Board index › Coping in life › Love and Dating

My wife is asexual

Page 4 of 6 [ 95 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

29 Sep 2015, 7:01 am

Phemto wrote:
I'm also really PO'd that I'm always the one making multiple trips up and down the stairs at bedtime. Everyone needs their special stuffy, their glass of water, their bed time book... I just want to settle down for the evening and yet up and down the stairs I go.


Funny you should mention that. Same thing here, but then we at least get free exercise, don't we? So why complain? :lol:

Phemto wrote:
Maybe I should tell the next person in a wheelchair I see how lucky they are to get to be the lazy one in the family.


That's not much better than whining about asexuals being lazy for not delivering sex.



YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

29 Sep 2015, 7:21 am

My ex-husband used to complain that we didn't have sex frequently enough. He used to tell me I had mental problems and was "frigid". The truth was that he was quite abusive - emotionally, mentally, financially, and sometimes physically. His insistence on having sex when I didn't want to was sexual abuse.
Women don't want to have sex when their emotional needs aren't being met. And why would anyone seek to have sex with someone who's told you they don't want it? At worst, that's rape. At best, it's using your partner as a free whore, or an object with which to masturbate. You can't love someone and treat them that way. It's monstrous.

(this is not directed at the OP's situation, just some of the responses to it)



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,038
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

29 Sep 2015, 7:39 am

YippySkippy wrote:
My ex-husband used to complain that we didn't have sex frequently enough. He used to tell me I had mental problems and was "frigid". The truth was that he was quite abusive - emotionally, mentally, financially, and sometimes physically. His insistence on having sex when I didn't want to was sexual abuse.
Women don't want to have sex when their emotional needs aren't being met. And why would anyone seek to have sex with someone who's told you they don't want it? At worst, that's rape. At best, it's using your partner as a free whore, or an object with which to masturbate. You can't love someone and treat them that way. It's monstrous.

(this is not directed at the OP's situation, just some of the responses to it)


To what responses you are referring to? To beakybird and nerdygirl?



YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

29 Sep 2015, 8:05 am

Primarily beakybird, who regards relationships as business contracts that entitle men to sex on demand.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,038
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

29 Sep 2015, 8:16 am

YippySkippy wrote:
Primarily beakybird, who regards relationships as business contracts that entitle men to sex on demand.


What about nerdygirl who is basically promoting the same idea breakybird talked about:
Quote:
I think you need to communicate how important this is to your wife, and make it clear that this negatively impacts your marriage. I personally don't care how if I don't have sex, but it's important to my husband and it is important to me because it is important to *him.* I don't think it's right for one person to say "no" to the other spouse because they're just not in the mood or whatever.


But, oh right....you never attack a female member :P.



YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 44
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

29 Sep 2015, 8:52 am

Nerdygirl isn't saying the same thing as beakybird. Beakybird is saying it's a man's right to have sex when he wants it, regardless of how his partner feels. Nerdygirl is saying it's a kind gesture for a woman to agree to sex even if she's not in the mood.
The difference is that in Nerdygirl's statement both people agree to sex. In beakybird's statement, only the man decides. The woman is treated as a possession.



rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

29 Sep 2015, 8:58 am

YippySkippy wrote:
Nerdygirl isn't saying the same thing as beakybird. Beakybird is saying it's a man's right to have sex when he wants it, regardless of how his partner feels. Nerdygirl is saying it's a kind gesture for a woman to agree to sex even if she's not in the mood.


Exactly. And it may be a kind gesture (not an obligation) for an asexual to agree to sex even when they dislike it.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,038
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

29 Sep 2015, 9:15 am

YippySkippy wrote:
Nerdygirl isn't saying the same thing as beakybird. Beakybird is saying it's a man's right to have sex when he wants it, regardless of how his partner feels. Nerdygirl is saying it's a kind gesture for a woman to agree to sex even if she's not in the mood.
The difference is that in Nerdygirl's statement both people agree to sex. In beakybird's statement, only the man decides. The woman is treated as a possession.


Actually, he's saying that it's not wrong if the person expects that the spouse would satisfy him/her physically.

He didn't mention "man" or "man's right" or "woman" and he didn't talk anything about "possession".

He's using "spouse" and "they" instead so his post is not gender-specific, so according to his wording it goes both ways, for him, spouses are expected to satisfy each other physically, not just woman for man.



Quote:
All I know is, I have no idea how the f**k you deal with that. I couldn't continue a relationship where it was that infrequent and there's no desire to find out if there's something wrong. I mean if that's how it was when you "signed up" then that's the terms of the agreement. If it wasn't, that's where I'd have a huge issue with it. But you are evidently a much better man than I. Good job on self control. I've fought with my wife before for only doing it once a week.

