|
Post by ironhamster on Mar 30, 2021 2:49:41 GMT -5
Both situations indeed suck. Given that my experience was more similar to that of deadzone75, his statement hits hard and true that it's hard to expect truth from someone that lied to trap you in the first place. Indeed, I will never have resolution on why my ex did what she did, but I certainly have my suspicions. My time on asexuality.org revealed how asexuals encouraged others to lie to their sexual partners in order to maintain the relationship. This isn't loving. This is controlling.
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Mar 30, 2021 5:44:06 GMT -5
Both situations indeed suck. Given that my experience was more similar to that of deadzone75 , his statement hits hard and true that it's hard to expect truth from someone that lied to trap you in the first place. Indeed, I will never have resolution on why my ex did what she did, but I certainly have my suspicions. My time on asexuality.org revealed how asexuals encouraged others to lie to their sexual partners in order to maintain the relationship. This isn't loving. This is controlling. Had a look over at asexuality.org Funny, they use teh same three choices: Stay Leave or Outsource They have to put a twist on all three. Stay and figure out how to be acceptably physical. Let the refused spouse divorce you, or leave to escape the guilt/harassment. Open your marriage and send your refused spouse out to get their needs met. Apocrypha 's observation that both partners in a SM are miserable seems especially true for many posters on asexuality.org. Their misery is couched in a sad compassion as opposed to some of ours who engage in haughty sanctimony.
|
|
|
Post by saarinista on Mar 30, 2021 11:39:56 GMT -5
Hey, sounds like there are some "woke" asexuals over at that website.
Too bad more of our spouses don't get on that forum!
|
|
|
Post by lwoetin on Mar 30, 2021 23:21:06 GMT -5
Had a look over at asexuality.orgFunny, they use teh same three choices: Stay Leave or Outsource They have to put a twist on all three. Stay and figure out how to be acceptably physical. Let the refused spouse divorce you, or leave to escape the guilt/harassment. Open your marriage and send your refused spouse out to get their needs met. It seems they are the victims at their site. So who is right? I bet we have more members than they do.
|
|
|
Post by baza on Mar 31, 2021 0:15:41 GMT -5
Had a look over at asexuality.orgFunny, they use teh same three choices: Stay Leave or Outsource They have to put a twist on all three. Stay and figure out how to be acceptably physical. Let the refused spouse divorce you, or leave to escape the guilt/harassment. Open your marriage and send your refused spouse out to get their needs met. It seems they are the victims at their site. So who is right? I bet we have more members than they do. There's where I reckon we make a big mistake (in trying to figure out "who is right" and "who is wrong" and why) In bringing these ILIASM deals to a resolution, it doesn't matter who is "right" or who is "wrong". You are "right" by your standards. Your spouse is just as "right" by their standards. You are not about to do a 180 on your standards. Your spouse is not about to do a 180 on their standards. Knowing who's "right" (or "wrong") doesn't actually help any. You're both "right" from your respective perspective.
|
|
|
Post by Handy on Mar 31, 2021 0:18:22 GMT -5
SO TRUE BAZA:
You are not about to do a 180 on your standards. Your spouse is not about to do a 180 on their standards.
Knowing who's "right" (or "wrong") doesn't actually help any.
You're both "right" from your respective perspective.
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Mar 31, 2021 4:24:14 GMT -5
Had a look over at asexuality.orgFunny, they use the same three choices: Stay Leave or Outsource They have to put a twist on all three. Stay and figure out how to be acceptably physical. Let the refused spouse divorce you, or leave to escape the guilt/harassment. Open your marriage and send your refused spouse out to get their needs met. It seems they are the victims at their site. So who is right? I bet we have more members than they do. As baza said, I say both are right. Victims of society's expectation of monogamy when some folks just ain't built for it (or stop being suitable) are at fault (or one of multiple causes.) People in general are unaware of the prevalence of sexlessness and asexuality and thus not having had frank discussions of what to do if... Both sides would benefit from asking "If you were paralyzed from the neck down...." before saying "I do." That way the angels and weak human rutting animals can marry their own kind and avoid the pointless mess. A huge difference in the posts I skimmed is that the asexual folk recognize society's expectation and appear to largely sympathize with their more conventional spouses. Refuser indifference and/or blame, to me, makes going without so much worse. The lack of interest in solving the problem that they must be a part of, yet demanding monogamy, is a shiv to the ribs. Apocrypha notes how hard it is to make yourself sleep with someone who you're not inclined to, so that hesitance to help the refused is understandable, but I don't much think it's alright for one side to tough out the consequences of falling out of love. Unrequited love is defective before marital vows, or after. Many useful marriages can continue with unrequited love but something unusual needs to happen. (Herculean stoicism or open marriage, as two examples)
|
|
|
Post by lwoetin on Apr 1, 2021 0:25:11 GMT -5
As baza said, I say both are right. Victims of society's expectation of monogamy when some folks just ain't built for it (or stop being suitable) are at fault (or one of multiple causes.) People in general are unaware of the prevalence of sexlessness and asexuality and thus not having had frank discussions of what to do if... Both sides would benefit from asking "If you were paralyzed from the neck down...." before saying "I do." That way the angels and weak human rutting animals can marry their own kind and avoid the pointless mess. A huge difference in the posts I skimmed is that the asexual folk recognize society's expectation and appear to largely sympathize with their more conventional spouses. Refuser indifference and/or blame, to me, makes going without so much worse. The lack of interest in solving the problem that they must be a part of, yet demanding monogamy, is a shiv to the ribs. Apocrypha notes how hard it is to make yourself sleep with someone who you're not inclined to, so that hesitance to help the refused is understandable, but I don't much think it's alright for one side to tough out the consequences of falling out of love. Unrequited love is defective before marital vows, or after. Many useful marriages can continue with unrequited love but something unusual needs to happen. (Herculean stoicism or open marriage, as two examples) You and I are both staying at the moment. But is it enough for you as is or are you staying because you are giving it a chance to get better? How much mileage can we get if our partner is doing it out of guilt and not out of enjoyment? Please correct me if she has found her groove back. Is it possible to try to enjoy sex when you don't? I don't really miss not having sex with my wife because she won't enjoy it anyway. It takes two. Then....why stay? Perhaps you count your blessings with her vs. without. These asexuals make it so difficult, Herculean.
