An End/Beginning of Year Update (Section 2)

[TeaEarlGreyHot]

Looks like the previous thread ran to the end of the ability to reply. There was something I wished to comment on by SSMGuy

It seems to me that cheating on one's spouse and shutting off one's spouse are about the same level of breaking one's vows. Both are grounds for divorce, and both result in divorce in practice.

Actually, they are not nearly the same, not even close. From my own POV, the effects of cheating are immediately devastating and an act of betrayal that has no real comparison in the sexless marriage. There is an explicit exclusivity that is contained within one's vows. In cheating on one's spouse (as my first wife cheated on me) the exclusivity is lost forever and you cannot undo it. You can go on from that point, learn, heal, and even remain exclusive beyond that point. But all parties know that the exclusive clause in the vows were violated.

That is not true in the sexless marriage. It is still exclusive relationship even without sex in the relationship. That loss of sex (in the absence of cheating) may also be a reason for ending a marriage but it doesn't compare to the immediacy of the effects of cheating.

The Captain

[DaddyLongShanks]

Looks like the previous thread ran to the end of the ability to reply. There was something I wished to comment on by SSMGuy

It seems to me that cheating on one's spouse and shutting off one's spouse are about the same level of breaking one's vows. Both are grounds for divorce, and both result in divorce in practice.

Actually, they are not nearly the same, not even close. From my own POV, the effects of cheating are immediately devastating and an act of betrayal that has no real comparison in the sexless marriage. There is an explicit exclusivity that is contained within one's vows. In cheating on one's spouse (as my first wife cheated on me) the exclusivity is lost forever and you cannot undo it. You can go on from that point, learn, heal, and even remain exclusive beyond that point. But all parties know that the exclusive clause in the vows were violated.

That is not true in the sexless marriage. It is still exclusive relationship even without sex in the relationship. That loss of sex (in the absence of cheating) may also be a reason for ending a marriage but it doesn't compare to the immediacy of the effects of cheating.

The Captain

At least if you cheat in a sexless relationship, the main "marriage" may end. That way you can do it the right way. Cheating your spouse out of sex and intimacy, "because you don't have to do it" is very evil and selfish. It's hurtful to someone a sex life and intimacy was important to.

[LFC1170]

It seems to me you still made a conscience choice to enter a marriage with the possibility, down the road, that this may happen. It's probably why you are at peace somewhat. It's very different, when while you were dating you were having sex all the time and great sex too, and you enter marriage, and you actually commit to a lifetime with the partner you have chose, that partner should not do a total 180 once they get what they wanted and shut down. That's kind of like false advertising. Now you are stuck in a deteriorating relationship and, when you have no financial stability, can't do nothing about it.

My situation is 11 yrs sexless and SHE then comes and wants a divorce. Sex is THE most important thing in a man's relationship. Not just for a release, but a physical relationship is necessary to establishing that bond and feeling that would have men commit to their woman like THEY would want. Not what we THINK they may want. Your romantic and cherishing nature would open the woman up for more physical relations which would open up your romantic nature and so on. This would be the opposite of a vicious cycle. I have read a lot of books on communication, sex, and divorce, and this is what i'm getting out of it.

The problem is to employ these communication techniques while you still have a relationship. In my case I didn't learn in time and now have a WAS as well and that's a whole different technique. I dream of the day I can use these communication skills on her. If it does end up to be someone else then they will benefit from my newfound knowledge.

Captain, if you are at peace with how things are, why don't you move back into the bedroom?

[ssmguy]

Actually, they are not nearly the same, not even close. From my own POV, the effects of cheating are immediately devastating and an act of betrayal that has no real comparison in the sexless marriage. There is an explicit exclusivity that is contained within one's vows. In cheating on one's spouse (as my first wife cheated on me) the exclusivity is lost forever and you cannot undo it. You can go on from that point, learn, heal, and even remain exclusive beyond that point. But all parties know that the exclusive clause in the vows were violated.

That is not true in the sexless marriage. It is still exclusive relationship even without sex in the relationship. That loss of sex (in the absence of cheating) may also be a reason for ending a marriage but it doesn't compare to the immediacy of the effects of cheating.

The Captain

I won't argue with this if it's your personal viewpoint of what is important in a marriage. But I don't think you have any ground to stand on if you insist this applies to everyone's marriages in general. I'm just saying that from my POV refusing sex on a long-term basis and sex outside the marriage are opposite sides of the same coin. I don't consider the immediacy of the effect to be the pivotal difference. Nor do I consider the inability to "undo" an exclusivity to be pivotal. Those are your constructs, and one could come up with other reasonable-sounding constructs which would lead to different conclusions.

I still see in this an American value judgement, that enduring long-term celibacy or forcing it on your spouse is more wholesome than having an affair. Refusing to have sex in a marriage is also a breaking of vows, at least implicit ones.

In a marriage where there is no sex for a long time, being "faithful" doesn't really have meaning. By that definition, any celibate person is faithful to the pope, or anyone else, because he could say "I'm not having sex with anyone else." So a celibate person is exclusive to everyone, and is therefore the purest of the pure.

So I would disagree with the logic your reasoning implies, that in a marriage where one partner refuses sex, and the other partner has an affair in response, the denying partner can stand on holy ground and accuse the other partner of doing worse.

And yes, I'm aware that the second partner could instead have divorce. Which any dunce can think of. And what difference does that make if the affair results in divorce anyway? Oh, yes, the exclusivity was maintained until the divorce. I could see that provides legal protection, but I don't see the point otherwise.

[ssmguy]

And, by the way, if you've shut your spouse off, would you blame them for going out and having sex with someone else? If you truly loved them, wouldn't you take joy in the fact that they got sex with someone else? Or is your own personal pain of jealousy that is your main concern.

Though I don't personally embrace the lifestyle of poly and swing, I do understand their concept of managing their jealousy and putting it in a context of selfishness. But it does shed a slightly different light on breaking exclusivity in response to sexlessness.

So, in emotional terms, your viewpoint strikes me as one which holds jealousy as a more important emotion to avoid than sexual deprivation. Wording it as "breaking exclusivity" and inability to undo said exclusivity just seem like a verbose technical smokescreen for the emotions they are really designed to protect.

[TeaEarlGreyHot]

At least if you cheat in a sexless relationship, the main "marriage" may end. That way you can do it the right way. Cheating your spouse out of sex and intimacy, "because you don't have to do it" is very evil and selfish. It's hurtful to someone a sex life and intimacy was important to.

Sorry, I haven't responded. I went and ran another marathon and was back into recovery and training for the next one in six weeks. I question what you think is "the right way" and how that compares with your view of what would constitute the wrong way. And while I agree it is hurtful (to me) and may even be classifiable as selfish, I doubt it lowers itself to the classification of "very evil." There are many things that I could classify as very evil and this is not one of them.

The Captain

[TeaEarlGreyHot]

I won't argue with this if it's your personal viewpoint of what is important in a marriage. But I don't think you have any ground to stand on if you insist this applies to everyone's marriages in general. I'm just saying that from my POV refusing sex on a long-term basis and sex outside the marriage are opposite sides of the same coin. I don't consider the immediacy of the effect to be the pivotal difference. Nor do I consider the inability to "undo" an exclusivity to be pivotal. Those are your constructs, and one could come up with other reasonable-sounding constructs which would lead to different conclusions.

I still see in this an American value judgement, that enduring long-term celibacy or forcing it on your spouse is more wholesome than having an affair. Refusing to have sex in a marriage is also a breaking of vows, at least implicit ones.

So, you are speaking from your experience of being cheated upon by your wife in your marriage? Or are you speaking from your experience of cheating on your wife in your marriage?

You see, unless you've done one or experienced the other (or both), you are (at best) guessing what it would be like for you if you actually had to address one situation or the other. Maybe the reality of it actually happening might match (for you)
what you think about strictly as a hypothetical. That, however, has not been my experience with friends and acquaintances that have dealt with marriage infidelity.

While I know you've repeatedly painted this as an American value judgment, it can also be viewed that your own inaction and lack of freedom (to have sex outside of your marriage) is rooted in geography. That is, if only you lived in France or Italy, you could have your marriage and your sex outside of marriage, too.

You do know that you can move to those places, don't you? There is a process you'd have to go through, but if my son can do that, so can you.

So, here is the ground I stand upon....

I have been cheated on in my first marriage. I have my own experience of what that is like, both the immediacy of the impact and the more drawn out part about seeing if a marriage is salvageable that ultimately ends in divorce. I've got both my childhood experience of what that was like and my experience as an adult. I can say that my experience as a child and young adult with the effects of infidelity on the family unit had little to do with my viewing it through a lens of an American value judgment (unless my mom and dad should live together as a family is a uniquely American value judgment). Your experience is....???

