|
Post by sunniedays on Feb 1, 2017 14:45:54 GMT -5
With much respect I'm questioning your analogy. Conversation - Communication and Sex - Connection are foundations and fundamental in a marriage. Board games are an interest and that is fair in a relationship to have different interests and to do those interests with different people. Agreed. The analogy whilst good is somewhat floored by virtue of the fact that sex is reasonably assumed when entering a relationship. Playing cards or other games is never a reasonable assumption. If someone genuinely doesn't like sex from the outset of a marriage they should be honest and give their partner the opportunity to make an informed decision as to whether they want to continue. Unfortunately what happens is people also assume the right to decline sex as in today's society we are taught from a very early age that you must respect yourself by participating in sex only if you fancy it. Whilst I agree with this in part it has been taken to an extreme in many relationships and what ends up happening is the lower libido person will end up inadvertently using their partner as a sexual partner when and only when they fancy a fuck. It is not unreasonable to ask for more in my opinion. I know for a fact that if I was with a woman who's libido was significantly higher then mine, I would never ever assume the right to limit sex to when I want it. It smacks of selfishness to me. "I know for a fact that if I was with a woman who's libido was significantly higher then mine, I would never ever assume the right to limit sex to when I want it. It smacks of selfishness to me." Fair enough. But "sexual desire" requires emotion. It's a feeling. If you and your LL partner are content with the idea that your partner was engaging with you, say 5 times out of 10, in the attempt to avoid selfishness, then great. That's an admirable relationship.
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 25, 2017 18:10:31 GMT -5
I don't think anyone would find a similar site where the posters refer to the offending party as "My alcoholic." or "my child molester." or "my lazy non-worker." or "my adulterer." I spent some time on a website called "Surviving Infidelity". If you are new to that site, you need a glossary to read the posts: "WS", "OW", "AP"... to name just a few. By the way ALL THREE of those directly refer to "adulterers": "wayward spouse", "other woman", and "affair partner". And two of those are regularly prefaced with "my": "my WS", "my AP". So there is one counter-example (or three) to sunniedays ' conjecture. I would bet that if we spend much time on substance-abuse support website, we could also find jargon or abbreviations for terms that -- out of context -- could be considered more "disparaging" than "definitional". (Just my hunch.) As far as "terms that are needlessly disparaging", I don't think "refuser" scores very high. Sure, it is used here with an undertone of judginess... but it is also just definitional. Furthermore, if someone earnestly believed that long-term refusing a spouse ANY sexual contact is reasonable, then the term wouldn't be disparaging... no? I think in the case of long term marital sexlessness, "refuser" is apt. Compare to DeadBeadrooms on reddit, where "HL" and "LL" stand for the high-libido and low-libido partner. Maybe those are more neutral/less judgey... but they, too, miss the mark in the case of a sexless marriage, where those of us here are probably " normal libido". Alas: using "NL" to mean "normal libido" and "NL" to mean "no libido" (terms that better fit the situation in this forum) would be confusing! So I -- for one -- am comfortable with using "refuser" as jargon on this forum. (I admit I would not use it freely outside this forum.) As for the comment "take some responsibility for your choice." -- I AGREE. Here's the thing: in my estimation, the folks who are tolerating long term marital sexlessness are WAY TOO RESPONSIBLE. They stay so long in the SM because it is the "responsible thing" to do w.r.t. they children. Or they feel responsible to care for their spouse. Or responsible to their faith, or family, or... I think anyone who sticks with a sexless situation for a decade or more then ends up here has spent many, many years responsibly wondering "what have I done wrong?", "what can I do?", "how can I help my spouse?". In my estimation, it is irresponsible people who would just up an leave the marriage on light pretense or when things get a little tough or when their unchecked libido draws them into a casual infidelity; it is those of us with over-active responsibility glands that have endured long-term marital sexlessness. In fact, this whole forum could be renamed "ORPDWMS" -- "Overly Responsible People Dealing With Marital Sexlessness". (Just my 2ยข.) I realize that people use NL, LL, DB, AP, etc in these forums for the sake of ease. They're often used a multitude of times in just one post, so to abbreviate is the simple, most streamline way to go. However, it's just as simple to type my wife, as it is to type my refuser. My wife is less key strokes. My husband is the same amount of key strokes. People may use what they wish, of course. I'm eternally grateful that my spouse doesn't refer to me as a refuser. As I would never refer to him as my pesterer, or my sex-fiend. I do agree that it