issues with hypoactive sexual desire disorder criteria

[Telecaster68]

In addition, feeling distressed because you're aware of the stress to your relationship because of your lack of sexual desire doesn't have to come from pressure from a spouse. You only have to look at many posts from asexuals on AVEN who are in relationships see that. Frequently, their anxieties are because they know that however patient and understanding their partners are, on some level, they would prefer sex to be part of the relationship.  The direct pressure is self imposed and therapy is often just as much about understanding how to deal with that as changing behaviour.

 

And even if partners are voicing concern and steering them towards therapy, its no more wrong than anyone suggesting therapy or medical treatment for their partner over anything else, especially when asexuality wasn't part of the relationship from the outset. Either partner can obviously unilaterally change their side of the relationship, but to expect that when it's something as fundamental as sex there'll be no consequences, and the other partner will just suck it up is ludicrously solipsistic. Asexuality simply isn't the most likely explanation. Relationship problems, mental health problems and physical health problems are far more likely. If one partner found they no longer had any interest in talking, would you expect the other to simply accept it without trying to figure out what's going on?

 

Really, trying to dump all the blame on sexuals for protesting when asexuals unilaterally change the fundamentals of a relationship really, really pisses me off. The usual response is to say 'well, you can choose to leave', and then wail that sexuals are only interested in sex and will not compromise.  What's actually happened is that asexuals have refused to compromise and made their needs the deal breaker. 

 

 

[Pramana]

3 minutes ago, FictoVore. said:

But no, the researchers are still always right, no matter how many times they've been proven wrong in the past. Personal experience will never, ever be correct in the face of... Papers.

I'm not of the view that research is always right, but I am sure that it is more likely to be right than anecdotal evidence. That is an important distinction.

As for Freud, we're talking about someone who was writing one hundred years ago, and who doesn't really have much to do with what people in behaviourist psychology are doing today. The intellectual lineage of behaviourist psychology traces to Charles Darwin, not Sigmund Freud.

Regarding the specific issue, CJ DeLuzio Chasin's claim that the majority of people diagnosed with HSDD are heterosexual women in relationships with sexual men seems to be a factual one, and I think it's unlikely she would be wrong on a point like that. The question then would be whether there's an alternative explanation than the one she provides. Perhaps HSDD is under-diagnosed among single women and men?

In any case, I think the experience you're describing supports Ellen Van Houdenhove, Paul Enzlin, Luk Gijs's interpertation that what separates asexuals from people with HSDD in those contexts is sexual attraction, since sexual attraction provides the internal motivational state of wanting to be sexual with specific people, regardless of one's relationship status and personal circumstances. That would make sense, since sexual attraction is understood to involve an intrinsic, evolutionary mechanism that is enduring and stable, whereas sexual desire is more circumstance dependent and can be affected by conditions like HSDD.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, Pramana said:

 The question then would be whether there's an alternative explanation than the one she provides. Perhaps HSDD is under-diagnosed among single women and men?

In any case, I think the experience you're describing supports Ellen Van Houdenhove, Paul Enzlin, Luk Gijs's interpertation that what separates asexuals from people with HSDD in those contexts is sexual attraction, since sexual attraction provides the internal motivational state of wanting to be sexual with specific people, regardless of one's relationship status and personal circumstances. That would make sense, since sexual attraction is understood to involve an intrinsic, evolutionary mechanism that is enduring and stable, whereas sexual desire is more circumstance dependent and can be affected by conditions like HSDD.

Now we are actually getting somewhere!

 

 

"that what separates asexuals from people with HSDD in those contexts is sexual attraction, since sexual attraction provides the internal motivational state of wanting to be sexual with specific people, regardless of one's relationship status and personal circumstances. "

 

Though it doesn't have to be with any specific person. Often if you're single (and romantic and sexual) you still desire the idea of a relationship and the sex that entails even if there is no specific target for that. The desire is still there, regardless of whether or not there is a target (for most romantic sexual people, there would of course be some exceptions). But other than that one point I can agree with the rest

[JDP]

14 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Relationship problems, mental health problems and physical health problems are far more likely. If one partner found they no longer had any interest in talking, would you expect the other to simply accept it without trying to figure out what's going on? 

This kind of oversimplification is what separates the sexual from the rational.

