SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

To me a ws refusing to do sexual acts with their bs is a slap in the face. It’s saying I’m not that into you and I preferred the ap

I 100% agree that is exactly what it's saying. No way I could even consider R in a situation like that.

Walloped, In my first marriage the sex had been "weaponized" and was very limited in both frequency and any "outside the missionary position" acts. Which means that anything "outside" was NEVER even on the table.

So the concept that all I got was "accommodation sex" and he got whore level sex really, really hurt. I never got very far in R as again it was never on the table.

She must have really hated me because first she helped destroy my career and when I had collapsed from losing my career she just started kicking me in the nads. So my point of view has significantly hardened over the ensuing years. (I was also dealing with PTSD from age 11 but it happened before that diagnosis was even invented so I was already severely cracked and the additional damage shattered me and it took 16 years for me to commit to another woman).

The other thing is she would have had to do EVERYTHING just to earn a CHANCE at a recovery. Obviously this never happened.

I really loved that woman and I have not permitted myself to care like that again ever!!

JMO YMMV

Just my 2 cents;

While this topic has been beaten to death across multiple threads, its clear it impacts many of us in different ways.

Meaning no disrespect, but I view this as not a black and white issue, there are too many variables and situations that come into play regarding this aspect.

I wont' minimize the frustration, anger, hurt, etc that this brings to a BS, as aside from all but one activity, what my WW gave to the AP we have never done. So I get it.

However, we each have to view our own situation its merits. What occurs in my relationship is vastly different than what occurs in another. The through process, moral, views, opinions are all different. Some can argue it is sexual abuse, some can argue it isn't. Both statements are accurate to that one unique situation.

As unimaginable as it sounds, there will be WS who view the "demands" from the BS post D-day as thrilling and exciting and not degrading, humiliating, etc. On the flip side, there will be WS who do view these things as such.

It's just an F'd up topic all the way around, but we all will and can view it from our own perspective.

I'll close with, I am able to see it abstractly because of my own situation. Initially, I was hurt and disgusted that my WW gave AP something she never gave me. However, none of that is anything I would ever, ever want with a woman, WW included. While unemotional sex is just that, making love is more special. So why would I want to call my wife a whore and a bitch? Yes, she allowed him to do that. Why would I want to be rough with my wife in the sheets, yes she allowed that too. Yes, she says it was thrilling and exciting, but the reality is, she let him abuse her. It's what she deserved because of her past. It's sickening, but this is another side of the coin. I would view this as abusive if I even asked her to do these things and I would violate my own code of ethics. So tis just a multi faceted coin, with different beginnings and endings.

As unimaginable as it sounds, there will be WS who view the "demands" from the BS post D-day as thrilling and exciting and not degrading, humiliating, etc.

That's not the least bit hard to imagine. If my major consequence of an A was to have more/kinkier/etc sex? It would be like punishing a child by making them eat ice cream for dinner.

Sorry, been away at the beach for 5 days so coming into this late.

As I understand this, the OP thinks that a WW who offers certain sexual services to her AP should do so in kind for her BH during R if requested.

Some agree and others feel this is sexual assault or coercion on the part of the BH.

As a general statement, I suppose I understand the POV of the OP. But I think the issues run much deeper than that.

Some WW perform certain sexual acts with their AP's as coercion from the AP. It's the price they pay for ego kibbles or satisfying their fantasies. With their BH they feel safer, I suppose and don't have to so such things. Or maybe they just don't love their BH to the point they would do such acts.

I think in R I would concentrate less on certain sexual acts and more on the rebuilding of the M.

I would consider "acts WW done with AP but not BH" as not absolutely mandatory, but rather optional "condition" of R. I'll explain why later.

If you demand such things, then you are definitely NOT in R. Scenarios, described by some posters, should not occur in a true R. I understand venting and even calling names as part of that process, but not as a part of sex act.

Following can be dismissed as a minimization on my WW's part, but I kind of believe it to be true to some extent. A large part of her second A was acting the part of woman in passionate affair and all of her third A. Affairs should include a lot of hot-no-boundaries sex, right? She also felt that it's what is expected of her. She also expected the passion to finally come, but it didn't. So it was part "fake till you make it" and part "I'm paying with sex for ego kibbles/adrenaline/etc.". She did some of the acts because it went with her "passionate woman in affair" image.

Now if I were in R and she did some acts with AP that she didn't do with me? Would I want her to do that not because she wants it herself, but because she is now acting a different part? No, I definitely do not want her to "act" with me. To act like she wants it. To manipulate me that way. What I would like her to do is to genuinely want to do everything with me she has done with AP (especially if she refused me these acts before A). This would not be mandatory condition for R, but it would certainly be a huge roadblock in the path of R. Maybe even one that finally leads to D.

In my situation, there was nothing she did with AP that we didn't before (if we are talking about specific acts). However, there were other things that were long forgotten between us (not because I didn't want it) and she did them with AP - sex in the office, driving somewhere just to have sex, sex priority over sleep, etc. And one of the biggest red flags of false R was that she didn't put that kind of effort into creating opportunities for having sex with me. It is completely different now.

One other thing. After/during one recent episode of venting and raging, WW said that she wanted me to fuck her. Rough. Slap her. Not as a play. Demean her. Punish her. I replied that if I start doing this, it will be certain sign that I'm gone, that there's no R, no path together.

She was always into soft S&M (or maybe not so soft) as a sub. So we do have rough sex. I do call her names during such sessions, but I never have her actions as WW in mind while doing it. I said that if I fuck you to punish you (not as an act), then S&M will be forever ruined for us, and it is one of the few things that is still completely "ours".

THIS TIME FOR SURE!

What are we talking about again?

What are we talking about again?

The proper bat selection and techniques for beating dead horses.

Ha!

It is a very tired topic, isn't it?

But this time, I think we'll all change each others' minds and be arguing from opposite sides of the ring before it's all said and done.

Here, I can sum this up.

Men are gonna be like "Yeah it's unfair that my wife let AP nail her in the butt and I want that too" and then women are gonna be like "My body" and then men are going to be like "Fine then we're done" and women are gonna be like "Hey that's coercion" and men are gonna be like "I get to choose what my reconciliation looks like" then silverhopes and hikingout are gonna come in and be very sensible and notthevictem will make a joke to try and disarm everyone and SMS and DarknessFalls are going to contribute advice that doesn't help anyone because their circumstances are so unique and then GoldenR and RideItOut will try to bridge the gap and communicate how this makes them feel and it will fall almost entirely on deaf ears then a couple of guys no one has heard of will don a pink hat and white knight their way through the discussion and then sisoon will post something kinda sensible but way above everyone's head and then I will argue unnecessarily with him and he won't respond and then sassylee will say something sensible AND accessible but people will be too self-involved to pay attention then an admin will post that skull thing once the discussion goes sideways the end.

Can we just post this every time we have this discussion?

[This message edited by xhz700 at 11:20 AM, September 26th (Wednesday)]

Cuz,

Your dead horse graphic is spot on. Your summary paragraph for cut and paste is hilarious!

xhz700 wins the internet today.

Please make a notation in your calendars.

Is it a dead horse? You bet it is. Can we change each other's minds? I don't know, but the only reason I engage in these threads is in the hope that we can. For me, if my WW read these threads and aligned with the "my body, if I want to have anal with the AP and not RIO, he should accept that and continue to R" our M would be over. And that's the important message here, and the reason these threads matter, we can say "It shouldn't matter" and "It's her choice" or even "That's almost rape" as much as we want. It won't change the fact that a whole lot of BH's (and some BW's) simply will not be able to accept it and move on. If you want a chance at R, or you really want R to be successful, well.. You better be ready to give all you gave to the AP and more to your BS. Might you not "have to"? Maybe. Just like you might not have to go NC and can convince your wife that a one sided open relationship is a good idea. But I can tell you, as these threads have shown us, if you don't, you stand a very good chance of winding up in court, or, in the terrible story of one BH, in car being screamed at to perform sexually as you did for the AP.

This is a wound that would not heal for me. I might want it to, I might convince myself that I shouldn't care. But I can't see it ever being "OK" that the last person my wife had anal sex with was the AP. Or, for a woman, the last person my H went down on was the AP.

The value in these threads is to try to explain that to WS's. And make them understand the sexual damage they did, and ways to try to fix it. My hope, when I post in a thread like this is that some WW who won't give her H a BJ but did every time for the AP reads it and realizes "wow, it really does matter; I need to get in gear if I want to save my marriage". Or a WH reads it who won't write romantic notes to his W (but did for the AP) and realizes the same thing.

It has to be better for your BS. Sure, you can try "half measures", just like you can try to keep working with the AP, or you can try to only TXT the AP but not sleep with them anymore. But any of those is VERY likely to lead to D. And telling people otherwise is setting them up for failure, IMHO.

[This message edited by Rideitout at 2:03 PM, September 26th (Wednesday)]

RIO, it isn't that I disagree with you, it's that we're (generally men and women) talking past each other.

I will be clear that I am firmly in the camp with you, and had some of the same issues that you did. I am divorced. Not only would that in particular be a deal-breaker in the future for me, but any infidelity will be, and furthermore this issue SHOULD have been an immediate deal-breaker before.

We don't agree, and that is fine. If she wants to be divorced and find someone that she WANTS to take it up the butt with (y'know, until she decides that she doesn't) then by all means. There are plenty of fish in the sea.

LiesWMD:

You’re correlating two very different situations here and your question isn’t about making sexual demands.

So Ephimera, if a BS says "stop cheating and never contact this person again under any circumstances or else I will D you" is abuse?

The answer to your question is obviously no. A relevant question for you though is this?

If a BS is screaming at his WW to “suck my cock like you did for him slut or tomorrow I’m filing and going for full custody!” and the wayward is pleading for the BS to stop, is that abuse?

EDIT: Subsequent posts from Ephimera clarified this for me.

Ephimera said making any demands under the threat of D was abusive, if I recall correctly. Yes, my example took things to an extreme.

I also think your example also takes things to an extreme with the whole "suck it bitch" scenario This is terrible and in my opinion it is abusive regardless of what a WS did. Unfortunately, I'm sure that that exact type of situation does, in fact, unfold many times; however, I don't think the OP was referring to that particular scenario, but rather one where the BS's requirements from a sexual standpoint are laid out in a more acceptable setting. I think it would be sick and sociopathic to get sexual pleasure from doing that in the manner you describe, regardless of whatever the nature and extent of the betrayal was.

If we were to - from both perspectives - refrain from engaging in "reductio ad absurdum", I think there is a completely reasonable middle ground. Meaning, a BS telling his/her WS in a non-abusive manner what they would require sexually in order to stay married.

My interpretation of Ephimera's comment is that even if the BS's position in this regard is explained in calm, dispassionate manner (e.g., even in MC or something), it would still be abuse. But Ephimera said (I believe) that *ANYTHING* stated as a requirement, the breach of which will result in D, is a form of abuse. Hence, my extreme example. I legitimately want to know if I was interpreting the comment correctly or if Ephimera meant it is abusive only in the context of a crying, terrified WS (or something remotely like it).

EDIT: Ephimera, I see where you are coming from with the "if you have to threaten D, they aren't worth trying" thing. I just read your initial post as ANYTHING stated as a "but-for I will D you" is abuse.

[This message edited by SilverLinings55 at 2:46 PM, September 26th (Wednesday)]

I don’t know whether making this point is important or not at this stage, but nonetheless, I am going to try again to make it anyways.

This version of this repeat discussion is the result of a post I made in the off-topic forum . I should not have made the post there and I have apologized to the moderators and the posters on that original thread. My comments there were NOT about sexual acts being performed for a betrayed spouse because they were performed for an affair partner and whether or not it’s okay to demand it as a condition of reconciliation.

