|
|
Post by callisto on Nov 12, 2016 4:57:38 GMT -5
I was going to ask if anyone out there had managed to successfully negotiate to remain in marriage but be able to explore intimate relationships with others? I don't see why we should have to loose homes and financial security due to what amounts to spousal refusal in not fulfilling a basic tenet of marriage and enforcing celibacy. I suppose the old fashioned term for such an arrangement would be a, 'marriage of convenience'.
Actually I realise your answers to this will be moot as sure my spouse won't agree ...
Assuming the marriage of convenience is, 'dead in the water' as an option it would be great to understand people's successful exit strategies better...
As well as seeing a lawyer, and shoring up some kind of a support network can anyone give advice on emotional or practical points (either little things they never expected to help so much or big ticket items) that facilitated their successful escape?
Currently I am struggling overcoming the reality of just how monetarily poor my everyday life will become (and I do have a job but it has no pension or security ). Also I am angry ( and scared ) that I will loose my home and security and no idea where I will live but if I don't leave the marriage I will remain, 'a nun without Faith', or, 'a eunuch'...
'Castration was typically carried out on the soon-to-be eunuch without his consent in order that he might perform a specific social function'
Jeezus that kind of sums up what happens in a SM to the refused partner- you are caught then (emotionally? )castrated to perform a specific social / domestic / function in being a spouse.
|
|
|
|
Post by baza on Nov 12, 2016 5:46:17 GMT -5
Has your legal advice suggested that there is a genuine risk that you - "will loose (your) home and security" ?
See, I'd figure that at the least, you'd be entitled to half the assets value as far as the marital home goes.
In a no fault jurisdiction basically it is a 50/50 split of all the divisible assets (with adjustments here and there based on earning capacity and suchlike matters).
-
Might be worth your while calling your lawyer again, and get him / her to walk you through the likely scenario again.
-
Unless you are in some bumfuck jurisdiction, you'll be up for 50% of the divisible assets. What is your understanding of the value of the total marital divisible assets ? How does half that total figure look ?
-
Perhaps another angle to look at it from in regard to your concerns about - "overcoming the reality of just how monetarily poor my everyday life will become (and I do have a job but it has no pension or security )"
-
As of today, you have a job, but no pension or security.
If you divorced, that wouldn't change. You'd still have a job, but no pension or security.
Employment wise, you'd be no worse off in such a scenario.
-
As far as hints on emotional aspects of a split, I believe it is imperative that (as far as you can) you deal with the task with as little emotion as possible. It is a commercial matter requiring a commercial resolution. Emotions are of very little assistance in such circumstances.
|
|
drbamboo
Junior Member
Posts: 20 
Age Range: 56-60
|
Post by drbamboo on Nov 12, 2016 6:05:08 GMT -5
I actually do know of a case where an "open" marriage or marriage of convenience seems to be working. In that case the refusing partner was fully aware of their refusal and took ownership of it. I expect that is an extremely unusual example.
This is someone I met through the old EP site. I'll see if they want to come on here and share.
|
|
|
|
Post by JonDoe on Nov 12, 2016 6:36:34 GMT -5
I actually do know of a case where an "open" marriage or marriage of convenience seems to be working. In that case the refusing partner was fully aware of their refusal and took ownership of it. I expect that is an extremely unusual example. This is someone I met through the old EP site. I'll see if they want to come on here and share. Yes, that sounds extremely unusual. Also consider that the marriage would be "open" for both partners. How would you feel and react if the refuser stepped outside the marriage too? Honestly, I've reached the conclusion that sex should be like golf. You may have one partner, a three-some, a four-some and occasionally go solo. |
|
|
|
Post by callisto on Nov 12, 2016 8:12:20 GMT -5
JD, I honestly wouldn't mind if my husband with off with the entire Olympic Brazilian beach volleyball team if he would give me a pass !
|
|
|
|
Post by beachguy on Nov 12, 2016 8:48:10 GMT -5
If a refuser has no immediate interest in sex outside the marriage then it's difficult to bring anything to the table in order to entice them into an open marriage. Except the threat of divorce if they don't accept. And in that case they will soon disavow their "agreement" because they were "coerced". That is what happened to me and that did cement my decision to leave.
|
|
|
|
Post by unmatched on Nov 12, 2016 10:06:59 GMT -5
JD, I honestly wouldn't mind if my husband with off with the entire Olympic Brazilian beach volleyball team if he would give me a pass ! How many people are in the Brazilian beach volleyball team? |
|
|
|
Post by callisto on Nov 12, 2016 12:18:51 GMT -5
Well .. I was really meaning however many individuals were involved over the Olympics - think per game there are four - that might be enough for starters!
