Clinical Case: Woman
Experiencing Low Sexual Desire in a Non Sexual Marraige
Mary, a teacher in her late 30s, phoned requesting an appointment
to address her lack of sexual desire for her husband of 15
years,
Herb. She explained that for the past three years, she had
had no sexual desire for him. Now, Mary reported feeling
desperate because
Herb was saying that unless she fixed her sexual problem,
he intended to leave the marriage. I suggested that even
though she was
experiencing the low sexual desire, it was best to treat
the sexual problem as a couple issue and for both of them
to attend the first
appointment. Mary agreed to ask Herb to accompany her and
booked an initial appointment.
STEP 1: Identify the cause of the low sexual desire
In Step 1 an assessment is conducted to identify the cause
of the low sexual desire. This involves an assessment of
the nonsexual
aspects of the marriage, the sexual functioning of both partners
as individuals, and the sexual relationship of the couple.
Generally,
this assessment reveals both an "originating" and "maintaining" cause
of the low sexual desire. A therapeutic alliance is formed
with
both partners, which helps partners to talk openly about
their sexuality. This Step concludes with both partners committing
to the goal
of revitalizing their sexual relationship as an intimate
team.
In the first session, Herb, a 38 year old real estate salesman,
described how he loved Mary but was feeling rejected sexually.
He stated
how romantic and passionate their sex life had been when
they had met at university, and how he longed to recover
this. Mary indicated
that she loved Herb and their life together as a family with
their 15 year old daughter, but that in the last three years
she had lost
sexual desire for him. She noted that sex occurred infrequently,
about four times a year, whenever she caved in to Herb's
pressure and
her own internal guilt.
An exploration of the nonsexual aspects of their marriage
indicated that they had a good relationship. Both conveyed
respect and trust
for each other. Both agreed that they liked each other's
company, enjoying a variety of outdoor and cultural activities
together.
Although they had occasional conflict, they recovered quickly
by talking soon after the argument. They seemed relieved
when I suggested
that the most common pattern of nonsexual marriages is the
couple that has a good relationship, but struggles with low
sexual desire.
Because it is very difficult to revitalize sexual desire
when respect and trust are missing, they also found it reassuring
that their
respect and trust for each other was an important ingredient
for revitalizing sexual desire.
An exploration of their sexual functioning as individuals
indicated that they both functioned normally. Herb reported
that he got and
maintained firm erections, that he wasn't concerned about
ejaculating too quickly, that his orgasms were satisfying,
and that he had a
strong appetite for sex. Although his preference was partner
sex, he admitted to self-stimulating to typical fantasies
about three times
a week. Mary indicated that with the right stimulation and
enough time, she could experience subjective arousal (feeling
turned on) and
objective arousal (vaginal lubrication), and achieve orgasm.
She denied any pain associated with sex, except mild discomfort
when Herb
penetrated her before she felt aroused sufficiently. She
reported that she didn't bother asturbating. She was aware
of sexual thoughts
and fantasies, and responded with mild arousal to sexual
stimuli on TV or in literature. What puzzled her was her
lack of sexual urges
for her husband, Herb. As much as she thought she should
feel sexual desire for him, she didn't.
Mary appeared a bit disappointed when I suggested that her
low sexual desire appeared to be psychogenic (related to
psychological
causes) rather than biogenic (related to physical causes).
She had read an article about how testosterone helps women
with low sexual
desire, and was hoping that it would help her. I explained
that an absence of sexual thoughts, fantasies, and arousal
to sexual stimuli
would point to a physical cause, but that this was not the
case for her.
In order to understand the psychological etiology of her
low sexual desire, I explored their marital sexual history.
Mary and Herb had
me in the last year of universtiy. Premarital sex had been
exciting, adventurous, and frequent. Herb in particular recalled
how
gratifying it had been to experiment sexually both in the
bedroom and in outdoor settings. Mary recollected how several
years into the
marriage, sex had become brief and routinized, with a focus
on intercourse. Typically, they would engage in about five
minutes of
touching and kissing before Herb entered her. He would climax
after five to ten minutes of intercourse. Although occasionally
he would
bring Mary to climax manually, typically she would say it
wasn't going to happen for her and they would stop love-making.
Both would
then fall asleep with little contact. Herb remarked that
for him sex early in the marriage had been good but less
frequent than he had
wanted. It surprised him that Mary painted such a bleak picture
of their sex life at that time.
Both agreed that there had been a gradual decline of sexual
frequency and quality over the years, until in the past three
years they had
had sex about four times a year. I suggested that they had
shifted gradually from a low sexual marriage to a non sexual
marriage.