My comments there were about sexual abuse inside a marriage. I attempted to make a distinction WITH A DIFFERENCE between requiring full trusting access to your spouse’s body as a condition for reconciliation versus demeaning and degrading threats and language just prior to or during a sexual act.

I explained that requiring a full and healthy sex life is necessary for solid and healthy reconciliation. However, if a betrayed spouse finds themselves out of control and berating and calling their spouse a whore or a slut or making them perform in a location where they may be seen or demeaning them AS OPPOSED TO discussing what they need (okay) and stating what they expect (okay), then the anger is too great, the chasm is too wide between the married couple, the destruction is too much, and the marriage is over.

I clearly stated that we aren’t talking about the MAJORITY of people here or anywhere. I was talking about a very very very few instances where I read what I view as a destructive use of power, behavior rooted in rage and anger, and psychological warfare. In those very, very very few cases, the destruction is permanent and rooted in a need for punishment rather than an attempt at reconciliation.

We always talk about people being either good or bad candidates for reconciliation. If two parties agree to reconcile, both parties should be all in. That means (at least for me) you approach each day ready to communicate, be honest about what you’re thinking and feeling, be honest about what you’re doing and commit to words and actions that are CONstructive rather than DEstructive. That responsibility lies with both spouses. I believe there are betrayed spouses who because of the trauma and damage from the infidelity itself and their personal understanding of what constitutes a deal breaker are also not good candidates for reconciliation. That’s okay. It’s obviously okay to say, “I cannot continue a marriage here.” What’s not okay is to say yes to reconciliation and then torture your WW IN AN ABUSIVE manner as I described above in my numerous posts until you decide he or she has had enough. That isn’t true reconciliation and it genuinely has nothing to do with an honest discussion or statement about your sexual needs and your sexual wants for reconciliation.

To put it plainly if not somewhat crassly:

For those of you in the “I believe you should enthusiastically provide me with the same acts, frequency, and locations/situations as you did for your AP,”

I assume you are not tacking the following onto the end of that statement:

“and I’m going to tell you that you are a worthless slut and a whore and scream at you while I’m telling you I’ll financially ruin you and make it so you can’t see your children unless you stop your crying and stick my penis in your mouth right now. I’m going to do this until I get what I want and expect you not to let it affect this reconciliation I say I’m fully committed to attempting with you.”

THAT is the distinction with a very big difference and unfortunately, because I didn’t look at or think about the rules in that forum, this thread once again reared it’s head and we were back again to discussing whether or not we as betrayeds should be allowed to request the same sex acts our WWs performed with their APs. We are talking about two very different things, talking past each other, and not recognizing that I was NEVER talking about whether a betrayed spouse has the right to the same sexual acts, etc.

My sincere apologies for my original post that sparked the retread of this topic. It turned into a repeat debate of something I wasn’t even referencing in the first place.

[This message edited by Lieswearmedown at 3:20 PM, September 26th (Wednesday)]

I believe a WW who loves her husband,and wants reconciliation would want to please him sexually.

I believe a BH has the right to request that the WW give him the kind of sex she gave the OM.

I think the BH has every right to divorce their WW if she won't do these things with him.

That said, I would like to ask a few questions of those men who demanded a sex act from their wife,under the threat of divorce, and their WW did it, even though it was obvious she didn't want to,and she was visibly upset and crying during the act.

Did it help? Did you enjoy it? When you think about it,after some time has passed, do you still feel good about it?

[This message edited by HellFire at 6:04 PM, September 26th (Wednesday)]

HellFire, if she cries then the sex is over PERMANENTLY! I will not have my wife cry during ANY sex act with me because I REALLY don't believe she cried when it was done with him. She would have been told this beforehand. The divorce papers would be served in the most public way possible.

The sex would not be for punishment but offered as a first step toward possible reconciliation. The serving of the papers in the most public way possible would be for punishment as would whatever followed.

JMO YMMV

[This message edited by Candyman66 at 6:13 PM, September 26th (Wednesday)]