Author Storyrider Posted March 29, 2007 Author Share Posted March 29, 2007 I'm sorry, SR, but I think that what your husband said was mean, hurtful, and misinformed. You felt lust and desire for your then-boyfriend - as is completely NORMAL - and he tried to make it ABnormal. That is just terrible. Has he never felt physical lust for someone? Has he never been so attracted to someone after six weeks that he just want to combine with that person? Well, to be fair, we did a lot of other fairly lustful stuff. We did a ton of kissing and fondling. He wasn't a puritan. Still, two adults slept in the same bed for at least a year without f*cking. Earlier on the thread someone mentioned it was odd we were even able to do this. If we wanted each other enough to get married it should have been unbearable. What he told you was not true, that it wasn't real or you were manufacturing that (in my opinion anyway). Here I'm in total agreement with you. He misunderstood, and then he pretty much insisted I interpret things his way. I really feel for you. I can relate to so much of what you've said about your marriage and my sympathy goes out to you in this difficult time. I am ending my (sexless, unsatisfying) marriage and am excited about the future and having a full relationship with a man. I wish you could have that same experience, either with your hub or not. It seems like your husband doesn't want to relinquish the teacher/master role, the role where he molds you to what he wants. Shouldn't marriage be a two-way street where people listen to each other? It sounds like he doesn't listen to you, just turns all of your comments back on you to make them your fault. The thing is, we both moved forward into the marriage, me knowing I didn't want to have sex with him (or even kiss him much) and him knowing that too. We can't just blame one of us. And here we are today. Maybe we should just forget about the past and try to wipe the slate clean, if that is possible. Well, I'm all for treating depression, if that is a factor here. I think it is getting to the point where I must in order to function. But I don't blame him for my depression. Perhaps the sex issues contribute. But I am also bored and overwhelmed with mommy duties after eight years of being out of the workforce. I miss using that part of my mind. I miss interacting with colleagues. I tried to talk to my H about the problems in our M for at least a year before I dropped the "I want to separate" bomb on him a week ago. He kept telling me it was my problem, and I was depressed, etc. I think if someone were to hear his side of the story, he would come across as a nice guy, like James or Moose, whose wife has problems. And as other posters have said about their wives, he believes I need an attitude adjustment and that I am primarily witholding myself from him because I can't handle intimacy. It might actually help our sex life that I'm starting to develop my own interpretations of things rather than buying his. I don't want him to tell me how I'm feeling, and I want us to be more equals and break out of the roles we are stuck in. So I'm sorry if I'm projecting a bit of my recent/past experience on your situation, Storyrider. But I hate to see someone who seems as reasonable and insightful as you (and as I believe I, too, am) stuck in relationship ambivalence because your SO is making you believe that that is where you should be, and they are not really there with you. They have put you there, in a corner, so to speak, on your own, to figure out your transgressions. We have other issues besides the sex, but on the whole we have a good relationship. If the sex problem were fixed today, I would call it a great relationship. We are well matched tempermentally and intellectually. Aside from sex, we fight about money (doesn't everyone?) and religion sometimes. I don't know. I think I'm too screwed up with my own situation to really have much useful to say to anyone right now! Will go back to lurk-mode. Good luck! I'll keep good thoughts coming your way. I appreciate it when you post. I like hearing what is going on with you, and there are some similarities. It sounds like you two have more of a father daughter relationship than an wqual partnership. He is the teacher, the responsible ine etc... you are the one who needs to learn etc... That could effect your libdo. Yes, I agree. And just a question your don't have to answer why doesn't he like BC pills? We are under the impression there is an abortive aspect to most b/c pills. If a pill is missed and ovulation occurs, the ovum, of course, can be fertilized. Then, the hormones in the pill prevent implantation b/c the uterine lining is too thin, thus aborting the embryo. I am still open to hearing this isn't true or only happens very rarely. I would like him to have a vasectomy which he will never do, even though he agrees we are done having children. He will also not agree to a tubiligation for me. He says this is treating the body like a machine that needs to be "fixed". This is a sore point between us as I don't agree at all. Link to post Share on other sites
norajane Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 We are under the impression there is an abortive aspect to most b/c pills. If a pill is missed and ovulation occurs, the ovum, of course, can be fertilized. Then, the hormones in the pill prevent implantation b/c the uterine lining is too thin, thus aborting the embryo. I am still open to hearing this isn't true or only happens very rarely. I would like him to have a vasectomy which he will never do, even though he agrees we are done having children. He will also not agree to a tubiligation for me. He says this is treating the body like a machine that needs to be "fixed". This is a sore point between us as I don't agree at all. Try the Nuva Ring. No pills to miss. Link to post Share on other sites