As this decline had occcurred, Herb had blamed Mary increasingly
for denying him sex. Although feeling guilty about this,
Mary expressed
increasing resistance to feeling pressured into sex that
she didn't find gratifying.
I suggested that the "originating" cause of their
non sexual marriage was falling into an inflexible, truncated
sexual script early in
marriage that was overly focused on performance and intercourse
rather than on pleasure. In addition, I suggested that the "maintaining" cause
was the negative pursue-avoidance cycle that characterized
their sexual interactions. Although Mary had lost interest
in sex
originally because of their inflexible sexual script, their
non sexual marriage was now maintained by a negative cycle
characterized by
his pursuit and her avoidance.
I validated them for having the courage to seek professional
help to revitalize their sexual relationship, indicating
that the longer a
couple avoids sexual contact, the harder it is to get back
on track because of increased levels of resentment and bitterness.
I noted
that these feelings may become a greater threat to the marriage
than the sexual problem itself.
I suggested that it was unrealistic to recover the sexual
passion of premarital sex, but that it was possible to create
a new marital
sexuality based on intimacy, pleasuring, and eroticism. I
indicated that there was no quick fix or magic formula, but
if they were
willing to commit to a process of change as an intimate team
over ten to 20 sessions, they could revitalize their marital
sexuality.
Although apprehensive, both Mary and Herb indicated they
were willing to try.
STEP 2: Interrupting the pursue-avoidance cycle that maintains
low sexual desire and fostering intimacy
In step 2, awareness of the pursue-avoidance cycle is heightened
by exploring this cycle in detail. Interventions drawn from
Emotionally
Focused Couples Therapy (EFT) are used to interrupt this
cycle. The negative cycle is framed as a mutual enemy requiring
their efforts
as an intimate team to overcome.
When I asked Mary and Herb to describe what happened typically
between them sexually, Herb indicated that he had mostly
given up
initiating sex because he was tired of feeling rejected.
Occasionally, when he thought Mary might be receptive, he
would ask if she
wanted to make love. Typically, Mary would decline with an
excuse or rationalization. Herb would then accuse her of
not keeping her part
of the marital bargain which included sex. Mary would respond
defensively, stating she wasn't going to have sex if she
didn't want to.
Herb would then exclaim in frustration, "You never want
sex", to which Mary would reply, "I can't help
it if I don't want sex. Leave me
alone!" Fortunately, Herb did not then become coercive
by insisting that if she didn't give him sex, there would
be negative
consequences for her (intimate coercion increases bitterness
and alienation). Instead, both would drop the issue, but
feel distant from
each other for the rest of the day.
I suggested that it was understandable that Herb felt frustrated
and deprived sexually and would want to blame Mary for withholding
sex.
I suggested that it was also understandable that Mary would
avoid sex when she felt pressured and wasn't feeling sexual
desire. Although
they perceived that they weren't having an impact on each
other, I pointed out that they were having enormous impact
on each other.
Herb's pursuit of Mary for sex evoked her avoidance; Mary's
avoidance evoked his pursuit. I suggested that the pursue-avoidance
cycle
was their well-intentioned but misguided attempt to reestablish
their marital sexuality. Peter's blame was his way of protesting
the
loss of the vital sex they had once had. Mary's avoidance
was her way of holding out for marital sex that was more
gratifying for her.
Their challenge was to see the pursue-avoidance cycle as
an enemy that stood between them and a revitalized marital
sexuality, and to
defeat it working together as an intimate team.
Following Emotionally Focused Couples' Therapy (EFT) approach
to interrupting negative fight cycles by accessing deeper
feelings
underlying the fight cycle (see the clinical case of EFT
under the link, "Counselling with Couples"), I
began to explore Mary and Herb's
deeper feelings. When I said to Herb, "I'm wondering
if under your frustration and anger toward Mary for avoiding
sex you're feeling
unwanted and unloved," he nodded affirmatively. When
in a low, soft voice, I asked him what this was like, he
indicated that it was
painful to feel unwanted sexually. When I directed him to
say this to Mary, he stated, "I feel so undesireable
when you don't want me
sexually. It's painful for me." Mary responded supportively,
saying "I'm sorry my not wanting sex is so hard for
you. I don't mean to
hurt you. I just don't know how to respond to you when I
don't feel desire."
