Jump to content

Acceptance


IronHamster

Recommended Posts

Just now, Camicon said:

Probably for the best. You weren't bringing anything substantive to argue anyways.

Miaow. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, vega57 said:

If you contract someone to build a house and they build you a DOLL HOUSE, you can't say they "broke" the contract, IF THE 'TERMS WEREN'T SPECIFIED BY *YOU* in the first place.  And yes, that burden would fall on *your* shoulders since you're the one who wants the house built in the first place. 

 

The OPs wife agreed to have sex with him after marriage.  She HAD sex with him after marriage, as stated by the OP himself.  No 'contract' was breached by his wife. 

The marriage vows also agree to "forsake all others".  The OP committed adultery, hence, HE was the one who broke the contract. 

 

 

 

It depends on the kind of marriage. Most religious marriages have the option of annulment if there is no sex after marriage and depending on the source or the religion that marriage literally was never a valid one. 

In civil marriages, depends on the country or the state, for example NY state for years had only 3 causes for divorce, one of them was not having sex during the last year.

Adultery or lack of sex are both contract breaking causes usually, but again it changes from country/religion/state to country/religion/state.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Camicon said:

You're confusing termination of a contract with enforcement of a contract.

 

Divorce is a termination of the marriage contract. Not enforcement.

 

Were I to sign a contract saying that I would build you a house then you could pursue me for legal damages if I did not. The court could order me to build you a house, or pay to have your house built, and jail me if I did not. That is an enforceable contract.

 

If a company hires me and I never show up to work they can fire me but they can't sue me. The contract I signed said that I would do things for them and they would pay me in return. Not showing up to work simply releases them from their obligations towards me. If I were to break my employment contract another way, say by violating their sexual harassment policies, or selling company secret, etc. then they might be able to sue me because I have failed to uphold my legal obligations to them.

 

A contract which requires me to have sex with someone is unenforceable, because a court cannot compel me to have sex against my will, because that's illegal. A contract's validity is intrinsically tied to whether or not it is enforceable. A contract that is unenforceable, because the act that the court would be enforcing is illegal, is (unsurprisingly) an illegal "contract" (something of a misnomer, but whatever). And a court cannot enforce alternative consequences when the act they are supposed to be enforcing is illegal, because they are then punishing you for something that they aren't actually allowed to punish you for.

 

Do you understand now? Would you like some more examples? Or are you going to keep ignoring the evidence and logic I have provided in favour of your as of yet unsupported opinion?

I just want to add to your (brilliant!) post. 

 

In contract law, there IS something called, 'mutual assent'. It means that "two parties agreed upon something and are prepared to enter into a contract. In other words, both parties agree to the same thing. There is also a mutual understanding of what each party promises and that the promise can be carried out as agreed". 

 

In the case of the OP, it doesn't sound like there was mutual assent.  After all, did his wife know that he expected to have sex "every day, once a day AT A MINIMUM" etc.?  At what point did he tell her this? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, but I feel like all this discussion about legal contracts and such is kind of beside the point. Here's the way I see it:

  • Most people are sexual, and to most people (for better or worse), marriage implies sex. For better or worse, that is the norm. Considering that, I think it was reasonable for OP to expect that sex would happen with some regularity throughout the marriage, especially since his spouse (apparently) didn't give any indication otherwise. Whether the spouse is at fault for failing to communicate or whether she just wasn't aware of her sexuality, I can't say.
  • Most people are also monogamous, and (once again, for better or worse) it is generally assumed that marriage implies monogamy unless the parties involved agree otherwise. Therefore, I think it would also reasonable for OP's wife to expect monogamy in their marriage. If OP's wife is really asexual, it may be difficult for her to understand why OP feels the lack of sex in their relationship justifies having sex with others. To her, it may seem that their implicit agreement to be monogamous was breached, while from his perspective, that agreement broke down when he wasn't getting his sexual needs met.

Personally, I don't think cheating was the best way to go about the situation - I think it's a breach of trust that closes off a lot of potential routes of resolution - but I can understand why OP did what he did. I'm not excusing his behavior, just saying that it's a sticky situation where both parties may feel wronged for different (but understandable, IMO) reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Blondbear said:

 

Most religious marriages have the option of annulment if there is no sex after marriage and depending on the source or the religion that marriage literally was never a valid one. 

