Infidelity in a sexless marriage

January 2, 2015

Turning the other cheek is all very noble, however denial of intimacy and refusal to entertain compromise is so ignorant and low that in a relationship where the denying spouse holds a weak hand (ie they are already lacking commitment to the marriage in other areas) going outside the marriage to have intimate needs met seems fair game so long as the denying spouse is aware thst there is an issue and what the potential consequences are.

I personally don't think its acceptable for one partner to hold the others sex drive under lock and key when they have such little regard for what it is that they hold in their hands. In my opinion when they do that with so little care then they lose the right for any moral judgement on the denied partner and the denied partner should be able to carry on in good conscience.

I am not trying to say that two wrongs make a right in this instance, as they don't, but the question for the denied spouse is not 'am I doing something wrong?'
But rather 'if I care about the marriage, how does my search for intimate gratification outside the marriage affect the survival of it?'

Oh, believe me, I agree with you about the denial of intimacy. I have a theory that most people who get defensive about sex not being important don't like having their toes stepped on about their own denial OR they are of the mindset that their spouse needs to earn enough points to get it.

My points are this:

I am responsible for my own choices and values regardless of what my spouse does. That means that even if they refuse to actually BE a spuse, I am still responsible to stay true to my values. And cheating isn't one of them.

If I cheat, I have just basically wiped out any legitimate complaint I have ever had and ever will have about my marriage because "I am the one who cheated." If you want ANYONE to give a crap or take your starvation pain seriously, the LAST thing you need to do is cheat.

January 2, 2015

It was once a month, I don't know whether that then completely stopped and the affair started.

For those justifying the affair, would you defend him continuing to sleep with his wife in the meantime, potentially exposing her to diseases?

If there is absolutely NO sex in a marriage, and no hope for any--zip, zilch, zero--then I have a hard time getting worked up about an affair. But continuing to have sex with your spouse (however infrequent) while having an affair is completely indefensible and disgusting.

January 2, 2015

Oh, believe me, I agree with you about the denial of intimacy. I have a theory that most people who get defensive about sex not being important don't like having their toes stepped on about their own denial OR they are of the mindset that their spouse needs to earn enough points to get it.

My points are this:

I am responsible for my own choices and values regardless of what my spouse does. That means that even if they refuse to actually BE a spuse, I am still responsible to stay true to my values. And cheating isn't one of them.

If I cheat, I have just basically wiped out any legitimate complaint I have ever had and ever will have about my marriage because "I am the one who cheated." If you want ANYONE to give a crap or take your starvation pain seriously, the LAST thing you need to do is cheat.

The only person whose opinion truly matters in that situation is the denying partners- their colours have already been firmly nailed to the mast by their (selfish) ramping down of sexual activity because it suits their aims.

The rest comes down to your own code of ethics, I think everyone's mileage is going to vary on that score. Turning the other cheek seems to me to be very noble but you are only hurting yourself by doing so, especially if your sex drive is that strong. The denying partner wont be losing any sleep over it while you lay awake at night nursing your blue balls, thats for sure.

January 2, 2015

For those justifying the affair, would you defend him continuing to sleep with his wife in the meantime, potentially exposing her to diseases?

If there is absolutely NO sex in a marriage, and no hope for any--zip, zilch, zero--then I have a hard time getting worked up about an affair. But continuing to have sex with your spouse (however infrequent) while having an affair is completely indefensible and disgusting.

I personally do think this risk of death/disability to the BS with STDs is over done and I guess its used by them to make the betrayal seem twice as bad. Sure there is risk, but I wonder how many of the BS who scream this, had their spouse provide a medical report before they slept with them, or cared if their partner had done a fair bit of casual sex before them, or they themselves had engaged in casual sex prior to marriage. Most affairs are not with craiglist skanks or niteclub players, but more so with a single mom/dad in their social circle, or a neighbor, or a co-worker or a secretary or an ex or a friend they fancied for many years or someone else unhappy in marriage. It not like the majority of your older single friends or neighbors or co-workers are riddled with pox.

Having sex once a month is not exactly a sexless relationship and there are lots of LTRs where sex 10-12 times a year happens. For some it will suit both, but for lots (more so the men) it's not enough. At want point you can claim justification for an affair is hard to say. Unsatisfied married persons will have different thresholds as will happily married people looking on and judging them.

