Is it ok if your partner gets their sexual needs met elsewhere?

[Philip027]

Quote

I still think you are applying children’s logic. 

Man with heart condition runs to the shop and collapses when he gets there.

Child believes running to the shop kills you.

 

Instead of man running to shop, he cycles to the hairdresser and collapses when he gets there.

Child believes biking to the hairdresser kills you instead.

 

It’s not wrong as such but it’s only seeing what’s in front of you and not understanding that life has a bigger picture. 

I think the real "children's logic" is trying to say stuff doesn't cause a death when it very clearly did.  Like, it's not even remotely up for debate the way you are presenting it, but somehow you keep thinking it is.

 

Here's what would make your examples a whole lot better:

Man with heart condition runs to the shop and collapses when he gets there.

 

Now what?  Is it clear that it was the run to the shop that caused him to collapse?  No, not really.  Might have happened to him no matter what he did.  We don't have the information anymore to properly say that it was running to the store that caused him to die.  With the heart condition though, it's pretty obvious.  Much like how car accidents have a tendency to cause people to die.

 

I'm not really sure why you keep bringing up what a child would think, anyway.  Who gives a shit what they think about how/why someone died?  Since when did they become an expert on the subject?  A lot of kids can't even properly comprehend death until they're older or have more personal experience with it.

[Chimeric]

1 hour ago, Homer said:

Yet that would be your feelings. Just because you feel it doesn't mean it's true.

 

Do you really think that someone taking part in an activity after expressing consent, even if they don't particularly like that activity, feel somewhat similar to someone being abused, without any consent?

I am not saying that consensual sex is rape. I'm not trying to redefine that word at all. I'm also not trying to diminish or minimalize or in any way suggest that rape isn't a terrible, terrible thing, because of course it is. 

 

I do really think that someone who is taking part in an activity even after expressing consent may still feel somewhat similar to someone being abused without any consent, yes, especially if that consent is borne of guilt or humiliation placed on them by their partner. It isn't rape, but it has the potential to be horrendously damaging to that person - especially if it's a long-term situation, and especially given that their abuser is someone they love. 

 

People always have the agency to say no, but if the cost of that "no" is a relationship with someone they otherwise love, clamming up and saying "yes" doesn't suddenly flip the switch on how the asexual person feels about the situation they're in, I would imagine. Especially since now they're feeling violated but they can't even complain about it, since, after all, they did say "yes."

 

It isn't rape, but it is surely damaging. 

 

And, of course, this isn't the case for everybody. I just was confused as to why the reaction to @James121s original statements made the leap to rape - but I think it's apparent now that for some people, these things amount to something very similar.

[Homer]

By the way...

 

3 hours ago, Philip027 said:

"knowingly" implies willful intent.

...no, it doesn't. "Knowingly" merely implies that you're aware of the risk, not that you want that risky thing to happen. Huge difference.

 

 

25 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

Not any different from yours I'm afraid

Pretty much anyone actually dealing with cases like this would disagree with you, I'm afraid.

[James121]

28 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

I think the real "children's logic" is trying to say stuff doesn't cause a death when it very clearly did.  Like, it's not even remotely up for debate the way you are presenting it, but somehow you keep thinking it is.

 

I'm not really sure why you keep bringing up what a child would think, anyway.  Who gives a shit what they think about how/why someone died?  Since when did they become an expert on the subject?  A lot of kids can't even properly comprehend death until they're older or have more personal experience with it.

I’m comparing your thought process and logical connection to that of a child because that’s the way it comes across. And children aren’t experts (that’s the point P).

 

Honestly, for someone who writes so well, I truly truly am amazed.

[vega57]

5 hours ago, Philip027 said:

The fact that you might not be able to be tried in such a scenario (I honestly wouldn't know if that's true, I'm not going to pretend like I know the laws) does not change to the fact that in my eyes, in that situation, you willingly took part in something that you knew could kill a person and succeeded, and as far as I'm concerned you still committed the textbook definition of manslaughter at the very least, regardless of the opinions of the courts.

Actually, the courts tend to share your view, Philip.  There is something called the Criminal Transmission of HIV (for example), which can be prosecuted as murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, reckless endangerment, (sexual) assault, and fraud, to name a few.   

[Philip027]

Quote

...no, it doesn't. "Knowingly" merely implies that you're aware of the risk, not that you want that risky thing to happen. Huge difference.

Knowing something is risky and going ahead with it anyway ultimately means you don't care about the risk.  Aka, you willfully ignored it.

 

Nowhere did I say that it means he wants the other person to die.  You're twisting my words to try to place me in a much more abhorrent position than what my position actually is, and it only makes you look ridiculous in the process.  I would have expected better behavior from a moderator, but I guess they just let anyone join these days...

 

Quote

Pretty much anyone actually dealing with cases like this would disagree with you, I'm afraid.

That doesn't mean much coming from you, I'm afraid.

 

I'm also very, very used to disagreement, so don't think it deters me.

 

Quote

Honestly, for someone who writes so well, I truly truly am amazed.

When it comes to dealing with people that are basically saying car crashes don't kill people, the feeling is entirely mutual.

[Telecaster68]

All this is presuming there's anything about non violent sex that is likely to kill anyone, and there simply isn't. STDs exist obviously but transmission is far from a done deal, and even when it is passed on, they're no longer fatal if treated or managed. Even HIV isn't the impending death sentence it used to be.

 

There's a strong subtext of demonising absolutely any sexual activity going on here.

[James121]

5 minutes ago, vega57 said:

Actually, the courts tend to share your view, Philip.  There is something called the Criminal Transmission of HIV (for example), which can be prosecuted as murder, attempted murder, manslaughter, reckless endangerment, (sexual) assault, and fraud, to name a few.   

But that’s HIV not the possible rupturing of a  cyst that everyone was talking about 😊

[James121]

6 minutes ago, Philip027 said:

When it comes to dealing with people that are basically saying car crashes don't kill people, the feeling is entirely mutual.

🤦‍♂️ Where’s the nearest brick wall to bash my head on.

[Philip027]

Quote

All this is presuming there's anything about non violent sex that is likely to kill anyone, and there simply isn't. STDs exist obviously but transmission is far from a done deal, and even when it is passed on, they're no longer fatal if treated or managed. Even HIV isn't the impending death sentence it used to be.

Agreed, for the most part (although I imagine people with heart conditions and such still need to exercise caution, otherwise I doubt all these Viagra/Cialis/etc commercials would be warning about it).

 

Like I said though, I really don't know anything about these cysts and not about to claim I do; was just going by the assertion made in this topic that they're supposedly dangerous to have sex with.  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[vega57]

11 minutes ago, James121 said:

But that’s HIV not the possible rupturing of a  cyst that everyone was talking about 😊

No, this argument started because you wrote that no one dies from having sex.  Having sex and rupturing a cyst in the process is one way.  Causing internal bleeding through rape in another way (which, by the way, is NOT dealing with a pre-existing condition), AND having sex with someone if you're unaware that they are HIV infected is another way that sex can kill. 

[Philip027]

Quote

No, this argument started because you wrote that no one dies from having sex.  Having sex and rupturing a cyst in the process is one way.  Causing internal bleeding through rape in another way (which, by the way, is NOT dealing with a pre-existing condition), AND having sex with someone if you're unaware that they are HIV infected is another way that sex can kill. 

Wouldn't even bother anymore.  He's already convinced that the sex has absolutely nothing to do with the death in any of these scenarios, even though anyone who can put 2 and 2 together can clearly see it

[Telecaster68]

I just googled. Dying from a ruptured ovarian cyst under any circumstances is 'extremely rare' according to Johns Hopkins, and nobody mentions sex as a potential danger. 

 

In the halcyon days when my wife and I occasionally had sex, she had ovarian cysts. I went to some of her appointments with her. Sex as a fatal risk was never, ever mentioned, and this was with some of the top specialists in the country. 

 

'Some' people get to be President. 'Some' people own mobile phones. Let's not act as though all 'some's are equally likely.

[gaogao]

Huh. I didn't know sex could kill someone with ovarian cysts.

 

Considering I have ovarian cysts, you'd think my doctor would tell me about something like that.

[James121]

5 minutes ago, vega57 said:

No, this argument started because you wrote that no one dies from having sex.  Having sex and rupturing a cyst in the process is one way.  Causing internal bleeding through rape in another way (which, by the way, is NOT dealing with a pre-existing condition), AND having sex with someone if you're unaware that they are HIV infected is another way that sex can kill. 

Sex where cyst ruptures - pre existing condition has caused death. 

 

Transmission of HIV - sex merely transmits the disease. It’s the disease that kills not the sex. There are hundreds of other ways it can spread.

 

Rape leading to internal bleeding that causes death - I have never heard of a single case where this has actually happened and no one has pointed me in the direction of a news article or anything that would prove it. I’m not saying I believe that it is impossible but I have my doubts.

 

This didn’t all start with me by the way. This all started with the first few replies which included the question ‘has anyone ever died of not having sex’ answer lol no! How do you guys know that? How do you know that someone hasn’t become so depressed over rejection that they took a bunch of tablets or chucked themselves in front of a train?

[James121]

6 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

I just googled. Dying from a ruptured ovarian cyst under any circumstances is 'extremely rare' according to Johns Hopkins, and nobody mentions sex as a potential danger. 

 

In the halcyon days when my wife and I occasionally had sex, she had ovarian cysts. I went to some of her appointments with her. Sex as a fatal risk was never, ever mentioned, and this was with some of the top specialists in the country. 

 

'Some' people get to be President. 'Some' people own mobile phones. Let's not act as though all 'some's are equally likely.

 

1 minute ago, gaogao said:

Huh. I didn't know sex could kill someone with ovarian cysts.

 

Considering I have ovarian cysts, you'd think my doctor would tell me about something like that.

It can’t. It’s been used as a means of winning a disagreement.

[vega57]

2 minutes ago, James121 said:

Sex where cyst ruptures - pre existing condition has caused death. 

Sex caused the cyst to rupture.  The cyst may have ruptured on it's own if no sex was involved.  Then again, it may not have ruptured at all.  But sex WAS involved, in this case.

 

Quote

Transmission of HIV - sex merely transmits the disease. It’s the disease that kills not the sex. There are hundreds of other ways it can spread.

Yes, sex is one way how the disease can be transmitted.  But in this case, it was the ONLY way the disease was transmitted.  If the victim doesn't partake in any of the other limited methods how the disease can be transmitted, then sex was the cause of becoming infected. 

 

Quote

Rape leading to internal bleeding that causes death - I have never heard of a single case where this has actually happened and no one has pointed me in the direction of a news article or anything that would prove it. I’m not saying I believe that it is impossible but I have my doubts.

You have the world at your fingertips, James.  Start Googling, lol! 

 

Quote

This didn’t all start with me by the way. This all started with the first few replies which included the question ‘has anyone ever died of not having sex’ answer lol no! How do you guys know that? How do you know that someone hasn’t become so depressed over rejection that they took a bunch of tablets or chucked themselves in front of a train?

I can use your 'logic', James, and tell you that it wasn't the rejection that killed, or the depression that killed, but that taking a bunch of tablets or throwing themselves in front of a train that killed them. 

[James121]

3 minutes ago, vega57 said:

Sex caused the cyst to rupture.  The cyst may have ruptured on it's own if no sex was involved.  Then again, it may not have ruptured at all.  But sex WAS involved, in this case.

Standing up may cause a cyst to rupture and thus standing up is also a killer.

 

4 minutes ago, vega57 said:

Yes, sex is one way how the disease can be transmitted.  But in this case, it was the ONLY way the disease was transmitted.  If the victim doesn't partake in any of the other limited methods how the disease can be transmitted, then sex was the cause of becoming infected. 

I’m struggling to argue this one so effectively. However it’s still the disease that causes possible death. Nowadays, unlikely to result in death.

 

6 minutes ago, vega57 said:

You have the world at your fingertips, James.  Start Googling, lol! 

I know of only one case this has happened. A poor woman that was raped and died of internal injuries 3 years later. It doesn’t really count for purpose of this discussion though.

8 minutes ago, vega57 said:

I can use your 'logic', James, and tell you that it wasn't the rejection that killed, or the depression that killed, but that taking a bunch of tablets or throwing themselves in front of a train that killed them.

I knew you would use my logic because you will use any logic that suits your purpose at any given time. 

[vega57]

Quote

I’m struggling to argue this one so effectively. However it’s still the disease that causes possible death. Nowadays, unlikely to result in death.

If you were single, would you KNOWINGLY have sex with someone who has HIV or full-blown AIDS?  I mean, if death from these diseases is only 'possible' and that nowadays it's "unlikely to result in death"...  Would you use that 'logic' to try to convince someone to have sex with you? 

 

Quote

I know of only one case this has happened. A poor woman that was raped and died of internal injuries 3 years later. It doesn’t really count for purpose of this discussion though

Many of the rape/murders are lumped into the category of homicide; not rape.  So, you won't find as much information under the rape category.  And to say that the woman's rape/death "doesn't count" , even for the purposes of this discussion is pretty insensitive, IMO. 

 

Quote

I knew you would use my logic because you will use any logic that suits your purpose at any given time. 

I can say the same thing about you, James.

[James121]

21 minutes ago, vega57 said:

If you were single, would you KNOWINGLY have sex with someone who has HIV or full-blown AIDS?  I mean, if death from these diseases is only 'possible' and that nowadays it's "unlikely to result in death"...  Would you use that 'logic' to try to convince someone to have sex with you?

No I definitely wouldn’t because I wouldn’t want to risk contracting the disease. In much the same way as if someone told me by walking in to a particular building I may contract a life threatening airborn disease like Ebola, I wouldn’t go in. Walking in to the building doesn’t kill you, Ebola does. I rest my case on that one.

21 minutes ago, vega57 said:

Many of the rape/murders are lumped into the category of homicide; not rape.  So, you won't find as much information under the rape category.  And to say that the woman's rape/death "doesn't count" , even for the purposes of this discussion is pretty insensitive, IMO.

That’s because the actual death tends to come from a separate act to the rape. As horrific as it is, rape isn’t the the act that typically kills the victim. It’s usually the blunt force trauma, strangulation or whatever horrific act that follows. 

The only case I know of doesn’t really count and in your opinion that is an insensitive thing to say. But I haven’t been insensitive to the victim at all. That’s just a cheap shot at me on your part. Her case is very different to the kind of rape we are even talking about and that’s why it doesn’t count because it’s not sex.

21 minutes ago, vega57 said:

I can say the same thing about you, James.

Round and round we go except if you read the thread, if you actually read the thread you will see the first person to claim that dying from the mental trauma that results from sexual rejection isn’t dying from a lack of sex, was a certain person that you have been arguing along side this whole time.  And funnily enough they referred to the mental state as “cuckoo” which you didn’t find insensitive and didn’t challenge like you have me?   

 

Which is it then vega? Let’s have a definitive answer from one of you. Please commit to something! Is chucking yourself under a bus as a result of depression that came from years of rejection, dying as a result of not have sex or not?

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Homer said:

Of course you can "make a case"... just not a very good or reasonable one.

Homer, I'm not sure if you read the whole conversation? 

 

It was specifically stated that no one has ever died from sex they don't want. Whereas there are exames of people dying from sex they DO want, and examples of people dying sex they don't want in the case of many rapes (and I mean dying from internal bleeding as result of the sex in those rape cases, I'm not talking about a woman being stabbed *during* a rape). I was not comparing unwanted consensual sex to rape, I was just saying, people have died as a result of both of those (rape and consensual enthusiastic sex) so I'm sure there are cases where someone has died from sex they consented to even though they didn't want it. We are talking all of human history here  based on the comment I was responding  to.

 

However, one of my examples of someone who has died from sex was a woman who I learned about in a medical documentary years ago who bled to death after her ovarian cysts burst from a sexual encounter (the pressure from the penis thrusting inside caused them to rupture and she bled to death).

 

The argument against that was that the sex didn't cause her death, the fact that she bled to death from her cysts bursting caused her death. But as the cysts only burst as a direct result of that sex, saying the sex wasn't what killed her is no different than saying someone can't ever die from being shot. They can ONLY die from a bullet damaging their internal organs and causing enough bloodloss to kill them, but it certainly wasn't being shot that killed them. So yes, if you're going to twist an argument to that extent, then a plane crash can't kill a person, starvation can't kill a person, being stabbed 20 times can't kill a person.. because it's not the action itself that killed them, it was what happened to their body after that killed them.

 

Taking the argument beyond the original discussion we were having and starting to argue with Philip about whether or not he's correct about the semantics seems a little strange to me based on the original context of the discussion,hence why I was wondering if maybe you missed what I originally said. 

 

It's a known medical fact that sex can directly cause ovarian cysts to burst, and it's also a medical fact that rarely ovarian cyst bursting can lead to death. As we are talking 'all of human history' here I'm sure that deaths of this sort (as a result of having  sex) happened before we had the correct medical capabilities to stop internal bleeding as well. 

 

And even if you're still going to insist that it was the cysts that caused death and not the sex (which *caused* them to rupture as a direct result of the internal thrusting of the penis in the woman's body), you can't deny that it's still a possibility it could happen to someone else as a direct result of having sex too, whether they want the sex or not. 

