Why Men Cheat - How Can I Break This Cycle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women are not wired to get aroused by the same man for more than a decade. You and she have to find ways to feel more sexual overall. I don’t judge your affairs, OP. I know it’s hard to feel dead inside and then a fling makes you feel alive again. It’s hard. But I think you and your wife have a lot of really hard work to do. It’ll be worth it because you’ll both grow old soon.

BS. I know a lot of women who are still very attracted to their husbands after a decade. I am. I think many men don’t know how to open up emotionally and give their wives the emotional intimacy that leads to lasting attraction. Many men are self-centered and oblivious to what women do, and after however many years of giving and giving women shut down. But that is not how women are wired. All this stuff about sex drive going down is just not true. If anything for many women it goes up due to more confidence and self knowledge.

This would make sense... EXCEPT for the fact that she was "wired" to sleep with him 24-7 in the beginning of the relationship when he brought less to the table.

You’re mixing a lot of things up. The beginning of the relationship — you mean when neither of you had kids or responsibilities? Of course life is going to be different ten or twenty years in.

For most women sexual desire is responsive and contextual. A man who knows what turns a woman on can get her there easily, it’s not about age or novelty. I guess I must be lucky because my husband knows. He has put in the work to really learn, so actually I feel even more desire for him now than at the beginning of our relationship. Maybe the guys on here saying it’s just factors beyond my control are lazy and clueless about what women want.

Man here, I partially agree but the bolded is the key. I am divorced, and it's really not hard to turn a woman on when you are new and shiny to her. The amount of effort I have to put in to have an amazing night of passion is low. With my ex-wife, I could put in 10x the work and maybe, if the stars were aligned, we would be intimate.

You really underestimate the power of novelty for most women.

And while I am not suggesting there aren't a million benefits to marriage that make it worth sticking it out, and sacrificing a passionate love life to get there, you aren't going to convince many men who are otherwise attractive and successful that married sex life is a fraction as easy or as good as being single was.

If you don’t have novelty in your sex life with your spouse, you’re doing it wrong.

This always cracks me up. By 50-years old- what’s novel anymore? You pretty much have tried every sex act and scenario. It’s why many men have midlife affairs for variety even if married to a hot sexual wife.

Sometimes that someone frumpy and dumpy that are thankful to be banging him. Lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women are not wired to get aroused by the same man for more than a decade. You and she have to find ways to feel more sexual overall. I don’t judge your affairs, OP. I know it’s hard to feel dead inside and then a fling makes you feel alive again. It’s hard. But I think you and your wife have a lot of really hard work to do. It’ll be worth it because you’ll both grow old soon.

BS. I know a lot of women who are still very attracted to their husbands after a decade. I am. I think many men don’t know how to open up emotionally and give their wives the emotional intimacy that leads to lasting attraction. Many men are self-centered and oblivious to what women do, and after however many years of giving and giving women shut down. But that is not how women are wired. All this stuff about sex drive going down is just not true. If anything for many women it goes up due to more confidence and self knowledge.

This would make sense... EXCEPT for the fact that she was "wired" to sleep with him 24-7 in the beginning of the relationship when he brought less to the table.

You’re mixing a lot of things up. The beginning of the relationship — you mean when neither of you had kids or responsibilities? Of course life is going to be different ten or twenty years in.

For most women sexual desire is responsive and contextual. A man who knows what turns a woman on can get her there easily, it’s not about age or novelty. I guess I must be lucky because my husband knows. He has put in the work to really learn, so actually I feel even more desire for him now than at the beginning of our relationship. Maybe the guys on here saying it’s just factors beyond my control are lazy and clueless about what women want.

Man here, I partially agree but the bolded is the key. I am divorced, and it's really not hard to turn a woman on when you are new and shiny to her. The amount of effort I have to put in to have an amazing night of passion is low. With my ex-wife, I could put in 10x the work and maybe, if the stars were aligned, we would be intimate.

You really underestimate the power of novelty for most women.

And while I am not suggesting there aren't a million benefits to marriage that make it worth sticking it out, and sacrificing a passionate love life to get there, you aren't going to convince many men who are otherwise attractive and successful that married sex life is a fraction as easy or as good as being single was.

If you don’t have novelty in your sex life with your spouse, you’re doing it wrong.

This always cracks me up. By 50-years old- what’s novel anymore? You pretty much have tried every sex act and scenario. It’s why many men have midlife affairs for variety even if married to a hot sexual wife.

It’s as limited as your imagination. You must be pretty superficial in bed if you think of it as just a list to run through. I guess that’s why you feel the need to cheat on your wife.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The common thread I have seen on DCUM is a husband wants to have more sex than his wife and so he wants his wife to change to accommodate that. How often are women told we can’t change men?

I think most men would be fine with the women wanting as much as she wanted 10 years ago. They don't need her to want it more than before, just the same as before.

I think that’s fine and wholly reasonable if the woman’s life looks like it did ten years ago.

Had a baby, never got decent pelvic floor care, sex is painful? It didn’t hurt ten years ago.

Had another baby, DH isn’t pulling his weight? She felt like she had an actual partner ten heads ago.

Never had the opportunity to regain her pre-children body? She felt like a more sexual being ten years ago.

Many husbands were more attractive to their wives ten years ago. They were attentive and fun. They cared about maintaining their wives attraction to them. Create the conditions for sexuality to succeed even if it means sacrifice, IMO it’s worth it.

Life happens, people change and our spouse simply must accept this is just how it goes. Some lose interest in sex, others lose interest in monogamy.

And successful marriages change to accommodate the changes life throws at us. Only failed marriages “lose interest” in monogamy, though some successful couples choose other paths— together.

I reject the hypocritical position that *only* a lost interest in sex is to be accommodated. Either *both* lost interests are acceptable, or neither are acceptable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
The common thread I have seen on DCUM is a husband wants to have more sex than his wife and so he wants his wife to change to accommodate that. How often are women told we can’t change men?

I think most men would be fine with the women wanting as much as she wanted 10 years ago. They don't need her to want it more than before, just the same as before.

I think that’s fine and wholly reasonable if the woman’s life looks like it did ten years ago.

Had a baby, never got decent pelvic floor care, sex is painful? It didn’t hurt ten years ago.

Had another baby, DH isn’t pulling his weight? She felt like she had an actual partner ten heads ago.

Never had the opportunity to regain her pre-children body? She felt like a more sexual being ten years ago.

Many husbands were more attractive to their wives ten years ago. They were attentive and fun. They cared about maintaining their wives attraction to them. Create the conditions for sexuality to succeed even if it means sacrifice, IMO it’s worth it.

Life happens, people change and our spouse simply must accept this is just how it goes. Some lose interest in sex, others lose interest in monogamy.

And successful marriages change to accommodate the changes life throws at us. Only failed marriages “lose interest” in monogamy, though some successful couples choose other paths— together.

I reject the hypocritical position that *only* a lost interest in sex is to be accommodated. Either *both* lost interests are acceptable, or neither are acceptable.

I mean, at the end of the day, sex is an act that needs two yesses. It’s not a guarantee, it’s not a right, and it’s not a need. It’s why when someone cheats on their husband who has cancer people rush to condemn her, not agree that she was being denied her rights.

A lost interest in sex can be rekindled when people are willing to make the actual effort. Effort that is more than loading the dishwasher once, making a dinner reservation, buying a sex you. OP isn’t. Others don’t believe they should have to. They prefer the lazy dishonesty of infidelity.

I wouldn’t be able to rekindle sex in someone that lazy either. In a good marriage the partner finds ways to make the environment conducive to sex— unselfishness and interest in your partners desires (sexual and otherwise) also correlate strongly with being good in bed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women are not wired to get aroused by the same man for more than a decade. You and she have to find ways to feel more sexual overall. I don’t judge your affairs, OP. I know it’s hard to feel dead inside and then a fling makes you feel alive again. It’s hard. But I think you and your wife have a lot of really hard work to do. It’ll be worth it because you’ll both grow old soon.

BS. I know a lot of women who are still very attracted to their husbands after a decade. I am. I think many men don’t know how to open up emotionally and give their wives the emotional intimacy that leads to lasting attraction. Many men are self-centered and oblivious to what women do, and after however many years of giving and giving women shut down. But that is not how women are wired. All this stuff about sex drive going down is just not true. If anything for many women it goes up due to more confidence and self knowledge.

If what you said was true, then how come half of lesbian marriages are sexless after a decade?

Female desire craters long term and it's not always someone's fault

Okay, "Women are not wired to get aroused by the same PERSON for more than a decade."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women are not wired to get aroused by the same man for more than a decade. You and she have to find ways to feel more sexual overall. I don’t judge your affairs, OP. I know it’s hard to feel dead inside and then a fling makes you feel alive again. It’s hard. But I think you and your wife have a lot of really hard work to do. It’ll be worth it because you’ll both grow old soon.

BS. I know a lot of women who are still very attracted to their husbands after a decade. I am. I think many men don’t know how to open up emotionally and give their wives the emotional intimacy that leads to lasting attraction. Many men are self-centered and oblivious to what women do, and after however many years of giving and giving women shut down. But that is not how women are wired. All this stuff about sex drive going down is just not true. If anything for many women it goes up due to more confidence and self knowledge.

This would make sense... EXCEPT for the fact that she was "wired" to sleep with him 24-7 in the beginning of the relationship when he brought less to the table.

You’re mixing a lot of things up. The beginning of the relationship — you mean when neither of you had kids or responsibilities? Of course life is going to be different ten or twenty years in.

For most women sexual desire is responsive and contextual. A man who knows what turns a woman on can get her there easily, it’s not about age or novelty. I guess I must be lucky because my husband knows. He has put in the work to really learn, so actually I feel even more desire for him now than at the beginning of our relationship. Maybe the guys on here saying it’s just factors beyond my control are lazy and clueless about what women want.

Man here, I partially agree but the bolded is the key. I am divorced, and it's really not hard to turn a woman on when you are new and shiny to her. The amount of effort I have to put in to have an amazing night of passion is low. With my ex-wife, I could put in 10x the work and maybe, if the stars were aligned, we would be intimate.

You really underestimate the power of novelty for most women.

And while I am not suggesting there aren't a million benefits to marriage that make it worth sticking it out, and sacrificing a passionate love life to get there, you aren't going to convince many men who are otherwise attractive and successful that married sex life is a fraction as easy or as good as being single was.

This guy gets it. Novelty is incredibly powerful for me. Maybe try role playing, OP?

[Anonymous]

Honestly, this makes me roll my eyes. Every woman I know has felt undervalued as a wife and person, and their husbands treat married and family life as a chore and lack all enthusiasm. Dudes should think about practicing what they preach, if they want enthusiasm and to feel valued, lead by example rather than nagging.

PF - this advice should work for both parties in a marriage. Every man I know has felt undervalued as well.

What I hear most, however, is women wanting their DH to change without making any effort to change themselves. Watch.

This post will be met with "How do you expect me to do _____, when he is always screwing up _________?" It is easy to focus on what others can do for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly, this makes me roll my eyes. Every woman I know has felt undervalued as a wife and person, and their husbands treat married and family life as a chore and lack all enthusiasm. Dudes should think about practicing what they preach, if they want enthusiasm and to feel valued, lead by example rather than nagging.

PF - this advice should work for both parties in a marriage. Every man I know has felt undervalued as well.

What I hear most, however, is women wanting their DH to change without making any effort to change themselves. Watch.

This post will be met with "How do you expect me to do _____, when he is always screwing up _________?" It is easy to focus on what others can do for you.

The person who wants change has to be the one to change. If you’re unsatisfied with the amount of sex, you are the one who needs to make changes, particularly if you have the spare time, spare energy, and spare money for an affair.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly, this makes me roll my eyes. Every woman I know has felt undervalued as a wife and person, and their husbands treat married and family life as a chore and lack all enthusiasm. Dudes should think about practicing what they preach, if they want enthusiasm and to feel valued, lead by example rather than nagging.

PF - this advice should work for both parties in a marriage. Every man I know has felt undervalued as well.

What I hear most, however, is women wanting their DH to change without making any effort to change themselves. Watch.

This post will be met with "How do you expect me to do _____, when he is always screwing up _________?" It is easy to focus on what others can do for you.

The person who wants change has to be the one to change. If you’re unsatisfied with the amount of sex, you are the one who needs to make changes, particularly if you have the spare time, spare energy, and spare money for an affair.

I think the folks who say that cheating is inevitable would argue that having the husband being monogamous instead is something that the low sex wife wants to change about the status quo. So, if she wants him to be faithful, she has to be the one to change.

Point being that your "person who wants change has to be the one to change" implicates them both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly, this makes me roll my eyes. Every woman I know has felt undervalued as a wife and person, and their husbands treat married and family life as a chore and lack all enthusiasm. Dudes should think about practicing what they preach, if they want enthusiasm and to feel valued, lead by example rather than nagging.

PF - this advice should work for both parties in a marriage. Every man I know has felt undervalued as well.

What I hear most, however, is women wanting their DH to change without making any effort to change themselves. Watch.

This post will be met with "How do you expect me to do _____, when he is always screwing up _________?" It is easy to focus on what others can do for you.

The person who wants change has to be the one to change. If you’re unsatisfied with the amount of sex, you are the one who needs to make changes, particularly if you have the spare time, spare energy, and spare money for an affair.

I think the folks who say that cheating is inevitable would argue that having the husband being monogamous instead is something that the low sex wife wants to change about the status quo. So, if she wants him to be faithful, she has to be the one to change.

Point being that your "person who wants change has to be the one to change" implicates them both.

Perhaps but it’s a false equivalence. If your spouse has ceased to be faithful they have lied and put your life at risk. The question isn’t whether to increase your sexual frequency, it’s whether to remain married.

