He said I should try being with another person?

I was merely offering my opinion based on what she shared. You then "applied" my comment to yourself, followed by a dig at me about polyamory. I never even mentioned polyamory!

I have not ever commented on your situation, nor cast aspersions on your comments. SMDH

I agree with you @fiery that would totally be a deal breaker for most.
It is not normal for a spouse to be ok with the other fucking someone else.
At the end I was wishing my H was cheating and that I could have my easy out. It is out of pure selfishness that a spouse can not meet your needs at least once a month to make you feel loved. For many years I believed his excuses month after month because I was in denial that my spouse was not attracted to me sexually while he strung me along so that I would continue to be his cook, maid, chauffeur, bill payer, grocery shopper, etc. It would have been more humane of him to tell me and not string me along for years because eventually when I ran out of love and attraction for him I set him free. If he would have told me to go fuck someone else, that says because I won't fuck you and in a spouse that is not acceptable to me at this stage of my life. My husband was such a controlling, narcissitic person he would have never told me to fuck someone else. He didn't want to touch me and no one else could either. That's not normal. Don't we deserve normal?

That is different. There is a danger the coffee might go near his mouth!

This is the best part of being out of a sexless marriage, normalcy. I thought that when I finally got to be with someone on a regular basis it would be nonstopulation (I just made that up). But no, just vanilla twice a week. And I love it.

Seriously gay

I think that - in the rare cases - the offer of the "Green Light" is extended, there is plenty of bullshit being produced at the same time, and by both parties in the dynamic.
-
A sexually disenfranchised spouse may, at some point in a fit of pique, say something along the lines of - "if you won't fuck me then I'll find someone who will" to which the refusive spouse responds "go ahead".
-
It is brinksmanship by them both, and they both know it.
-
The sexually disenfranchised spouse has shot from the hip, mainly to try and stir a reaction out of the refusive spouse, and has no plan - or even a candidate - to go and fuck.
-
The refusive spouse just calls the bluff, as there is no evidence that the sexually disenfranchised spouse has any plan - or even a candidate - to carry this threat through.
-
In another scenario, where the refusive spouse makes the suggestion, that the sexually disenfranchised spouse go outside the marriage, that too is invariably a bluff tactic. The offer would NOT be made if the refusive spouse had any inkling whatsoever that the sexually disenfranchised spouse might actually do it.
-
And the disenfranchised spouse - if they had a plan and a candidate lined up - would be out there doing it, not discussing the theory with, or seeking the approval of, the refusive spouse.
-
Refusive spouses will "agree" to all sorts of things. Particularly things that are highly unlikely to happen.
-
I speculate here, that our Sister lost34 is a pretty straight up chick, believes in monogamy, believes in marriage as an institution, has no history of marital infidelity, and is not currently chasing spare dicks up and down the street.
I further speculate that she is HIGHLY unlikely to suddenly become an extra-marital root rat.
-
So Mr lost34's "generous" offer is at a pretty low risk of happening............and that's the only reason he offered it.

Mine is affectionate as well, obnoxiously so in light of the fact that there is absolutely zero "I think you are hot and want to boink your brains out" sex factor to his hugs and pecks. After a few years of only this, it is becoming harder to even desire physical touch from him because it is starting to feel like a bandage on my gaping rejection wound.