 

Sexual desire can vanish without explanation, does not REQUIRE an explanation, and is not a problem in and of itself.

 

It just...happens. Like life itself.

[Guest]

 

9 minutes ago, asexjoe said:

This kind of oversimplification is what separates the sexual from the rational.

 

Sexual desire can vanish without explanation, does not REQUIRE an explanation, and is not a problem in and of itself.

 

It just...happens. Like life itself.

Please at Ieast try to see it from our perspective?? What TeIe said was rational and was a good analogy. For many couples, one or both partners wiII actively want to find out what the issue is and even try to fix it, because for many sexual people, sex is very, very important. It couId even be a sign of a very serious heaIth issue if one partner very suddenIy stopped wanting sex, so many wouId want to find out what's wrong just in case, regardIess of whether or  not they find sex super important.

[Telecaster68]

3 minutes ago, asexjoe said:

This kind of oversimplification is what separates the sexual from the rational.

 

Sexual desire can vanish without explanation, does not REQUIRE an explanation, and is not a problem in and of itself.

 

It just...happens. Like life itself.

That's precisely what I meant by asexuals expecting their partners to just shrug apathetically when they unilaterally remove something fundamental from the relationship. 

 

Joe, if your second wife had decided she was no longer going to look after your kids for no apparent reason, would you have shrugged and not wanted to figure out why this had happened and what could be done about it? 

 

Looking for reasons things happen is pretty much the definition of rationality. 

[Pramana]

7 minutes ago, FictoVore. said:

Though it doesn't have to be with any specific person. Often if you're single (and romantic and sexual) you still desire the idea of a relationship and the sex that entails even if there is no specific target for that. The desire is still there, regardless of whether or not there is a target (for most romantic sexual people, there would of course be some exceptions).

 

24 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Either partner can obviously unilaterally change their side of the relationship, but to expect that when it's something as fundamental as sex there'll be no consequences, and the other partner will just suck it up is ludicrously solipsistic. Asexuality simply isn't the most likely explanation. Relationship problems, mental health problems and physical health problems are far more likely. If one partner found they no longer had any interest in talking, would you expect the other to simply accept it without trying to figure out what's going on?

I would agree that asexuality wouldn't be the most likely explanation if you follow the attraction-based definition of asexuality from behaviourist psychology (basically, that there's a part of the brain that has evolved to orient sexual desires towards suitable reproductive partners, that in some cases the development process is altered producing homosexuality and bisexuality, and that in some cases it isn't there or isn't activated resulting in asexuality).

However, feminists like CJ DeLuzio Chasin want to argue that anyone lacking sexual desire, for whatever reason, is asexual. Her reasons:

1. Principle that having sex you don't want is worse than not having sex you do want.
2. Belief that male sexual pressure subjugates women, and so women need tools such as asexuality to defend themselves from that pressure.

Some issues:

1. I've read some research which suggests that people who lose sexual desire for their partners in long-term relationships often still have sexual desires for people outside the relationship, which puts into question whether they would actually want to give up on sex.
2. CJ DeLuzio Chasin doesn't say much about what would happen in these relationships after one partner decides to be asexual. She argues that asexual experiences and intimacy is just as good as sexual experiences and intimacy, so perhaps she would view this as an opportunity for the sexual person to embrace the asexual lifestyle.

[Telecaster68]

Having sex you don't want probably is worse than not having sex you do want. That's why no means no, but it still leaves sexual partners suffering. As for sex subjugating women - clearly it has been used for that, just as men have used sex to subjugate other men. That doesn't mean all sex subjugates women or necessarily subjugates women. Categorising asexuality as a tool to combat this very dodgy idea demeans sexuality and asexuality at the same time. 

 

If someone wants to have sex with someone other than their partner, they're simply not asexual, in anyone's terminology. And viewing one partner unilaterally changing a fundamental of the relationship as a learning opportunity for the other is patronising and arrogant. Perhaps abused wives should view their situation as an opportunity to learn to appreciate masochism? 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Pramana said:

However, feminists like CJ DeLuzio Chasin want to argue that anyone lacking sexual desire, for whatever reason, is asexual. Her reasons:

1. Principle that having sex you don't want is worse than not having sex you do want.
2. Belief that male sexual pressure subjugates women, and so women need tools such as asexuality to defend themselves from that pressure.

