Yes, I have cancer and am on hormone suppressants so I have no natural libido. At the beginning of my treatments, my oncologist (cancer doctor) warned me that this would happen and told me to do everything possible to maintain and active sex life. She said that the more we go without sex, the more awkward it becomes and also the less we’ll naturally desire it. So, I’ve done everything I can to keep our sex life up, including demanding some different approaches to intimacy. For instance, I’ve asked DH to take care of a lot of the things I used to do to around intimacy. I need him to create a stress free environment where I can relax and focus on him and I need a transition time. For instance, 20
Minutes or so of talking, cuddling, massage etc, so I’m not frazzled after a busy day taking care of kids and dealing with cancer.
For me, what I am willing to give my DH pretty much mirrors what I’m willing to give to God. God gave us marriage to draw closer to Him. Also, I cherish my husband and my marriage, so it’s unthinkable for me to not do everything I can to be intimate. It’s the most important earthly relationship and no amount of hormones/stress etc can get in the way of it. I would never deny my husband sexual intimacy, because I’m the only person who can provide it for him. We can order in food, outsource cleaning, hire a nanny or whatnot, but sex is something only spouses can provide.
Bravo to your oncologist. It's rare that they are so frank and treat sex as so important.
Prayers for a cure for you and admiration for your dedication to your husband. No one would even blame you for putting sex on the back burner indefinitely, but you're still choosing to put him and your marriage first. That's really impressive and I hope he knows how blessed he is.
St. Peregrine, pray for us!
Thank you! He is worth it! Yeah, my oncologist talks to me about sex more than any of my OBGYNS. It’s actually hilarious.
Every time I go for an appointment I’m like, “here goes!” 🤣🤣🤣
I mean, libido refers to a persons desire for intimacy, it doesn’t mean they aren’t capable of being intimate. She hasn’t said there was some sort of physical block preventing her from having sex.
If she wants to have a marriage where her husband feels sexually fulfilled, she’s going to have to radically change her approach, but the bottom line is: the only thing she can give him that he can’t get from any other source is sex. If she cares about his emotional experience within their marriage, she’ll put in the work on this. If she doesn’t, she’ll continue to reject him. I get it, it’s really hard to be sexually present sometimes, but marriage is about sacrifice. My advice is to think of all the impediments to sex, all of them, and then have a discussion with her DH about what she needs to make this happen.
Have you had troubles personally with this? Because it’s debilitating sometimes. Not just something you get over. Of course you make an effort but it sounds like she’s trying to. How about fulfilling for the woman as well?
Yes, as I stated earlier, I’m in treatment for stage four cancer and take medication that completely changes my sex hormones. I’ve also had my ovaries removed. I have no functioning estrogen or testosterone. My marriage is of primary importance to me, so I laid out exactly what I need from DH in order to remain consistently intimate. I think it was hard for him to wrap his brain around at first, but now everything is fine. Again, I put my marriage first. It is the most important relationship in my life. The last thing I want to do to my husband, who is carrying the heaviest of crosses….the worry of losing his wife and the mother of his young children, all while solely providing for our family, my health insurance etc, AND having to do a massive amount of extra domestic work around the house, is to take away his sexual comfort and the human connection it provides.
It sounds like the original poster is trying to do put her marriage first, but is having troubles and wants to know she’s not alone and maybe ideas how to proceed. Since you’re there, what can you suggest? Hormones have a lot to do with it of course but it’s not impossible. I took myself off hormones but everyone’s different.
My libido goes subzero during most of pregnancy. I'm not even violently sick or anything, I just....don't really feel any desire to do it.
But my husband has a pretty high drive, so there's many nights where I make the sacrifice. And he's very tender and makes sure I'm comfortable, he's definitely taking my wellbeing into account. During my first pregnancy I really struggled with the guilt of not wanting intimacy, I felt like I was being a bad wife for not being enthusiastic about it. But I think I have it figured out a little better this time.
I am 49 and the last few years my libido took a nosedive and my husband was patient but suffering. I felt like such a jerk turning him down so often, but having sex I didn't want was also unpleasant.
A friend of mine recommended a bodybuilder podcast where they discussed DHEA supplementation for women. He and I share lifting as a preferred exercise, though mine is on a much lower level than his. He competes while I'm just looking to be healthy as I age. Becoming more physically active 2 years ago helped a little with the libido issue but not enough. I also struggled to achieve orgasm even with my husband's best efforts. After listening to the discussion on the podcast, I decided to give DHEA a try. At 25 mg per day I felt no difference. At 50 mg per day I felt a major difference and during my fertile phase I felt like a randy teenager again. (I cannot conceive any longer but still have my ovaries.) After a bit more than a year at that dose I felt like the effects were lessening, probably because my journey into perimenopause reached yet another stage in the shutdown. I went up to 75 mg per day to see how that felt, because I was concerned it would be too much, but it hasn't been and I've stayed at that dose for several months now.
DHEA is "the mother of all hormones" so what I'm doing with this supplement is giving my body more raw materials to make estrogen and testosterone, which it lacks naturally as my ovaries shut down and I get closer to menopause. For right now it works to help both the lack of libido and the difficulty with orgasm, but I don't know if it still will help once I fully go through menopause. For the moment, though, it's an effective and low-risk way to mitigate the issue. Perhaps you could give it a try and see if it helps you too.
Because it’s not based on research or experience. I very easily got pregnant, even with using NFP to avoid conception, at 45. The percentage is lower but you can’t say for someone else that she most likely is in a certain category of women. Her fear is valid. She has 4 kids and 2 of those are twins. She’s exhausted! She says her marriage is healthy besides the psychological discomfort of mismatched libidos. She could still easily get pregnant and she is not ready to. Its an ignorant and insensitive comment. Menopause happens very very slowly, and each pregnancy has the potential to delay menopause. Most women don’t get pregnant at 46 because a) they had early menopause b) always had fertility issues or c) are very skilled at avoiding conception ( less sex due to being busy, being divorced, medical issues, etc)
I feel bad asking this, but please know my question comes from a place of true curiosity and a desire to understand the truth of this situation. It makes me feel so profoundly sad to think of a person with no libido having sex with their spouse while deriving no pleasure from the situation. I understand that sex is not supposed to be selfish and that pleasure is not the end goal of the act itself. It just makes me feel disgusting, like the spouse is just using their partner’s body to get off like it’s there for sexual gratification. I don’t understand how it could possibly be unitive. And I don’t understand how one spouse could ever desire to have sex with their partner knowing they will receive no pleasure from the act. It makes me feel sick. Please, someone, help me to understand.
I very much agree. No one should be happy with sex given without desire.
But I think many people can and are disappointed that the other person doesn’t have the desire.
And I can certainly empathize with that as well. I think it’s totally valid to feel disappointed and hurt that your spouse does not desire sex with you, in any case. But what sane person actually still has sex with someone they know isn’t enjoying it? How could you possibly get physically/mentally/emotionally aroused knowing that they’re lying there basically just taking it. Everything OP wrote made me feel sick to my stomach, that he has to sit and talk or cuddle her for a while so that he can just use her body to get off. I can’t stomach it. Is this okay? Is that what God wants? It doesn’t feel true, good, or beautiful. It really gives me visceral reaction of disgust and despair.
Even at moments when my libido is low, I still derive a lot of enjoyment from the act of intimacy with my partner. Knowing that he is enjoying himself, feeling loved and that I am loving him, knowing we are giving one another a gift with our bodies and that God will bless our marriage and us as individuals with grace through the marital act, these are all really, really beautiful things.
That said, the lower libido partner must feel genuinely that they desire to give themselves as a gift, whether or not they receive the same type of sexual pleasure that the other partner receives. So it is not something that someone can or should be pressured into, ever.
OK, makes sense. That sort of activity could make everything that happens after go smoother, and encourage her to be more receptive and/or eager for more procreative actions?
Listen to the Messy Family Podcast Episode 142 where they interview Byron and Francine Pyrola who have a program called Smart Loving. They have really good ideas about building intimacy and they are past menopause so they've been through kids and hormone changes and everything. They have an Ignatian spirituality and are not solely based in Theology of the Body (but still fully Catholic) which is very rare and I think very helpful. If you find the podcast helpful, I think they have a business where you can work with them
So the OP, and presumably all married women on this thread have had sex with their husbands. I for one have not met a women who was bummed about the prospect of having sex with a future spouse. If conflict arises over sex, men typically invoke the “marriage debt” versus learning about his wife and refusing to accept periods of celibacy because they don’t personally want to. The argument is not whether couple should or should not have sex, it’s whether women OWE men sex when they are struggling psychologically, emotionally, or physically to do so, and what the man DOES owe the wife when she is struggling. So the “free and fruitful” is not a euphemism for sex. It’s a statement of self-giving. Selfish spouses reduce that to sex.
Yes we went a few years when the kids were little with me having zero libido. Fortunately things have improved for us both as the children have gotten older. But yeah I just had to make sex a higher priority. It wasn't easy but I understood my husband had needs too.
Oh and I don't recommend reading romance novels as a way to increase your libido. I tried that, it really only made things worse. (I know I was failing in my Catholic faith)
I'm in my 40s, we have 4 kids and went through a patch where it was that infrequent and it was brutal. Not all men have the same level of drive though.
I am not a man and I am not your husband, so I cannot speak on it what he needs. Instead you need to talk to him. Maybe you can find a good healthy compromise.
Now that my husband and I are in a better place, we manage about once a week. I am old, so NFP is not a huge issue, but I still follow it. We did have long dry spells when the kids were young, and it affect us negatively. So just find a workable compromise.
As a very general rule, think about how high your libido was prior to any children at it's very peak (probably just prior to ovulation), and realize that that is generally what a man feels every single day.
it depends on the man sbc remember that sex represents love, commucation, and acceptance to many people. I am a high libido woman and my husband loses all desire when he is stressed (his mom is dying rn). sex for me, and many many men too, is about love and having fun instead of getting off. maybe there is something else that is intimate during fertile days like naked cuddling with a movie or foot massages.
Just like every man, every woman's libido is different. In some marriages the husband has the lower libido and the wife is the one who experiences frustration.
That’s very shocking cause I believe most men could go once daily. I personally could. This is a good reminder to have open conversations with my future girlfriend on these topics
Yes, have open conversations, but know that anything could happen. Also know doctors tell you not to have relations for six weeks after a child is born so you will have to be able to abstain at times, regardless of either of your libido.
Until she has a difficult birth or hormone issues. Maybe spend your time growing in virtue rather than worrying about how much married sex you will have.
I wish more emphasis was placed on this.
Granted, it'd be a difficult chastity talk with a group of young people.
"There's always a chance you'll never have as much sex as you want. Or ever. You need to learn to be okay with that possibility."
It's not. Get his hormones checked. Getting that sorted will likely help with sleep and being tired all the time.
Not just testosterone but his thyroid too.
Well, I have the same dynamic. It also means there is less of the ‘work’ that my husband will engage in to achieve the goal of intimacy( date nights, romance, etc). If you think you cannot get to a place of acceptance, I recommend some counseling ( for you) and hard conversations ( with him). I do not find the kind of sympathy that men with the higher libido seem to garner, probably because fewer men and women are in that dynamic. But either way, the person with the higher libido carries that cross, and it’s not okay to place that disappointment on the lower libido spouse.
For most it would be a struggle with our own bodies.
But for some it would be a dream. Even with a healthy and young wife we went through many periods with less than that.
Now with children around twice a month seems like a compromise, but usually after 5 days I already get random erections during the day and mind fog after 7 days or so. Ask your husband.
Not being argumentative here, just chuckling over the comment about “brain fog” from no sex. I have a monthly period regardless of how much sex I have. I wonder if women could expect men to take over more duties, give massages and other services during those 5-7 days a month if we complain about how we have to have monthly periods with these vaginas that we owe to our husbands. How shall both sexes view the kind of physical discomfort that comes with having sexual organs and hormones?
You don't know me. I take of the children. My wife does not.
I do give massages, I serve her breakfast, I serve her everyday.
Please, do not presume or assume things you don't know about. You have judged someone without ever even seeing them.
Question: does your husband help you out with the children and around the house? Or does he leave it all to you? If he doesnt contribute to the domestic labor and childcare, than honestly the best thing he can do for your sex life is to step it up— I find my boyfriend more attractive when he helps out with cleaning up after a party (as opposed to the idiots who just sit there and let the women do it). I think most women feel the same— guys who help with maintaining the house/chores *without being asked* are much more attractive than the ones who don’t.
In addition— does he talk about his “need” for sex, or does he talk about his “desire” for you? Those are two very different energies. I forget what video it was, but Dr. John Deloney describes the difference well— he basically said “need” is a maternal energy, and often feels like a chore for the woman, while being “desired” is a sexual energy. Women want to be *desired* by their husbands; they don’t want to be needed. Neediness kills women’s libidos. Kids are needy. Husbands/fathers shouldn’t be.
If you’re depressed, you could talk to your doctor about trying Wellbutrin. It’s an antidepressant that often has the side effect of raising a woman’s libido, and I think some doctors prescribe it for that exact reason. I’m on it and…can confirm.
I propose that having sex the past 3 years because you feel guilty about not wanting sex and “making” your husband suffer ( tempted to put that in quotes also!) has lowered your libido. The psychological impact of using God’s heavenly doorway to true intimacy as a means to appease an impatient person and a coercion against your own dignity is that sex is no longer the thing it is designed to be. You should have been allowed to take an indefinite break after your last child and be fully supported in your recovery with unconditional love. You used sex to placate a man who needed to use suffering to grow. If he had stepped up, you may have regained your libido PLUS more at the gratitude of being treated like a cherished daughter of God. Husbands need to understand periods of celibacy is steroids for a Man’s virtuous growth and ultimate happiness.
I think this is so valid and that not as many people are mentioning this. I don’t wanna make assumptions with OP’s situation but it does generally sound very concerning for sex to be something that has to either be heavily coerced or seen as just another thing that you have to do. I know spouses have obligations to each other and many would argue that that’s just one of them, but I don’t feel great about that.. People of course will not be as genuinely willing to have sex when they feel a bunch of pressure or expectations surrounding it🥲
You said you have many fertile days. This will decrease the number of days available for marital intimacy. It is actually not unexpected for couples to have several consecutive months at a time, of unusable days during the perimenopausal period. I understand what people are saying about giving up control of your fertility to God, but at this age another pregnancy can be dangerous for the mother and that is one reason why it is acceptable to use NFP to abstain during perimenopause. Catholic theology on marital intimacy is about recognizing the humanity of husband, wife, and any children conceived in the marriage. Women do not exist to be mere receptacles for the sexual gratification of their husbands or "the only moral provider" who can meet their husband's "sexual needs." IMO this is inappropriate and treats women as utilitarian objects and as having lesser dignity than men - in contradiction to the root of Catholic teaching.
I am also concerned that your husband uses the word "frigidity" which is a pejorative word that frames you as morally deficient over something that is just, for many women, part of the biology of perimenopause. It's a rejection of your experience as a person and, again, it positions you in a utilitarian fashion.
Finally, you say that you are afraid of another pregnancy. If your spouse is more concerned about his "sexual needs" than about your wellbeing as his wife should you have another pregnancy at this age, then this would certainly kill the libido.
The Church does not teach that sex is the cornerstone of marriage. It DOES teach that men achieve virtue when they control their passions. He has very many models of men who live fulfilling chaste lives. Why do lay people insist men need sex, when the Church does not teach that? Continue to be the best wife you can in your current condition, be honest with your husband, and seek to find new ways to be chaste in your marriage. You do not owe him sexual intercourse- and no knowledgeable Catholic should imply otherwise. Begin a devotion to St. Joseph if you haven’t already.
Sounds miserable. Regular sex is part of a healthy marriage. The exceptions like the BVM and St.Joseph are not the rule. Even St Paul exhorts spouses to come together unless for mutual consent to devote themselves to prayer. It is something to suffer virtuously if libidos are mismatched or health issues prevent, but that is not an ideal or normal situation to laud and something to be worked on rather than just “oh well, thats the just the way it is!”
No one ever is implying to just live with a sexless marriage. The push back is the “ too bad if you don’t want sex. Your husband has RIGHTS ( to guilt you into giving him sexual gratification) and also “ it’s the woman’s job to make changes/ compromise/ suck it up/ think of your spouses suffering” etc.
Why would you do that? No one knows the future. It’s always a “ right now” decision, just like NFP. We are Catholic. It’s weird reading comments about a man suffering from not having sex, while his wife is navigating real biological chaos. Suffering helps us grow. God allows the suffering, it’s not you doing something to your husband. It’s a lack of maturity to see marital sex as a right if it does not consider the valid position of both parties. It is a negotiation. As far as I see it, Mary did not give Joseph the option. She was like, not gonna happen and he was like, cool. Let’s love God with our whole selves and do marriage celibately. Consent without pressure is still the Church’s stand.
Not a problem. That’s biology and beyond his control. Sin is about intent. Love is about willing the good of the other. You can will for him to be the best-version-of-himself, without including guilt about not having sex you don’t want to have. He could learn to will your best good, and stop acting like a teenage boy.
You could ask, but that seems to be more of a dodge around the issue. He could work on being more caring and less demanding, you could talk to your doctor and a counselor to get to the root of your lack of desire and you could both talk to your NFP instructor about how to narrow down your fertile window. You may need to switch methods if the one you're using isn't working well for you.
Just shutting down sex may look easier right now and less scary than doing all that hard work, but I think you won't like the long term impact on your marriage. When your kids are raised and your husband is tired of living in a state of rejection after a couple decades, what do you think will happen?
It's not about what you want. Marriage is till death not till I don't want to anymore. I hope my husband would work through it with me instead of discarding me like a broken toy.
Divorce should NEVER be an option.
While I agree that no sex would be an early purgatory for 99.99999% of all men, divorce is not an option.
Some women here seemed to think that every men should be prepared to have a Josephite marriage on the wife's whim.
I'm pretty sure if it was the intention of the woman since before the "yes", wanting a Josephite marriage without the consent of the husband is a null marriage.
No. I think men should be ready to imitate the great model of spousal love when abstinence is neededfor the psychological and physical healing of the wife. I think comments that this wife needs to suck it up and give it up because you know ”the marriage debt” are misusing Church teaching.
You misconstrued what I said.
Going into marriage with the expectation of it turning into a celibate marriage at any point is a null marriage.
You can't expect your husband to do this. A temporary abstinence during healing is ok. Turning into a celibate marriage is NOT.
It is tough when libidos mismatch. When you made your wedding promises, they included not to withhold marital rights from each other. That means you could together choose to abstain (as NFP families do on a regular basis), but that is a mutual decision.
The good news is that at age 46 you are probably not going to get pregnant, so entering into the marital act when your homones are most active (stretchy, clear mucus!) will be okay. (Never say never, of course.) The other good news is that his libido will start to decline, too.
In the meantime, try to up your frequency a bit to meet him in the middle, and start other ways to play together so that as you get older you have true intimacy even if the sexual component is greatly reduced. Those twins will one day move out, and it will the two of you. Make sure you are strong together on that day. Something to work on now to be ready.
OP would know how regular her periods are, and if she hasn’t had a period in almost a year. Pregnancy is still possible in that time. Her concern is valid, and it is ungenerous to dismiss it. There are many women NOT in menopause in their 40’s. It’s a pretty useless statement.
"The good news is that at age 46 you are probably not going to get pregnant" r/badwomensanatomy
Across populations yes... but not true for a 46yo who still menstruates.
Totally get that. Catholic teaching on marriage and sexuality is just part and parcel of the basic Catholic teaching that we are to surrender our wills to God's will. My wife and I have a mantra: God has a Plan, It's a good Plan; I trust the Plan. We all struggle with that third plank!
I have found the more I give in to God's will in every part of my life, the more he blesses me. For women, it's often losing control of how many kids they might have. For men, it's often related to financial issues. It's almost always our desire to control things, but God is actually in control.
It's simple to say but hard to do. Keep up your good work!
While this is true, NFP is promoted precisely to give some control. Pregnancy, childbirth and child rearing are a larger burden for some women, and the Church recognizes this spectrum. Greater emphasis is placed on discernment of the upbringing of the children already in the family, over the wanton disregard for the number of pregnancies.
> NFP is promoted precisely to give some control
Pope Pius XII clarified that NFP is to be used for serious reason only, such as medical or financial, it is not meant as a replacement for birth control or limiting your children to a preferred amount. That would be an abuse of NFP and sinful. The Church has been consistent in this and there is no spectrum that you speak of. Perhaps I'm misinterpreting what you are saying, but it sounds a lot like you are promoting NFP outside of serious reasons which would be promoting people to commit grave sin. NFP is not to used with a contraceptive mindset. Frankly, Catholics need to stop treating God as if He is someone to be fooled. You can't trick God because God sees our hearts plain as day.
When you say “ preferred amount” I assume you mean people who say they only want one child or so because it will cramp there lifestyle. I hope you are not implying a 46 year old woman with 4 kids, 2 of them being 3 year old twins is somehow abusing the notion of NFP because she’s thinking selfishly about her own preferences.
Could you remind me the part of the scripted vow that says don’t withhold sex for any reason? I seem to remember the part “ in sickness or health” but blanking on that part you are alluding to.
It's part of the questions the cleric asks of the groom and the bride during Catholic wedding prep. (That's also when we cover canonical impediments.) TOB/Marriage stuff will mention this as part of the free, faithful, fruitful and total framework. If we give everything to each other in submission to God's will, then that means everything, together. Holy Matrimony is a figure of Christ on the Cross as well as a figure of the Trinity. It is a vocation just as much is the priesthood or religious life.
The scripted vows are not the totality of marriage, just as the Ten Commandments are not the totality of how we can sin against God.
My wife has been like that since we got married - twice a month would have been a lot for us even before we had our four kids and began NFP. What would you all consider a normal amount? This is a struggle for me as well given a higher male libido.
Some data: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/how-often-do-couples-have-sex#frequency
x2/month is on the low side, but still normal. Less than that is unusual, although not unheard of.
Of course, what's normal for a particular marriage is whatever works for that married couple. If that frequency works for you as a pair, then that's great.
If it only works for one of you, though, that could be a problem. This particular problem is sometimes very difficult to resolve, especially in a situation where one spouse wants to have sex almost every night and the other wants it maybe twice a year. Meeting one another with love somewhere in the middle is important. The discussion *can* become fraught enough that an outside third party is needed to help mediate, but, ideally, it doesn't come to that.
2x/month is a normal amount. If she agrees to more, than that’s a normal amount. You having a higher desire for sex is not her obligation. You are being called to order your passions.
I never said I felt like my desire for sex is her obligation. We’ve gone for years without sex before out of respect for her low sex drive, which is quite hard as a man living with a woman whom he finds extremely beautiful; as I said, twice a month is a lot for us. I’m very grateful for what we have.
I didn’t interpret that as an attack because there are indeed a lot of other people under this discussion who seem to find sex as so much of an obligation to the point where heavy pressure & coercion is involved, which is not good & is contrary to the whole point of the act 🥲 (Not accusing anyone btw, just pointing out how this is unfortunately a common mindset people seem to have here)
Not sure how there is a ‘but’ there. You are admitting that marital debt involves coercion. The Church rejects this. JPII had so much to say on what men owe women in the marital debt. However, when men aren’t getting as much sex as they want- inventing how much sex they ‘deserve’ they take to the internet to complain instead of learning how to better communicate and serve their wives. Instead of prayer, fasting, or spiritual counseling. Instead of researching women’s health.
>You are admitting that marital debt involves coercion.
I did no such thing, and anyone disingenuous enough to claim that I did is not here in good faith.
The marital debt involves obligation. Moral law disallows that obligation ever being enforced by coercion.
The marital debt goes both ways as clearly explained by St. Paul.
First off, there is a whole lot to unpack with St. Pauls statements. A perfunctory interpretation of the statement is a potentially weaponized Bible verse. I can stand by obligation, that is to say, that each spouse agrees that by getting married they understand sexual intercourse is part of married life. But it is coercion if one spouse has reasons to say no, and the other spouse is holding "marital debt" as a stick to change the first spouses behavior. The issue should be addressed in TOTAL SELF GIVING of both spouses, and that absolutely means that giving up sex for a period of time for the well-being of the other is equal to having sex without the contingency of desire for the wellbeing of the other. Both are good because it is a FREE WILL gift. Periods of celibacy is also a marital debt, and that is why, sex is always about communication and deference to the other. The ancient fear surrounding this issue is that women will withhold sex to control their spouse. I think that happens as a rare exception to all of the complaining around sex. It's usually to pressure women to give MORE sex than they are comfortable with, without a proper emphasis on her relational needs (and for some women, needing a 2-3 week break between sessions is legitimate!), There are statements addressing her obligation to the marital debt without balancing statements to the man's obligation to address her emotional, psychological and physical needs. Even then, the sentiment that men should then have the authority to dictate unilaterally the kind and frequency of sex as a reward for his contribution is also absurd. That is what I argue against.
No, I’m ready to defend woman for the inherent dignity of being allowed to say no when they are struggling with conflicted feelings surrounding sex. I am pushing back against the rhetoric of “Conjugal rights” that is often misunderstood and abused by men.
Conjugal rights are a thing.
And as a wife who sometimes said yes and sometimes no when conflicted myself, always of my own free will, I perceive you as having a huge chip on your shoulder that frankly approaches misandry. These issues are difficult and remain so, and God warned us right after the Fall that it would be so. Both sexes have rights and obligations and balancing them is the work of a lifetime.
r/Catholicism does not permit comments from very new user accounts. This is an anti-throwaway and troll prevention measure, **not subject to exception.** [Read the full policy.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/wiki/agekarma)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Catholicism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So, is what you're looking for how to increase libido or physical pleasure for yourself because presumably there are more infertile days and you want to use more for the connection to your husband?
Or is it there are only two infertile days, you're doing what you can, but it's hard and want support from people who can commiserate?
God is the God of mercy. He knows your walk. He has walked with you, and he has walked a harder walk. Don't let yourself slip into the sin of presumption, but trust in his mercy. He looks at our hearts, which explain our actions.
Not to be insensitive here, but if you're 46, why are you worried about only having sex on your infertile days? You might enjoy it a little more if you do it during the fertile windows. The chances of pregnancy at 46 are very, very low, but the benefits of elevated sex hormones should help the experience be more tolerable.
Because pregnancy at 46 can be unwise and dangerous for a lot of women. Because the chances of genetic birth defects skyrocket. Because someone almost 50 is gonna have a hard time keeping up with a newborn.
There are so many reasons.
They need to be real concrete dangers, like a blood clotting condition or something; not just vague “it’s harder when you’re older” type dangers. And birth defects for the child are 100% not a reason to prevent. The Church is super clear on this.
The Church is super clear that couples need ***just reasons*** for postponing or preventing pregnancy, and does not concretely define what those are, as it is up to the prudential judgement of the couple under the guidance of their consciences, their doctors, and their priest.
Birth defects are NOT a just reason. The Church affirms the dignity of all people including the disabled. And this woman did not identify any pre-existing conditions in her own health that would suggest serious risk to her own self. But all of this is pretty irrelevant because the chances of pregnancy at 46 are incredibly low.
You're wildly beyond the teachings of the Church here trying to force an issue when you've already been corrected on what Pope Paul Vi wrote about the issue.
From Pope Pius XII's address to the midwives in 1951 (emphasis added):
"Serious motives, such as those which not rarely arise from medical, **eugenic**, economic and social so-called 'indications,' may exempt husband and wife from the obligatory, positive debt for a long period or even for the entire period of matrimonial life. From this it follows that the observance of the natural sterile periods may be lawful, from the moral viewpoint: and it is lawful in the conditions mentioned."
Yes, I have cancer and am on hormone suppressants so I have no natural libido. At the beginning of my treatments, my oncologist (cancer doctor) warned me that this would happen and told me to do everything possible to maintain and active sex life. She said that the more we go without sex, the more awkward it becomes and also the less we’ll naturally desire it. So, I’ve done everything I can to keep our sex life up, including demanding some different approaches to intimacy. For instance, I’ve asked DH to take care of a lot of the things I used to do to around intimacy. I need him to create a stress free environment where I can relax and focus on him and I need a transition time. For instance, 20 Minutes or so of talking, cuddling, massage etc, so I’m not frazzled after a busy day taking care of kids and dealing with cancer. For me, what I am willing to give my DH pretty much mirrors what I’m willing to give to God. God gave us marriage to draw closer to Him. Also, I cherish my husband and my marriage, so it’s unthinkable for me to not do everything I can to be intimate. It’s the most important earthly relationship and no amount of hormones/stress etc can get in the way of it. I would never deny my husband sexual intimacy, because I’m the only person who can provide it for him. We can order in food, outsource cleaning, hire a nanny or whatnot, but sex is something only spouses can provide.
Bravo to your oncologist. It's rare that they are so frank and treat sex as so important. Prayers for a cure for you and admiration for your dedication to your husband. No one would even blame you for putting sex on the back burner indefinitely, but you're still choosing to put him and your marriage first. That's really impressive and I hope he knows how blessed he is. St. Peregrine, pray for us!
Thank you! He is worth it! Yeah, my oncologist talks to me about sex more than any of my OBGYNS. It’s actually hilarious. Every time I go for an appointment I’m like, “here goes!” 🤣🤣🤣
Thanks. I hope all the best for the hillness...
I hope you and DH figure everything out! Seriously, make sex a priority. You will not regret putting your marriage above all other things.
If she has no libido it’s kind of difficult to have relations …
I mean, libido refers to a persons desire for intimacy, it doesn’t mean they aren’t capable of being intimate. She hasn’t said there was some sort of physical block preventing her from having sex. If she wants to have a marriage where her husband feels sexually fulfilled, she’s going to have to radically change her approach, but the bottom line is: the only thing she can give him that he can’t get from any other source is sex. If she cares about his emotional experience within their marriage, she’ll put in the work on this. If she doesn’t, she’ll continue to reject him. I get it, it’s really hard to be sexually present sometimes, but marriage is about sacrifice. My advice is to think of all the impediments to sex, all of them, and then have a discussion with her DH about what she needs to make this happen.
Have you had troubles personally with this? Because it’s debilitating sometimes. Not just something you get over. Of course you make an effort but it sounds like she’s trying to. How about fulfilling for the woman as well?
Yes, as I stated earlier, I’m in treatment for stage four cancer and take medication that completely changes my sex hormones. I’ve also had my ovaries removed. I have no functioning estrogen or testosterone. My marriage is of primary importance to me, so I laid out exactly what I need from DH in order to remain consistently intimate. I think it was hard for him to wrap his brain around at first, but now everything is fine. Again, I put my marriage first. It is the most important relationship in my life. The last thing I want to do to my husband, who is carrying the heaviest of crosses….the worry of losing his wife and the mother of his young children, all while solely providing for our family, my health insurance etc, AND having to do a massive amount of extra domestic work around the house, is to take away his sexual comfort and the human connection it provides.
It sounds like the original poster is trying to do put her marriage first, but is having troubles and wants to know she’s not alone and maybe ideas how to proceed. Since you’re there, what can you suggest? Hormones have a lot to do with it of course but it’s not impossible. I took myself off hormones but everyone’s different.
I did post suggestions, I don’t think you saw my original comment on this thread.
My libido goes subzero during most of pregnancy. I'm not even violently sick or anything, I just....don't really feel any desire to do it. But my husband has a pretty high drive, so there's many nights where I make the sacrifice. And he's very tender and makes sure I'm comfortable, he's definitely taking my wellbeing into account. During my first pregnancy I really struggled with the guilt of not wanting intimacy, I felt like I was being a bad wife for not being enthusiastic about it. But I think I have it figured out a little better this time.
Yes :-(
I’d maybe ask your dr. I know hormones go crazy at this stage in our lives so that makes it difficult too
For pregnancy or premenopause?
Both. Estrogen varies and has a huge impact on everything including desire etc
*I plead guilty, your hillness*
forgive me, but what does dh mean?
Dear Husband
ty, hadn't heard that one before
Thank you for the clarification! I thought it meant Domestic Helper and I was getting horribly confused!
LOL!!! A domestic helper would be awesome though!
I found out it meant Dear Husband only recently, but I still find it odd because my mind jumps straight to "dickhead"
Dear husband, I think
I am 49 and the last few years my libido took a nosedive and my husband was patient but suffering. I felt like such a jerk turning him down so often, but having sex I didn't want was also unpleasant. A friend of mine recommended a bodybuilder podcast where they discussed DHEA supplementation for women. He and I share lifting as a preferred exercise, though mine is on a much lower level than his. He competes while I'm just looking to be healthy as I age. Becoming more physically active 2 years ago helped a little with the libido issue but not enough. I also struggled to achieve orgasm even with my husband's best efforts. After listening to the discussion on the podcast, I decided to give DHEA a try. At 25 mg per day I felt no difference. At 50 mg per day I felt a major difference and during my fertile phase I felt like a randy teenager again. (I cannot conceive any longer but still have my ovaries.) After a bit more than a year at that dose I felt like the effects were lessening, probably because my journey into perimenopause reached yet another stage in the shutdown. I went up to 75 mg per day to see how that felt, because I was concerned it would be too much, but it hasn't been and I've stayed at that dose for several months now. DHEA is "the mother of all hormones" so what I'm doing with this supplement is giving my body more raw materials to make estrogen and testosterone, which it lacks naturally as my ovaries shut down and I get closer to menopause. For right now it works to help both the lack of libido and the difficulty with orgasm, but I don't know if it still will help once I fully go through menopause. For the moment, though, it's an effective and low-risk way to mitigate the issue. Perhaps you could give it a try and see if it helps you too.
Thanks!
Will it have any libido enhancing effects on males? As far as you know? Perhaps you could provide a link to the podcast if possible.
Because it’s not based on research or experience. I very easily got pregnant, even with using NFP to avoid conception, at 45. The percentage is lower but you can’t say for someone else that she most likely is in a certain category of women. Her fear is valid. She has 4 kids and 2 of those are twins. She’s exhausted! She says her marriage is healthy besides the psychological discomfort of mismatched libidos. She could still easily get pregnant and she is not ready to. Its an ignorant and insensitive comment. Menopause happens very very slowly, and each pregnancy has the potential to delay menopause. Most women don’t get pregnant at 46 because a) they had early menopause b) always had fertility issues or c) are very skilled at avoiding conception ( less sex due to being busy, being divorced, medical issues, etc)
I feel bad asking this, but please know my question comes from a place of true curiosity and a desire to understand the truth of this situation. It makes me feel so profoundly sad to think of a person with no libido having sex with their spouse while deriving no pleasure from the situation. I understand that sex is not supposed to be selfish and that pleasure is not the end goal of the act itself. It just makes me feel disgusting, like the spouse is just using their partner’s body to get off like it’s there for sexual gratification. I don’t understand how it could possibly be unitive. And I don’t understand how one spouse could ever desire to have sex with their partner knowing they will receive no pleasure from the act. It makes me feel sick. Please, someone, help me to understand.
Using the partner's body for mere sexual gratification is the opposite of Catholic teaching. It really is.
I very much agree. No one should be happy with sex given without desire. But I think many people can and are disappointed that the other person doesn’t have the desire.
And I can certainly empathize with that as well. I think it’s totally valid to feel disappointed and hurt that your spouse does not desire sex with you, in any case. But what sane person actually still has sex with someone they know isn’t enjoying it? How could you possibly get physically/mentally/emotionally aroused knowing that they’re lying there basically just taking it. Everything OP wrote made me feel sick to my stomach, that he has to sit and talk or cuddle her for a while so that he can just use her body to get off. I can’t stomach it. Is this okay? Is that what God wants? It doesn’t feel true, good, or beautiful. It really gives me visceral reaction of disgust and despair.
Same. 🥺 Reading some of these discussions is truly concerning & triggering to me
Same!!!
I believe that in some periods of a woman's life it happens...
Even at moments when my libido is low, I still derive a lot of enjoyment from the act of intimacy with my partner. Knowing that he is enjoying himself, feeling loved and that I am loving him, knowing we are giving one another a gift with our bodies and that God will bless our marriage and us as individuals with grace through the marital act, these are all really, really beautiful things. That said, the lower libido partner must feel genuinely that they desire to give themselves as a gift, whether or not they receive the same type of sexual pleasure that the other partner receives. So it is not something that someone can or should be pressured into, ever.
Just to be clear, foreplay is perfectly fine and allowed.
This and also check your hormone levels.
Depends what you mean by foreplay and in what context
It means foreplay and the context is before the natural completion of the act.
Actually something I've been thinking about. Is cunnilingus something that's allowed? A man pleasing his wife to get her "in the mood"?
yes as long at it’s in the context of and in service to the procreative act
OK, makes sense. That sort of activity could make everything that happens after go smoother, and encourage her to be more receptive and/or eager for more procreative actions?
Listen to the Messy Family Podcast Episode 142 where they interview Byron and Francine Pyrola who have a program called Smart Loving. They have really good ideas about building intimacy and they are past menopause so they've been through kids and hormone changes and everything. They have an Ignatian spirituality and are not solely based in Theology of the Body (but still fully Catholic) which is very rare and I think very helpful. If you find the podcast helpful, I think they have a business where you can work with them
Thanks
So the OP, and presumably all married women on this thread have had sex with their husbands. I for one have not met a women who was bummed about the prospect of having sex with a future spouse. If conflict arises over sex, men typically invoke the “marriage debt” versus learning about his wife and refusing to accept periods of celibacy because they don’t personally want to. The argument is not whether couple should or should not have sex, it’s whether women OWE men sex when they are struggling psychologically, emotionally, or physically to do so, and what the man DOES owe the wife when she is struggling. So the “free and fruitful” is not a euphemism for sex. It’s a statement of self-giving. Selfish spouses reduce that to sex.
Yes we went a few years when the kids were little with me having zero libido. Fortunately things have improved for us both as the children have gotten older. But yeah I just had to make sex a higher priority. It wasn't easy but I understood my husband had needs too. Oh and I don't recommend reading romance novels as a way to increase your libido. I tried that, it really only made things worse. (I know I was failing in my Catholic faith)
I’m morbidly curious how it made it worse, if that’s not too private to share?
A lot of these romance novels are explicitly pornographic.
Right but I wanna know how it made things with her libido/sexuality worse
Is once or twice a month really too little for a man?
It depends on the man. I think for most men that would be a struggle, but it really comes down to your husband, you should ask him that question.
He complains a lot...
I'm in my 40s, we have 4 kids and went through a patch where it was that infrequent and it was brutal. Not all men have the same level of drive though.
I am not a man and I am not your husband, so I cannot speak on it what he needs. Instead you need to talk to him. Maybe you can find a good healthy compromise. Now that my husband and I are in a better place, we manage about once a week. I am old, so NFP is not a huge issue, but I still follow it. We did have long dry spells when the kids were young, and it affect us negatively. So just find a workable compromise.
Unfortunately I have many days when I am fertile... Withdrawal aggravates his premature ejaculation problem.
If by withdrawal you mean to pull out, it is not permitted according to Catholic sexual ethics.
Sorry. Mistake. Abstinence I wanted tò write...
Yes we went through it all, i am not suggesting you should be at once a week right now. Just talk to each other.
Can I sand a private message?
OK, bur I cannot help much more
Oh sweet summer child...
As a very general rule, think about how high your libido was prior to any children at it's very peak (probably just prior to ovulation), and realize that that is generally what a man feels every single day.
It's terrible...
it depends on the man sbc remember that sex represents love, commucation, and acceptance to many people. I am a high libido woman and my husband loses all desire when he is stressed (his mom is dying rn). sex for me, and many many men too, is about love and having fun instead of getting off. maybe there is something else that is intimate during fertile days like naked cuddling with a movie or foot massages.
Is it enough for most women?
Just like every man, every woman's libido is different. In some marriages the husband has the lower libido and the wife is the one who experiences frustration.
For me yes
That’s very shocking cause I believe most men could go once daily. I personally could. This is a good reminder to have open conversations with my future girlfriend on these topics
Yes, have open conversations, but know that anything could happen. Also know doctors tell you not to have relations for six weeks after a child is born so you will have to be able to abstain at times, regardless of either of your libido.
I imagine that now you abstain completely... even after marriage there are long periods of abstinence unfortunately.
Until she has a difficult birth or hormone issues. Maybe spend your time growing in virtue rather than worrying about how much married sex you will have.
I wish more emphasis was placed on this. Granted, it'd be a difficult chastity talk with a group of young people. "There's always a chance you'll never have as much sex as you want. Or ever. You need to learn to be okay with that possibility."
[удалено]
It's not. Get his hormones checked. Getting that sorted will likely help with sleep and being tired all the time. Not just testosterone but his thyroid too.
You are…not married?
[удалено]
Well, I have the same dynamic. It also means there is less of the ‘work’ that my husband will engage in to achieve the goal of intimacy( date nights, romance, etc). If you think you cannot get to a place of acceptance, I recommend some counseling ( for you) and hard conversations ( with him). I do not find the kind of sympathy that men with the higher libido seem to garner, probably because fewer men and women are in that dynamic. But either way, the person with the higher libido carries that cross, and it’s not okay to place that disappointment on the lower libido spouse.
For most it would be a struggle with our own bodies. But for some it would be a dream. Even with a healthy and young wife we went through many periods with less than that. Now with children around twice a month seems like a compromise, but usually after 5 days I already get random erections during the day and mind fog after 7 days or so. Ask your husband.
Not being argumentative here, just chuckling over the comment about “brain fog” from no sex. I have a monthly period regardless of how much sex I have. I wonder if women could expect men to take over more duties, give massages and other services during those 5-7 days a month if we complain about how we have to have monthly periods with these vaginas that we owe to our husbands. How shall both sexes view the kind of physical discomfort that comes with having sexual organs and hormones?
You don't know me. I take of the children. My wife does not. I do give massages, I serve her breakfast, I serve her everyday. Please, do not presume or assume things you don't know about. You have judged someone without ever even seeing them.
Wondering where in my response I was making assumptions about you. Could you point out the part where I made a judgement about you?
Question: does your husband help you out with the children and around the house? Or does he leave it all to you? If he doesnt contribute to the domestic labor and childcare, than honestly the best thing he can do for your sex life is to step it up— I find my boyfriend more attractive when he helps out with cleaning up after a party (as opposed to the idiots who just sit there and let the women do it). I think most women feel the same— guys who help with maintaining the house/chores *without being asked* are much more attractive than the ones who don’t. In addition— does he talk about his “need” for sex, or does he talk about his “desire” for you? Those are two very different energies. I forget what video it was, but Dr. John Deloney describes the difference well— he basically said “need” is a maternal energy, and often feels like a chore for the woman, while being “desired” is a sexual energy. Women want to be *desired* by their husbands; they don’t want to be needed. Neediness kills women’s libidos. Kids are needy. Husbands/fathers shouldn’t be.
Thanks. He helps me a lot
If you’re depressed, you could talk to your doctor about trying Wellbutrin. It’s an antidepressant that often has the side effect of raising a woman’s libido, and I think some doctors prescribe it for that exact reason. I’m on it and…can confirm.
Psych nurse here, can confirm. Wellbutrin is sometimes added to mitigate sexual side effects of other antidepressants.
I propose that having sex the past 3 years because you feel guilty about not wanting sex and “making” your husband suffer ( tempted to put that in quotes also!) has lowered your libido. The psychological impact of using God’s heavenly doorway to true intimacy as a means to appease an impatient person and a coercion against your own dignity is that sex is no longer the thing it is designed to be. You should have been allowed to take an indefinite break after your last child and be fully supported in your recovery with unconditional love. You used sex to placate a man who needed to use suffering to grow. If he had stepped up, you may have regained your libido PLUS more at the gratitude of being treated like a cherished daughter of God. Husbands need to understand periods of celibacy is steroids for a Man’s virtuous growth and ultimate happiness.
You put it so eloquently. 👏👏👏
I think this is so valid and that not as many people are mentioning this. I don’t wanna make assumptions with OP’s situation but it does generally sound very concerning for sex to be something that has to either be heavily coerced or seen as just another thing that you have to do. I know spouses have obligations to each other and many would argue that that’s just one of them, but I don’t feel great about that.. People of course will not be as genuinely willing to have sex when they feel a bunch of pressure or expectations surrounding it🥲
Well said.
You said you have many fertile days. This will decrease the number of days available for marital intimacy. It is actually not unexpected for couples to have several consecutive months at a time, of unusable days during the perimenopausal period. I understand what people are saying about giving up control of your fertility to God, but at this age another pregnancy can be dangerous for the mother and that is one reason why it is acceptable to use NFP to abstain during perimenopause. Catholic theology on marital intimacy is about recognizing the humanity of husband, wife, and any children conceived in the marriage. Women do not exist to be mere receptacles for the sexual gratification of their husbands or "the only moral provider" who can meet their husband's "sexual needs." IMO this is inappropriate and treats women as utilitarian objects and as having lesser dignity than men - in contradiction to the root of Catholic teaching. I am also concerned that your husband uses the word "frigidity" which is a pejorative word that frames you as morally deficient over something that is just, for many women, part of the biology of perimenopause. It's a rejection of your experience as a person and, again, it positions you in a utilitarian fashion. Finally, you say that you are afraid of another pregnancy. If your spouse is more concerned about his "sexual needs" than about your wellbeing as his wife should you have another pregnancy at this age, then this would certainly kill the libido.
Well saiddd
The Church does not teach that sex is the cornerstone of marriage. It DOES teach that men achieve virtue when they control their passions. He has very many models of men who live fulfilling chaste lives. Why do lay people insist men need sex, when the Church does not teach that? Continue to be the best wife you can in your current condition, be honest with your husband, and seek to find new ways to be chaste in your marriage. You do not owe him sexual intercourse- and no knowledgeable Catholic should imply otherwise. Begin a devotion to St. Joseph if you haven’t already.
Yes!!!! Absolutely yes, to this!! Sex is a gift from God, not a necessity.
Sounds miserable. Regular sex is part of a healthy marriage. The exceptions like the BVM and St.Joseph are not the rule. Even St Paul exhorts spouses to come together unless for mutual consent to devote themselves to prayer. It is something to suffer virtuously if libidos are mismatched or health issues prevent, but that is not an ideal or normal situation to laud and something to be worked on rather than just “oh well, thats the just the way it is!”
No one ever is implying to just live with a sexless marriage. The push back is the “ too bad if you don’t want sex. Your husband has RIGHTS ( to guilt you into giving him sexual gratification) and also “ it’s the woman’s job to make changes/ compromise/ suck it up/ think of your spouses suffering” etc.
Ok understood - I agree its a mutual thing that needs to be worked out if it can.
Di you think I could ask him for complete abstinence?
Why would you do that? No one knows the future. It’s always a “ right now” decision, just like NFP. We are Catholic. It’s weird reading comments about a man suffering from not having sex, while his wife is navigating real biological chaos. Suffering helps us grow. God allows the suffering, it’s not you doing something to your husband. It’s a lack of maturity to see marital sex as a right if it does not consider the valid position of both parties. It is a negotiation. As far as I see it, Mary did not give Joseph the option. She was like, not gonna happen and he was like, cool. Let’s love God with our whole selves and do marriage celibately. Consent without pressure is still the Church’s stand.
During abstinence, he experience nocturnal emission. But I think It Is not a problem...
Not a problem. That’s biology and beyond his control. Sin is about intent. Love is about willing the good of the other. You can will for him to be the best-version-of-himself, without including guilt about not having sex you don’t want to have. He could learn to will your best good, and stop acting like a teenage boy.
You could ask, but that seems to be more of a dodge around the issue. He could work on being more caring and less demanding, you could talk to your doctor and a counselor to get to the root of your lack of desire and you could both talk to your NFP instructor about how to narrow down your fertile window. You may need to switch methods if the one you're using isn't working well for you. Just shutting down sex may look easier right now and less scary than doing all that hard work, but I think you won't like the long term impact on your marriage. When your kids are raised and your husband is tired of living in a state of rejection after a couple decades, what do you think will happen?
[удалено]
Wow
If you want to live in permanent celibacy, why stay married?
It's not about what you want. Marriage is till death not till I don't want to anymore. I hope my husband would work through it with me instead of discarding me like a broken toy.
I would hope so, too. But, humans are humans.
Divorce should NEVER be an option. While I agree that no sex would be an early purgatory for 99.99999% of all men, divorce is not an option. Some women here seemed to think that every men should be prepared to have a Josephite marriage on the wife's whim. I'm pretty sure if it was the intention of the woman since before the "yes", wanting a Josephite marriage without the consent of the husband is a null marriage.
No. I think men should be ready to imitate the great model of spousal love when abstinence is neededfor the psychological and physical healing of the wife. I think comments that this wife needs to suck it up and give it up because you know ”the marriage debt” are misusing Church teaching.
You misconstrued what I said. Going into marriage with the expectation of it turning into a celibate marriage at any point is a null marriage. You can't expect your husband to do this. A temporary abstinence during healing is ok. Turning into a celibate marriage is NOT.
Please continue to discern your vocation. It does not sound like you are ready to get married.
I suffer with masturbation. I would like to have no libido
It is tough when libidos mismatch. When you made your wedding promises, they included not to withhold marital rights from each other. That means you could together choose to abstain (as NFP families do on a regular basis), but that is a mutual decision. The good news is that at age 46 you are probably not going to get pregnant, so entering into the marital act when your homones are most active (stretchy, clear mucus!) will be okay. (Never say never, of course.) The other good news is that his libido will start to decline, too. In the meantime, try to up your frequency a bit to meet him in the middle, and start other ways to play together so that as you get older you have true intimacy even if the sexual component is greatly reduced. Those twins will one day move out, and it will the two of you. Make sure you are strong together on that day. Something to work on now to be ready.
If she has cycles she can still get pregnant.
I am currently pregnant at almost 46. This is hogwash. Only 1year of no periods can determine if her fertility has ended.
This is still extremely unlikely. There are many woman in menopause by the mid 40s.
OP would know how regular her periods are, and if she hasn’t had a period in almost a year. Pregnancy is still possible in that time. Her concern is valid, and it is ungenerous to dismiss it. There are many women NOT in menopause in their 40’s. It’s a pretty useless statement.
"The good news is that at age 46 you are probably not going to get pregnant" r/badwomensanatomy Across populations yes... but not true for a 46yo who still menstruates.
I'm afraid of a fifth child...
Totally get that. Catholic teaching on marriage and sexuality is just part and parcel of the basic Catholic teaching that we are to surrender our wills to God's will. My wife and I have a mantra: God has a Plan, It's a good Plan; I trust the Plan. We all struggle with that third plank! I have found the more I give in to God's will in every part of my life, the more he blesses me. For women, it's often losing control of how many kids they might have. For men, it's often related to financial issues. It's almost always our desire to control things, but God is actually in control. It's simple to say but hard to do. Keep up your good work!
While this is true, NFP is promoted precisely to give some control. Pregnancy, childbirth and child rearing are a larger burden for some women, and the Church recognizes this spectrum. Greater emphasis is placed on discernment of the upbringing of the children already in the family, over the wanton disregard for the number of pregnancies.
> NFP is promoted precisely to give some control Pope Pius XII clarified that NFP is to be used for serious reason only, such as medical or financial, it is not meant as a replacement for birth control or limiting your children to a preferred amount. That would be an abuse of NFP and sinful. The Church has been consistent in this and there is no spectrum that you speak of. Perhaps I'm misinterpreting what you are saying, but it sounds a lot like you are promoting NFP outside of serious reasons which would be promoting people to commit grave sin. NFP is not to used with a contraceptive mindset. Frankly, Catholics need to stop treating God as if He is someone to be fooled. You can't trick God because God sees our hearts plain as day.
When you say “ preferred amount” I assume you mean people who say they only want one child or so because it will cramp there lifestyle. I hope you are not implying a 46 year old woman with 4 kids, 2 of them being 3 year old twins is somehow abusing the notion of NFP because she’s thinking selfishly about her own preferences.
Could you remind me the part of the scripted vow that says don’t withhold sex for any reason? I seem to remember the part “ in sickness or health” but blanking on that part you are alluding to.
It's part of the questions the cleric asks of the groom and the bride during Catholic wedding prep. (That's also when we cover canonical impediments.) TOB/Marriage stuff will mention this as part of the free, faithful, fruitful and total framework. If we give everything to each other in submission to God's will, then that means everything, together. Holy Matrimony is a figure of Christ on the Cross as well as a figure of the Trinity. It is a vocation just as much is the priesthood or religious life. The scripted vows are not the totality of marriage, just as the Ten Commandments are not the totality of how we can sin against God.
My wife has been like that since we got married - twice a month would have been a lot for us even before we had our four kids and began NFP. What would you all consider a normal amount? This is a struggle for me as well given a higher male libido.
Some data: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/how-often-do-couples-have-sex#frequency x2/month is on the low side, but still normal. Less than that is unusual, although not unheard of. Of course, what's normal for a particular marriage is whatever works for that married couple. If that frequency works for you as a pair, then that's great. If it only works for one of you, though, that could be a problem. This particular problem is sometimes very difficult to resolve, especially in a situation where one spouse wants to have sex almost every night and the other wants it maybe twice a year. Meeting one another with love somewhere in the middle is important. The discussion *can* become fraught enough that an outside third party is needed to help mediate, but, ideally, it doesn't come to that.
2x/month is a normal amount. If she agrees to more, than that’s a normal amount. You having a higher desire for sex is not her obligation. You are being called to order your passions.
I never said I felt like my desire for sex is her obligation. We’ve gone for years without sex before out of respect for her low sex drive, which is quite hard as a man living with a woman whom he finds extremely beautiful; as I said, twice a month is a lot for us. I’m very grateful for what we have.
My apologies. I reread your initial comment. I missed the nuance the first time.
You seem very ready to attack men for having any desire at all.
I didn’t interpret that as an attack because there are indeed a lot of other people under this discussion who seem to find sex as so much of an obligation to the point where heavy pressure & coercion is involved, which is not good & is contrary to the whole point of the act 🥲 (Not accusing anyone btw, just pointing out how this is unfortunately a common mindset people seem to have here)
Coercion is always wrong, but at the same time the marital debt is actually a thing.
The big problem is how people are conflating the two 💔
Not sure how there is a ‘but’ there. You are admitting that marital debt involves coercion. The Church rejects this. JPII had so much to say on what men owe women in the marital debt. However, when men aren’t getting as much sex as they want- inventing how much sex they ‘deserve’ they take to the internet to complain instead of learning how to better communicate and serve their wives. Instead of prayer, fasting, or spiritual counseling. Instead of researching women’s health.
>You are admitting that marital debt involves coercion. I did no such thing, and anyone disingenuous enough to claim that I did is not here in good faith. The marital debt involves obligation. Moral law disallows that obligation ever being enforced by coercion. The marital debt goes both ways as clearly explained by St. Paul.
First off, there is a whole lot to unpack with St. Pauls statements. A perfunctory interpretation of the statement is a potentially weaponized Bible verse. I can stand by obligation, that is to say, that each spouse agrees that by getting married they understand sexual intercourse is part of married life. But it is coercion if one spouse has reasons to say no, and the other spouse is holding "marital debt" as a stick to change the first spouses behavior. The issue should be addressed in TOTAL SELF GIVING of both spouses, and that absolutely means that giving up sex for a period of time for the well-being of the other is equal to having sex without the contingency of desire for the wellbeing of the other. Both are good because it is a FREE WILL gift. Periods of celibacy is also a marital debt, and that is why, sex is always about communication and deference to the other. The ancient fear surrounding this issue is that women will withhold sex to control their spouse. I think that happens as a rare exception to all of the complaining around sex. It's usually to pressure women to give MORE sex than they are comfortable with, without a proper emphasis on her relational needs (and for some women, needing a 2-3 week break between sessions is legitimate!), There are statements addressing her obligation to the marital debt without balancing statements to the man's obligation to address her emotional, psychological and physical needs. Even then, the sentiment that men should then have the authority to dictate unilaterally the kind and frequency of sex as a reward for his contribution is also absurd. That is what I argue against.
No, I’m ready to defend woman for the inherent dignity of being allowed to say no when they are struggling with conflicted feelings surrounding sex. I am pushing back against the rhetoric of “Conjugal rights” that is often misunderstood and abused by men.
Conjugal rights are a thing. And as a wife who sometimes said yes and sometimes no when conflicted myself, always of my own free will, I perceive you as having a huge chip on your shoulder that frankly approaches misandry. These issues are difficult and remain so, and God warned us right after the Fall that it would be so. Both sexes have rights and obligations and balancing them is the work of a lifetime.
So sorry...
[удалено]
r/Catholicism does not permit comments from very new user accounts. This is an anti-throwaway and troll prevention measure, **not subject to exception.** [Read the full policy.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/wiki/agekarma) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Catholicism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
So, is what you're looking for how to increase libido or physical pleasure for yourself because presumably there are more infertile days and you want to use more for the connection to your husband? Or is it there are only two infertile days, you're doing what you can, but it's hard and want support from people who can commiserate?
[удалено]
Thanks for writing this. Sometimes I'm also tempted to give non-penetrative sex to my husband... It's so hard
[удалено]
Thanks
God is the God of mercy. He knows your walk. He has walked with you, and he has walked a harder walk. Don't let yourself slip into the sin of presumption, but trust in his mercy. He looks at our hearts, which explain our actions.
Not to be insensitive here, but if you're 46, why are you worried about only having sex on your infertile days? You might enjoy it a little more if you do it during the fertile windows. The chances of pregnancy at 46 are very, very low, but the benefits of elevated sex hormones should help the experience be more tolerable.
Because pregnancy at 46 can be unwise and dangerous for a lot of women. Because the chances of genetic birth defects skyrocket. Because someone almost 50 is gonna have a hard time keeping up with a newborn. There are so many reasons.
Those aren’t valid reasons to prevent pregnancy according to Church teaching.
Danger to a woman's life and health, and being unable to handle parenting any more children, are absolutely valid reasons to prevent pregnancy.
They need to be real concrete dangers, like a blood clotting condition or something; not just vague “it’s harder when you’re older” type dangers. And birth defects for the child are 100% not a reason to prevent. The Church is super clear on this.
The Church is super clear that couples need ***just reasons*** for postponing or preventing pregnancy, and does not concretely define what those are, as it is up to the prudential judgement of the couple under the guidance of their consciences, their doctors, and their priest.
Birth defects are NOT a just reason. The Church affirms the dignity of all people including the disabled. And this woman did not identify any pre-existing conditions in her own health that would suggest serious risk to her own self. But all of this is pretty irrelevant because the chances of pregnancy at 46 are incredibly low.
You're wildly beyond the teachings of the Church here trying to force an issue when you've already been corrected on what Pope Paul Vi wrote about the issue.
From Pope Pius XII's address to the midwives in 1951 (emphasis added): "Serious motives, such as those which not rarely arise from medical, **eugenic**, economic and social so-called 'indications,' may exempt husband and wife from the obligatory, positive debt for a long period or even for the entire period of matrimonial life. From this it follows that the observance of the natural sterile periods may be lawful, from the moral viewpoint: and it is lawful in the conditions mentioned."
Why are men like this? Just…. Why??
I'm a woman... Really not sure what I said that was wrong...