January 2, 2015

Having sex once a month is not exactly a sexless relationship and there are lots of LTRs where sex 10-12 times a year happens. For some it will suit both, but for lots (more so the men) it's not enough. At want point you can claim justification for an affair is hard to say. Unsatisfied married persons will have different thresholds as will happily married people looking on and judging them.

It's all context. If a couple is in a LDR and they only get to see each other every month or so and they tear each other clothes off and ravage each other once a month, that is a far cry different story from a couple that have a home and family together and one of them only puts out a measured dose of starfish sex or slambamthankyoumam sex for 5 minutes a month to shut them up.

One is an act of desire and passion. The other is an act of control and manipulation.

January 2, 2015

It's all context. If a couple is in a LDR and they only get to see each other every month or so and they tear each other clothes off and ravage each other once a month, that is a far cry different story from a couple that have a home and family together and one of them only puts out a measured dose of starfish sex or slambamthankyoumam sex for 5 minutes a month to shut them up.

One is an act of desire and passion. The other is an act of control and manipulation.

I agree, I just bet a lot of 'cheating is the worst sin' people wont.

Starfish sex sucks. Its a really poor substitute for passionate lusty sex, and if you get it once a month for 5-10 minutes that = a bit more than an hour of worse than prostitute sex a year. Blah. I have a couple of friends who are in relationships that sound a lot like the friend of the OP, and they joke (though its black humor) about having to earn their sporadic sex. I would resent that, and it would feedback into me having lower desire to sleep with her (which could well suit her). If you have to earn it, then might as well pay for a much sexier hooker, and take that burden off your wife.

January 2, 2015

There's lots of posts on here supporting ( though there's lots of denial that's what really going on) for cheating in a marriage where one partner isn't satisified with the amount/quality of sex...

There's even condemnation for the one who doesn't want to have sex saying that they are unfairly controling the sex life of the person with the higher sex drive, but where does one draw the line? Sexonce a month, once a wee, once a day? At what point does the "withholding spouse" have a valid argument for saying " no" ( there are some men and women out there who are never satisfied, and will continue to feel as if they are not getting enough sex. It's rare, but it can happen)

Turn that aorund. I haven't been in the situation myself, but just imagine being told that ' you either give the sex I want when I want it and how I want it or I am going to go find someone who will, and it will all be your own fault because you have a lower sex drive than me"

If you were the "withholding" spouse, how would that make you feel? What it seems to basically be comming down to is a someone using one of he most hurtful threats that I expecet could be used ir order to have more sex and build a sense of intimacy.

Please explain to me eactly how that is going to work? If you have to resort to that, what's the damned point anyway? I can see saying" there's no intimacy in our marriage, so it's time to end things" but not to make a threat like that.Why would someone even want to stay married if they were using threats of infidletiy to get what they want?

besides, the argument that "they only cheated because they weren't getting enough sex " really goes against the rationale most cheaters use. I could understand the logic ( if not agree with it) if it was a one night stand, sex with an escort or that sort of thing. Most people who cheat will say "I never planned to cheat, it just sort of happened, and I didn't see it comming, until we started getting close and it wasn't about sex anyway"

If it's about lack of sex, lack of emotional intimacy, or some other reason, cheating won't fix that, and can only make it worse. it's far better to for both to leave on as good a terms as posisble. Cheating has no place in creating the best posisble environment for ending a marriage.

January 2, 2015

I agree truncated, it seems to some that having their own way as regards sex is their divine right and if the person doesn't conform to what THEY want, when THEY want it, then they are perfectly justified in cheating.

If a person 's sex drive is dwindling then the question needs asked why, not "Give it to me now or I will leave" or "I will not leave but I will cheat, take it or leave it..."

Seems there is a lack of understanding in the marriage if ultimatums are being fired off.

As it appears women are being blamed here on this thread, I need to say this.

Most women in LTRs like to see and feel a connection with their man, before they agree to sex. If a woman is witholding sex or is disinterested (discounting medical issues) then I suggest the man needs to look closely at what he is truly bringing to the relationship. Demanding sex as if she has no option, is certainly no way to get a woman on side - starfish he will get, if that.

