All Posts

There is a pattern I encounter regularly that most couples have never had explained to them. One partner's desire has gone quiet, and underneath it is anger that has never been expressed. Not rage. Frequently not even anger the person would identify as anger. It presents as fatigue, disinterest, a general flatness. And when the anger is finally named, the desire frequently returns.

This is the topic I have been asked about most often and written about least. The cultural conversation is conducted almost entirely by two camps — one treating it as a moral catastrophe, the other as harmless entertainment. Neither is useful to a couple trying to figure out what to do about something real. So I am going to describe the specific mechanisms by which it does and does not affect relationships, and leave the moral question where it belongs.

A growing number of people are taking semaglutide or tirzepatide, and a meaningful subset have noticed something change in their intimate lives. Almost none were told anything about this possibility. I want to write about it carefully, because the two dominant treatments of it online are both wrong. One says these drugs destroy your libido. The other says they improve everything. The actual answer is considerably less satisfying than either.

This is the most common message I receive, and it arrives in some version of the same three sentences almost every time. I want to work on our intimate life. My partner isn't opposed exactly, but they're not interested in doing anything about it. What am I supposed to do when I'm the only one who cares? The standard answer is not useful, and the situation is more workable than it appears.

There is a specific configuration of exhaustion that belongs to blended families, and almost nobody writes about what it does to the couple at the center of it. Children who did not choose this arrangement. Ex-spouses who remain permanent features of the landscape. Custody schedules that determine which weeks are possible. And underneath all of it, a couple who is supposed to be the foundation of the entire structure and frequently gets the least attention of anyone in it.

There is a category of Nashville marriage that almost no relationship advice is written for. One partner tours, or engineers sessions until three in the morning, or disappears for six weeks and reappears for two. This is an enormous number of households in this city. Music is not an abstraction here; it is the economy. And the intimate lives inside those households operate under conditions standard guidance does not contemplate.

Of all the things that quietly determine whether a couple has an intimate life, sleep may get the least serious attention relative to its actual influence. Nobody wants to be told the answer to their intimate difficulties is going to bed earlier. It is not a satisfying answer. It is also, for a substantial number of couples, correct.

A significant number of couples are attributing to their marriage a problem that is being caused by a prescription. This is not rare. What makes it so damaging is not the medication — which is often genuinely necessary and genuinely helping — but that nobody told the patient it might happen. So the desire disappears, and both partners reach for the explanations available to them. Meanwhile the actual cause is sitting in the medicine cabinet.

There is a stretch of about ten weeks every year that is uniquely hostile to intimate connection, and most couples walk into it without a plan. In our house, with three kids and two businesses, this stretch is the hardest of the year by a wide margin. The typical pattern is that couples suspend their intimate life for the season and intend to resume in January. The problem is that ten weeks is long enough for the suspension to become the new baseline.

Nobody prepares couples for what grief does to their intimate life. What is not prepared for is what happens in the bedroom in the months afterward, when the casseroles have stopped and two people are trying to figure out how to be physically close in the middle of something neither of them has language for. Brittney and I have been through a version of this.

Almost everyone who decides to work on their intimate life starts the same way. A moment of clarity, a resolution, and for about two weeks things are different. Then a week gets difficult and the practice gets skipped. Within a month the resolution has joined every other resolution that did not survive contact with an ordinary Tuesday. This is not a motivation problem. It is a design problem.

There is a particular loneliness that comes with living in a body that has stopped cooperating — and a parallel loneliness that comes with loving someone whose body has. Chronic illness reshapes intimate life comprehensively. And almost none of it gets addressed, because the medical system managing the illness is not asking about the intimacy, and the couple is not raising it.

If I had to name the single most common unspoken grievance in long-term relationships, it would be this: I'm always the one who initiates. Or its mirror image, which lives in the same house: I feel like I'm constantly being asked for something. Both are true simultaneously. That is what makes this pattern so persistent — neither partner is wrong, and every attempt to fix it reinforces it.

One of the more useful things about the Erotic Blueprint framework is that it explains why generic intimacy advice so often fails. The advice is not wrong — it is calibrated for someone else's wiring. The same is true of guided audio. Coelle works differently depending on your Blueprint. Brittney is a Sensual. I am a Shapeshifter. We use the same platform in noticeably different ways, and the difference is instructive.

There is a belief about good relationships that I encounter constantly and that the research directly contradicts: that healthy couples do not fight much. It is intuitive. It is wrong. What actually distinguishes thriving relationships from deteriorating ones is not the frequency of conflict — it is what happens afterward. The skill is repair. And almost nobody is taught it.

It was an ordinary Tuesday when I noticed it. Brittney and I were on the same couch, lit blue by two screens, and the aliveness that used to crackle between us was simply gone. When I went looking for why, I found that I'd been showing up to my marriage as half a man. What pulled me out wasn't a technique — it was the one man in history who never showed up as half of himself.

There is a phrase couples use when describing this, and it is remarkably consistent: we're more like roommates. Two people who genuinely like each other, cooperate well, and have essentially no erotic current running between them. Not hostile. Not in crisis. Just administrative. Brittney and I have been in a version of this. Here's what it actually is — and why it isn't as stable as it feels.

Brittney and I lost a pregnancy, and then spent nearly two years trying to conceive again. Our daughter Isla exists because of IVF — a process that was physically brutal for Brittney and emotionally brutal for both of us. One of the parts nobody prepares you for is what happens to your intimate life. Sex became scheduled. Then clinical. Then a task with a pass-fail outcome announced two weeks later.

Nashville runs on alcohol. Not in a hidden way — openly, culturally, as a defining feature of the place. I am not writing a temperance post. What I want to name is more specific and less discussed: alcohol has a direct, measurable, and consistently negative effect on sexual function and intimate presence. And in a city where drinking is this normalized, a meaningful number of couples are attributing to their relationship a problem that is substantially pharmacological.

There is a hesitation I encounter regularly: if the goal is intimate connection with my partner, isn't working on this alone somehow beside the point? I understand the logic. Intimacy is relational by definition. But the logic is wrong. The quality of connection available between two people is substantially determined by what each of them brings — and what each brings is developed individually, not relationally. You cannot give someone presence you have not developed.