Charity sex - is it enough?

[Lady Girl]

Another thing: I believe that there is no worse way to measure the "success" of a relationship than "lasting". A relationship can last a lifetime and be a miserable mess, held together by codependency and sheer abuse. "Lasting" shouldn't be celebrated at all. All that should be celebrated is being a positive influence on each other in the moment, and if that happens to last, great. If not, that's great too. If you've been a positive influence on each others' lives while it lasted, it was still a net gain.

You make a lot of excellent points, as always! This bit though doesn't hold true for me. I think people can and do grow to be better people sometimes for "lasting" through something that seemed so difficult for awhile. Kind of like when someone does get terribly sick or something...you don't say well, the happiness is over, I'm outta here. I think working through difficult psychological and emotional situations can be just as important as "working" your way through one of the person's physical illness. I think it totally depends on the couple and I think positive influence doesn't always mean happy times. I think for some people, staying together through the tough times, aka "lasting", is a measure of true success.

[Kitty Spoon Train]

Another thing: I believe that there is no worse way to measure the "success" of a relationship than "lasting". A relationship can last a lifetime and be a miserable mess, held together by codependency and sheer abuse. "Lasting" shouldn't be celebrated at all. All that should be celebrated is being a positive influence on each other in the moment, and if that happens to last, great. If not, that's great too. If you've been a positive influence on each others' lives while it lasted, it was still a net gain.

You make a lot of excellent points, as always! This bit though doesn't hold true for me. I think people can and do grow to be better people sometimes for "lasting" through something that seemed so difficult for awhile. Kind of like when someone does get terribly sick or something...you don't say well, the happiness is over, I'm outta here. I think working through difficult psychological and emotional situations can be just as important as "working" your way through one of the person's physical illness. I think it totally depends on the couple and I think positive influence doesn't always mean happy times. I think for some people, staying together through the tough times, aka "lasting", is a measure of true success.

Yeah, it's a difficult one...

It comes back to what I said about "fundamentals", and whether there is any acceptable solution or compromise which can be found at all. I don't expect things to always be 100% rosy, or advocate abandoning ship on the first bad day. I mostly just don't believe in fighting for lasting for its own sake, when there is truly nothing to save except the "lasting" itself. But you just feel "invested" because by this point it has lasted for X amount of time. Vicious circle.

It sounds crazy, but this was pretty much the situation I allowed myself to fall into before. And I don't think I'm the only one.

[Sally]

I think this has been one of the best discussions on AVEN. All of us seem to have been honest in what they say, and no one has simply ignored what others have said. to all who have participated, sexual and asexual alike!

[Lady Girl]

Another thing: I believe that there is no worse way to measure the "success" of a relationship than "lasting". A relationship can last a lifetime and be a miserable mess, held together by codependency and sheer abuse. "Lasting" shouldn't be celebrated at all. All that should be celebrated is being a positive influence on each other in the moment, and if that happens to last, great. If not, that's great too. If you've been a positive influence on each others' lives while it lasted, it was still a net gain.

You make a lot of excellent points, as always! This bit though doesn't hold true for me. I think people can and do grow to be better people sometimes for "lasting" through something that seemed so difficult for awhile. Kind of like when someone does get terribly sick or something...you don't say well, the happiness is over, I'm outta here. I think working through difficult psychological and emotional situations can be just as important as "working" your way through one of the person's physical illness. I think it totally depends on the couple and I think positive influence doesn't always mean happy times. I think for some people, staying together through the tough times, aka "lasting", is a measure of true success.

Yeah, it's a difficult one...

It comes back to what I said about "fundamentals", and whether there is any acceptable solution or compromise which can be found at all. I don't expect things to always be 100% rosy, or advocate abandoning ship on the first bad day. I mostly just don't believe in fighting for lasting for its own sake, when there is truly nothing to save except the "lasting" itself. But you just feel "invested" because by this point it has lasted for X amount of time. Vicious circle.

It sounds crazy, but this was pretty much the situation I allowed myself to fall into before. And I don't think I'm the only one.

How weird...I just came across Aimeendfire's signature,

"Long distance is hard. You have to trust that as you each change on your own, your relationship will also change along with you. It takes hope, good humor, and idealism. It takes a massive dose of courage to protect the relationship at all odds. It is hard, but worth it. You'll both be stronger as a result."

