SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

I have. Her answer is "But I really do want to do it with you". Which, of course, is the "right" answer, but, you think she told the AP anything different? I don't. Never asked, but, I sincerely doubt her answer to him was "I'll f**k you for some kibbles". I have a feeling, no, it was more "I really want to sleep with you" until, of course, the entire thing is re-written into "for the kibbles".

Unless you are summarizing " I really want to do it with you" is not a sufficient answer. She really should be able to tell you what has changed in her thinking, what she has learned about herself. Superficial answers or discussions aren't going to be very convincing.

At the same time, you say you are about action. She is doing it, has done it consistently and at a better quality for what you say is years now. So, I guess that leads to more questions...is the problem that she can't discuss things more elaborately to where you understand better, is the problem you feel she has an ulterior motive for wanting to stay and she just knows sex is the price?

I don't think comparing it to the AP situation is all that helpful but I can understand how someone would get stuck there.

First point, agreed. I really don't care, it doesn't bother me to do it. I think it's silly, but it's not something that grates my nerves to do. It's a neutral for me.

It's not neutral though. It keeps you comparing it to what the AP did. And, it keeps you from feeling like you can just do it naturally. It keeps you feeling like it's a transaction.

And third, yes, of course, I know they have value because of what they can get me, but I don't see the value for the receiver, particularly when, especially in an A, the "value" in the thing your received is almost certainly counterfeit.

By saying this, you are still saying "I do it because the AP did it but it was counterfeit. This has no value" I would think maybe you should try not doing it at all for a short time and see what happens or how that feels. My guess is that it has nothing at all to do with any of this and more the state of mind she was in before and during her affair. You think it's about words, I think it was more about coping and escaping the crisis that was happening at that time. That was a major thing she was tryin to accept.

But, point taken, I know that "kicking game" to women is a valuable skill, and I know that women find it attractive. It's like makeup, is knowing how to put it on well valuable? Well, it is if it helps you get the man you want, or change the way that other people perceive you.

That's maybe a young man's dating game, but that's really irrelevant to marriage between two healthy adults.

I

t's disturbing to me too. Let me try a little harder. I feel like dropping a 100 on the nightstand, at least I'd be providing something that has value to both of us. The 100 can buy me something I want, and can buy her something she wants. The words have 0 value to me, I feel guilty trading words for sex with her because I'm not providing something that's equally valuable to both of us. A 100 dollar bill would take that guilt away.

This is a big part of why this is a problem. First, I would say things that came from your heart would feel like they had value to you. Secondly, we do all sorts of things for our spouse we know they enjoy and that gives us joy. You don't feel that way totally towards her because you still have unresolved anger and resentment. So, it's not about the "what" it's about where it's coming from.

I have to say I agree with all of this (change the sexes for me). I believe when WS say they've done the work and realised it was the attention they were after all this time, the more sex, the more varied, the more kink etc, the more attention was received but now they realise that and can admit the sex was bad! Can I say what a load of bull, I firmly believe that's shame talking. It's ok to admit you wanted the attention but as we've seen from the reactions to the few WS who've admitted to liking A sex (especially WW) there's likely to be a mob posting in about 30secs. So they go with not liking it because they're ashamed.

This was really taking where I was going with my question in a different direction. It's more about what has changed than getting back into comparing sex, or was sex good.

I will also say that I know at least a dozen women here who have said "I enjoyed the sex". The only time it's contentious in this forum is when the question isn't "did you enjoy it" the hot button question that you can't find people to answer differently is "Did you enjoy sex with the AP more than you do with your H". For me, I don't know how you would ever compare the experience of decades to a few encounters. We have had a few women come here and say they did enjoy it more.

But, when I think about other men, prior to my husband, if you had asked me who was better I couldn't have told you. They were different. I liked different things about them. But, the reason that's a bad answer for an affair is...you were married there shouldn't have been other sex. There shouldn't have been someone to compare it to, etc.

But my question to RIO was more...what does your wife say she learned. Why is their sex life different. I just don't think it's about kibbles. And, she should be able to communicate how she has evolved. Unless she hasn't...and that's a big issue if not. I recently saw RIO say she was close to "being nexted", and I can't help but wonder if better communication is needed or if she just never did anything to work on herself. Or if this was just something RIO will not be able to accept and should move on. There is no shame in that, it's her who had the affair. Still needing excessive external validation could be something he is assuming, or worse something she hasn't worked on.

[This message edited by hikingout at 8:37 AM, February 28th (Friday)]

Fair point. I guess, for me personally, I don't operate that way.

I believe you. You come off to me as an incredibly honest man.

For the record. I don’t believe an affair is just kibbles or just sex. I’ve found that life usually operates in the grey areas. But we are getting very far from NTSC, original question here.

Let's all just remind ourselves that boundaries only work whenever the other person is adhering to them openly. My ex and I had very clear "don't cheat on each other" boundaries, but we all know how that worked out. Boundaries are important, but they're nothing without some kind of "trust but verify" process. Which of course opens up a whole other set of problems: when is a person being paranoid and controlling, when are they being reasonable.

That’s not a boundary.

She has CLAIMED she had sex she didn't want to get something in return

True. Bad choice of words on my part. Either way, you know she's lying somewhere. I think you're right in your logic. What if you took the sex out of the equation just to see? Tell her you don't need that stuff anymore and watch what she does. Of course, that's only if you plan to do something if you don't get the reaction you want, or your ok with accepting less.

Are you ok with the way things are? If not, what are you doing to change them?

There isn't any difference between the 2 statements, "Do this or I'll leave," and, "I won't put up with this." The other person still has a choice. Is there some coercion there? Maybe. That's a tough one to call, very nuanced. Controlling would be to say, "I will not allow this!" and then locking her in the closet.

Physical force is really the only way to truly control another person. Coercion is not control because the person does still have a choice. Some people do choose a beating over scrubbing the toilet or going hungry or homeless rather than having to pray before being given food and shelter.

Have kinky sex with me or I will divorce you. Your W can choose divorce. She didn't. Why not? Because she values your M more? Because she values you more? Because she values her lifestyle more?

Or, maybe she discovered that she does like kinky sex and, because she values you, she wants to do it with you. Of course, she discovered that in the worst possible way. The question then becomes, can you live with that?

My H says he never stopped loving me, never wanted to leave me. There were problems in our M, things he didn't like about me, that he didn't know how to handle. Now, he knows. Now, he accepts as I am, warts and all. He stays.

Do I believe him when he says he loves me? No, I don't. I don't think there is anything he could say or do that would make me believe that again. I think he stays, doesn't consider D, because he made a commitment and feels obligated. He has children to consider. He's trying to make the best of it. Or, maybe I'm projecting.

she did a good job of pointing out that my "help" is not always as helpful as I think

One thing that has always really bothered me is when people try to help me when I haven't asked for help. Drives me insane! If I ask, "How does this work?", I don't want you to do it for me. I want you to explain it to me so I can do it myself. If I want you to do it for me, I will clearly say so.

My H is notorious for assuming he knows what I want and doing it. Then, he's dumbfounded when I'm not happy about what he did. Of course, that leads to his "poor me" thinking that I don't appreciate him. There's such an easy fix to that. Just ask. "What do you want?" I don't understand why that's so difficult for him to do.

Marriages are transactional. That is why it is generally referred to as a covenant (a contract). The vows are a solemn pledge to honor the covenant.

So I think any faithful, loyal, hardworking betrayed spouse should look at it thru this coldly clinical lens (as well as considering it from other angles).

But when you out it in these stark terms, it’s helpful. You can detach a bit more and really ask, “what is my wayward spouse REALLY bringing to the table as a part of a transactional relationship? Are they living up to their end of the bargain? Will they? Can they?”

It’s a useful way of considering it.

And once infidelity has occurred you’ll never be able to look at the relationship as a romantic ideal (or at least you should not, and if you do you’re falling into a trap). Henceforth it should always be “what am I getting out of this and is it good enough for me?”

[This message edited by Thumos at 8:52 AM, February 28th (Friday)]

Marriages are transactional. That is why it is generally referred to as a covenant (a contract). The vows are a solemn pledge to honor the covenant.

So I think any faithful, loyal, hardworking betrayed spouse should look at it thru this coldly clinical lens (as well as considering it from other angles).

But when you out it in these stark terms, it’s helpful. You can detach a bit more and really ask, “what is my wayward spouse REALLY bringing to the table as a part of a transactional relationship? Are they living up to their end of the bargain? Will they? Can they?”

I really feel like you might be mixing concepts here.

Finding someone who meets your credentials to marry...meaning "what do they bring to the table", is more about compatibility really. I chose my husband for a lot of reasons. If those reasons went downhill over time, then I agree there is no unconditional romantic love. I would say my things I chose about him were not shallow, they are actually mostly personality traits.

Transactional means...I will pay you for this.

