Jump to content
Mary Lambert

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

Recommended Posts

Username_2017
3 hours ago, Telecaster68 said:

There's nothing unwholesome about fancying someone sexually.

Wholesome was possibly the wrong word to use. I was just trying to explain thay my definition of fancy (albeit incorrect, but that doesn't mean other people haven't got the wrong end of the stick either). Was that to fancy someone meant to be attracted to them for many different reasons only one of those reasons being that they wanted to be sexual with that person 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68

Fair enough. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
9 hours ago, James121 said:

Marriage is religious full stop. And no the spirit of marriage is the spirit of marriage.

Not necessarily.  Marriage is (also, in many cases, but sometimes exclusively) a legal institution.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
1 hour ago, Username_2017 said:

Wholesome was possibly the wrong word to use. I was just trying to explain thay my definition of fancy (albeit incorrect, but that doesn't mean other people haven't got the wrong end of the stick either). Was that to fancy someone meant to be attracted to them for many different reasons only one of those reasons being that they wanted to be sexual with that person 

Yeah, my takeaway from this particular bit was to stop saying “I fancy [insert non-sexual thing, e.g., “some of that really good gelato” or “a trip to the zoo to see the baby lions” here].”  :lol:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
1 minute ago, ryn2 said:

Yeah, my takeaway from this particular bit was to stop saying “I fancy [insert non-sexual thing, e.g., “some of that really good gelato” or “a trip to the zoo to see the baby lions” here].”  :lol:

...although I just looked it up and the first US English meaning is “to feel a desire or liking for,” and none of the definitions mentions anything more clearly sexual than that, so perhaps it’s more a question of dialect/local usage and I’ve been using it correctly (for my US location) all along.  I’ll be careful not to say it elsewhere.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James121
27 minutes ago, ryn2 said:

Not necessarily.  Marriage is (also, in many cases, but sometimes exclusively) a legal institution.

With religion at its core

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
1 minute ago, James121 said:

With religion at its core

While in some cultures marriage  originated (or at least proliferated) with religion, it has in many places long since evolved (or devolved, I suppose, depending on one’s perspective) into a secular, legal institution.  Whether or not it also has religious significance - to individuals (or couples) - depends on the beliefs those individuals hold.

 

I was married in a secular ceremony and am no more or less married under the laws of my nation than are couples married in houses of worship/by religious officiants.  One could argue I am less married in the eyes of [insert deity] but that is only a concern to those who honor [insert deity].

 

Modern Judeo-Christian marriage also has strong roots in the concept of property ownership but that hasn’t held up so well to the test of time either.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James121
13 minutes ago, ryn2 said:

While in some cultures marriage  originated (or at least proliferated) with religion, it has in many places long since evolved (or devolved, I suppose, depending on one’s perspective) into a secular, legal institution.  Whether or not it also has religious significance - to individuals (or couples) - depends on the beliefs those individuals hold.

 

I was married in a secular ceremony and am no more or less married under the laws of my nation than are couples married in houses of worship/by religious officiants.  One could argue I am less married in the eyes of [insert deity] but that is only a concern to those who honor [insert deity].

 

Modern Judeo-Christian marriage also has strong roots in the concept of property ownership but that hasn’t held up so well to the test of time either.

I get what you are saying but marriage traced back to its origins and still for the most part today is a religious institution.

Millions of people the world over celebrate Christmas without being religious but that is irrelevant. Christmas is a religious celebration. No amount of evolving will ever change these facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2

One could argue that Christmas is actually a Pagan celebration coopted by newer religions for purposes of easier assimilation but that would be so far off topic that it’s not worth pursuing.

 

Marriage is a religious institution to you.  As you said, it is to some degree for many people.  “Many” is not “everyone,” though, so plenty of people will disagree.  My marriage, for example, is bound by the laws of my state and not the teachings of someone else’s religion.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
AussieIsAce
On 13/04/2018 at 1:29 AM, ripley said:

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.

look i disagree with you. 

sorry. 

now get over it please. you dont need to keep yapping on at me. 

 

i get you you get me. 

 

k thank you goodnight. 

