“Choreplay” and the myth of housework and desire
If you and your partner share chores, it seems you’re also likely to have more intimacy. There’s even a word for this now: “choreplay.”
The advice seems obvious: if you’re a married man and want to roll in the sheets more often, load the dishwasher, pick up a vacuum, fold the laundry.
I’ve seen the Tiktok videos and IG reels women have posted of their husbands and male partners doing chores set to songs like Bruno Mars “That’s What I Like” or “One Margarita.”
Set to lyrics like, “I’ma open my legs…/It’s about to get freaky tonight, baby,” the message seems clear: men doing chores is hot.
But as a relationship coach who has worked with couples for many years, I find that sharing chores leading to more intimacy may in fact be an example of “correlation does not imply causation.”
The “Choreplay” Myth
Having been a married single mother, I was overworked and exhausted. I don’t think I even slept a full eight hours until my twins were close to their first birthday.
An unfair division of labor can impact drive and desire by increasing emotional exhaustion and heightening mental health symptoms like depression and anxiety, and sleep loss can lower it too.
Since the opposite of unfair division of labor would be fair division of labor, you would think that sharing chores with my partner and getting more sleep would increase my drive and desire overall.
But in fact, my drive has stayed the same throughout the years, both in my first marriage, as a dating divorcée, and in my second marriage. It only dwindled somewhat shortly after each of my four pregnancies, but then returned to its original levels.
I could be an exception, but in studies, I’m not alone: “women between 27 and 45 had more [intimacy] and were more likely to have it sooner in a relationship.”
In another study, it was found that in relationships where men did more “feminine” chores (cooking, cleaning, laundry) around the house, they were intimate 1.5 fewer times a month than couples who divided their chores more traditionally (as in, women do the housework and men do the yard work).
And this even went further: women reported greater satisfaction too if the chores were divided more traditionally in their relationship.
Again, this could be absolutely be another example of “correlation does not imply causation.”
To use my own marriage for an example, my husband and I have divided chores equitably based on our preferences, strengths, and availability. My schedule is more flexible, so I take on more to do with the children. He likes making sure the yard is nice, so he handles the yard.
From the outside, our relationship might look like we’ve divided chores along more “traditional” lines, but cleaned clothes magically appear in my closet every week, and when we bought my husband a new truck, I negotiated the sales price and signed all of the paperwork.
Traditional chore division or not, the frequency with which we have been intimate and my satisfaction have never really changed.
The Complexity of Desire
But why is this the case? Why might my desire stay the same even when chores are shared or not shared if “choreplay” is a thing?
Esther Perel, couples therapist and author of Mating in Captivity, said this, “Egalitarian marriage takes the values of a good social system — consensus-building and consent — and assumes you can bring these rules into the bedroom. But the values that make for good social relationships are not necessarily the same ones that drive [desire]….most of us get turned on at night by the very things that we’ll demonstrate against during the day.”
What she’s saying is simple: desire doesn’t care whether the laundry is folded. Desire doesn’t care whether your partner replaces the toilet paper or picks up the kids after school.
Desire means, for example, that the feminist might like it when she’s objectified. Our desires are and can be myriad and can completely conflict with the person we are outside of the bedroom, which is why “choreplay” may not do much to increase desire.
The Transactional Nature of “Choreplay”
I would be remiss if I didn’t mention how transactional “choreplay” comes across as well.
If “choreplay” is advertised as increasing the frequency of intimacy in relationships, can’t you see some misguided husband pulling out the laundry basket and saying with a wink, “If I do this, maybe I’ll get some later?”
Transactional intimacy ("intimacy exchanged for money, goods, services, and/or status") does require the consent of both parties, and the misguided husband in my example above likely wouldn’t find himself a willing partner in his irritated wife.
When couples have intimacy problems, it's likely connected to several issues instead of just one. It could be unfair division of labor. It could also be long working hours, lack of emotional intimacy or connection, hormonal or aging issues, pain or dysfunction, health or psychological causes, loss of love, or even discomfort around the topic in general.
To state a couple’s poor intimate life is due to just an unfair division of labor is likely a gross oversimplification. This means a partner taking on the laundry now when they didn’t before will probably do little to correct it.
“Choreplay” is far from a one-size-fits-all solution to a couple’s intimacy dynamics. While sharing household responsibilities is undoubtedly essential for a harmonious relationship, it’s not necessarily a direct path to increased desire or satisfaction. “Choreplay” might make for entertaining social media content, but real intimacy requires more than a well-folded pile of laundry.