I then explored Mary's deeper feelings underlying her position
of avoidance in the negative cycle. When I said I wondered
if under her
defensiveness and guilt she was feeling besieged and inadequate,
she replied, "Yes". When I asked Mary what it was
like to feel
inadequate sexually, she stated, "I've always felt inadequate
when it comes to satisfying Herb sexually. I could never
do it right or
enough for him". When I directed her to say this to
Herb, he started to respond defensively. I interrupted, stating
it was important
that he struggle with what Mary was telling him. With my
support, he replied, "I didn't realize you were feeling
so incompetent sexually
with me. I don't mean for you to feel this way."
When I asked Mary to tell Herb what she was wanting from
him sexually, she stated, "I'm not sure. But it would
help if you would stop
pressuring me and if you would just be with me. I want to
feel close rather than like I have to perform for you." Herb
felt apprehensive
about what Mary was asking of him, but said he was willing
to try.
I validated both Mary and Herb for their willingness to
be more open and vulnerable regarding their sexuality, rather
than accusatory
and defensive. I indicated that this increased responsiveness
and emotional intimacy is what would be required as they
worked together
as an intimate team to rekindle their marital sexuality.
STEP 3: Creating responsive desire through pleasuring
In step 3, pleasuring touch is introduced as an incentive
for responsive desire. As the couple engages in exercises
of sensuous touch,
they are encouraged to "go with" feelings of arousal
and desire rather than blocking themselves. A temporary ban
on orgasm and
intercourse reinforces that pleasuring touch is valued for
its own sake rather than as a pressure or demand for sex.
Although Mary wanted to feel sexual desire for Herb, she
didn't know how to feel desire for him . I indicated that
if she waited for
spontaneous sexual urges for Herb, she would likely wait
a long time. What she didn't know was that it is common for
the low desire
partner to lack spontaneous sexual urges for their partner.
The alternative to waiting and hoping to feel spontaneous
urges again was to
create responsive desire. I explained that this is the desire
one feels in response to engaging in sensuous touch or pleasuring.
Pleasuring is the incentive for sexual desire. If one engages
in pleasuring and feels the positive sensations that emerge
rather than
blocking them, one will experience increasing levels of sexual
arousal and desire.Mary seemed intrigued about feeling sexual
arousal and desire again through pleasuring, but wondered
how this would work.
I suggested
that what would be required from her was the willingness
to start from "neutral", without preexisting sexual
urges, using a special type
of touch called "nondemand" pleasuring.
I explained that nondemand pleasuring is touch that is valued
for itself, that is not a pressure or demand for sex, but
rather is a way
of maintaining physical contact, feeling connected, and sharing
pleasure. Nondemand pleasuring would help them learn how
to pleasure
each other and to keep the "demand" out of sex.
It would help them to replace foreplay, which is goal-oriented,
with a broad-based
sexuality oriented toward pleasure rather than performance.
Nondemand pleasuring would not only help to create responsive
desire, but
would also inoculate their sexual relationship from deteriorating
in the future.
I then suggested an exercise involving nondemand pleasuring
that they could do at home. I instructed Mary and Herb to
begin by showering
together, noting that cleanliness promotes comfort. Next,
they were to retire unclothed to their bedroom, which they
had already
organized with candles, incense, and their favorite music
to create a romantic mood. With Herb leaning against the
headboard and Mary
lying against his chest, Herb was to begin in the giver role
by caressing and touching Mary's head, neck, and shoulders
as tenderly and
sensously as possible. When he was ready to caress the front
of her body, Mary was to take his hands and guide them over
her body, in
whatever way and pace she preferred, communicating verbally
and nonverbally what she liked and wanted more of. When Mary
was finished,
they were to reverse roles, with Mary becoming the giver
and Herb the receiver. In the giving role, the task was to
experience as much
pleasure as possible in giving touch. In the receiving role,
the task was to focus with eyes closed on the sensations
and feelings of
being touched. Finally, I explained that the purpose of the
exercise was to enhance sexual communication and pleasure,
and not to turn
the partner on. It was important that the exercise not lead
to orgasm and/or intercourse.
Knowing that couples are reluctant to engage in touching
because it is easier to avoid than to try again, I explored
what they were
telling themselves about engaging in the pleasuring exercise.