is an admirable trait not to cut and run when the going gets tough, especially when there are minor children involved. It just seems like if there is something so organically important that's missing in a relationship, something that seems to debase a person to the core, something so inherently important that's missing -- to the extent that a person in their situation likens it to a form of abuse, staying in a relationship "for the kids" doesn't seem the practical decision. Especially after the kids are gone. If your son or daughter came to you and confessed how unhappy and how emotionally abused they feel because their spouse was withholding sex out of spite or an attempt to control, would you advise them to stay? Insert any unhealthy attribute in the scenario -- spouse cheats, gambles away the money, is verbally abusive or physically abusive -- you wouldn't give your child the advice to stay, for their children's sake. I realize it's easier said than done. But either something is intrinsically important to you or it's not. It seems unfair to argue that sex when you want it, how you want it, is one of the top three most important aspects in a relationship; but on the other hand it's not important enough to take a stand and move on when it's not fulfilled to your expectations. It just seems such a colossal waste of life to stand for something that you claim is so important, and when you're not receiving it in your relationship, you choose to stay and complain and try to figure out the why's of the situation, for years -- decades, sometimes, instead of perhaps looking for a solution for a year or whatever, and then moving on if a solution is not forthcoming. I want to be respected in my relationship. It's one of MY top three most important aspects in a marriage. Suppose I really love my husband. EVERYTHING else about my marriage is perfect. The sex is great. He's a great father. He's a great provider. We like the same things. BUT, everyday he tells me I'm stupid and ugly and worthless. Every day. Who is going to congratulate me for staying with him, for the kids' sake? Who is going to tell me I should hang on for years, trying to figure out "why" he does what he does? No one. And I wouldn't. Because respect is one of my top three most important aspects of a marriage. And if I'm not getting it, I'm not staying. My point is only that if something is so important to a person, make it important. Make a stand. Don't waste your life. Find someone who also finds it important.
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 23, 2017 11:01:09 GMT -5
I guess the lack of ANY drive would be rock bottom; right? Then the rest is on a spectrum. I'm just thinking if you (not you personally) want society to believe you're normal. Ok. I do. I think your libido is perfectly normal. You're not strange or abnormal. You and your partner happily have sex three days a week. But your neighbor thinks YOU'RE abnormal because he and his partner have sex 6 days a week. Who's correct? Who gets to set the bar? There is no line. You avoided my question, and I know why you did. Instead you reply with a rather absurd and extreme hypothetical about how many times per week is normal. Whan ALL the discussion here is about how many times, if any, per year, that can be counted on fingers. And you well know that. So bitter. It's good to know that you have the ability to know what I'm thinking. That's a unique talent. Here you go. Definition of LACK of libido: No libido. As in lack of money = no money. Lack of empathy = no empathy. Low/lower libido: Sexual urge once a month, twice a month, three times a month, four times a month, five times a month, six times a month... Depends on what any individual's idea of low/lower libido is, I guess? To a partner who wants sex 30 times a month, but their partner only wants sex twice a month, partner #1 would consider partner #2's libido low. (Since you're counting on fingers, that would be two fingers)
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 20, 2017 14:49:48 GMT -5
I'd be interested to know where you draw the line between lack of drive and low/lower drive. Where is the low end of low? Or no sex drive - zero for your spouse but wacking off to porn is ok? I think Apocrypha hits the nail on the head about spouses no longer desire each other. To some degree the institution of marriage, kids, bills, a mortgage, busy schedules puts a strain on relationships. Some people are strong and giving and can handle all that comes there way and still want to cultivate a relationship with their spouse, others are weak and selfish and take the spouse and the relationship for granted. They think we will never leave and I can understand why after years and years of us enduring a SM they really think they have their cake and eat it too and some do. Some will never leave. However sometimes the chickens come home to roost and in the words of my ex, "yeah I was an asshole" is the only way to sum it up. I do not have room in my life ever again for takers or assholes. No sex drive for your spouse but masturbating to porn is not low sex drive. That's low sexual attraction for partner. And it's s*** behavior. And no partner should treat their partner like s***, whether it's withholding sex or withholding conversation or withholding mutual finances -- fill in the blank.
