|
|
Post by Lithium92 on Jan 20, 2017 9:27:31 GMT -5
Our 'full members' are the problem...
'Junior member' has its own cruelty.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2017 9:33:30 GMT -5
sunniedays,
Lack of sex drive is a deviation from the norm. It's perfectly normal to desire and even evolutionary to have a desire for sex. What is abnormal is the lack of desire for sex. Lack of sex drive can be physical but it also happens often with people who are unhealthy emotionally.
Most people in this forum have been criticized by their spouses because they want sex. Remember wanting sex is perfect natural and normal.
You're correct. There is something wrong with us. Why we would stay with someone who does not care enough to meet our physical needs? Sexual withholding is a form of abuse. It's much worse than physical abuse because it's unseen and goes much deeper. Maybe a better term would be abuser instead of refuser.
I had a epiphany the day I broke down balling in my car one day. It was then that I took an honest look at myself. I begin to fix myself and told the wife that she needs to start changing or I'm leaving. My refuser started giving me what I needed. I stood up for myself and demanded to be treated with respect. I got tired of taking the emotional beating and being a pathetic person who accepted this kind of treatment from someone.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lithium92 on Jan 20, 2017 9:37:57 GMT -5
There's a flaw in that logic though. You (and me) feeling like shit doesn't mean anyone else is doing anything wrong. They're just doing something they're perfectly entitled to do, or even have no choice about, and we don't like it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2017 9:43:41 GMT -5
Telecaster,
It's not normal for someone not to want sex. It's not normal for us to accept being married to someone who is not willing to meet our needs.
I've begun to meet my wife's needs that are not related to sex. She begin to meet my needs. My wife and I made a vow to love and cherish each other. Part of this for my wife is to take care of my physical needs. I give my wife security and emotionally support. These are her needs.
You can accept the treatment from your wife. I'm not going to accept it, especially when I'm meeting her needs and she is happy.
Just the other day, my wife told me that her libido was lacking. I told her you just have to do it. It may sound mean but there is real honesty in my relationship now. Either we're going to make it as a couple or it's divorce. I refuse to live the rest of my life without having sex.
For security and planning, I'm actively exercising and getting myself healthy in case I need to leave. If I do leave my marriage, I'm going to attract a healthy woman. I know that I can find another woman. Already, my son has noticed that women are looking at me and flirting with me. Women pick up when you're healthy. No more walking around like a beat dog.
|
|
|
|
Post by greatcoastal on Jan 20, 2017 9:49:59 GMT -5
There's a flaw in that logic though. You (and me) feeling like shit doesn't mean anyone else is doing anything wrong. They're just doing something they're perfectly entitled to do, or even have no choice about, and we don't like it. Perfectly entitled to do or have a choice. That part is 100% correct. I have a choice to mentally abuse someone, decieve them, lie to them, manipulate them, coerce them, use them for self gain, profit, tear down their whole sense of self worth, ruin there ability to trust anyone. That doesn't mean I'm doing anything wrong. They also have the choice to prosecute me, sue me, avoid me, isolate me, and warn others about me. |
|
|
|
Post by Lithium92 on Jan 20, 2017 9:53:19 GMT -5
Can you grasp that their actions aren't aimed at you? They affect you, but you're not the reason they're doing it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2017 10:09:58 GMT -5
Can you grasp that their actions aren't aimed at you? They affect you, but you're not the reason they're doing it. They're doing this because they are unhealthy emotionally. It still does not change the fact that it is abusive, even if they are not doing it intentionally to you. And as I posted earlier in this thread, the real problem is why do we accept the treatment? We are unhealthy for continuing on in these relationships. Two emotionally sick people in a relationship going nowhere. That's really what a SM comes down to in the end. Until someone decides to change, don't expect the relationship to get better. |
|
|
|
Post by beachguy on Jan 20, 2017 10:24:41 GMT -5
Can you grasp that their actions aren't aimed at you? They affect you, but you're not the reason they're doing it. It's hard to grasp when they insist you're not good enough to fuck. Was good enough to marry though, the day before. |
|
|
|
Post by Lithium92 on Jan 20, 2017 10:27:20 GMT -5
Not wanting to have sex isn't necessarily done to inflict cruelty though. That's my point.
In some cases yes, but not all.
|
|
|
|
Post by beachguy on Jan 20, 2017 10:42:52 GMT -5
Not wanting to have sex isn't necessarily done to inflict cruelty though. That's my point. In some cases yes, but not all. Just pointing out it's not black or white. |
|
|
|
Post by csl on Jan 20, 2017 10:49:54 GMT -5
Can you grasp that their actions aren't aimed at you? They affect you, but you're not the reason they're doing it. That is a bridge too far, isn't it? After all, the actions aren't aimed at their kids or co-workers, but at their spouses. |
|
|
|
Post by Lithium92 on Jan 20, 2017 10:54:57 GMT -5
Well, they can be aimed at spouses, if it's manipulation or control. But if it's illness or menopause or hormonal or whatever, it's just not aimed at anyone. It just is.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2017 12:32:46 GMT -5
Apocrypha isn't always wrong. I think maybe he takes fair-mindedness to an extreme sometimes. But there are worse flaws. And I think he's right about a lot of things.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2017 12:40:04 GMT -5
Can you grasp that their actions aren't aimed at you? They affect you, but you're not the reason they're doing it. Maybe the intent isn't to harm you. But if that is the outcome, they are not 100% innocent, either. I get a bit frustrated with people who take "personal responsibility" to an extreme - every time you're in pain, it's your own fault for "choosing" to feel that way. If somebody steps on my foot, that HURTS. Whether they did it on purpose or not. I'm going to yell, "Ouch!" Unless I know for sure that they did it on purpose, I won't be angry with them. If I know or strongly suspect they did it on purpose, my "Ouch!" will be followed by a string of cuss words, and possibly me striking back in some way. But - in either scenario - my foot still hurts, and I didn't "choose" to feel pain. |
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jan 20, 2017 12:44:30 GMT -5
Not wanting to have sex isn't necessarily done to inflict cruelty though. That's my point. In some cases yes, but not all. Totally agree. The point I was trying to make, and the neighborhood in which you are driving, is that in 99% of these stories it is not proven that the spouse has no desire for sex. What's shown is that they do not have sex with their partner, and if they do, they don't initiate, or the sex they choose to have is bad sex with minimal investment.