There are a lot of factors involved with granting an annulment in religious circles.  The church is going to want to know extensively what the circumstances are.  Simply saying, "We haven't had sex in a long time" wouldn't be good enough.  The church is going to want to know WHY...what the 'terms' were...and see if the expectations of BOTH parties is "reasonable".  Plus, the church would also want to know if the couple was using artificial birth control.  If, for example, the man complained of 'no sex', but it was found out that the man used  condom when he DID have sex with his spouse, the church may frown on that practice enough to NOT grant an annulment.  They might see the husband as using his wife's body for masturbatory purposes, and, therefore a "grave offense". 

 

Quote

In civil marriages, depends on the country or the state, for example NY state for years had only 3 causes for divorce, one of them was not having sex during the last year.

I lived in NY for many years and I'm aware of their laws.  You are correct on one level, but even if you had ONE "sexual" encounter during that year,  your 'grounds' could easily be dismissed.  LOL!  I HATED NY law!  NJ law was just as bad...

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Law of Circles said:
  • Most people are sexual, and to most people (for better or worse), marriage implies sex.

Let's say you're right. 

 

Where does it "imply" HOW MUCH or HOW OFTEN or even WHAT KIND?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, vega57 said:

There are a lot of factors involved with granting an annulment in religious circles.  The church is going to want to know extensively what the circumstances are.  Simply saying, "We haven't had sex in a long time" wouldn't be good enough.  The church is going to want to know WHY...what the 'terms' were...and see if the expectations of BOTH parties is "reasonable".  Plus, the church would also want to know if the couple was using artificial birth control.  If, for example, the man complained of 'no sex', but it was found out that the man used  condom when he DID have sex with his spouse, the church may frown on that practice enough to NOT grant an annulment.  They might see the husband as using his wife's body for masturbatory purposes, and, therefore a "grave offense". 

 


Sure, it would require a process, no doubt about it, and it would depend on the church. If it is the catholic church a very little amount of sex would almost guarantee an annulment because of the technicalities of catholicism (no divorce allowed). If we are talking about baptist/lutheran, etc.. I really don't know. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Blondbear said:


Sure, it would require a process, no doubt about it, and it would depend on the church. If it is the catholic church a very little amount of sex would almost guarantee an annulment because of the technicalities of catholicism (no divorce allowed). If we are talking about baptist/lutheran, etc.. I really don't know. 

No, it wouldn't.  I was born and raised as a Catholic.  The Catholic church wants couples to have Catholic offspring.  So, the sex that a couple is having should be geared toward that goal.  They frown upon oral sex, anal sex and manual sex (a.k.a. hand jobs) as an 'end goal', because none of those types of sex will produce children.  They also frown on the use of artificial contraception, but support natural family planning.  While oral sex (for example) isn't the 'best' of sexual situations, they have no problem with it IF it leads to the husband 'finishing' inside of the wife's vagina.  No 'withdrawal' allowed. 

 

Catholics have other 'remedies' besides annulment.  They ARE allowed to 'separate', as in, obtaining a legal separation.  No remarriage allowed...unless the OTHER PARTY obtains a divorce.  And, of course, the death of a spouse will free the other spouse from the bonds of marriage (but don't get any ideas, LOLOLOL) :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

Miaow. 

Not my fault if you can't keep up.

 

2 hours ago, Law of Circles said:

I don't know, but I feel like all this discussion about legal contracts and such is kind of beside the point.

It would be beside the point, if the OP wasn't insistent that his wife was obligated to have sex with him because they got married.

 

Marriage is a legal contract, and if you're arguing that marriage obligates you to do something then that's the context in which you have to contend.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy fuck.  I'm not demanding she fuck me.  That is not the kind of sex I want.  I simply do not see the problem with someone else completing the work she refuses to do.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ironhamster, let us be very clear on the facts here. Your wife is asexual and chose not to disclose this to you. She has therefore stolen your absolute right to make an informed decision about who and what life you were committing to. This theft is as cruel as they come as any stolen asset can be replaced but your lost years will remain lost forever. I see signs that her feelings and hurt concern you. No one typically wants to hurt another person particularly if it is someone they care about but has she shown any care or consideration to whether she has hurt you and continues to do so? 

There is more then one way to be unfaithful in a marriage. The conventional way to be unfaithful is to cheat with another person but to cheat your spouse out of a sexual relationship is so much worse.