Some issues:

1. I've read some research which suggests that people who lose sexual desire for their partners in long-term relationships often still have sexual desires for people outside the relationship, which puts into question whether they would actually want to give up on sex.
2. CJ DeLuzio Chasin doesn't say much about what would happen in these relationships after one partner decides to be asexual. She argues that asexual experiences and intimacy is just as good as sexual experiences and intimacy, so perhaps she would view this as an opportunity for the sexual person to embrace the asexual lifestyle.

She sounds Iike just another of the many peopIe who have their own opinion and and apply it to literally every person alive. Just like that feminist from back in the day who said that rape is always about power (which is nonsense) because men naturally want to dominate women.. ergo, all men are potential rapists who want power over women (which is bull). Though yes she is correct that having sex you don't want is worse than not having sex you do want.

 

And yes, of course there are people who lose desire for their own partners but still want to bang others. Reasons can vary greatly from couple to couple but its not that uncommon. No one 'decides' to be asexual though, no one 'decides' to stop desiring sex either (though they can definitely decide to stop giving sex). If both partners are sexual, it can often be just as difficult and painful for the partner who stops desiring sex as the one who still desires it, and in other cases one partner may care a lot more than  the other (and that could be either partner who is upset, it's not always automatically the one who still wants sex who is most cut up by this. It depends on how important sex is to the individual who is experiencing the issue).

 

Some sexuals may embrace asexual intimacy (though in my experience that's quite rare), others still deeply desire that sexual intimacy and either leave, cheat, or remain with their partner and remain faithful to them, but also experience deep unhappiness and longing as a result of the lack of sexual intimacy. It's completely dependent on the individuals involved!

 

And just to throw it out there again, the sexual attraction isn't as important as the underlying desire to connect sexually with others. You can still desire sex without having any specific target to aim that at. I still feel uncomfortable with the idea of lumping all sexuals into this 'sexual attraction' criteria when it's experienced so differently from person to person, and seemingly not at all by some, UNLESS we are saying sexual attraction is whoever you end up having sex with. Whatever reason you chose them, that's sexual attraction. Though at the same time, you can still have that desire and not want to have sex with anyone, so it always comes back to the desire. The attraction doesn't spark the desire, the underlying desire is what drives you to seek or choose partners, or at the very least makes you enjoy the idea of sex even if you don't want to have it with anyone specifically (in the same way that the idea of sex with anyone in my town, or anyone I've ever met in person, literally sickens me, even though I do desire sex.. I just need a romantic connection to be able to actively desire a specific person.). I think it's actually quite rare to be totally driven only by attraction (meaning, if there isn't anyone you're attracted to, you just don't desire the idea of sex. - I honestly don't think that's very common at all).

 

But that's a different matter entirely, I just noticed it kept coming up so thought I'd throw my two cents in there.

 

[JDP]

39 minutes ago, FictoVore. said:

 

Please at Ieast try to see it from our perspective?? What TeIe said was rational and was a good analogy. For many couples, one or both partners wiII actively want to find out what the issue is and even try to fix it, because for many sexual people, sex is very, very important. It couId even be a sign of a very serious heaIth issue if one partner very suddenIy stopped wanting sex, so many wouId want to find out what's wrong just in case, regardIess of whether or  not they find sex super important.

I understand and sympathize, but it's not a problem that can be solved.

 

There is no drug or chemical to make one person want to have sex with another person, and if there were, it wouldn't be natural sexual desire, would it?

 

I am so much happier now that I have given it up. No more drama.

 

 

[JDP]

45 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

That's precisely what I meant by asexuals expecting their partners to just shrug apathetically when they unilaterally remove something fundamental from the relationship. 

 

Joe, if your second wife had decided she was no longer going to look after your kids for no apparent reason, would you have shrugged and not wanted to figure out why this had happened and what could be done about it? 

 

Looking for reasons things happen is pretty much the definition of rationality. 

Actually that's exactly what happened, and that's exactly what I did.

 

At some point sexual desire stops. It isn't a problem to those who expect it to happen eventually, or for those who have good self-esteem.

[Telecaster68]

If the problem is low testosterone, or depression, or relationship issues, then they very well could be solved. And those reasons are a lot more likely than asexuality. That's why sexual partners push to not just have shoulders shrugged at them and be told to shut up, but to try to work together to save the relationship. It may fail, but doing nothing will definitely fail. The lack of motivation to even try anything at all is a very clear signal that the relationship isn't even worth trying to save for the partner who no longer wants to have sex if it entails venturing outside their comfort zone. Meanwhile, they expect the sexual partner to live the rest of their lives in that relationship outside their comfort zone, and be happy about it. 

[Telecaster68]

4 minutes ago, asexjoe said:

Actually that's exactly what happened, and that's exactly what I did.

 

At some point sexual desire stops. It isn't a problem to those who expect it to happen eventually, or for those who have good self-esteem.

Presumably shrugging your shoulders and giving up is why you're the happy psychologically fulfilled person you now are. 

 

I'll let the hubris of the rest of your post speak for itself. 

[Pramana]

1 hour ago, Telecaster68 said:

Categorising asexuality as a tool to combat this very dodgy idea demeans sexuality and asexuality at the same time. 

 

1 hour ago, FictoVore. said:

If both partners are sexual, it can often be just as difficult and painful for the partner who stops desiring sex as the one who still desires it, and in other cases one partner may care a lot more than  the other (and that could be either partner who is upset, it's not always automatically the one who still wants sex who is most cut up by this. It depends on how important sex is to the individual who is experiencing the issue).

I agree it's unlikely that many people will want to identify as asexual as an alternative to HSDD within the criteria discussed by CJ DeLuzio Chasin, although perhaps some people will and I think that is best left for people to work out in practice.

 

1 hour ago, FictoVore. said:

And just to throw it out there again, the sexual attraction isn't as important as the underlying desire to connect sexually with others. You can still desire sex without having any specific target to aim that at. I still feel uncomfortable with the idea of lumping all sexuals into this 'sexual attraction' criteria when it's experienced so differently from person to person, and seemingly not at all by some, UNLESS we are saying sexual attraction is whoever you end up having sex with. Whatever reason you chose them, that's sexual attraction.

As far as I can tell after doing a lot of research on this question, I think what you're describing just is sexual attraction. That's probably why the German AVEN website translates as "innate desire for partnered sex" because that's another way of representing the idea of an internal mechanism that makes people desire partnered sex. On that account, a couple of further points:

1. There is an important difference between preferences in terms of sexual orientation towards people of one or another gender and preferences within a gendered sexual orientation. For example, it's probably fairly common for heterosexual men to desire sex with  unattractive women. But it's probably quite rare for heterosexual men to desire sex with other men. There are examples where heterosexual men report desiring sex with other men when they haven't had access to women for a long period of time, but not all heterosexual men in those circumstances do so, and there are various complicating factors (perhaps some heterosexual men might be understood as slightly bisexual according to a spectrum view of sexual orientations, perhaps what they really wanted was to have sex with a woman so they imagined their male partner as female during the act, perhaps they had other motivations such as establishing dominance).

2. For the reasons provided in #1, I don't think there's an innate desire for partnered sex that's distinct from sexual attraction. However, I'm not sure that precludes the ability to gain some intrinsic goods from sex with people outside one's orientation. In that regard, I think the much contested issue of sex-favourable asexuality comes in with respect to potential non-innate desires for partnered sex. For example, I'm sure that I sometimes experience sexual attraction towards women (internal thoughts/fantasies/drive) and never towards men, such that if I wasn't sex-averse then maybe I'd want to be sexually active with women, whereas I dislike the idea of sex with men because I'm not attracted to men. Nevertheless, I'm not convinced that I would be incapable of experiencing physical arousal and deriving some physical pleasure from sex with men. To apply that more broadly, if some asexuals can obtain physical pleasure from masturbation, then it seems likely that some could gain physical pleasure from partnered sex. It is pretty well established today that physical arousal doesn't correlate that well with sexual attraction and sexual orientation (for example, there are some well-known studies suggesting that women in particular may become aroused when shown a variety of sexual imagery regardless of their sexual orientation) which makes me think that sex-favourable asexuality is a distinct possibility (especially when you consider that many asexuals still experience romantic attraction, and so might already be comfortable with other forms of physical touching with their partners).

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, asexjoe said:

There is no drug or chemical to make one person want to have sex with another person, and if there were, it wouldn't be natural sexual desire, would it?

I'II quote TeIe because his response is what I wouId have said.

27 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

If the problem is low testosterone, or depression, or relationship issues, then they very well could be solved. And those reasons are a lot more likely than asexuality. That's why sexual partners push to not just have shoulders shrugged at them and be told to shut up, but to try to work together to save the relationship. It may fail, but doing nothing will definitely fail. 

 

For an asexuaI, you can NEVER change their Iack of desire in the same way you can't MAKE a gay man desire sex with women, but for a sexuaI, there are numerous things that can be done if the sexuaI person wants that desire back, it just depends on the underIying causes. For examIe, something as basic as Iosing weight can heIp some sexuaI peopIe get their desire back, sometimes they need to feeI more Ioved, sometimes medication or iIIness can cause the Iack of desire so a change of medication couId heIp. ObviousIy none of this wiII heIp an ace but they can definiteIy heIp many sexuaI peopIe. Guys even have a piII they can take (and I'm Iooking forward to the day they invent the femaIe version of that piII, haha) ...So yeah, you can't change an ace, but there are many things you can try to bring desire back for a sexuaI!

[JDP]

24 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Presumably shrugging your shoulders and giving up is why you're the happy psychologically fulfilled person you now are. 

 

I'll let the hubris of the rest of your post speak for itself. 

What hubris? I am simply stating fact. A mature, working marriage can transcend loss of sexual desire in either or both spouses. If you go into marriage with commitment as a goal, and contemplate the natural deduetude of sex over time, it does not become such a problem later.

[Sally]

On 8/27/2017 at 10:13 AM, Telecaster68 said:

Maybe. My experience with my therapist was very positive. 

You're sexual, and male.  From my experience and what I've heard from others, both of those make a difference.

[JDP]

5 minutes ago, FictoVore. said:

I'II quote TeIe because his response is what I wouId have said.

 

For an asexuaI, you can NEVER change their Iack of desire in the same way you can't MAKE a gay man desire sex with women, but for a sexuaI, there are numerous things that can be done if the sexuaI person wants that desire back, it just depends on the underIying causes. For examIe, something as basic as Iosing weight can heIp some sexuaI peopIe get their desire back, sometimes they need to feeI more Ioved, sometimes medication or iIIness can cause the Iack of desire so a change of medication couId heIp. ObviousIy none of this wiII heIp an ace but they can definiteIy heIp many sexuaI peopIe. Guys even have a piII they can take (and I'm Iooking forward to the day they invent the femaIe version of that piII, haha) ...So yeah, you can't change an ace, but there are many things you can try to bring desire back for a sexuaI!

Medicines for erectile dysfunction increase blood flow, not desire, and increasing testosterone can have dangerous side effects.

 

I don't know how many men get their desire back once it's gone, but I suspect there aren't many.

 

All I know is that for me, the drama in my marriage is gone, and I've enjoyed great piece of mind, and I sleep a lot better, since I stopped pretending.

[Guest]

55 minutes ago, asexjoe said:

Medicines for erectile dysfunction increase blood flow, not desire, and increasing testosterone can have dangerous side effects.

 

I don't know how many men get their desire back once it's gone, but I suspect there aren't many.

 

All I know is that for me, the drama in my marriage is gone, and I've enjoyed great piece of mind, and I sleep a lot better, since I stopped pretending.

That's because you're ace so of course it's not an issue for you and you'll feel better without that pressure. And actually sexual menmen and women experience a lack of desire on and off as a regular part of life. Often it comes back on its own after the stress or whatever that's causing it has passed, sometimes people seek treatment and the treatment helps. You're only looking at this from the perspective of an ace though which is why we aren't getting anywhere and why we certainly won't get anywhere if we keep going round in circles like this. It's different for sexuals, which is why a criteria and treatment etc for HSDD exist for those sexuals who experience distress as a result of their persistent loss of sexual desire. The reason part of the criteria is a persistent loss for a period of more than six months is because it's very common for sexuals to temporarily lose sexual desire as a result of stress, grief, or illness etc for a short space of time (up to a few months or sometimes years even though that's less common). Sexuals certainly don't want to bang literally 24/7; a guy might not feel like sex in the afternoon but be super amped for it in the evening lol. That doesn't mean he's permanently lost his desire just because he didn't feel like sex that afternoon. Sexual desire comes and goes, it's only an issue if the lack of desire is persistent and causing significant distress. And in that case there are many options available that may be of benefit depending on the person, as long as they're not ace obviously.

[JDP]

1 hour ago, FictoVore. said:

That's because you're ace so of course it's not an issue for you and you'll feel better without that pressure. And actually sexual menmen and women experience a lack of desire on and off as a regular part of life. Often it comes back on its own after the stress or whatever that's causing it has passed, sometimes people seek treatment and the treatment helps. You're only looking at this from the perspective of an ace though which is why we aren't getting anywhere and why we certainly won't get anywhere if we keep going round in circles like this. It's different for sexuals, which is why a criteria and treatment etc for HSDD exist for those sexuals who experience distress as a result of their persistent loss of sexual desire. The reason part of the criteria is a persistent loss for a period of more than six months is because it's very common for sexuals to temporarily lose sexual desire as a result of stress, grief, or illness etc for a short space of time (up to a few months or sometimes years even though that's less common). Sexuals certainly don't want to bang literally 24/7; a guy might not feel like sex in the afternoon but be super amped for it in the evening lol. That doesn't mean he's permanently lost his desire just because he didn't feel like sex that afternoon. Sexual desire comes and goes, it's only an issue if the lack of desire is persistent and causing significant distress. And in that case there are many options available that may be of benefit depending on the person, as long as they're not ace obviously.

 

I don't feel we're going in circles, here, FictoVore. You write with great eloquence, credibility and conviction as a woman.

 

You necessarily see sexuality differently than do men. Our brains are different.

 

I don't claim to be asexual or sexual. I don't qualify as either based on what appear to be the accepted definitions. Neither of them want me around.

 

It may only be intuition and life experience, but it tells me that when a married man's desire is gone, it's gone.

 

Maybe women need sex differently and it's more important to them, and they can get that desire back, or want it back. As a man, I can't know what it means to them.

 

 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, asexjoe said:

It may only be intuition and life experience, but it tells me that when a married man's desire is gone, it's gone.

 

Maybe women need sex differently and it's more important to them, and they can get that desire back, or want it back. As a man, I can't know what it means to them.

 

 

I think @Telecaster68 needs to give some input here. Yes it's like that for YOU, but what I said applies to many sexual men as well as women. I'm certainly not an example of your average sexual woman, I don't care if I never have sex again, but I was speaking for other sexuals (not all, but many) in my comments. However you may take Tele's opinion on that more seriously, as he is a sexual man. I'm sure he can attest to the fact that not all men desire sex 24/7 and that male desire issues can actually be treated depending on the circumstances. (He may not have been there himself, but it's common knowledge). A man can not feel like having sex for a month or two as a result of stress or illness or grief or whatever, but get the desire back once those issues are dealt with. That's relatively common. It's different for you though clearly, just as I experience my sexuality very differently than the 'norm'. But just because it's different for me doesn't mean that applies to most of the rest of the population and I'd never assume to say all women are just like me sexually because I know for a fact they're not

[Telecaster68]

6 hours ago, Sally said:

You're sexual, and male.  From my experience and what I've heard from others, both of those make a difference.

You may well be right, but as @FictoVore.said@FictoVore.said, if an asexual is perfectly happy they're not going to be talking to a therapist anyway, so there will be no pressure. If they're not happy, then considering whether its because of their lack of sexuality, or issues arising from it is a sensible thing to do. Its also completely legitimate for someone deeply affected by someone else's behaviour to be involved in working with them on a solution. Asexuals can of course always completely reject this, just as sexuals can leave.

[Telecaster68]

Joe

 

Everything Ficto says about male desire not being a lost cause is right. 

 

Loss of sexual desire is recognised flag for depression. Frequently, men avoid sex as a result of ED, and that can be caused by mental issues like depression, or, for instance, blood pressure problems, which again can be resolved. Work stresses or tiredness can frequently cause loss of interest in sex and once these go away, sexual desire returns. And declining interest in sex is most often a sign of problems in the relationship, a symptom more than cause (but then of course becomes a cause, too), so if the relationship is improved, desire returns. 

 

I don't even mention those as a man, just as well known possibilities that would make intuitive sense to most sexuals. And they're far more likely than asexuality. 

