I want a partial divorce!

[Agonizer]

I adore my wife. I like living with her, being around her, making small talk with her, cuddling with her, etc. I also think we are great parenting partners and financial/logistical partners. Those are the parts I want to stay married to.

Can I just divorce the intellectual and sexual parts of her?

Sexually, I give up. All the conditions that have to be just right for her to be interested in sex -- I'm worn out and resentful before we even get started. And when we do it, it's beyond dull, for both of us.

Intellectually, it's almost as bad. I can't have a deep conversation with her about anything that is important to me -- either my worldview makes her feel threatened or the details bore her to death.

I daydream about being roommates, parenting partners, financial partners, and friends, but having our sexual/romantic lives be our own business. I want to be free to interact with women who 'get me,' to feel man/woman chemistry again and not feel guilty about it. Similarly, she might like connecting with guys who are into what she's into, and if so, I want that for her.

But this idea is kind of a threat to the idyllic suburban lifestyle we are both trying to have. We are just starting to make friends in a new place, and being that weird couple with the open marriage or 'not really a marriage' could ruin it all. (I'm confident that I could keep a secret from everyone except my wife.)

Is this just an absurd fantasy or do some couples actually succeed at this kind of life?

[Sally]

I'm not quite sure why you are asking this on an asexual forum. Some of us have been married (me among them), but we're not really great sex or marriage counselors! :D

Edit: OOPS! I didn't notice you'd post this in Sexual Allies -- sorry, someone here may indeed be able to advise you about the extramartial stuff.

[Guest]

Many couples who have open marriages keep it secret from a lot of people. You can just have "friends" or "couple friends" without them needing to know they are romantic relationships, if that is what you want to do. Who you have sex with is your own business. You'd just have to keep the PDAs to places where no one you know would be around, so maybe dates in a different town or an agreement to no PDAs. You'd need your wife on board though. :)

[The B]

Questions for you to think on:

Do you have to stay married to be good parents and to work on the logistics of things?

Similarly, do you have to be married to someone with whom you have sex with, or with whom you have deep intellectual conversations with?

Do you really want the "suburban lifestyle"? How will it benefit you to be an exact copy of everyone else? How you run your marriage isn't their business. Who you have sex with or who takes the kids on the weekends isn't something you'll be discussing when you talk to your neighbors, is it? Is that what you want to talk about?

I'm also inclined to say that suburbia is full of people with unique marriage situations (divorce, etc.), just because that's how the world works. Would you really be so weird? Is being weird really so bad? Do you want friends who judge you that much?

[Agonizer]

Serran, thanks for that insight!

Tohuvabohu: Good questions.

I do think we could be good exes without living together, but I actually really like the day-to-day partnership, such as it is. I would miss her, and I would miss being a family of three.

I think I get the second question. I'm using the word "divorce" kind of symbolically here. Right now I'm enamored with the idea of formally terminating our interests in each other's sexual/romantic lives.

[Notte stellata]

Marriage is just a legal contract. What it entails is totally up to each couple, as long as they can reach an agreement. No rule says you have to have sex with, be "in love" with, or have intellectual conversations with your spouse. You can take whatever components in a marriage that work for you, and leave those that don't work for you and seek fulfillment from other people (again, your wife needs to agree). So yes, a "partial divorce" in this sense is totally possible, although I'd call that "customized marriage." :P It's no less real than a "normal" marriage, and it's a healthy approach for couples who have major incompatibilities but can still benefit from their mutual companionship overall.

[Méshie Péshie]

Sounds to me like you want an open relationship. I'm watching a movie about one right now actually. It's called "Fling." I highly suggest it :) Good luck.

[Philip027]

Yeah, I'd sure like to have my cake and eat it too, too.

But that ain't what marriage is all about, at least not typically. When you agree to marry someone else, you are accepting the entire package. You don't get to choose only the bits and pieces you want.

[Notte stellata]

But that ain't what marriage is all about, at least not typically. When you agree to marry someone else, you are accepting the entire package. You don't get to choose only the bits and pieces you want.

Not everyone wants the entire package, and there's nothing wrong with that. That's why it's important to discuss the terms and conditions before getting married (or even before starting a long-term relationship) and re-negotiate them down the road when people or circumstances have changed, as unromantic as it sounds. ;)

EDIT: Also, what the "entire package" contains is unclear to begin with. Most people would say sex is included in the package, but I bet most asexuals would disagree. And childfree people don't want the component of having kids, which is also considered part of the package by many people. If you can customize your marriage into a sexless and childfree one, you can also customize it into any way, shape or form.

[Philip027]

Yeah, my point was that if you are not OK with the entire package (note that this is different from *liking* the entire package, which you almost certainly will not), you should probably reconsider the whole marriage deal.

Most people will not be particularly thrilled at the prospect of the other person only being married to certain "parts" of you. I know I sure wouldn't be.

[Kitty Spoon Train]

Most people will not be particularly thrilled at the prospect of the other person only being married to certain "parts" of you. I know I sure wouldn't be.

Depends how you look at it...

eg. I know people who would probably quite seriously say that a marriage isn't "real" and complete until it has produced children.

So what about a couple who know they both don't want children, and go into marriage with the intention of being a childfree couple forever? According to the above mindset, they're only marrying parts of each other, and not really having a proper full package marriage. That can be extended to pretty much anything, including situations where certain aspects of personal fulfillment which are usually seen as belonging to marriage are obtained outside it. And as long as both people agree to it, I don't really see a problem.

For me personally for example, marriage makes very little sense altogether, since I don't want children and don't even want to live with someone and do the whole "domestic life partnership" deal. So about the only reason I'd ever get married was if there was some practical concern, such as citizenship or whatever. But very little of the traditional marriage "package" is something that me and the people I get along with as SOs would want from each other. :D

[Philip027]

eg. I know people who would probably quite seriously say that a marriage isn't "real" and complete until it has produced children.

Pretty piss poor way of looking at it, even if you rule out the people that just don't want children. Some people cannot produce children even though they'd sure like to. It is flat out wrong to try to police these people, saying that they cannot really be married, they cannot really experience love, or what have you.

It's the same sort of slippery slope argument that perpetuates dangerous abuser mindsets like "if you really loved me you'd have sex with me"

So what about a couple who know they both don't want children, and go into marriage with the intention of being a childfree couple forever? According to the above mindset, they're only marrying parts of each other, and not really having a proper full package marriage.

Even if it weren't for that mindset being fundamentally flawed (which it is), that kind of thing isn't really for people outside of those involved in the relationship to decide XD

[sound_the_bugle]

eg. I know people who would probably quite seriously say that a marriage isn't "real" and complete until it has produced children.

Pretty piss poor way of looking at it, even if you rule out the people that just don't want children. Some people cannot produce children even though they'd sure like to. It is flat out wrong to try to police these people, saying that they cannot really be married, they cannot really experience love, or what have you.

It's the same sort of slippery slope argument that perpetuates dangerous abuser mindsets like "if you really loved me you'd have sex with me"

So what about a couple who know they both don't want children, and go into marriage with the intention of being a childfree couple forever? According to the above mindset, they're only marrying parts of each other, and not really having a proper full package marriage.

Even if it weren't for that mindset being fundamentally flawed (which it is), that kind of thing isn't really for people outside of those involved in the relationship to decide XD

I don't think KST was disagreeing with that, but what he stated does support the argument (that is, that what "the whole package" is varies from person to person). Also, you just said that it wasn't those people's jobs to police said hypothetical couple's relationship and that it's for those in the relationship to decide. How is this person's idea of his ideal marriage less acceptable to you, and why do you feel like you can judge it and say that it is unacceptable?

[Kitty Spoon Train]

I don't think KST was disagreeing with that, but what he stated does support the argument (that is, that what "the whole package" is varies from person to person). Also, you just said that it wasn't those people's jobs to police said hypothetical couple's relationship and that it's for those in the relationship to decide.

Yeah, exactly.

I mean, of course I can see the problem of going up to someone new you're dating and one-sidedly expecting and "demanding" the ability to do something non-standard and "partial" with a relationship with them. But if those things are worked out and mutually negotiated, then it's all good.

But when you step right back, you can see that everything should be treated that way anyway. All relationships are unique. There are some "standard package" sets of boundaries out there which makes sense for a lot of people, for sure, but there's no reason why particular components can't be negotiated in each specific relationship.

Hmmm, I've been in the relationship anarchist mindset for a while now, I forget that stuff like this sounds a bit weird and needs explaining at times. :lol:

[Philip027]

Also, you just said that it wasn't those people's jobs to police said hypothetical couple's relationship and that it's for those in the relationship to decide. How is this person's idea of his ideal marriage less acceptable to you, and why do you feel like you can judge it and say that it is unacceptable?

I'm not saying it's unacceptable. I personally don't give a rat's ass.

I'm saying that if HE finds certain aspects of the other person undesirable, that's the sort of thing you should hash out prior to marriage, because as I stated, you don't get to pick and choose which "parts" of another person you want to be married to.

Also, by "entire package" I'm referring primarily to the other person and their attributes specifically (things that you can, in theory anyway, get a "partial divorce" to ), not the sort of things that you want to have out of a marriage (like sex, kids or what have you).

[Sally]

Not everyone is able to hash everything out before they get married. However, if they encounter problems during marriage, the person they should be talking to is their partner/spouse. Venting/asking question on an on-line forum doesn't replace that, because all you'll get are many individual opinions from people who are not your partner/spouse.

[arras]

Dear Agonizer

I understand you and agree with you in many ways. I also wish I could have a partial divorce (although not married) or as I normally put it to my friends I want a part time relationship. I just don't know how that would work in real life, is not like you can do 5-2 days a week or something like that because the feelings of unfulfilment do not come by request in an orderly manner.

I am a bit scared here because Aphrodite has been quite aggressive before and doesn't seem to get what you are talking about, but it is a relief to see that everyone else does.

In my case I love my partner in almost every sense and we make a perfect team on 90% things but there are parts of me that are starved in my relationship. Sex is one of them, having crazy fun and partying is another one. Overall, life with my partner is great most of the time but the feelings of emptiness and unfulfilled creativity, missing on biological fun and not reaching my potential lurk there 10% of the time. Certainly I believe sex is about practice and the least you do it the least you miss it. After 10 years I have no sexual desire for my partner any longer and much less desire that I used to have in general, but there is something sad about this for me, because sex can be so creative and take your life to the next level sometimes. We decided not to have children so we are not together for that, just because we love each other.

My partner and I did talk about an open relationship, of which I was in favour, but it was not accepted by saying: "no because one of us will fall in love and will be the end of our relationship" I see the point on this although you can fall in love at any time unexpectedly. We do not go to therapy or talk about it any longer because we get nowhere and only exacerbates de emptiness feelings so I distract myself with other things and I guess my partner might do the same when feeling like that.

I really cannot help, I am stuck on a similar place as you seem to be, just offering my solidarity. And yes I want to have my cake and eat too! just don't know how to do it.

[Philip027]

Not everyone is able to hash everything out before they get married.

I'm sure a lot of them would be able to if they exercised more patience before getting hitched.

But yes, not everything is foreseeable.

However, if they encounter problems during marriage, the person they should be talking to is their partner/spouse. Venting/asking question on an on-line forum doesn't replace that, because all you'll get are many individual opinions from people who are not your partner/spouse.

Def agreed on that part

I am a bit scared here because Aphrodite has been quite aggressive before and doesn't seem to get what you are talking about,

In what way am I not getting it?

If the ridiculous notion of wanting to "divorce" the aspects of your spouse that you don't like or agree with doesn't blatantly come off as wanting to have one's cake and eat it too, I really don't know what does.

I still stand by my first response to the thread.

That all being said, I'm sure the kind of arrangement the OP wants does exist (as essentially an open relationship), but that's definitely something to be comfirmed with the spouse, not any of us.

[Guest]

The wording was a little harsh, Phil, but someone not fulfilling their partner 100%, especially after being together a while is pretty common. It is HARD for a single person to fulfill 100% of a persons relationship needs. OP could probably word it better when discussing it with their spouse, to avoid hurt feelings, but the general idea is a pretty common one. "I love my spouse, but I can't do X with them." Many times a friend fills that role, but if sex is the thing they can't do, then something a bit beyond normal friendship is required.

arras - Why would falling in love end your relationship? Are you and your partner against polyamory? Many people assume loving another means being loved less, but that simply isn't true to everyone. If your partner is mono, that is fine - but if they just haven't looked into the poly lifestyle of loving more than one person, a little research might reassure them that even if love to another person happens, it doesn't have to mean the end of your relationship. Worth exploring if an open relationship is something you guys really want to do.

[Don't Sex Me Bro]

But that ain't what marriage is all about, at least not typically. When you agree to marry someone else, you are accepting the entire package. You don't get to choose only the bits and pieces you want.

Not everyone wants the entire package, and there's nothing wrong with that. That's why it's important to discuss the terms and conditions before getting married (or even before starting a long-term relationship) and re-negotiate them down the road when people or circumstances have changed, as unromantic as it sounds. ;)

EDIT: Also, what the "entire package" contains is unclear to begin with. Most people would say sex is included in the package, but I bet most asexuals would disagree. And child-free people don't want the component of having kids, which is also considered part of the package by many people. If you can customize your marriage into a sexless and child-free one, you can also customize it into any way, shape or form.

starrynight, you have hit the nail on the head as far as I'm concerned. Thank you!

[Sally]

But it takes both partners to do a satisfactory customization. If they don't agree about it, there's just more misery for both of them.

[The B]

I agree with Sally (and I am skimming, f%ing Norovirus is killing me) in that not everything can be hashed out before marriage, and the couple should be talking...but I do think that asking "outsiders" (outside relationship) for help can be beneficial, because they are removed from the situation and can think of/notice things and ask questions that might not have been thought of yet.

It very likely won't work out the way everyone expects it to - compromise is inevitable. I thought I'd found my forever man, and things just went all to hell when he started getting lazy and hurtful...I wanted to keep certain parts of him too, and kick out the others. I wanted to take a break, and see if things would change, but it all just fell apart. Be aware that a total falling-apart is a possibility too...

but, good, luck...

oh, also, I would think about how important this is to you, what is there ultimately to gain from it, over the other option (living with the best life could give you right now)...it sounds terribly stupid, but you know how the best advice for a job is to not quit until you've found a new one? well, perhaps that philosophy applies to relationships, in that...well, not finding a new relationship while you're still with someone else, but being able to be comfortable with being single or looking or whatever life will throw at you...did that make any sense? i feel like an elephant is sitting on my head :(

[Charming]

Just a note that I understand where you are coming from.

I think you could find an extra-marital intellectual mate and that would be fairly acceptable in our culture.

The idea of finding an extra-marital sexual mate is more complicated.

I walk in similar shoes and I wish you the best.

[joesantus]

Agonizer, you asked, "Is this just an absurd fantasy or do some couples actually succeed at this kind of life?".

A small percentage do succeed at open marriage. Success -- which itself is subjective -- depends in part upon each partner 1) giving not merely passive consent but active support to opening the marriage; 2) consistently communicating honestly, especially about feelings, while the marriage is open; 3) being able to sufficiently rationalize away the instinctive jealousy that inevitably arises at times 4) being ready and willing to terminate it at any point.

Open marriage requires effort. Like any other form of relationship, it can't solve nor resolve every problem; indeed, open marriage generates some unique to itself. Introducing multiple people into the mix of intimacy not only multiplies the complications but also increases the potential for heartaches.

So, from one who's experienced it (with success) -- only attempt open marriage with eyes wide open and no idyllic illusions.

[Agonizer]

I appreciate all the responses (to me and other members). Very insightful.

I've been pondering this, and I'm pretty sure my wife would be crushed if I even suggested open marriage or anything like it. So I'm accepting the likelihood that monogamy and a clean break are probably the only options I have.

[thoughtitwasjustme]

I have very similar feelings sometimes. My wife has never shown much interest in sex, although she was somewhat more interested briefly at the beginning. I believe she's either asexual or very close to it (just very very low drive and interest). There is no identifiable reason why she shouldn't be into sex, so I believe it's just the way she is.

I'm the opposite. To me, sex is an emotional experience that connects me with my partner. I want it as often and with as much variety as possible. With this divide between us growing every day, the emotional connection between us is very weak, if there at all. However, we are great co-parents. She stays at home, we don't fight much at all, and things function very well in our house. It's more transactional than romantic though. It's never really been romantic or passionate. She doesn't feel that or seem to need it, with anyone.

As the years go by though, it wears on me to be honest. We went through a pretty bad time recently for a few years where I really pushed to see if we could improve this area. I wanted passion, intimacy. I needed it to feel like I was bonded with her and that we had a real partnership. Eventually I just realized that we weren't compatible this way and never were and me trying to force her to be like me was just driving us further apart. I stepped back and realized that she just is the way she is. It's not wrong or right, it just is. I can't make her desire me or sex. I can't make her understand what sex is like for me. I can't really understand how she can be so apathetic to all things intimate, but she is.

So as a couple and parents we function very well now. There is very little relationship there though. I want to be able to be happy and feel connected to her without the intimacy, but I just don't work that way. It's the opposite of how I imagine everybody here feels. They don't understand how that works for me. Why do I need that so much? Why is it so important to me? Why does it have to be this prolonged and enthusiastic experience that comes from a real place? We can make analogies, but in the end I don't think we will truly ever really understand what it feels like to be in each other's shoes.

I've thought about the open marriage route. I just can't believe I would ever be okay with her with another man though. I'm so willing to be the man in her life, that it would crush me to see her happy with another man, even if it was mostly an asexual bond. I don't think I would deal with that well. So I would only want it open for me and I realize that that is very unfair. Also, I think she would be crushed, just like Agonizer's wife. It's just a natural human feeling to be jealous and feel threatened by your partner getting intimacy from someone else, even if you have very little desire to have that intimacy with them. That's another feeling that doesn't make logical sense to me, but I know that's how she feels.

I stay because I love seeing my children every day, and if I find other ways to be happy and fulfill myself outside of sexuality and passion, then our household functions. I've given up on pursuing my wife that way and it's been better for both of us. All the pressure is gone. It's not ideal and I definitely have my bad days where I long for a good sex life and someone who desires me, but I choose my family over those wants.

[joesantus]

"...I want to be able to be happy and feel connected to her without the intimacy, but I just don't work that way. It's the opposite of how I imagine everybody here feels. They don't understand how that works for me. Why do I need that so much? Why is it so important to me? Why does it have to be this prolonged and enthusiastic experience that comes from a real place? We can make analogies, but in the end I don't think we will truly ever really understand what it feels like to be in each other's shoes...."

Thoughtitwasjustme, actually several of us on site wear similar if not identical shoes, including myself, a man married thirty-three years to an Asexual woman. We definitely understand and empathize. The emotional pain might wane for periods but, nope, it never ends. Never.

And, while the Asexuals here obviously can't experience your specific pain, trust me -- enough of them have experienced being partnered with a Sexual for long-term, and they definitely do recognize the pain a Sexual partner such as you experiences.

[thoughtitwasjustme]

I was in no way trying to diminish the feelings of those with asexuality. In fact I think a lot of my growth has been just accepting my wife as she is, which I am now pretty certain is some level of asexuality (I assume it's a spectrum of sorts, but I'm still learning). I think this because she was never really into it and has never really sought out anything extramarital. She seems find to just hang out as basically roommates. The relationship functions for her that way just fine. She doesn't even need basic affections like hugging, although will go along for my sake I believe. I can tell when she is trying to fake it for me.

In the past that all made me very resentful, and to be honest I still have my days, but mostly now I just try and appreciate the good I have in my life and that my wife does want to be the partner I need, but just doesn't now how to be that person. So I stopped trying to force her to be that person. I know it's not going to happen. I don't pursue her anymore. The consequence of course is it lowers my self-esteem and the bond between us is mostly broken, but I do my best to be understanding of the position I'm in and be happy.

What I was saying about how we will never know what it feels like to be in each other's shoes I still stand by though. My wife recognizes the pain it causes me I believe, but she still doesn't 'get' it. I don't resent her for that. I don't get what it feels like to be asexual or homosexual or any other kind of sexual. I know that for me it's fundamental to remaining connected to my partner. Without it, it doesn't feel like a relationship to me. I don't ultimately understand how it does feel like one to her. How can just hanging out as friends in a house be a relationship to her? I can hang out and pal around with my guy friends if I need to. I have other female friends too that I obviously don't have romantic feelings for, but I share a lot with them as friends and hang out. It's very difficult for me to get into a mindset where no intimacy = relationship. It's not a state that I know, but I try and at least accept that it can be and that it's not wrong.

Asexuality confuses me to be honest, which is why I'm here. Who do asexuals seek out members of the opposite sex for instance? See, it's difficult for me to separate the male/female intimate dynamic from the relationship. Could they not find what they want just as easily in a same sexed partner? I do understand though that the genders bring many things to a relationship other than sexuality. I imagine that even asexuals enjoy the contrast of male and female.

[Sally]

Asexuality confuses me to be honest, which is why I'm here. Who do asexuals seek out members of the opposite sex for instance? See, it's difficult for me to separate the male/female intimate dynamic from the relationship. Could they not find what they want just as easily in a same sexed partner? I do understand though that the genders bring many things to a relationship other than sexuality. I imagine that even asexuals enjoy the contrast of male and female.

Aside from the obvious difference between sexuals and asexuals, both are similar in that there's many variations of relationshis. That is, just as sexuals, some asexuals are aesthetically/romantically attracted to their own "gender", or the other gender. Some asexuals don't feel any romantic attraction at all. In a sexual, not feeling romantic attraction would mean the sexual would have sex just for its own sake. In a sexual, not feeling romantic attraction would mean the asexual doesn't really want the other things in a relationshi: feeling the other erson is a artner (forgive me, it's obvious which letter on my keyboard isn't working!), liking some form of hysical affection (cuddling, etc.). There is much individual variation. But the standard among asexuals is that they are not interested in (sometimes are reulsed by) the act of sex with someone else.

I know it's confusing. But if you just take the "wanting sex with someone" out of the equation, then asexuals are just as varied in their feelings as sexuals.

[Guest]

Asexuality confuses me to be honest, which is why I'm here. Who do asexuals seek out members of the opposite sex for instance? See, it's difficult for me to separate the male/female intimate dynamic from the relationship. Could they not find what they want just as easily in a same sexed partner? I do understand though that the genders bring many things to a relationship other than sexuality. I imagine that even asexuals enjoy the contrast of male and female.

Aside from the obvious difference between sexuals and asexuals, both are similar in that there's many variations of relationshis. That is, just as sexuals, some asexuals are aesthetically/romantically attracted to their own "gender", or the other gender. Some asexuals don't feel any romantic attraction at all. In a sexual, not feeling romantic attraction would mean the sexual would have sex just for its own sake. In a sexual, not feeling romantic attraction would mean the asexual doesn't really want the other things in a relationshi: feeling the other erson is a artner (forgive me, it's obvious which letter on my keyboard isn't working!), liking some form of hysical affection (cuddling, etc.). There is much individual variation. But the standard among asexuals is that they are not interested in (sometimes are reulsed by) the act of sex with someone else.

I know it's confusing. But if you just take the "wanting sex with someone" out of the equation, then asexuals are just as varied in their feelings as sexuals.

Indeed what Sally says. We are as varied as sexuals. :)

It sounds like your wife is simply not physically affectionate, which some people even sexuals, are not. My cousin can barely tolerate hugs etc and he is a sexual, he is simply touch averse, but he tries to tolerate them for his wife since she likes physical affection. They both like sex, but physical intimacy outside of sex is something he has trouble with. So, that isn't just mixed relationships. Many asexuals are physically affectionate though - many of us like kissing, like hugging, like cuddling, etc. And romantic attraction works the same for us (asexuals, whether affectionate or not) as it does for sexuals, we just don't desire the sex part with the attraction. So, like for me, I am heteroromantic and I only develop romantic feelings for men. Being with a woman and kissing/cuddling/hand holding/long hugs etc just would feel weird to me, the attraction doesn't develop. Others may be biromantic, panromantic, homoromantic, etc and the same gender and/or opposite gender alls the same, just like with sexuals, but again lacking the sexual desire with the attraction bit.

Many people confuse what we want with friendship - in which case gender wouldn't matter at all to any of us usually, friendship is friendship. But, our romantic feelings are just as strong and just as varied as anyone elses. We simply don't require sex for romance. Take a man who has been married to his wife for say 20 years, then he gets into an accident and can no longer have sex. His romantic feelings for his wife are still there, his love, attraction, etc. Taking sex out of the equation doesn't null the other feelings. Now, I, personally couldn't have a romantic relationship without physical affection (hugs, cuddles, kisses, etc) but other people can and even prefer it.

Everyone has a different what is called by some experts "love language" - it can be speech, touch, time together, money spent, whatever. Things done for them/with them that make them feel loved. It's important in a relationship to learn each others language and try to work around it if it is different. My boyfriend feels loved by sex and compliments - two things I honestly do not find natural. I feel loved by physical non-sexual affection - something he is not good at. So, it can take a lot of work to work your head around "How on earth can they even like me if they don't do this?" when it feels like the perfectly NATURAL thing to do if you love someone. Both parties being able to take a step back, look at it from the others point of view and try to teach themselves how to make the other feel loved is part of the hard part of a relationship. Especially when one isn't that into touch, my cousin and his wife separated at one point because of their differences, but they ended up getting back together and working doubly hard at coming to an understanding. And now they seem much closer than ever, even though he still can't even let her massage his back he dislikes touch so much.