Being a team means, I have your back, let me get that for you. No expectation of payment. There is an implied overall expectations we are a team and you are going to have my back when I need it.

I am not saying nothing is transactional. I might say "I will pick up your dry cleaning on the way home, can you get the dishes put away so that I can start dinner when I get there". That's specifically "I will do X, you do Y" That's really not about payment though - right? That's about working together.

I have sex with my husband because I want to. I don't have it with him so that he will buy me something expensive that he is balking at or so that he will let me have my way about something we are arguing about.

Teamwork, cooperation, compromise, I suppose some people can look at those things as transactions. But, those are really motivated by more auspicious intentions rather than manipulation.

“Do this or I'll leave," and, "I won't put up with this." The other person still has a choice. Is there some coercion there?

No, not a single whit of coercion in this. We had this long protracted argument in the infamous and interminable thread about WW’s giving their sexual best to AP’s — and this kept coming up as a root disagreement. Most of the men on that thread said “do this or I want a divorce” was not coercion, while many women seemed to think it was.

I think there is a gulf of understanding here that baffles me. You seem to land where most men do — that this is not coercion. Coercion, as you say, would be threatening a WW with some kind of harm or locking her in a closet.

Simply saying “this is what I want and if you can’t provide it, I’m going to find another path in my life” and then following through on that is not coercion.

It is, however, transactional. As all marriages are.

Again, I think it’s quite helpful to look at marriage as transactional — especially post infidelity. Because it is transactional by its very nature. A husband and wife are always making a bargain and striking a deal. The deal is basically “I love you, you love me. I’ll be faithful to you, and you’ll be faithful to me, and in exchange we will always take care of each other, look out for each other and enjoy each other’s bodies.”

Always ask “what am I getting out of this and is it working for me.” Anyone can divorce at any time for any reason. after infidelity, the stakes for a faithful betrayed spouse deserving and getting what they want out of life are even higher.

[This message edited by Thumos at 9:05 AM, February 28th (Friday)]

What if you took the sex out of the equation just to see? Tell her you don't need that stuff anymore and watch what she does. Of course, that's only if you plan to do something if you don't get the reaction you want, or your ok with accepting less.

LOL, it's a good suggestion, but I'm laughing at what she'd do. I can tell you what she'd do, she'd flip the f**k out! We've been together long enough and she knows me well enough, if I suddenly "lose interest" in sex, she'll go bonkers because she'll know that's me pulling away from her.

Are you ok with the way things are? If not, what are you doing to change them?

Direct answer, yes, I'm "OK" with how things are now. One of the reasons I post a lot on this topic is so that others don't have to get here, to where "OK" is as good as you can hope for. But, yes, I'm OK with it, it just could be better. I have a sex life that would turn most men green with envy with a beautiful wife where we basically do "anything we dream up" together. That's a HUGE plus, in fact, it's so much a plus that it kind of overshadows everything else. Yes, it completely sucks how I got here, and yes, it could be SO MUCH better if it hadn't gotten as "transactional". But, that water is under the bridge; so all I can do is look at what I have now. And, when I do, I smile, I know we both would basically "do anything" for one another sexually, and that feeling, while tempered with "what it took to get there" is absolutely amazing. Anything she or I dream up, we're doing it together. The power of that, at least for me, cannot be overstated, it's having someone to explore, laugh, be afraid, push a boundary, pull back from it, and then push again; it's just an amazingly intimate and exciting connection for me. That isn't the problem, if I could "undo" what it took to get here, I wouldn't feel like I should drop some money by the nightstand after a particularly erotic evening; it's entirely "what it took" that occupies my thoughts, not what I'm actually doing. And, this is an important distinction, it's not "what it took" in the meaning of "her having an affair"; that part just sucks, but it doesn't cause me NEARLY as much pain as "what it took" meaning laying down an ultimatum/requirement for R that included "sex like the OM got". That's the part that f**ks me up the worst. Of course, I don't know this, but thinking about it, if out of the affair, before I had a chance to ask, my wife had gone to where we are today sexually (or, put another way, where she and the OM were) I think I'd feel dramatically better about it. The crux of it isn't "you did it with him first" it's "I had to demand it".

There isn't any difference between the 2 statements, "Do this or I'll leave," and, "I won't put up with this." The other person still has a choice. Is there some coercion there? Maybe. That's a tough one to call, very nuanced. Controlling would be to say, "I will not allow this!" and then locking her in the closet.