The funny thing about this, is that as I was writing my reply to you earlier this morning, I kept thinking about sports and various other "long distance" efforts. It's like you said though, it's difficult and everyone has to decide whether they should stay or go, and why.

[Kitty Spoon Train]

The funny thing about this, is that as I was writing my reply to you earlier this morning, I kept thinking about sports and various other "long distance" efforts. It's like you said though, it's difficult and everyone has to decide whether they should stay or go, and why.

Yeah, the point I was making probably wasn't clear. I was speaking from the point of view of a situation where there literally wasn't anything worthwhile fighting for - but truly just "lasting for the sake of lasting". Just about everything else that was looming in our futures was a total mismatch in every way - we were basically holding on for some silly invisible sake of being invested, and perhaps some sense of comfortable rut. And this managed to happen to a person like me, who is quite independent and enjoys being alone. I can only imagine how much more likely it is for those who are afraid of being alone.

So yes, I can totally imagine that it completely changes the game when you really do have solid reasons to work at it. I suppose I've just seen this from the point of view of a truly hopeless situation - so now it's very tempting to draw huge exclusions zones around the possibility of falling into such a pattern again.

Another thing I forgot to add: "loving the idea of each other". That was another issue in the mix. But that's probably obvious from the above. :P

[test account]

A post.

[Kitty Spoon Train]

I cannot bring myself to say that a relationship that only lasts one night, however pleasant, was a successful relationship. Thats too.... zen for me. I'm not ready for that.

Just to clarify this...

I think there's a big difference between going in with honourable intentions and then things naturally not working out, versus going in with the upfront intentions to just use each other's bodies to have some fun. Okay, I don't actually think there's anything inherently "wrong" with the second scenario either - as long as everyone's fully informed and not being misled into it - but we're talking actual relationships here, not one night stands.

So what I mean by a "successful short relationship" is more along the lines of: a couple get together in college, go out for a few years, have a positive loving relationship, learn a lot about love and life from each other, but then it turns out that they just grow into different people with extremely different goals in life after graduation. eg. One wants to be childfree and travel and work around the world, the other wants to settle down into domestic bliss, have 5-6 children and never leave their home town again. Or whatever - they grow into massively irreconcilably different people anyhow. The point is, I don't think there's any particular value or wisdom in trying to force things to work if they've clearly grown so completely off, and then looking at that whole stage of your life as a "failure".

I suspect most people understand this. Few of us marry our first high school sweethearts and live happily every after. Most people go through several relationships which teach them about themselves and what they need (and can give) before settling down into something "final". But this is exactly why I find that "relationship longevity" gets overrated a bit. I think it's one of those things that should be a fairly natural side-effect of doing things right, for sure, but treating it as an aim in itself seems a bit like manually wagging the dog's tail to make it happy.

/$0.02

[Notte stellata]

AVENites often suggest splitting or open relationships as a 'solution' but that isnt possible for some people to do on moral grounds, whether religious, cultural, or personal.

Funnily enough, my impression is that compromise is usually the first option suggested by most AVENites (unless the OP was already leaning towards other options). Splitting up and open relationships are usually brought up with some reservation, e.g. something like "If you can't reach a middle ground, maybe it's better to break up" or "You can consider an open relationship but it doesn't work for everyone". I guess our observations are all more or less biased due to our personal preference. :)

[test account]

A post.

[BJvirgin]

unless the OP was already leaning towards other options

I think I've already been compromising for 20+ years (once a month or less), so compromise is fine with me. If only could get back to a compromise. I certainly don't prefer other options, but the evidence I see tends to indicate that's a low percentage now. I think I'm being realistic, but hoping for better.

[Sally]

Maybe so, but I still think it could bear some discussion, with real answers and not the trite "you need to communicate" line.

But we're talking about two individuals in a couple, and each individual, and thus each couple, is different. There are some commonalities in situation and experience, but each human is unique. So I don't know how we, as an internet group of people, sexual and asexual, who only know each other from what we type, can come up with answers for everyone who posts here. That's why the "you need to communicate" came about. Each couple needs to devise their own answers (or not). All we can do is make suggestions and talk about our own experiences.

[test account]

A post.

[Kitty Spoon Train]

But we're talking about two individuals in a couple, and each individual, and thus each couple, is different. There are some commonalities in situation and experience, but each human is unique. So I don't know how we, as an internet group of people, sexual and asexual, who only know each other from what we type, can come up with answers for everyone who posts here. That's why the "you need to communicate" came about. Each couple needs to devise their own answers (or not). All we can do is make suggestions and talk about our own experiences.