Perhaps this entitlement attitude is what leads to the lack of sex in the first place...

January 2, 2015

There's lots of posts on here supporting ( though there's lots of denial that's what really going on) for cheating in a marriage where one partner isn't satisified with the amount/quality of sex...

There's even condemnation for the one who doesn't want to have sex saying that they are unfairly controling the sex life of the person with the higher sex drive, but where does one draw the line? Sexonce a month, once a wee, once a day? At what point does the "withholding spouse" have a valid argument for saying " no" ( there are some men and women out there who are never satisfied, and will continue to feel as if they are not getting enough sex. It's rare, but it can happen)

Turn that aorund. I haven't been in the situation myself, but just imagine being told that ' you either give the sex I want when I want it and how I want it or I am going to go find someone who will, and it will all be your own fault because you have a lower sex drive than me"

If you were the "withholding" spouse, how would that make you feel? What it seems to basically be comming down to is a someone using one of he most hurtful threats that I expecet could be used ir order to have more sex and build a sense of intimacy.

Please explain to me eactly how that is going to work? If you have to resort to that, what's the damned point anyway? I can see saying" there's no intimacy in our marriage, so it's time to end things" but not to make a threat like that.Why would someone even want to stay married if they were using threats of infidletiy to get what they want?

besides, the argument that "they only cheated because they weren't getting enough sex " really goes against the rationale most cheaters use. I could understand the logic ( if not agree with it) if it was a one night stand, sex with an escort or that sort of thing. Most people who cheat will say "I never planned to cheat, it just sort of happened, and I didn't see it comming, until we started getting close and it wasn't about sex anyway"

If it's about lack of sex, lack of emotional intimacy, or some other reason, cheating won't fix that, and can only make it worse. it's far better to for both to leave on as good a terms as posisble. Cheating has no place in creating the best posisble environment for ending a marriage.

There is no easy answer. But what IS an easy way of looking at it is that its the responsibility of BOTH partners to resolve it. From what I hear both from my friend and other couples who go through is that the witholding partner never sees it as a problem- and of course they wouldnt, their goal is to have as little sex with their partner as possible.

So the couple either splits or has an open relationship, I would have thought open relationships would be a natural conclusion but it seems that (as in my friends case) the witholder doesnt want to leave the family unit but doesnt want the person sexually but also doesnt want

Anybody else to have them. Its incredibly, unbelievably selfish and thats what I find so hard to stomach about this. Its not the lack of sex because imbalanced sex drives are to be expected over time. Its the bloody mindedness of the witholder getting what they want and not giving two hoots about their partners needs and being willing to subject them to chastity (a quicky once a month being pretty much the same) than try and work a positive outcome for both.

January 2, 2015

I agree truncated, it seems to some that having their own way as regards sex is their divine right and if the person doesn't conform to what THEY want, when THEY want it, then they are perfectly justified in cheating.

Read that through again and apply it to the witholder. See- its selfish on both sides, its just that the witholding partner holds the keys to the gates so by default they are in control of what happens and so dont have to compromise. If there is no attempt to compromise then THEY are the selfish ones.

January 2, 2015

The compromise here was once a month sex, if we are to believe that was the reality.

Do not forget cheaters will say anything to everybody to justify their position.

And yes withholding sex would be a selfish act, if that is what it indeed it is.

But reduced libido is a complicated subject and reducing it to "she doesn't want sex" and thus "she deserves to be cheated on" or "they need an open marriage" is ridiculous.

Edited January 2, 2015 by elaine567
spelling

January 2, 2015

Not wanting sex is a poor excuse for not having sex. I don't want to exercise, but once I get started, I usually like it, and afterwards I'm glad I did. The rewards outweigh the lack of initial interest. Sex is no different, if hormones are not creating the desire. Many - if not most - people do enjoy sex once they get started, so the only problem is getting started.

As we've gotten older and hormone levels have declined, we are both facing the issue of decreased desire. But, we also know how important sex is to both of us, and know how much we enjoy it once we start, so we've formed the habit of starting, and do so every day. We've always had an exceptional sex life, and even with these challenges, it's better than most 20-somethings have.

