Understanding When a Partner Is Not in the Mood: Sexual Communal Strength in Couples Transitioning to Parenthood
Situations in which one partner is interested in having sex but the other partner is not “in the mood” are common in relationships. We extend previous work on sexual communal strength—the motivation to be responsive to a partner’s sexual needs—to demonstrate that in addition to the motivation to meet a partner’s need to have sex, the motivation to be understanding about a partner’s need not to engage in sex is uniquely associated with sexual and relationship satisfaction. In Study 1, we adapted a measure of sexual communal strength for having sex (SCSS) to create a new measure of sexual communal strength for not having sex (SCSN). We demonstrated that SCSN is distinct from SCSS and associated with more positive and less negative responses to an imagined situation of sexual rejection. In Study 2, both SCSS and SCSN were uniquely associated with greater sexual and relationship satisfaction in couples transitioning to parenthood—a time when many couples experience changes to their sexual relationship. Having a partner who is higher in SCSN is associated with greater sexual satisfaction and relationship quality for new mothers but not new fathers, suggesting that during the transition to parenthood, it might be more important for women to have a partner who is understanding about their need not to engage in sex. The results suggest that the motivation to be understanding about a partner’s need not to engage in sex may be an additional way that partners can show communal care in their sexual relationships.
KeywordsSexual motivation Sexual satisfaction Relationship satisfaction Transition to parenthood Couples Sexual communal strength
This work has been supported by an IWK Health Centre postdoctoral fellowship and a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC) Banting postdoctoral fellowship awarded to Amy Muise, grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the IWK Health Center awarded to Natalie O. Rosen and Emily A. Impett, a SSHRC Insight Grant awarded to Emily A. Impett and Amy Muise, and a SSHRC CGS fellowship awarded to James J. Kim.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
None of the authors have conflict of interests to declare.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the University of Toronto (Study 1) and Dalhousie University (Study 2).
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Belsky, J., & Kelly, J. (1994). The transition to parenthood: How a first child changes a marriage: Why some couples grow closer and others apart: Based on a landmark study. New York: Dell.Google Scholar
- Costello, A. B., & Osborne, J. W. (2005). Best practices in exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, & Evaluation, 10, 1–8.Google Scholar
- Cowan, C. P., & Cowan, P. A. (2000). When partners become parents: The big life change for couples. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
- Day, L. C., & Impett, E. A. (2015). For it is in giving that we receive: The benefits of sacrifice in romantic relationships. In C. Knee & H. T. Reis (Eds.), Advances in personal relationships, Vol. 1: Positive approaches to optimal relationship development (pp. 211–231). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Fehr, B. (2013). The social psychology of love. In J. Simpson & L. Campbell (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of close relationships (pp. 201–233). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Haugen, E. N., Schmutzer, P. A., & Wenzel, A. (2004). Sexuality and the partner relationship during pregnancy and the postpartum period. In J. H. Harvey, A. Wenzel, & S. Specher (Eds.), The handbook of sexuality in close relationships (pp. 411–435). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers.Google Scholar
- Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Kim, J. J., Muise, A., & Impett, E. A. (2015). Not in the mood? How do people reject their partner for sex and how does it matter? Paper presented at the Canadian Sex Research Forum, Kelowna, BC, Canada.Google Scholar
- Muise, A., & Impett, E. A. (2012). Are you game? The benefits of sexual communal strength. Paper presented at the Canadian Sex Research Forum, Ottawa, ON, Canada.Google Scholar
- Risch, G. S., Riley, L. A., & Lawler, M. G. (2003). Problematic issues in the early years of marriage: Content for premarital education. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 31, 253–269.Google Scholar
- Schlagintweit, H., Bailey, K., & Rosen, N. O. (2016). A new baby in the bedroom: Frequency and severity of postpartum sexual concerns and their associations with relationship satisfaction in new parent couples. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 13, 1455–1465. doi: 10.1016/j.jsxm.2016.08.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- Serati, M., Salvatore, S., Siesto, G., Cattoni, E., Zanirato, M., Khullar, V., … Bolis, P. (2010). Female sexual function during pregnancy and after childbirth. Journal of Sexual Medicine, 7, 2782–2790.Google Scholar