Mary's thoughts were, "He doesn't want to touch me,
just to have sex", and "
This exercise won't work for me. I won't feel anything." I
suggested that Mary was having a negative thought process
which if "
listened" to would limit her ability to benefit from
the exercise. Using a procedure from Voice Therapy, I instructed
Mary to say these
thoughts in the second person, "You", as if someone
else was addressing her (see the link, "Approach to
Counselling" for more
information). Mary said, "He doesn't want to touch you,
just to have sex", and "This exercise won't work
for you. You won't feel
anything." Mary was surprised by how negative and against
herself these thoughts sounded when she said them in this
way. When I
instructed her to counter these negative thoughts or voices
in the 1st person "I", from her healthy point of
view, she stated, "I know
Herb likes to touch me. I trust that if I open myself to
pleasuring touch, I will experience positive feelings." Countering
the voices
helped her to feel more confident about benefiting from the
exercise.
When I asked Herb what he was telling himself about the
nondemand pleasuring exercise, he remarked, "This exercise
is for her, not for
me. I will be bored. What's the point." Expressing these
thoughts as "voices" in the 2nd person, "You",
Herb said, "This is for her not
for you. You will be bored. What's the point." When
Herb countered these voices in the 1st person, "I",
he stated, "I know that I too
can benefit from the exercise. I want to be open-minded and
see." Herb realized that "listening" to his
negative thought process would
undermine his benefiting from the experience.
I suggested that before, during, and after the pleasuring
exercise, they would likely both have a negative thought
process. The
challenge was to be aware of any negative voices, to separate
them out in the 2nd person, and to refocus on the experience
of giving and
receiving touch. If at any point the negative voice was too "loud",
or if they felt uncomfortable for any reason, they were to
stop the
exercise, assume a trust position by holding and looking
at each other, and talk about their experience until they
felt ready to resume
touching.
Mary and Herb reported that they found the exercise artificial
but helpful. Herb noted that he felt more comfortable in
the giving than
the receiving role, but that he could see the value of learning
to enjoy touch. Mary noted that without the pressure of touch
leading to
sex, she had been able to relax enough to experience some
pleasure in both roles. Both commented that they had been
aware of a negative
thought process during the exercise, but that they had not
allowed these thoughts to interfere with the experience.
Over the next few months, Mary and Herb engaged in further
experiences of nondemand pleasuring on three levels: 1) affectionate
touch
while clothed (e.g., hugging, kissing, holding hands), 2)
sensual touch while nude or semi-clothed (nongenital touch
such as massage,
bathing together), and 3) playful touch (a combination of
genital and nongenital touch such as "fooling around" on
the couch, in bed, or
in the car). Mary, to her surprise, reported feeling considerable
sexual arousal and desire. Herb commented that often he felt
so
aroused that he had a hard time not "breaking the rules" and
having intercourse.
I congratulated them both on pushing through their resistance
to nondemand pleasuring, and staying with the experience
of pleasuring
long enough to reap the benefits of arousal and desire. I
indicated that pleasuring was not only a bridge between intimacy
and
eroticism, but also a means of sustaining their sexual relationship
throughout the life cycle (as people age, they require more
stimulation to feel aroused).
STEP 4: Increasing arousal and sexual gratification through
eroticism
In step 4, couples experiment with erotic techniques and
scenarios in order to heighten arousal and experience orgasmic
sex. Inhibitions
to erotic techniques are overcome or significantly reduced
where possible.
Although intimacy and nondemand pleasuring are necessary
for sexual satisfaction, they are not sufficient. For heightened
arousal and
orgasm, eroticism is required. Eroticism refers to sexual
thoughts, fantasies, and behaviors that turn a person on.
Eroticism includes
intercourse, but is not limited to it. It includes erotic
scenarios and techniques such as sexual fantasy, manual and
oral stimulation,
various intercourse positions, and multiple stimulation before
and during intercourse (e.g., kissing, caressing, breast
and testicle
stimulation).
Herb was enthusiastic about augmenting the pleasuring phase
of love-making with erotic scenarios and techniques, while
Mary seemed less
enthusiastic. She was afraid that the pleasuring phase of
love-making that she had been enjoying so much would be lost.
She seemed
reassured when I stressed that eroticism requires arousal
which is best fulfilled by pleasuring. I suggested as a useful
guideline that
they both be between 3 to 5 on an 11-point arousal scale
(where zero represents no arousal and 10 orgasm) before transitioning
from
pleasuring to erotic stimulation.
In order to increase their eroticism, I suggested that both
write down erotic techniques and scenarios that they would
like to
incorporate into their sex life. To compile their individual
lists, I recommended they reflect on behaviors they had found
arousing in
the past, behaviors they found arousing currently but wanted
more of, and behaviors they had never asked for. Finally,
I instructed them
to rank the behaviors from the most arousing to the least
arousing.
Mary's most arousing erotic request was for Herb to perform
cunnilingus (oral sex). Because she knew that Herb didn't
like to give her
cunnilingus, she had given up wanting this early in the relationship.
