Husband keeps bringing up sexual past

[DKT3]

Its unbelievable how many women dont get it and believe lying or being dishonest about thier sexual past is a viable foundation to build a relationship.

 

Truth is some men are very insecure and any number will be difficult for those men to handle. Also true that most men are not that insecure about a women's past. However the secrets drive curiousousity that turns to obsession then insecurities.

 

It's easy for a person who has been unable to hold a successful relationship to say or it's his problem. Well, its actually a marriage problem thus making it OPs problem.

 

Listen, being vague and secretive hasn't worked, maybe it's time to try something else before this ruins your marriage.

[elaine567]

The problem here is not that she was vague and secretive it is that he cannot cope with her sexual past, he has been told too much for his comfort already.

He cried when she told him that she had sex with a guy...

She is supposed to be amazed and in awe of his meagre sexual exploits, but she cannot reveal the real truth about hers as he might end up being "suicidal"...

Guys like this, don't get better with the truth, the more they know the worse they get...

The truth merely confirms their perceived inadequacy and that is difficult to live with.

[mark clemson]

There are exceptions to the rule ... it isn't 100%.

 

 

Fair enough, I totally agree it's a signficant tendency and probably rooted in evolutionary biology.

[DKT3]

And should that be true then how realistic is this marriages survival?

 

Again its amazing that so many women believe dishonesty is a foundation. Truth is it's not really up to her to decide what he could handle.

 

Would it be fair for a husband to withhold that his primary relationship past was with other men? Or that he had risky sexual practices? Of course not, but for whatever reason its different with women. Withholding information is withholding who you are, make no mistake a women sexual past is part of who she is, lying or misleading or withholding doesn't change that.

[understand50]

I think DKt3 hit it the nail on the head. Be open. You say you are not ashamed, so why not? Once it is all out he can process, or not.

 

Keeping secrets always leads to problems. How about trying to be open. Your number is what your number is. I think, a good relationship, is one where both sides can talk about anything, to include your, and theirs, sexual past.

 

I am not saying a detail discussion about C**k or boob size with the sexual techniques thrown, but a general, who, how did you meet, and how did it lead to sex, and last why it broke up, or was a one time thing. I think this would go a long way to helping your husband, as while you may not like that he is stuck on this, he is, and you as his spouse should help him through it.

 

Keeping secrets will not help, they always tend to come out when you least expect them, always with more damage then if you had just come clean in the first place.

 

BTW, you need to let him know, using your past is not OK in arguments. Arguments should always be about things and actions in the present. IF there is one thing that leads to a long happy marriage, this is it.

 

I wish you luck....

[Tamfana]

People should be honest about the number of sex partners they've had, if they care about such things. But it wouldn't even get that far for me. Personally, I'd stop dating a guy who asks, for several reasons. First, we see the world too differently and have very different values. Second, I don't count and I'd be skeptical (at best) of a guy who takes a headcount view of sex, or rather, of the people he's had sex with. The whole idea's weird to me.

 

OP, I suppose your husband shouldn't have married you if he had a problem with any of that. But he did marry you so he didn't have a problem with it.

 

That raises the question of whether he's sincerely upset about it now (in which event, he should look within and examine why) or merely using his suppositions from the little hard info you've given as a tool he uses to win an argument or just kind of knock you down a bit, because he wants you knocked down.

 

In the end, telling him to stop is all you can do. That's setting a boundary. No yanking up the past, and certainly no yanking up a feared or assumed past, to bonk you on the head when he's upset by an argument.

[DKT3]

Yes that is my point...hiding your sexual past is hiding a part of you. Yes there are men who will change their opinion of a woman based solely on the number of men she has been with...but being dishonest and marrying that guy is basing a marriage on a lie or misleading a man who would have otherwise made a different decision.

 

Dont we all want someone who will accept and love us for who we really are and not the image that we want to put out there. In this lays the root to today's society and why relationships fail.

[rjc149]

You're a 34-year old woman who's had 5 sexual partners in her entire *life* and he's got a problem with that?

 

Are you guys in Yemen or something? Or did he just step off the Mayflower?

 

Edit: Just read the 'more than' 5 part. Okay, if that means less than 10, he needs to hang up his pilgrim hat. If it's like 25 however, then yeah, I can see his beef. Especially if that involved any MMF threesomes. That would be a deal-breaker for me in terms of marriage material.

Edited November 13, 2019 by rjc149

[Tamfana]

You're a 34-year old woman who's had 5 sexual partners in her entire *life* and he's got a problem with that?

 

Are you guys in Yemen or something? Or did he just step off the Mayflower?

 

Edit: Just read the 'more than' 5 part. Okay, if that means less than 10, he needs to hang up his pilgrim hat. If it's like 25 however, then yeah, I can see his beef. Especially if that involved any MMF threesomes. That would be a deal-breaker for me in terms of marriage material.

 

Yeah, see, even running the analysis or caring about one's number of sex partners is itself a perspective that not all people share. If it's important to you, bring it up while dating, not after marriage and only when irritated.

[rjc149]

I agree, but women rarely, if ever, reveal the full truth of their sexual history to men they're dating when asked. They just don't do it. It would usually come out after a degree of comfort and intimacy has already been established. If I found out my wife got gangbanged at frat parties back in college or did porn or has been with wayyy more partners than me, that would bug the sh-t out of me. It would be a deal-breaker, but now there's been all this investment into her. That's a problem. My bar is a lot lower than the OP's husband, but I get the sentiment.

 

I think all people, especially men, care about their partner's sexual pasts. For men it's an innate biological fear of being cuckolded into raising another man's offspring by partnering with a promiscuous woman, hence why female promiscuity -- and infidelity by proxy -- is such a turn-off or deal-breaker for many men.

 

He asked if I slept with him. He gave me so much detail about the sexual relations he’s had with the few women he’s mentioned that it felt natural to say YES, I did. He started crying.

 

All men feel insecure when their woman has more sexual experience than they do. 5-10 sex partners by age 35 seems low or average, to me, for an American woman. But 5 is obviously more than he's had, so he's obviously highly insecure about this. I think he's being ridiculous, but only because his bar is at 5, not higher as is normally is for 30-something American men. And also because he cried about it and they were still dating, not even married. That's just ridiculous.

 

Unless by "more than 5" OP means 50. Most if not all men would be pretty insecure about that.

Edited November 13, 2019 by rjc149

[Crazelnut]

Edit: Just read the 'more than' 5 part. Okay, if that means less than 10, he needs to hang up his pilgrim hat. If it's like 25 however, then yeah, I can see his beef. Especially if that involved any MMF threesomes. That would be a deal-breaker for me in terms of marriage material.

 

I have a problem with this way of thinking. It's still assuming that there is some arbitrary number that makes a woman slutty. Let's say a woman becomes sexually active at 17 and marries at 30. That gives her 13 years to "accumulate" a number of sexual partners. Two a year takes you to the magic 26 number. Is 2 partners a YEAR really that bad? Is it slutty? That's my problem with this whole line of thinking. Maybe she had 1 steady relationship for 10 years, then went nuts for 2. I just think this type of reasoning is dangerous and pointless.

[preraph]

It's none of their business what you did before you met them, period. If they can't judge your character by something other than the number of times you got played into having sex when you were young, they themselves don't have much going for them.

 

I'm with Tamfana. I wouldn't keep dating a guy for whom it was even a concern because it shows at minimum a different lifestyle and belief system and in most cases, a hypocritical double standard.

 

But it's too late. She's married to him and now he's holier than thou and judgmental. Maybe he needs counseling.

[preraph]

Oh, one thing he talks about a lot from

his party days is how much opportunity he had with women but most of the time he didn’t want to because he didn’t want to have to worry about staying sober enough to do it

 

Well, there you have it. He can't always get it up when drunk, so there's his physical inadequacy, plus he has mental inadequacy, and his manufactured puritanism is a convenient cover for him not always being able to do it, his way to avoid erection mishaps. He was probably nervous around unknown women.

[DKT3]

This none of your business stuff is bologna.

 

Where does none of your business stop?

 

Again this is why relationships fail...

[vla1120]

Past behaviour suddenly is irrelevant? So if it's positive things you did in the past it should have no positive connotations?

Actions have consequences.

Everything is a scale, would you marry a guy that used to be a male stripper? How about a gigolo? Extreme I know but I'm only bringing it up to argue with your notion that what happened in the past is irrelevant. It is very relevant.

 

It's obvious it bothers him, but it's his fault for marrying you. No one is entitled to an individuals love and marriage. Who you are and what you do is important. Duh.

 

You're talking apples and oranges. No one said anything about being a prostitute or gigolo. We're talking about two average people who've had different sexual experiences in their past. If their SO is going to get insecure about what happened in the past, there's not much hope for the future. Duh.

[rjc149]

It's still assuming that there is some arbitrary number that makes a woman slutty....Maybe she had 1 steady relationship for 10 years, then went nuts for 2. I just think this type of reasoning is dangerous and pointless.

 

I understand your logic. The number is arbitrary yes, but I think it's more determined by comparison to the male partner's past experience. I say 25 because my own count is somewhere around 30, and I've never been in a threesome or done super kinky adventurous stuff, so I have to admit it would bug me if I found out my wife has had more partners than me, took part in group sex or orgies, had relationships with women, or performed sex acts I would deem... eye-raising. So it's arbitrary in terms of being subjective.

 

It's not necessarily that a high count makes her slutty. But it maybe indicates that she has problems with maintaining longer-term sexual relationships. And if by 'going nuts' for 2 years, in this instance that means 24 people in 2 years. That's pretty slutty, I'm sorry. It is. In either scenario, she's either a serial monogamist, monkey-branching from man to man, or a major party girl going home with randos from the bar on a routine basis. Both red flags in terms of wife material.

[elaine567]

...my own count is somewhere around 30.

 

Does that make you "husband" material, or is that an indication of you having problems with maintaining longer-term sexual relationships?

Or does that only apply to women?

[DKT3]

You're talking apples and oranges. No one said anything about being a prostitute or gigolo. We're talking about two average people who've had different sexual experiences in their past. If their SO is going to get insecure about what happened in the past, there's not much hope for the future. Duh.

 

Its actually not apples and oranges. Its the same line of thinking. who gets to determine what information should be shared?

 

Sure a woman doesn't want a man who is insecure about her past, that's her right. However according to the majority of the women posting on this thread men dont deserve to have that option not to date or marry a woman with a undesirable sexual past.

 

I just dont get it...if a woman slept with 100 guys wouldn't think she would want to date and marry a man who is ok with that. Why lie to a man who you know is not ok with it, why deceive him about who she is/was?

[rjc149]

Does that make you "husband" material, or is that an indication of you having problems with maintaining longer-term sexual relationships?

Or does that only apply to women?

 

I am probably not husband material and I never portray myself as such to women. And I do have problems maintaining long-term relationships because I am emotionally avoidant and I tend to have a wandering eye.

 

The double-standard for promiscuity between men and women is a derivative of early human society and biology. Feminism has challenged this in recent decades.

 

Promiscuous men demonstrate virility, facial symmetry, dominance, strength, aggression, and high status -- all indicators of good genetics and offspring survival, all highly attractive qualities for females. Hence why "pre-selected" men -- players, womanizers, celebrities, etc. -- are attractive to women. The guesswork of determining if the man is actually a strong, attractive man is already done for them.

 

Promiscuous women present the risk to males of investing his resources providing for and rearing offspring that may be another man's -- thus his investment into caring for the woman during pregnancy and providing for the offspring may not ensure the survival of his own genes into the next generation.

 

Hence why there is a universal -- across the span of time and civilization -- double standard for genders regarding promiscuity. Promiscuous men are attractive, chaste women are virtuous. Only recently in the mid-20th century has western feminism begun to challenge this. And I do believe sexual liberation in our modern society, particularly for women but also for men, makes maintaining lasting relationships far more difficult.

 

That's the theory, at least.

[JS84]

Would it be fair for a husband to withhold that his primary relationship past was with other men?

 

Not to thread jack, but that's an interesting question actually. Despite all the "not judging someone's sexual past" there are plenty of women who will judge the hell out of their men when they find out they've been intimate with other men. I've seen this a few times in person myself.

[elaine567]

Yes and it is also a myth that "women" are all highly attracted to men that act like "sluts".

Some women are, just like some men are highly attracted to promiscuous women, but it is often their looks that are attractive, NOT the fact their number is in double/triple figures and counting...

[mark clemson]

Hence why there is a universal -- across the span of time and civilization -- double standard for genders regarding promiscuity. Promiscuous men are attractive, chaste women are virtuous.

 

I'm not sure about universal, but I agree there's a strong tendency. It's too bad more people don't use the higher parts of their brain to look beyond "instinct" or whatever this is.

 

Let's not kid ourselves, people change over time and it's certainly possible for a 35 year old woman who banged 60 guys in her 20's or whatever to be fully past that and not interested in revisiting it. If she's clean of STI's there no REAL reason not to accept her. But many men seem unable to get past it. Hence the tendency to "hide the numbers".

 

And I think it works both ways. I would bet for most women the virility thing is only up to a point. I'm sure there are plenty of women who would (unfairly) reject a guy who'd had 80 past partners. And there's probably "church going" women who'd have problems with 18-20.

[rjc149]

The people we hook up with, and the people we settle down with, are not the same for either gender. Women are sexually drawn to pre-selected "alpha" men but tend to settle down and rear children with more compliant, nurturing "beta" men.

 

In the OP's instance, it's clear her husband is highly insecure about his sexual prowess (thus compensating for it by boasting with excessive detail of his few conquests) and being completely unreasonable about her sexual history. 5-10 partners for a 35-year old woman is low in my opinion, and to me it's actually a positive attribute, not a red flag.

 

If it's not something he can accept short of "evening the score" then OP may need to take a hard look at the relationship. The husband is insecure and clearly somewhat resentful -- that will quickly lead to contempt and anger. Not a good direction to be headed. The fact that he keeps that as ammo to shoot at her is a red flag.

[rjc149]

 

Let's not kid ourselves, people change over time and it's certainly possible for a 35 year old woman who banged 60 guys in her 20's or whatever to be fully past that and not interested in revisiting it.

 

Yeah but it's not the number per se that raises eyebrows, it's what the number means. A woman who's banged 60 dudes is either really insecure with herself and requires sexual validation from lots of men to maintain her self-esteem, or, she's a highly sexual, highly liberated individual who just likes hooking up with lots of guys.

 

Nothing "wrong" or "bad" about either, but not what I, personally, would be looking for in a wife that I'm sharing a house and bank account and raising children with.

 

Then again, myself as a 35-year old man who's never been married, never had a relationship that lasted more than a year, emotionally distant and avoidant and has a decent number of notches on his bedpost, presents a red flag to a lot of women looking to settle down. I get it. I accept it.

[mark clemson]

...5-10 partners for a 35-year old woman is ... not a red flag.

 

Not sure if 10 is "low" (could be I guess) but for modern US or European culture I totally agree it's no red flag.