s/o: sexless marriages, did you know this happens often?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me, it's the buildup of emotional baggage in a marriage that decreases the desire to have sex. It's not physical. If I were single again, I know I'd love sex with other men. When you are dating and a man does something mean or stupid, you can easily break up with him and start fresh. When you are married with kids, you put up with more (at least I do). I don't think men allow those hurts to build up enough to interfere with sex.

This is usually the case. Emotional baggage and resentment are the killer. Men move on from disagreements more easily. My divorced friends are going at it like rabbits again. From this vantage point, it does seem less messy to just have the affair and get it out of your system. Such a shame the supposed ethical way to have sex again is divorce.

No. The ethical way is to work with your spouse to rekindle. Marriage desire has ebbs and flows. It can come back just as strong. You essentially will be divorced when you go down the affair road...and the divorce will be more contentious due to the cheating and lies.

Your "ethical way" requires a wife's willingness to let go of some emotional baggage. If she can't or won't, a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do.
In case of sexless marriage, the concept of "potential divorce if affair gets discovered" is completely irrelevant. Because, given the fact that men cannot go celibate, sexless marriage EQUALS divorce. So there is no "risk" of divorce, zero downside of an affair, only upside because the sexless marriage has been saved from certain divorce.

this is untrue.

Plenty of men go without sex.

I agree.
The poster above you is nuts. I wonder what his position is on rape or pedophilia. What if you are only attracted to prepubescent children? Is it possible to go without sex? What if you can’t find a person who wants to have sex with you? Is it possible to go without sex?

Rape and pedophilia are crimes that should be punished to the maximum allowed by law.

Is this thread really about criminals? Or contrived theoretical situations, such as what might be possible under ideal controlled laboratory conditions?
Ok sure, men can "go without sex" ... in the same way that "women can go barefoot".
Meanwhile, back in the real world, I have yet to encounter a woman with fewer than 3 or 4 pairs of shoes.

This thread has become about adultery, which is always immoral and some times and places illegal as well. I would put it in the same category as the above sex crimes.

If wearing shoes was seen as immoral by all major religions and was harmful to families and children, many more people would go barefoot.

And adultery is actually a crime in 21 U.S. states.

Adultery is a crime in the DMV.

An "extramarital affair" is illegal in the District of Columbia, where adultery is a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of $500 or 180 days in jail. It's a misdemeanor as well in Virginia, Maryland and more than 20 other states, and a felony in Idaho, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oklahoma and Wisconsin.

This thread is NOT about crimes of adultery. This thread is about sexless marriage, wherein neither party wants to get divorced, but since one of them does not what sex they have opened their marriage to avoid divorcing. Just as sexless is a valid lifestyle choice, so is open marriage a valid lifestyle choice. Unfortunately some people make these choices without first seeking their partner's input.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me, it's the buildup of emotional baggage in a marriage that decreases the desire to have sex. It's not physical. If I were single again, I know I'd love sex with other men. When you are dating and a man does something mean or stupid, you can easily break up with him and start fresh. When you are married with kids, you put up with more (at least I do). I don't think men allow those hurts to build up enough to interfere with sex.

This is usually the case. Emotional baggage and resentment are the killer. Men move on from disagreements more easily. My divorced friends are going at it like rabbits again. From this vantage point, it does seem less messy to just have the affair and get it out of your system. Such a shame the supposed ethical way to have sex again is divorce.

No. The ethical way is to work with your spouse to rekindle. Marriage desire has ebbs and flows. It can come back just as strong. You essentially will be divorced when you go down the affair road...and the divorce will be more contentious due to the cheating and lies.

Your "ethical way" requires a wife's willingness to let go of some emotional baggage. If she can't or won't, a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do.
In case of sexless marriage, the concept of "potential divorce if affair gets discovered" is completely irrelevant. Because, given the fact that men cannot go celibate, sexless marriage EQUALS divorce. So there is no "risk" of divorce, zero downside of an affair, only upside because the sexless marriage has been saved from certain divorce.

this is untrue.

Plenty of men go without sex.

I agree.
The poster above you is nuts. I wonder what his position is on rape or pedophilia. What if you are only attracted to prepubescent children? Is it possible to go without sex? What if you can’t find a person who wants to have sex with you? Is it possible to go without sex?

Rape and pedophilia are crimes that should be punished to the maximum allowed by law.

Is this thread really about criminals? Or contrived theoretical situations, such as what might be possible under ideal controlled laboratory conditions?
Ok sure, men can "go without sex" ... in the same way that "women can go barefoot".
Meanwhile, back in the real world, I have yet to encounter a woman with fewer than 3 or 4 pairs of shoes.

This thread has become about adultery, which is always immoral and some times and places illegal as well. I would put it in the same category as the above sex crimes.