In exploring Herb's inhibition to cunnilingus, it became
apparent
that Herb had developed this inhibition in young adulthood
when attempting to give oral sex to a girlfriend who not
only had poor
hygienne but also was critical of his efforts. When I asked
if Herb was willing to challenge this inhibition, he said
that he was
willing to try because he knew cunnilingus was important
to Mary's eroticism. I suggested that they experiment with
a gradual approach
involving practice, feedback, and validation, in which Mary's
support was crucial (sex is a team sport, in which partners
win or lose as
a team). First, Herb became comfortable with the scent of
Mary's fresly bathed genitals. Then, he experimented with
kissing and licking
the area around her vulva. Finally, he kissed and licked
her clitoris. Once Herb accomplished this, he was surprised
to find himself
becoming turned on by Mary's response to receiving cunnilingus.
I commented that the partner's arousal is the best aphrodisiac.
Herb's most arousing erotic request was for Mary to role
play the sexual fantasy of a high class escort. Herb found
the fantasy of
picking up an escort, and having her talk dirty to him during
sex, extremely arousing. Although he utilized this fantasy
during partner
sex, he felt guilty about doing so. I suggested that it is
common for people to use fantasy during partner sex to heighten
their
arousal, and that it is okay to do so providing they do not
lose connection with their partner. He had never shared this
fantasy with
Mary because he felt embarrassed by its unusual elements.
He seemed relieved when I indicated that most peoples' sexual
fantasies have
unusual elements, and that it is these very elements that
give sexual fantasies their charge.
Mary was okay with his having this fantasy, but didn't want
to act it out. I said that it was important that she not
do anything that
she felt uncomfortable with, but wondered if she would be
willing to try role playing some of the elements of Herb's
fantasy. Knowing
this was important to Herb's eroticism, she agreed. When
I asked what elements she thought she could act out, she
indicated that she
could wear the lingerie of an escort, and act submissively.
What she didn't want to act out was "talking dirty".
Herb was pleased with
Mary's willingness to respond to him. Before engaging in
this role play at home, I reminded Mary that she could ask
Herb to stop at any
point and to assume a "trust position", by holding
her until she felt secure enough to resume. After experimenting
with this fantasy
several times, Mary reported that she was beginning to feel
aroused not only by Herb's arousal but also by playing a
submissive role. On
reflection, she realized that submission was an element in
her own sexual fantasies.
Over the next several months, Mary and Herb continued to
incorporate erotic scenarios and techniques into their sex
life. This was not
done at the expense of the pleasuring phase of love-making.
They continued to enjoy affectionate, sensuous, playful,
and erotic levels
of touch. Mary was surprised that she was anticipating sex
with Herb positively. Both were experiencing more satisfaction
after sex in
the form of "afterplay". Both enjoyed holding each
other and basking in the warm after-glow of sex.
I validated Mary and Herb for persisting in the process
of revitalizing their sex life, even though this had neither
been easy nor
without set backs. I congratulated them on creating a new,
broad-based sexual script that included positive anticipation,
invitation
(not demand), pleasuring, eroticism (including but not requiring
orgasm and intercourse), and satisfaction (after play).
STEP 5: Maintaining a rekindled marital sexuality
In step 5, couples are encouraged to be proactive in maintaining
their treatment gains so as to avoid regression.
In order to maintain their rekindled marital sexuality,
I provided Herb and Mary with a number of guidelines. First,
I suggested that
they maintain a regular pattern of sexual contact. This would
require their investing the necessary time and energy as
an intimate team
in both planned intimacy dates and spontaneous encounters.
Second, I advised that they anticipate that about 5 to15
percent of their
sexual experiences would be mediocre. Having a realistic
view of marital sexuality would help them to take mediocre
experiences in
stride without over reacting or becoming demoralized. Third,
I recommended occasional pleasuring encounters that didn't
lead on to
orgasm and/or intercourse. Doing so would help them to remember
that marital sexuality is more than orgasm and intercourse.
Conclusion
Revitalizing marital sexuality in a low sexual or non sexual
relationship in which one of the partners experiences low
sexual desire is
a challenging process requiring considerable motivation.
By working as an intimate team to interrupt the pursue-avoidance
sexual cycle
and foster intimacy, by creating sexual desire through nondemand
pleasuring, and by heightening arousal through erotic techniques
and
scenarios, couples may build a flexible, broad-based marital
sexuality based on intimacy, pleasuring, and eroticism.
|