[Anonymous]

The person who wants change has to be the one to change. If you’re unsatisfied with the amount of sex, you are the one who needs to make changes, particularly if you have the spare time, spare energy, and spare money for an affair.

If the couple had more sex at the beginning of their relationship, and now is having less because the wife will not participate, then your point is nonsense.

Look at your words, and really try to understand what you have written. Apply your reasoning to another aspect of married life.

If at the beginning of the marriage the DH shared all of his earnings, but now only shares 5% of them, the relationship has changed. If that 5% equaled the same amount of money (in inflation-adjusted dollars), the relationship has still changed.

Making a unilateral change and then demanding your spouse change to regain the status quo is what you are suggesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly, this makes me roll my eyes. Every woman I know has felt undervalued as a wife and person, and their husbands treat married and family life as a chore and lack all enthusiasm. Dudes should think about practicing what they preach, if they want enthusiasm and to feel valued, lead by example rather than nagging.

PF - this advice should work for both parties in a marriage. Every man I know has felt undervalued as well.

What I hear most, however, is women wanting their DH to change without making any effort to change themselves. Watch.

This post will be met with "How do you expect me to do _____, when he is always screwing up _________?" It is easy to focus on what others can do for you.

The person who wants change has to be the one to change. If you’re unsatisfied with the amount of sex, you are the one who needs to make changes, particularly if you have the spare time, spare energy, and spare money for an affair.

I think the folks who say that cheating is inevitable would argue that having the husband being monogamous instead is something that the low sex wife wants to change about the status quo. So, if she wants him to be faithful, she has to be the one to change.

Point being that your "person who wants change has to be the one to change" implicates them both.

Perhaps but it’s a false equivalence. If your spouse has ceased to be faithful they have lied and put your life at risk. The question isn’t whether to increase your sexual frequency, it’s whether to remain married.

And in Queens, NY -literal lives were at stake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The person who wants change has to be the one to change. If you’re unsatisfied with the amount of sex, you are the one who needs to make changes, particularly if you have the spare time, spare energy, and spare money for an affair.

If the couple had more sex at the beginning of their relationship, and now is having less because the wife will not participate, then your point is nonsense.

Look at your words, and really try to understand what you have written. Apply your reasoning to another aspect of married life.

If at the beginning of the marriage the DH shared all of his earnings, but now only shares 5% of them, the relationship has changed. If that 5% equaled the same amount of money (in inflation-adjusted dollars), the relationship has still changed.

Making a unilateral change and then demanding your spouse change to regain the status quo is what you are suggesting.

She can get her 50% in court. No court will order her to have sex with him. Your parallel doesn’t hold up.

Marriage does not entitle you to sex. The only thing that ensures you get sex within marriage is being someone your spouse wants to have sex with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

The person who wants change has to be the one to change. If you’re unsatisfied with the amount of sex, you are the one who needs to make changes, particularly if you have the spare time, spare energy, and spare money for an affair.

If the couple had more sex at the beginning of their relationship, and now is having less because the wife will not participate, then your point is nonsense.

Look at your words, and really try to understand what you have written. Apply your reasoning to another aspect of married life.

If at the beginning of the marriage the DH shared all of his earnings, but now only shares 5% of them, the relationship has changed. If that 5% equaled the same amount of money (in inflation-adjusted dollars), the relationship has still changed.

Making a unilateral change and then demanding your spouse change to regain the status quo is what you are suggesting.

Who says it’s unilateral? I doubt a spouse, man or woman, never tells why they don’t want to have sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Honestly, this makes me roll my eyes. Every woman I know has felt undervalued as a wife and person, and their husbands treat married and family life as a chore and lack all enthusiasm. Dudes should think about practicing what they preach, if they want enthusiasm and to feel valued, lead by example rather than nagging.

PF - this advice should work for both parties in a marriage. Every man I know has felt undervalued as well.

What I hear most, however, is women wanting their DH to change without making any effort to change themselves. Watch.

This post will be met with "How do you expect me to do _____, when he is always screwing up _________?" It is easy to focus on what others can do for you.

The person who wants change has to be the one to change. If you’re unsatisfied with the amount of sex, you are the one who needs to make changes, particularly if you have the spare time, spare energy, and spare money for an affair.

I think the folks who say that cheating is inevitable would argue that having the husband being monogamous instead is something that the low sex wife wants to change about the status quo. So, if she wants him to be faithful, she has to be the one to change.

Point being that your "person who wants change has to be the one to change" implicates them both.

Perhaps but it’s a false equivalence. If your spouse has ceased to be faithful they have lied and put your life at risk. The question isn’t whether to increase your sexual frequency, it’s whether to remain married.

And in Queens, NY -literal lives were at stake.

You are so gleeful about that, you sicko.