The real problem is when other issues exist in the marriage that would make sex and intimacy undesirable even when hormones are normal and you retain an interest in sex in general.

January 2, 2015

There's lots of posts on here supporting ( though there's lots of denial that's what really going on) for cheating in a marriage where one partner isn't satisified with the amount/quality of sex...

There's even condemnation for the one who doesn't want to have sex saying that they are unfairly controling the sex life of the person with the higher sex drive, but where does one draw the line? Sexonce a month, once a wee, once a day? At what point does the "withholding spouse" have a valid argument for saying " no" ( there are some men and women out there who are never satisfied, and will continue to feel as if they are not getting enough sex. It's rare, but it can happen)

Turn that aorund. I haven't been in the situation myself, but just imagine being told that ' you either give the sex I want when I want it and how I want it or I am going to go find someone who will, and it will all be your own fault because you have a lower sex drive than me"

If you were the "withholding" spouse, how would that make you feel? What it seems to basically be comming down to is a someone using one of he most hurtful threats that I expecet could be used ir order to have more sex and build a sense of intimacy.

Please explain to me eactly how that is going to work? If you have to resort to that, what's the damned point anyway? I can see saying" there's no intimacy in our marriage, so it's time to end things" but not to make a threat like that.Why would someone even want to stay married if they were using threats of infidletiy to get what they want?

besides, the argument that "they only cheated because they weren't getting enough sex " really goes against the rationale most cheaters use. I could understand the logic ( if not agree with it) if it was a one night stand, sex with an escort or that sort of thing. Most people who cheat will say "I never planned to cheat, it just sort of happened, and I didn't see it comming, until we started getting close and it wasn't about sex anyway"

If it's about lack of sex, lack of emotional intimacy, or some other reason, cheating won't fix that, and can only make it worse. it's far better to for both to leave on as good a terms as posisble. Cheating has no place in creating the best posisble environment for ending a marriage.

Where I am drawing the line is cases like this one where the withholder simply does not want to have intimacy with the withholdee anymore and expects the withholdee to continue to provide and just suck it up and live with it.

It doesn't really have anything to do with frequency. If someone is just begrudgingly putting out some starfish sex and letting their partner masturbate with their body every now and then to shut them up and they lay there looking at clock and telling them to hurry up, then it doesn't count.

When someone is doing that then all bets are off. No cheating is not righteous or just or called for in that situation but at that point the withholder has waived their right to exclusivity.

The reason this makes people uncomfortable is all of have declined our partner at some point or another. I am the horniest guy on the planet and even I have declined my wife on occasion. Does that mean she should go get it elsewhere??? No. No because I am still committed to trying to meet her needs and trying to have an intimate and full service relationship. She knows that I may be too tired or too sick or too stressed out on Friday night but she knows that by Sat or Sun night I will bring the thunder and love her up good....twice.

I'm not talking about normal couples that have normal things come up to interfer with a night of passion now and then. I am talking about cases like this one where it is established that one party no longer wants to be intimate with the other and has no room in their life for intimacy with them and they begrudge that the other still wants a sex life.

For those people, they have no right to expect or demand exclusivity. The cheating may still be wrong but it is a natural and to be expected result of the environment that they created.

January 2, 2015

Where I am drawing the line is cases like this one where the withholder simply does not want to have intimacy with the withholdee anymore and expects the withholdee to continue to provide and just suck it up and live with it.

It doesn't really have anything to do with frequency. If someone is just begrudgingly putting out some starfish sex and letting their partner masturbate with their body every now and then to shut them up and they lay there looking at clock and telling them to hurry up, then it doesn't count.

When someone is doing that then all bets are off. No cheating is not righteous or just or called for in that situation but at that point the withholder has waived their right to exclusivity.

The reason this makes people uncomfortable is all of have declined our partner at some point or another. I am the horniest guy on the planet and even I have declined my wife on occasion. Does that mean she should go get it elsewhere??? No. No because I am still committed to trying to meet her needs and trying to have an intimate and full service relationship. She knows that I may be too tired or too sick or too stressed out on Friday night but she knows that by Sat or Sun night I will bring the thunder and love her up good....twice.

I'm not talking about normal couples that have normal things come up to interfer with a night of passion now and then. I am talking about cases like this one where it is established that one party no longer wants to be intimate with the other and has no room in their life for intimacy with them and they begrudge that the other still wants a sex life.

For those people, they have no right to expect or demand exclusivity. The cheating may still be wrong but it is a natural and to be expected result of the environment that they created.

But you ignore the fact that in some relationships, the emotional connection that is so important to some women diminishes, they no longer feel close to a man who they feel is distant, preoccupied or even downright hostile or they have pain or are too tired, too stressed from raising children to even contemplate sex and what is left is often a man demanding sex, or whining when it is not on offer. That leads to resentment as the man clearly no longer understands her, and that leads to even less sex.

Instead of attempting to truly understand or work through it, it appears lack of sex is often seen by men as the woman wielding "control" and therefore it needs stamped upon by punishment - ie cheating or leaving.

January 2, 2015

And yes withholding sex would be a selfish act, if that is what it indeed it is.
But reduced libido is a complicated subject and reducing it to "she doesn't want sex" and thus "she deserves to be cheated on" or "they need an open marriage" is ridiculous.

The problem with that assertion is at some point he will find out she is having wild, nasty porno sex with someone else some day. 9 times out of 10 these guys find out at some point that her "reduced libido" is actually in hyper drive - just with someone else.

But just for the sake of argument let's flip it around and make it a man with ED.

There is a whole galaxy of difference between a man with ED who is seeking treatment and loving up his wife through other means (ie oral, manual, toys etc) and who holds his wife at night and tells her he loves her and will do what he can to make sure she knows he loves her and wants her in his life.

Verses the guy with a limpy who just sits on the couch eating Cheetos and playing Xbox all say who tells his wife he has ED and it doesn't bother him and he isn't going to do anything about so she just needs to live with it. While at the same time he expects her to fix his meals, clean his house, take care of the kids, get the groceries etc etc.

In case #2, it is up to her to determine how she gets her needs met because he has consciously abdicated his role in meeting them.

January 2, 2015

But you ignore the fact that in some relationships, the emotional connection that is so important to some women diminishes, they no longer feel close to a man who they feel is distant, preoccupied or even downright hostile or they have pain or are too tired, too stressed from raising children to even contemplate sex and what is left is often a man demanding sex, or whining when it is not on offer. That leads to resentment as the man clearly no longer understands her, and that leads to even less sex.
Instead of attempting to truly understand or work through it, it appears lack of sex is often seen by men as the woman wielding "control" and therefore it needs stamped upon by punishment - ie cheating or leaving.

I have said about half a dozen times throughout this thread that the withholdee does have a responsibility to address the issue and work with the other to find a mutually agreeable solution.

I am talking about when the withholdee does make a sincere and honest effort to address and correct the issues and the withholder turns his/her nose up at it and basically tells the withholdee to quit bothering them about it and live with it.

January 2, 2015

it seems to some that having their own way as regards sex is their divine right and if the person doesn't conform to what THEY want, when THEY want it, then they are perfectly justified in cheating withholding.

Yup. Change one word and read again aloud. Can you not see the irony?

I think what you're missing is that when people get married, sex is part of the deal. Your argument sounds like what women complain about when a man thinks he's entitled to sex on a first date. Of course you loaded the sentence with words to try and make it sound ridiculous (having their own way; divine right; what THEY want, when THEY want it), but yea... when people are married certain reasonable expectations are justified!

So let's ask it another way... do you believe that a [married] woman has a devine right to limit a man's access to sexuality based solely on whether she sees her glass as half empty or half full?

January 2, 2015

I have said about half a dozen times throughout this thread that the withholdee does have a responsibility to address the issue and work with the other to find a mutually agreeable solution.

I am talking about when the withholdee does make a sincere and honest effort to address and correct the issues and the withholder turns his/her nose up at it and basically tells the withholdee to quit bothering them about it and live with it.

So I guess my position in this matter is when a withholder tells the withholdee to "live with it", How they choose to live with it is up to them.

My point is Once you tell someone to just live with it, you don't really have any say in how they live with it.

January 2, 2015

I am talking about when the withholdee does make a sincere and honest effort to address and correct the issues and the withholder turns his/her nose up at it and basically tells the withholdee to quit bothering them about it and live with it.

