Hardcover, 244 pages
English language
Published Sept. 5, 2006 by HarperCollins.
Why does great sex so often fade for couples who claim to love each other as much as ever? Can we want what we already have? Why does the transition to parenthood so often spell erotic disaster? Does good intimacy always make for good sex? Ether Perel takes on these tough questions, grappling with the obstacles and anxieties that arise when our quest for secure love conflicts with our pursuit of passion. She invites us to explore the paradoxical union of domesticity and sexual desire, and explains what it takes to bring lust home.In her twenty years of clinical experience, Perel has treated hundreds of couples whose home lives are empty of passion. They describe relationships that are open and loving, yet sexually dull. What is going on?In this explosively original book, Perel explains that our cultural penchant for equality, togetherness, and absolute candor is antithetical to erotic desire for …
Why does great sex so often fade for couples who claim to love each other as much as ever? Can we want what we already have? Why does the transition to parenthood so often spell erotic disaster? Does good intimacy always make for good sex? Ether Perel takes on these tough questions, grappling with the obstacles and anxieties that arise when our quest for secure love conflicts with our pursuit of passion. She invites us to explore the paradoxical union of domesticity and sexual desire, and explains what it takes to bring lust home.In her twenty years of clinical experience, Perel has treated hundreds of couples whose home lives are empty of passion. They describe relationships that are open and loving, yet sexually dull. What is going on?In this explosively original book, Perel explains that our cultural penchant for equality, togetherness, and absolute candor is antithetical to erotic desire for both men and women. Sexual excitement doesn't always play by the rules of good citizenship. It is politically incorrect. It thrives on power plays, unfair advantages, and the space between self and other. More exciting, playful, even poetic sex is possible, but first we must kick egalitarian ideals and emotional housekeeping out of our bedrooms.While Mating in Captivity shows why the domestic realm can feel like a cage, Perel's take on bedroom dynamics promises to liberate, enchant, and provoke. Flinging the doors open on erotic life and domesticity, she invites us to put the "X" back in sex.
Perel has great ideas for how to rethink eroticism in the context of a long term relationship. I’ve got lots to think about.
Lots of good ideas for reframing how to think about eroticism in a long-term relationship. Lots to think about
This isn't really for anyone who has practiced consensual nonmonogamy or doesn't identify with relationships based on domestic normativity in the first place. It's like watching a reality show.
Separate to strengthen.
That is the theme of Perel's book. Perel address the problem: sex life declines as couples become closer in their day to day lives - moving in, getting married, sharing more activities, raising kids. Perel challenges the notion that that's just how things work.
For Perel, the underlying problem is that each person gradually loses their identity as relationships become more intimate and supportive. Often a person wants to be too giving or too thoughtful. That's nice for the rest of life but not for the erotic. So Perel encourages people to develop their own identities and not be so nice.
Perel acknowledges that part of the problem is the cultural and familial baggage we carry into relationships. Being America, there is a Puritan strain - we've all heard that it should be confined to marriage for reproduction. There is also a secularist strain that demands equality …
Separate to strengthen.
That is the theme of Perel's book. Perel address the problem: sex life declines as couples become closer in their day to day lives - moving in, getting married, sharing more activities, raising kids. Perel challenges the notion that that's just how things work.
For Perel, the underlying problem is that each person gradually loses their identity as relationships become more intimate and supportive. Often a person wants to be too giving or too thoughtful. That's nice for the rest of life but not for the erotic. So Perel encourages people to develop their own identities and not be so nice.
Perel acknowledges that part of the problem is the cultural and familial baggage we carry into relationships. Being America, there is a Puritan strain - we've all heard that it should be confined to marriage for reproduction. There is also a secularist strain that demands equality and democracy, which like being thoughtful is a generally nice idea but not always for the erotic.
The key points of the book could be put into a short essay. But the rest of the book is filled with examples of Perel's patients and illustrates her points. At times these examples are repetitious, but make the abstract more concrete. Another problem with the examples is how she quotes herself and her patients. This is the difference between character dialog in a novel and real life. In a novel the characters always say things in context with the text, the author tries to be as pithy, witty, or concise as possible. In real life people overuse pronouns, use non-standard syntax and indirect diction.
The most controversial part of Perel's book is not that she withholds judgement on cheating spouses, but at times encourages it. To say that she encourage cheating is wrong. She finds that in some cases it may be useful to bring in a third party. Sometimes the third party is imagined or figurative and other times it's real.
Where Perel misses, is not her advice, but why most people reject it. She sees how we've become more excepting of gays and premarital sex, but not extra marital sex and she doesn't understand why. She thinks that extra martial sex the next taboo to go and that our fidelity fixation has something to do with our mothers caring for us, but not everyone has had a strong consistent mother figure and the slippery slope is often a sticky staircase.
Whether we come from a puritan or secularist or in-between background almost all of us feel strongly about fidelity in monogamous relationships - married or not. Why is that? I think its because we are materialistic, legalistic society based on property rights and capitalism. Fidelity is the key and universal clause in all monogamous relationship contracts - implicit or explicit. The rule of law and the sanctity of contracts must be upheld, we demand. Divorce is ok, because it ends the contract. Friends with benefits is ok because there is no fidelity clause. Two men or two women can enter into a contract, but you can't contract with a horse. There are two parties to a contract, you can't have multiple spouses. Where there is a contract, we must punish violators of the fidelity clause in the court of the public commons.
Looking at an intimate relationship as a contract - whether you think its like property law or corporate law - is part of the problem with the decline of eroticism. Law is pretty boring. The law of man runs counter to the law nature and blocks nature from taking its course.
If you are looking for a step by step how to, this isn't it. If you are looking for a better point of view read Perel's book.
Definitely some interesting thoughts in here for those of us who are learning to cultivate intentional, mindful, non-stagnant long term relationships.
The author's thesis is that relationships require a gap for a spark to cross, or that too much intimacy kills sex.
I stopped reading after getting fed up with the name dropping, failure to back up her claims, and offering conflicting, and potentially damaging advice in her book regarding relationships.
If you want a pop-sci self-help book that encourages infidelity, you might find comfort in this book. Otherwise I'd recommend staying away from this one.
