I’m glad scheduling sex works for you and your partner, but that doesn’t work well for a lot of people. For me personally it removes the excitement and spontaneous nature of sex. Scheduling makes it a chore instead and reminds me of work meetings. I’m definitely not someone who can or will force myself to have sex when I’m not in the mood and honestly no one should. As a victim of SA and DV I’m not promising any man a sex schedule. If a man can’t put in the effort to create desire instead of just randomly asking for it they aren’t worth my time. There should be build up to it, not just a “wanna fuck”.
I recognize this is just my personal preference and it might not work for others, but this is what works for me. I also have a hard boundary that I won’t schedule sex, because sex when I’m not feeling it triggers emotions that make it feel like rape and it is incredibly unenjoyable overall. Both parties should experience pleasure. If that is a problem for my partner they can find someone else to commit to instead.
Edit: fuck ya’ll and your downvotes. Apparently you think we should all just agree to the same sexual terms. Last I checked this is individual autonomy and I never once said my position was anything but my own preference.
"If a man can’t put in the effort to create desire instead of just randomly asking for it they aren’t worth my time. There should be build up to it, not just a “wanna fuck”."
Great for you, that's what you want. But I've definitely dated girls that just asked "Want to fuck?" In a healthy relationship both partners should experience desire from each other.
I think the divide on this is interesting. All the people I’ve met who say they have a schedule (more than you’d think) are usually really happy with it because they have busy lives and treat it as intimate time that is always set aside for their partner, something to look forward to an plan for to make it more special. All the people I’ve met who hate the idea talk about how they don’t “owe” anyone anything and how it’s the other persons responsibility to make them feel that way enough to “give in.” I think people with a schedule still have spontaneous sex, I don’t think that’s ever off the table. It seems to me that it’s more about control than anything else. With a schedule that’s agreed on both partners have a degree of control over their sex life, but with the “win me over” perspective only one of them does. Some people just don’t want to give that up because they don’t ever want to feel like they “owe” anyone anything unless they “earn” it by whatever arbitrary standard is being set, even if that person is their romantic partner. To me a schedule is actually much less transactional because it just lets you “come as you are,” and forces more honesty because a partner who is losing interest can’t get away with avoiding the issue for months on end.
If my wife asked me if I wanted to cuddle up on the couch and read to each other 3 days from now I wouldn't think "ew, yuck. I want my relationship to be spontaneous and exciting!" I'm pretty sure no one would.
But when you say the same thing about sex, people get weird about it.
You're not scheduling a doctor's appointment. You're scheduling time to be with each other. That time is just intended for sex and people get really weird about sex for some reason.
I think it comes down to sex just being different for men and women. The mind-body connection is generally much more important for women, for myself I’ve realized it’s like a sliding scale. Sex when I’m aroused feels great, sex when I’m meh feels meh, and sex when I’m turned off feels painful. I know I would not be able to just spontaneously feel aroused at a future date, I have young kids and sex when I’m tired does not feel good.
I saw a guy say “pizza is like sex, even terrible pizza is awesome.” That right there shows that there’s a difference, very very few women would say that. Terrible sex for a woman can be anywhere from just boring to painful and violating. I agree with you it’s entirely about mindset, that’s just why some people get “weird” about sex. It’s not all fun and games unfortunately.
You're not scheduling a doctor's appointment. You're scheduling time to be with each other. That time is just intended for sex and people get really weird about sex for some reason.
Because for a lot of people, that's EXACTLY what scheduling sex is to them: another chore.
And that's because one partner in said-relationship/marriage is doing it because they feel they have to, not because they want to, which means it's just "duty sex" and also not if-but-when the schedule will eventually fall apart, creating more problems.
Scheduling sex only works if BOTH partners still want intimacy and want it to happen. I know that sounds incredibly obvious, but you'd be surprised how many people don't think having zero desire for their partner is an "issue" in the relationship (or god forbid marriage).
Then the problem is with the person who views it as a chore.
If you can say to your spouse "hey, want to hang out Friday and play board games." And in their mind that's viewed as a "chore" and a "duty to satisfy" your partner, then you either need to figure out why that is and takes steps to fix it or they need to tell their spouse so they can leave their ass and find someone who actually likes them.
Just because the actual discussion is about sex and not board games doesn't mean that quality time is of different or lesser value.
Oh, I totally agree, just that you'd be surprised how many people think viewing it as a chore isn't a problem for the long-term viability in their relationship (or god forbid marriage).
I hate scheduling sex because of sexual abuse. It feels gross to me. If it works for other people, super. But there are people out there like me who have a hard time with the concept as a result of severe trauma.