My thinking is basically that, once someone has come to us asking for advice, about the most trite thing to say would be something like "just stick to it as it is, no matter what", because unless you're one of the most extreme relationship longevity fundamentalists out there, that advice sounds borderline crazy. Especially considering the person has actively approached AVEN with the implication that some changes are required in/with their life and relationships, and implying that it's not working the way it currently is.

That said, we're all likely to offer advice which reflects our personality and value system, and/or has worked for us, and sometimes go overboard with implying that it just "should" work for others too, regardless of their personal values and situation. I've been guilty of doing this plenty myself, I know. Trying to be more sensitive with that now. :D

[Notte stellata]

unless the OP was already leaning towards other options

I think I've already been compromising for 20+ years (once a month or less), so compromise is fine with me. If only could get back to a compromise. I certainly don't prefer other options, but the evidence I see tends to indicate that's a low percentage now. I think I'm being realistic, but hoping for better.

Yeah, I understand. I was talking about the general trend on this forum, not particularly about this thread. :) Also I don't think any one option is automatically better than others; it all depends on each couple. Most people choose to compromise, but it's totally okay to consider other options, even right from the start. :)

[Sally]

True. I thought of that after I posted.

Ho hum. Farfel farfel etc.

Pipik indeed.

unless the OP was already leaning towards other options

I think I've already been compromising for 20+ years (once a month or less), so compromise is fine with me. If only could get back to a compromise. I certainly don't prefer other options, but the evidence I see tends to indicate that's a low percentage now. I think I'm being realistic, but hoping for better.

The trouble is, compromise is whatever the two people agree to at any given point. It sounds like your partner can't do the former compromise anymore. I hope something can be worked out.

[test account]

A post.

[Sally]

People use the word "compromise" in negative ways. They really mean "stop getting what I want".

When people are in love they go out of their way for each other effortlessly. They do it because they want to. They learn how to please each other because it's a delight. And then somewhere down the track it all becomes too much effort. And then they "compromise". It's an ugly word.

Wouldn't it be better to work on falling in love again? And if that sounds repugnant, then maybe that's telling you that you really should leave.

I don't think com*romise is a negative word. What it means to me is to work on an accetab*e medi*m, instead of one getting what they want and the other not getting anything they want. If yo* can't do that, then bye-bye.

Fa**ing in *ove is s*ontaneo*s. It isn't something yo* can work on.

(I have to *se * to stand for the *etters my keyboard won't ty*e.)

[Kitty Spoon Train]

Wouldn't it be better to work on falling in love again? And if that sounds repugnant, then maybe that's telling you that you really should leave.

I was going to say something like "work on loving the new people whom you've both become", but I thought that probably sounds a bit too wanky. :lol:

I'm not a fan of the idea of trying to directly copy and "re-kindle" something that existed in the past. Why? Because people grow into something slightly different and new every day. Over time this adds up to becoming practically a whole different person. The person you were ten years ago is very different to the person you are today, so am I, so is everyone. That's how couples can grow apart. This is why high school sweethearts rarely end up a couple for life - because the two people who thought they had compatible life goals when they were both 15, now find that they each want something totally different when they're 24, and going through post-uni quarter life crises. And sometimes these differences really are too fundamental to be "worked out", which is why I don't believe there is anything wise about forcing things to "last" for it's own sake.

Maybe "re-kindling" certain nostalgic details can help things along though, for sure. I guess that's why taking a long vacation together can be a good thing, or "date nights", etc. But I think usually "falling out of love" is a symptom of something more fundamental, which is why I think it's more important to really address where you both are at that point (ie "the new people you've each become"), rather than try to cover up problems by replaying cute nostalgic moments and hoping they will rekindle something by themselves (something that probably doesn't even exist as such any more in these "new" people).

Okay, maybe this is all just a long-winded way of saying "work on falling in love again" :P, but I just wanted to expand on the idea of how personal growth can be a hazard - as well as a great mutual adventure - depending on how you deal with it when you hit bumps in the road. But this is also where I think that isolating relationship longevity out as a goal entirely in itself misses the point. Which is how it tends to sound when it's celebrated by society.

[Lady Girl]

Okay, maybe this is all just a long-winded way of saying "work on falling in love again" :P, but I just wanted to expand on the idea of how personal growth can be a hazard - as well as a great mutual adventure - depending on how you deal with it when you hit bumps in the road. But this is also where I think that isolating relationship longevity out as a goal entirely in itself misses the point. Which is how it tends to sound when it's celebrated by society.

I'll probably always disagree with this. I think both not staying together is fine and going for the longevity of it is also fine. I really don't see why one needs to be condemned in favor of the other. If a person feels that there are five people out there that they could be happy with and they are with so and so, maybe they will decide for themselves that they will stay and grow as a person and are in it for the long haul (just for the long haul). I really think it's ok and should be celebrated if they want to celebrate that.

I think there's a big difference between falling in love, feeling loved, and loving others.

I also like the word compromise because it has the prefix com-which means jointly or with and then promise. I think compromise is indicative of knowing that you don't get your own way all the time.

Edit: There's been a huge resurgence of people finding their high school sweethearts and marrying them. Studies have shown because they were their first love, they have a basic connection they can't find with anyone else. This is thanks to the Internet of course.

[Guest]

I think there's a big difference between falling in love, feeling loved, and loving others.

Especially seeing as there's peeps like me who still can't really wrap their mind around what "falling in/being in love" actually means...

I also like the word compromise because it has the prefix com-which means jointly or with and then promise. I think compromise is indicative of knowing that you don't get your own way all the time.

Ooooh, I love this part! Never thought of it that way!

[Kitty Spoon Train]

Okay, maybe this is all just a long-winded way of saying "work on falling in love again" :P, but I just wanted to expand on the idea of how personal growth can be a hazard - as well as a great mutual adventure - depending on how you deal with it when you hit bumps in the road. But this is also where I think that isolating relationship longevity out as a goal entirely in itself misses the point. Which is how it tends to sound when it's celebrated by society.

I'll probably always disagree with this. I think both not staying together is fine and going for the longevity of it is also fine. I really don't see why one needs to be condemned in favor of the other. If a person feels that there are five people out there that they could be happy with and they are with so and so, maybe they will decide for themselves that they will stay and grow as a person and are in it for the long haul (just for the long haul). I really think it's ok and should be celebrated if they want to celebrate that.

I think there's a big difference between falling in love, feeling loved, and loving others.

I also like the word compromise because it has the prefix com-which means jointly or with and then promise. I think compromise is indicative of knowing that you don't get your own way all the time.

Edit: There's been a huge resurgence of people finding their high school sweethearts and marrying them. Studies have shown because they were their first love, they have a basic connection they can't find with anyone else. This is thanks to the Internet of course.

Oh, don't get me wrong - I don't think one should automatically be condemned in favour of the other. I just think that the current societal situation is that one is celebrated for its own sake a bit too much, that's all (by society, not by individual couples). I guess I'm just jaded because I've seen bad relationships up close, which lasted purely through being held together with codependency, abuse and suicide threats - but to the outside world it was all smiles and happiness. And the outside world would have seen these relationships as "good because they're lasting". Maybe it's not really a major point in most people's lives, but when you've seen it in a certain light, then the whole emphasis-on-longevity thing really looks like a bad form of societal enabling - of something that shouldn't really be anybody's business to automatically judge either way.

As for "first love" - I never really had one. My intense high school crushes all ended up either as some form of friendzoning, or else just utterly unrequited. So I think by the time I had my first actual relationship (second year of college), that "first love" part of my brain must have already been spent, so there literally isn't anyone I can relate to as having been a "first love", as such.

Hmmm, maybe this is affecting the psychology behind how I look at all this. Meeting new people is sort of a blank slate to me, and not something that I'm ever comparing against the rosiness of any particular first love, etc. Who knows.

[Percivel]

BJ, I'm a sexual in a mixed marraige for 20+ years. Found AVEN a year ago. I found that the greatest thing about knowing about asexuality is that asexuality is no ones fault. It was a heavy burden lifted. The sex challenge remains, however. I've gone through quite a process over the last year and I'm sure it's not done yet. I, too, felt tortured (still do)..though it's not anyones fault.

I have settled for "table scraps" because, to me, thats my only option as I won't leave my wife. I have found myself increasingly less and less interested in sex with my wife ...probably because the sex is not what I hoped/wanted and it is something my wife only does out of obligation... because she would rather scrub the bathroom clean.