CaterpillarGirl Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Try the Nuva Ring. No pills to miss. According to the Catholic Church, any kind of contraceptive is contrary to church law. This includes the Nuva Ring and b/c bills, which, as Storyrider said, may not prevent always release of an egg and subsequent fertilization, but generally prevent the implantation of this embryo in the uterine wall. Pretty much, Catholics are limited to the Natural Family Planning method, which requires abstinence during ovulation. Storyrider, I'm surprised your husband, being a dedicated Catholic, would even consent to condoms. These are not condoned by the Church, either. Link to post Share on other sites
Starry-eyed Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Well, Storyrider, I've recently come to the conclusion that a relationship without sexual desire and fulfilling sex is just not a relationship, at least not one that I want to have. I deserve to have a good sex life as well as good other things. And I am leaving my marriage, and know something better is out there, and I hope my husband will find a happier relationship, too. Life is just too short to suffer or willingly be a martyr to situation. However, you've got kids, and that makes everything different, so I really don't know what to say. I still believe all the things I said above, but you have two beautiful little girls to think about. I really hope you can get into counseling and talk to a professional; it certainly has helped me. You know, your feelings for your husband will probably not change. He will probably not change, and you will probably not change, as it's hard for us to change who we are. So, you have to ask yourself if you want to be the student, the unstable one, for the rest of your life. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Storyrider Posted March 29, 2007 Author Share Posted March 29, 2007 According to the Catholic Church, any kind of contraceptive is contrary to church law. This includes the Nuva Ring and b/c bills, which, as Storyrider said, may not prevent always release of an egg and subsequent fertilization, but generally prevent the implantation of this embryo in the uterine wall. Pretty much, Catholics are limited to the Natural Family Planning method, which requires abstinence during ovulation. Storyrider, I'm surprised your husband, being a dedicated Catholic, would even consent to condoms. These are not condoned by the Church, either. He would prefer not to use condoms either, but he knows I wouldn't go for it. It is a concession he has made to me (I'm not Catholic). In fact, he mentioned to his boss when he was hired that we are outside Catholic teaching on this (he works for the Church). Every time I shake his boss's hand at a party I wonder if he is thinking about that! Link to post Share on other sites
burning 4 revenge Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Story, if you had to do it over, would you marry someone more than a decade older than you? Link to post Share on other sites
Author Storyrider Posted March 29, 2007 Author Share Posted March 29, 2007 Story, if you had to do it over, would you marry someone more than a decade older than you? I don't know...I would marry someone I wanted to f*ck and who I lusted for day and night. I would marry someone I couldn't keep my hands off of. (And hope they were a good person? And a trustworthy person?) You know, I was so jaded over men when I met him. I was like whats his name? Diogenes? Looking for the one honest man. I was so afraid of being shafted. I wonder if I had gotten my confidence and trust back then maybe I wouldn't have felt I had to marry a saint in order to feel safe. I am tipsy on amaretto, a gift from the in-laws. Cheers! Link to post Share on other sites
Author Storyrider Posted March 29, 2007 Author Share Posted March 29, 2007 Thinking more about your question, B4r, maybe the age difference has increased the teacher/pupil thing we seem to have going. But in some ways he is also younger than his age. He'd had fewer sex partners than me, by far, when we met. He had hardly dated at all. He is an innocent in many ways. Link to post Share on other sites
mental_traveller Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 She's not attracted to him physically. It's quite simple really. People tend to overanalyze things. I agree. He probably isn't really into her physically either. The fact is that they have zero sexual chemistry. Divorce & move on, and next time don't marry someone where that chemistry is lacking. Link to post Share on other sites
Sevenmack Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 ^Exactly. It may be time to end it. And if ending it is a problem, then perhaps Storyrider and her husband should both agree to just reside in the same house to take care of the kids and live separate lives otherwise. They're already doing this, so make it formal. Link to post Share on other sites
mental_traveller Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Threads like this just reinforce my belief that most women have absolutely no clue in what they want or desire. Here you describe your husband as a perfect angel and a great father, but this is not enough. Nope something is lacking, perhaps if he were to treat you like garbage you might find him more desirable. It certainly seems to be a common theme with the ladies, always attracted the losers who will treat them like crap and break their hearts, yet for the stand up guys in the world .... no lube action happening. Is it any wonder there are plenty of jerks in the world. She knew exactly what she wanted (i.e. someone totally different physically, and more aggressive in bed, someone that she wanted to f*ck). She was just in denial and too ashamed to admit it. After all, that would mean she was being "superficial", which clashed with her value system at the time. This is just another example of why people under 30 should not get married. Link to post Share on other sites
