jennie-jennie Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 As much as it sucks to have a spouse that won't touch you it does not compare to being beaten. I have suffered both and I do believe it is a valid comparison. Link to post Share on other sites
JackJack Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 I have suffered both and I do believe it is a valid comparison. But what might be a valid comparison to you might not be for others. Link to post Share on other sites
mem11363 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 The comparison is not as good until you get to the "end". When you talk to people who have "stayed" in a low sex, sexually frustrating or sexless (as defined by 10 times/fewer per year) marriage and they get to the point in their lives where they realize it is too late, too late to change partners, too late to have any hope of fixing their marriage etc. They have profound feelings of anger, betrayal and sadness. The bitterness at being deceived and letting themselves be deceived are devastating. When people "think" they are working through it, and they still have hope, their optimism anaesthetizes them from the pain. But towards the end game, when they realize their whole life has gone by with the most important person in their life denying them this very basic emotional need, they become devastated. Hell, even when they don't wait until turning 60 - even at a earlier breaking point, 45,50 etc. when they fully accept the depth of selfishness and deceipt that the other person engaged in - well - they don't fully recover from that. But what might be a valid comparison to you might not be for others. Link to post Share on other sites
blair08 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 But what might be a valid comparison to you might not be for others. I agree. I think alot of people's experiences might be different, not everyone's is the same. Link to post Share on other sites
allina Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 After reading through a couple of these sexless marriage threads I'm honestly confused. So when one partner tries to get intimate (kiss, stroke the other). They are always told "no" or "stop?" Or have both partners just stopped trying in these marriages? Does the husband ever say to his wife "honey we haven't had sex all week." How does all this happen? How do you end up having sex only 10 times a year? What happens when one partner expresses their dissatisfaction with the lack of sex? :confused: Link to post Share on other sites
jennie-jennie Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 But what might be a valid comparison to you might not be for others. True, but mem's quote led me to believe otherwise. Link to post Share on other sites
Lizzie60 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 I have suffered both and I do believe it is a valid comparison. Well.. for me.. I would rather suffer from being ignored than being beaten.. Link to post Share on other sites
jennie-jennie Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 After reading through a couple of these sexless marriage threads I'm honestly confused. So when one partner tries to get intimate (kiss, stroke the other). They are always told "no" or "stop?" Or have both partners just stopped trying in these marriages? Does the husband ever say to his wife "honey we haven't had sex all week." How does all this happen? How do you end up having sex only 10 times a year? What happens when one partner expresses their dissatisfaction with the lack of sex? :confused: Being a woman it is pretty obvious I could not have sex with my partner without him agreeing to it. I often wished I had been a man instead. It would have been easier to get my way then. Yes, my ex SO would tell me "no" or "stop" whether it was sex or other expressions of intimacy. He would say I was not respecting his space, that I should check with him if he was in the mood before touching him... My view on relationships is that you have agreed to share your body with someone else, that he/she has the right to approach you for affection and sex, and if you really are not into it on this occasion you will say no, not the other way around: checking for permission. My ex SO's view made it very frustrating to approach him, I was always anticipating his rejection. I am a very physical person so I could not keep my hands off him anyway, but I became very damaged inside and my self esteem took a heavy blow by not feeling loved. Yet I could not leave him, since I loved him. I have a high sex drive and enjoy sex but inevitably it hurts you when you are always being rejected, when you are never allowed to take the initiative to sex. Then when my ex SO would want sex he would just come and take it. By then I had shut down my sex drive to survive the rarity of sex, and it was not like he gave me time to turn it on again. Hey, honey, let's have sex these 15 minutes in a month... yeah, great... No wonder it was sexual paradise when MM and I got together, each coming from sexless marriages/relationships. :love: Link to post Share on other sites
jennie-jennie Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Well.. for me.. I would rather suffer from being ignored than being beaten.. Lizzie, it is not being ignored that gets you, it is the constant rejection. Link to post Share on other sites
jennie-jennie Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 "QUOTE: Sexual refusers and spouse beaters both do the same amount of damage in the long run. The only difference is the refusers bruises and injuries are all on the "inside"." Mem, where did that quote come from? Link to post Share on other sites
Lizzie60 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Lizzie, it is not being ignored that gets you, it is the constant rejection. I understand what you're saying.. but rejection doesn't put your life in danger... as being beaten.. can be fatal... I wish my first ex would have 'rejected' me... (sexually)... Link to post Share on other sites
mem11363 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 I truly believe that statement is true. Those are my words. "QUOTE: Sexual refusers and spouse beaters both do the same amount of damage in the long run. The only difference is the refusers bruises and injuries are all on the "inside"." Mem, where did that quote come from? Link to post Share on other sites
mem11363 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 I was aware - when I first said this - that there is a spectrum of physical abuse. I am not going to argue with Lizzie on this point simply because the high end of the sexual refusal spectrum is 100% rejection rate. The high end of the physical abuse spectrum is homicide. I understand what you're saying.. but rejection doesn't put your life in danger... as being beaten.. can be fatal... I wish my first ex would have 'rejected' me... (sexually)... Link to post Share on other sites
angie2443 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 very good! But sex has always been good, anyway... I think I remember you saying this before now that I think of it. So, was it just the frequency that was a problem, or did you want your wife to initiate more often? Link to post Share on other sites
