Jump to content
Mary Lambert

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

Recommended Posts

ryn2

In some relationships, at least, there is more to emotional and physical intimacy than sex alone.  If the sexual partner entered into celibacy voluntarily (without a sense of unfairness or coercion) and cheerfully, perhaps those other aspects of intimacy could continue on unaffected...

 

...but at least amongst the people here that seems to be the exception rather than the rule.  I.e., it isn’t as simple as sex=happy sexual, no sex=happy asexual.  If the level/quality of non-sexual intimacy in the relationship degrades as a result of no sex, the ace partner may well be unhappy anyway.

 

I can’t speak for everyone but I’m a lot unhappier in that degraded state than I was when my partner and I were having sex, even though sex itself does not increase (and may even decrease) my happiness.

 

It’s not always as simple as “as long as there is no sex the asexual got what he/she/they wanted and is happy.”

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I'm not. I'm asking that you recognise the logic that if one person can stop something happening, they control whether it happens it or not.

 

O.k.  Let's say that you're right.  If you want to be right then by all means, be right!  But even if you're right, so what?!  I'm sure your point isn't simply the acknowledgement that the other partner "controls" whether or not sex happens.  Your point, I'm sure, goes deeper than that.  

 

Quote

No, my position is as above. I've never said what you're attributing to me, in fact I've frequently said it's right that 'no' trumps 'yes'.

 

What I have said is that if one person routinely has all the control of whether sex happens because they're always the one who says no, then over time clearly there's an imbalance of power, and that feels unfair.

You're only saying that it's unfair because it's what you want.  If you didn't want it, it wouldn't be unfair at all.  

 

Quote

I agree, and I've never said it was.

You havn't come out and directly said that it is, but your attitude about it is clear.  After all, if you TRULY BELIEVED that it wasn't a right, you wouldn't be arguing the points you've been arguing.  You wouldn't be seeing it as unfair.  

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 

Quote

And yes, I've read that paper I cited.

Oh, o.k. Good.  I had a few questions about the abstract so if I remember (and don't get too caught up in the day) I'll try to shoot them off to you.  

Share this post


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

 I'm sure your point isn't simply the acknowledgement that the other partner "controls" whether or not sex happens.  Your point, I'm sure, goes deeper than that.

Honestly, I'm just frustrated (and a little intrigued) that you seem unable to either understand or admit (I'm not sure which) something so simple and logical.

 

Quote

You're only saying that it's unfair because it's what you want. 

What's unfair is the imbalance of power within a relationship. It doesn't matter what it's about, or to whose advantage.  It's also frustrating when the person holding that control denies they have it. 

 

10 minutes ago, vega57 said:

You havn't come out and directly said that it is, but your attitude about it is clear.

What exactly is my attitude, explicitly? As far as I can tell you seem to think I wish marital rape was legal, which is rather offensive.

 

I've explicitly said it's right that 'no' trumps 'yes', in pretty much every other post.  I'm not sure what else I can do to persuade you it's not the case. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
19 minutes ago, ryn2 said:

In some relationships, at least, there is more to emotional and physical intimacy than sex alone.  If the sexual partner entered into celibacy voluntarily (without a sense of unfairness or coercion) and cheerfully, perhaps those other aspects of intimacy could continue on unaffected...

I agree.  

 

Quote

...but at least amongst the people here that seems to be the exception rather than the rule.  I.e., it isn’t as simple as sex=happy sexual, no sex=happy asexual.  If the level/quality of non-sexual intimacy in the relationship degrades as a result of no sex, the ace partner may well be unhappy anyway.

It's funny that you posted sex=happy sexual, no sex = happy asexual.  I was just thinking about this yesterday, that it seems to be:

 

No sex = feeling unloved = unhappy sexual.  BUT...

Sex = not necessarily feeling loved or unloved, but it = happy sexual.  

 

The reason I bring this up is because so many sexuals claim to equate sex to love.  And yet, if they find themselves without a partner, many of them would have NO PROBLEM finding sex.  Not love.  