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Apr 1, 2021 5:52:30 GMT -5
My profile explains my SM is in remission. (no official definition....we should come up with one.) Pretty sure she likes what I do. She's highly engaged when she's pleasing me. I would like the frequency up a notch, but I might make it to the finish line if nothing changed. (Medical problems make progress a special challenge.) Stories I've read here make re-engagement by the refused spouse difficult due to fear of a return to deprivation (failed reset), poor effort by the refuser (starfish, or only slightly better), or resentment that the starvation went for so damn long when they key was apparently within reach, but wasn't used. Some refused partners decide to stay on the splitting trajectory. Their refusing partner having become someone they see as having been outright hostile to them and therefore unsuitable to love. A few want to reverse the resentment and grow to adore their spouse. This is a risky path full of fear and I've not heard the outcome of efforts of this type. We surely hear of failed resets. This may be a result of passion returning and refusers seeing the gestures of love as an "all clear" sign and a chance to resume the celibacy the want more than their partner's affection. I compartmentalize like its my superpower, so were I in that situation and to decide to take that route, a small part of me would hold aside a mental "panic room" where my cynical self could hide and most of me could relish the bliss of being one with one's betrothed, with a rescue line attached to me if the little guy in the panic room feels the line go limp. I'm not brave enough (foolish enough?) to give my entire soul to my wife again. Look at my wedding picture to find the guy who believed in "Happily Ever After". What we got now is "Pretty Pleased at the Moment".
|
|
|
Post by Apocrypha on Apr 2, 2021 2:11:10 GMT -5
It seems they are the victims at their site. So who is right? I bet we have more members than they do. As baza said, I say both are right. Victims of society's expectation of monogamy when some folks just ain't built for it (or stop being suitable) are at fault (or one of multiple causes.) People in general are unaware of the prevalence of sexlessness and asexuality and thus not having had frank discussions of what to do if... Both sides would benefit from asking "If you were paralyzed from the neck down...." before saying "I do." That way the angels and weak human rutting animals can marry their own kind and avoid the pointless mess. A huge difference in the posts I skimmed is that the asexual folk recognize society's expectation and appear to largely sympathize with their more conventional spouses. Refuser indifference and/or blame, to me, makes going without so much worse. The lack of interest in solving the problem that they must be a part of, yet demanding monogamy, is a shiv to the ribs. Apocrypha notes how hard it is to make yourself sleep with someone who you're not inclined to, so that hesitance to help the refused is understandable, but I don't much think it's alright for one side to tough out the consequences of falling out of love. Unrequited love is defective before marital vows, or after. Many useful marriages can continue with unrequited love but something unusual needs to happen. (Herculean stoicism or open marriage, as two examples) Most of the people on aesexuality.org, won't be aesexual anymore within two weeks of separating from their partner. On their dates, they will say "I used to think I was aesexual". The "woke" ones will stay "aesexual" as a route toward social authority in identity politics - having discovered a tribal identity for which they may claim their alphabet bona fides. They'll be pretty committed to that route. I don't think the "if you were paralyzed from the neck down" question is really all that relevant in all these cases here, and is likely harmful in its false equivalency. Medicalizing and catastrophizing what's really a simple (and fatal) loss of attraction in a relationship, ends up prolonging the inevitable, framing this dysfunction as something that's happened to both of you; it isn't. It kept me yoked to Mrs Apocrypha for years of therapy, misery and affairs. It wasn't a medical issue. I often find that a celibate partner's demand of monogamy would be more aptly described as a demand for celibacy, if they want to get real about it. So, it's down to "Have a different sexual partner" (in or out of the marriage) or "Let's be celibate forever." While I certainly understand the rage and sanctimony against a spouse who checks out of a marriage, I find that the faster you can move forward into practical matters about how you will move forward in your life, the better. Sometimes forgiveness is a way to do that.
|
|
|
Post by jerri on Apr 2, 2021 2:59:00 GMT -5
Don't bother posting because he was last online on March the 2nd. He came in made a couple of posts and vanished.