In a marriage where there is no sex for a long time, being "faithful" doesn't really have meaning. By that definition, any celibate person is faithful to the pope, or anyone else, because he could say "I'm not having sex with anyone else." So a celibate person is exclusive to everyone, and is therefore the purest of the pure.

You have a conflation of religiosity with reference to that Pope that, for me, is not real. Actually, it does have meaning. Yes, I am (like you) in a legally recognized relationship that has as part of it's vows and in it's legal underpinnings an exclusivity in sexual relationships. And while you can make some valid claim that has some basis in "religion" it is not exclusively religious or entirely based with religious values. While you may have an agreement/arrangement with your spouse that rules out exclusivity, the legal underpinnings don't, nor are they required, to recognize it.

So I would disagree with the logic your reasoning implies, that in a marriage where one partner refuses sex, and the other partner has an affair in response, the denying partner can stand on holy ground and accuse the other partner of doing worse.

See above, there is nothing about standing on holy ground. There is a choice in pursuing the dissolution of a marriage on the basis of the absence of sex. An affair might complicate that, even if it is "justified" in the way that you seem to be justifying it.

And yes, I'm aware that the second partner could instead have divorce. Which any dunce can think of. And what difference does that make if the affair results in divorce anyway? Oh, yes, the exclusivity was maintained until the divorce. I could see that provides legal protection, but I don't see the point otherwise.

I know you have the answer to this from your vast experience of cheating, being cheated upon, and going through divorce. While a shallow answer is it provides legal protection, the difference is much deeper than that. It is a choice of action that defines who you are. And the proof is that it matters to you.

Time for me to go running again.

The Captain

[DaddyLongShanks]

I won't argue with this if it's your personal viewpoint of what is important in a marriage. But I don't think you have any ground to stand on if you insist this applies to everyone's marriages in general. I'm just saying that from my POV refusing sex on a long-term basis and sex outside the marriage are opposite sides of the same coin. I don't consider the immediacy of the effect to be the pivotal difference. Nor do I consider the inability to "undo" an exclusivity to be pivotal. Those are your constructs, and one could come up with other reasonable-sounding constructs which would lead to different conclusions.

I still see in this an American value judgement, that enduring long-term celibacy or forcing it on your spouse is more wholesome than having an affair. Refusing to have sex in a marriage is also a breaking of vows, at least implicit ones.

So, you are speaking from your experience of being cheated upon by your wife in your marriage? Or are you speaking from your experience of cheating on your wife in your marriage?

You see, unless you've done one or experienced the other (or both), you are (at best) guessing what it would be like for you if you actually had to address one situation or the other. Maybe the reality of it actually happening might match (for you)
what you think about strictly as a hypothetical. That, however, has not been my experience with friends and acquaintances that have dealt with marriage infidelity.

While I know you've repeatedly painted this as an American value judgment, it can also be viewed that your own inaction and lack of freedom (to have sex outside of your marriage) is rooted in geography. That is, if only you lived in France or Italy, you could have your marriage and your sex outside of marriage, too.

You do know that you can move to those places, don't you? There is a process you'd have to go through, but if my son can do that, so can you.

So, here is the ground I stand upon....

I have been cheated on in my first marriage. I have my own experience of what that is like, both the immediacy of the impact and the more drawn out part about seeing if a marriage is salvageable that ultimately ends in divorce. I've got both my childhood experience of what that was like and my experience as an adult. I can say that my experience as a child and young adult with the effects of infidelity on the family unit had little to do with my viewing it through a lens of an American value judgment (unless my mom and dad should live together as a family is a uniquely American value judgment). Your experience is....???

In a marriage where there is no sex for a long time, being "faithful" doesn't really have meaning. By that definition, any celibate person is faithful to the pope, or anyone else, because he could say "I'm not having sex with anyone else." So a celibate person is exclusive to everyone, and is therefore the purest of the pure.

You have a conflation of religiosity with reference to that Pope that, for me, is not real. Actually, it does have meaning. Yes, I am (like you) in a legally recognized relationship that has as part of it's vows and in it's legal underpinnings an exclusivity in sexual relationships. And while you can make some valid claim that has some basis in "religion" it is not exclusively religious or entirely based with religious values. While you may have an agreement/arrangement with your spouse that rules out exclusivity, the legal underpinnings don't, nor are they required, to recognize it.

So I would disagree with the logic your reasoning implies, that in a marriage where one partner refuses sex, and the other partner has an affair in response, the denying partner can stand on holy ground and accuse the other partner of doing worse.

See above, there is nothing about standing on holy ground. There is a choice in pursuing the dissolution of a marriage on the basis of the absence of sex. An affair might complicate that, even if it is "justified" in the way that you seem to be justifying it.

And yes, I'm aware that the second partner could instead have divorce. Which any dunce can think of. And what difference does that make if the affair results in divorce anyway? Oh, yes, the exclusivity was maintained until the divorce. I could see that provides legal protection, but I don't see the point otherwise.

I know you have the answer to this from your vast experience of cheating, being cheated upon, and going through divorce. While a shallow answer is it provides legal protection, the difference is much deeper than that. It is a choice of action that defines who you are. And the proof is that it matters to you.

Time for me to go running again.

The Captain

Why does she have to be your lover? She can just be your friend. Sexless and affectinless marriage is not a good marriage unless both people desire to be sexless and affectionless.

If your position is that you would prefer to not have sex with your wife after all of these years, and a lack of affections doesn't bother you much, then you have a great situation.

[ssmguy]

My viewpoint probably diverges a bit from the norm because of my own family, in-laws, and my own experience. I have never experienced anyone in my family, or extended family, or in-laws (and there are many) who have been cheated on, or who have cheated, in the sense that they kept it secret and that it would a surprise to the "betrayed" person. There are several instances of marriages which are more or less open -- I say "more or less" because it's not like they announced it or "came out of the closet", but everybody knows that everybody is in on it and they seem to prefer that arrangement for different reasons in the different cases.

Yet, when I turn on the radio or TV, and listen to relationship and marriage advice shows, or read about troubled relationships on forums, I hear endless accounts of secret cheating and people being "devastated" and splitting up and being unable to deal with their spouses infidelities.

So here are two fundamental viewpoints I have which probably differ from most people. But I see them as healthy viewpoints, and I see that if you don't have these viewpoints, you're vulnerable to all kinds of problems and pain:

1. If you're dissatisfied with an aspect of your marriage, talk about it with your spouse. If it doesn't get resolved, be honest about the fact that you would like to meet that need with someone else. Of course, I mean, you'd have to be a dunce not to expect someone to have that temptation, so just be honest about it. Besides, that could prompt your spouse to do something about it. And if they choose not to, they know full well what the deal is, that you might indeed be tempted to go somewhere else. But then if it doesn't matter enough for the spouse to do anything about it, they probably don't mind you going somewhere else anyway.

2. If your spouse goes somewhere else, and they really enjoyed it, why would should you be angry about their happiness? If you really love them, shouldn't you be happy that they found happiness? I can understand jealousy, especially if the cheating is done secretly. But if you've been talking about it all along, that doesn't make sense to me.

3. A long-term marriage is about a whole lot more than sex. So I'm perplexed every time I hear that you need to get a divorce every time somebody put a body part into somebody else, as if that relates to your property, health insurance plans, where you live, child custody, etc.

[ssmguy]

I know you have the answer to this from your vast experience of cheating, being cheated upon, and going through divorce. While a shallow answer is it provides legal protection, the difference is much deeper than that. It is a choice of action that defines who you are. And the proof is that it matters to you.

Was just noticing this which was apparently in response to what I wrote. Huh? None of that applies to me. Never been divorce, etc. Are you trying to say that people would only have my viewpoint if they've been wallowing in dishonesty and resentment from a divorce? I don't think so.

[TeaEarlGreyHot]

No, I was saying this because if you haven't actually experienced any of it, it is all an interesting hypothetical on your part.

A couple of useful analogies to illustrate:

I can tell you all the individual movements and limits to movements of the pieces on a chess board. I can tell that "white starts first." I can tell you what constitutes "checkmate" and how that ends the game. I can define for you what a "stalemate" is and how it differs from a "draw."

But do you "know chess?"

How about riding a bicycle or using a pair of skis or snowboard and "balance." I can describe what to do, you can read about other people's experience, and watch other people and imagine what it might be like if you could achieve the level of balance to begin skiing or snowboarding. Interestingly, your own sense of balance from walking or running gives you only some small amount of knowledge (in that you don't fall and you might know the sensation of falling). But your sense of balance and your
ability to describe it or have it described is very, very limited.

Why? Because you developed the muscle motor skills and the neural pathways to have it function in an automatic way without language.

Or how about my current interest and activity: running marathons? You can read about what it takes, what people experience, how to train, etc. But until you actually step up to the training and ultimately to the starting line and finish the race. it is all an interesting hypothetical.

Or how about a not so analogous example: the intimate sexual experience? You can read about it, learn about some things that may be pleasurable for you or your partner, maybe what constitutes "good sex" and "bad sex" or what you might feel when intimately connected to another person through sexual experience(s). However, those imaginings are probably far less vivid than the actual experience.

And that was the intent of my comment. It makes for an interesting hypothetical discussion if you've never gone through it. But the reality of the experience is likely to be far different than thinking about it in the abstract and hypothetical world.

The Captain

[ssmguy]

You pick some amusing examples. Yes, I play chess, ride bicycles, ski, and run marathons. And I certainly never had a problem with my own sexual functioning, but I have not had all the facets of a good partnered experience which might be considered normal for most people.

You're right, I wouldn't truly know what divorce is like until I have it. But I disagree with what you seem to be implying, namely that if I did A, then it would result in B which I haven't experienced.

Just as an example of my point, not everyone handles or reacts to a situation the same way. Several people in my extended family had apparently open marriages (I say because everyone knew about, it though they didn't announce it) and nobody divorced anybody, nobody was angry, nobody felt betrayed, and everyone was on very good terms, including my own parents. So you could say I wouldn't know about the effects of extramarital sex because I haven't seen the pain of betrayal and divorce. And my answer would you're wrong because those aren't always the effects.

[DaddyLongShanks]

You pick some amusing examples. Yes, I play chess, ride bicycles, ski, and run marathons. And I certainly never had a problem with my own sexual functioning, but I have not had all the facets of a good partnered experience which might be considered normal for most people.

You're right, I wouldn't truly know what divorce is like until I have it. But I disagree with what you seem to be implying, namely that if I did A, then it would result in B which I haven't experienced.

Just as an example of my point, not everyone handles or reacts to a situation the same way. Several people in my extended family had apparently open marriages (I say because everyone knew about, it though they didn't announce it) and nobody divorced anybody, nobody was angry, nobody felt betrayed, and everyone was on very good terms, including my own parents. So you could say I wouldn't know about the effects of extramarital sex because I haven't seen the pain of betrayal and divorce. And my answer would you're wrong because those aren't always the effects.

Each of you extreme sexless are under the same effects as anyone else who is suffering from extreme sexlessnes. The soul looks deprived. In order to maintain momentum, you have a lot of anger to be in extreme activities, but each and every day you know you are cheated out of life and you move on. Compartamentalizing that portion, but you can see it in your soul in your image. There is no good reason for it. I'm really down about people being abused and neglected like this.

[oldtimer]

Wow. I'm totally blown away. I'm so very sorry to hear of your history and of the childhood wounds denied. I'm not sure if you've mentioned this aspect of what it was like for you to be a member of your family before, but I've not seen you mention it.

Have you looked at how the dysfunction has affected your ability for intimacy? Have you ever tried any 12-step programs, for addicts or co-dependents? Have you ever thought that your wife might be a sexual anorexic, which is a type of sexual addiction? Melody Beattie's work on codependency might be helpful.

Thanks for your openness. It helped me remember my compassion.

[ssmguy]

Are you kidding me? I had to double check that you were actually replying to me. I suppose you're going to say I'm in deep denial. Your response is hilariously patronizing.

Childhood wounds? No. And by the way, I've been over my childhood in therapy as part of our marriage therapy. Not an issue. My parents set a good example of being loving and caring without jealousy, secrecy or dishonesty. I'm not sure what kind of yardstick you're applying to my life, but it feels judgemental, rigid and cold to me. That's not to say that it doesn't work well for you.

Or am I totally misunderstanding something here?

[ssmguy]

And yes, I read Patrick Carnes book on sexual anorexia. But just reading books and getting tons of intellectual insight only goes so far.

As for 12 step anything, you have to get your partner to be interested in doing it. If I could get just that far, I'd almost consider my problem solved.

[TeaEarlGreyHot]

You pick some amusing examples. Yes, I play chess, ride bicycles, ski, and run marathons. And I certainly never had a problem with my own sexual functioning, but I have not had all the facets of a good partnered experience which might be considered normal for most people.

You're right, I wouldn't truly know what divorce is like until I have it. But I disagree with what you seem to be implying, namely that if I did A, then it would result in B which I haven't experienced.

