Hello Puffin
The way even many fairly progressive men see it is they are getting everything they need from you whilst giving nothing but their time (and sometimes their exclusivity) in return. Why should they change that and give up the right to perhaps see others simultaneously (an unpleasant thought if you love someone, granted) or at least change partners on a whim if they so desire (also not too pleasant)???
Sometimes men are sincerely emotionally engaged to some level, and may have honest feelings of affection or even love. But if you are already exclusive to them, physically intimate, and giving your time, affection, sex, and support solely to them...often, that's all they need from you. There is no incentive whatsoever for them to commit, unless losing you is imminent and often then, not even. As they see it, YOU are the one who has already committed to the man in all but name...after all, if you are like many women, you've held nothing back. On the other hand, they've often not had to give or do too much more than show up and happily receive the gracious bounty of a woman's love, free for the taking.
From many gents' POV, when he already has your de facto commitment, what could possibly spur him to take the next step? Aside from his own level of maturity, and/or his own love, integrity and desire to commit wholeheartedly to you, joyfully and by choice? If these factors are not already clearly present in spades, then it's not always clear how things might possibly change, or when, if ever. Usually change has nothing to do with you..it involves a man either coming into a new place of maturity, and/or already being in that place and thus able to realise the gift he has in you on his own. Sometimes change does involve fear... him being motivated by fear of losing you...but that is no guarantee of change even if there is real love.
Sex often comes way before love ever arrives in a lot of modern relationships, which doesn't really make sense from the perspective of care of the soul IMO. However, it's commonly done due to social and personal pressures, or a desire to please, or from extending oneself in love and trust very early on, before there is any firm indication of reciprocity of that love and trust. Then love typically comes before commitment, which of course makes sense if we remove sex from the equation. However it still doesn't make too much sense if we throw sex in from the get go...as then it's often not clear how strong or long-term the foundation of the love really is.
So these days much of all that is real and sacred is all a bit buggered up. The sex first, questions later approach to relationships often leaves otherwise healthy women often feeling extremely vulnerable and insecure on nearly all levels, Whilst otherwise healthy men may be feeling complacent and lazy, LOL, having assessed that there is no pressing need for them to commit now or perhaps ever. For some, rather than commit, they'll just get someone else to pony up all the gracious bounty of her love...and they'll willingly take that for free, too, until such time as they are no longer willing or able play that game. It's a lame situation but has become fairly commonplace in our society. Sadly, many have fully extended themselves on trust both physically and emotionally to someone first, only to find out later that their trust was somehow misplaced or misused, or that other is not ready for commitment and may never be, or does not do monogamy, or is not free to commit to you for some other reason.
It is of course very difficult to be deceived, regardless...and even if you walk away, you may feel some pain and heartbreak. But it is always worse if you have extended yourself fully in love and trust -- with concrete gifts of your love, your time, your exclusivity, your fidelity and your body -- without receiving the concrete gifts you need in return -- such as love, exclusivity, fidelity, commitment, etc.
And it's fair and honest to own those needs. Particularly given the context of modern relationships and in any context where one person is expected to give out of balance with what they are receiving or what they need to receive, for their own emotional and physical health. Modern relationships are often very unbalanced in regard to the speed with which the gift of exclusivity, commitment, intimacy, love, and time are expected to be given by women, versus men. It's up to each of us to reclaim our own balance and in order to do that, we must honestly own and communicate (discuss) our needs and what I call the balance equation.
If you need commitment in order to fully love and commit and be exclusive with someone, then that's what's right and good for you. It's not for anyone to say it's wrong for you. Unconditional love at the soul level nonetheless still always requires conditional boundaries in relationship, in order to honour and respect both the bodies and the spirits of both parties. We are not only spirit...we are flesh and blood...and we must honour and respect that fact.
Your feelings are perfectly normal and IMO you are honouring a very deep and integral response from your soul to seek the sacred in relationship.
Love and commitment are not casual to the soul, even if we sometimes treat them in very casual or common ways in modern society. The capacity to love is fundamental and IMO sacred, just as much as higher intellect and the capacity to reason or self-reflect. Sex too is a sacred act, not some sort of utilitarian necessity that allows us to use one another out of need or convenience, whether short-term or long-term.
I wish you love & light on your journey Puffin
Peace & blessings,
7L