Share this post


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

Every one off us commenting here must actually be heavily religious anyway, both as Christians and as followers of Nordic religion. We base our schedules around the year 2018, right? Well, it's only 2018 because of Jesus Christ, and also the days of the week are all named after Norse gods so pretty much everything is religious and we may as well just accept our innate religious natures. There's no such thing as an athiest either as every self identifying athiest I have ever met still agrees that the year is 2018 lol.

 

I'm being silly, just saying though -marriage these days is a bit like the way we date our years and the names we have for the days of our weeks.. they're no longer inherently religious UNLESS you view them that way personally. Just because they're rooted in different religions doesn't make them inherently religious to everyone though. :)

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alejandrogynous

To my knowledge, marriage is more rooted in ownership, barter/trading, securing property, family survival, and forming socio-political alliances than it is in religion.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
16 minutes ago, Alejandrogynous said:

To my knowledge, marriage is more rooted in ownership, barter/trading, securing property, family survival, and forming socio-political alliances than it is in religion.

Religion made a handy, “inarguable” way to enforce some of those more easily, conveniently.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James121

So in essence, all the people on this forum arguing that cheating is really terrible it’s because they believe that their partner/spouse is their property!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
18 minutes ago, James121 said:

So in essence, all the people on this forum arguing that cheating is really terrible it’s because they believe that their partner/spouse is their property!

Saying “marriage doesn’t carry religious context for everyone here” isn’t the same as saying “marriage carries religious context for no one here.”

 

In many places, though, civil marriage also involves a contractual requirement for monogamy and/or adultery is a crime...

 

...and there are probably still people out there who do see it as a threat to their property, but I’m not sure that’s what anyone meant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James121
5 minutes ago, ryn2 said:

Saying “marriage doesn’t carry religious context for everyone here” isn’t the same as saying “marriage carries religious context for no one here.”

 

In many places, though, civil marriage also involves a contractual requirement for monogamy and/or adultery is a crime...

 

...and there are probably still people out there who do see it as a threat to their property, but I’m not sure that’s what anyone meant.

That’s basically what I said.

Those arguing marriage is not religious are of the opinion that they own their spouse.

Adultery should never be criminal unless sexual abandonment is equally so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
16 minutes ago, James121 said:

That’s basically what I said.

Those arguing marriage is not religious are of the opinion that they own their spouse.

Adultery should never be criminal unless sexual abandonment is equally so.

Those are two of many possible reasons people might either feel cheating is wrong and/or opt not to engage in it.  I doubt every single person who opts not to cheat subscribes to one of the two of them.

 

There are plenty of outdated laws still on the books.  In places where adultery is grounds for divorce decriminalizing it would probably not change much from a practical standpoint.

 

I doubt all the non-religious people out there consider their spouses their property, though.  I have to imagine there are a good number who don’t see their relationships that way.

Share this post


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

So in essence, all the people on this forum arguing that cheating is really terrible it’s because they believe that their partner/spouse is their property!

Well I can't speak for everyone, but my point was that 1) saying that the institution of marriage came solely out of religion and thus all marriage is inherently religious is factually false, and 2) more importantly, even if it were true, the outdated reasoning of past norms should have little bearing on how we treat these things in the modern day, especially when the past reasons no long apply to our society as it is now.

 

40 minutes ago, James121 said:

Those arguing marriage is not religious are of the opinion that they own their spouse.

I am not religious, nor of the belief that marriage partners own each other, and I still think cheating is morally wrong.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

and I still think cheating is morally wrong.

Many would say that this could be one of those outdated elements of a relationship albeit that’s not my thoughts.

What I do believe though is that just as cheating is morally wrong, sexual abandonment is morally wrong (especially sexual abandonment from someone who expects monogamy). But the world isn’t allowed to say things like that because too many people will make the incorrect association with that statement and the idea that rape is ok.

In exactly the same way that in the UK, if you voted for brexit because you wanted your country to control immigration more tightly, it meant you had to be a racist. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2

Personally it’s the lying/dishonesty aspect of cheating I find most off-putting.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
10 minutes ago, James121 said:

What I do believe though is that just as cheating is morally wrong, sexual abandonment is morally wrong (especially sexual abandonment from someone who expects monogamy). But the world isn’t allowed to say things like that because too many people will make the incorrect association with that statement and the idea that rape is ok. 

Where I live either is really considered acceptable grounds to end a marriage; while only the first is called out specifically, the second is still covered under irreconcilable differences.

Share this post


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

Many would say that this could be one of those outdated elements of a relationship albeit that’s not my thoughts.

I personally believe that monogamy (and marriage as we understand it) is an outdated element that should be let go, but I still don't think that makes cheating okay. Cheating is a breach of established trust, it's wrong in the same way promising someone you won't do something and doing it anyway is wrong.

 

5 minutes ago, James121 said:

What I do believe though is that just as cheating is morally wrong, sexual abandonment is morally wrong (especially sexual abandonment from someone who expects monogamy). But the world isn’t allowed to say things like that because too many people will make the incorrect association with that statement and the idea that rape is ok.

I don't think these two things can be viewed the same way, since at least in the case of asexuality, a lot of asexuals didn't know this is what was going to happen when they got married. They didn't go into a marriage with the intent to sexually abandon their partner. Cheating, on the other hand, is done with complete intent and knowing full well what you're doing. I still don't think it's right for asexuals to refuse sex with their partner while also refusing to let their partner find another outlet, and I don't think it's wrong for the sexual partner to leave if their needs aren't being met. And still, none of this makes cheating okay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James121
4 minutes ago, ryn2 said:

Personally it’s the lying/dishonesty aspect of cheating I find most off-putting.

Often, sexual abandonment involves habitual lying and dishonesty....

 

”I’ve got a headache” you didn’t 5 minutes a go

”I’m too tired” - proceeds to stay up scrolling through social media for an hour

”I don’t feel sexy at the moment” yet the other day you were saying how much your body has improved and you actually like it.

 

The list of lies is endless but we all tolerate it as acceptable and we aren’t allowed to say anything about the lies because......

if we do we must have the mind o f a rapist.

Share this post


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

Cheating is a breach of established trust, it's wrong in the same way promising someone you won't do something and doing it anyway is wrong.

Like, maybe, sexually abandoning them?

 

2 minutes ago, Alejandrogynous said:

Cheating, on the other hand, is done with complete intent and knowing full well what you're doing.

I don't think many people go into a marriage intending to cheat, either. But the situation changes - like your partner decides they don't want to have sex again. It's parallel with the asexual intending have sex but finding they can't.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
James121
Just now, Telecaster68 said:

Like, maybe, sexually abandoning them?

 

I don't think many people go into a marriage intending to cheat, either. But the situation changes - like your partner decides they don't want to have sex again. It's parallel with the asexual intending have sex but finding they can't.

Thanks tele, this is the point I’m trying to get at.

 

Too many people are viewing it from one side only and refuse to acknowledge the hypocrisy in what they are saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alejandrogynous
6 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Like, maybe, sexually abandoning them?

 

I don't think many people go into a marriage intending to cheat, either. But the situation changes - like your partner decides they don't want to have sex again. It's parallel with the asexual intending have sex but finding they can't.

Oh yeah, I agree. I didn't mean that it's okay to sexually abandon your spouse and not expect anything to come of it.

 

Realizing you're not having sex with your partner, don't plan to in the future, all the while holding them to a monogamous relationship with no compromise = wrong.

 

Cheating on your spouse = also wrong.

 

And relationships are messy, I get that, it's not always so cut and dry. But ultimately, if you feel you've been done wrong, you have the choice to leave, make ultimatums, whatever, or you can feel justified in doing wrong back to them. Some people are okay with that second option. I personally am not.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
16 minutes ago, Alejandrogynous said:

And relationships are messy, I get that, it's not always so cut and dry. But ultimately, if you feel you've been done wrong, you have the choice to leave, make ultimatums, whatever, or you can feel justified in doing wrong back to them. Some people are okay with that second option. I personally am not.

Yeah, that’s the part I don’t like: the sense that retribution is justified.  That’s probably because (to me) it implies malicious intent where no malicious intent may exist.

 

Anyone is justified in leaving a relationship for either reason.  The idea of choosing to stay but then getting back at the other person by intentionally doing things to hurt them doesn’t set well with me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Telecaster68
2 minutes ago, ryn2 said:

 That’s probably because (to me) it implies malicious intent where no malicious intent may exist.

Obviously being asexual isn't done with intent, let alone malice. But it seems a very grey area about how this is made clear to partners - when, how clearly, the implications, for example. I'm sure sometimes asexuals just aren't sure about what's going on with them, but there's also some level of making excuses, dismissing partner's feelings, going on in many cases.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ryn2
10 minutes ago, Telecaster68 said:

Obviously being asexual isn't done with intent, let alone malice. But it seems a very grey area about how this is made clear to partners - when, how clearly, the implications, for example. I'm sure sometimes asexuals just aren't sure about what's going on with them, but there's also some level of making excuses, dismissing partner's feelings, going on in many cases.

Agreed.  In some cases that may be because of societal pressures or self-deception but in others it could be less “innocent.”

 

It’s when the conversation turns from “my ace spouse lied/intentionally deceived me” (or even “some ace spouses lie to/deceive their partners”) to “ace spouses lie to/deceive their partners” (with the implied or explicitly-stated “all”) that I take issue with it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Skullery Maid
1 hour ago, ryn2 said:

Yeah, that’s the part I don’t like: the sense that retribution is justified.  That’s probably because (to me) it implies malicious intent where no malicious intent may exist.

 

Anyone is justified in leaving a relationship for either reason.  The idea of choosing to stay but then getting back at the other person by intentionally doing things to hurt them doesn’t set well with me.

So, here's my major qualm with the idea that "cheating" constitutes harm... it doesn't, really. It doesn't do harm, at least not unreasonable or unjustified harm. 

 

During my year off, I realigned with a belief that seems to exist everywhere except AVEN... specifically, that some things are unhealthy and abusive, even if neither party acknowledges it. 

 

AVEN is this weird world where everyone says "you have a right to any type of relationship you want, and if someone violates what you want, you should leave them."

 

Thats an incredibly unhealthy way to view relationships!! Sure, you may have the right to action, but you don't have the MORAL RIGHT to do anything you want to your partner. For example, many people don't realize they're in an abusive relationship until they get some perspective, either from third parties or from finally escaping. It was NEVER ok for their partner to coerce, manipulate, or otherwise abuse them, even if the person didn't object. If a husband backhands his wife every time his dinner isn't perfect, we call that wrong even if his wife is like "it's my fault for being such a bad cook." 

 

Morality is morality and it is not circumvented by ignorance or contract. 

 

So. Let's say my partner and I love each other very, very much. Let's say we own a house and pets, let's say we're both very close to each other's families and friends. Let's say that my partner has never, not once, agreed that she's asexual. Let's say she's spent 8 years telling me it's my fault because I'm just not good enough to, basically, win the prize of sex. Let's say that she's aware I've fucked around a bit and she says sometimes that she understands and is ok with a "don't ask, don't tell" scenario. Let's say that like most people, my partner experiences an acute fear that my hooking up with others will lead me to leave her. Let's say that because of that fear, my partner will openly say that we may not have an open relationship, despite also saying she'd understand if I "cheat." Let's say that, outside of this specific issue, my partner is wildly happy in her life and our relationship. 

 

So, where's the actual harm in cheating here? I get that she wants me to be celibate, but that's abusive and wrong. She understands intellectually that it's wrong, which is why she's always saying that she "just doesn't want to know." She's also afraid, which makes her say "absolutely no cheating." But, I'm miserable. So why on earth is her fear more important than my misery? 

 

If the woman with the abusive husband one day simply stopped cooking him dinner because he always smacks her when he doesn't like what she cooked, she is not in the wrong. Even though she agreed to cook dinner for him every night, he used it as a weapon to hurt her. The fact that she initially agreed doesn't make his behavior any less wrong, and it doesn't make her any less right for quitting the cooking. So, she gets to quit. And he can leave her, sure, but then that was always true, wasn't it? If she's such a terrible cook, he should have left her a decade ago, right, rather than continue to hit her every night because she doesn't cook well enough for him. 

 

And, the same for me and my partner. She knows I'm miserable, she knows I'm missing something important, and she could leave me for it if she wanted to. But she's chosen not to. If she wants to leave me for cheating, she can do that too. But I fail to see why every single decision is both my responsibility to make and my responsibility to shoulder the burden of. Yes, I could be brutally honest or I could leave. I don't want to do either of those things. 

 

But see... she could also be brutally honest or she could leave too. She doesn't want to do either of those things either. 

 

And so, we're both in the grey. And I adamantly refuse to take sole responsibility for that, nor solely shoulder the burden of it. 

  • Like 3

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...