• Announcements

    • Kelly

      New Team members Needed--Moderator, Project Team, and Declass Team: Voting   12/10/13

      See:   http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/164659-new-declass-team-member-needed-voting/   http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/164657-new-moderator-member-needed-qa-co-mod-and-world-watch-mod-voting/   http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/164656-new-project-team-member-needed-resources-and-education-director-voting/  
    • Kelly

      AVENues Holiday Special Edition is now live   08/17/17

      The new edition of AVENues is done!   See:        
    • Lady Girl

      Ace Community Census   11/06/17

      It’s time for the 2017 Ace Community Census!   see:   http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/162675-announcing-the-2017-ace-community-census/  
    • Heart

      Help fund AVEN's servers!   11/06/17

      AVEN is doing its annual fundraiser to raise donations for server costs! See http://www.asexuality.org/en/topic/163251-aven-server-fundraiser/ for more details.  
IronHamster

Acceptance

Recommended Posts

Telecaster68
3 minutes ago, IronHamster said:

She said she was a virgin, saving sex for marriage,  and that she was ready.  While we were dating, she swallowed.  After the ring went on I did not get anything for about a year.  In retrospect I should have gotten it annulled, but I still had hope.  

That is most definitely not being up front. It's pretty clearly bait and switch.

 

Quote

All of her needs are not being met, clearly. You cheated on her.

After twenty years of being deceived into not having a fundamental need of his own not met.

 

Quote

nobody is obligated to have sex with you. Even your spouse.

True, but it's also true that marriage has always been based on the assumption of a sexual relationship. It's also based on trust, and saying she was saving it till marriage, then not wanting sex after you're married is already a breach of trust.

 

Quote

You sought out another person to fuck, and that speaks volumes about what you were actually after.

Yes, a sexual partner. Which is what his wife had promised to be, and then reneged on that promise.

 

 

Share this post


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

 

If there is no moral obligation to have sex within a marriage,  there is no moral problem with having sex outside marriage.   You cannot have it both ways.  It is illogical.  

The moral obligation in marriage is to be monogamous to your spouse. That does not necessarily mean having sex with your spouse, but it does necessarily mean not having sex with anyone else.

 

1 minute ago, Telecaster68 said:

After twenty years of being deceived into not having a fundamental need of his own not met.

 

True, but it's also true that marriage has always been based on the assumption of a sexual relationship. It's also based on trust, and saying she was saving it till marriage, then not wanting sex after you're married is already a breach of trust.

 

Yes, a sexual partner. Which is what his wife had promised to be, and then reneged on that promise.

Having sex with other people is not a fundamental need.

 

It is very possible that his wife was saving herself for marriage, and after having sex realized that she actually didn't care for it. Lots of people realize that they're asexual later in life. If I had married when my father did, then it still wouldn't have been until a few years later that I realized the truth about myself.

 

Marrying someone is not promising to be their sexual partner; it is promising not to be sexual partners with anyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shadowstepper
2 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

 

Yes, a sexual partner. Which is what his wife had promised to be, and then reneged on that promise.

 

 

If you are unhappy in your marriage or feel you were deceived, get a divorce.

 

Doing hurtful things in return is not the way to go about things.

Share this post


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

The moral obligation in marriage is to be monogamous to your spouse. That does not necessarily mean having sex with your spouse, but it does necessarily mean not having sex with anyone else.

 

Having sex with other people is not a fundamental need.

 

It is very possible that his wife was saving herself for marriage, and after having sex realized that she actually didn't care for it. Lots of people realize that they're asexual later in life. If I had married when my father did, then it still wouldn't have been until a few years later that I realized the truth about myself.

 

Marrying someone is not promising to be their sexual partner; it is promising not to be sexual partners with anyone else.

Monogamy implies regular sex with one partner.  We had no monogamy.  We had none-ogamy.   It is illogical to accept that as normal marital relations.  

Share this post


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

 It is illogical to accept that as normal marital relations.  

Then. Get. A. Divorce.

 

No one is telling you that you have to accept circumstances that are causing you pain. We are telling you it was wrong to do it in return instead of just leaving.

Share this post


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

Monogamy implies regular sex with one partner.  We had no monogamy.  We had none-ogamy.   It is illogical to accept that as normal marital relations.  

Doesn't matter what you think it implies, what matters is what it means. Legally. Because marriage is a contract. And within the contract that is marriage, monogamy is not having sex with anyone but your spouse, regardless of whether or not you are having sex with your spouse. Nobody ever called that normal, simply that the situation doesn't mean you're morally in the clear if you step out on your wife.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

Marrying someone is not promising to be their sexual partner; it is promising not to be sexual partners with anyone else.

Only on AVEN is marriage a promise not to have sex...

 

Quote

Having sex with other people is not a fundamental need.