That is the assumption of this whole thread, that this cheater's wife made NO effort BUT we do not know that.

We do not even know if they are having once a month or once a day sex, we only have the cheater's word on that.

We do however know that cheaters will justify their actions in every way possible to paint themselves a good light.

if this woman IS withholding sex in a nasty controlling way, then the honourable thing to do is to discuss, IC, MC and if he is getting nowhere, then split, not cheat.

January 2, 2015

if this woman IS withholding sex in a nasty controlling way, then the honourable thing to do is to discuss, IC, MC and if he is getting nowhere, then split, not cheat.

Yes that would be the honorable way and it would make many people on the board happy.

My point though is if you tell your spouse to just live with it, be aware that they may or may not take the honorable route.

Once you say say, 'live with it' - how they live with it is up to them.

January 2, 2015

I personally do think this risk of death/disability to the BS with STDs is over done and I guess its used by them to make the betrayal seem twice as bad. Sure there is risk, but I wonder how many of the BS who scream this, had their spouse provide a medical report before they slept with them, or cared if their partner had done a fair bit of casual sex before them, or they themselves had engaged in casual sex prior to marriage. Most affairs are not with craiglist skanks or niteclub players, but more so with a single mom/dad in their social circle, or a neighbor, or a co-worker or a secretary or an ex or a friend they fancied for many years or someone else unhappy in marriage. It not like the majority of your older single friends or neighbors or co-workers are riddled with pox.

Having sex once a month is not exactly a sexless relationship and there are lots of LTRs where sex 10-12 times a year happens. For some it will suit both, but for lots (more so the men) it's not enough. At want point you can claim justification for an affair is hard to say. Unsatisfied married persons will have different thresholds as will happily married people looking on and judging them.

STIs are not uncommon, and are not discriminative.

My point is this: if the sex at home is so unsatisfying (in frequency or quality) that an affair is justified, at least stop having sex at home.

What is the justification for continuing to have sex with the spouse, potentially exposing a spouse unknowingly to disease, while having an affair due to unsatisfactory sex at home?

January 2, 2015

So I want to pose a question for the group -

- since so many think that he should divorce her and he hasn't, should she divorce him?

Should she be obligated to divorce him since she didn't want to have intimate relationship with him instead of making him frustrated and putting pressure on her and ultimately having infidelity in the marriage?

If he should divorce instead of cheat, Should she divorce instead of deny intimacy?

Should she be held accountable for not leaving him before things got to this stage?

Yes or no? Why or why not?

January 2, 2015

If he should divorce instead of cheat, Should she divorce instead of deny intimacy?

Why should she divorce him if she was satisfied with the marital situation as it was? It is up to each adult partner to decide if the relationship meets their needs, and be honest about it.

January 2, 2015

Why should she divorce him if she was satisfied with the marital situation as it was? It is up to each adult partner to decide if the relationship meets their needs, and be honest about it.

I understand your point, however...

Its kind of a passive aggressive way of handling that, though....

TFY

January 2, 2015

There is surely more to a marriage than just sex, they have children together and there is a big difference between no sex and having sex with another as far as the institution of marriage is concerned.

The marriage is between two people, how much sex, cuddles, kisses, chairs, patios, gardens, houses they have together is between the two of them to decide.

Introducing a third person to the marriage, a third person who she did not agree to, is far more of a reason for divorce, than a potential blip in their sex drives. This is about lying and the ruination of trust. I am not surprised she has adopted the moral high ground now.

Had this man explored IC and MC and the wife done the same and they visited doctors and still no sex, then no sex may be a reason to split.

BUT trying to justify cheating with a third party, when AFAWK no outside agences were involved to try and mend their marriage, is abysmal behaviour.

Sign In

Infidelity in a sexless marriage

Recommended Posts

autumnnight

xxoo

insert_name

ascendotum

oldshirt

ascendotum

truncated

elaine567

insert_name

insert_name

elaine567

central

oldshirt

elaine567

oldshirt

oldshirt

salparadise

oldshirt

elaine567

oldshirt

xxoo

oldshirt

xxoo

thefooloftheyear

elaine567

What's New

My Activity Streams

More...