I agree with your definitions, and further agree that it's really impossible to control another person without physical force/threats of physical force. As you well said, "They have a choice" and the alternative choice, while not optimal (divorce, for example) is still a choice. It crosses the line when the alternative choice is "get the crap beat out of you" or "get shot" (gun to the head situation).

Have kinky sex with me or I will divorce you. Your W can choose divorce. She didn't. Why not? Because she values your M more? Because she values you more? Because she values her lifestyle more?

I'd pay a lot of money to know the "real" answer to that question. If I knew, it would end this issue for me, one way or another. Lifestyle? D. Values our M more? Good, I value it like crazy too, continue to R. But that's the key question, OK, your doing it now, but WHY? And there are a few "D" answers, not just lifestyle. "I feel bad for you and think you deserve it after what I did" is also, believe it or not, a D answer for me. I don't want her pity, and I don't want a gun to her head, I want her to want to do it with me because, much like the OM, she wants that experience together.

Or, maybe she discovered that she does like kinky sex and, because she values you, she wants to do it with you. Of course, she discovered that in the worst possible way. The question then becomes, can you live with that?

Sure, honestly, that would be as good an answer as I could hope for. You know how I know I liked kinky sex? Because I did it with people before my W and enjoyed it. Of course a better answer would be "we discovered it together" but, I'd accept what you said above as a reasonable answer and yes, I'd live with it.

I think he stays, doesn't consider D, because he made a commitment and feels obligated.

Now this answer (and I'm sorry to say this) terrifies me. If that was her "why", I'd walk out the door so fast the carpenter would take a week to rebuild the door frame after I tore it off the hinges. I don't want her to stay because of commitment or guilt (just like I don't want her to get kinky in bed for those reasons), I want her to stay because SHE wants to stay.

The WS-AP relationship is unconditional love.

No it’s not.

It’s a cheap tinfoil fantasy pasted together with lies and delusions.

Transactional means...I will pay you for this.

That’s a narrow definition. A transaction is an exchange. This for that. Marriages are a contractual and transactional relationship. And IMO that’s exactly how every betrayed spouse should view it and has to view it to maintain sanity.

That’s a narrow definition. A transaction is an exchange. This for that. Marriages are a contractual and transactional relationship. And IMO that’s exactly how every betrayed spouse should view it and has to view it to maintain sanity.

I was merely pointing out that there is a difference in what we are talking about. Maybe the words should really be "Toxically transitional". Because to me, that's what it is...It's not the normal teamwork that happens in a healthy marriage. It's about manipulation, expecting explicit returns on what you are giving.

Again, compromise, teamwork, roles, etc...yeah they are "transactions", but when we are talking about transactional relationship, I really see it as we are talking about toxic transactions. Because affairs are transactional, in a very unhealthy way. They are toxic and unhealthy. Which means the WS has toxic and unhealthy tendencies that should be worked on and not brought into the marriage.

Because affairs are transactional, in a very unhealthy way. They are toxic and unhealthy.

I agree with you, but it's really only the element of the BS's that make it "toxic and unhealthy". What would we call an A between 2 single people? Probably friends with benefits would be the best description, people who meet up to sleep together and provide ego kibbles (whatever the other person is after, gifts, words, etc). It's only the damage done by an A that really change the nature of it and make it toxic and unhealthy, take that away, you have your "new standard" male/female relationship.

It's about manipulation, expecting explicit returns on what you are giving.

This I agree with, and it's also why, in a lot of cases, I don't see a ton of distinction between your "typical male A" and a paid encounter. I sometimes read in the emotionless infidelity thread and think to myself, this should really be in general. Your husband paid in cash, my W's AP paid in words. Is there really much difference in the two? I mean, of course, there are differences; for example, I think the risk of recidivism for men who pay with cash is probably higher (although, honestly, that's just a hunch, I don't know it to be true). And, obviously, if my wife was out accepting cash for sex it would impact my thoughts in some ways (in some ways better, in others worse). But is it fundamentally different? I'm not sure it really is, and, if it's not, then when we start to extend that into "normal" relationships, I find myself in a very uncomfortable place. I always, in the past, thought of sex as an "even trade", I'm trading mine for yours, and, for some reason, that gave me a LOT more peace than trading sex for words or sex for money. I'm not sure why, to be honest, it matters to me, but it just seemed so much "purer" when we both wanted to sleep together and our reason was "we want to sleep together" not "so he'll tell me I'm pretty".

They are toxic and unhealthy.