Just as an example of my point, not everyone handles or reacts to a situation the same way. Several people in my extended family had apparently open marriages (I say because everyone knew about, it though they didn't announce it) and nobody divorced anybody, nobody was angry, nobody felt betrayed, and everyone was on very good terms, including my own parents. So you could say I wouldn't know about the effects of extramarital sex because I haven't seen the pain of betrayal and divorce. And my answer would you're wrong because those aren't always the effects.

In my own sex-life, before it all went south with my first wife with the birth of our son and then a couple of years later with her affair, and then with my second wife as the need for a radical hysterectomy became more urgent, my sex life was good and what I would consider normal, even adventuresome in their own ways. Its the contrast of such a good sex life to absolute zero that was the challenge.

And I'll be perfectly blunt about it, I see no reason to hope that there will ever be ANY sex in this marriage for as long as we remain married. And so I've given up on my sex life and gone on to pursue other things that she cannot. She is in total control of the absence of the sex life and it is something that she is unwilling relinquish.

I've traded an intimate relationship in a marriage for a legal marriage with a housemate where we share responsibilities for a household and occasional time together for dinner, or a trip to the beach. It not that these are unpleasant times, they just aren't intimate.

Actually, you do know that B follows A. You see it all around you and you know better. How do we know? Well, if you really believed that the limited case of open marriage and affairs did not cause any problems and would not cause any problems in your own marriage, it wouldn't even be an issue for you. You'd be married and having a wonderful sex life...it just wouldn't be with your wife.

And the point wasn't that B follows A. The point was that you lack both A and B (or C, D, E, or F which may follow from A) as personal experiences from which to discuss your experience with either affairs or divorce. The example you gave is like knowing the moves of the chess pieces from the outside without actually "playing the game."

The Captain

[TeaEarlGreyHot]

You pick some amusing examples. Yes, I play chess, ride bicycles, ski, and run marathons. And I certainly never had a problem with my own sexual functioning, but I have not had all the facets of a good partnered experience which might be considered normal for most people.

You're right, I wouldn't truly know what divorce is like until I have it. But I disagree with what you seem to be implying, namely that if I did A, then it would result in B which I haven't experienced.

Just as an example of my point, not everyone handles or reacts to a situation the same way. Several people in my extended family had apparently open marriages (I say because everyone knew about, it though they didn't announce it) and nobody divorced anybody, nobody was angry, nobody felt betrayed, and everyone was on very good terms, including my own parents. So you could say I wouldn't know about the effects of extramarital sex because I haven't seen the pain of betrayal and divorce. And my answer would you're wrong because those aren't always the effects.

Each of you extreme sexless are under the same effects as anyone else who is suffering from extreme sexlessnes. The soul looks deprived. In order to maintain momentum, you have a lot of anger to be in extreme activities, but each and every day you know you are cheated out of life and you move on. Compartamentalizing that portion, but you can see it in your soul in your image. There is no good reason for it. I'm really down about people being abused and neglected like this.

People be who they be. Ultimately, who they really are "shows up." Chess, bicycle riding, or skiing are hardly extremes. They serve as useful examples and analogies for the discussion.

Can I deny that running is an outlet for the loss of intimacy or a way to channel that unused energy? No. But I don't run angry. Running is a way I defined myself before there was any attachment or love for someone outside of my family. So, in one way I've gone back to a way that I've known myself in the past...though never as a marathon runner.

And why marathons? Because 99.99% of the human population will never run that distance all at once. They won't even put in the time and training that it requires to respect the distance. Of those who do, there are a fair number that will only do it once. I've run three in six months.

There is a calm in the long training runs and during the races. I'm on a summer break from marathons (though I am still running half-marathon races and will be training throughout the summer. So rather than sexless husband, I have an identity of marathon runner.

And once I gave up on having a sex life with my wife and realized that she would never willingly have sex with me again, I rarely think about the loss of sex.

Its just who she is and I did not realize that before we were married.

The Captain

[Accuray]

I'm getting divorced, I'll let you know how it is on the other side.

[DaddyLongShanks]

I'm getting divorced, I'll let you know how it is on the other side.

Congrats Accuray. The pain and devastation has continued long enough. Now you are taking control of your life. It doesn't mean you won't be open to a opposite sex relationship partner, but you have some needs that any intended lover will need to meet. Having a female room mate was not in the cards, nor a non-sexual female lover. You can be friends or associates and use someone else for a lover.

I wanted you to provide feedback in the "Sexual Issues" forum to my responses.