It still really bothers me and I still pity myself and get depressed. My wife continues to feel horribly guilty about it, too. But, it has gotten easier. I'm slowly excepting the fact that a life of good sex, intimacy and romance are not in my cards...not even for a day. I find it takes quite a bit of mental and emotional discilpline to accept this. My wife feels less pressure but her guilt feelings won't ever go away. Being in a mixed marriage is not easy. The greatest love is when we love even when we don't feel like loving.

[Sally]

"I have settled for "table scraps" because, to me, thats my only option as I won't leave my wife...It still really bothers me and I still pity myself and get depressed. My wife continues to feel horribly guilty about it, too."

That's really sad. Are you sure that's that only option? I don't mean to pry, so you needn't explain this -- but I'm wondering why you've decided you can't leave. Is it because of love, or pity, or duty?

[Percivel]

Hello Sally!

Often I do feel sad about it. But, I really do love my wife. Duty does play a role, too. Duty to her. Duty to the kids. And to set a model for the kids.

[Sally]

Hello Sally!

Often I do feel sad about it. But, I really do love my wife. Duty does play a role, too. Duty to her. Duty to the kids. And to set a model for the kids.

That's admirable -- especially the latter.

[Percivel]

Thanks Sally. I thought I would get reemed for that.

[Guest]

Okay, maybe this is all just a long-winded way of saying "work on falling in love again" :P, but I just wanted to expand on the idea of how personal growth can be a hazard - as well as a great mutual adventure - depending on how you deal with it when you hit bumps in the road. But this is also where I think that isolating relationship longevity out as a goal entirely in itself misses the point. Which is how it tends to sound when it's celebrated by society.

I'll probably always disagree with this. I think both not staying together is fine and going for the longevity of it is also fine. I really don't see why one needs to be condemned in favor of the other. If a person feels that there are five people out there that they could be happy with and they are with so and so, maybe they will decide for themselves that they will stay and grow as a person and are in it for the long haul (just for the long haul). I really think it's ok and should be celebrated if they want to celebrate that.

Well, I don't think staying with someone, if it increases the amount of sadness in the world and decreases the amount of happiness in the world, should be celebrated, even if the two dolts in the sad relationship want to celebrate it. Time happens without our help... simply sitting around watching time pass, if you're not making that time valuable, is nothing to celebrate.

That being said, I've also posted that the longevity of relationships IS pertinent to whether that relationship was successful... but not because I think there's something inherently good about longevity, but rather, because that tends to be what people are looking for in a relationship. Therefore, using a basic definition of success as: "fullfilling one's expectations" or "achieving one's goals"... if your goal was to have a relationship that doesn't end, your relationship is de facto unsuccessful if it ends. There's good reason why people don't like the end of relationships... they tend to be pretty ouchy. Wanting to avoid pain is rational, but interestingly, that rational desire tends to make us do lots of other irrational things (like stay in relationships that will end up hurting us much more than the pain of a breakup).

[Percivel]

Well....I suppose it depends on what ones view on suffering and sacrifice is. Should one never become an NFL football player because it will cause to much pain and sacrifice? All the players experience it. Should one never have children because of the pain and sacrifice it will cost in your lifetime? All parents experience it. It often depends on whether the benefits out weigh the price. Because there is sadness does not mean there is no joy. Because there is sacrifice does not mean there is no gain. Suffering in itself is not intrinsically evil. Neither is sacrifice. But both can be turned into good.

[Down in Texas]

Some times when there are children added to a mixed relationship, their happiness has to be added into the decisions that are made. In some cases the happiness of the children and the chance to be an active part of their lives can out weigh the unhappiness that occurs in the over all value of the relationship between the two partners. Does that erase the hurt? No. But, does it make staying, worth staying? Sometimes.

[Guest]

I think some people get a lot of satisfaction out of fulfilling their concept of "duty". Like: I hate my wife, but it's my duty to stay with her, and that makes me a good person.

I don't have anything against this line of moral reasoning, it just isn't my preferred moral orientation. Perc, I think duty plays a huge role in your moral satisfaction, so it doesn't surprise me at all that you make the choices you make. Given your value set, it makes complete sense. If you're able to find some sort of joy or, at least, satisfaction in that, more power to you.

I think its the same with celibacy. People who find spiritual growth in celibacy, like buddhists, for example, probably have a lot more to gain from it than some poor schmo who just doesn't get to have sex.