My advice to you would be that you suggest to your wife that you can open the marriage up and you alone should be allowed to cheat. After all, you wouldn’t be asking if she was participating in a sexual relationship so this is absolutely fair and just.  If she agrees, you have your license to have intimate relations without any burden of guilt which is something you should have been offered from day one. If she declines, my suggestion would be to have those intimate relations elsewhere anyway. Again, it WILL be without any guilt as she should not dictate that you will never have sexual relations with anyone. Finally you could leave but unlike some narrow minded people  who believe this should be your first choice, of course it is not always that easy when children have arrived. This is a mess that she is responsible for making and if you are going to be burdened with the clean up, you should at least have the right to choose how you do it. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, IronHamster said:

Holy fuck.  I'm not demanding she fuck me.  That is not the kind of sex I want.  I simply do not see the problem with someone else completing the work she refuses to do.  

I don't think anyone ever said that. I merely pointed out that you are incorrect to say that marriage requires or obligates spouses to have sex, and that not having sex with your spouse does not make it OK to break your marriage vows.

Just now, James121 said:

Ironhamster, let us be very clear on the facts here. Your wife is asexual and chose not to disclose this to you.

Actually, we don't know that. Given how long ago they married it is very possible (likely, even) that his wife didnt know she was asexual at the time.

2 minutes ago, James121 said:

... she should not dictate that you will never have sexual relations with anyone... This is a mess that she is responsible for making and if you are going to be burdened with the clean up, you should at least have the right to choose how you do it. 

She isn't dictating that. He agreed to monogamy when he got married. If he wanted to fuck another woman then he should've ended the marriage first. And no, she is not responsible for his decision to stay in a marriage he wasn't satisfied with, or his decision to cheat.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Camicon said:

I don't think anyone ever said that. I merely pointed out that you are incorrect to say that marriage requires or obligates spouses to have sex, and that not having sex with your spouse does not make it OK to break your marriage vows.

Actually, we don't know that. Given how long ago they married it is very possible (likely, even) that his wife didnt know she was asexual at the time.

She isn't dictating that. He agreed to monogamy when he got married. If he wanted to fuck another woman then he should've ended the marriage first. And no, she is not responsible for his decision to stay in a marriage he wasn't satisfied with, or his decision to cheat.

I’m sorry.....but are we saying a grown adult didn’t realise that they didn’t particularly like having sex? The may not have found ‘the multiple labels’ that we all seem to use on this forum but she damn well knew that she didn’t like sex. 

Secondly, yes she is dictating to him. She provides him no option but to turn his back on his marriage AND his children. Let me say that again for those of you who can’t understand...turn his back on his children because his wife refused to disclose something crucial from day 1. But oh yes may be she didn’t know that she didn’t like having sex. I mean come on, let’s live in the real world here! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one more thing....

I've read on here that “sex IS NOT a requirement of marriage” -  I absolutely agree. BUT living in the same country isn’t a requirement of marriage either.

Being prepared to speak to your spouse is not a requirement of marriage but both tend to be an expectation (perfectly reasonable ones at that). Unless it was AGREED BY BOTH from the outset, living together, talking and finally (drum roll) sex are very reasonable expectations in a marriage.

Unless of course you don’t like sex in which case just hide it, let it fester, allow your spouse to feel miserable and undesirable for years, forbid him from seeking sex elsewhere, allow him to leave and wave goodbye to his children and simply hide behind and claim ‘I didn’t realise that when I married you that I didn’t actually like sex’.

Again....let’s get back to the really real world.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, James121 said:

I’m sorry.....but are we saying a grown adult didn’t realise that they didn’t particularly like having sex? The may not have found ‘the multiple labels’ that we all seem to use on this forum but she damn well knew that she didn’t like sex. 

Secondly, yes she is dictating to him. She provides him no option but to turn his back on his marriage AND his children. Let me say that again for those of you who can’t understand...turn his back on his children because his wife refused to disclose something crucial from day 1. But oh yes may be she didn’t know that she didn’t like having sex. I mean come on, let’s live in the real world here! 

Yes, I am saying that, in a society which so severely silences asexual voices and experiences, a person may not realize they are asexual until late in their life. They may think that they have some kind of mental illness, or that they simply need to  find the right person, or that they will eventually like it if they do it enough. A person can be asexual and not know, especially prior to the advent of resources like AVEN. Hell, if I had married at the same age my Dad did then I wouldn't have known I was asexual at the time, and I grew up when the internet was in full bloom.

 

And no, she is not dictating anything. The OP got married. He signed a marriage contract in which he promised to be monogamous to his wife, and when he realized that he wasn't willing to stay faithful to those vows he chose to cheat on his wife. He had another option: it's called divorce. But he chose to forgo that option. The OP's wife did not force him to do anything. He chose to get married. He chose to cheat, rather than divorce his wife after he realized that she was unable to fulfill his sexual desires.

 

A divorce can be amicable. It does not force a parent to turn their back on their children. On the contrary, two parents happily separated can provide a better upbringing for their children than if they stay miserable together and subject their children to a mountain of stress, anxiety, and tension every time they walk through the front door.

 

12 minutes ago, James121 said:

Just one more thing....

I've read on here that “sex IS NOT a requirement of marriage” -  I absolutely agree. BUT living in the same country isn’t a requirement of marriage either.

Being prepared to speak to your spouse is not a requirement of marriage but both tend to be an expectation (perfectly reasonable ones at that). Unless it was AGREED BY BOTH from the outset, living together, talking and finally (drum roll) sex is a very reasonable expectation in a marriage.

 

Yes, it is reasonable to expect that, when you get married, you will have sex with your spouse. But an expectation that you will have sex with your spouse is not the same thing as your spouse being obligated to have sex with you now that you are married; and it is the latter, not the former, that the OP has been fixated on.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 1:01 PM, IronHamster said:

Year 1.  It not only took a year to consummate the marriage,  but every alternative we had been playing with dried up, too.  I expressed a lot of grief and frustration, but I was also loving and committed to making our marriage work.  I saw this as temporary.  She went through counseling....

 

So, she did try and attempt to fix the problem in your marriage, then; she didn't not do anything. I wonder what the counselor suggested. Here's what another male, marriage therapist says about this topic:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/love-and-sex-in-the-digital-age/201704/13-reasons-why-men-cheat

 

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/love-and-sex-in-the-digital-age/201706/should-you-tell-your-partner-you-cheated

 

Yes. Life was, and is, different and confusing for asexuals (compared to heterosexuals who grow up being taught about their sexual orientation and who know they're interested in having sexual relationships), especially heteroromantic/homoromantic asexuals with random libidos that give them an urge to masturbate: many asexuals thought this was what heterosexual attraction must be like.

 

It really doesn't feel nice to read others criticizing, telling and mocking asexuals that they're wrong about their experiences, how they think and feel, claiming that their thought are the only correct ones, when all we were trying to do was explain what your asexual wife might be feeling and going through, since the OP said they couldn't understand why she felt upset by his infidelity.

 

We already said we understand where sexual people are coming from (some asexuals have had or had relationships with sexual people; and some of us have relatives who've had the same problem with their spouse); it's the fact that you're blaming your asexual wife that feels hurtful, when she went to therapy and didn't grow up knowing that asexuality was a sexual orientation. Medical conditions could cause lack of sex drive, too.

 

It's a completely different story for young asexuals nowadays, who grew up hearing about asexuality: if they don't choose to tell their partner about their asexuality, then, yes, that would be unfair on their part. But, as you can read on this forum, many are openly upfront with their potential romantic partners because they grew up knowing, or found out, about asexuality (so they didn't have to incorrectly assume they were "broken" heterosexuals with low sexual desire disorder.)

 

On ‎12‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 1:57 PM, IronHamster said:

...I know if I ever lost my sex drive I would go to any extent to get it back.

This is exactly what older asexuals tried and thought they had to do, before asexuality became known, in order to be more sexual, like their partner; it what doctors and therapists used to think was the cure, too, before they knew about asexuality: everyone back then was ignorant about asexuality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yanno....?

 

I just realized that in the past 10 pages of this thread, that not once...NOT ONCE...did the OP EVER write that he wanted to have sex with his wife because he LOVED her. 

 

Is it possible that sex is a 'requirement' of marriage, but that love....isn't?

 

After all, people have pointed out that people can get divorced because of the lack of sex. 

 

But can they get divorced because of the lack of love? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, vega57 said:

But can they get divorced because of the lack of love? 

love is difficult to define as a reason to cite for divorce but something like neglect in terms of affection is probably grounds for divorce just as denying a spouse sex or cheating on a spouse

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mermaidy said:

love is difficult to define as a reason to cite for divorce but something like neglect in terms of affection is probably grounds for divorce just as denying a spouse sex or cheating on a spouse

Sex is also difficult to define, because everyone's sexual "appetite" is different.  My sexual appetite TODAY may be different that tomorrow.  Yet, I may be married to someone whose sexual appetite remains constant. 