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Apr 2, 2021 6:28:54 GMT -5
Most of the people on aesexuality.org, won't be aesexual anymore within two weeks of separating from their partner. I don't think the "if you were paralyzed from the neck down" question is really all that relevant in all these cases here, and is likely harmful in its false equivalency. Medicalizing and catastrophizing what's really a simple (and fatal) loss of attraction in a relationship, ends up prolonging the inevitable, framing this dysfunction as something that's happened to both of you; it isn't. It kept me yoked to Mrs Apocrypha for years of therapy, misery and affairs. It wasn't a medical issue. I often find that a celibate partner's demand of monogamy would be more aptly described as a demand for celibacy, if they want to get real about it. So, it's down to "Have a different sexual partner" (in or out of the marriage) or "Let's be celibate forever."... See, the threads I read were of asexuals truly wishing to love their partners physically. Not in a "get it over with and as little as possible" way either. These are people distressed at their own indifference. If you get an entire planet of asexuals into a single web site, I find it plausible that the bulk of them are truly indifferent about sex. Homosexuals are 5-10% of the population. Statistical relative rarities. Asexuals strike me as likely to exist in smaller numbers. Maybe half a percent? Rare enough that you are absolutely right for most of them; asexual with specific people. Other threads may have been written by exactly the type you describe. My search terms likely weeded them out. Apologies. My metaphor was clear to me, but not plain in hindsight. I used the paralysis question as a barometer. What does the partner think of open marriage in teh event of sexlessness? Do you love your partner enough to make the sacrifice of monogamy (or agamy*)? Or is forced celibacy a thing they would expect of you? If sexlessness occurs for non-medical reason, this conversation should hold up. What diff does it make WHY the person doesn't have sex with you. The difference between can't and won't? A mental block to regular intimacy, given the physicals nature of our brains is, in a way, a physical, medical problem towards an intimate marriage. Happy fiancées cannot envision the circumstance of no longer desiring their partner so teh paralysis question bypasses the unshakable optimism. Cynical refusers in waiting may masquerade as these optimistic spouses-to-be, but the paralysis question circumvents the subterfuge. Both loving spouses and refusers can have tragic accidents. All of this is restricted to specualation about future sexlessness. I agree it's not a path towards resolution of existing unwanted celibacy. That "let's be celibate forever" answer would be a valid answer to the paralysis question, but one both fiancées should be acknowledging in advance. * Side note: agamy seems to be defined as: "absence, nonregulation, or nonrecognition of marriage. 2 : agamogenesis." Well, shit. Here I thought the Latin root would serve me well, but it's been hijacked. I use "agamy" to mean. "Zero lovers" just as "polygamy" means many lovers.
|
|
|
Post by ironhamster on Apr 3, 2021 7:02:40 GMT -5
That definition works, mirrororchid. The prefix, "a-" being without. Atheist, without god. Agnostic, without knowledge. Agomy would then be without a marriage/relationship partner.
|
|
|
Post by elynne on Apr 4, 2021 8:43:08 GMT -5
It seems they are the victims at their site. So who is right? I bet we have more members than they do. There's where I reckon we make a big mistake (in trying to figure out "who is right" and "who is wrong" and why) In bringing these ILIASM deals to a resolution, it doesn't matter who is "right" or who is "wrong". You are "right" by your standards. Your spouse is just as "right" by their standards. You are not about to do a 180 on your standards. Your spouse is not about to do a 180 on their standards. Knowing who's "right" (or "wrong") doesn't actually help any. You're both "right" from your respective perspective. baza You are the wise sage of the hopeless and sexless. Just wanted to table thump and an “AMEN!” to your statement, and a fragment that I remember from an argument with an old boyfriend. In frustration I asked him, “Do you want to be right or do you want to be happy?” He honestly replied, “I want to be right.” It doesn’t matter who’s right, who’s wrong. It’s the wrong question. A better one, are you happy? If no, what are you going to do about it? With love and greetings E
|
|
|
Post by mirrororchid on Apr 5, 2021 5:39:46 GMT -5
... I remember from an argument with an old boyfriend. In frustration I asked him, “Do you want to be right or do you want to be happy?” He honestly replied, “I want to be right.” The weird part is, some people argue their case, eternally wrong, when being willing to be persuaded you're temporarily wrong allows you to be right the rest of your life. The tragic plague I see is everyone digging their heels in to a false collection of conventional wisdom. Truths and falsehoods intermingled, but teasing the two apart is forbidden. True guidance and myths that is bought and sold only as a set. Where religion is in decline, secular dogma is coming to fill the vacuum. The unquestioning nature of both is a flaw in common. They're comforting. Easy to understand. And inevitably wrong, in at least some small way; correction and improvement seen as a nemesis.
|
|