I believe it IS a spouses duty to satisfy their mate. This is emotionally, mentally and physically. For those suggesting it's not a spouses job, would you also agree then that it's not a spouses' job to be emotionally supportive? I mean, if I decide that my wife's emotional struggles are too inconvenient for me to deal with, am I within my rights to simply ignore her when she speaks of any problems? Am I within my rights to not talk to her but two or three times per year? I don't think anyone in their right mind would. If you do agree with that then you have no idea what a relationship is about for the vast majority of people.

My point is, sex is a valuable part of the whole. None of the major needs can be neglected. I personally am a firm believer in monogamy, I can't imagine for a second how a relationship works any other way. But thats just me. However from that perspective, Im committing to someone, and expected to not have my needs met elsewhere. It's highly selfish as far as I am concerned to expect I do not seek satisfaction. I personally don't like masturbation. It's boring to me. I often start and cant finish. It's very unsatisfying. So not having sex, to me, is like not doing anything to meet that part of my needs. To me sex is inseparable from being very close to someone. I've never slept with someone I didn't intend to try and get serious with. But as with many things, sexual beliefs are far ranging. Outside of religious beliefs there is no wrong.

As NerdyGirl suggested, my first thought was maybe she wasn't being satisfied so it was uninteresting to her. However if Grue, you say this is not true, then I believe it. It's just a shame to have to live with that. At least, putting myself in your shoes I'd seriously contemplate suicide. Totally honest.

Guess it's a good thing you got that legal weed. You need something. And if the only way your wife gets horny is to drink wine, why haven't you started a vineyard?????


Quote:
Exactly the point I was trying to make. If you just "stopped wanting to" talk or share thoughts with your spouse, that'd be considered almost criminal- as it should. But sex? That's ok. Nope, go jerk off. Sorry that's just not at all fair. If that is any spouse's attitude to their unsatisfied spouse, I contend they simply don't care enough about their spouses needs and doesn't truly love them as much as they claim.

If there's an agreement, then whatever, that's a couples right to decide together what is best for them. When one party has all the deciding power, this is unfair. Sex is very important to some people, and not just to get off. Some people require that validation to feel good about themselves. To ward off self-esteem issues. To comfort them. To maybe help them, oh I dont know, control a dangerous and explosive temper.

If it's mutually agreed to, cool. But let's not act like expecting your spouse to satisfy you physically as part of their commitment is somehow wrong. It's a fair expectation.


if Beakybird is a woman but having the same issue and attitude regarding the spouse, what would be your response? I wonder... :P



Peacesells
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Sep 2014
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,915
Location: Anzio, Italy

29 Sep 2015, 9:33 am

It would be interesting to know if the OP always had this problem. In particular, was it like this before getting married too?



Phemto
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

Joined: 7 Sep 2015
Posts: 217
Location: Gaitherburg MD

29 Sep 2015, 9:35 am

Ok. Let's all calm down here and stop creating straw men to knock down.

What it comes down to is this. If there is a vast difference in sex drive between two partners that needs to be dealt with, because one or both are going to be unhappy. We can't just assume it's the high-sexed partners fault for wanting it, or that he/she is being overly demanding or treating the other like a possession. Likewise, we can't assume that the lower-sexed is not fulfilling some sort of contractual obligation.

To be helpful, we need to get to the root causes.

Is there is something that is keeping her from wanting sex? Then it IS her obligation as a grown-up to use her words and own up to what is getting in the way. Then it can be discussed and hopefully dealt with.

Is it that they have inherently different sex drives. Then they should discuss solutions. She is not obligated to have sex whenever he wants, but he should not be obligated to feel as deprived as he is currently feeling. Accusations of "whining" are hurtful and unhelpful. They also show a total lack of compassion just because someone's problem isn't the one you've had in the past. If you haven't been there, you might have to admit that you don't have anything helpful to contribute.

Creativity will be required. There's chemical of physical castration. She could allow him to find a surrogate. Or they could come to some sort of compromise regarding the amount of sex they have, which is the least drastic.

Whatever the ultimate course, the first step is communication. From what OP has said, it sounds like his wife has been stonewalling all his attempts to find is solution. If I've give the impression that I blame the wife for this problem, THAT is why. She's not doing the grown-up thing and facing the problem.



rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

29 Sep 2015, 9:36 am

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
YippySkippy wrote:
Nerdygirl isn't saying the same thing as beakybird. Beakybird is saying it's a man's right to have sex when he wants it, regardless of how his partner feels. Nerdygirl is saying it's a kind gesture for a woman to agree to sex even if she's not in the mood.
The difference is that in Nerdygirl's statement both people agree to sex. In beakybird's statement, only the man decides. The woman is treated as a possession.


Actually, he's saying that it's not wrong if the person expects that the spouse would satisfy him/her physically.

He didn't mention "man" or "man's right" or "woman" and he didn't talk anything about "possession".
He's using "spouse" and "they" instead so his post is not gender-specific.

Quote:
Exactly the point I was trying to make. If you just "stopped wanting to" talk or share thoughts with your spouse, that'd be considered almost criminal- as it should. But sex? That's ok. Nope, go jerk off. Sorry that's just not at all fair. If that is any spouse's attitude to their unsatisfied spouse, I contend they simply don't care enough about their spouses needs and doesn't truly love them as much as they claim.

If there's an agreement, then whatever, that's a couples right to decide together what is best for them. When one party has all the deciding power, this is unfair. Sex is very important to some people, and not just to get off. Some people require that validation to feel good about themselves. To ward off self-esteem issues. To comfort them. To maybe help them, oh I dont know, control a dangerous and explosive temper.

If it's mutually agreed to, cool. But let's not act like expecting your spouse to satisfy you physically as part of their commitment is somehow wrong. It's a fair expectation.


His claims are wrong on multiple levels, not only in regards to sex. He says that if somebody is not up for sex, they no longer love their spouse. That's obviously not true. Love and sex are totally different processes. Then of course he is wrong about obligations in general, and marriage being a contract for a set of needs and obligations to satisfy those. He obviously has not studied the marriage contract if he believes that.



rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

29 Sep 2015, 9:40 am

Peacesells wrote:
It would be interesting to know if the OP always had this problem. In particular, was it like this before getting married too?


Agreed. This is the pressing issue that we need to know the answer to before suggesting any possible solutions.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,038
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

29 Sep 2015, 9:57 am

rdos wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
YippySkippy wrote:
Nerdygirl isn't saying the same thing as beakybird. Beakybird is saying it's a man's right to have sex when he wants it, regardless of how his partner feels. Nerdygirl is saying it's a kind gesture for a woman to agree to sex even if she's not in the mood.
The difference is that in Nerdygirl's statement both people agree to sex. In beakybird's statement, only the man decides. The woman is treated as a possession.


Actually, he's saying that it's not wrong if the person expects that the spouse would satisfy him/her physically.

He didn't mention "man" or "man's right" or "woman" and he didn't talk anything about "possession".
He's using "spouse" and "they" instead so his post is not gender-specific.

Quote:
Exactly the point I was trying to make. If you just "stopped wanting to" talk or share thoughts with your spouse, that'd be considered almost criminal- as it should. But sex? That's ok. Nope, go jerk off. Sorry that's just not at all fair. If that is any spouse's attitude to their unsatisfied spouse, I contend they simply don't care enough about their spouses needs and doesn't truly love them as much as they claim.

If there's an agreement, then whatever, that's a couples right to decide together what is best for them. When one party has all the deciding power, this is unfair. Sex is very important to some people, and not just to get off. Some people require that validation to feel good about themselves. To ward off self-esteem issues. To comfort them. To maybe help them, oh I dont know, control a dangerous and explosive temper.

If it's mutually agreed to, cool. But let's not act like expecting your spouse to satisfy you physically as part of their commitment is somehow wrong. It's a fair expectation.


His claims are wrong on multiple levels, not only in regards to sex. He says that if somebody is not up for sex, they no longer love their spouse. That's obviously not true. Love and sex are totally different processes. Then of course he is wrong about obligations in general, and marriage being a contract for a set of needs and obligations to satisfy those. He obviously has not studied the marriage contract if he believes that.



Some view it as the physical expression of love, if it's gone then they would assume love was gone before it.



rdos
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jul 2005
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,089
Location: Sweden

29 Sep 2015, 9:59 am

The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Some view it as the physical expression of love, if it's gone then they would assume love was gone before it.


That's scientifically incorrect. Love and attachment is an exaptation of the parent-child mechanism, while sex is for reproduction. They have nothing in common.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

29 Sep 2015, 10:01 am

Love can very well be separate from sex. But when I love somebody, I want to make love to that person.



The_Face_of_Boo
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Jun 2010
Age: 42
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 33,038
Location: Beirut, Lebanon.

29 Sep 2015, 10:02 am

rdos wrote:
The_Face_of_Boo wrote:
Some view it as the physical expression of love, if it's gone then they would assume love was gone before it.


That's scientifically incorrect. Love and attachment is an exaptation of the parent-child mechanism, while sex is for reproduction. They have nothing in common.



and here we go again :lol:.

*yawn*....zzzZZZ