Acceptance

[IronHamster]

6 minutes ago, vega57 said:

She didn't fail to compromise, either. 

 

Tele, you seem to be depending on what the OP has posted as being "truthful".  He originally claimed that he hadn't "had sex" in DECADES.  Yet, when I asked him a bunch of questions, he admitted that he DID have sex several times a year. 

 

Not too sure if I would depend on his "4 times a year" thing as being accurate.  After all, he seemed to change his tune from "never" to "sometimes". 

Did I write that wrong?  We did not have oral sex for over a decade.  

[vega57]

7 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

How did she compromise? 

 

And falling back on 'he's probably lying' is a sure sign none of your previous arguments are holding water. You were quite happy to rely on them when it suited you.  

I didn't say that he was probably "lying".  I said that he may not be  being "truthful".  There's a difference. 

 

And she may have been compromising by having unwanted sex (outside of procreation) PERIOD. 

[vega57]

6 minutes ago, IronHamster said:

Did I write that wrong?  We did not have oral sex for over a decade.  

That's oral sex.  Did you have intercourse during that time?  The answer is obviously 'yes'. 

[Telecaster68]

Hairsplitting much? 

 

If she was compromising, she was lying initially. If she wasn't lying, she wasn't compromising. One or the other. 

[IronHamster]

Just now, vega57 said:

That's oral sex.  Did you have intercourse during that time?  The answer is obviously 'yes'. 

I do not see the contradiction.  Not having oral sex is not the same as not having PIV sex.  I am trying to clarify a statement buried under the last twenty pages that was either miscommunicated or misunderstood.  

 

For the record, the first year was the longest drought of all sexual activity.  From all of 2006 through all of 2016 there was no cunnalingus or fellatio unilaterally decided on by my wife. 

[James121]

1 hour ago, Puck said:

I believe the reason is because we are only talking to iron hamster. He's the one coming for advice/support, not his wife. If his wife posted here, you'd probably see many people here telling her to leave him and saying that she's right to feel hurt that he cheated but she shouldn't have let the problem on for so long when he was vocalizing his need so much. He'd get the blame for making the choice to cheat still, but it takes two to tango. And if she came on saying "if he loved me, he should just have continued to not have sex!" you'd better bet she's see a ton of backlash.

 

Yes, you find a little more sympathy for the wife in the situation here, but that's really just because she was cheated on. Had ironhamster or his wife left each other before the cheating happened, either of them would probably be getting sympathetic "you did the right thing" responses. No guarantee, but most of the mature AVENites you see posting in this thread are quite understanding to sexuals needs, even if they haven't experienced those needs themselves.

Well I don’t think she has any right to feel hurt that he cheated. That’s the issue. She decides sex isn’t  for her anymore and just takes it away. Then she offers no solution whatsoever apart from what suits her. Clearly she ‘wants’ to keep ironhamster (or she would have left), clearly she doesn’t want sex anymore (so she took away), clearly she wants ironhamster to be faithful so with no regard to how the 20 years of sexlessness has made him feel, she said no to him opening up the marriage. Like I said in a previous post, would she like a castle and a pony to go with all the things she see’s fit to expect?

[vega57]

15 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Hairsplitting much? 

 

If she was compromising, she was lying initially. If she wasn't lying, she wasn't compromising. One or the other. 

She didn't lie.  She had sex with him.  What part of that DON'T you get?

 

I'm sorry Tele, but if he was to present his 'case' in a court of law, he would lose.  BIG time.  I was a paralegal since 1989 and worked in family law for many years.  I've SEEN cases such as his, and believe me, he would LOSE.  The judge would see his wife as NOT having "lied" since they DID have sex, and they DID have children.  They also had sex in addition to having children.  The fact that he hadn't received a blow job in a decade wouldn't hold water, IF he had intercourse during that time, or ANY OTHER FORM OF SEX from his wife. 

 

He wouldn't be able to get a divorce based on "abandonment" if he has had sex with his wife in the past YEAR, at least. Plus, the court would look at other factors that may have contributed to her lack of desire for sex with him, during that time. 

[vega57]

18 minutes ago, IronHamster said:

I do not see the contradiction.  Not having oral sex is not the same as not having PIV sex.  I am trying to clarify a statement buried under the last twenty pages that was either miscommunicated or misunderstood.  

 

For the record, the first year was the longest drought of all sexual activity.  From all of 2006 through all of 2016 there was no cunnalingus or fellatio unilaterally decided on by my wife. 

But was there INTERCOURSE??????  Anal sex?  Hand jobs? 

[James121]

1 hour ago, IronHamster said:

I have been issued a warning for violating the rules.  Please be advised that if I do not respond for a long period of time it is not my doing.   I think the judgement is a bit late and a bit picky, but it is not my forum to moderate and I will do my best to comply.  I have a lot of irons in the fire right now and will respond as I can.   Thank you all for your patience.  

I was expecting that to be fair. Around a year  ago I saw a sexual being referred to as “having the mind of a rapist” simply because he expected sex in a relationship. I wonder if that resulted in a warning!

[James121]

1 hour ago, Puck said:

I honestly don't think that is the case. I met the dude, I really don't think it was as manipulative at all. He wasn't thinking "if I tell her I don't want sex then she'll leave me!" it was as simple as "sex isn't important to me, I dunno why you are making such a thing about it."

 

Of course my sister talked to him about it and asked if he was ace. He said he thought he wasn't and that it just wasn't something he wanted to do at the amount she did.

 

They have since broken up and, though that wasn't the main reason, I'm sure it was a fair sized part of it. They just weren't compatible. No one was trying to manipulate the other, they vocalized their needs/lack of need and because those needs as well as other needs didn't line up, they left the relationship.

 

My sister doesn't hold resentment for him, like some sexual partners seem to. She doesn't blame him. She saw they weren't compatible and recognized that it meant the relationship should end. She's now with someone who meets her needs and is way happier with this man than with the boyfriend I had talked about here.

 

So, yeah, he basically did say “I don’t like, need or want sex in my life” in different words.

Excellent. And also a very good example of why ‘some’ (not all) people such as iron hamsters wife may lie. How many times will that man be dumped by a girl and be left wandering if he is going to be left on the shelf before he thinks ‘this being honest about having no desire for sex keeps preventing me from getting anywhere near to marriage’.

I assure you if he splits up with enough woman he may consider having more frequent sex until....after the wedding day.

[Telecaster68]

In the UK, divorce has to be founded on irretrievable breakdown, and lack of sex is one way in which it can be irretrievably broken diwn. Exactly what constitutes lack of sex is down to the court, so over here, it could stand up. Besides, the first gap *was* a year. 

 

Anyway, I wasn't arguing the legal case - you've slipped back to that because the rest of your arguments were so obviously flawed. I just said it was clear she wasn't acting in good faith. Refusing to consummate the marriage for a year after specifically saying PIV should wait for marriage is clearly  a case of lying. There's no other interpretation. You really believe that something changed on their wedding day other than having a marriage certificate, to stop her having any kind of sex for a year? 

[James121]

2 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

In the UK, divorce has to be founded on irretrievable breakdown, and lack of sex is one way in which it can be irretrievably broken diwn. Exactly what constitutes lack of sex is down to the court, so over here, it could stand up. Besides, the first gap *was* a year. 

 

Anyway, I wasn't arguing the legal case - you've slipped back to that because the rest of your arguments were so obviously flawed. I just said it was clear she wasn't acting in good faith. Refusing to consummate the marriage for a year after specifically saying PIV should wait for marriage is clearly  a case of lying. There's no other interpretation. You really believe that something changed on their wedding day other than having a marriage certificate, to stop her having any kind of sex for a year? 

She probably had a headache.

[Telecaster68]

10 minutes ago, James121 said:

I was expecting that to be fair. Around a year  ago I saw a sexual being referred to as “having the mind of a rapist” simply because he expected sex in a relationship. I wonder if that resulted in a warning!

I think that was me. I complained and I'm pretty sure that poster did get warned. They flounced off soon afterwards anyway. 

[vega57]

1 minute ago, Telecaster68 said:

In the UK, divorce has to be founded on irretrievable breakdown, and lack of sex is one way in which it can be irretrievably broken diwn. Exactly what constitutes lack of sex is down to the court, so over here, it could stand up. Besides, the first gap *was* a year. 

The first "gap" had a reasonable reason for occurring.  She had a medical issue, but even though the OP said that her issue "should have" been cleared up in 12 weeks does NOT preclude OTHERS for taking longer to heal.  Don't believe me?  Look it up...same as *I* did. 

 

Quote

Anyway, I wasn't arguing the legal case - you've slipped back to that because the rest of your arguments were so obviously flawed. I just said it was clear she wasn't acting in good faith. Refusing to consummate the marriage for a year after specifically saying PIV should wait for marriage is clearly  a case of lying. There's no other interpretation. You really believe that something changed on their wedding day other than having a marriage certificate, to stop her having any kind of sex for a year? 

No.  It changed on the second day of their honeymoon, according to the OP...

[James121]

1 minute ago, Telecaster68 said:

I think that was me. I complained and I'm pretty sure that poster did get warned. They flounced off soon afterwards anyway. 

Ah ha! You!! You have the mind of a rapist sir! How dare you expect your wife to want to have sex. That’s obscene!

Just a joke moderators. Bit of a giggle.

[Telecaster68]

4 minutes ago, vega57 said:

The first "gap" had a reasonable reason for occurring.  She had a medical issue, but even though the OP said that her issue "should have" been cleared up in 12 weeks does NOT preclude OTHERS for taking longer to heal.  Don't believe me?  Look it up...same as *I* did. 

 

No.  It changed on the second day of their honeymoon, according to the OP...

If her tailbone was so badly hurt it took a year to heal, she'd have been in hospital that night. 

 

So, the second day of their marriage, by your own admission. You really think that changes anything? 

 

If she'd actually wanted to have some kind of sex, or been in the least bothered about her husband's needs, a BJ or hand job would've been possible at some point during the ensuing 12 months, and she was clearly fine with them up to the wedding ceremony. 

[James121]

4 minutes ago, vega57 said:

The first "gap" had a reasonable reason for occurring.  She had a medical issue, but even though the OP said that her issue "should have" been cleared up in 12 weeks does NOT preclude OTHERS for taking longer to heal.  Don't believe me?  Look it up...same as *I* did. 

I’ve missed something. What medical issue did mrs ironhamster have?

[vega57]

1 minute ago, James121 said:

Ah ha! You!! You have the mind of a rapist sir! How dare you expect your wife to want to have sex. That’s obscene!

Just a joke moderators. Bit of a giggle.

WANTING sex is one thing.  Expecting it and feeling ENTITLED to it is another....

[vega57]

1 minute ago, Telecaster68 said:

If her tailbone was so badly hurt it took a year to heal, she'd have been in hospital that night. 

 

So, the second day of their marriage, by your own admission. You really think that changes anything? 

No, she wouldn't.  Like I said, LOOK IT UP. 

 

And, I said by the second day of their HONEYMOON.  When *I* got married, we didn't take our honeymoon for 4 months....

[vega57]

1 minute ago, James121 said:

I’ve missed something. What medical issue did mrs ironhamster have?

She broke had an accident and broke her tailbone. 

[vega57]

2 minutes ago, James121 said:

I’ve missed something. What medical issue did mrs ironhamster have?

She had an accident on their honeymoon and broke her tailbone.

[James121]

1 minute ago, vega57 said:

WANTING sex is one thing.  Expecting it and feeling ENTITLED to it is another....

That would depend on whether you have been given every indication that your relationship was going to include sex. If you were given every indication you were going to have a relationship involving sex and then that is simply removed, you have been robbed of your right to make an informed decision about who you really are marrying.

[Telecaster68]

Injured. Broken wasn't specified. 

 

You're actually saying she was rendered unable to give a hand job for a year because of an injured tailbone, despite really wanting to live up to her premarital promises? 

 

Even you can't honestly take that seriously, Vega. 

[vega57]

4 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

If she'd actually wanted to have some kind of sex, or been in the least bothered about her husband's needs, a BJ or hand job would've been possible at some point during the ensuing 12 months, and she was clearly fine with them up to the wedding ceremony. 

Have you ever broke your tailbone before, Tele?  Do you have any idea of the EXCRUCIATING pain you could feel? 

[Telecaster68]

Hamster, was she laid up for twelve months, unable to walk, work, shop, or any of the things she wanted? 

[Telecaster68]

6 minutes ago, vega57 said:

When *I* got married, we didn't take our honeymoon for 4 months....

Why is  that no surprise? 

[James121]

Just now, vega57 said:

Have you ever broke your tailbone before, Tele?  Do you have any idea of the EXCRUCIATING pain you could feel? 

Ironhamster needs to clear this one up.

ironhamster.....Did mrs ironhamster cease all physical activity during this year long drought or was it one of those injuries where the pain started at around bed time or very suddenly if you got close on the sofa?

[vega57]

1 minute ago, Telecaster68 said:

Injured. Broken wasn't specified. 

 

You're actually saying she was rendered unable to give a hand job for a year because of an injured tailbone, despite really wanting to live up to her premarital promises? 

 

Even you can't honestly take that seriously, Vega. 

OHFERCRYINOUTLOUD.  My late husband was in a serious car accident while we were married.  He injured his shoulder and needed surgery to repair it.  It took several MONTHS to heal.  I HARDLY would have expected him to cook his own meals during that time.  He was in CONSTANT pain, and sex was the LAST thing on my mind.

[vega57]

Just now, Telecaster68 said:

Why is  that no surprise? 

You can be such a DORK sometimes, Tele.  For your information, the REASON why we didn't take it for 4 months is because my husband was OVERSEAS at the time. 

[Telecaster68]

Shoulders aren't tailbones