Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 17, 2017 21:39:01 GMT -5
Quite honestly - if it weren't for the possibility of sex on a regular basis, with somebody you know you are sexually compatible with - I no longer understand why anybody puts up with marriage.
It's no longer the 1950s. It's now socially acceptable to be single.
If you want a warm, comforting home, good meals, etc. - you don't have to be married to get that. You can give that to yourself.
If you don't want to live by yourself, you can find a roommate, share with a family member, etc. With housing costs going up, that's not as uncommon as it used to be.
If you want kids, people are a lot less judgmental about single parents (in more modern countries.)
If all I wanted was to not live by myself, have someone around all the time, etc., I wouldn't get married; I'd look for a roommate.
Without sex, I for one don't see any point to marriage.
|
|
|
|
Post by DryCreek on Aug 17, 2017 21:53:29 GMT -5
celibatejoe, hopefully you were prepared for the lively debate. I hope you're thick-skinned and I'm glad you've stuck around so far. Selfishly, I find your perspective interesting, because my wife seems to have similar behavior but won't discuss it; perhaps some of your comments will shed light on her logic. So far, your comment struck a chord that you believe one can have passion or commitment, but not both.
|
|
|
|
Post by celibatejoe on Aug 17, 2017 21:54:00 GMT -5
My wedding vows said "to have and to hold". I always inferred simple affection and loyalty from that statement. There was nothing mentioned about desire or sexual compatibility when I took my vows, and I was not raised to even consider either. With the exception of very few scenarios such as very old people looking for companionship, who exactly enters a relationship or dare I say a commitment of marriage and honestly believes that sex won't form part of that relationship? I always did it for companionship, since sex eventually stops in a marriage anyway. I never thought much about sex until I was forced to stop anyway, because of a heart attack, even though in my mind I had already made the decision. That clinched it for me, because I thought about it a lot in the hospital. I would guess that it would be under 1% of people. When you get married you are doing a lot more than "promising that you won't have sex with others". I think you have misunderstood the meaning of marriage entirely. As far as I knew, my parents never had sex. It's not like they tried to hide it. They just didn't do it. You're certainly right that my marriages were mistakes, but I did the best I could. There was lots of sex during the first two, although it made no difference. |
|
|
|
Post by celibatejoe on Aug 17, 2017 21:56:38 GMT -5
celibatejoe , hopefully you were prepared for the lively debate. I hope you're thick-skinned and I'm glad you've stuck around so far. Selfishly, I find your perspective interesting, because my wife seems to have similar behavior but won't discuss it; perhaps some of your comments will shed light on her logic. So far, your comment struck a chord that you believe one can have passion or commitment, but not both. Passion is fine when you're young and reckless. It's not going to get a couple to the finish line, though. If I had to do it all over again, I'd have remained a virgin. |
|
|
|
Post by celibatejoe on Aug 17, 2017 22:00:00 GMT -5
"I just got tired of always giving, and never getting" What do you mean? What weren't you getting? Any kind of emotional connection, a sense that sex had any meaning at all. Not to mention it always took me a long time to climax, on the few occasions I did. My partners always got a lot more than I did. |
|
|
|
Post by DryCreek on Aug 17, 2017 22:08:38 GMT -5
