Big debate...touch vs sex in marriage...well here I go again.

About fifty years ago John Bowlby, author of Attachment, showed that we humans need something more than just food, water, oxygen, and physical shelter. He discovered that we could, as infants, receive all of those things and yet waste away without one other essential nurturing element: touch. Babies who were not cuddled sank into depressive states, quit eating, and died. And we never grow out of the desire and requirement for physical contact. Of course there are cultural and family differences as to how touch and affection are given, but the basic need persists.

Give me the touchers any day. My family are huggers and kiss and hug you into surrender. My nieces love to hug and like I said before...my fondest moments were spent cuddling Grace.

It’s no question that even “non-toucher” men are driven by another inner force: sex. The concept might be more solemnly expressed as a drive for procreation, but let’s face it, that usually has little to do with it. And that’s where the conflict arises. The need for touch and cuddling survives childhood but gets waylaid by testosterone in adolescent males, who never recover. Often I hear from my femaile friends, “I’d like for my husband to just hold me, but it will never stop there. Once he starts any touching, it’s going to end up in the bedroom.” (I would deny that emphatically. Lovemaking can happen on the couch in the living room, in the back seat of the car, or on the floor of the family room. A bed is not essential. I would say emphatically that it doesn’t take touch at all. Any look, sexy movement, or seductive dress is equally dangerous. A trench coat is deadly.)

Well, there you have it: There’s a real and healthy desire both sexes have for touch and affection not leading to intercourse and the real and healthy drive for the sexual release of orgasm. Are there any ways to satisfy both of these short of emasculation or deprivation? I hope so. Consider these alternatives.

When people with contrasting perceptions become polarized by differences, they become enemies fighting for their own point of view. Rather than considering each other, they entrench into defensive postures or express aggressive demands. Walls are built and distance develops. This can certainly happen in marriage over this issue of how affection is given.

I would propose that rather than negotiate from positions of “principles,” that parties discuss their conflict with an eye on their “interests.”

How so you ask?

Let’s say I want to have some cuddling from my husband without it leading to intercourse, but my husband thinks I am just looking for a way to deny his need for sexual release. If we approach each other on “principle” rather than with our interests in mind, I will feel uncared for by husband, who doesn’t seem to notice that I need to be held even when she may not feel up to making love. I can develop anger and resentment and refuse to come close to my husband at all. My husband may interpret my resistance as rejection and denial of his manhood. Giving in to my position may feel like giving up his manliness to have a relationship with me.

For us to look at the conflict from the position of our mutual “interest” we should discuss what we each want in our marriage. Our list would probably include words like intimacy, trust, caring, closeness, affection, respect, consideration, selflessness, and probably even sexual pleasure. Chances are once we shared our individual lists we would find we have many more common desires than differences. Realizing that can help us shift from being adversaries under attack to being allies working together. In all honesty we would probably discover that my husband likes loving touch (back rubs, a gentle hand running through his hair, holding hands, or cuddling on the couch watching TV) and that I enjoy the exciting release of orgasm when the time is right for me. Defining the parameters of our touching is no longer a win-lose proposition.

People are lousy mind readers. When we just assume we know what the other is thinking, feeling, or wanting, we’re often wrong no matter how long you know a person. How often do we hear couples describe disastrous results of playing guessing games with each other.

People do better at connecting with each other when we talk...actually saying words that reveal ourselves. One form of communication is what one might call “preambles.” You give each other a signal that you’ve got something important to say. You may even give each other a clear idea of the response you’d like to have.

Just talking to each other solves a lot of potential problems. The old way of hinting and guessing and assuming ends up with lots of frustration. And frustration is just something good for each other...period.

Any friendship is built on reciprocal giving to meet the other person’s needs. It’s the spiritual principle of reaping what you sow and it works in marriage as well as in other relationships. Because of our desire to meet one another’s needs.

So you fill your partner's emotional bank account through “non-sexual” touch and she responds with red hot lovin’.

Don't believe me?

Well...if you are having problems in this regard...why not try it? It may work...and then where will you be...in blissful fulfillment I would say...or at least for the moment...until you have to decide who will take out the garbage...now that one is a deal breaker.

Oh...and the Doors...



Touch me babe...well that works too.

or if you are trying to simply get the romance back...



You see...puts you in the mood doesn't it?

Yep...sure does...

Love,
The Lass