This is the newsletter that came out this morning. I haven't read it yet but it sounds interesting!

The question of the ages:
How can a husband receive the sex he needs in marriage?
Willard F. Harley, Jr.


The Apostle Paul wrote concerning sex, "Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent" (I Corinthians 7:5). Oh, if it could be that simple. Later in the passage, knowing that the issue is complicated, he lets the reader know that it's a suggestion, not a command.

Receiving the sex a husband needs in marriage is as common a problem today as it was two thousand years ago. And as is the case with most ageless problems, the issue is definitely complicated. But from the perspective of most men, it shouldn't be that way. What's complicated about a man and woman enjoying sex with each other?

At the time of marriage, most men consider frequent and fulfilling sex with their wives to be one of the God-given benefits of marriage. At that moment in time, most wives agree with their husbands. But as time passes, these men discover that their wives don't see things quite the same way. They find that frequent sex requires negotiation for which they apparently have no skill. In this article, I'll try to help husbands develop that skill so that their sexual frustration becomes a thing of the past.

Why should we have sex?
How should we have sex?
How can we make love more often?
And more...

CLICK HERE to read the rest of Dr. Harley's article.

Thank you for sharing this, ML.

what is normal for a couple in their 40's to have sex per week? 1,2,3,4 times?? If the article is right it would be 4 times...he suggests spending it meeting the top en's using 4 - 4hr dates per week....do I have that right??

i personally don't feel St. Paul is suggesting anything, he's stating an obvious fact what will happen if a married couple begins denying each other sex...we read in 1 Corinthians 5 that Satan will tempt, because we lack self control ...the ONLY time a couple should abstain from sex is when a couple is devoting themselves to prayer and fasting and that's ONLY if its mutually agreed upon AND for a short period of time and come together again after.

even though the 1 Corinthians is talking about sex, you could probably use any EN as a substitute...

in verse 6 St. Paul states he speaks by permission and not of commandment, meaning Christ never listed this teaching as a commandment, but St. Paul under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, speaks on behalf of the Holy Spirit...in other words, God sanctioned and approves what he penned.

in the same sense too, St. Paul commands husbands to love (AGAPE-"unconditional") their wives, as Christ loves the Church and gave Himself for it...

So with both together, I take it as St. Paul teaching us how we can safeguard our marriages and for husbands to love their wives unconditionally...if our wives are sick or just don't feel like having sex, we should avoid AO's and love our wives and show compassion...BUT if it gets to the point where sex is being withheld or EN's aren't being met...you run the risk of Satan tempting your spouse...

my wife and I have talked a lot about these verses with our Priest in the Orthodox Christian Church...my wife still has a few issues with St. Paul and some women do...

I think 'normal' is a word that can get us messed up. You shouldn't look to what other couples are doing to define what is the right amount of sex you're having. Different people have different sex drives. Trying to achieve some randomly determined benchmark of 'normal' may leave neither spouse satisfied.

POJAing the amount of sex you want to have is a much healthier and productive way of determining what is right for you. And be opening to revisiting the topic as things change. This is why it is so important that a couple be comfortable talking about sex.

SF doesn't need to be had at each date, unless that is what both parties agree to. Rather I think Dr. H is saying that the dates need to have some combination of the top 4 that satisfies both parties. I haven't finished reading the article yet, though.

No he says it should cover the top 4 en's....sf is one of those top 4 en's....he is relating I think to some women who have averison to sex w/o the other 3 en's being met first I think.

also I get what your saying it's just that I wonder about him listing it 4 times per week like that....cause that would meet the 15hr UA time and include everything to keep the relationship strong and health.

I agree with his thinking on it personally and have no issue with 4times per week....that would be awesome....but in reality in my life that's not gonna happen when spouse works way too much and isn't home traveling and so on....I just wondered what I say other normal people do is all...I have never had a normal marriage so I am clueless.

Read the article, then discuss.

It will make more sense.

Basically, he says the same thing many of us have said here. Boiled down: women want/need affection in order to desire sex. Men desire sex to help fulfill not only the physical side of that need, but to achieve intimacy.

And then he sets about suggesting ways both can get their needs met which will result in an enthusiastic agreement about the frequency of sex.

On another thread by a poster, it was suggested a W will have sex if she gets pleasure from doing the act and if she feels safe and cared for.

I am beginning to think not much works for some W�s because in my W�s case she will have sex with me maybe 1X or 2X a month but she is there in body but not in spirit.

From her POV, SF isn�t something she enjoys, gets no actual sexual pleasure, but likes me playing with her hair and rubbing her back while we do enguage in SF. It boils down if I do enough for her, she will reluctantly have sex with me.

It is difficult to be a H (and a partner that cares) knowing that the sex was basically a trade. I think most men want their W to be happy and when she isn�t (no sexual feelings for her) the intimacy and connection suffer a great deal.