"I just got tired of always giving, and never getting" What do you mean? What weren't you getting? Any kind of emotional connection, a sense that sex had any meaning at all. Not to mention it always took me a long time to climax, on the few occasions I did. My partners always got a lot more than I did. I get this, and it makes sense. If you don't enjoy sex and it doesn't give you a sense of emotional connection or intimacy with your partner, then I can see why someone wouldn't be interested ever, except as they might be compelled purely for their spouse's benefit. But as we've discussed, that kind of disconnected sex, however willing, doesn't satisfy a lot of people that end up here. That seems to be the gap for a lot of couples here, though for most it crept in later in the relationship. For some, the pleasure is there on both sides, but the willingness is still lacking. That one is harder to understand. A few are in the boat where the dynamic existed early in the relationship, or all along. That seems to be what you describe. Remaining a virgin... it's a perfectly acceptable option. The angst comes in when there's a mismatch that emerged as a surprise. |
|
|
|
Post by celibatejoe on Aug 17, 2017 22:09:20 GMT -5
if there was a pill that increased your desire, you would not take it? She has to accept you for you right? Presumably such a pill would increase my sexual desire for anyone I found attractive. I don't think my wife would like that at all. |
|
|
|
Post by celibatejoe on Aug 17, 2017 22:12:12 GMT -5
If you don't enjoy sex and it doesn't give you a sense of emotional connection or intimacy with your partner, then I can see why someone wouldn't be interested ever, except as they might be compelled purely for their spouse's benefit. But as we've discussed, that kind of disconnected sex, however willing, doesn't satisfy a lot of people that end up here. That seems to be the gap for a lot of couples here, though for most it crept in later in the relationship. For some, the pleasure is there on both sides, but the willingness is still lacking. That one is harder to understand. I certainly don't. I'd cash out my 401k to experience sexual intimacy. It must be nice. |
|
|
|
Post by DryCreek on Aug 17, 2017 22:27:41 GMT -5
I certainly don't. I'd cash out my 401k to experience sexual intimacy. It must be nice. It is, and that's why it's so very hard to lose. Many folks do, quite literally, cash out their 401(k) in the form of a divorce just to get that intimacy back. |
|
|
|
Post by allworkandnoplay on Aug 17, 2017 22:56:06 GMT -5
Welcome, Joe. I also very much appreciate your point of view.
For me the main point is missing here. It is not really about the sex. So you don't desire sex and no longer want it. Fine. It is your choice, no judgment. Would you describe yourself as "asexual"? I would say that most people in our society view sex as a required component of a marriage, whether by vows or by common societal/archetypal understanding. (You can find past discussions on the scriptural understanding of the marriage vows and how they really do include a sexual component. Even non-religious marriage ceremonies often use vows that at least were based on the original religious context.)
Please correct me if I am wrong, but it seems to me that you have unilaterally decided that sex will no longer be a part of your life, even though your wife still wants it. To me, marriage is the ultimate compromise - one partner sacrifices something with the reasonable expectation of reciprocation later. It is as if you are telling (not asking) your wife to not only sacrifice her needs for yours, but to expect nothing in return. You have already mentioned "desire" as part of the equation as well. You are absolutely right that you cannot force desire. However, you are still describing mismatched needs between you and your wife, and therein lies the real issue. It appears you have been honest about all of this with your wife (which is very commendable). I would dare say that most of us here do not get that honesty - just a bunch of excuses and reversal of blame. That should tell you a lot about why many of us feel the way we do.
Ask yourself what you would see as the best, most equitable solution to the issue. Ask your wife to do the same and compare notes. If nothing else it might provide a foundation to begin (or continue) an honest and frank dialogue.