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 20, 2017 14:45:59 GMT -5
Lack of sex drive is a deviation from the norm? I believe lack of ANY sex drive is a deviation from the norm. Do you believe Low/lower sex drive is a "deviation" from the norm? I'd be interested to know where you draw the line between lack of drive and low/lower drive. Where is the low end of low? I guess the lack of ANY drive would be rock bottom; right? Then the rest is on a spectrum. I'm just thinking if you (not you personally) want society to believe you're normal. Ok. I do. I think your libido is perfectly normal. You're not strange or abnormal. You and your partner happily have sex three days a week. But your neighbor thinks YOU'RE abnormal because he and his partner have sex 6 days a week. Who's correct? Who gets to set the bar? There is no line.
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 20, 2017 13:56:22 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. Lack of sex drive is a deviation from the norm? I believe lack of ANY sex drive is a deviation from the norm. Do you believe Low/lower sex drive is a "deviation" from the norm? I don't believe anyone should be criticized by anyone, especially a spouse, because they want sex. Honestly, you don't have to educate me that wanting sex is perfectly natural and normal. But low/lower libido is perfectly natural as well. (I'm not speaking about low libido due to physical or emotional factors) YOUR sex drive may seem "normal" to you. But it may seem low to your next-door neighbor. It may seem high to the neighbor on the other side of you. I fully agree that neither spouse should withhold sex out of spite, manipulation, or control; and that healthy relationships will be able to find a compromise solution. You and others here strive to make others hear and accept that people who want sex - want as much sex as they want - is normal, and are not to be criticized. I agree with that. But can you agree that a person who has a lower libido than you is normal, and not to be criticized? I mean, if not, then who gets to set the bar for "normal?" Please know that I'm not criticizing you or anyone here for wanting sex. And if a spouse is withholding maliciously, then I would agree that it could be considered abuse. I just get a little prickly when a person with a low/lower libido, is described as "not normal." Just as you would be, if someone were to describe you as deviant, or "not normal" because you want more sex.
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 18, 2017 19:00:17 GMT -5
When I say "refuser" I mean it with no ill or demeaning intent. A person who teaches I call a teacher. A person who fights fires I call a fire fighter. A person who gardens is a gardner. A person who takes photos is a photographer. A person who robs someone is a robber. AND A person who refuses to have sex is a refuser. sunniedays I really see your story different than a lot of us on here due to your medical history. You had a good sex life for many years with your husband. You have a loving relationship as well. Honestly for a lot of us the issue isn't sex or lack of it in the present day, it's about the lack of sex that started on the honeymoon and the emotional toll it took on our confidence and self esteem. If my own husband doesn't want me who will? How do I get a divorce the first year? I'm embarrassed by the fact that my own husband doesn't want sex with me. It's such a horrible torturous existence where the one person that is supposed to love you is intimate with you but they won't. And why do we stay? For a long time because we love them until one day we don't anymore. Again the term refuser is not meant to be mean it's just a word. If I was going to be mean I would have called him a broke dick asshole but I didn't do that about my husband. LOL that made me laugh! Your examples are reasonable. It just seems that "refuser" as used here is mostly used in a not-so-nice, just-being-descriptive way. It may start out as just a description, but doesn't seem like it's used in a complimentary fashion - MOST of the time. Not always, maybe.