 

I also understand that of the sexuals here on AVEN (and other places) that the reason they're staying is because of love.  They may not be happy about it, but...they're staying...for now...

 

If they DO leave, does that mean that they're putting sex ahead of love?  

 

Quote

It’s not always as simple as “as long as there is no sex the asexual got what he/she/they wanted and is happy.”

You're right.  And, it's such a shame that so many feel that way because it makes it sound like the asexual is in la-la land because of NOT having sex, and/or, that the asexual is always conscious of what's going on, and that they view the situation as "getting what they wanted".  Meanwhile, in reality, it's not even close.

Share this post


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

Honestly, I'm just frustrated (and a little intrigued) that you seem unable to either understand or admit (I'm not sure which) something so simple and logical.

 

Because it's not about "logic".  We're talking about this in the scheme of a relationship, and relationships aren't "logical".  

 

Quote

What's unfair is the imbalance of power within a relationship. It doesn't matter what it's about, or to whose advantage.  It's also frustrating when the person holding that control denies they have it. 

Once again, even if they do, so what?!  I mean, you seem to be obsessed with power and control!  This is not about an imbalance of power.  I mean, do you seriously want to be able to have sex with your partner even if they don't want to? Would THAT make you happy?  From what I've gathered from MOST sexuals, the answer is 'no'.  Sexuals would rather their partner desire to have sex with them.  

 

This is not really about sex.  It's about our beliefs about sex...about love...about men...women...relationships...marriage...and where those beliefs come from.  Some (?!) people believe that once they're married, they should get sex from their partner most of the time.  Where did they get THAT belief from?  Others believe that once they're married, they "shouldn't" HAVE to masturbate anymore.  Where did they get THAT belief from?  


 

Quote

 

What exactly is my attitude, explicitly? As far as I can tell you seem to think I wish marital rape was legal, which is rather offensive.


 

Not.  Even.  Close.  See the above.  You obviously have certain beliefs about sex etc..  But have you ever challenged them?  To paraphrase, you wrote earlier that you thought it was 'unfair' that it's o.k. for your partner to say 'no' to sex, but it's NOT o.k. for *you* to say 'yes' to it...without being considered to be a rapist.  Do you believe that it should be o.k. for you to say 'yes' to sex and that your partner should 'go along' with your 'yes'?  If so, WHY?  In earlier posts, it's obvious that you don't want to give me the Renoir.  So, why is it o.k. for you to say 'no' to giving me what *I* want, but it's NOT o.k. for me to say 'yes' to having it?  Is there a double standard?  Do the 'standards' only apply to you?  Again, WHY

 

Quote

I've explicitly said it's right that 'no' trumps 'yes', in pretty much every other post.  I'm not sure what else I can do to persuade you it's not the case. 

Yes, you've said it.  But you've also said that it's UNFAIR.  Once again, WHY?

Share this post


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

You might not care

i had a very abusive childhood. thats why i dont give a rats ass about the children. 

if she isnt happy her children will blamed in the long run. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
35 minutes ago, vega57 said:

And, it's such a shame that so many feel that way because it makes it sound like the asexual is in la-la land because of NOT having sex, and/or, that the asexual is always conscious of what's going on, and that they view the situation as "getting what they wanted".  Meanwhile, in reality, it's not even close.

While I’m not doubting it could apply to some ace partners, it definitely doesn’t to all.

 

In a perfect world, I might well enjoy a happy, close, loving relationship that does not involve sex a little more than I enjoy one that does... but in my mixed relationship (and previous ones) those are definitely not the two choices.  I do and would prefer a happy, close, loving relationship that includes sex over an unhappy, strained, fragile relationship that doesn’t.

Share this post


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

Because it's not about "logic".  We're talking about this in the scheme of a relationship, and relationships aren't "logical".

They're not. But we're not talking about the emotional gestalt of a relationship, we're talking about the idea that if one person can say 'no' to something that by definition would involve them and a specific other person, the other person can't do it either. That is logic. If you invite me out for a coffee and I decline, you can't then go out for a coffee with me.

 

24 minutes ago, vega57 said:

even if they do, so what?!  I mean, you seem to be obsessed with power and control!

'so what' because if you have a relationship where one person is entirely controlling an important aspect of it - whatever the mechanism - it affects the other because they have no agency in that part of the relationship, and therefore in that part of their life. There's a kind of pooling of autonomy when people get married, on the understanding you have broadly the same priorities, and while there'll inevitably compromise, over the whole picture and the important stuff, it'll be reciprocal and not skewed too far one way or the other.

 

What happens when one partner always says 'no' is that the compromise and reciprocation is lost in one of the most important areas, and the sexual partner has absolutely no say in it, short of two nuclear options: rape or leaving. The asexual partner has three: have sex, don't have sex, or leave.

 

There's all the studies (I'll dig them out at some point) that show not having a sense of control/agency over major parts of your life (not just sex, but work, for example) has serious long term mental health effects. And in social psychology terms, humans, and most other social animals, using reciprocation as a way of building bonds, and when reciprocation breaks down (as in one partner continually uses control of a particular aspect purely for their own benefit, those bonds do too).

 

24 minutes ago, vega57 said:

To paraphrase

Please don't. Quote my words directly, then I'll respond.

 

24 minutes ago, vega57 said:

Do you believe that it should be o.k. for you to say 'yes' to sex and that your partner should 'go along' with your 'yes'?

Not always, and not if it's simply too distressing or painful, but yes, sometimes. I'd do (and have done) the same. Being in a relationship is about doing things for the other person that you wouldn't otherwise do, surely?

 

24 minutes ago, vega57 said:

 So, why is it o.k. for you to say 'no' to giving me what *I* want, but it's NOT o.k. for me to say 'yes' to having it?  Is there a double standard?

Property laws, in that example. It's mine. I can choose to give it to you, but you can't (legally) choose to take it from me, and my choice affects us both.

Share this post


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

They're not. But we're not talking about the emotional gestalt of a relationship, we're talking about the idea that if one person can say 'no' to something that by definition would involve them and a specific other person, the other person can't do it either. That is logic. If you invite me out for a coffee and I decline, you can't then go out for a coffee with me.

 

First of all, let the record show that I would never...NE-VER invite you out for coffee, in a million years (because I don't drink coffee.  Haven't touched it since 1985)

 

Secondly, it's not that you want coffee.  It's that you want coffee with *me* that's the issue.  You DO have a choice to have coffee with someone else.  You might have to give up your coffee-wanting with me, but nonetheless...


 

Quote

 

'so what' because if you have a relationship where one person is entirely controlling an important aspect of it - whatever the mechanism - it affects the other because they have no agency in that part of the relationship, and therefore in that part of their life.


 

They DO have agency; just not with the person they want it with.  At SOME point, people often make a choice:  Do they want sex OR do they want the relationship with the person they're with?  You seem to want it BOTH ways and claim "unFAIR" if it isn't.  

 

Quote

There's a kind of pooling of autonomy when people get married, on the understanding you have broadly the same priorities, and while there'll inevitably compromise, over the whole picture and the important stuff, it'll be reciprocal and not skewed too far one way or the other.

Well,, that's part of the problem, isn't it?  I mean, a man may get married expecting the same amount of sex he ALWAYS had with the woman who has had sex with him for the past 18  months.  And they get married.  And they have a baby.  And the sex STOPS.  With all of the information out there about how this is common, you'd think people would KNOW this by now.  It's not only common, it's normal.  But if it's so normal then why do so many people try to convince 'her' that she 'should' try to get her sex life back on track...with his?  

 

Quote

What happens when one partner always says 'no' is that the compromise and reciprocation is lost in one of the most important areas, and the sexual partner has absolutely no say in it, short of two nuclear options: rape or leaving. The asexual partner has three: have sex, don't have sex, or leave.

No.  The sexual also has the option of NOT having sex.  It's not only rape or leave and YOU can testify to THAT.  

 

Quote

There's all the studies (I'll dig them out at some point) that show not having a sense of control/agency over major parts of your life (not just sex, but work, for example) has serious long term mental health effects. 

From what I understand, the studies aren't conclusive.  They say that it can have long-term mental health effects; not that they do have long-term mental health effects. I mean, I couldn't imagine some random dude walking up to me and demanding sex while claiming that his "mental health" is at stake if I don't!  It gets dicey at that point.  

 

Quote

Not always, and not if it's simply too distressing or painful, but yes, sometimes. I'd do (and have done) the same. Being in a relationship is about doing things for the other person that you wouldn't otherwise do, surely?

No.  Relationships are about building each other up, not necessarily through an activity that you don't enjoy.  

 

Quote

Property laws, in that example. It's mine. I can choose to give it to you, but you can't (legally) choose to take it from me, and my choice affects us both.

Again, so what?  I'll be "unhappy" if I don't get it from you?  Since when is it my job to make you happy?  It isn't.  

 

And neither is it a partner's 'job' to make the other happy.  I may be able to add to your happiness.  But being happy is pretty much *your* job.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Philip027
Quote

What's unfair is the imbalance of power within a relationship. It doesn't matter what it's about, or to whose advantage.  It's also frustrating when the person holding that control denies they have it. 

Life isn't fair.

 

Not sure if you got the idea when I brought it up back on page 1, but you bringing this up over and over and over again in enough threads that I've lost track of how many it's been has gotten pretty tiresome.  Not sure what you're even trying to achieve by doing this.  If you're attempting some kind of "gotcha" against asexuals-in-mixed-relationships-kind, it isn't working.

 

Unless someone is literally keeping you from exiting the relationship they are not exerting power or control over you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James121
3 hours ago, vega57 said:

Did you tell her that?  

It’s made up in the vows 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
16 minutes ago, James121 said:

It’s made up in the vows 

No, it's not.  And please don't tell me that "to have and to hold" has ANYTHING to do with sex.  I have said before, and I'll say again, it's called the Habendum clause, and it has to do with property.  

 

The only passage that has anything to do with sex is "...and forsaking all others..."  

 

Marriage was about producing children...not having sex in such a way that you didn't produce children.   One of the oldest marriage vows around is written like a pre-nup.  It actually specifies that if the woman didn't conceive within 2 years, she could be 'discharged' with all of her belongings. 

 

The marital "deal" was like this:  You can have sex with your wife as long as your intention was to procreate, AND, neither you or your wife could have sex with ANYONE ELSE.  It did NOT give either spouse a license to have sex whenever they wanted.  

 

My, my...how times have changed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
uhtred
20 hours ago, Mary Lambert said:

Yes, the kids always say, "Dad is so unhappy". I remember him crying to me once saying he did not know how to make me happy. I hurt for him so much that day. But I remember it so vividly. I was so beside myself. (like why can't he see how much he is hurting me). I just dropped it. That was long ago.  So great incite from you, thank you. This site has been amazing. My husband was never able to express himself or talk about this. I think he feels that the less he says and the more he pretends the better. 

This is such a huge problem. I know my wife wants me to be happy, but she can't do the only thing that can help. Its not that i'm unhappy all the time, but the lack of sex just sort of puts a grey cloud over everything. 

 

I want to make her happy, but there is that background suspicion that when I do nice things, its trying to bribe her for sex. 

Share this post


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

Ohfercryinoutloud.

 

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

 

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?  

 

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.....

Happiness is not just internal. Look at all the literature that connects finding love with being happy. For many people that is very real - being with a person they love makes them happy.  Now the problem is that a significant number of people cannot feel loved without sex.  No sex -> no love -> no happiness.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
uhtred
5 hours ago, FictoVore. said:

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).

