Advertisement

Sexology pp 172-176 | Cite as

Does Marriage Inhibit Sexual Desire?

  • C. Buddeberg
Conference paper

Abstract

Until a few decades ago, marriage was the only place where sexual desire could be shown and lived without scruples. The limitations of personal freedom through marriage were compensated for by the attainment of sexual possibilities and rights. Today, premarital sex is accepted quite widely and is practiced by a large part of the population. As a rule, conclusion of marriage does not mean any longer a gain today, but rather a limitation of sexual freedom to the relation with the marital partner. Is it a consequence of this limitation that ever more men and women have come in recent years to consult physicians, psychotherapists, and sexologists because of lack of libido? It would be too simple to attribute the increase of disturbances of libido to this aspect alone. Sexual appetence is the expression of a complex occurrence, in which biological, psychological, and social factors have their parts. I limit myself in the following to three aspects that make understandable in part why disorders of sexual desire are so frequent today: They are the change in the social meaning of marriage, the discrepancy between the ideal of marriage and its reality, and the value of sex within marriage today.

Keywords

Sexual Desire Marital Relationship Social Meaning Sexual Disorder Sexual Freedom 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Buddeberg C (1987) Sexualberatung, 2nd edn. Enke, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  2. Buddeberg C (1987) Familiäre Reifungskrisen. Praxis Psychotherapie Psychosomat 32: 57–64Google Scholar
  3. Buddeberg C, Furrer HJ, Sieber M (1987) 10 Jahre sexualmedizinische Sprechstunde am Universitätsspital Zürich, Switzerland. Unpublished paperGoogle Scholar
  4. Clement U (1986) Sexualität im sozialen Wandel.Google Scholar
  5. Enke, Stuttgart Elliott SA, Watson JP (1985) Sex during pregnancy and the first postnatal year. J Psychosom Res 29: 541–548Google Scholar
  6. Imhof AE (1981) Die gewonnenen Jahre. Beck, MunichGoogle Scholar
  7. Levine SB (1987) More on the nature of sexual desire. J Sex Marit Ther 13: 35–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ryffel-Gericke C (1985) Männer in Familie und Beruf. Ruegger, DiessenhofenGoogle Scholar
  9. Willi J (1975) Die Zweierbeziehung. Rowohlt, ReinbekGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • C. Buddeberg
    • 1
  1. 1.Abteilung für Psychosoziale MedizinUniversitätsspital ZürichZürichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations