Jump to content
Mary Lambert

I think, my ACE husband has ruined sex for me?

Recommended Posts

James121
6 hours ago, vega57 said:

Ohfercryinoutloud.

Yep, again there is outrage at an adult having a perfectly normal desire and expectation. I could say ofercryinoutloud about 90% of the content on this forum but I would be shot down as being dismissive.....

 

6 hours ago, vega57 said:

Annnnnd...this would ALSO be considered having her cake and eating it too.....

In your opinion yes but in my opinion, if an adult wants to have sex (which is perfectly reasonable) they should be able to have sex. What is very unreasonable is to say no all the time and offer no solution....

 

6 hours ago, vega57 said:

No one is "giving" her options.  The options have always existed.  Either you STAY and endure...have an affair...or...leave.  What's the 'right' thing to do?

Funnily enough, when an asexual is having sex they would prefer not to have, the advice is never ever stay and endure. The right thing to do is what makes you happy and in an ideal world both should be on board with that......

 

6 hours ago, vega57 said:

No one has the "right" to happiness.  We all have the right to pursue happiness, but not at another person's expense.  

 

Look James, it's FINE to want to be happy.  What's not fine is expecting someone else to 'make' you happy. Once you drink THAT Kool-Aid, you're doomed.  

 

If you expect to find happiness outside of yourself, you're never going to be happy.  Oh, you might find it for a SHORT time...until it's time to 'make' you 'happy' again.   Just look at how you view sex.  If you have sex TODAY, you're "happy".  But if you want sex again on Friday and you don't get it, you'll be UNHAPPY.  Why?  Because you're depending on forces outside of yourself to 'make you happy!  You're depending on another person to 'make' you happy.  

 

If you think that having sex is the ONLY thing that's going to make you happy.....

No one has a right to be happy? Now you are talking rubbish. If it’s not fine to expect someone to make you happy then this seals the deal. It should be an affair because he wants monogamy despite his lack of interest. Clearly he has no right to that monogamy because that’s just something that will make him happy. I don’t think having sex is the only thing that can make you happy (far from it), I think not having sex and feeling unwanted and undesirable can make you sad. There’s a distinct difference.

 

There’s an old saying....Money doesn’t make you happy. I agree! But being riddled with debt can make you very sad.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
36 minutes ago, Sally said:

Oh come on, Tele, you've been on AVEN too long to make that statement.  Sex happens often -- in mixed and unmixed relationships -- when only one person wants it.  Generally because the person who doesn't want it (either ever, or just at that particulatr time) wants to please their partner.  

 

You may not want that particular kind of sex, but you really can't intelligently claim that it isn't sex.  

Even if one is less keen than the other, on some level both want it - it might be because they know it will please their partner, or it's maintenance sex, but they still, on balance, want it, for whatever reason. Short of coercion, which means rape, there's consent. It's like saying I don't want to go to the gym because in an ideal world I'd rather not; on balance, I do want to go.

 

But that's separate from the point I was making. The control of any situation lies with the person who can impose their will, and with sex, the one who says 'no' imposes their will (rightly) because they have the backing of the legal system, and few sexual partners want to have sex with someone who's unwilling. Of course there are external factors why asexuals may feel they don't want to exercise that power, but they do have it. But sexuals, under no circumstances, can say 'I don't care what you think, say, or consent to, we're having sex'.

Share this post


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

look im not gonna get into why i did give a rats ass if theres a family to deal with

Wow okay. 

 

You might not care, but Mary clearly does care about her children. And right now, this thread is discussing Mary’s predicament in regards to her relationship. You’re the one that instantly jumped to leaving, and all I’m saying is if she ever does want to think in that park she seriously needs to consider the bigger picture. It can be very selfish to just say ‘we’re breaking up’ without really considering how to deal with breaking that to the family.

 

However, you’re ignoring the important thing: Mary doesn’t even want to leave her husband. Other than the sex (or lack thereof) she is happy with him.

 

6 hours ago, AussieIsAce said:

He is a man he will survive. 65% of marriages end in divorce your kids will be fine. 

And most of those relationships are because all involved took the time to consider how such a decision affects an immediate family. It’s easier when it’s just you and a partner, but when you have kids there’s more to consider. As long as you make sure your kids understand then it’s fine, but by the way you’re saying ‘pack up and leave right now go and live your life’ can be very damaging, because you haven’t had the time to say ‘hey, so what your father and I have isn’t working but that doesn’t mean we don’t still love each other or love you any less. We just need to separate and be our own people.’ Acting for yourself when there’s others to consider but not taking the care of others into account is selfish, but acting for yourself whilst making sure those people know why you’re doing so isn’t.

 

6 hours ago, AussieIsAce said:

you need to live for yourself. be happy for you can raise your family happily. he was be fine. you can be friends with him. 

 

but go out there and get some sex girl. 

No one is saying that if they did decide to separate they can’t be friends. I actually agree, if that’s the decision a couple makes it is absolutely possible to still be on friendly terms. But relationships are different for everyone, some you can separate and walk away from as friends, and others it’s not so simple. At the end of the day, how her relationship with her husband would manifest after a breakup is something only Mary and her husband would know or experience. We don’t know if there would still be a friendship there, we can only say what we think from the information we’ve been given.

 

Again, though, Mary doesn’t want to separate from her husband. To her that wouldn’t make her happy. In an ideal world she’d get to be with her husband and her husband would be sexually interested in her, or she’d be with her husband and her husband would feel she could find sex elsewhere without worry. But that’s not how things work in this scenario unfortunately, and Mary’s just trying to figure out what she wants or thinks they can do. She’s still learning and understanding what asexuality likely means to her husband and their relationship, so this time right now is still a transitioning period for her. Maybe in the future her husband will become open to her having an open relationship, and maybe he won’t. Maybe they will eventually come to the decision to walk their separate ways, but maybe they won’t. Just because there’s a bump in the road they’re trying to find a way around doesn’t mean it’s instantly time to jump ship however.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
2 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

Vega, if no one ever spoke to you again, and blanked you for the rest of your life, would you be happy?

Umm...what is "blanked"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

Ignored you when you spoke to them directly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
1 hour ago, Telecaster68 said:

Even if one is less keen than the other, on some level both want it - it might be because they know it will please their partner, or it's maintenance sex, but they still, on balance, want it, for whatever reason. Short of coercion, which means rape, there's consent. 

Ah back to the ridiculous old 'asexuals have all the power over sex in a mixed relationship' convo. 

 

Believe me, if you love your partner but they'll leave you if you don't give them sex, you choose sex only because it's the lesser of two evils. The sexual can still have total control over how often the sex happens (and even what kind of sex happens) without it being rape or coercion if the ace is only giving it in the hopes of keeping their partner, because they LOVE their partner and their partner has clearly stated they cannot be happy without sex. That doesn't mean the ace wants the sex in any way, they just want to keep their relationship.

 

Just like YOU Tele never initially wanted celibacy, but that was the only choice you were left with short of losing your relationship. Or are you saying all the sexual people  (with non-compromising ace partners) who come to AVEN actively want the celibacy that drew them here? Or is it more accurate to say they want their relationship and the celibacy is an unwanted price they have to pay to keep said relationship?

 

Consenting to something as a price for not losing something else is not that same as actively wanting the thing you're consenting to. It can't get much more simple than that.

 

1 hour ago, Telecaster68 said:

But sexuals, under no circumstances, can say 'I don't care what you think, say, or consent to, we're having sex'.

But they can say "I love you so incredibly much but I truly cannot continue in this relationship without daily sex. I'm so, so sorry but I have to be true to my own needs or I'll be miserable. I totally understand if you would rather break up than have sex with me, but yeah.. I just can't be happy without sex and will end the relationship without it". That's someone being very open and honest about their feelings. If the relationship is very important to the ace, they may give sex as a price of keeping that relationship - it happens literally all the time here. That doesn't mean the ace wants the sex though. Just as you yourself are making the conscious choice to live in daily celibacy, no matter how much pain that caused you for literally years, as the price to keep your relationship. You could have left at any time, but you chose to stay and suffer despite not wanting the celibacy. It feels exactly the same for an ace who gives sex to keep their relationship even though they don't want the sex.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

The flipside of both those things applies to sexuals too. That's one of my points.

 

My substantive point is that on top of the things that apply to both partners, the person who doesn't want to have sex gets their way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
1 minute ago, Telecaster68 said:

the person who doesn't want to have sex gets their way. 

Ah yes, tell that to every one of the hundreds (thousands) of asexuals on AVEN who have had sex they don't want as the price they had to pay to keep their relationship.

 

(and yes, there are sexual people who end up in that situation as well, but this convo is about mixed ace/sexual relationships so let's stick to that).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

They could've said no and not had sex, regardless of their partner's wishes. They chose, for whatever reason, not to.

 

Their partner had no such choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
8 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

They could've said no and not had sex, regardless of their partner's wishes. They chose, for whatever reason, not to.

 

Their partner had no such choice.

And, you can also chose to end the relationship/marriage regardless of your partner's wishes.  You're simply choosing, for whatever reason, not to.  

 

After all, the person who doesn't want the relationship, also 'gets their way'.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
11 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

They could've said no and not had sex, regardless of their partner's wishes.

And their sexual partner would have walked out the door.

 

Your example only works if the ace responds: ''I'm not fucking you, ever, and you're not allowed to leave me. If you try to leave, I'll say you raped me and get you dragged through court and maybe even put in prison, so now you're stuck with me and you better make damn sure you tell all our friends how happy you are to be with me, or else''. THAT'S a better example of the sexual having literally no choice.

 

The sexual could always leave if they can't face celibacy, just as the ace can always leave if they can't face sex. Same level of choice.

 

11 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Their partner had no such choice.

In my example (which certainly has happened to many aces here even if you yourself personally would never do it) the sexual partner gave the ultimatum: ''Have sex with me or I'm leaving you''. They took total control of the situation and the ace was left with the option of either giving sex, or losing their partner.

 

The ace could also leave, just as the sexual forced into celibacy could always leave. That doesn't mean the ace wants the sex, or the sexual wants the celibacy, just because both of them accepted to suffer instead of breaking up (which they have clearly both assessed would hurt more than having to give sex/having to be celibate).

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Just now, FictoVore. said:

And their sexual partner would have walked out the door.

 

Your example only works if the ace responds: ''I'm not fucking you, ever, and you're not allowed to leave me. If you try to leave, I'll say you raped me and get you dragged through court and maybe even put in prison, so now you're stuck with me and you better make damn sure you tell all our friends how happy you are to be with me, or else''. THAT'S a better example of the sexual having literally no choice. The sexual could always leave if they can't face celibacy, just as the ace can always leave if they can't face sex. Same level of choice.

 

In my example (which certainly has happened to many aces here even if you yourself personally would never do it) the sexual partner gave the ultimatum: ''have sex with me or I'm leaving you''. They took total control of the situation and the ace was left with the option of either giving sex, or losing their partner. The ace could also leave, just as the sexual forced into celibacy could always leave. That doesn't mean the ace wants the sex, or the sexual wants the celibacy, just because both of them accepted suffering over breaking up.

 

 

5 minutes ago, vega57 said:

And, you can also chose to end the relationship/marriage regardless of your partner's wishes.  You're simply choosing, for whatever reason, not to.  

 

After all, the person who doesn't want the relationship, also 'gets their way'.  

The asexual partner has the choice to leave too. That isn't the inequality I'm talking about, as I've explained in painful detail about three times on this thread already.

 

Which bit are you unclear about?

 

@vega57 have you worked out if you'd be unhappy if no one ever talked to you again? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
1 minute ago, Telecaster68 said:

 

@vega57 have you worked out if you'd be unhappy if no one ever talked to you again? 

No.  I'm still trying to work out why you're asking the question in the first place, especially since it would be unlikely.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
Just now, Telecaster68 said:

Which bit are you unclear about?

I'm not unclear about any bit of it, and haven't been unclear about any bit of it any other time we've had this convo. It's you who can't possibly see things outside of your own situation (where you gave your ace partner all the control as the price for keeping your relationship) who is persistently unclear. If you could just see that not all sexual partners are like you, then we'd be able to move beyond this.

 

2 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

painful detail

Believe me Tele, it's no less painful for me nor anyone else who has been on the other side of the fence (as the one who has no choice but to have sex or lose their partner) who has tried to have this convo with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Just now, vega57 said:

No.  I'm still trying to work out why you're asking the question in the first place, especially since it would be unlikely.  

It's called a platonic dialogue. Go with it.

 

Would you be unhappy if, hypothetically, no one wanted to talk to you ever again?

Share this post


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

I'm not unclear about any bit of it, and haven't been unclear about any bit of it any other time we've had this convo. It's you who can't possibly see things outside of your own situation (where you gave your ace partner all the control as the price for keeping your relationship) who is persistently unclear. If you could just see that not all sexual partners are like you, then we'd be able to move beyond this.

 

Believe me Tele, it's no less painful for me nor anyone else who has been on the other side of the fence (as the one who has no choice but to have sex or lose their partner) who has tried to have this convo with you.

I'm not sure how I can be any clearer than this, and you're an intelligent woman. I'm sure you can follow the logic. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
4 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

It's called a platonic dialogue. Go with it.

 

Would you be unhappy if, hypothetically, no one wanted to talk to you ever again?

Maybe not at first, but I'd probably get used to it after a while.  I mean, I used to work in a field where I had no contact with other people, and when I went home, I had no radio and no t.v..  Plus, I used to unplug my phone on the weekends and stay in my apartment just reading, cleaning, laundry, singing, washing my hair, etc.  That was the most isolation I had, and I was no worse for wear over it.  

 

Oh, I forgot.  I also used to go and bang a tennis ball against a handball court for a few hours, go for a run/jog, go for a drive...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

How about if you were with people all the time and they were choosing not to talk to you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
1 minute ago, Telecaster68 said:

How about if you were with people all the time and they were choosing not to talk to you?

I'd probably do the same things I explained earlier.  Believe me, I never really had much of a problem entertaining myself.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

Wouldn't you feel the loss of human interaction?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
3 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Wouldn't you feel the loss of human interaction?

I'm not as concerned with human interaction as I am with Godly interaction.  

 

Still not quite sure what you're getting at.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gaogao

Man ... I think Ficto has a point, though. I have never been coerced into having sex, even though I really would rather I didn't and that's the bottom line. I agree to sex because I want my partner to be happy and I know she would quite likely have to leave if I didn't. She says she would stay, and that she'd find a way, but I think if I could no longer give her sex, I would have to break up with her because I really can't bear seeing her as sad as she can be when she's been deprived of it. I value her and my relationship way more than that.

 

Am I the gatekeeper here? Maybe. I don't really know - but I know that if I don't agree to sex on a regular basis the relationship will no longer work and I don't want that to happen. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

@vega57

 

It sounds like you're not concerned at all with human interaction, which is very unusual.

 

Most people feel ostracism and social isolation in the same way they feel physical pain - here's a link, references for peer reviewed research at the bottom.

 

https://www.learningandthebrain.com/blog/ostracism/

 

The point I was getting at is this: feeling unhappy because of the way other people behave towards you is a perfectly normal human reaction, and is part of how we function as social animals. Social ostracism is viewed as a kind of bullying, and known to cause depression and other mental health issues. You seem to be dismissing this as people just being weak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
7 minutes ago, gaogao said:

Man ... I think Ficto has a point, though. I have never been coerced into having sex, even though I really would rather I didn't and that's the bottom line. I agree to sex because I want my partner to be happy and I know she would quite likely have to leave if I didn't. She says she would stay, and that she'd find a way, but I think if I could no longer give her sex, I would have to break up with her because I really can't bear seeing her as sad as she can be when she's been deprived of it. I value her and my relationship way more than that.

 

Am I the gatekeeper here? Maybe. I don't really know - but I know that if I don't agree to sex on a regular basis the relationship will no longer work and I don't want that to happen. 

I completely accept all that. But sexuals don't get to make even that hard choice over whether to have sex with our partners or not. We get to choose to leave or continue with a distressing sexual relationship - as do asexuals.

 

I'm not asking for sympathy, I'm asking that simple logic is acknowledged, even though it runs against the narrative of asexuals as victims.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gaogao

But Tele how is this different from "continuing with a distressing sexual relationship?"

 

Is it not a distressing sexual relationship for me or do you somehow think that making the choice to commit to sex for the entire duration of a relationship is somehow less difficult than the choice of remaining celibate for the entire duration of a relationship?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
1 minute ago, Telecaster68 said:

It sounds like you're not concerned at all with human interaction, which is very unusual.

That's not true.  First of all, you asked me if I would be unhappy if no one ever talked to me again.  The chances of that happening in reality are slim to none, so it would be hard to give you a rational response.  I thoroughly enjoy interacting with people, but I also enjoy my 'down' time.   

 

Quote

 

Most people feel ostracism and social isolation in the same way they feel physical pain - here's a link, references for peer reviewed research at the bottom.

 

https://www.learningandthebrain.com/blog/ostracism/

 

People may feel this way to a point, but I would wonder why they would feel ostracized or isolated in the first place.  For instance, did they do something that society deems as taboo, and that caused them to be isolated?  Or, are they choosing to isolate themselves from society for some reason?  

 

Quote

The point I was getting at is this: feeling unhappy because of the way other people behave towards you is a perfectly normal human reaction, and is part of how we function as social animals. Social ostracism is viewed as a kind of bullying, and known to cause depression and other mental health issues. You seem to be dismissing this as people just being weak.

 Tele, this whole idea gets into a bunch of different facets.  If someone is behaving badly toward me, I'll try to work it out.  But I won't feel unhappy about it.  I might be disappointed, but it would be short-lived.  I would try to figure out what the problem was, and if they didn't want to talk to me...wrote me out of their life, well then, they certain have that right to do so.  Would I feel despair?  Probably.  Would I dwell on it or wallow in it for the rest of my life?  Hardly.   I just don't give away my power to be happy to someone else all that easily!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

During that distressing relationship, the thing that's ultimately making it distressing is the presence or lack of sex. Asexuals' preference is 'no sex', and (short of rape) they get to have no sex, or have sex. So they, by themselves, can remove one of the main distressing factors from the equation. Sexuals preference is 'sex', so to remove that distressing factor, they would have to have sex. But they need asexuals to agree to it, so by themselves, they have no control over removing it, so the distressing factor for sexuals will most likely remain.

 

That's one thing.

 

The other is that having agency to make your own choices (as asexuals do in this situation) is known to greatly reduce stress, regardless of the situation or the actual choice made. Sexuals don't have this agency.

 

Every time this issue of who gets to say whether sex happens comes up, asexuals jump to the 'but it's still horrible', as though that means they don't have the choice. It may be horrible, but sexuals have parallel awful situations - stay or go, unhappy partner, etc. That's why I'm focussing in on the one that's different which is who controls the underlying issue, which logically, is asexuals. It seems very simple to me, and not particularly allotting blame, but something that some asexuals just don't want to concede.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
gaogao

@Telecaster68 on second thought I suppose you mean I could choose to withhold sex from my gf and she would be forced to stay, but then she's the one making the choice - whether to leave or continue. I personally couldn't watch her suffer as I withheld an essential form of affection from her - but I guess many aces can. They are lucky that their SO hasn't thrown in the towel because of it :/ 

 

Just like, i think, many Sexuals find it very difficult to accept the idea of their partner having sex with them if they aren't attracted and it's not 100% mutual. Some sexuals can't watch that happen, because they see it as a sort of suffering, even if the asexual is perfectly aware of our choice. I think I'm lucky that my GF hasn't given up because of this...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
11 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

I completely accept all that. But sexuals don't get to make even that hard choice over whether to have sex with our partners or not. We get to choose to leave or continue with a distressing sexual relationship - as do asexuals.

 

I'm not asking for sympathy, I'm asking that simple logic is acknowledged, even though it runs against the narrative of asexuals as victims.

What you've been proposing is not about "simple logic".  All of life isn't equal, Tele.  But just because it's not equal doesn't mean it's not fair.

 

Your same 'logic' works for any human relationship; not only a sexual one.   

 

After all, if someone wanted you to give them something you owned, but you didn't want to, they could just as easily cry 'foul!' (as you're attempting to do)...and say, "Why is it o.k. for Tele to say 'no' to giving me this 'thing', but it's not o.k. for me to say 'yes' to having it?"  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
Quote

  The chances of that happening in reality are slim to none, so it would be hard to give you a rational response. 

It's a hypothetical. Can't you imagine yourself in such a situation? I can imagine how I'd probably feel if I won the lottery, which is vanishingly unlikely as I don't buy tickets. 

 

8 minutes ago, vega57 said:

People may feel this way to a point

People do. Don't minimise.

 

8 minutes ago, vega57 said:

I would wonder why they would feel ostracized or isolated in the first place.  For instance, did they do something that society deems as taboo, and that caused them to be isolated?  Or, are they choosing to isolate themselves from society for some reason?

I'm sure you would, because it's diverting from my point. I'd wonder why you are diverting my point in the first place?

 

More directly, they feel that because humans are social animals, generally, like all primates. We form groups, families, we interact, we help, support, and have conflicts with each other. There's a good argument it's a our main evolutionary advantage.

 

Quote

If someone is behaving badly toward me, I'll try to work it out.  But I won't feel unhappy about it.

If you're not unhappy about it, why would it need working out?

 

Quote

Would I feel despair?  Probably.  

So you're letting another person dictate your happiness, if only for a while, which is the flaw you bring up about sexuals who are unhappy because they feel rejected by their partners. 

 

This is the parallel I've been working towards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...