For most sexuals, within a relationship, it's about as fundamental as talking to your partner. And sexuals are the norm, statistically. So if you don't view sex as important, the onus is on you to make that clear and engage with the consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

No one is telling you that you have to accept circumstances that are causing you pain. We are telling you it was wrong to do it in return instead of just leaving.

Why is the onus not on OP's wife to leave when she discovered she wasn't able to live up to her marital promises?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Camicon
4 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Only on AVEN is marriage a promise not to have sex...

 

For most sexuals, within a relationship, it's about as fundamental as talking to your partner. And sexuals are the norm, statistically. So if you don't view sex as important, the onus is on you to make that clear and engage with the consequences.

 

3 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Why is the onus not on OP's wife to leave when she discovered she wasn't able to live up to her marital promises?

Marriage isn't a promise to have sex. See: marital rape.

 

And some people get married before they realize they're asexual. Pitfall of a society that censures asexual voices.

Share this post


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

Monogamy implies regular sex with one partner.  We had no monogamy.  We had none-ogamy.   It is illogical to accept that as normal marital relations.

"Monogamy" is derived from Greek. Mono- (monos) one and -gamy (gamos) marriage .

 

4 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

For most sexuals, within a relationship, it's about as fundamental as talking to your partner. And sexuals are the norm, statistically. So if you don't view sex as important, the onus is on you to make that clear and engage with the consequences.

I do understand that we live in a sexual world and most people have sexual needs, but placing sex above your partner is by no means healthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

Marriage isn't a promise to have sex.

The church and legal system would beg to differ. Marriages can be annulled if they're not consummated.

 

Quote

See: marital rape.

The consequence of breaking that promise isn't rape, it's divorce.

 

There's a huge difference between a husband not taking 'no' for an answer, and a wife never saying 'yes'.

Share this post


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

"Monogamy" is derived from Greek. Mono- (monos) one and -gamy (gamos) marriage .

 

I do understand that we live in a sexual world and most people have sexual needs, but placing sex above your partner is by no means healthy.

If placing sex above your partner is by no means healthy, than placing not having sex above your partner is by no means healthy.   There is no room for either extreme.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

placing sex above your partner is by no means healthy.

But asexuals are placing their need to have no sex above their partner, in the same way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shadowstepper
5 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Why is the onus not on OP's wife to leave when she discovered she wasn't able to live up to her marital promises?

Because it appears she never had a problem with any of it. Maybe even thought it was normal. We don't know, she isn't here to give her side.

 

We DO know that the OP was unhappy. 

 

It was his decision to either walk away or live within the confines of the unhappiness he found himself in.

 

Share this post


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

Because it appears she never had a problem with any of it. Maybe even thought it was normal. We don't know, she isn't here to give her side.

 

We DO know that the OP was unhappy. 

 

It was his decision to either walk away or live within the confines of the unhappiness he found himself in.

 

We also know the OPs wife misrepresented herself.  

 

Now, we have a situation where others would be hurt by the dissolution of the relationship.   

 

It goes beyond sadism to suggest divorce.  The agreement can be amended, at least until the kids graduate.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

Because it appears she never had a problem with any of it. Maybe even thought it was normal.

As the OP said, she was having all her needs met. By extension, her husband being miserable was of no interest or concern to her.

 

Your reasoning is that if either side can't keep to the agreement to only have sex with one person, they should instigate a divorce. She couldn't, 20 years before he couldn't. Why didn't she conclude she was not living up to her promise and therefore should cancel the agreement? It's what you're saying @IronHamster should've done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yatagarasu
2 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

But asexuals are placing their need to have no sex above their partner, in the same way.

Does he accept her? Doesn't seem so. Things work both ways. If he had tried, maybe she would've been more open.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

He's not been having sex with her (or, very very rarely) for twenty years while (by the sounds of it) providing for her and his children. How is that not trying?

 

By the same token, shouldn't the asexual partner just accept their partner's needs and have sex, if that's your argument...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shadowstepper
9 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

He's not been having sex with her (or, very very rarely) for twenty years while (by the sounds of it) providing for her and his children. How is that not trying?

 

By the same token, shouldn't the asexual partner just accept their partner's needs and have sex, if that's your argument...

All of this makes him justified in LEAVING. 

 

It still doesn't justify him CHEATING.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yatagarasu
4 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

He's not been having sex with her (or, very very rarely) for twenty years while (by the sounds of it) providing for her and his children. How is that not trying?

 

By the same token, shouldn't the asexual partner just accept their partner's needs and have sex, if that's your argument...

(There's a term for it when someone has sex with a person who didn't want that.)
Everyone should find a solution and/or compromise. If one doesn't fancy doing so, then you should divorce. He "saw" her needs which doesn't equal "understood".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

 

All of this makes him justified in LEAVING. 

 

It still doesn't justify him CHEATING.

