|
Post by northstarmom on Nov 4, 2019 10:29:59 GMT -5
“ Why? To save a marriage and to turn things around. After all, not all SMs are toxic, and your assumption that they are is unwarranted.”
Two years of “raising holy hell” sounds toxic to me. I would rather be alone than live like that. I also wouldn’t want to have sex with someone whom I had to “raise holy hell with” to fuck me. I want to enjoy sex with someone who desires me me, not someone who has to be bullied into fucking me.
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Nov 4, 2019 10:31:23 GMT -5
What’s the point of raising holy hell for 2 years to force someone to fuck you? Better to let go of a toxic marriage and create one’s own happiness. This represents the nature of ILIASM. Why? To save a marriage and to turn things around. After all, not all SMs are toxic, and your assumption that they are is unwarranted. Why the automatic assumption that you are "forcing" a f*ck? Coercive rape? Sorry, but people can change, and even brought to change. Let's descend into the particulars though - because you are right - this is the central question we wrestle with at ILIASM. The question I'd want to hover on is WHY doesn't that person want to fuck you anymore (if they ever did)? The answer, I have come to believe across quite a few years on this forum, is that they don't want to be married to you: Maybe they don't like their partner - as a person. Maybe they never wanted to be married. Maybe they don't, now. Maybe they find their partner to be disgusting, or just not good enough. Maybe they are deeply, deeply angry, or disappointed. Maybe the way marriage materialized wasn't the ideal dream they'd envisioned. Maybe they thought love was enough, or maybe they didn't know what love was, or maybe it changed. But irrespective of the upstream causes, it landed at the immovable state of actively being turned off their present partner - for years. How do you change an aversion to someone - the feeling of being trapped in a scenario, or space, with someone who you just don't want to be with, let alone be touched by? Even if it's based on a mistake or a misunderstanding, that doesn't really change the feeling, when it has progressed to a point where you just can't stand to be touched by someone. In our single lives - can we think of anyone we thought of in that way? Anyone who we just thought was so awful or gross, or annoying or upsetting that it turned us off? Can you imagine a state where you change your mind on that, to the point that you are attracted to them? I'm not talking about a situation in a musical, where the hero and heroine don't know each other yet, and eventually find their commonality. I'm talking about having an in depth informed opinion of someone (or in depth misinformed) that arrives at a state of active aversion. I don't really think that can be realistically turned around. There's not much to do with something like that. If you even get to a place where you can authentically identify where your courses diverged - it doesn't really change the place the heart has arrived. It doesn't change that the person is so averse to their partner that they override THEIR OWN sex drive to avoid sex. So then it gets to a place where it's really just about each partner deciding between household management with someone who isn't into you, vs doing it by yourself.
|
|
|
Post by northstarmom on Nov 4, 2019 14:39:56 GMT -5
“ The answer, I have come to believe across quite a few years on this forum, is that they don't want to be married to you.”
It may be that they want the benefits of marriage to you: companionship, financial support, childcare, cooking, cleaning, house repairs, the status of being married, etc. They just don’t want to have to fuck you.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Nov 4, 2019 15:09:08 GMT -5
“ The answer, I have come to believe across quite a few years on this forum, is that they don't want to be married to you.” It may be that they want the benefits of marriage to you: companionship, financial support, childcare, cooking, cleaning, house repairs, the status of being married, etc. They just don’t want to have to fuck you. ooorrrrrr, it may be that you are one screwed up "lover." I realize that this is anecdotal evidence, but Dr. Corey Allan of the Sexy Marriage Radio podcast tells of hearing his wife say, in marriage counseling, after accusing his refusing wife of not liking sex, "I like sex. I just don't like sex with you." He goes on to say that, after hearing his wife out, that he had to agree: "I wouldn't want to have sex with me either!" But his wife is his cohost on their weekly podcasts, and they host, together, the annyual Sexy Marriage Getaway in Texas. Sorry, but your vision is too narrow and short-sighted. As I've said in previous posts, there is more to sexlessness than the ILIASM world and its suppositions.
|
|
|
Post by northstarmom on Nov 4, 2019 15:16:42 GMT -5
Bottom line is that it’s possible one’s refuser has the marriage they want. That even may be that that the choose to be married to a good provider or parent while getting hit sex on the side from someone who doesn’t meet the refuser’s standards for a spouse.
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Nov 4, 2019 16:58:48 GMT -5
“ The answer, I have come to believe across quite a few years on this forum, is that they don't want to be married to you.” It may be that they want the benefits of marriage to you: companionship, financial support, childcare, cooking, cleaning, house repairs, the status of being married, etc. They just don’t want to have to fuck you. I have most to all of those things with my close separation with my ex-wife, to some degree --and so does she (aside from the status of being married). It gets into a personal question for all of us here: What constitutes a marriage, as opposed to "managing a household" and/or "co-parenting"?