If wearing shoes was seen as immoral by all major religions and was harmful to families and children, many more people would go barefoot.

And adultery is actually a crime in 21 U.S. states.

Adultery is a crime in the DMV.

An "extramarital affair" is illegal in the District of Columbia, where adultery is a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of $500 or 180 days in jail. It's a misdemeanor as well in Virginia, Maryland and more than 20 other states, and a felony in Idaho, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oklahoma and Wisconsin.

This thread is NOT about crimes of adultery. This thread is about sexless marriage, wherein neither party wants to get divorced, but since one of them does not what sex they have opened their marriage to avoid divorcing. Just as sexless is a valid lifestyle choice, so is open marriage a valid lifestyle choice. Unfortunately some people make these choices without first seeking their partner's input.

Yeah. Open marriage is not a valid choice unless both partners are on board.
Having children is a valid option only if both partners are on board. If your partner isn’t in to it, you don’t just find an AP to have a child with.

And yes. In the above scenario, I definitely feel sorry for the partner who wanted children, particularly if that was the plan before marriage. But that doesn’t make it okay to sneak out behind your partner’s back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me, it's the buildup of emotional baggage in a marriage that decreases the desire to have sex. It's not physical. If I were single again, I know I'd love sex with other men. When you are dating and a man does something mean or stupid, you can easily break up with him and start fresh. When you are married with kids, you put up with more (at least I do). I don't think men allow those hurts to build up enough to interfere with sex.

This is usually the case. Emotional baggage and resentment are the killer. Men move on from disagreements more easily. My divorced friends are going at it like rabbits again. From this vantage point, it does seem less messy to just have the affair and get it out of your system. Such a shame the supposed ethical way to have sex again is divorce.

No. The ethical way is to work with your spouse to rekindle. Marriage desire has ebbs and flows. It can come back just as strong. You essentially will be divorced when you go down the affair road...and the divorce will be more contentious due to the cheating and lies.

Your "ethical way" requires a wife's willingness to let go of some emotional baggage. If she can't or won't, a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do.
In case of sexless marriage, the concept of "potential divorce if affair gets discovered" is completely irrelevant. Because, given the fact that men cannot go celibate, sexless marriage EQUALS divorce. So there is no "risk" of divorce, zero downside of an affair, only upside because the sexless marriage has been saved from certain divorce.

this is untrue.

Plenty of men go without sex.

I agree.
The poster above you is nuts. I wonder what his position is on rape or pedophilia. What if you are only attracted to prepubescent children? Is it possible to go without sex? What if you can’t find a person who wants to have sex with you? Is it possible to go without sex?

Rape and pedophilia are crimes that should be punished to the maximum allowed by law.

Is this thread really about criminals? Or contrived theoretical situations, such as what might be possible under ideal controlled laboratory conditions?
Ok sure, men can "go without sex" ... in the same way that "women can go barefoot".
Meanwhile, back in the real world, I have yet to encounter a woman with fewer than 3 or 4 pairs of shoes.

This thread has become about adultery, which is always immoral and some times and places illegal as well. I would put it in the same category as the above sex crimes.

If wearing shoes was seen as immoral by all major religions and was harmful to families and children, many more people would go barefoot.

And adultery is actually a crime in 21 U.S. states.

Adultery is a crime in the DMV.

An "extramarital affair" is illegal in the District of Columbia, where adultery is a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of $500 or 180 days in jail. It's a misdemeanor as well in Virginia, Maryland and more than 20 other states, and a felony in Idaho, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oklahoma and Wisconsin.

This thread is NOT about crimes of adultery. This thread is about sexless marriage, wherein neither party wants to get divorced, but since one of them does not what sex they have opened their marriage to avoid divorcing. Just as sexless is a valid lifestyle choice, so is open marriage a valid lifestyle choice. Unfortunately some people make these choices without first seeking their partner's input.

Yeah. Open marriage is not a valid choice unless both partners are on board.
Having children is a valid option only if both partners are on board. If your partner isn’t in to it, you don’t just find an AP to have a child with.

And yes. In the above scenario, I definitely feel sorry for the partner who wanted children, particularly if that was the plan before marriage. But that doesn’t make it okay to sneak out behind your partner’s back.

Only if the sexless marriage was established by mutual consent would this be needed to open the marriage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For me, it's the buildup of emotional baggage in a marriage that decreases the desire to have sex. It's not physical. If I were single again, I know I'd love sex with other men. When you are dating and a man does something mean or stupid, you can easily break up with him and start fresh. When you are married with kids, you put up with more (at least I do). I don't think men allow those hurts to build up enough to interfere with sex.