 

 

I agree. But it's also an argument that she should've left as soon as she knew the lack of sex was an insoluble problem. I'm guessing that took a lot less than 20 years...

Share this post


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

(There's a term for it when someone has sex with a person who didn't want that.)
Everyone should find a solution and/or compromise. If one doesn't fancy doing so, then you should divorce. He "saw" her needs which doesn't equal "understood".

I agree there's a term. And he's not a rapist (so far as we know). This is the way in which she has had twenty years getting her need to not have sex met, at the expense of his needs.

 

Quote

He "saw" her needs which doesn't equal "understood".

And she saw his needs, and clearly didn't understand them either.

Share this post


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

If placing sex above your partner is by no means healthy, than placing not having sex above your partner is by no means healthy.   There is no room for either extreme.  

Except that people have a right to bodily sovereignty. Not to having sex with whomever they want.

 

18 minutes ago, IronHamster said:

We also know the OPs wife misrepresented herself.  

 

Now, we have a situation where others would be hurt by the dissolution of the relationship.   

 

It goes beyond sadism to suggest divorce.  The agreement can be amended, at least until the kids graduate.  

An amicable divorce is better than an irreconcilable marriage.

 

14 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

He's not been having sex with her (or, very very rarely) for twenty years while (by the sounds of it) providing for her and his children. How is that not trying?

 

By the same token, shouldn't the asexual partner just accept their partner's needs and have sex, if that's your argument...

Supporting your loved ones should never be viewed as a sacrifice. It's the baseline expectation for people that aren't assholes.

 

1 minute ago, Telecaster68 said:

 

I agree. But it's also an argument that she should've left as soon as she knew the lack of sex was an insoluble problem. I'm guessing that took a lot less than 20 years...

Her husband's apparent inability to have a loving and supportive relationship with her, without fucking her, is not her fault. If he can't cope with that then he should be the one asking for a divorce.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

Supporting your loved ones should never be viewed as a sacrifice.

Your point was that he hadn't been trying. He clearly had.

 

Are you now saying that in fact asexuals should have sex, to be supportive of their partner's needs?

 

Quote

Her husband's apparent inability to have a loving and supportive relationship with her, without fucking her, is not her fault. If he can't cope with that then he should be the one asking for a divorce.

or...

 

His wife's apparent inability to have a loving and supportive relationship with her, including fucking him, is not his fault. If she can't cope with that then she should be the one asking for a divorce.

 

See how it works?

Share this post


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

(There's a term for it when someone has sex with a person who didn't want that.)
Everyone should find a solution and/or compromise. If one doesn't fancy doing so, then you should divorce. He "saw" her needs which doesn't equal "understood".

So you are saying my children should suffer because my wife misled me?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yatagarasu
8 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

And she saw his needs, and clearly didn't understand them either.

 

4 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

or...

 

His wife's apparent inability to have a loving and supportive relationship with her, including fucking him, is not his fault. If she can't cope with that then she should be the one asking for a divorce.

Then it's good to go and fuck another person?
 

2 minutes ago, IronHamster said:

So you are saying my children should suffer because my wife misled me? 

How old are they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shadowstepper
12 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

 

I agree. But it's also an argument that she should've left as soon as she knew the lack of sex was an insoluble problem. I'm guessing that took a lot less than 20 years...

Unless she didn't see it as a problem the way he did.

 

You can spout all day that she should have left when she saw there was a problem, but that only works IF she thought it was actually a problem.

 

There are a lot of posts on this forum where asexuals didn't want sex and either didn't recognize or couldn't understand that it was a problem for their sexual spouse. This may well be the case here.

 

Again, we don't know what her thoughts on it were. All we know is that he wanted it, she didn't. For all we know, that was a perfectly normal thing as far as she was concerned.

 

At that point it does fall back to him, since he recognized it as a problem he couldn't overlook.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

Then it's good to go and fuck another person?

I have no idea how you got that from what I said.

 

1 minute ago, Shadowstepper said:

Unless she didn't see it as a problem the way he did.

 

You can spout all day that she should have left when she saw there was a problem, but that only works IF she thought it was actually a problem.

 

There are a lot of posts on this forum where asexuals didn't want sex and either didn't recognize or couldn't understand that it was a problem for their sexual spouse. This may well be the case here.

 

Again, we don't know what her thoughts on it were. All we know is that he wanted it, she didn't. For all we know, that was a perfectly normal thing as far as she was concerned.

You're right. OP, during the twenty years, did you at any point make it clear that never having sex was a problem and you would like to have more sex?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yatagarasu
1 minute ago, Telecaster68 said:

I have no idea how you got that from what I said.

Because the OP apparently uses this to justify his actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IronHamster
2 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

I have no idea how you got that from what I said.

 

You're right. OP, during the twenty years, did you at any point make it clear that never having sex was a problem and you would like to have more sex?

Plenty of times.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now