Yes, I have asked what will influence her to feel more than just a back or hair rub but my W quickly tells me �nothing, she just isn�t into sex and doesn�t want to try anything with me.

She was interested in some sex toys so I ordered them for her. One toy, a Rabbit works for her but she doesn�t want me around when she uses it monthly. She claims getting off using the rabbit doesn�t feel sexual and she doesn�t know how she gets off, it just happens and it is over in a flash.

As far as most of the Bible stuff, it might work for some people but I hear more arguments from women suggesting the Bible�s recommendations as words written by men (not inspired by God) for the mens' (general) personal benefit and it also leaves out how most women actually feel, that is unless the (few) women are nymphomaniacs. To some other women I have listened to, they seem to want SF if the H possess God or superman like characteristics, then the Bible�s advice works for them. My W goes to church fairly often if the weather is good or her friends are there.

To make a simple statement, unless I do almost every thing correctly (my W version of correct) I doubt true SF will ever happen. After I do a job around the house, my W points out what isn�t up to her standards, took too long, or how she would have done it differently. She is interested in the finished and almost perfect results and doesn�t seem to have time or interest in all the work it took me to get to where I believe is the finished product. That applies to doing things/work around the house or carrying out activities.

First, second, and third prize count for her. The rest seem to be dust in the wind.

Lou
I should have been rich.

OgLou, what is equally important to women in having sex is emotional attachment to the man. She needs to be in love with him. Does that describe your wife's feelings?

Off to finish the article!

How often does a man need to have sexual relations with his wife?
That depends on why he is doing it.

If he is doing it for himself, its however often he needs it as a diversion from anxiety, or whatever else motivates him to think about it. A man can have this sort of need met by a lot of other women.

If a man needs to make love instead of "having sex", one reason he needs it is in order to feel loved. Depending on how much admiration, respect, good conversation, and recreational companionship he has with is wife, he may need more or less love making.

The other reason a man needs to make love to his wife is to let her know how much he loves her. So he might need to do this once or more a week. And when his wife needs to be loved, he should be happy to meet her needs on her schedule, too, so this might be another once or twice a week.

But every person is different, and every couple is different, so it all adds up differently.

MelodyLane
Og Lou, what is equally important to women in having sex is emotional attachment to the man. She needs to be in love with him. Does that describe your wife's feelings?
My W's feelings as she tells me after 42 yrs. The old ILUBINILWU, "you are a good guy/H but frustrating to live with."

My W likes men with a very outgoing, charming personality, men that exude power. Glen Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'riley, Ronald Regan. She watches FOX news most of the day and Judge Judy.

On the flip side she dislikes Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Obama.

Like some other H posted, My W likes me to do things for her with out strings or expectations, which leads to me doing and her declining when I ask for something, even RC, so I go places alone.

Lou

I think your wife may have a thing for conservatives (not that there's anything wrong with that), OGLOU as opposed to just outgoing, charming, etc. To say that Bill Clinton wasn't charming contradicts what many, many women have said about their experiences with him...

I won't argue MB principles with Dr. Harley, but I disagree with his take 1 Cor 7 verse 6.

What isnt a command is that Paul wishes we were like him. Unmarried. (Paul emphasizes this in v28 and v32-v35.) It is very clear that we are not to defraud each other of sex in marriage. Paul makes the case that its better to be single, but if you can't control yourself; can't stay sexually pure when unmarried, then you should get married so that you can have sex.

In any event, MB principles, I believe, state that SF is one of the top ENs and that we should strive to meet the ENs of our mates.

1 Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: �It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.� 2 But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. 3 The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. 4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. 5 Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. 6 Now as a concession, not a command, I say this. 7 I wish that all were as I myself am. But each has his own gift from God, one of one kind and one of another. 1 Corinthians 7:1-7 (English Standard Version)


28 But if you do marry, you have not sinned, and if a betrothed woman marries, she has not sinned. Yet those who marry will have worldly troubles, and I would spare you that. 1 Corinthians 7:28 (English Standard Version)

32 I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord. 33 But the married man is anxious about worldly things, how to please his wife, 34 and his interests are divided. And the unmarried or betrothed woman is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit. But the married woman is anxious about worldly things, how to please her husband. 35 I say this for your own benefit, not to lay any restraint upon you, but to promote good order and to secure your undivided devotion to the Lord. 1 Corinthians 7:32-35 (English Standard Version)

Even if it isn't a command, (though it is), neither is talking to your wife. But we are to love our wives and we are to live with them in an understanding way. We are not to be harsh with them. How can we show love and understanding without talking to them? How can we keep from seeming harsh if we ignore them? How can wives show love to their husbands if they won't have sex with them? In general they can't. Husbands won't be able to hear your love over the cacophony of the rejection.

