|
Post by njsojourner on Jan 15, 2018 23:54:18 GMT -5
I have come to the viewpoint that a marriage can be solid without sex as long as BOTH are truly ok with that. If one or both are not, then I no longer feel it is immoral or wrong to outsource. I know many will disagree and say that there has to be explicit consent by each partner, etc., but I do believe that sometimes the partner that refuses sex wants the benefits of marriage without the obligations that are implicit. To say "I love my wife" but I want sex with someone else (only because she doesn't want sex with me) doesn't mean that I am a creep or immoral--I am human. We have built a pretty damn good life together (children, grand children), successful careers, and lots of other things in common, but she just doen't want or can't have sex. Should I chuck it all because of that? Should I become a monk? Or should I get it somewhere else once in a while and still continue to love and cherish what we have? Some people can live happily without sex. Some cannot. Who am I to judge? So, to be totally honest, after 40 years of marriage I recently did have sex with someone other than my wife. I had 5 minutes of guilt; then I just savored the beautiful time I had and remembered what it was like to feel a sexual connection. I feel alive and happy. Maybe it will all come crashing down sometime. But screw it. It's not completely my fault. I will accept part of the responsibility and blame but not 100%. Life does go on.
|
|
|
Post by baza on Jan 16, 2018 1:42:54 GMT -5
I don't think this outsourcing / cheating question is a moral issue at all. It isn't "right" nor is it "wrong". It is rather an activity that some people indulge in, for reasons best known to themselves. It is not necessary to justify the behaviour "I did it because my spouse cut me off" or "I did it because my spouse did it first" or similar. Fact is, you made the choice to cheat. You don't have to justify your choice, but you do have to own it, and the consequences that ensue from it. Just as the refuser spouse can make the choice to withhold sex. It is not necessary for them to justify their choice, but they own it, and any consequences that result from it. Take Brother njsojourner 's story above. His missus' choice to turn off the tap has had the consequence of him cheating (although his missus doesn't know there has been this consequence) Brother njsojourner chose to cheat and has reaped the consequences of that choice. Those consequences being 5 minutes of guilt plus a prolonged period of feeling terrific. Now if Mrs njsojourner gets to hear about this, there may be further consequences to roll out from here. Same if our esteemed Brother njsojourner chooses to back up for another taste If there are, then both parties own their choices, and the consequences that ensue. It's not a question of morals. It's a question of choices.
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jan 16, 2018 11:49:14 GMT -5
I don't think this outsourcing / cheating question is a moral issue at all. It isn't "right" nor is it "wrong". It is rather an activity that some people indulge in, for reasons best known to themselves. It is not necessary to justify the behaviour "I did it because my spouse cut me off" or "I did it because my spouse did it first" or similar. Hmm. I'm not sure if I'm disagreeing or just elaborating here. I think empathy helps to anticipate likely consequences and that the avoidance of principled actions (ie. cheating when, on principle, one is against that) perpetuates an unsatisfying stasis. I think empathy helps people come to the truth of their situation faster, realizing the scale of what they are up against. I see the justifications for cheating as being the most slippery slope into assigning one's own agency to the partner. "I had to cheat as a consequence of my partner's refusal to have sex - it's their fault." That isn't how the avoidant partner will see it. The refusing partner is the protagonist of her own story, married to someone who is not of interest to them sexually. From her perspective, she chooses the path of preserving the associated benefits of marriage rather than risking them to have a chance at a different relationship that includes desire. The uncooperative oneis the squeaky wheel, constantly bringing up the sex issue, whereas the perpetuation of the presentation of a marriage depends on the other dismissing or invalidating it. From her standpoint, her action (refusing sex with her partner and gaslighting on the discussion of it) is also passive. It is the consequence of not desiring her partner, and so she is not to blame either. The result is that both partners assign their agency externally. No wonder people stay in a shit deal so long. So, while both parties choose to endure the stress of misaligned desire to retain their other benefits, they are both choosing it together. Even though they are both unsatisfied sexually (one vocally and one not), their pact has been one of mutual sacrifice and shared stress, with the goal of preserving the presentation and pretense of a non-existent romantic intimate attraction. When one party LEAVES the de facto celibacy without saying so, the other party views it as a betrayal, and as a threat to their presentation as a pair - to themselves, to each other, to a third party, and to all others. That is the betrayal, like sneaking a Twinkie from your pocket on a starving lifeboat. I'm not sure about the morality there, but I would say that the act of cheating in a marriage is at least inconsistent with the principle of authenticity. Without authenticity, there can be no sustainable remedy.
|
|
|
Post by snowman12345 on Jan 21, 2018 20:18:02 GMT -5
I'm not sure about the morality there, but I would say that the act of cheating in a marriage is at least inconsistent with the principle of authenticity. Without authenticity, there can be no sustainable remedy. Why can't there be a sustainable remedy without authenticity? If one party is half way discreet with cheating and the other party turns a blind eye, why can't the rest of the marriage go on as before? If I were to say to my wife "gee, Honey, I've been having sex with someone else for the last 5 years. I just thought you aught to know, so I can be "authentic"; I would be hurting her just to make myself feel better. She was perfectly happy not knowing and not having sex. No questions asked. A tacit agreement if you will. If cheating makes you feel guilty than stop doing it, but keep that shit to yourself.
|
|
|
Post by rejected101 on Jan 21, 2018 20:31:36 GMT -5
I'm not sure about the morality there, but I would say that the act of cheating in a marriage is at least inconsistent with the principle of authenticity. Without authenticity, there can be no sustainable remedy. Why can't there be a sustainable remedy without authenticity? If one party is half way discreet with cheating and the other party turns a blind eye, why can't the rest of the marriage go on as before? If I were to say to my wife "gee, Honey, I've been having sex with someone else for the last 5 years. I just thought you aught to know, so I can be "authentic"; I would be hurting her just to make myself feel better. She was perfectly happy not knowing and not having sex. No questions asked. A tacit agreement if you will. If cheating makes you feel guilty than stop doing it, but keep that shit to yourself. The reason 99.9% affairs are intended to remain hidden is because the cheater doesn’t want to hurt their partner. It’s deceatful but in some cases necessary.
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jan 22, 2018 13:24:21 GMT -5
I'm not sure about the morality there, but I would say that the act of cheating in a marriage is at least inconsistent with the principle of authenticity. Without authenticity, there can be no sustainable remedy. Why can't there be a sustainable remedy without authenticity? If one party is half way discreet with cheating and the other party turns a blind eye, why can't the rest of the marriage go on as before? If I were to say to my wife "gee, Honey, I've been having sex with someone else for the last 5 years. I just thought you aught to know, so I can be "authentic"; I would be hurting her just to make myself feel better. She was perfectly happy not knowing and not having sex. No questions asked. A tacit agreement if you will. If cheating makes you feel guilty than stop doing it, but keep that shit to yourself. Why? Because without being authentic about the nature of the problem, the solutions you design will fail to remedy that problem. I surmise that you are assuming my point about authenticity is aimed solely at your moral obligation to your spouse. Rather, the more immediate issue is our own capacity for error and self-delusion. Yes, you might find sex and even love in your life again through an affair, but it doesn't solve the problem of being in a marriage to someone who is so averse to you that they won't even fuck you. You have no way to know that "she was perfectly happy [...] not having sex". You only know that she was not happy having sex with you. I've seen this with my own ex, in both an open relationship and post separation, and I've dated a gazillion women who also were turned off their spouses within marriage - but mistakenly thought they were turned off sex in general. In those cases, they also were not being authentic with themselves. The tacit agreement isn't about not telling. Rather it's a tacit agreement that BOTH parties are enduring an unsatisfying relationship while in the service of the rest of the household enterprise. Do ANYTHING that contradicts that fantasy, and the whole thing falls apart. So you get these situations with two marital partners locked into noble sacrifice with each other in the service of their families, with each side seeing the other as the demanding antagonist and themselves as martyrs, in an escalating cold war of resentment, moving toward contempt and even self-loathing. They both would agree that a marital relationship includes a mutual romantic element, and yet that is lacking. Any dating couple would let go without a second thought, but the mutual investment within benefits and obligations associated with the marriage (kids, finances, shelter), motivates both sides to maintain the fiction that they are living a married life. That fiction leads BOTH parties into a state of constant tension and disappointment that they source to the other. Here's a closely related dynamic that gets played out constantly here, illustrating the example. Frustrated writes in that she's dying from a lack of intimacy. Here marriage would be fixed if only Cold Fish would fuck her once in a while. Frustrated and Cold Fish agree that the problem is a lack of sex in the marriage. Cold Fish agrees to try harder. They set up a calendar. The real problem, though, is that Cold Fish doesn't WANT to have sex with Frustrated, for reasons. Maybe Cold Fish is gay, or doesn't love Frustrated, or got so angry with Frustrated for something (or unfairly, for nothing), to such a degree that the attraction was lost. Whatever it was, the solution they devised was to increase the sex, whereas the problem was actually an aversion to the partner. So the solution, based off their incorrect framing of the problem, was to increase the amount of unwanted sex that Cold Fish must endure. This increases the lack of desire and trauma to Cold Fish, to the breaking point. Either Cold Fish abandons the plan (and Frustrated complains at ILIASM about the "reset sex") or Cold Fish goes to truly dark and self-destructive places, and eventually Frustrated is able to see the pain and contempt, and internalizes that. In the case of an affair or some variant of an open or transparent arrangement, sexual intimacy and possibly more is introduced outside of the household arrangement. There are costs associated with that. In the case of a transparent arrangement, those costs are managed up front by both parties, or in near real time. In the case of an affair, they are deferred until a later time, after which they will be compounded by deceit. Also, depending on the length of the affair and the deceit, the whole thing will hit at once, and because there is no way to tell for sure whether any part of the marital relationship was authentic or not - the WHOLE THING becomes suspect. From experience, I would liken it to the rewind and fast/forward at the end of The Sixth Sense where the omniscient narrator of the film becomes suspect and nothing you saw can be taken at face value anymore, even if any of it was true. The good memories as well as the bad get this asterisk beside them (*may have been cheating at the time). So, ya. You can have an affair. You might get a bit of sex, mutual desire, love, but you won't have it in the context of "home" where you live. The place where you live and sleep is still going to be steeping in pain, contempt, and secrets. What is the cost of a secret? No one can really be told that, but let's just say that after my ex and I dropped the pretense with ourselves, with each other, to our family and friends, I was shocked at the relief in the unburdening. I imagine it to be like a gay person "coming out". My question back - what's the affair arrangement bringing to the table that an amicable co-parenting separation agreement couldn't? If you both are on the same page, wouldn't that be just as easy?
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jan 22, 2018 13:39:20 GMT -5
The reason 99.9% affairs are intended to remain hidden is because the cheater doesn’t want to hurt their partner. It’s deceatful but in some cases necessary. Intention matters little when the affair gets exposed anyway. Mrs. Apocrypha's affair partner's wife discovered her husband's affair when I contacted her and told her. I don't think Mrs Apocrypha's affair partner remotely conceived that possibility, nor that Mrs Apocrypha would break down under the strain of lying, get totally wasted, and unburden her soul to me.
|
|
|
Post by M2G on Jan 22, 2018 18:23:20 GMT -5
Too complex.
I view my wife as a family member, not a romantic sexual partner.
I want to have sex, so I look for like more like minded NSA people, as I don’t want want love, just friendship and fucking.
I don’t tell my w because it would upset her. If I tell her, it would be because I was an asshole that wanted to hurt her.
If, at some point, a shining light from the heavens stuck me with guilt, then I still would not tell her. That would serve only to unburden myself at the expense of another
|
|
|
Post by snowman12345 on Jan 22, 2018 21:03:43 GMT -5
Why can't there be a sustainable remedy without authenticity? If one party is half way discreet with cheating and the other party turns a blind eye, why can't the rest of the marriage go on as before? If I were to say to my wife "gee, Honey, I've been having sex with someone else for the last 5 years. I just thought you aught to know, so I can be "authentic"; I would be hurting her just to make myself feel better. She was perfectly happy not knowing and not having sex. No questions asked. A tacit agreement if you will. If cheating makes you feel guilty than stop doing it, but keep that shit to yourself. Why? Because without being authentic about the nature of the problem, the solutions you design will fail to remedy that problem. I surmise that you are assuming my point about authenticity is aimed solely at your moral obligation to your spouse. Rather, the more immediate issue is our own capacity for error and self-delusion. Yes, you might find sex and even love in your life again through an affair, but it doesn't solve the problem of being in a marriage to someone who is so averse to you that they won't even fuck you. You have no way to know that "she was perfectly happy [...] not having sex". You only know that she was not happy having sex with you. I've seen this with my own ex, in both an open relationship and post separation, and I've dated a gazillion women who also were turned off their spouses within marriage - but mistakenly thought they were turned off sex in general. In those cases, they also were not being authentic with themselves. The tacit agreement isn't about not telling. Rather it's a tacit agreement that BOTH parties are enduring an unsatisfying relationship while in the service of the rest of the household enterprise. Do ANYTHING that contradicts that fantasy, and the whole thing falls apart. So you get these situations with two marital partners locked into noble sacrifice with each other in the service of their families, with each side seeing the other as the demanding antagonist and themselves as martyrs, in an escalating cold war of resentment, moving toward contempt and even self-loathing. They both would agree that a marital relationship includes a mutual romantic element, and yet that is lacking. Any dating couple would let go without a second thought, but the mutual investment within benefits and obligations associated with the marriage (kids, finances, shelter), motivates both sides to maintain the fiction that they are living a married life. That fiction leads BOTH parties into a state of constant tension and disappointment that they source to the other. Here's a closely related dynamic that gets played out constantly here, illustrating the example. Frustrated writes in that she's dying from a lack of intimacy. Here marriage would be fixed if only Cold Fish would fuck her once in a while. Frustrated and Cold Fish agree that the problem is a lack of sex in the marriage. Cold Fish agrees to try harder. They set up a calendar. The real problem, though, is that Cold Fish doesn't WANT to have sex with Frustrated, for reasons. Maybe Cold Fish is gay, or doesn't love Frustrated, or got so angry with Frustrated for something (or unfairly, for nothing), to such a degree that the attraction was lost. Whatever it was, the solution they devised was to increase the sex, whereas the problem was actually an aversion to the partner. So the solution, based off their incorrect framing of the problem, was to increase the amount of unwanted sex that Cold Fish must endure. This increases the lack of desire and trauma to Cold Fish, to the breaking point. Either Cold Fish abandons the plan (and Frustrated complains at ILIASM about the "reset sex") or Cold Fish goes to truly dark and self-destructive places, and eventually Frustrated is able to see the pain and contempt, and internalizes that. In the case of an affair or some variant of an open or transparent arrangement, sexual intimacy and possibly more is introduced outside of the household arrangement. There are costs associated with that. In the case of a transparent arrangement, those costs are managed up front by both parties, or in near real time. In the case of an affair, they are deferred until a later time, after which they will be compounded by deceit. Also, depending on the length of the affair and the deceit, the whole thing will hit at once, and because there is no way to tell for sure whether any part of the marital relationship was authentic or not - the WHOLE THING becomes suspect. From experience, I would liken it to the rewind and fast/forward at the end of The Sixth Sense where the omniscient narrator of the film becomes suspect and nothing you saw can be taken at face value anymore, even if any of it was true. The good memories as well as the bad get this asterisk beside them (*may have been cheating at the time). So, ya. You can have an affair. You might get a bit of sex, mutual desire, love, but you won't have it in the context of "home" where you live. The place where you live and sleep is still going to be steeping in pain, contempt, and secrets. What is the cost of a secret? No one can really be told that, but let's just say that after my ex and I dropped the pretense with ourselves, with each other, to our family and friends, I was shocked at the relief in the unburdening. I imagine it to be like a gay person "coming out". My question back - what's the affair arrangement bringing to the table that an amicable co-parenting separation agreement couldn't? If you both are on the same page, wouldn't that be just as easy? I get it - you were hurt by a cheating spouse in the past. So, would it be easier to split up? No. No it would not. I am in a profession where people disclose secrets and really bad problems to me on a daily basis. Confidentiality and discretion are ways of life for me. I will continue with the course I am on as it has far less drama than disclosure would have. This is something I will literally take to my grave. I am not trying to kid myself here - I am doing this for me - yup, a selfish thing to do. I met an old man once. His wife was in the hospital dying of cancer. He was loyally sit at her bedside offering what comfort he could. I spent many a night shift there and talked with him. There was another couple down the hall in the same situation - wife dying but her husband was in and out, not really there with her much. It turns out that years before the first wife once had an affair with the husband down the hall. The first husband knew about the affair, but forgave his wife for it. However, he never forgave the other guy. He said to me that he felt guilty because deep down inside he was happy that the other guy's wife was dying and causing horrific pain for the cheater - a pain he knew all about from his situation. What good did disclosure do in his situation? Their marriage survived anyway, why did he need to suffer knowing about the affair? Most times knowing when to keep your mouth shut is a better quality that trying to keep it real. I think we will just have to agree to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by surfergirl on Jan 22, 2018 21:45:04 GMT -5
Good discussion. ^^^
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Jan 23, 2018 1:18:53 GMT -5
I get it - you were hurt by a cheating spouse in the past. What you have written above is a true fact, but if that's all you get, then I have failed to make the point. Once again, I'm not expressing this out of a point of moral outrage or social obligation. Guilt, moral obligation - let's put that aside - I'm not talking about that. I'm looking at it from a practical standpoint. I'm talking about people here in this group who are presently "trapped" in this situation because of their choice to present as married or to hope to be married when they are not living a married life and do not live a married relationship - irrespective of whether they are cheating. Nobody here stood on the altar in front of friends and family and put on a nun's habit or priest's collar and pledged to themselves and others a vow of celibacy. A cheating relationship is not a monogamous one and neither is a celibate one. They thing that keeps them pinned in place is this fantasy that they are married. A celibate marriage is just as much a lie - it just happens to be a lie both parties make a tacit agreement to choose together. The latent tension of an agreement based on a lie is like an economic bubble. There is always the knowledge that too much weight is pinned to a total figment, and that the bottom could drop out at any point. I'm not remotely suggesting that you confess to an affair. Authenticity and its benefits are not a single event. I'm asking you what the fantasy or veneer of a "marriage" brings to the table that an amicable separation doesn't? What is a marriage, as opposed to some other kind of intimate relationship? Do you have that? Married or not, you are going to have a kind of relationship with that woman, and she is going to be a part of your family. You don't have a romantic sexual relationship with that woman. You do likely run a household with her. You do likely share finances and family. In that sense, how is she different from an ex wife and co-parent who maybe you get along with? Do you get along?
|
|
|
Post by wom360 on Jan 23, 2018 1:27:04 GMT -5
The difference is in way too many cases the co-parent arrangement means the man sees his kids every other weekend for 2 days. I agree that zero is not monogamous, same as outsourcing. Both of those are choices, but leaving results in only one actually paying for the choice.
|
|
|
Post by baza on Jan 23, 2018 1:49:26 GMT -5
This is a bit of a sidebar to your discussion Brothers Apocrypha and snowman12345 , but it occurs to me that my relationship was different things at different times. For example Initially we were lovers. Then we moved in together we became Financial Partners as well. Add in kids and we added co-parents into the equation as well. As it started to turn to shit, lovers dropped off. At that point we were Financial Partners and co-parents only. Then she started engaging in behaviours that put the Financial partnership at risk. At that point we were just co-parents under the same roof. When we split (and took our right whack of the accrued assets) we ceased being Financial Partners but remained co-parents. So we finished up as being co-parents but not under the same roof. Then, after things had cooled down after we were divorced, we "warily" became friends. And still co-parents. Not great friends, or best friends, but friends. And co-parents. That ended in April 2015 when she suddenly died. So now, I am the last bloke standing out of that deal and I guess I am "sole surviving parent". Meantime, another relationship has been under development since 2010 with Ms enna. That one started off as friends. It developed somehow or other in to lovers as well. And Financial Partners as well. Plus co-parent (enna) of 2 previous kids. And sole parent (me) of twp prior kids. And so far remains all those things, and more.
|
|
|
Post by snowman12345 on Jan 23, 2018 6:29:31 GMT -5
I get it - you were hurt by a cheating spouse in the past. What you have written above is a true fact, but if that's all you get, then I have failed to make the point. Once again, I'm not expressing this out of a point of moral outrage or social obligation. Guilt, moral obligation - let's put that aside - I'm not talking about that. I'm looking at it from a practical standpoint. I'm talking about people here in this group who are presently "trapped" in this situation because of their choice to present as married or to hope to be married when they are not living a married life and do not live a married relationship - irrespective of whether they are cheating. Nobody here stood on the altar in front of friends and family and put on a nun's habit or priest's collar and pledged to themselves and others a vow of celibacy. A cheating relationship is not a monogamous one and neither is a celibate one. They thing that keeps them pinned in place is this fantasy that they are married. A celibate marriage is just as much a lie - it just happens to be a lie both parties make a tacit agreement to choose together. The latent tension of an agreement based on a lie is like an economic bubble. There is always the knowledge that too much weight is pinned to a total figment, and that the bottom could drop out at any point. I'm not remotely suggesting that you confess to an affair. Authenticity and its benefits are not a single event. I'm asking you what the fantasy or veneer of a "marriage" brings to the table that an amicable separation doesn't? What is a marriage, as opposed to some other kind of intimate relationship? Do you have that? Married or not, you are going to have a kind of relationship with that woman, and she is going to be a part of your family. You don't have a romantic sexual relationship with that woman. You do likely run a household with her. You do likely share finances and family. In that sense, how is she different from an ex wife and co-parent who maybe you get along with? Do you get along? Yes sir, I understand what you are saying - in my situation, I just don't agree with it. I guess I have an easier time compartmentalizing my life and it's problems than some folks do. Love and sex are great together. They are also great separately. I don't need one without the other as long as I am getting both somewhere. My kids are grown and have families of their own. I still love my wife, maybe not in a romantic way anymore, but I would still take a bullet for her. We have gone on separate vacations most of our married lives - family and politics we have basic agreements on. So, the woman I love - I don't have sex with. The other woman is a friend who hates commitment, lives a pretty free lifestyle and just wants to have sex for sex sake. We are FWB not lovers. Marriage does not have a checklist of things that you must have in order to make it work. My definition of a marriage probably shadows baza's example of stages - only I have skipped the separation and co-parenting part. So far... I am doing what I have to do to stay in it for the long haul. I understand the risks that I take and I try not to get sloppy as time goes on. Maybe I am a bit shallower than some folks, but the risk/benefit ratio is better this way - at least for me.
|
|
|
Post by james on Jan 23, 2018 8:04:00 GMT -5
snowman12345 I guess you have been married to your wife for some time? Then you will probably know what her views about affairs are. Has she ever expressed a view about people who have affairs? If she has, then you can take it that that same view would also apply to you. So, what are her views? Sorry if you've already told us.
|
|