Talk About Marriage banner

41 - 60 of 98 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,782 Posts
Now to address your actual question. The most simple and concise answer is she has all the power.

The second you get with someone that actually wants to be with you and has genuine desire for you, she looses all her power and control over you.

She knows that your affections and attentions and ultimately your resources and money and support and provisioning and security etc will shift to the other person.

Right now she has you right where she wants you. She gets all the benefits of marriage and having a man around to buy new furniture sets every few years and that unclogs toilets and kills spiders and brings home $$$, but she doesn't have to do anything and doesn't have to put up with any of that icky sex stuff...... at least not with you.

When she says it's not important, she means it is not important to HER because she is not attracted to you and does not desire you.

However, she knows fully well that it is important to YOU and that if someone else was providing that to you, that you would soon be moving on with that person(s) and as the Eagles said in the song "Already Gone" "But let me tell you I got some news for you, and you'll soon find out it's true, and then you'll have to eat your lunch all by yourself."

So no, it's in her best interests to keep you captive in the dead marriage.... and I have to say she has played it masterfully. She dangled the carrot like a zen master. You have been on the string like the perfect puppet.

At the moment you value your money, furniture and 24/7 access to your children more than your own sexuality and well being. That may or may not change in time.

If you value your property, financial accounts and status quo more than your sexuality and happiness, you will remain in your sexless state.

The day that you value your own happiness and sexuality more than the new furniture, you will walk.
Good point.

Many want a sure exit strategy. From having nothing to cling to at night, to having a chest full.

Classic honey/hunky branching.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,235 Posts
OP wasn't asking about leaving a marriage.

He was wondering why a long time refuser would care if the refusee finally got a girlfriend or had sex on the side. He did not say religious belief is any factor in this.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,782 Posts
The delicious promise of your next lover is more a surety, than your cold, present one.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,088 Posts
Point being a lot of people do not think that sex is a good enough reason to throw away a marriage and family. There's a lot at stake.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,792 Posts
OP wasn't asking about leaving a marriage.

He was wondering why a long time refuser would care if the refusee finally got a girlfriend or had sex on the side. He did not say religious belief is any factor in this.
That got started by a poster who decided to play semantics with another.

I think most here are not going to advocate for having a girlfriend even if the wife decides sex is off the menu.

Most would advocate for divorce so that's what they are saying.

I'm not sure how large the pool of contributors there will be who fit the narrow criteria of having a chunk of wood laying next to them who have asked that chunk of wood about going out and getting a girlfriend.

Someone has to be pretty much disconnected from reality to think being a chunk of wood in bed is acceptable at all in marriage so I have no idea why they wouldn't want their roommate to get sex elsewhere except for needing to be in control, fear of social embarrassment, etc...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,792 Posts
Point being a lot of people do not think that sex is a good enough reason to throw away a marriage and family. There's a lot at stake.
There are apparently quite a few who think not having sex is a great reason to destroy a marriage and family.

To each their own but involuntary eunuchs get little sympathy, or comprehension, from me for staying and chunks of wood get zero.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,782 Posts
OP wasn't asking about leaving a marriage.

He was wondering why a long time refuser would care if the refusee finally got a girlfriend or had sex on the side. He did not say religious belief is any factor in this.
Who gives a rats behind about her cares?

She cares, not a hoot, for his needs.

Yes, she would care, as she has demonstrated innate selfishness.

For her, not to care about his going outside of the marriage for comfort, would assign her a generous air.

Of which, she has none.

So, it seems.

Her selfish gene goes all the way to the bone, including his bony appendage.

The correct answer would come from her lips.

God's, that he needs permission.
Rightly, he does. The mere statement would likely set her all atwitter.

Um, to be tha fly on the wall, hearing that outcry.
Umm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,134 Posts
We may be arguing semantics. Marriage is a package. There's a lot more to commitment than just the few items listed in the very short marriage vows. I've never considered marriage vows to be a case of expressio unius est exclusio alterius. If I'm mistaken, we're going to have to add a LONG list of new things to vows, including, "You agree not to spend more than ___ hours per day on your cell phones..." and such.
Maybe. And I agree that marriage is a package. But, and this may fall under the semantics issue, I see what I agree to and what I vow to as very differently. I also don't make assumptions as to what vows people have taken. However, I am aware of what is common, and I honestly wondered if that was something you and your wife specifically made vows upon.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,782 Posts
Someone said...

If you get divorced you will be losing half of your your assets.

Hah!

One set of buns has been broken for years.

Remarry, and double your buns and your triple your fun puns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,134 Posts
I'm on the same page. I've also witnessed, and been approving of, marriages being ended because one person decided sex wasn't on the menu.
I agree with the principle as well. It was just the vow breaking aspect that I was inquiring about.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
233 Posts
That got started by a poster who decided to play semantics with another.

I think most here are not going to advocate for having a girlfriend even if the wife decides sex is off the menu.

Most would advocate for divorce so that's what they are saying.

I'm not sure how large the pool of contributors there will be who fit the narrow criteria of having a chunk of wood laying next to them who have asked that chunk of wood about going out and getting a girlfriend.

Someone has to be pretty much disconnected from reality to think being a chunk of wood in bed is acceptable at all in marriage so I have no idea why they wouldn't want their roommate to get sex elsewhere except for needing to be in control, fear of social embarrassment, etc...
I strongly believe the best course of action in these cases (if the spouse doesn’t come around after attempts to fix the sexual dynamic) is to divorce and go find a real passionate relationship with a partner who actually wants to have sex with you.

That said, if someone decides that the cost of divorce is higher than the cost of an unfulfilling marriage, other options may be viable. At the risk of finding myself aligned with the poly patrol, I wouldn’t actually be opposed to getting a girlfriend in OPs case. As long as he owns it and does it above board.

If he’s a man with options that can get sex elsewhere, I can see a case for telling her “if you won’t be in an intimate sexual relationship with me, I’ll find it elsewhere. Since we are both comfortable in our lifestyle and have a lot to lose in a divorce, I’m willing to keep things in place but I will be getting my needs for sex and intimacy met elsewhere. If you don’t like it, start contributing to an intimate, sexual marriages and I’ll reevaluate.”
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,792 Posts
I strongly believe the best course of action in these cases (if the spouse doesn’t come around after attempts to fix the sexual dynamic) is to divorce and go find a real passionate relationship with a partner who actually wants to have sex with you.

That said, if someone decides that the cost of divorce is higher than the cost of an unfulfilling marriage, other options may be viable. At the risk of finding myself aligned with the poly patrol, I wouldn’t actually be opposed to getting a girlfriend in OPs case. As long as he owns it and does it above board.

If he’s a man with options that can get sex elsewhere, I can see a case for telling her “if you won’t be in an intimate sexual relationship with me, I’ll find it elsewhere. Since we are both comfortable in our lifestyle and have a lot to lose in a divorce, I’m willing to keep things in place but I will be getting my needs for sex and intimacy met elsewhere. If you don’t like it, start contributing to an intimate, sexual marriages and I’ll reevaluate.”
That's definitely their business but I doubt someone, so irrational as to believe turning their spouse into a eunuch as acceptable, would really go for any form of resolution.

If they are so out of touch as to try and make their spouse into a eunuch in the first place, they probably think cats and dogs can have a viable mating relationship and make kuppies or pittens.😵
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,134 Posts
Of course marriage is about more than sex. BUT sex is a core, foundational pillar of marriage. Without sex, it is not a marriage, it’s just another friend, at best.
I disagree with this. There are plenty of couples, mostly elderly but not all, who are happily married and not having sex. Even to the point where elderly couples are getting married even though they don't have sex any more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
233 Posts
I disagree with this. There are plenty of couples, mostly elderly but not all, who are happily married and not having sex. Even to the point where elderly couples are getting married even though they don't have sex any more.
Exception for the elderly noted and agreed.

Otherwise I stand by the initial statement. For healthy, non-elderly people; sex and sexual intimacy is a core, existential pillar of marriage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,456 Posts
Point being a lot of people do not think that sex is a good enough reason to throw away a marriage and family. There's a lot at stake.
Yes there is, but you have not answered the question. The withholding spouse could allow it but almost always does not.

The withholding spouse could say "I'm not into you but I don't want to upend our lives so I'm cool with you getting it on the side if that works for you." But most won't. Like I said before, it comes down to self-interest, power, control.

"He might like her better." "He'll be spending time and money somewhere else." "What will people think if they find out?" That's what people think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,456 Posts
Point being a lot of people do not think that sex is a good enough reason to throw away a marriage and family. There's a lot at stake.
Well then that person can provide more and better sex to keep the marriage going if it's "just sex". The issue here is that at its root, this is a matter of "what I want matters more".
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,088 Posts
Usually it's not a simple matter. Usually there is something that caused the rift to begin with that made the woman not feel like "making love" to her husband.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,861 Posts
Exception for the elderly noted and agreed.

Otherwise I stand by the initial statement. For healthy, non-elderly people; sex and sexual intimacy is a core, existential pillar of marriage.
I would also put in an exception for people who are healthy, non-elderly people wo are both low drive or both asexual. For example, if two people love and commit to one another for the purpose of forming a family, but in getting to know each other agree that having sex once every-other-month is fine for them, then they are married. Same for a healthy, non-elderly couple who spoke ahead of time and told each other they are asexual (meaning "lack of sexual attraction to others" not very low drive). If two asexual people love and commit to one another for the purpose of forming a family, but just agree that there's little to no real desire for intercourse, then they are married too.

I think it might be most reasonable to say that A MUTUAL, ENTHUSIASTIC AGREEMENT about sex and sexual intimacy is a core pillar of marriage. (I included "enthusiastic" so that we're not talking about folks who agree to something only to flip after marriage or folks who feel pressured or "forced" into saying one thing when they feel or think another.) As long as the two people AGREE and both feel that way or both think in similar ways, then whatever goes on between them is their business!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
5,727 Posts
I strongly believe the best course of action in these cases (if the spouse doesn’t come around after attempts to fix the sexual dynamic) is to divorce and go find a real passionate relationship with a partner who actually wants to have sex with you.
While I agree that divorce is the best course of action, i think you are missing a key word from the quote above. That word is TRY as in " the best course of action in these cases is to divorce and TRY to find a real passionate relationship with a partner who actually wants to have sex with you."

It's not as easy as many make it out to be, especially after a certain age.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
233 Posts
While I agree that divorce is the best course of action, i think you are missing a key word from the quote above. That word is TRY as in " the best course of action in these cases is to divorce and TRY to find a real passionate relationship with a partner who actually wants to have sex with you."

It's not as easy as many make it out to be, especially after a certain age.
Fair enough. Though I do believe that to a fair degree, one’s attractiveness and ability to find a new relationship it’s largely within your control. Granted more difficult with age.
 
41 - 60 of 98 Posts
Top