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Nov 4, 2019 17:08:37 GMT -5
ooorrrrrr, it may be that you are one screwed up "lover." I realize that this is anecdotal evidence, but Dr. Corey Allan of the Sexy Marriage Radio podcast tells of hearing his wife say, in marriage counseling, after accusing his refusing wife of not liking sex, "I like sex. I just don't like sex with you." He goes on to say that, after hearing his wife out, that he had to agree: "I wouldn't want to have sex with me either!" But his wife is his cohost on their weekly podcasts, and they host, together, the annyual Sexy Marriage Getaway in Texas. Sorry, but your vision is too narrow and short-sighted. As I've said in previous posts, there is more to sexlessness than the ILIASM world and its suppositions. Could be, though since you are taking it to a personal level, csl , I've been in the singles world a few years now, and I've had enough generous and specific compliments, as well as confidence in my own skills (which weren't bad to begin with, before I deliberately expanded my repertoire), that I'm comfortable ruling that out at this point. What you are quoting: "I like sex. I just don't like sex with you" - is basically what I said, and what I always have said. Not wanting sex with someone isn't necessarily a product of technique. I've never made that claim. It could be a product of the circumstance in which the sex happens (such as when an affair evaporates once a partner becomes single). It could be that they never wanted to be married. It could be that they don't like you anymore - as I said. It could be that their not liking you is for reasons, or for misunderstandings. I've been through that conversation a few times with my ex-wife. It goes like this: "When we don't have sex, it makes me feel like you don't love me/aren't attracted to me etc" I posed it on the premise that the feeling was an unintentional mistake, rather than an accurate read of how she feels about me. My advice now that I'm out of the fog tends to be to not assume it is a mistake, and that the shitty feeling people have is an accurate reading of the state of contempt or disgust in the relationship. If you want to be specific about what you are talking about when you say "the ILIASM world" and "its suppositions" - it sounds like you might have something in mind to consider. This is too general for me to do anything other than assume I know what you are talking about.
|
|
|
Post by baza on Nov 4, 2019 17:43:05 GMT -5
You've got 3 choices Brother windturbineguy . You stay (which is your current choice) You cheat (not advisable unless you like high adventure and drama) You leave This group might be able to help you choose the right one for you. There is no "great choice" available in our common situations, the 3 choices that are available all have significant downsides to them. It oftentimes comes down to what is the "least worst" choice .... and getting yourself fully informed about all the 3 choices is no short term thing. Welcome to the zoo. Actually, there is a fourth option, but it has the price of making two people miserable, instead of just the one. My option is to raise holy hell, continuously, until the status quo is intolerable to the refuser. One guy I know said that the two worst years of his marriage were the last two, when he made their SM a cause. He did say that his W did change, but it took two years of misery for both to get there. I think this - "raise holy hell, continuously, until the status quo is intolerable to the refuser" - isn't actually a new option, but is rather a nuance of the "stay" option .... (and a perfectly valid option too I hasten to say). I reckon that adopting a policy of "raising holy hell, continuously, until the status quo is intolerable to the refuser" would require tremendous reserves of self discipline and determination - and not everyone would have such reserves. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't have the requisite mental toughness to see such a policy through.
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Nov 4, 2019 20:45:21 GMT -5
Actually, there is a fourth option, but it has the price of making two people miserable, instead of just the one. My option is to raise holy hell, continuously, until the status quo is intolerable to the refuser. One guy I know said that the two worst years of his marriage were the last two, when he made their SM a cause. He did say that his W did change, but it took two years of misery for both to get there. I think this - "raise holy hell, continuously, until the status quo is intolerable to the refuser" - isn't actually a new option, but is rather a nuance of the "stay" option .... (and a perfectly valid option too I hasten to say). I reckon that adopting a policy of "raising holy hell, continuously, until the status quo is intolerable to the refuser" would require tremendous reserves of self discipline and determination - and not everyone would have such reserves. Basically, isn't that exactly what the refuser in that situation is doing anyway? Isn't that a shared situation from the get go? Checking out of intimacy for <reason> in a marriage, when intimacy is a thing that distinguishes a marriage from other close relationships and partnerships, and when (in most cases) the marriage depends on a deal in which neither partner takes exterior partners - means imposing celibacy on a partner AND on oneself. It might not be using words to say what one thinks of a partner, but it certainly contributes to making the status quo intolerable. Not disagreeing that it's a variant of "stay" - you aren't wrong. I'd just take it farther and say it's an extension of the same thing.
|
|
|
Post by ironhamster on Nov 4, 2019 20:59:15 GMT -5
If we break it down, raising holy hell is at least drawing attention to the problem. Perhaps the refuser gets their shit together. Perhaps they take the path of least resistance and acquiesce to a romp. In the end, we have five choices.