jennie-jennie Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 I bet you this, if we had the victims in these sexless marriages write down there stories - and we had the "refusers" write down their stories this is what would happen: 1. The victims would make the same types of excuses for their refusers that victims of spousal abuse/violence make for theirs. And the victims would repeat many of the lies that their refusers tell them, which is just what the victims of domestic violence do. And if you scored these people on a self esteem scale you would find that they have awful self esteem, which is one big reason they don't leave the marriage, because they don't truly believe they deserve better. Their refusers lies, tricks and manipulations have slowly sucked the love, confidence and spirit from them to the point where they have terrible trouble ending it. This one guy wrote in - his youngest kids are in college now and he is still claiming to "stay" for them. No way - he is afraid to leave. His refuser has destroyed his spirit over a period of almost 20 years. 2. The refusers would lie about the frequency and severity of their behavior which is EXACTLY what spouse beaters do, and they would blame the victim relentlessly just like spousal abusers. Spousal abuse and spousal refuse even rhyme. They really are sickeningly similar. All it takes is a strong willed spouse who is willing to flat out lie, coupled with a very trusting spouse who is somewhat conflict avoidant. Thats it. Well, you sure described my reality here. Lizzie, sure enough, I was never severely beaten. For those who suffered that, they might have a different take on it. Link to post Share on other sites
angie2443 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 QUOTE: Sexual refusers and spouse beaters both do the same amount of damage in the long run. The only difference is the refusers bruises and injuries are all on the "inside". I find the comparison disgusting. No one owes their body or their love to another person. If, during the course of a relationship, the sex leaves and the love goes, that is a very sad thing. The other spouse certainly has the right to leave that relationship. No one has the right to physical abuse someone. Link to post Share on other sites
JackJack Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 True, but mem's quote led me to believe otherwise. That is fine, no problem. BUT what I'm saying is, if that's the way you and maybe others feel or see it, because you have gone through it, doesn't mean it is the way everyone else will see it or feel. If you are/were in a sexless relationship and have been beaten at some point in your life as well, and you think the two are one in the same as far as pain, and rejection and whatever else that's ok, its ok if thats how you feel. I'm just saying SOME may not feel like that. You feel its a good comparison, others may not. Link to post Share on other sites
mem11363 Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 This is not about "falling out of love". This is about parasitically consuming a weaker partner over a long period of time for your own advantage. This is about deception and outright lying. This is the ultimate "long con". Turns out that there are lots and lots of evil, soul destroying things you can do to your spouse that are all perfectly legal. And in the context of a "lifetime" marrital commitment, the victim can sometimes be convinced that they are "weak" or worse "not honoring their vows" (sic) or are harming their children if they leave their abuser. THAT is what I am talking about. And just for the avoidance of doubt, I believe that physical spousal abuse is severely wrong, I am glad it is a criminal offence, glad that the laws are enforced, and the offendors get punished/go to jail. I have zero sympathy for any spouse who physically intimidates or harms their partner regardless of how upset the "aggressor" is. I expected to get some really inflamed responses to my comment. I find the comparison disgusting. No one owes their body or their love to another person. If, during the course of a relationship, the sex leaves and the love goes, that is a very sad thing. The other spouse certainly has the right to leave that relationship. No one has the right to physical abuse someone. Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 Being a woman it is pretty obvious I could not have sex with my partner without him agreeing to it. I often wished I had been a man instead. It would have been easier to get my way then. : So if you were a man you would have been a rapist? Link to post Share on other sites
jennie-jennie Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 So if you were a man you would have been a rapist? LOL I figure I deserved that one. Perhaps you are right. Perhaps it wouldn't have made any difference. I wonder what made me think it would have at the time. I guess it was thinking that a man does not need to excite a woman to have sex with her, he only needs her permission. Link to post Share on other sites
Woggle Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 LOL I figure I deserved that one. Perhaps you are right. Perhaps it wouldn't have made any difference. I wonder what made me think it would have at the time. I guess it was thinking that a man does not need to excite a woman to have sex with her, he only needs her permission. It's actually men who are usually on the receiving end of a sexless relationship. Your situation doea happen but it is different from the norm. Link to post Share on other sites
giotto Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 I think I remember you saying this before now that I think of it. So, was it just the frequency that was a problem, or did you want your wife to initiate more often? this is OT, but yes, I wanted the frequency (not adequate) and wife initiating a little more often... I remember my wife initiating sex about 3 times in 24 years... Link to post Share on other sites
jennie-jennie Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 It's actually men who are usually on the receiving end of a sexless relationship. Your situation doea happen but it is different from the norm. That is so difficult for me to understand, why women would not want sex with their men. Are we women so different that some of us like sex and some don't? Is it that simple? To me sex is such a major component of a relationship, it is incomprehensible to me that any women would want to live without it. Link to post Share on other sites
carhill Posted September 5, 2009 Share Posted September 5, 2009 To me sex is such a major component of a relationship, it is incomprehensible to me that any women would want to live without it. Those who do enjoy the other aspects of the relationship which benefit them and find other outlets for intimacy. IME, it's much easier for a woman to seek out and find intimacy, both with other women as well as men who would like to get into her pants, regardless of marital/relationship status. Absent medical issues, IMO, a woman who does not desire sex with her partner simply does not desire her partner anymore. He has become a friend; a friend who helps support the family and who hopefully co-parents children. This is the female version of male compartmentalization. Link to post Share on other sites
Lizzie60 Posted September 6, 2009 Share Posted September 6, 2009 I find the comparison disgusting. No one owes their body or their love to another person. If, during the course of a relationship, the sex leaves and the love goes, that is a very sad thing. The other spouse certainly has the right to leave that relationship. No one has the right to physical abuse someone. I tend to agree with this.. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts