Excellent summary. To this, I would also add: it's not always strictly that the man is unskilled (or that the woman is sex-negative). The man might also be an unappealing lover for issues like poor hygiene or bad bedroom boundaries.

For example, if she doesn't like a particular move, or doesn't like it very often, and you keep trying that move frequently — regardless of her stated aversion to it — she will rightfully get fed up with the fact that you are constantly disregarding her boundaries, and she would thus rather avoid sex with you altogether. This latter case is not about being a bad lover for lack of skill, but rather being a bad lover for lack of respect. All the skill in the world won't make someone excited about you if you ignore their stated preferences.

In my history, if a man turned me off as a lover, I simply ended things (early on) altogether, rather than avoiding sex. I'd rather be in a relationship with a man with whom I'm excited to have frequent sex, rather than subject myself to subpar-quality lays. That said, not all women will do this because they don't realize (thanks to our puritanical socialization) that it's totally okay for them to WANT better sex; a lot of women who genuinely love sex are gaslighted by society into believing that sex is a superficial concern in a love relationship and that therefore the "noble" thing to do is to stand by a man who doesn't please them. So this is something to be mindful of too...