I agree with you, but it's really only the element of the BS's that make it "toxic and unhealthy". What would we call an A between 2 single people? Probably friends with benefits would be the best description, people who meet up to sleep together and provide ego kibbles (whatever the other person is after, gifts, words, etc). It's only the damage done by an A that really change the nature of it and make it toxic and unhealthy, take that away, you have your "new standard" male/female relationship.

I can see what you are saying, but that is really an oversimplification. There are a lot of things about an affair that is toxic, I do agree that the dynamic of there being a spouse on either end may be the big thing. But...

If I were single, I would have had a different pool I would have been dipping my toe into. If you are married, a healthy person is not going to be on the receiving end of your advances or make advances on you. So, right off the bat you have drawn in someone who also has something pretty wrong with them and that goes way beyond a lack of integrity.

Secondly, because there is a spouse, then it means some percentage of your needs really can be met in that relationship. So, you are choosing not to do that, and why? Because you are a fucked up person. So, then, what is it that you are seeking? Gravy. Superficial shit. Things that do not add up to something you should risk your marriage over. So, you have two fucked up people, giving the other whatever flavor of gravy it is.

Does that happen in the dating world? Sure, amongst young people who are not looking to get tied down. So, I can grant you that you probably had those superficial things.

But, then there are the "high" feelings. Those come from probably the most darkest toxic places of all.

I can't express this enough, it's a misconception that what happens with the AP is like dating, or like when you met your spouse. It's not at all like that. Sure, you might have gone through a phase when you had those excited feelings with your spouse when you first met them and you thought about them all the time or whatever. No, this is dark, addictive, and it's a sad play out of something of your youth without the innocent underpinnings. It's dark and evil.

Dating in your 20's, eh, that's not dark and evil. Shoot, of course we all did misguided things at that time, it didn't come from a bad place usually more of one of underdevelopment.

[This message edited by hikingout at 10:03 AM, February 28th (Friday)]

I would say my things I chose about him were not shallow, they are actually mostly personality traits.

I would say the same thing about why I chose my H. All those personality traits turned put to be fake, though, and here I am. Maybe I would've been better off if I just chose the richest guy I could find so I could spend all my days at the gym and the spa.

I don't want her to stay because of commitment or guilt (just like I don't want her to get kinky in bed for those reasons), I want her to stay because SHE wants to stay.

RIO, I feel the same way. If I could, I would walk out the door right now. Technically, I can, but that would mean leaving my children, which I am not willing to do. So, I stay and my H stays and we pretend we love each other and try to make the best of it.

Here's the thing, though, and this may just be semantics. Whatever the reason for her staying, ultimately, it's because she wants to. If she didn't want to, she would leave. My H says he knows D is an option. He doesn't want D. He wants to stay married to me.

The question then becomes, why does he want to stay married to me? Because he truly loves me? Because he doesn't want to deal with 50/50 custody of our children? Because he doesn't want to be a failure? Because he doesn't want to lose 50+% of his stuff? Because he is Catholic?

That's the part I don't know. Because of his past actions, I don't believe what he says. Unfortunately, I think the only way I would believe himself is if he said he didn't love me and was only staying because it's too expensive to D, or something like that.

WRT how someone discovers they like kinky sex and then shares that with their partner, I think it absolutely matters if they discovered it before being with their SO vs. while cheating on said SO. My H honed his sexual skills before he met me. I really don't care what he did with anyone before me. However, if he learned a new thing from or with the MOW, that would be off the sex menu for me. And, if it was the one thing that is most important to me, that would mean D.

Back to whether or not a statement like, "If you do this or don't do that, I will divorce you," is coercion depends on whether or not it elicits a fear response. What would D mean to the other person? Would she lose her home? Would she not be able to support her kids? Does she care so much about appearances that she would sacrifice herself so people wouldn't judge her for her failed M? Staying and doing things you don't want to do for any of those reasons would be coercion.

Problem is it can be very difficult to determine if fear is the reason someone stays. Sometimes it's obvious, like the trust fund kid who is told he will be disowned if he doesn't become a lawyer when he really wants to be an artist who starts law school next fall. Sometimes not so much, like the lower earner who stays because he doesn't want to give up his beamer.

With cheating, it's easy. Cheat again and I'll leave. The cheater isn't really losing anything by giving up cheating. Have anal sex with me like you did with the AP or I'll file for D is too close to the coercion side for me.

really see it as we are talking about toxic transactions.