1. Stay and be miserable. 2. Stay and pressure your partner to do things they don't want to do. 3. Stay, but outsource with permission and clear communication. 4. Stay, but outsource without permission. 5. Leave, because the relationship is not meeting your needs and it is the honest thing to do.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Nov 4, 2019 22:08:36 GMT -5
Bottom line is that it’s possible one’s refuser has the marriage they want. That even may be that that the choose to be married to a good provider or parent while getting hit sex on the side from someone who doesn’t meet the refuser’s standards for a spouse. ooorrrrrrr, it's possible that they don't, that neither has the marriage that they want. One person I have in mind is the person who writes the Forgiven Wife blog. If you read her stuff, you will find out that she, the refuser, was miserable in her marriage for years. But if we are going to use the word "possible" as the bar by which we measure things, you open the door to all sorts of imagined contingencies.
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Nov 4, 2019 22:43:34 GMT -5
From "Forgiven Wife" the part where she realized how it felt to be refused sexually and deciding to go from a refuser / gate keeper to at least participating during sex. And then I started to read posts from women who were refused. I will always be thankful to them. Reading about the experience of refusal from a woman’s perspective, I was finally able to hear my husband’s pain in language I could relate to. It broke my heart to realize what I had been doing to him.
|
|
|
Post by northstarmom on Nov 4, 2019 23:16:42 GMT -5
CSI said; “ But if we are going to use the word "possible" as the bar by which we measure things, you open the door to all sorts of imagined contingencies.”
There are all sorts of possible reasons and truths when it comes to SMs. People vary greatly in why they marry and what they want out of marriiage.
|
|
|
Post by baza on Nov 5, 2019 0:43:18 GMT -5
Work on the information the OP offers up is my suggestion. Here, the OP Brother windturbineguy , has made two posts, very short posts at that. All you can do is take what he's said as right. In his case been married something like 20 years+ and has been an ILIASM set up a long time. You could not possibly deduce anything much from that as far as his deal being recoverable or for that matter irrecoverable. About all you could deduce is that it looks like a "typical" ILIASM shithole so far, on what has so far been divulged .... and that's not a good sign. Thing is - if Brother windturbineguy is indeed "typical" of initial posters here, then those two posts will be "it". Eight out of 10 initial posters here are never heard from again.
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Nov 5, 2019 10:12:22 GMT -5
Bottom line is that it’s possible one’s refuser has the marriage they want. That even may be that that the choose to be married to a good provider or parent while getting hit sex on the side from someone who doesn’t meet the refuser’s standards for a spouse. ooorrrrrrr, it's possible that they don't, that neither has the marriage that they want. One person I have in mind is the person who writes the Forgiven Wife blog. If you read her stuff, you will find out that she, the refuser, was miserable in her marriage for years. But if we are going to use the word "possible" as the bar by which we measure things, you open the door to all sorts of imagined contingencies. Strongly agree. I recall the day Mrs Apocrypha, who is no dumby, responded to my complaint about the state of our celibacy in her post-affair world and what it meant. She pointed out, "Let's keep in mind that my marriage has also been sexually unsatisfying as well." In light of the facts, this was interesting: Mrs Apocrypha was always the first to say that reaching orgasm had always been difficult for her, even by herself. This was not at all a problem for me in getting her there though. And it was something I noticed in our open relationship period - it was still technically difficult for her with other partners. Those partners she clearly enjoyed more than me though and would go to some trouble or risk to spend time. Looking back at our history - even our wedding day speeches - it's crystal clear to me that she did NOT want to be married to me (or perhaps at all - it's hard to say). Forgiving my wife was helpful in two ways: 1. In realizing the scale of the problem I was dealing with, and that it was based either on me as a person or on the state of being married itself. Dramatically changing the person I am and the way I present (after the affair revelation) did not help at all. When I finally grasped the enormity of it, I was able to stop chasing the why. I might as well have been trying to land on the moon by jumping really high. 2. In realizing the scale of the problem, I also was able to empathize with her plight, and even understand her choice to stay and have an affair, and all the other vile betrayals and subversions of our efforts at fixing things. I considered, if I was spending a life sentence with someone I didn't want to be with, I likely wouldn't present the best version of myself either. This helped me to detach and to mitigate some of the poison that might characterize our post-marriage relationship. We still have kids and are going to have to contend with each other.
|
|