|
|
|
|
Post by callisto on Nov 12, 2016 12:21:54 GMT -5
If a refuser has no immediate interest in sex outside the marriage then it's difficult to bring anything to the table in order to entice them into an open marriage. Except the threat of divorce if they don't accept. And in that case they will soon disavow their "agreement" because they were "coerced". That is what happened to me and that did cement my decision to leave. Well I can but try... I'm sure no matter how I dress my soliloquy/ discussion it will be met with a flat, 'No.' |
|
|
|
Post by beachguy on Nov 12, 2016 12:30:03 GMT -5
If a refuser has no immediate interest in sex outside the marriage then it's difficult to bring anything to the table in order to entice them into an open marriage. Except the threat of divorce if they don't accept. And in that case they will soon disavow their "agreement" because they were "coerced". That is what happened to me and that did cement my decision to leave. Well I can but try... I'm sure no matter how I dress my soliloquy/ discussion it will be met with a flat, 'No.' Yes you can try and you know you will get the standard "no" The problem is the marriage contract that effectively enforces fidelity without the quid pro quo of having needs met. It's that simple and it's difficult to negotiate from such a weak losing position. That's why I often talk about replacing the fidelity vow with a right of first refusal. That would force the refusing spouse to accept an open marriage. Well not force but the strong negotiating position shifts to the refused |
|
|
|
Post by worksforme2 on Nov 12, 2016 12:35:26 GMT -5
Toward the end of my marriage I proposed that my then spouse should allow me a FWB as a solution. I took the approach that it would allow the continuation of our marriage, satisfaction of my sexual needs and relief for her of having to be burdened with my constant attempts at intimacy. She was adamantly against the idea to the point she actually started having sex with me a couple times a week. The new arrangement only lasted a couple months and she returned to refusing which led to my removing myself from most aspects of the marriage, distancing myself from her emotionally, and no longer attending any social or other functions with her. She soon decided she would leave. Few refusers would hold still for what the humiliation of watching ones spouse get ready and walking out the door to meet their paramour.
I'm fortunate that my now X was accepting of her role and responsibility in the marriage ending and that we parted as friends, a friendship that continues.
|
|
|
|
Post by callisto on Nov 12, 2016 13:18:34 GMT -5
Well I can but try... I'm sure no matter how I dress my soliloquy/ discussion it will be met with a flat, 'No.' Yes you can try and you know you will get the standard "no" The problem is the marriage contract that effectively enforces fidelity without the quid pro quo of having needs met. It's that simple and it's difficult to negotiate from such a weak losing position. That's why I often talk about replacing the fidelity vow with a right of first refusal. That would force the refusing spouse to accept an open marriage. Well not force but the strong negotiating position shifts to the refused If only that were the case- although I am almost positive that under no circumstances would he consent to me seeing anyone else- but at least he couldn't divorce me for adultery if fidelity vow was replaced with first refusal- unfortunately we don't live in that world... |
|
|
|
Post by JonDoe on Nov 12, 2016 13:18:47 GMT -5
JD, I honestly wouldn't mind if my husband with off with the entire Olympic Brazilian beach volleyball team if he would give me a pass ! How many people are in the Brazilian beach volleyball team? Does it really matter? One or two of these fine young ladies would be more than enough for me!  |
|
|
|
Post by callisto on Nov 12, 2016 14:23:04 GMT -5
[Hi Baz, Thank you for your extremely well considered pragmatic (as always) response. My reply is modified from a previous post explaining my situation. I consulted a lawyer and was given bad news.I live in a place where they judge on what the court deem fair rather than a straight 50/50. Due to a set of unbelievable circumstances (and loopholes built into the law ) arising from my husband's accident which ended his career just 2months before we married the scales are weighted towards him - To cut to the chase I could be very, very unlucky.. I may end up with 40% of the house or nothing at all as the court are given wide discretion to whether all or, non of house value is paid to him. Since I have no kids ( haha - how could there be?) to balance any weighting I may be given little if anything. He has a large monthly income plus is due a substantial pension when it comes. . Most spouses are entitled to a share of spousal pension in divorce commensurate to their time in the marriage- because of particular circumstances I may receive very little if anything. So his accident has dissolved the usual norms for spouses at separation/ divorce. I would like to clarify that I do work- my job yields a substantial supporting wage but will not buy me much more than a room in a shared flat (bills, taxes etc) if I don't get any alimony payment or anything else.. - and I have sunk substantial amounts and every penny earned into refurbishment and upkeep of the house and stupidly (as it turns out) saved nothing for myself. My husband knows the value of coin and may well be ruthless in protecting himself. It will be a case of fingers crossed and no surety. The lawyer did say it was very, very unlikely I would get nothing but couldn't rule it out. So it boils down to this, financially I may be well and truly screwed if I leave but it will be the only good screwing I'm ever likely to have if I don't get out. What would you do?  ?? |
|
|
|
Post by baza on Nov 12, 2016 18:00:30 GMT -5
For me Sister callisto, money IS an important factor.
Not piles of it, but "enough" of it.
-
When I left (and moved up country), I took a car, and about 4 grand in cash which was going to have to sustain me until such time as I got another job initially, and until such time as I got my right whack out of the joint assets longer term.
-
My lifestyle was extremely frugal as you might imagine, initially living in an old farmhouse (essentially house sitting) very little social life etc.
And I was, for the first time in years, happy.
-
So that was a good outcome.
-
But wait - there's more !!!!!!!
-
-
After about 2 months I got a part time job, and found out I was entitled to some govt assistance.
I was able to move into town and rent a modest house.
Got more work.
And I was happy.
-
After the statutory year had passed, my lawyer suggested I sound my missus out on agreeing to a "Binding Financial Agreement" rather than a straight up divorce. So we (my missus and I) thrashed out an agreement. Essentially, of the 100% of divisible assets, it worked out about 38 / 62 in her favour (as she wanted the house - and I wanted her to have the house as our two kids were at that time still living with her)
And I was happy.
-
About another year after that, we divorced. A simple rubber stamping of what we had already done.
And I was happy.
Still am.
-
Now I would not presume to advise you "what you should do".
-
Rather, I offer up the above anecdote for your consideration.
-
The pivotal thing in my opinion, is that "happy" started only once I got out.
Initially it was a struggle, but I remained "happy" through that stage.
Then, financially, things started to turn around for me.
(and as a sidebar, my personal life improved exponentially)
-
Today, I am one happy bloke.
Soooooooooooo incredibly different to where I was in 2009.
|
|
?? 