 

There are even lists of symptoms to look for after sex just in case (like bloating, pain, excessive discharge, and blood) which may indicate a burst cyst, and these will usually emphasize the fact that burst cysts can rarely cause death so get to your doctor asap. It's often after SEX that there's a greater danger though.

 

I understand why James doesn't want to back down as he was the one who originally catergorically stated that no one has ever died from sex they don't want but I wasn't too sure of your motivations, unless you do agree with James that in all of human history no one has ever died from having regular sex that they don't want, even if they have cysts that burst as a direct result of that sex and they die? 

 

Cysts also weren't the only examples I gave, but that's the example that keeps being brought up.

[Homer]

Yes, I read the whole thing, but no, I wasn't referring to you at all.

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, Homer said:

Yes, I read the whole thing, but no, I wasn't referring to you at all.

Well the conversation with Philip is only happening as a direct result of my original statement, I was the one who made those points orginally so that's why I was a little baffled that the argument got so off topic attacking Philip's points when it was orginally about whether or not, in all of human history, anyone has ever died from having sex they don't want. 

 

And no, you're right, if you want to twist the wording then no one has ever died from sex in the same way no one has ever died from being shot or stabbed...  They died as a RESULT of those things, just as someone, under rare circumstances, can die as a RESULT of having sex. That doesn't mean the sex didn't cause the event that lead to the death though, in the same way the gun caused the event that led to a shooting victims death (the gun caused bullets to pierce internal organs and caused bloodloss etc). It was still the act of being shot that killed that person, even if it was bloodloss and organ failure that they died from.

 

 

[Homer]

Yeah no... argh. The point I'm trying to make is that when Person would just have walked away from the crash if it hadn't been for the pre-existing condition, it's the pre-existing condition that caused the outcome. I can't think of any pre-existing conditions that make much of a difference when you get shot or when your plane crashes.

[Guest]

Another thing I forgot to mention is that sex has also been shown to directly cause a specific type of fatal brain hemorrhage. So while yes, the person died from the brain hemorrhage, medical professionals conclude that sex itself caused it as opposed to some other pre-existing medical condition. 

 

@Homer maybe you should split this thread as it's meant to be about whether or not the sexual person should be have sex outside the relationship?(which I say no, they catergorically should not unless their asexual partner enthusiastically wants them to. There is never an excuse for cheating. Leave your partner if you have to, but don't go behind their back and screw other people. Also, an ace also has just as much right to leave their sexual partner if the sexual person wants too much sex/if the ace feels too uncomfortable about sex even if not much is wanted. That's my stance on the matter).

[James121]

39 minutes ago, FictoVore. said:

The argument against that was that the sex didn't cause her death, the fact that she bled to death from her cysts bursting caused her death. But as the cysts only burst as a direct result of that sex, saying the sex wasn't what killed her is no different than saying someone can't ever die from being shot.

Ficto, I have major issues with that comparison as as I previously pointed out which I guess you either ignored or couldn’t rebutt.

 Being shot involves someone shooting a gun and the bullet entering the body causing death for a variety of reasons. 

Your example of the cyst is totally and utterly flawed and completely different.

There was a pre existing medical issue that caused the death not sex. You can rupture a cyst simply by standing up. Do you think anyone would be prepared to class that as “died from standing up”. Total and utter nonsense.

The use of the cyst example is a mere attempt to demonise the act of sex as something that can kill. It is not.

If the person with the cyst had no cyst and had sex that same day (like on your program) would have they have died. No no no they would not have. They died of a ruptured cyst. Sex was the trigger, not the cause. 

Let’s go to another extreme. The cyst ruptured when they bent down to tie their shoes. The coroner has to report that death was caused by tying shoe laces? 

 

To make my final point please feel free to answer this question...

 

A woman with a substantial ovarian cyst carefully walks up the road to catch the number 43 bus to London. At the halfway mark the cyst ruptures and she is killed.

Did this lady die of “walking carefully up the road” or did she die because her cyst ruptured?.

[James121]

6 minutes ago, FictoVore. said:

sex has also been shown to directly cause a specific type of fatal brain hemorrhage.

Ooh examples required please. Any evidence?

[Telecaster68]

You guys are aware that death certificates often state causes of death like:

 

1. Immediate cause (eg massive brain haemorrhage)

2. Thing that caused that (eg strain from lifting something heavy)

3. Underlying factors (eg heart disease which may have made caused circulatory problems)

 

..aren't you?

 

 

[Telecaster68]

I think she mean this... 

 

https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/subarachnoid-haemorrhage/

[Cobie]

.