You are so obtuse. It isn't even worth my time responding. |
Where the hell did you get that from? Your post is one long speculation about things that weren't actually said. Her point was very clear and succinct. You can ramble on all you want but you have yet to refute her actual point. As for your point about "taking a long hard and honest look at sexual compatibility prior to marriage"; that all sounds great on paper, but hard to apply in the real world. I remember having no complaints about my sex life when my DW and I were dating. It wasn't until long after we'd been married that things got out of whack. I take ownership of my own role in that, but it doesn't change how hard it is and I'm not about to divorce her over it. If I'd read what you wrote back then I'd say that "hell, we fuck like rabbits now, what could possibly go wrong?" People change, marriages change, life happens. It doesn't change the basic truth that if you make unilateral decisions in a marriage that's your right as a free man or woman, but you should expect consequences for your actions. That applies to cheating and to starving your spouse of sex and/or affection. |
What do you think her point was? Because I basically agree with your lady two sentences. You seem to want to read everything I am writing as pro sex withholding |
My last two sentences basically restate her point. If you agree with those, then we're apparently in violent agreement. |
I would recognize that sexual fulfillment is an essential part of life, and if I were no longer physically capable of providing sexual touch to my spouse I would freely grant my spouse permission to get it elsewhere. I wouldn't be so cruel as to make my spouse choose between celibacy and continuing marriage to me. |
I would recognize that sexual fulfillment is an essential part of life, and if I were no longer physically capable of providing sexual touch to my spouse I would freely grant my spouse permission to get it elsewhere. I wouldn't be so cruel as to make my spouse choose between celibacy and continuing marriage to me. Whereas I think I'd find it bearable if my wife couldn't have sex. The difference between "can't" and "won't" is the rejection. The former is not a rejection by the person who is supposed to love you best in the world. The latter is. |
|
|
I'm the first quoted pp. I did not marry him, but that's because I don't see the point of legal marriage. We were together for many years, decided to have a child together and jointly bought a house. Separating our lives was just as difficult as it is for married people because we had to handle the legal steps separately. It wasn't like we dated for a while and decided to go our separate ways. We talked about sex before we took all of these very involved steps. He assured me that he wouldn't do what he did 7 years later. If he had been honest in the beginning, we wouldn't have gone as far down the road of commitment. |
That different than choosing to deprive your spouse of affection. |
And once again what you all see as choosing to deprive you of affection is usually a deeper more complicated situation. Affection isn't always something a person can turn on and off like a faucet. When a relationship is healthy in all of its aspects, the affection comes naturally, when some part of the relationship is sick, the affection might suffer as a result. I'm not saying there aren't situations where a spouse simply cruelly and randomly decides they are no longer interested in their spouse. Just simply that it seems more likely that there are a lot more relationships that could use some work then manipulative sociopathic spouses that suddenly decide that they want to hurt their SO. Its easier of course to write them off as the latter but it just seems more realistic that at least some of you are more in the former category. |
i understand that, and that may be what happens some of the time. It is probably a first sign that there is a problem, unless you have a petty spouse who uses sex as a control tactic. Some people cheat when they're having relationship troubles. Some people yell and throw things when they feel like the relationship is slipping. None of those are reasonable ways to treat your spouse because you're angry. |
I don't know about you but I would have no interest in having sex with my DH if he was angry with me or if he was unhappy in the relationship. Sex with someone who is just going through the motions is not enjoyable (to me at least). And equating being uninterested in sex (which in the scenarios I'm describing at least is a physiological thing not a malicious thing) with throwing things or cheating is, IMO, insane. Those are things a person can control! Now the sociopathic spouse that is holding back because her DH didn't buy her Tiffany's ring? Sure, I guess that could be the same category. |
You don't see withholding sex for years and aborting efforts to repair the situation as malicious? |
I think I'd need to hear the other side of the equation before determining malice or unhappiness in that case. |