I like the distinction between toxic and health transactions. Very helpful. Affairs are toxic transactions. Marriages are healthy transactions. Post-infidelity relationships are in the “remains to be seen” category.

We've been together long enough and she knows me well enough, if I suddenly "lose interest" in sex, she'll go bonkers

I'm not saying lose interest in sex. I'm saying lose interest in some or all of the specific sc acts she did with the AP that she didn't do with you previously. You could say you've btdt now and it's just not that important to you anymore. 🤷‍♀️

Or, you could be more honest and say that you realizes that your demands may have been coercive and you don't want to do that to her, so she doesn't have to do them if she doesn't want to.

You could say you've btdt now and it's just not that important to you anymore.

She'll never believe that. I've done plenty of "ego kibbling" about how impactful those acts have been, how much I enjoyed them, how I wanted her to know what it meant to me. She'd know I was lying (and so would I!).

Or, you could be more honest and say that you realizes that your demands may have been coercive and you don't want to do that to her, so she doesn't have to do them if she doesn't want to.

Now this, I've kind of done this (not in so many words, but I've implied it and tried to make her understand it's no longer a "requirement"). Thing is, between just us here, I'm not sure it's true. I mean, of course she doesn't have to do them if she doesn't want to, that part is true, but I'm not sure if I'd be OK with her now removing the "good stuff" from the menu. I could say I am, but I think it would start to eat me up inside. I really try to work from a basis of honesty on this topic, "We'll have those experiences together or I'm going to leave" is the honest answer, it might not be the "right answer" or a "good answer" but it's the honest to God truth of the matter, and that's the basis that I try use universally, but especially with her.

The sad thing is, I just don't think there's any way, after an A where you have the "for him/her (AP), but not for you (BS)" there's any way to go backwards. It's always going to be a sore point, and it's always going to be something that the BS is thinking about (assuming that thing was important to them) and "measuring" their WS's commitment to the relationship by that basis. Put another one up there on the chalkboard for "good reasons not to have an A".

Because of his past actions, I don't believe what he says. Unfortunately, I think the only way I would believe himself is if he said he didn't love me and was only staying because it's too expensive to D, or something like that.

Wow, you captured that well. I'd believe "I did those things with him because I was so attracted to him I'd do anything" in a heartbeat. The "bad answer" I'd immediately believe. What I really struggle with is believing anything that seems like a "good answer" (did it for the kibbles, etc).

it just seemed so much "purer" when we both wanted to sleep together and our reason was "we want to sleep together" not "so he'll tell me I'm pretty".

That's not quite how it works. A woman doesn't have sex with a man so he will tell her she's pretty. A woman has sex with a man because he tells her she's pretty. He says things that make her feel special. She has sex with him because she thinks she's special to him. Afterward, maybe, she discovers he didn't really think she was special. She is heartbroken.

This goes back to the inherent risks of intercourse. Women expend much more energy and take much more risk when they have sex than men do. That's a biological fact, even with birth control. Women don't want to risk the potential consequences of sex with someone who is likely to abandon them.

I am simplifying and making generalizations, but I think it gets my point across.

Women expend much more energy and take much more risk when they have sex than men do. That's a biological fact, even with birth control. Women don't want to risk the potential consequences of sex with someone who is likely to abandon them.

This is spot on analysis and indubitably true.

So how should we view WW’s in this light, and WW’s view of their BH’s, given that sexual intercourse is freighted with so much more risk and energy for women than for men?

I just don't think there's any way, after an A where you have the "for him/her (AP), but not for you (BS)" there's any way to go backwards. It's always going to be a sore point

I get that. That's not what I'm trying to address. I trying to add the question of coercion. The only way to know whether or not she feels coerced is to take the requirement back. You don't have to be honest about if the sole purpose is to determine whether or not she really wants to do those things with you.

You can always change your mind again. If you let go of that requirement and she stops, you can always come back later and tell her it's not working for you. At that point, though, I think you'd have to decide if you can go back to pre-A sex, or D. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that being a dealbreaker for you.

I get that you're ok with the sex. That's not what I was asking. I was asking if you're ok with they way you got the sex, not the way she may have learned she likes it, but that you had to essentially demand it.

What do you want? Do you want all the amazing sex you can get with the knowledge that your W might only be doing it so you won't D? Would you rather go back to pre-A sex with the knowledge that your W is doing what she wants with you just because she wants to, with no possible coercion involved? Is neither of those really palatable and you'd be better off D?

Stop thinking, good or bad, right or wrong. Instead, think, What is, without any judgement.