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 18, 2017 18:55:33 GMT -5
sunniedays , for a person who doesn't want to offend anybody, you are awfully offended about one little word that doesn't even contain a curse word or an insult. And regarding your statement that we "choose" to stay: Yes, many people do choose to stay for varying lengths of time. Maybe we still love the person, we take their reasons for refusing seriously, and we want to stick around and try to change that situation, so that we can be happy again. I was in that group for a long time. Or, maybe we have sunk a lot into the relationship, by having children together, mingled finances, etc. Or, maybe because we live in a culture that's run by people who think sex is dirty/unimportant/etc., it's very difficult for people to leave a relationship that looks pretty good on the outside - where the problems happen behind closed doors. We're afraid of the social disapproval we would get for breaking up with someone over "only" sex. Let me ask you this: You won't have sex with your husband. This is utterly repellant to you and you just don't want to do it. But - since sex IS part of marriage - why do YOU choose to stay with HIM? That's one thing I never understand about refusers. If we're so ugly, fat, smelly, stupid, boring, or whatever that you just can't stand to have sex with us - if we're that terrible - why don't the refusers "just leave"? As to your last question, I don't know why someone would stay with someone who they didn't find attractive -- or any one of the other adjectives you propose. I can only say that those are no where near the reasons why I don't want to have sex. Sometimes it doesn't have anything to do with those reasons. And if it does, then I can't imagine a reason why either spouse would stay with the other. I believe some people stay for periods of time because they want to change their situation. Absolutely. But in my opinion, trying to work through problems while simultaneously referring to your loved one as a "refuser" seems counter-productive. We live in a culture that's run by people who think sex is dirty? Who the F cares? We've only got this one life. Who cares what anyone thinks? It's YOUR happiness. Sex is not utterly repellent to me. My husband and I have been having sex for over 33 years. I'm not disgusted by sex at all. I just don't physically have a libido, due to medical issues and age. I CHOOSE to stay with him because I love him. We have an awesome life. We have wonderful history together. We have grown children. We enjoy each others' company all the time. We RESPECT each other. We see that we have a future together. There were a couple of difficult years recently. We figured out what we wanted. What we knew we would be happy with. My husband has a right to leave me. We discussed that. He can leave me if I don't want to have sex with him, just as easily as he can leave me for not having dinner on the table every night. Doesn't matter. If he's unhappy and I can't make him happy, he absolutely can leave. As can I. Yes, sex is a part of marriage. Which is why we had sex for 33 years. But shit happens. So WE had to CHOOSE what was most important to us. To US. Which is what we did. To me, in my opinion, it just seems you're either trying to resolve a problem or you're not. And calling names does't seem to benefit an already unhappy situation. Especially between to people who "love" each other.
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 18, 2017 18:36:51 GMT -5
I would ask politely once or twice a year if we could have sex tonight, he said maybe then nothing or we laid in bed and I'd grab his hand and put it on me and he said leave me alone I'm trying to sleep. I share that experience and pain. I also, in the years without, experimented with asking once or twice across a period of 5 months, and STILL was characterized by my wife at the time to our counselor and to me as insatiable. So, with respect to the words we use and how they denote narratives that pin us to our own lack of agency, evidence suggests that she would post on this board's equivalent - I Live With An Insatiable Spouse. She would refer to me as her "Pesterer" and the board of like-minded people would use such code and language to frame the discussion within those brackets. Discussions would be fixed on "How do I get my spouse to stop bothering me about sex?" and support would entail shaming spouses for unreasonable and unwanted demands, even staking the marriage and children on it. Each example is wrong and hurtful. What's the point? You're either trying to repair a problem or you're not. "How do I get my spouse to stop bothering me about sex?" You get a different spouse. or don't get one at all. It's just wrong. Either way. I don't understand why people who love each other or loved each other at one time, would WANT to behave in this manner.
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 18, 2017 18:33:29 GMT -5
Sunniedays I can see why you get offended at the term 'refuser', and I can see why people use it. It reflects the hurt in the situation, and mostly the hurt on the non-refuser's side comes at least as much from our partner's refusal to empathise or make any effort to compromise as refusing sex. That's about a lack of caring, and that's why it hurts. You're not refusing either of those things, and it must hurt when you're lumped in with people who are. This kind of situation is why I push back against ILIASM's shibboleth that the 'why' doesn't matter. It does. There are people who can't do anything about their lack of libido, but would if they could. There are people who could at least try, but clearly don't give enough of a shit. Those two things spill over into the rest of the relationship in very different ways, generally reflecting the reasons behind the lack of libido. 'Why' does matter, for the wider relationship and therefore to decisions about staying or going. My wife's said a lot of the things you've mentioned and is in a similar position - a medical condition plus menopause nuking her libido, and she hates that it causes me pain, but in the end, has no idea what to do about it. In her case, there's something aspergerish going on as well when it comes to emotional connection. But at least one poster isn't seething with resentment (well, not any more) and convinced that all partners who don't want to have sex are evil, manipulative and selfish. I agree. It just seems to me an enormous waste of energy to complain endlessly about something that's lacking, which is so important to a person, to the point of resentment where you would refer to the person you loved in a demeaning manner. I am absolutely not overlooking the fact that one partner is perhaps not behaving in a caring, loving manner. No excuse ever for a person to treat the person they love in disrespectful, selfish ways. But is the solution to "vent" by ranting about them, assigning a less-than-loving name? Then everyone is being disrespectful.