|
|
|
|
Post by hopingforachange on Aug 17, 2017 23:19:33 GMT -5
My wedding vows said "to have and to hold". I always inferred simple affection and loyalty from that statement. There was nothing mentioned about desire or sexual compatibility when I took my vows, and I was not raised to even consider either. With the exception of very few scenarios such as very old people looking for companionship, who exactly enters a relationship or dare I say a commitment of marriage and honestly believes that sex won't form part of that relationship? I always did it for companionship, since sex eventually stops in a marriage anyway. I never thought much about sex until I was forced to stop anyway, because of a heart attack, even though in my mind I had already made the decision. That clinched it for me, because I thought about it a lot in the hospital. I would guess that it would be under 1% of people. When you get married you are doing a lot more than "promising that you won't have sex with others". I think you have misunderstood the meaning of marriage entirely. As far as I knew, my parents never had sex. It's not like they tried to hide it. They just didn't do it. You're certainly right that my marriages were mistakes, but I did the best I could. There was lots of sex during the first two, although it made no difference. Sex does not have to stop in a marriage. My 80 year old grandparents are still getting it on in someway shape or form, according to my aunt that is living with them. My grandfather has a heart valve replaced and is on blood thinners. My grandmother had multiple strokes. |
|
|
|
Post by celibatejoe on Aug 17, 2017 23:24:20 GMT -5
Would you describe yourself as "asexual"? Possibly. I don't really like the words sexual or asexual.I can be seduced and aroused, but I am quickly reminded that no benefits accrue to me from sexual involvement with a female, and that I pay a terrible price when my partner finds out I get so little pleasure from it, that I'm only doing it because I'm supposed to. The prevailing, malicious prejudice in this culture is that sexual intimacy is always possible, for anyone. I would say that most people in our society view sex as a required component of a marriage, whether by vows or by common societal/archetypal understanding. That was my understanding, but the vows always mention for better or for worse.Part of the "worse" is that passion dies. It always does. It's just a matter of when. it seems to me that you have unilaterally decided that sex will no longer be a part of your life, even though your wife still wants it. I'm assuming she still wants it. She has never actually brought it up. I do remember eye contact and body language years ago that indicated to me the last time she tried to initiate, and kind of a look of disappointment afterwards. She is under the impression that my medical condition is behind my lack of desire, which is partially true because I do take several antihypertensive medications, and to point out that there's a lot more to it than that, without her asking about it, seems rather pointless and needlessly provocative, to me. marriage is the ultimate compromise - one partner sacrifices something with the reasonable expectation of reciprocation later. It is as if you are telling (not asking) your wife to not only sacrifice her needs for yours, but to expect nothing in return. You have already mentioned "desire" as part of the equation as well. You are absolutely right that you cannot force desire. However, you are still describing mismatched needs between you and your wife, and therein lies the real issue. It appears you have been honest about all of this with your wife (which is very commendable). I would dare say that most of us here do not get that honesty - just a bunch of excuses and reversal of blame. That should tell you a lot about why many of us feel the way we do. Yeah, I get that. The pain, frustration and anger is real. My marriage really isn't like that. I am more than willing to have sex without desire honestly, but that is too much to ask of her. She is insulted by the very thought of it. Ask yourself what you would see as the best, most equitable solution to the issue. Ask your wife to do the same and compare notes. If nothing else it might provide a foundation to begin (or continue) an honest and frank dialogue. There is no issue until she makes it one. That's up to her. In the meantime, I live my life and she lives hers. There is an intersection of both, but it's small, and we try to make the best of that. |
|
|
|
Post by celibatejoe on Aug 17, 2017 23:27:38 GMT -5
My 80 year old grandparents are still getting it on in someway shape or form, according to my aunt that is living with them. My grandfather has a heart valve replaced and is on blood thinners. My grandmother had multiple strokes. I don't even know how that works, but OK. More power to them. That's not the kind of marriage I ever anticipated for myself. I wasn't raised that way. It's not in my realm of experience. |
|
|
|
Post by celibatejoe on Aug 17, 2017 23:31:24 GMT -5
Many folks get do, quite literally, cash out their 401(k) in the form of a divorce just to get that intimacy back. That seems sad to me, when there are so many good things that can be done with the money, so many ways to enjoy life. The intimacy thing is academic, to me. I've never had it and never will. I'm OK with it now. |
|
|
|
Post by rejected101 on Aug 18, 2017 3:23:40 GMT -5
if there was a pill that increased your desire, you would not take it? She has to accept you for you right? Presumably such a pill would increase my sexual desire for anyone I found attractive. I don't think my wife would like that at all. I would say she would. The reason being that now you had a desire and sexual appetite you have to actually control your desires and save them for you the one you love. I'm sure this combined with the fact that you were now presumably having a full relationship would almost certainly make her happy. |
|
