SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

As has been said ad nauseam, women put a lot more investment into every sexual exchange they have then men do. We put ourselves in a very vulnerable situation. We risk our bodies and our lives every time. Unless the parts are gone or have gone through menopause, there is always a chance of pregnancy. Life-threatening risks come with pregnancy that men will never experience. Not to mention being left to possibly raise a child by ourselves because we don't even know the father's name. We have to be more cautious.

As a man, I can say that this is congruent with my experiences with most of the women in my life (both romantic and non-romantic).

But in the context of affair sex vs. married sex and betrayed masculine emotion, I would find the subtext of this statement actually reinforces a lot of what has been said in this thread and the other betrayed husband wayward wife sex threads: If my WW is a woman, then what does it say that she's had to put this much conscious thought and "investment" into her sexual decisions, so much so that it would be a universal female critical safety concern, knowing that she was "risking her body and her life", knowing that she could confront accidental pregnancy or lying about STDs or being driven into the woods and hearing a revved up chain saw-

-and she still *consensually and repeatedly chose* those risks and this sexual encounter with an AP under this sociobiological mental prism that distinguishes female sexual experiences from male ones?

I understand the context in which this statement is coming from, but I can't help but feel that learning that my WW always needed to put more thought and "investment" into her sexuality as a woman (and made her choices based on that) would not disprove the beliefs expressed by men in this thread: that their pain is a function of their WW's perceived investment by comparison in the AP, whose desire was so strong that it managed to override not just moral concerns but even the preservation and safety instincts described here.

(Edited to clean up some grammar)

[This message edited by dri4039 at 10:39 AM, October 13th (Sunday)]

would not disprove the beliefs expressed by men in this thread that their pain is a function of their WW's perceived investment by comparison in the AP, whose desire was so strong that it managed to override the preservation and safety instincts described here.

It's also a bit of a function of our individual biological imperatives. They are quite different between men and women, specifically because of the danger and investment gap between the sexes. A male's (of just about any species, not just human) imperative is "spread seed" and fight, if necessary for the right to do. A female's imperative is "gather the best seed" and wait for that to come around. Now, of course, we're not governed by those desires and biological forces entirely, but they certainly do play a role, or at least they seem to for me personally. And research does back this, but, honestly, just observe a little and you'll see it without any research at all. Why is porn so much more popular with men and romance novels so much more popular with women. Well, porn is all about "spreading seed" into as many willing women as possible. It's displaying the "male imperative" and simulating it, making it erotic and exciting for people sexually motivated by that (which, of course, is both men and women, but, more men than women regularly watch porn, by a rather large margin). Now, flip it around, what's the typical plot of romance novel? It very often centers around some really "high quality male" who's difficult to get. The impossibly rich and handsome guy (50 Shades type stuff). The ruthless pirate who's feared by everyone except his lover. The powerful attorney who's incredibly smart but has no skills with women. The fantasy there is being desired by a very "high quality" man, not having unfettered access to as many men as you want. Where porn is the opposite, yes, I'd say that most porn stars are "high quality" too, but it's really about having lots of access to lots of different "high quality" women that's the primary male fantasy being played to.

t/j: RIO, personal question: did you begin a sexual relationship with your wife before or after you fell in love with her? There is a reason for my question.

I understand the context in which this statement is coming from, but I can't help but feel that learning that my WW always needed to put more thought and "investment" into her sexuality as a woman (and made her choices based on that) would not disprove the beliefs expressed by men in this thread: that their pain is a function of their WW's perceived investment by comparison in the AP, whose desire was so strong that it managed to override not just moral concerns but even the preservation and safety instincts described here.

Ed Zachary

t/j: RIO, personal question: did you begin a sexual relationship with your wife before or after you fell in love with her? There is a reason for my question.

Before. I know this will sound cliche, but I knew "something was different" with her day 1, but I can't say I was in "love" with her immediately, just knew that I "could" fall in love with her if I let myself.

DF, you might find the answer to your question in Betrayed Menz Thread on the last couple pages in an exchange between myself and RIO.

RIO, the reason I asked was as follows: you have stated that your W’s list of sexual “no”s was not to your liking, pre-A, but that you endured it because you love her. But if you were ordering off of her “sexual menu” before you loved her, I’m curious as to why it was acceptable THEN, before you were emotionally invested.

But if you were ordering off of her “sexual menu” before you loved her, I’m curious as to why it was acceptable THEN, before you were emotionally invested.