[JDP]

Can you name a single case of complete loss of desire in a man for his wife, where the desire comes back?

 

I'm talking about real desire, not faked.

 

I understand how a dip in desire can be overcome, but you seem to be closed to the disappearance of desire altogether, while offering nothing in rebuttal.

 

Both the sexuals and asexuals here make a lot of assumptions.

[Telecaster68]

https://www.reddit.com/r/DeadBedrooms/comments/5mzbfa/success_things_are_on_the_mend/

 

You're really not saying that depression, ED and stress can't kill libido and can't often be resolved with therapy, are you?

 

The point is not assuming that desire disappearing is permanent.

[JDP]

13 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

You're really not saying that depression, ED and stress can't kill libido and can't often be resolved with therapy, are you?

 

The point is not assuming that desire disappearing is permanent.

You're confusing desire with libido. They're not the same thing.

 

Depression, erectile dysfunction and stress can be resolved with therapy and still not do anything about sexual desire, i.e. desire for partnered sex with the one who wants it.

 

Why is that so inconceivable to you? Or is your reason subordinate to mere sentiment?

[Telecaster68]

Quote

Depression, erectile dysfunction and stress can be resolved with therapy and still not do anything about sexual desire, i.e. desire for partnered sex with the one who wants it.

Yes, they can, but it's more frequent that they're the cause of lack of desire than asexuality is, purely going on percentages (double figure percentages of depression, ED, and stress; asexuality affects 1%). They don't always, but they often do.

 

And given that's the case, shrugging your shoulders, especially when it's probably going to end your relationship, seems defeatist. And given your behaviour is probably deeply painful to your spouse and you can at least try to do something about it, selfish. The same would apply to say, self medicating with drink or drugs for depression, or compulsively working 18 hour days when it was killing your marriage. The spouse is completely entitled to push for trying to find a solution, because it's them being affected as much as you.

 

If your response is going to be 'well, leave then' - fine. But don't then complain that all sexuals want is sex. In this scenario, they're the ones trying to work together for a solution, and the asexual/non-desiring partner is refusing.

[JDP]

5 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Yes, they can, but it's more frequent that they're the cause of lack of desire than asexuality is, purely going on percentages (double figure percentages of depression, ED, and stress; asexuality affects 1%). They don't always, but they often do.

 

And given that's the case, shrugging your shoulders, especially when it's probably going to end your relationship, seems defeatist. And given your behaviour is probably deeply painful to your spouse and you can at least try to do something about it, selfish. The same would apply to say, self medicating with drink or drugs for depression, or compulsively working 18 hour days when it was killing your marriage. The spouse is completely entitled to push for trying to find a solution, because it's them being affected as much as you.

 

If your response is going to be 'well, leave then' - fine. But don't then complain that all sexuals want is sex. In this scenario, they're the ones trying to work together for a solution, and the asexual/non-desiring partner is refusing.

As I've stated numerous times, there's nothing I can do, and there's nothing any man can do, once desire is completely gone.

 

You're totally absorbed in fixing blame where there is none, and finding problems where problems don't exist -- except for the sexual who insists on taking, irrationally and childishly, what a non-desiring partner can't give.

[Telecaster68]

Quote

As I've stated numerous times, there's nothing I can do, and there's nothing any man can do, once desire is completely gone.

And Ficto and I have pointed out how you're wrong.

 

Quote

You're totally absorbed in fixing blame where there is none, and finding problems where problems don't exist -- except for the sexual who insists on taking, irrationally and childishly, what a non-desiring partner can't give.

I'm simply saying that someone whose behaviour is painful to their partner and refuses to countenance the idea of finding a solution is selfish.

[JDP]

2 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

And Ficto and I have pointed out how you're wrong.

 

I'm simply saying that someone whose behaviour is painful to their partner and refuses to countenance the idea of finding a solution is selfish.

She hasn't pointed out that I'm wrong. She is saying that many men can be helped. She isn't saying desire can be manufactured at will, as you are.

 

Demanding sex is one thing. Demanding desire is something else entirely.

 

It's not like I'm holding it back, waiting for the right circumstances. It's gone. Poof. Just like that.

 

My wife is intelligent enough, mature enough, to understand that. She doesn't hold that against me.