Love is the same way.   And yes, if my husband's sexual appetite remains the same for 10 years....and then changes...am I, as a wife, supposed to oblige him, even if I don't like the sexual antics he proposes? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, vega57 said:

Yanno....?

 

I just realized that in the past 10 pages of this thread, that not once...NOT ONCE...did the OP EVER write that he wanted to have sex with his wife because he LOVED her. 

 

Is it possible that sex is a 'requirement' of marriage, but that love....isn't?

 

After all, people have pointed out that people can get divorced because of the lack of sex. 

 

But can they get divorced because of the lack of love? 

Well, I suppose there are reasons other than love to get married, but in this age, there is no dowery and no shotgun.  Of course it was love, goofy!  LOL.  That crazy emotion, and hoping things would turn out at least as intimate as they were when we were dating, both screwed me out of being screwed.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, vega57 said:

Sex is also difficult to define, because everyone's sexual "appetite" is different.  My sexual appetite TODAY may be different that tomorrow.  Yet, I may be married to someone whose sexual appetite remains constant. 

Love is the same way.   And yes, if my husband's sexual appetite remains the same for 10 years....and then changes...am I, as a wife, supposed to oblige him, even if I don't like the sexual antics he proposes? 

If he was in agony over his desires not being filled by you, I would expect you to be loving enough to at least search for a third, if not help him find one.  Love is not selfish.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is a joke.

 

OP, you're not a victim, you're certainly not a hero, you aren't entitled to anything, and you are the only person who cheated.

 

Quote

Not true.  She has my approval to fuck or not fuck as she chooses, just like I have given myself.  We have equal rights, there.  

Cheating doesn't suddenly become okay just because you would have no problem if the other person did it.

 

What is this anyway, kindergarten?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, vega57 said:

Yanno....?

 

I just realized that in the past 10 pages of this thread, that not once...NOT ONCE...did the OP EVER write that he wanted to have sex with his wife because he LOVED her. 

 

Is it possible that sex is a 'requirement' of marriage, but that love....isn't?

 

After all, people have pointed out that people can get divorced because of the lack of sex. 

 

But can they get divorced because of the lack of love? 

I think it’s safe to assume that he loved her so it’s probably best that we drop the ‘he just wants to use her for sex’ insinuation. That’s what so many people on this forum turn to in order to try and win an argument. It’s really poor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

This thread is a joke.

 

OP, you're not a victim, you're certainly not a hero, you aren't entitled to anything, and you are the only person who cheated.

 

Cheating doesn't suddenly become okay just because you would have no problem if the other person did it.

 

What is this anyway, kindergarten?

There are hundreds of threads on this site that are a joke not just this one. Cheating is never ok especially in a marriage but neither is committing someone to marriage, completely avoiding sex with them and essentially stealing years of someone’s life away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You phrasing it as "stealing someone's life away" is also a joke.

 

Nothing was forcing him to stay.  Instead he chose to be a child about things.  It usually will not garner you sympathy points among actual mature adults.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

You phrasing it as "stealing someone's life away" is also a joke.

 

Nothing was forcing him to stay.  Instead he chose to be a child about things.  It usually will not garner you sympathy points among actual mature adults.

How is staying loyal and making every effort to honour the marriage vows (which he has clearly done for years) being “childish”? I would suggest that not having the courage to confess to your fiancé that you don’t like sex is the childish act. If not that then believing you can sustain an entire life with someone and just completely avoid having sex. That’s also very childish.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 06/12/2017 at 2:16 PM, Yatagarasu said:

Why didn't you talk with your wife about that?
Cheating within a relationship is being sexually unfaithful which has nothing to do with a person being asexual.

By the way, cheating by definition is: "to gain an advantage over or deprive of something by using unfair or deceitful methods; defraud."
If you feel sexually deprived and you think that having sex is more important than your wife's feelings then I agree with @Shadowstepper .

You see and this is very much the problem. It highlights it perfectly....”If you feel sexually deprived and you think that having sex is more important than your wife’s feelings then I agree with...”

At what point do any of you consider the feelings of Ironhamster. You ALL behave and speak as though sex is something that someone just wants. You ALL revert to attempting to guilt anyone who disagrees with your views in to thinking that they are being selfish for wanting sex and yet, sex is a very normal part of a relationship and typically a very healthy sign of affection, love and attraction. 

Please can you try to drop this ‘sexual people are selfish and out to get what they want’ attitude?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Camicon said:

Yes, I am saying that, in a society which so severely silences asexual voices and experiences, a person may not realize they are asexual until late in their life. They may think that they have some kind of mental illness, or that they simply need to  find the right person, or that they will eventually like it if they do it enough. A person can be asexual and not know, especially prior to the advent of resources like AVEN. Hell, if I had married at the same age my Dad did then I wouldn't have known I was asexual at the time, and I grew up when the internet was in full bloom.

 

And no, she is not dictating anything. The OP got married. He signed a marriage contract in which he promised to be monogamous to his wife, and when he realized that he wasn't willing to stay faithful to those vows he chose to cheat on his wife. He had another option: it's called divorce. But he chose to forgo that option. The OP's wife did not force him to do anything. He chose to get married. He chose to cheat, rather than divorce his wife after he realized that she was unable to fulfill his sexual desires.

 

A divorce can be amicable. It does not force a parent to turn their back on their children. On the contrary, two parents happily separated can provide a better upbringing for their children than if they stay miserable together and subject their children to a mountain of stress, anxiety, and tension every time they walk through the front door.

 

Yes, it is reasonable to expect that, when you get married, you will have sex with your spouse. But an expectation that you will have sex with your spouse is not the same thing as your spouse being obligated to have sex with you now that you are married; and it is the latter, not the former, that the OP has been fixated on.

Do you have children, have you been divorced and consequently do they now live with your ex partner? If you are exactly as I have just asked you have no place in giving an opinion as it is an irrefutable fact that who ever leaves the family home (usually has to be Dad) never ever has the same level of closeness as the other person who keeps the children. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, James121 said:

You see and this is very much the problem. It highlights it perfectly....”If you feel sexually deprived and you think that having sex is more important than your wife’s feelings then I agree with...”

At what point do any of you consider the feelings of Ironhamster. You ALL behave and speak as though sex is something that someone just wants. You ALL revert to attempting to guilt anyone who disagrees with your views in to thinking that they are being selfish for wanting sex and yet, sex is a very normal part of a relationship and typically a very healthy sign of affection, love and attraction. 

Please can you try to drop this ‘sexual people are selfish and out to get what they want’ attitude?

Doesn't matter if a person is ace or not, spouse or not, sex is not something you are entitled to; expecting someone else to have sex with you, when you are aware that they have no desire to, is inherently selfish.

 

Just now, James121 said:

Do you have children, have you been divorced and consequently do they now live with your ex partner? If you are exactly as I have just asked you have no place in giving an opinion as it is an irrefutable fact that who ever leaves the family home (usually has to be Dad) never ever has the same level of closeness as the other person who keeps the children. 

My parents divorced. I split time between their houses for a few years before staying full-time with one of them, because they were closer to my school. Do not think to tell me what I am qualified to speak on when you know nothing about me.

 

And don't think that saying "X is a fact", without actually providing any kind of evidence that X is actually a fact, is even remotely convincing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Camicon said:

Doesn't matter if a person is ace or not, spouse or not, sex is not something you are entitled to; expecting someone else to have sex with you, when you are aware that they have no desire to, is inherently selfish.

 

My parents divorced. I split time between their houses for a few years before staying full-time with one of them, because they were closer to my school. Do not think to tell me what I am qualified to speak on when you know nothing about me.

 

And don't think that saying "X is a fact", without actually providing any kind of evidence that X is actually a fact, is even remotely convincing.

Sorry but YOU are not qualified to speak about the subject because you have not experienced being the parent who had to walk away and see their child every other weekend. You have only experienced being the child so baring in mind there are a lot statements being made on here, a lot of people claiming that their opinion is gospel, I will join you! You are not qualified full stop.

 

As for expecting someone to have sex with you when they have no desire being ‘inherently selfish’...Isn’t this thread about the fact that ironhamster NOT wanting to do that and to seek it elsewhere? A perfectly reasonable thing to want as he doesn’t want to walk away from his children and every other part of his life. He was the one who was duped in to marriage under false pretences.

 

Finally, how did Mrs Ironhamster have children? Oh yes....Sex suited her agenda at that stage so she she became capable and used ironhamster’s penis as a tool to impregnate her. And again we revert back to how she ‘didn’t realise’ she didn’t like sex at the point she was accepting a marriage proposal and again we really need to come back to the really real world. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...