mental_traveller Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 ^Exactly. It may be time to end it. And if ending it is a problem, then perhaps Storyrider and her husband should both agree to just reside in the same house to take care of the kids and live separate lives otherwise. They're already doing this, so make it formal. Exactly. They can still be best friends platonically after a divorce. Staying together will guarantee that both of them have zero sex life forever and the resentment will just get worse and worse over time. Link to post Share on other sites
mockeryjones Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Exactly. They can still be best friends platonically after a divorce. has that ever happened? Link to post Share on other sites
Sevenmack Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Mental_traveler wrote: This is just another example of why people under 30 should not get married. And not just people under 30. Anyone who hasn't sat down, really looked at themselves for who they really are and figured out what they want in a lover. There are too many 30-somethings in my life who are in the same boat as Storyrider or haven't figured themselves out. If you don't know who you are, you can't know anyone else. And you can't grow together. Link to post Share on other sites
Author Storyrider Posted March 29, 2007 Author Share Posted March 29, 2007 She knew exactly what she wanted (i.e. someone totally different physically, and more aggressive in bed, someone that she wanted to f*ck). She was just in denial and too ashamed to admit it. After all, that would mean she was being "superficial", which clashed with her value system at the time. These are qualities I know I want now, in retrospect. I am just much more sexual now than I was at 23. Therefore, I'm much more aware of what I want in a sex partner, and it has become much more important to me. But I would disagree that I wanted someone totally different. There are so many things about him that I would choose all over again today. If some aggressive assh*le meathead started pursuing me, and I was single today, I wouldn't go for him just because he had the right physique. Also, if it were clear that I should divorce him, I wouldn't be conflicted. I would be filing papers. I agree that I have a tendency to overanalyze, but things can be oversimplified too. Link to post Share on other sites
mental_traveller Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 Everyone has your particular brand of neurosis, including me and probably including your husband. Like I said we're all superficial to a degree. What happens is we end up settling for what we think is the best option at the time and often one partner will get the better deal of the two in terms of physical attraction and it's understood on some subtle level. I think this fact may cause resentment in one or both of the two partners. Interesting theory. I think there's a lot of truth in it. It's so ridiculous that people describe it as "superficial" to go for someone who actually arouses you to lust & passion, as opposed to the sorry excuse for a sex life that so many couples (probably the majority after 5+ years together) endure. I think to avoid this miserable fate, you simply have to refuse to settle. Go for lust/passion instead of looks or 100% emotional compatibility (the latter is what friends are for, not lovers). As long as you don't argue a lot then who cares about companionship. Link to post Share on other sites
mental_traveller Posted March 29, 2007 Share Posted March 29, 2007 These are qualities I know I want now, in retrospect. I am just much more sexual now than I was at 23. Therefore, I'm much more aware of what I want in a sex partner, and it has become much more important to me. But I would disagree that I wanted someone totally different. There are so many things about him that I would choose all over again today. If some aggressive assh*le meathead started pursuing me, and I was single today, I wouldn't go for him just because he had the right physique. Also, if it were clear that I should divorce him, I wouldn't be conflicted. I would be filing papers. I agree that I have a tendency to overanalyze, but things can be oversimplified too. I guess it depends on your priorities. Do you place more importance on being able to have a satisfying (or just not totally non-existent) sex life, or do you value companionship etc more. And do you think it's fair to also ruin his chances of achieving that by continuing in the relationship. Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Lucky Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 I think to avoid this miserable fate, you simply have to refuse to settle. Go for lust/passion instead of looks or 100% emotional compatibility (the latter is what friends are for, not lovers). As long as you don't argue a lot then who cares about companionship. Your theory would work as long as your are willing to change spouses or SO's every 18 months or so. If "companionship" is shorthand for friendship, respect and shared interests, it is the foundation you build everything on (including an enduring sex life) after "lust/passion" fades. Otherwise, it's just a series of flings... Mr. Lucky Link to post Share on other sites
burning 4 revenge Posted March 30, 2007 Share Posted March 30, 2007 If some aggressive assh*le meathead started pursuing me, and I was single today, I wouldn't go for him just because he had the right physique. Oh please Id give it three hours before you were touching his schmekel Link to post Share on other sites
Author Storyrider Posted March 30, 2007 Author Share Posted March 30, 2007 Oh please Id give it three hours before you were touching his schmekel You're hurting my sore lip. Tomorrow, the Yiddish word of the day will be "shvitsn". As in, "I found a new Neanderthal boyfriend, and the action was so hot in the bedroom that, oy, I was shvitsn." Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts