Why Won’t You Talk (About Sex)?

Talking about sex is not always easy, but sometimes it is the best way to prevent misunderstandings when it comes to sexual agreements. In a separate post, I discussed how feeling anxious or overwhelmed can lead people to shut down (or physically walk away) from a conversation. Here we take a look at another potential motivation for refusing to talk with a partner: the expression of power.

A disclaimer is in order. Disparities in relationship power can be associated with intimate partner violence. While most research has involved heterosexual couples, this finding has been replicated in studies of sexual and gender minority relationships (Bosco et al., 2022; Peitzmeier et al., 2020; Porsch et al., 2023; Robles et al., 2022). This post is not intended to address the needs of couples who are experiencing physical, sexual, or emotional abuse or those in which one partner is monitoring or controlling the other’s behavior. For those seeking that information, the Human Rights Campaign has compiled an overview of intimate partner violence among LGBTQ+ people with links to relevant national resources.

The power in staying silent

It can be tempting to think of power in terms of having the legitimate authority to tell someone else what to do (French & Raven, 1959). That is one form of power; however, silence can also be a way of asserting power and control. Consider this example.

Partner 1: Someone at work asked me the other day whether we are monogamous or not, and I realized I actually don’t know for sure. I mean, I have only just been with you, but we never really talked about it.

Partner 2: Do we need to?

Partner 1: I mean, it might be good to know that we’re on the same page.

Partner 2: [audible sigh] This was such a nice day. Seriously, I had a good time seeing you.

Partner 1: I thought so too. And you don’t have to go right away. I am not trying to ruin anything. I am actually really open to whatever. I just thought we could talk about it.

[long pause]

I mean, I guess I would prefer if it was just us, but I think I would be OK with the idea that maybe we play with other people sometimes. If that is what you were thinking you wanted.

Partner 2: I can’t do this now. I’ll see you later.

Constructive communication tends to be characterized by mutual disclosure, discussion, and negotiation (Christensen, 1987, 1988). Disparities in disclosure leave the partner with less information at a disadvantage. Knowing what a partner wants or values in a given situation means you understand what they might be sacrificing in any compromise. In our example, Partner 2 leaves knowing a fair bit about Partner 1’s perspective but has not shared their own at all. Without saying much—and without saying anything overtly cruel or directive—Partner 2 sends the message that they are the one with the authority to decide whether this conversation is going to happen. That is an expression of power—asserting control over a partner’s access to information (French & Raven, 1959).

People will sometimes talk about “giving the silent treatment” to a partner who has done something wrong. The connotation is that not talking will cause their partner to feel bad about what they have done, so that they will not do it again. We could understand this as a form of negative punishment (taking away something that is desired) in the operant conditioning paradigm (Skinner, 1953). French and Raven (1959) refer to it as coercive power—or the power to punish. There is a behaviorist adage, going all the way back to Skinner (1953), that punishment provides less information than reinforcement does. When we are punished for a behavior, we may learn not to do it again (to avoid punishment); however, we learn relatively little (sometimes nothing at all) about what we are supposed to do instead.

Consider our example. Partner 1 might very well have gotten the message that it was somehow “wrong” or “bad” to bring up the topic of sex at the time or in the way that he did based on Partner 2’s reaction. But that is about the only thing Partner 1 has the chance to learn. Partner 2 gave no indication of when, if ever, it would be OK to bring this up. They provided no information about what Partner 1 could do differently next time. In the absence of feedback, Partner 1 can either give up or else try again and hope it somehow goes better. Neither option is great.

Responding to a partner who asserts power through withdrawal

You cannot compel or force someone to talk. In fact, pursuing someone who is withdrawing can lead to a range of dysfunctional communication exchanges (Christensen, 1987, 1988). There are a couple of options you can try instead.

• Create opportunities for them to speak. When someone withdraws, it can be tempting to fill the silence. Partner 1 does this in our example. An alternative is to make it clear that you are curious about your partner’s perspective—by asking open-ended questions or inviting them to tell you more about what they think. Then wait. If they refuse to speak, let them know you are open to talking whenever they decide they want to share.
• Create a consequence for silence. One reason why the “silent treatment” can be disempowering is that one partner is withholding information the other may want or need in order to make an informed choice. One way to limit this effect of silence is to assign meaning to a “non-answer.” In our example, Partner 1 might do this by saying, “If you don’t want to talk, I respect that. I am going to assume we are not monogamous until or unless you want to discuss a different option.”

Things to consider if you are tempted to walk away from a conversation

• Refusing to tell someone what you want, means giving up your chance to negotiate. Leaving can send the message you did not like something, but it leaves your partner without any sense of what you wanted instead. Discussion may resolve an issue faster and with less conflict than just conveying your disapproval by shutting down the topic.
• You may diminish your partner's motivation to compromise with you. The more rewarding we find a relationship, the more likely we are to make sacrifices or compromises to protect it. When you walk away and withhold communication to punish your partner, you are taking away the opportunity for your partner to experience you as a, invested, supportive, desirable presence in their life.
• Sometimes sharing your perspective with a partner can make you feel anxious and vulnerable. If that happens, it can be tempting to respond by asserting control—potentially by shutting down the situation entirely. If that sounds relatable, see my post on anxious withdrawal for tips on managing anxiety in conversation.

Sex Essential Reads

“Sugar” Dating: Companionship, Mentoring, or Sex Work?

Is Voluntary Celibacy on the Rise?

Conclusions

As with any relationship guidance, there are no guarantees—only possibilities. Partners may walk away from a conversation for a variety of reasons. Expressing power is just one. Recognizing when that may be happening can help you respond more effectively in difficult moments. For those interested in learning more about relationship power and its impact on conversation, or for counselors interested in working with couples, Kendell and Starks (2022) provide a general overview of this literature.