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 18, 2017 18:23:47 GMT -5
This is an outlet and a place where "the refused", "the rejected", "the celibate" feel safe to vent anonymously. When I came to it, I didn't necessarily want to vent or feel safe. I wanted to solve my problem, and I wanted advice and experience from others who had a similar problem. Nothing safe about that. "Abuse"! How would one characterize demanding sex from someone who doesn't want it with you? Suppose there is a site somewhere like this one, in which our spouses gather to discuss their "sex-persistents" or "perverts". The term just is used for ease of use to describe their spouses who constantly pester them for sex, instead of sharing in more important priorities. Would the term, which is only for ease of use, promote the kind of introspection and self-agency that would be effective in achieving their goals? Suppose there was a site somewhere in which a spouse would gather with others to discuss their unhappy marriage in terms of "my pervert" did this. Or "my pervert" always wants this? I can't think of any "self-help" site that assigns a name to their spouse in describing the behavior of that spouse. Are there any?
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 18, 2017 18:16:32 GMT -5
Well fuck me in the ass! I never bloody realised you are a refuser sunniedays That's shown me up for not reading back stories. I see why the attitude now. You're quite the mature one, I see. Call me whatever name you'd like. We don't know one another, so the fact that you refer to me in a derogatory manner really merely reflects the lovely person you must be. I am sorry for you and your partner. It's sad that you're so unhappy. I may be a "refuser" in your mind. Think what you want. All that matters to me is I have a husband of 26 years who loves me and doesn't refer to me by a demeaning name. Yes, I "refused" him. But we worked out our problems over time. At least he didn't stay with me for years and years, secretly calling me names to anonymous people, yet refusing to do something to make himself happy. Because he's a grown ass man, Not a 12-year-old. I'm also quite sure that even if he had chosen to leave, he wouldn't feel the need to refer to me by a negative name. Yes, call me what you want. I'll be the "refuser" with the attitude AND the happy marriage and a husband who respects me.
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 18, 2017 11:23:24 GMT -5
I'm not interested in what came first: the name or the attitude. I don't care. I'm not trying to change anything to suit my preferences. I'm the last person who anyone would describe as politically correct. I was just pointing out an observation I've come to after reading numerous posts; and that is that the majority of the unhappy people on this site are so angry with their SO's they resort to name-calling, disparaging descriptions of the person, up to and including wishing ill will upon them for whatever unfair treatment the poster has received from them. I understand that people here are angry. I get it. But to constantly refer to a person whom you chose to be your partner as "my refuser" really shines light on the person who is doing the name-calling. "MY REFUSER." Seems like most posters only want to blame their SO's for bad behavior. But rarely - rarely do I read anything where OP takes responsibility for choosing this person in the first place. All we see is, "well, they weren't like this in the beginning." Okay. I'll buy that. Then change your circumstances. Don't bitch and complain about "my refuser" this - and "my refuser" that. It would be refreshing to read a poster start with the opening line, "Hey, I chose the wrong person. Wasn't what he/she said she was. So I left." So many people here have been in their "horrible" relationship for years and years -- some still with the person, yet refer to them as "my refuser." What the hell? It's derogatory. I mean, you're in a marriage with someone you chose, yet you call them "my refuser". If you're at a point where you're referring to the person you "love" (or loved at one time) as a refuser, you're to a toxic stage. In my opinion, when someone goes on and on about how miserable and mistreated they are by their "refuser", yet takes no responsibility and doesn't make a concerted effort to change their circumstances, it only makes that person look bad. It's like no one here wants to say, "My husband", or "my wife." They will only refer to the offending party as "my refuser." That's my point. Yes, they refuse/refused. But take some responsibility for your choice. I don't think anyone would find a similar site where the posters refer to the offending party as "My alcoholic." or "my child molester." or "my lazy non-worker." or "my adulterer." I'm not trying to change anyone's terminology. Just making an observation. I wish I had the energy to pick through your post. I havent. So ill just just say that you obviously cannot have had time to read through every post on here to find out everyone's back stories. We say our refusers for ease. Nobody comes here to be nasty. Nobody. We come for support aNd understanding. There are a tonne of much worse descriptors we could use. Im not easily offended. But you just managed it. Don't be offended. I don't mean to offend. I'm just offering an opinion (everyone has one) of what I see when I read posts. Everyone needs support and understanding. I mean, maybe it's just me. Yes. Everyone knows. You've been refused. (not you, specifically. You, generally) Yes, your SO says they love you then they refuse you. Yes, it makes you feel horrible. Yes, some peoples' situations are more difficult than others'. I just look at my spouse as the person I chose, because I love him. If he turned out to be derelict in some way that wasn't acceptable to me, I would find a way to move on. I'm not going to pick a derogatory name to assign to him, and then only refer to him as that derogatory name, as if I had no say in who I chose to live my life with. You call them refusers for ease? How much more difficult is it to say, "my husband?" Or, "my wife?" I need to preface my next comment by telling you that I don't mean to offend. Truly. And I'm not judging anyone at all. There are a ton of much worse descriptors you could use? Is "the person I chose" one of those descriptors?
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 18, 2017 11:04:48 GMT -5
If someone is in a relationship where they're contemplating whether to call their partner frigid b**** or limp dick, the fact that they aren't getting any sex is the least of their worries. Well, in that case, I will continue to use the term "refuser" to describe a person who will not have sex with his or her partner - who still expects monogamy, and will get all butthurt if the partner can't handle celibacy. Or you could refer to them as someone you chose, who didn't turn out to be the person you thought they were. Seems like no one ever starts a story with, "Well, my husband....." Or, "my wife." It's almost like people here are, in a way, trying to deflect the blame off themselves by assigning a derogatory name to their partner, and then in more than half of the situations, they continue to STAY with the person, while continuing to complain and resort to name-calling. I understand this is a place to vent and get advice. I'm only making an observation. Seems like situations might be resolved a little faster and a little easier if people could simply state, I chose this person. They turned out not to be A) what they said they were, or B) what I wanted. I made a mistake. I changed my circumstances. I am absolutely not condoning bad behavior or misleading behavior by any spouse or partner.
|
|
|
Post by sunniedays on Jan 18, 2017 10:46:51 GMT -5
If someone is in a relationship where they're contemplating whether to call their partner frigid b**** or limp dick, the fact that they aren't getting any sex is the least of their worries. No. It is the refusing that causes that attitude. Trust me on that. I'll also suggest that the term "refuser" was used universally in the predecessor EP experience group, and it is the same here. You are not going to change us or or our terminology here to suit your individual preferences. You are swimming upstream against a very stiff current. My refuser always was a refuser and would always be one if I hadn't left, making it a moot point. But then I was never one to buckle under to political correctness. I'm not interested in what came first: the name or the attitude. I don't care. I'm not trying to change anything to suit my preferences. I'm the last person who anyone would describe as politically correct. I was just pointing out an observation I've come to after reading numerous posts; and that is that the majority of the unhappy people on this site are so angry with their SO's they resort to name-calling, disparaging descriptions of the person, up to and including wishing ill will upon them for whatever unfair treatment the poster has received from them. I understand that people here are angry. I get it. But to constantly refer to a person whom you chose to be your partner as "my refuser" really shines light on the person who is doing the name-calling. "MY REFUSER." Seems like most posters only want to blame their SO's for bad behavior. But rarely - rarely do I read anything where OP takes responsibility for choosing this person in the first place. All we see is, "well, they weren't like this in the beginning." Okay. I'll buy that. Then change your circumstances. Don't bitch and complain about "my refuser" this - and "my refuser" that. It would be refreshing to read a poster start with the opening line, "Hey, I chose the wrong person. Wasn't what he/she said she was. So I left." So many people here have been in their "horrible" relationship for years and years -- some still with the person, yet refer to them as "my refuser." What the hell? It's derogatory. I mean, you're in a marriage with someone you chose, yet you call them "my refuser". If you're at a point where you're referring to the person you "love" (or loved at one time) as a refuser, you're to a toxic stage. In my opinion, when someone goes on and on about how miserable and mistreated they are by their "refuser", yet takes no responsibility and doesn't make a concerted effort to change their circumstances, it only makes that person look bad. It's like no one here wants to say, "My husband", or "my wife." They will only refer to the offending party as "my refuser." That's my point. Yes, they refuse/refused. But take some responsibility for your choice. I don't think anyone would find a similar site where the posters refer to the offending party as "My alcoholic." or "my child molester." or "my lazy non-worker." or "my adulterer." I'm not trying to change anyone's terminology. Just making an observation.
|
|