The dynamics vary with the relationship. It depends on whether either person is willing to end the relationship.  If the sexual is not willing to end it, then the asexual controls the amount of sex, because they can say no with no consequences.  If the sexual is willing to end it, but not the asexual, then the sexual controls sex. 

 

*Why* some people will end relationships and others won't is much more complex.  Sometimes its practicality, sometimes its an (often badly misplaced) desire to not hurt a loved partner. 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Happiness is not just internal.

Happiness is internal.  One can be happy whether they're in a relationship or not...whether they're getting a steady stream of sex or not...whether they have they eye color they want...or not.  

 

Quote

Look at all the literature that connects finding love with being happy.

And look at all those same people who find love, yet are not happy.  A relationship can add to your happiness but not be the source of it.  *YOU* are the source of it.  

And yes, there is literature about that, too.  

 

Quote

For many people that is very real - being with a person they love makes them happy. 

It can cause them to feel happier, but again, not be the source of their overall happiness.  

Quote

Now the problem is that a significant number of people cannot feel loved without sex.  No sex -> no love -> no happiness.

Funny how many of those same people will go out after 'sexless' relationship ends and report that they found LOTS of sex...but not love...and yet, they're happy.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
19 minutes ago, uhtred said:

The dynamics vary with the relationship. It depends on whether either person is willing to end the relationship.  If the sexual is not willing to end it, then the asexual controls the amount of sex, because they can say no with no consequences.  If the sexual is willing to end it, but not the asexual, then the sexual controls sex. 

Not debating the controlling access part, but I’m not sure I agree with “with no consequences.”  The only time there are truly no consequences is when the sexual partner is completely a-ok with going without sex, and that scenario seems rare amongst this audience.

 

Otherwise consequences include some subset of an unhappy sexual partner, worry and guilt, erosion/loss of overall intimacy, and the like.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

The dynamics vary with the relationship. It depends on whether either person is willing to end the relationship.  If the sexual is not willing to end it, then the asexual controls the amount of sex, because they can say no with no consequences.  If the sexual is willing to end it, but not the asexual, then the sexual controls sex. 

 

*Why* some people will end relationships and others won't is much more complex.  Sometimes its practicality, sometimes its an (often badly misplaced) desire to not hurt a loved partner. 

Or maybe they don't see themselves as being 'controlled' by the other and they value love over sex...

Share this post


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

i had a very abusive childhood. thats why i dont give a rats ass about the children. 

if she isnt happy her children will blamed in the long run. 

But this isn’t about your own childhood. And I’m sorry, but you not giving a damn about kids is a little redundant when Mary clearly loves and cares for her children. People are different. It is very easy for any one of us to sit here and go ‘based on my own past you should do this’, but unless it’s a direct colleration to what’s going on it means very little. Your own personal situations are, likely, very different to Mary’s and you have to bear that in mind.

 

Again, you are ignoring two main things that Mary herself has already said in this thread:

  1. She does not want to break up with her husband. Apart from the sex, she has said she feels very happy in the relationship.
  2. She loves and cares for her children. Their feelings are important to her as much as her husbands.

To me, it seems you are set firm in your own believes. And that’s good - there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that! But that doesn’t mean what you think and know would work for you will work for everyone, and it’s something to think about when you’re advising someone through a difficult situation they’re in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)
24 minutes ago, ryn2 said:

but I’m not sure I agree with “with no consequences.”  The only time there are truly no consequences is when the sexual partner is completely a-ok with going without sex, and that scenario seems rare amongst this audience.

 

Otherwise consequences include some subset of an unhappy sexual partner, worry and guilt, erosion/loss of overall intimacy, and the like.

Yep.

 

For many of the aces who have actually been in this situation (there are many on AVEN) they all report that their partner will quickly plummet into all kinds of negative emotions which make the ace feel guilt or even self loathing or deep sadness for turning down the sex. For my ex, it was instant jealousy and accusations that I must be cheating if I tried to get out of sex. For others, it's seeing their sexual partner plummet into depression and self loathing because they think they must be repulsive to you, some sexual partners will start trying to pick a fight because they're so frustrated at you for saying you don't feel like sex - but whatever the reaction it's almost never a case of 'no' having no consequences. This is something that many of the sexual members of AVEN seem utterly incapable of grasping because they personally chose the road of letting the ace control the sex and can't see how it could ever happen any other way. But it's just a fact that in other relationships, the ace lets the sexual control the sex (And again, that doesn't mean the ace WANTS the sex as was implied earlier, they want a partner who won't leave them which is a huge difference).

 

It is perfectly possible for the sexual person to have 100% control over the sex in the relationship, and for that to still not be rape. It's extremely frustrating as someone who has been on the 'having no real choice but to give sex on demand' end of this, and knowing so many others on AVEN who have been on this same end, to be told ''No, you controlled access to the sex in your relationship''. Believe me, the world isn't black-and-white fairies and unicorns where no person would try to guilt trip the person they love into sex, or give them no choice but to have sex or break up.. Maybe the world has worked that way for some of the sexuals here (and look where that got you, most of you who chose celibacy rather than breaking up with your ace are just as utterly miserable as everyone else) but for other sexuals, they won't take the celibacy option and that's final: Screw me or we are over.

 

For some people 'no' is never without emotionally devastating consequences. That seems bizarrely difficult for some members here to wrap their heads around, but it's just a fact, and they've been told this repeatedly by many in these forums who have actually experienced this.

 

Lets not forget also that the sexual partner will be able to move on to a more sexually compatible relationship if a breakup does happen, and the ace will have to face either being alone or starting the exact same cycle over again which is another reason the ace will want to try other options before ending things, even if that means suffering through sex. A breakup will almost always work out better for the sexual than the ace in the long run unless the ace is lucky enough to find another ace.. but that's a different topic.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James121
1 hour ago, vega57 said:

No, it's not.  And please don't tell me that "to have and to hold" has ANYTHING to do with sex.  I have said before, and I'll say again, it's called the Habendum clause, and it has to do with property.  

 

The only passage that has anything to do with sex is "...and forsaking all others..."  

 

Marriage was about producing children...not having sex in such a way that you didn't produce children.   One of the oldest marriage vows around is written like a pre-nup.  It actually specifies that if the woman didn't conceive within 2 years, she could be 'discharged' with all of her belongings. 

 

The marital "deal" was like this:  You can have sex with your wife as long as your intention was to procreate, AND, neither you or your wife could have sex with ANYONE ELSE.  It did NOT give either spouse a license to have sex whenever they wanted.  

 

My, my...how times have changed. 

Never heard of this before. It’s another completely new unsubstantiated interpretation of the vows. But seeing as marriage is largely a Christian tradition and the bible references sex for pleasure and honouring your partner, my view is that you are wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
2 minutes ago, James121 said:

Never heard of this before. It’s another completely new unsubstantiated interpretation of the vows.

Look it up...

 

Quote

But seeing as marriage is largely a Christian tradition and the bible references sex for pleasure and honouring your partner, my view is that you are wrong.

Marriage existed LONG before Christianity got involved.  

 

And no.  The Bible does NOT reference sex for pleasure.  That's just another misinterpretation.  

 

In fact, the words "sex", "relations", "husband" and "wife weren't even words when the Bible was written.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James121
3 minutes ago, vega57 said:

Look it up...

 

Marriage existed LONG before Christianity got involved.  

 

And no.  The Bible does NOT reference sex for pleasure.  That's just another misinterpretation.  

 

In fact, the words "sex", "relations", "husband" and "wife weren't even words when the Bible was written.  

I love the way everyone else has ‘misinterpreted’ things but you are the one who is correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
Just now, James121 said:

I love the way everyone else has ‘misinterpreted’ things but you are the one who is correct.

I love you you generalize and make false claims that I ever said that "everyone" has misinterpreted things.  

 

Out of 7.5 billion people on this planet, do you really think that I'm the ONLY person who believes that the bible is often misinterpreted?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pan Ficto. (on hiatus?)

To those who are still under the mistaken impression that in all relationships, under all circumstances, the one who doesn't want the sex is the one who holds the power:

 

Until you've felt the powerlessness of knowing saying 'no' to the person you love will mean you lose them, no matter how badly you want to say no because you know it's going to hurt and you'd rather have your teeth pulled than do it again but the prospect of being alone hurts you even more, you'll never be able to grasp what it's like to not have any control over the sex that happens in a relationship. I'm not the only person here who has gone to great lengths to explain the feeling of having literally no control over the sex in the relationship without it actually being rape, but it just falls on deaf ears to the extent it feels like I'm bashing my head against a brick wall - which after everything I went through as a direct result of a relationship like that those are emotions I should not still have to be feeling - but now they're as a result of certain members saying that people like me had all the choice, we held all the cards, we must have wanted it on some level - Disgusting. Even my ex, who was the one who put me through all that, would be disgusted at some of the claims being made here about the ones not wanting sex having the control, and he's about as deep in the gutter of humanity as it's possible to be. I can't even fathom what it would be like to exist in a brain that can't comprehend that experiences other than your own do exist, and that relationships (including sex) can work in different ways for different people depending on the individuals involved. Shocking I know. 

 

I never wanted to be in so much pain down there that I had to take painkillers mixed with spirits multiple times daily just to be able to walk to the shop to buy groceries, or to be able to vacuum the floor, or even just go to the bathroom. What I wanted was to be loved and I truly believed no one else would have me, and that if he left me I'd be alone. My case is obviously extreme, but there are many much less extreme cases on AVEN where the ace hasn't wanted the sex but has had no choice but to have it if they want to keep their partner. You KNOW you'll probably never find anyone else to love you the way you are (you're a broken mess, that's what I told myself anyway) so you endure despite the pain. It's still not rape though. It's just an experience that's very different from that of the sexuals who choose to give all the power to their asexual partner because they would rather suffer in celibacy than break up.

 

It's two sides of the same coin, but you'll never understand.

 

And this is slightly off topic so I'll leave it at that.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James121
1 minute ago, vega57 said:

I love you you generalize and make false claims that I ever said that "everyone" has misinterpreted things.  

 

Out of 7.5 billion people on this planet, do you really think that I'm the ONLY person who believes that the bible is often misinterpreted?  

How do you KNOW who has misinterpreted what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vega57
Just now, James121 said:

How do you KNOW who has misinterpreted what?

Once again, you're trying to put words in my mouth.  I never said that I know WHO has misinterpreted the bible.  All I said was that it's been misinterpreted.  

 

I've read the bible enough.  Have YOU???  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
alligator

I feel like this post has gotten a little out of hand. @Mary Lambert, I'm really happy that you have accepted that your husband is asexual. I know with good communication, and compromise from both sides, you two can have a healthy relationship from this point on :) 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2

This is where the whole “good, ongoing communication” thing comes in.  While we might assume the vows we took are clear and not subject to interpretation, it’s obvious just from the small sample here that they actually read differently to different people based on orientation, religious background, and other things.

 

Being more clear upfront (isn’t 20/20 hindsight wonderful?) on “what does this mean to you?” could help avoid a lot of painful misunderstanding down the road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James121
2 minutes ago, vega57 said:

Once again, you're trying to put words in my mouth.  I never said that I know WHO has misinterpreted the bible.  All I said was that it's been misinterpreted.  

 

I've read the bible enough.  Have YOU???  

Reading it and interpreting it are two different things. My vicar did specifically ask if we were initmate and had connected well sexually prior to our marriage. We had 5 pre marriage sessions with her aimed at steering us in to a healthy married lifestyle. On entire 30 minute session revolves around the importance of love making and intimacy. There are plenty of other religious people who speak of sexual connection being important in marriage but by virtue of what you are saying, these people have all misinterpreted the bibles teachings?

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...