Those things suggest they don't want sex with their partner, not necessarily that they don't want sex at all. If they are invested in the fantasy that they are in a monogamous relationship (as opposed to the reality of a celibate one), this will present to BOTH of you as a lack of desire for sex.
The test will come with the market correction on the fantasy, when the "aesexual partner" seeks sex - often with someone who is a near stranger.
Both parties in these deals have an incredible capacity for self-delusion so this isn't necessarily a lie. Even if they KNOW they don't desire their partner and flick their bean every day to Benedict Cambembertsnich, they still are in the position of telling a person whom they love and and share a home and children that they don't desire sex with them. Ever. At all. The courage to say that to a loved one and invoke consequences to those words is well beyond many people, and there's not much reward for it either.
Let me paint a few pictures for the benefit of everyone here (not you specifically):
Take Mrs Apocrypha. Nearly celibate with increasing levels of crisis for 6 years, with complicated sexuality before that - starting on the wedding day. Her adamant narrative -even while engaged in an affair, and AFTER - was that she was had a low libido. With sex freely available 24/7 with an attractive partner who loved her, with sex posed as a real problem in the marriage, with kids in the picture, a supportive sympathetic environment, and an opportunity to discuss terms for a transparent open relationship on the table - she still chose to explore her sexuality in the context of an affair. She had a libido there - and enough to justify threatening her whole world.
Even after - she STILL clung to the aesexual narrative. The affair was an aberration - and in her narrative, she pursued it to rediscover sexuality so that she could then have that with me. See how that works? Even while porking in broad daylight at a city park and a hotel, a bj in a grocery parking lot, an office studio mid afternoon delight, she still gets to be aesexual
When the reconciliation failed and we decided to split, a frank conversation about next steps for each of us revealed that she was really looking forward again to having all kinds of sex. It took only two weeks from saying "I quit" to get to that stage. Two weeks. She pitched the open relationship the next morning and I agreed. She would use that to "find her sexuality again" - which was misplaced somehow.
That led to two years of fraught misadventures as well as Penthouse Letters, until it became apparent that it was "misplaced" again, and likely had been the whole time. Again, the same aesexual narrative. And, when I pulled the plug on this "aesexual" zombie once and for all, it took less than 24 hours for her to leave her phone on my cutting board at dinner prep - open to the page in which she was responding to one of her many candidates in the singles ad she posted for "An Asian Boytoy". She STILL clung to the aesexual narrrative as earnestly as day 1. Neither of us are particularly stupid people, so she wasn't trying to fool me. She believed her bullshit.
But maybe that was just the two of us, specific to a super-rare case - right? After all, what kind of people do that?
I've been single and dating for close to 3 years now. Dating at my age, most of the women I'm meeting are in their second round. I've likely dated 20 women in that time, give or take, spoken to 50-70 at some length, had intimate relations (kissing or more) with less than 20, and had invested relationships with maybe 4-5. I find that same story to be quite common among them - that they got to a point in their marriage where they didn't want sex or didn't like it. And once single, that they were finding they were enjoying it. In some cases, their partners were poor lovers, but in most cases there was a hurt - often many years -even two decades earlier - that was never properly resolved. What was evident though, was that they enjoyed the hell out of sex.
Circling back - the point is that our capacity for perpetuating our dissatisfaction is increased when we get caught up in the fantasies we tell ourselves so that we can feel better about our choices. It's dangerous to assume someone's motivation and it's helpful to be aware of how the words we use to define a concept limit and shape the way we think about it.
A refuser is someone who refuses sex. Ok - we ALL choose not to have sex with people every day. We all have people and relationships that are not sexual. Whether or not it is appropriate due to the fantasy that we are in a monogamous relationship (when in fact we are celibate) we encounter people every day who we wouldn't have sex with. Some of those might want to have sex with us. Some of those might be good people, who "deserve" to have sex in their lives, who treat us well. But we don't and we wouldn't even with we were single - because - we don't desire sex with them. That's not "abuse". It's absurd, of course, to even think that one is deliberately harming another in this situation - that sex might be owed to someone who doesn't desire sex with you.
So where does that leave us in a marriage though - because they promised? How do you promise to desire someone for the rest of your life? IT'S ABSURD. It might happen - you both might intend it. But it might end up here, instead. So the solution is to have sex with a person who you don't desire for the rest of your life? Think about that. It sounds like the kind of fairy tale contractual horror that evil princes inflict on maidens, and that is exactly how these spouses feel.
Calling them "refusers" or "abusers" is convenient - I get it. So is "pro-life" and "anti-abortion". Be aware of the payload in the terms we use, and how that affects YOUR thinking. But we do. Just at a cost we are unwilling to pay. Which puts you in the same boat as your "refuser".
We get dealt a series of shitty hands and we are losing our shirts. The dealer dealt you those hands. Is that a bad dealer? Is that abuse?
|
|