This is usually the case. Emotional baggage and resentment are the killer. Men move on from disagreements more easily. My divorced friends are going at it like rabbits again. From this vantage point, it does seem less messy to just have the affair and get it out of your system. Such a shame the supposed ethical way to have sex again is divorce.

No. The ethical way is to work with your spouse to rekindle. Marriage desire has ebbs and flows. It can come back just as strong. You essentially will be divorced when you go down the affair road...and the divorce will be more contentious due to the cheating and lies.

Your "ethical way" requires a wife's willingness to let go of some emotional baggage. If she can't or won't, a man's gotta do what a man's gotta do.
In case of sexless marriage, the concept of "potential divorce if affair gets discovered" is completely irrelevant. Because, given the fact that men cannot go celibate, sexless marriage EQUALS divorce. So there is no "risk" of divorce, zero downside of an affair, only upside because the sexless marriage has been saved from certain divorce.

this is untrue.

Plenty of men go without sex.

I agree.
The poster above you is nuts. I wonder what his position is on rape or pedophilia. What if you are only attracted to prepubescent children? Is it possible to go without sex? What if you can’t find a person who wants to have sex with you? Is it possible to go without sex?

Rape and pedophilia are crimes that should be punished to the maximum allowed by law.

Is this thread really about criminals? Or contrived theoretical situations, such as what might be possible under ideal controlled laboratory conditions?
Ok sure, men can "go without sex" ... in the same way that "women can go barefoot".
Meanwhile, back in the real world, I have yet to encounter a woman with fewer than 3 or 4 pairs of shoes.

This thread has become about adultery, which is always immoral and some times and places illegal as well. I would put it in the same category as the above sex crimes.

If wearing shoes was seen as immoral by all major religions and was harmful to families and children, many more people would go barefoot.

And adultery is actually a crime in 21 U.S. states.

Adultery is a crime in the DMV.

An "extramarital affair" is illegal in the District of Columbia, where adultery is a misdemeanor with a maximum penalty of $500 or 180 days in jail. It's a misdemeanor as well in Virginia, Maryland and more than 20 other states, and a felony in Idaho, Massachusetts, Michigan, Oklahoma and Wisconsin.

This thread is NOT about crimes of adultery. This thread is about sexless marriage, wherein neither party wants to get divorced, but since one of them does not what sex they have opened their marriage to avoid divorcing. Just as sexless is a valid lifestyle choice, so is open marriage a valid lifestyle choice. Unfortunately some people make these choices without first seeking their partner's input.

Yeah. Open marriage is not a valid choice unless both partners are on board.
Having children is a valid option only if both partners are on board. If your partner isn’t in to it, you don’t just find an AP to have a child with.

And yes. In the above scenario, I definitely feel sorry for the partner who wanted children, particularly if that was the plan before marriage. But that doesn’t make it okay to sneak out behind your partner’s back.

Only if the sexless marriage was established by mutual consent would this be needed to open the marriage.

There are a lot of times couples don’t mutually agree on something. That doesn’t give one partner license to do whatever they want.
I am not really sure that open marriages are ethical even when there is mutual consent. Polygamy and bigamy are still illegal for a multitude of reasons. I am positive that it’s not ethical even when one party has not agreed to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of times couples don’t mutually agree on something. That doesn’t give one partner license to do whatever they want. I am not really sure that open marriages are ethical even when there is mutual consent. Polygamy and bigamy are still illegal for a multitude of reasons. I am positive that it’s not ethical even when one party has not agreed to it.

In the case of a unilaterally declared sexless marriage, the only reasonable way to solve that is an open marriage.
The ethics here are identical and reciprocal. Sexless equals open.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of times couples don’t mutually agree on something. That doesn’t give one partner license to do whatever they want. I am not really sure that open marriages are ethical even when there is mutual consent. Polygamy and bigamy are still illegal for a multitude of reasons. I am positive that it’s not ethical even when one party has not agreed to it.

In the case of a unilaterally declared sexless marriage, the only reasonable way to solve that is an open marriage.
The ethics here are identical and reciprocal. Sexless equals open.

And open marriages are ethical because...?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are a lot of times couples don’t mutually agree on something. That doesn’t give one partner license to do whatever they want. I am not really sure that open marriages are ethical even when there is mutual consent. Polygamy and bigamy are still illegal for a multitude of reasons. I am positive that it’s not ethical even when one party has not agreed to it.

In the case of a unilaterally declared sexless marriage, the only reasonable way to solve that is an open marriage.
The ethics here are identical and reciprocal. Sexless equals open.

And open marriages are ethical because...?

I never said it’s ethical (or not). I am saying the sexless party has determined that sex isn’t important to the marriage. Which means sex must be below the threshold of importance where ethics could even matter at all.