LS

I'm not sure what I really get out of the article. It was nice...some good, basic information in there. It didn't exactly crack a code for me.

This confirmed my heart and mind are in the right place (with an unnecesary reminder the act is also a physical craving...for me, the pure physical "need" is something I'm better off trying to ignore otherwise it just adds to the frustration). I don't just want the physical act...

There are times when I have made such an effort in all the ways he talks about in the "often" section, we don't have any of the mentioned "problems" (or unmentioned ones for that matter) and there has been no increased activity as a result. Other times, when I think things aren't so good, she's been up to the task (not in a long time...but 15 months ago I remember thinking "I'm not really doing much to have her feel this way..."). I can't figure it out.

Also- Jesus was not gender biased. Read the New Testament...I think that is pretty clear.

although as I stated before, I disagreed with Dr. Harley about the command issue, I think this was a good article.

Just adding a perspective. This paragraph from the article is something I often hear and I believe its legitimate.

** For some couples, that assignment doesn't work at first because the wife has developed an aversion to sex. In the beginning of their marriage, his view of sex overruled her view, and so he forced her to have sex with him on his terms. Complying with his demands, she associated sex with an emotionally and physically painful experience. Eventually, sex became the last thing she wanted to do with her husband.**

What I don't often hear is the opposite. In my marriage, its my wife's preferences have overruled mine almost completely with regard to sex. She has been the sexual gatekeeper for almost two decades. Just as the wife in the paragraph above has a bad association to sex, I have a bad association to so-called "romantic" times. Romance means "NO SEX". For us, the MOST romantic days have been the driest in the bedroom.

Actually Dr. Harley does mention this in one of his articles. How some wives will show the most affection to their spouses when there is no chance of anything leading to sex and the husbands feel cheated. (Can't find the article right now)

I think I can relate to you, LS.

I've never forced sex on my terms, or talked her into it, or found some way for her to comply to my demands. Like you, it was always on her terms. There have been times when I've asked, times when I've been rejected for dozens of times in consecutive streaks. She doesn't show an aversion to sex, she just doesn't want to do it very often.

I think I'm with you on 1st Corinthians. You could even take things a step further since we are to "love our W as Christ loved the Church..." That sentiment is often glossed over, when in fact, if anyone really thought about it, that should show just how high the bar was set that we're supposed to strive toward.

This is an interesting article. I've been thinking about it all weekend. A few of my own comments:

1) Why should we have sex?

One thing I don't generally like about these kinds of articles is that I always feel "stereotyped." I feel like I'm being told, "As a man, you are a hormonally driven animal whose sole purpose in life to see how far and wide he can spread his genes." I just don't feel that one dimensional.

I don't want to fault Dr. Harley for this simplification; I, too, work in a field where the right simplification makes all the difference in understanding reality. I just find it hard to accept myself as that one-dimensional. On the other hand, maybe I am a stereotypical male, and I just don't want to admit it. I find it is important for me to use an article like this as a springboard from the simplified "stereotypical" male to me as a real, live male -- to understand how I fit the stereotype and in what ways am I different from this description. As noted in the "how" section, the important thing here is being honest about the whys and not judgemental. This means being able to be honest with myself and accepting that maybe I am (at least in part) a testosterone driven animal (and maybe that doesn't have to be a bad thing).

I found this statement interesting (emphasis mine): "For most women, the answer to the question, why should we have sex, is that sex is necessary for emotionally bonding that builds on affection and intimate conversation." It sometimes seems that some women decide that affection and intimate conversation are enough and decide that sex is not necessary as an expression of that emotional bond.

I expect Dr. Harley felt that he could have written an entire article (maybe even a small book) covering the reasons why. I think it would be nice to see a deeper discussion on the different ways men and women will answer "why should we have sex?" rather than reducing everything to a single stereotype. (This might actually make an interesting thread of its own on this board.)

2) How should we have sex

As Dr. Harley notes, the "how" depends greatly on the "why". His discussion of how mostly follows the stereotype established in why, which means that, if I don't feel I fit the why stereotype, it becomes hard to see myself in the how section.

As noted above, the statement on honesty becomes important. As I tried to explain above, this means being able to be honest with myself, too.

"Tell your wife what would please you the most if she were to not object." This would make an interesting list, I think. It would also make me nervous, because I'm sure there would be objections, which, if I take them too personally, could impede my ability to work through the negotiation. As I've seen discussed in other places, it might be important to recognize that no single "act" by itself represents sexual fulfillment, but to be open to the final agreement that both parties can be enthusiastic about.