Fair question.. In my experience with women, there was a progression. Things that were "no's" became "yes's" as they become more comfortable and intimate with you. It wasn't until I was "in love" that I realized that "no will always mean no for you". I'd done most of the acts that we talk about in these threads with other women before my W, and, most of the time, it was after some time to get to know one another and open up the "sexual menu". With a few exceptions, my pre-M relationships weren't like an A, we didn't go from "hi" to "anal sex" in the space of a week. It was a much slower progression from the less intimate (holding hands), to more intimate (kissing, BJs, etc) to the even more intimate (sex, sex with a condom, oral sex on her) to the most intimate (kink, anal sex, BJ w/swallow, etc). I heard a lot of "I don't do that" in my past only to wind up "doing that" with that woman a few weeks later, so I had reason to believe that "No" meant "Not yet, or, no until I feel more attracted/comfortable/etc". By the time I knew it really meant "No, as in NEVER", I was already deeply in love and was "OK" with looking past it. It bothered me, for sure, but loving her (and having her love me) was worth more to me than an particular thing I might want to do in the bedroom, so.. I gave it up. And never gave it a ton of thought, I'd revisit some of the things I really wanted every few years, but, by and large, I didn't dwell on it. It was the A that changed this for me, I sure as hell didn't feel that "anal was a must have" about my W before the A, I can tell you that. But after she recreated just about every porn thing I've ever mastrubated to with the OM, well.. Things, right or wrong, changed.

RIO,

You still, today, do not understand female experience.

You want to love your WW in the way you want to love her. In a typical male way. At one time you wanted to nail a bunch of women and you did. Then you wanted the experience of finding "the one" and you did. This is typical male experience, let's build this, let's construct this in a linear method to the inevitable climax. Get it?

I am not a woman, I can only speak awkwardly to their experience. But it seems that they are a lot more circle of life, yin/yang, wanting a good cry. They want a range of experience. Not the straight line stuff most men gravitate to.

When I was in the manosphere, even there... all of the emphasis on lifting. So, so stupid. David Niven and Prince did a lot better with women than John Wayne. A lot more guys want to be John Wayne, I get it. Because that's how they want to love.

You are still loving in the way YOU want to love. You want to have your WW on a pedestal. I get it. Maybe she wants to be easy/sleazy once in a while. Maybe think about how she experiences life, how most women experience life, and love her or others on that basis.

Thanks, RIO. That makes sense.

Maybe think about how she experiences life, how most women experience life, and love her or others on that basis.

This is what I'm trying to get at. Stop looking at it from your POV. Look at it from another angle. It's called empathy.

Can you just "listen"?. Read what is posted and take it in. Think about it. Maybe ask some questions for clarification. But, don't respond. Don't argue. Don't come back with your own spin, your own explanation. Just listen.

RIO, I appreciate your last post in response to DF's question. You shared what you thought about what your CW did, how it affected you.

Dri, that was beautiful. You're right. I was not talking in the context of an A. I have no idea what goes on with that since I've not done it.

[This message edited by cocoplus5nuts at 6:53 PM, October 13th (Sunday)]

DF, you might find the answer to your question in Betrayed Menz Thread

I didn't know this was ok. I thought that thread was off limits to women like the betrayed womenz thread. I stay away. I don't read it.

Coco, anyone can read it—we just can’t post on it.

Coco, anyone can read it—we just can’t post on it.

Well, I know we can read it. Who would know? It just seems like a violation to me.

It just seems like a violation to me.

How so?

I guess I see it ad private communication between men. You might share things there that you wouldn't share with the general public, as it were. Kind of like my fch's IC. He can and is welcome to share any of that with me that he wants, but it's not mine to know otherwise.

Thanks people of SI....I just learned about facials. It only took me, ummmm, about 4 pages to be educated. What I've missed by being out of the sexual arena for 10 years. Glad Im back in.

Pretty hard to call it private on the internet, coco. In the past, when the menz thread was extremely active, many a WW and BW openly admitted to reading the thread for their own benefit and understanding. It was often encouraged that WWs should check it out in hopes of helping themselves and their BH’s.

In what I could only imagine as hundreds of posts I’ve made in the various menz threads, I can’t think of one time when I would have considered it private. The thread’s appeal and comfort lies in the fact that we can communicate as men, without the miscommunication that can occur between genders.

I never thought I was doing anything wrong by reading it—I guess I thought if people wanted to post privately they’d use PMs.

To me it’s like the WS topics with stop signs. Ok, BSs can’t post on them, but what are we going to do, tell them not to read them? Yeah, there’s a stop sign, but it’s still out there on the open forum.

RIO, one thing I've always been curious about. Well, one thing in two subparts: how did you learn your WW was having an A, and how did you come to know the details of her A?