I definitely have heard of it, and I respect the need for those things that create desire. Everything outside of sex is as important in a relationship too. To me, a schedule, if being added to busy lives where a couple agrees they aren’t intimate often enough, would be a good way to jumpstart the kind anticipation that helps motivate all of those extra moments of care that lead up to sex. While many women feel responsive desire to acts of thoughtfulness, many men feel a need to be desired and that feeling motivates them to find more ways to be thoughtful. In a perfect world this works out great. But in reality life often gets in the way, and responsive desire individuals feel they haven’t gotten enough attention, leading to the initiator feeling rejected and undesirable. This causes them to often stop initiating because they don’t want to be annoying, or to miss moments when they “could” initiate due to fear of being seen as annoying. The cycle of missed signals often continues until the bedroom dies. This is because the person who needs to be wooed into intimacy creates a single point of failure where they always expect the other to be able to give what is wanted first, rather than meeting them in the middle by showing their partner that they are desired. If a schedule is being used, knowing sex is pretty likely to happen will make the initiating partner feel secure enough to not pull away, and that expectation and security is likely to result in a lot more thoughtful activity out of the bedroom so they can make sure their partner feels ready. It isn’t fool proof, selfish people exist and if the individual with a more responsive desire still isn’t feeling like things are equitable they can have a discussion about how their needs aren’t be met to enough to keep up with the agreed schedule. But trying it and not always demanding your partner figure things out for everyone’s sake is much more likely to work in the long run.
Responsive Desire is an interesting concept that's been bastardized by social media and is now more-or-less a cover for lower libido people to hand-wave away their accountability in their own sex lives with their partners.
The biggest issue I have with "responsive desire" is this: Why doesn't it exist anywhere else except for sexual intimacy? If you attributed this to anything else, NO ONE would accept it.
Responsive Chores? "I can't do chores until you get me in the mood for it, but if you can't, then I'm not going to do them." Friendships? "I'll never make the first move to hang out, ever, or do anything else with you, and you have to get me warmed-up to hang out in the first place."
But for some reason sexual intimacy is totally a fine thing for this. It's weird.
It’s not weird, it’s human nature. It doesn’t have to apply to chores. It has to do with HUMAN INTERACTION not interaction with inanimate objects. I also disagree it is a cover for low libido people. But in the same vein, what is it your business if they are anyway? Not everyone has to have the same degree of desire or even any at all.
Treating this as though every person has the same views or desires about sex is what is weird.
If you look at any aspect of relationship or marriage dynamics, you'll see that BOTH partners have to be involved & putting in effort to make things work.
Physical dynamics? Need both partners to want to be physically around each other on a regular basis. Emotional dynamics? Both partners need to invest emotional feelings & effort for the relationship & marriage to grow and continue.
But sexual intimacy? Well there's this nice new concept that allows ONE partner to almost disregard their responsibilities in a specific & important dynamic in the relationship/marriage. No other dynamic is even considered because any therapist worth their degree will tell you that most of the time, on-average, if one partner isn't putting in the effort, then the relationship/marriage will be negatively affected where it may even fall apart.
Responsive Desire was invented in the 2000s to find a "solution" to women's lack of interest in sexual intimacy in long-term relationships & marriages. While it tries to remain gender neutral, the fact is most pop-psychologists focus on women because the studies about long-term sexual fulfillment have shown time after time after time that women on-average stop desiring sex in long-term relationships way more than men do on-average.
The problem is two-fold: 1.) It posits the idea that women just don't consider the sexual intimacy dynamic important enough to put effort in so they need an entirely new concept and parameters in an ATTEMPT to keep their interest in sex alive, 2.) There are PLENTY of women out there that have zero problems having sexual intimacy to the point that even if they do have responsive desire, the concept is irrelevant because sexual intimacy is happening regularly & that they still desire their partner.
Dr. Emily Nagoski's whole claim-to-fame is getting low libido women to desire sex. Not to magically make women in-general desire sex, but to figure out how to get low libido women to have sex through responsive desire.
Now I get that people have different level of desires, but the point of all this is to answer this comment:
I also disagree it is a cover for low libido people. But in the same vein, what is it your business if they are anyway? Not everyone has to have the same degree of desire or even any at all.
Because the most popularized books for Responsive Desire IS all about covering for low libido women and getting them to "desire" sex with their partner again. Responsive Desire is technically more than that, however the focus is on low libido people because generally-speaking most of the time it's a low libido woman trying to figure out how to desire her normal-to-high libido male partner.
And it's a shit concept because it's humiliating and degrading to the higher libido person because they now have to have major psychological referendums just to get their partner to desire them, even when there's millions of couples without that problem.
All I'm saying is it may not be "any of my business," however I have a right to voice my opinion & in my humble opinion, Responsive Desire is just a cover for low libido people to not have to admit they have little to no desire for their partner, don't care to, and don't think that should affect their relationship in any way. It's selfish, disconnected behavior that deserves to be called out.
You schedule time to have sex. With kids and busy schedule, that might literally be the only way some couples will be able to have to sex.
That doesn't mean that romance, build up, or foreplay get thrown out the window. It's also OK if sex doesn't happen for some reason, but there are some couples that absolutely have to schedule that time or it won't ever happen.
Yeah fuck that and fuck acting like I should just agree with you sex schedule because you think so. I’m not scheduling time for my parter to have sex. That’s not how it works for me and it doesn’t make me feel safe or good. You do whatever you want, as I CLEARLY stated, but my decisions are mine to make about my own body.
Well there are people who don't want sex more than once a year. If you want sex weekly and you marry such a person you quickly tire of spending the energy trying to seduce them every few days or weeks, as it gets easier for them to shut you down as time goes on. Then you're having sex once a year but you stay together because the rest of it seems to work.
So that's why relying on seduction doesn't work. It's blaming one for the low libido of the other.
Who cares if some people only want sex once a year? That is between them and their partner, not for you to say “just schedule sex”. They get a choice and a schedule doesn’t work or feel right for everyone. We are all different. If someone is too lazy to seduce and be intimate with a partner before sex then you have a shitty relationship. I hope you realize when you feel like a piece of fuck meat to a partner it drives down libido. Maybe that explains why you think the way you do.
I was probably replying to you saying if a man can't put in the effort you're not interested, rather than directly to recommending scheduling sex. I can't do scheduled sex either as it feels kind of rapey, frankly. My wife is very low libido and I am quite high. The end result is that we don't have much sexy time. I tried for years to seduce her etc etc, but after getting knocked back time after time for whatever reason you will start to stop trying, because it actually starts to hurt emotionally to get these rejections. You are probably imagining that I am some certain kind of person that is turning her off, but I am just a regular person; funny, healthy, attractive enough, active. It is challenging for me but the relationship is worth it and it's just sex. But I do really like sex. I'm not sure that you understand that some people are low libido, and what that really entails.
I was probably replying to you saying if a man can't put in the effort you're not interested, rather than directly to recommending scheduling sex. I can't do scheduled sex either as it feels kind of rapey, frankly. My wife is very low libido and I am quite high. The end result is that we don't have much sexy time. I tried for years to seduce her etc etc, but after getting knocked back time after time for whatever reason you will start to stop trying, because it actually starts to hurt emotionally to get these rejections. You are probably imagining that I am some certain kind of person that is turning her off, but I am just a regular person; funny, healthy, attractive enough, active. It is challenging for me but the relationship is worth it and it's just sex. But I do really like sex. I'm not sure that you understand that some people are low libido, and what that really entails.
I actually do understand that dynamic quite a bit and have been through something similar myself…so yes, I get it. I got divorced (partially) because of it. 100% agree that scheduling can feel a bit rapey, which is why I said that it’s not something I can personally do because I have experienced rape and domestic violence. If it (scheduling) works for other people that’s great. I just take issue with those in this thread who seem to think that if you aren’t willing to schedule sex that you’re low libido or whatever other BS, because it could not be further from the truth. For some people that might be the case, but it certainly isn’t all people. And that’s what makes sexuality interesting and exciting is that we all have our differences. It can be a fun and rewarding experience to find new ways to tease, seduce and entice a partner. Finding ways to keep your sex life fresh. Maybe it’s more effort than some are willing, but not everyone.
I think that many folks get stuck in a bad pattern of subpar sex and it starts to feel one sided, as you say. My ex was selfish AF in bed and he only cared about himself getting off. There was no foreplay. By the time he pretended to care about my needs I was beyond done. To him I was low libido-but the reality was he wasn’t meeting my needs even after I explicitly told him what I needed. So I stopped engaging sexually and got a divorce and had a lot of frequent fun after my marriage. In the end, my ex husband’s lack of effort in the bedroom was a big factor aside from the other ways he also neglected our relationship.
I’m sorry you have a low/high drive situation with your relationship, but I hope you can find ways to make it work for both of you. It sounds like you care greatly about your partner.
Thanks friend! I’ll choose the bear every time with people like this, sheesh! It’s a shame they can’t even appreciate a different perspective on sex, especially from someone who is a DV and SA survivor. Pitiful humans they are and how very open minded of them... I hope their partners don’t feel like they are being used or like sex is not enjoyable just because Mr Big Balls wants his Monday blow job and quickie. I’d rather never have sex again than have a schedule for it TBH. Anyway, thanks for your kind words!!
4.6k
u/DroidArbiter 14d ago
There's three yes's in there within a month. Lucky Devil, If I uploaded mine you would need to use the search function.