

I had a friend who had a very high drive for SF. Prior to being married he was wild and aggressive. After he got married I was over at their place one time and he was starting shows signs of aggression and frustration. His wife gave me a slight smile and suggested it may be time for me to go as she had work to do. She knew what he needed, I am not totally sure if she felt like it all the time, as it was never discussed, but she looked after him in that department. I had several discussions with this fellow and he appreciated and admired her for how well she looked after him. As a result he was fiercely loyal to her. He worked hard to provide a stable home life (financially secure), which she appreciated. It was an arrangement that worked well for both of them.

What we seem to be talking about here is the arrangement is not working out in some cases. But the principles of MB makes sense as the antidote. If the need is SF then do your utmost to meet it. If it is conversation or recreational companionship then meet it. Give of yourself to meet the needs of the one you love. That is what I see MB saying. If you don't then you are at risk of your relationship not being what you hoped for, or your spouse may look elsewhere, or you may look elsewhere. In essence the failure of the relationship, which deteriorates into disappointment, disillusionment, and complaining.

MB helps by giving tools to deal with the issues and these boards are a testament that they work for a great number of people. If a person is not philosophically aligned with those principles and ideas, this is not a cult, and no one will force you to adopt the principles. However we tend to accept that driving on the right hand side of the road in North America is a pretty good practice and has worked for a number of years. Just like the rules of the road MB gives a pretty good road map for relationships.

So if SF is important then........

In the words of that famous sneaker commercial "Just do it".

Totally o/t here, but someone asked about H's EN's. His top EN's would be DS, O&H, Admiration, FS, and AS. We have lots of conversation, and he is a very honest person. He also wants me to be completely honest with him even if it might make him uncomfortable. So I guess that also falls under conversation. He also really needs to be admired -- he wants to know I believe in him. DS I have covered in many places. Though he swears on 15 Bibles that my size doesn't bother him AT ALL, he gives other clues that let me know that AS is important. RC may beat that out at times. He's hard to pin down. Neither of us ever have normal, clear scores on personality tests or anything else.

Anyway, that's DH in a nutshell.

I'm not saying have a fight and immediately after start tearing off each other's clothes, but you said you have to wait at least a week...a week or longer?

if it going to take you a week or longer to get over an argument/disagreement (not talking about a physical fight) that maybe heated and emotions get out of hand before you can be intimate with him, and in the mean time you withhold SF, then you're showing signs of passive aggressiveness...meaning payback...just like the soup Nazi..."no soup for you!"

and if your hubby does the same to you in regard to withholding conversation or any other EN for a week or longer, then he too is showing signs of passive aggressiveness...he's paying you back for that argument.

Oh wow, the "openness and honesty of a good fight?" Holy CRAP. I can't believe you said that, TTT. That is mixing something bad with something GOOD. There is NOTHING GOOD about a fight. Nothing. One does not have to have a fight to be open and honest.

TTT, when your marriage gets healthier, I doubt you will feel this way. When you are in happy marriage that is open and honest and pleasant, you will not enjoy the fights. Once you become INTIMATE in your marriage, you will see how very damaging they are.

I have been sitting here thinking back to a time when I felt the same as you and the REASON I felt fights were healthy is because our marriage WAS NOT intimate so there was no intimacy [emotional closeness] to tear down. But once we became intimate, the GULF caused by a fight was EXTRAORDINARY. It was so bad that we do everything to avoid a fight.

Nope, I don't believe in passive agressiveness at all.[I want all credit for my agressive behavior] It takes AT LEAST a week to feel emotionally close to him again.

So, what we do is avoid fights. We stopped fighting.

sure and when you are in that state of intimacy...should a fight (not a physical fight) not drain your love bank to a negative that its now takes a week or longer of him having to run the gauntlet of meeting your EN's before you can be intimate again?

BTW, every couple regardless of what state their marriage is in will have an argument or two or three at some point in their marriage...

That doesn't surprise me at all Luri. You notice that not one of those "top needs" is one of the INTIMATE emotional needs?

I think the reason you and your H have so much trouble with meeting the need for SF is reflective of a larger problem. That neither of you is meeting each other's INTIMATE emotional needs. None of them. No wonder your desire for SF is so strong. I bet if he was good in the convesation, recreational companionship and affection departments, you need for SF would lessen a bit.

And I bet that if he would allow you to meet the intimate needs, he would become more willing to do SF.

I can somewhat relate to your H, because my fear of intimacy keeps me from allowing my husband to meet my intimate EN even as I want them to be filled. So my love bank stays empty, despite his attempts to fill it. And he meets the less intimate needs farily well.