"With such a wide difference in perspective, how can a husband and wife be expected to reach an enthusiastic agreement regarding sexual frequency? Having sex his way makes her feel like a receptacle -- something he uses to merely relieve his sexual craving. Having sex her way makes him feel that she is imposing conditions that makes the frequent sex he needs essentially impossible for him." This sometimes feels like a key obstacle overcome in this negotiation. I don't fully understand the female perspective of "feeling like a receptacle". I see the idea discussed in different ways and different contexts, and it helps. On the other hand, I recall a conversation I heard on the radio between Rabbi Schmulley (sp?) and a woman. I don't remember spcifics of the conversation (something about what it would take for her to be interested in her husband sexually). I do recall my response. It seemed that, with each additional "requirement" ("if my husband would do this, that, and the other correctly"), I became more agitated. It felt to me like she was saying, "If my husband were perfect (by my definition of perfect), then and only then would I condescend to make love to him." Men, who are stereotyped as being incompotent in the relationship arena anyway, may choose to simply give up if the bar is set too high.

3. Bringing it together to create a more fulfilling (for both) sexual relationship.

"When a husband meets his wife's needs for affection and intimate conversation, she finds it much easier to meet his need for sexual fulfillment. Of course, the converse is also true. The more she meets his need for sexual fulfillment, the easier it is for him to meet her emotional needs for affection and intimate conversation." I really find this "feedback" loop interesting. When I reach beyond myself to try to meet my wife's needs, she is more motivated to meet my needs, and we grow together. When I selfishly refuse to meet her needs, she decides that she doesn't have any reason to meet my needs, and we grow apart. And I'm not talking about tit-for-tat exchanges or scorekeeping, but really trying to do what's best for my spouse.

"engage in three hours of affection and intimate conversation before having sex." I, too, find this daunting. What does that three hours look like? I'm a poor conversationalist, and have a hard time carrying on a one hour conversation with anyone on anything, let alone try to stretch that out to three hours? Affection is included, but, really, how long does it take to say, "I saw these flowers and thought of you." and then hand her the flowers? I'm not saying it is not important, nor that it shouldn't be done. It just seems daunting. As with other aspects of this brief article, I would really like to see some case studies and other discussion on this part to better understand and implement this "assignment."

Yes, sometimes it is a daunting list. Nevertheles, until we are prepared to exit the marriage, accomplishing the items on that list is what we have undertaken. Just have our wives have undertaken to accomplish the items on our list. They may find satisfying our ENs even more daunting than we find theirs. Even if their list is longer.

I exited my relationship due to this topic. We spent 20+ counseling sessions together discussing it. I tried my best and finally gave up.

This was with my fiance (maybe 2 years or so). I asked her nicely and in a good amount of time to leave. Lo and behold after the 1 week of shock that she was in, a fantastic and miraculous event occurred. She sought sex from me and had a complete change of heart. She even chased me around the house!

I resisted! She did have other annoying issues! And now (three years later) I am remarried to a great girl who is matched with me in that area. She is actually a little higher than me.

Prior to my fiance, I was married for 19 years. My XW rejected me constantly and I become accustomed to this. It was my 'Lot' in life as I was a 'Good Christian Man' in my mind.
We probably had sex 1 time every 1.5 months. It was terrible. I spent a lot of time walking off my frustrations!

However it was good news for her! It turned out that the XW actually had a high sex drive, but not with me... She simply preferred other men.

My father was visiting me recently and made a comment about seeing the XW at a bar whooping it up with various guys. I wish he would of told me!! Oh, well.

In my humble opinion..... Rejection of Sex is BREAKING VOWS and IS grounds for leaving. But that is me...

Here's my take on it, reinforced by an informal poll of my girlfriends... (NOT scientific, and NOT representative of the entire gender, mind you)

While there are certainly women who set up a 440-meter-hurdle race for their men in the area of SF, there's probably more of us who have a much simpler set of requirements:

* Pay attention to *ME* instead of the TV for at LEAST the duration of a sit-com during the evening.

* Some conversation during said attention time that doesn't revolve around child rearing (esp. discipline or bodily functions), or sports would be appreciated.

* Some cuddling or affectionate NON-SEXUAL touch either during aforementioned attention time would also be appreciated. And because some men (though certainly none here at MB) are JUST that CLUELESS - that means DO NOT touch ANYTHING that's covered by a bikini at this time unless specifically requested by ME.

* When we *get* to the bedroom (or wherever), let's play a game... how about you try touching anything BUT the aforementioned bikini areas for 5-10 minutes while kissing me like you used to when you were trying to convince me to HAVE sex with you? While most of us are game for a 'quickie' every now and then, as a general rule, you need to "warm up the engine" instead of going for a cold start. Works a lot better, and is a lot more fun.

Most of us also have a few minor hygiene requirements like not smelling like old sweat, brushing teeth, and/or requesting a bit of cologne, as well.

Now, frankly, if that's too much to ask for... IMNSHO, you're better off with a C-note on Hollywood Blvd.