SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

You seem to believe you coerced your WS into doing sexual acts.

I did, I made "as good as he got" a condition of R. Both sexually and non-sexually (she had to be as present with me, for example, as well as the sex stuff).

You seem to feel guilty and bad about it.

I do.

Why do you feel the need to label other people's safe boundaries as coercion too?

I'm not labeling anything as anything. It's the English language, and that's what the word "coercion" means (to extract something by force or threat). "Go NC with the AP or I'm filing papers" is a perfect example of coercion. I don't care what you personally want to call it, and if we're redefining words, let's say that and decide what coercion should mean and all agree that the dictionary definition isn't our definition. I'm OK with that too. But mental gymnastics to say "No, my boundary was stop seeing the AP, there's no reason at all much husband/wife should have felt coerced" is, well.. Mental gymnastics. Of course coercion is part of R for most people, many WS's are sh*t eating happy in an A and must be forced to stop through an ultimatum of some sort. I think it's important to be precise here for what a BS should expect, and "setting boundaries but don't coerce" isn't, at least in my experience, at all what they should anticipate. Perfect world, sure, that's what should happen. Real world, it rarely does, as we see from strings of broken NC, further sexual acts, TT, etc. You want to R? Well, good, but I'm not going to be the one to sugar coat it and tell you that it's usually possible without lots of pressure put on the WS and the word for that pressure is "coercion". Is it in their best interest? I think it is, much like a mother saying "You cannot have any pie unless you finish your peas"; it's not necessarily a "bad thing" to force someone else to do what they need to do/is in their best interest. In my case, yes, it was, and I do think that all of us would be MUCH happier if our WS's just ate the damn peas and "got it" without us having to resort to ultimatums. But is it realistic for a new BS here to read this thread and think "I guess I shouldn't do that". IMHO, no, not at all; in fact, most of the steps we all recommend either border on or are deep into coercion. Intended or not, dropping the 180 on someone, seeing a D attorney, demanding NC; all actions that, even if done for other intentions (protecting yourself as the BS), have a completely different impact on the WS. And that impact is basically comes down to "get your s**t together or I'm out of here". The fact that you're doing it to protect yourself vs influence their behavior doesn't matter one iota to how they will feel inside.

Sorry; but when you cheat, you lose, for a long time, your sexual autonomy.

I completely disagree. Nothing a person can do, should ever result in becoming your sex slave. No wonder you feel awful about it.

Well, I hope you go and plaster that message all over BW threads where they've decided they aren't going to have sex with their POS cheating husband anymore. Or is it OK to be someone's "sexual eunuch" but not someone's "sex slave"? I wasn't even talking about my personal situation, I was talking about losing your sexual autonomy to HAVE sex (as this was the topic of the thread), but, since you opened the can of worms, I'd love to know how one is OK (forced celibacy for a WS) where another is not (requirements for more sex as part of R).

We all gave up a large part of our sexual autonomy when we got married; I can no longer sleep with whoever I want as part of the deal I made with my W. It's not as "scary" as your making it out to be, and "sexual slavery" is an exaggeration beyond all reason.

How on earth could you be accused of coercion while setting a boundary? The boundary is set to protect oneself, not control another person.

Please give some examples of boundaries you'd set that aren't actually coercive statements phrased differently.

[This message edited by Rideitout at 6:52 PM, November 29th (Sunday)]

You feel that here on SI you and/or BS in general are expected to be perfect and forgiving while allowing for the WS failings. Is that right?

I do think this is right, but many posters seem to think the "you" in "you think I should" is her WH. Some people who are saying, "You go, girl! That's why I got a D!" seem to think she is angry with her WH who expects too much, but she has not said she is angry with her WH. She has said she is angry about what is permitted "in the wayward forum" several times.

Let me be clear in my interpretation, Onebiglie. It IS your WH you are furious with, who has these high expectations and demands of you, who wants you to be over it already, but you will not draw a line in the sand with him so are angry with SI and the posts in the WS forum as a proxy for your anger? Is this correct? Because that is sure how it sounds.

Nobody HERE has said any of the things you keep complaining that BS are "expected" to do. SI would never condone that position. Are you conflating your anger with your WS and HIS lack of support and understanding with your anger at the members of SI?

As other posters have said, they divorced their WS who pushed these unreasonable and cruel expectations at them. Have you considered divorcing your WH?

Well, I never got the impression that I was expected to be perfect or understanding of my XW. I think that the decision to divorce was endorsed, as was ghosting her.

I have read many times that lashing out verbally is fine, as is declining sex.

I would never touch my serially cheating XW with a ten foot pole after being betrayed.

I never lashed out, as doing so would just empower her more. She was not worth my anger.

Rideitout,

You're very good at using the English language in a way that fits your narrative. I won't even try to compete with that.

Dictionary or not, I view coercion as something done for bad intentions by bad people. That is my opinion. I also don't feel "awful" about that.

I made "as good as he got" a condition of R

IMO, that's a condition of getting even, not R. Setting that condition leaves you now feeling awful. Was it beneficial? or worth it? I'm also not saying you should settle for less either. If those were requirements for you, but performing those acts now make her feel less as a person. Maybe divorcing and finding someone else to perform those acts would have been a better idea. FTR I dont really know how your WS responded to your demands.

I'd love to know how one is OK (forced celibacy for a WS) where another is not (requirements for more sex as part of R).

I don't agree with controlling other people, period. I am guilty of it in the past. I coerced my xW. I also feel "awful" about it. If the goal is just to punish or get even (forced celibacy or pornstar sex), I think its a bad idea. What's the end goal, Other then control and power? Probably not a real shot at reconciliation. You might as well divorce. If you're are just trying to get your footing after finding out about your partners infidelity, by all means push them away sexually if you aren't ready or willing. You were shot in the stomach after all, so how could you be ready for sex.

getting even is not recovery?

A man cares for his wife, when he married her he was willing

to accept that his wife would not do full menu sex. after all

she was willing to meet his need for sexual release in various

ways. what man would force his wife to do things that turn

her off.

D day, the BH learns that his WW gave her OM full menu sex

every time they hooked up. All the things that the BH had

wanted to do but gave up doing them for his WW along with

all the things that he wanted to try that he never got to do

because his WW said no.

Nothing wrong for a BH to want those things after D day from his WW.

How can a WW justify saying no to doing full

menu sex with her BH after D day?

Is she going to say OM turned her on more, OM better skilled

in bed got her too worked up to say no?

Or she gave the OM full menu sex because she was afraid

if she did not give the OM full menu sex he would dump her?

How does a WW justify that she gave her OM full menu sex,

porn star sex, better sex than she gave her BH?

[This message edited by oldtruck at 9:02 PM, November 29th (Sunday)]

How can a WW justify saying no to doing full menu sex with her BH after D day?

Exactly. So then why would you still want her? You have your answer.

[This message edited by OwningItNow at 9:09 PM, November 29th (Sunday)]

Something said often to wayward spouses is to let go of the outcome. I wish most betrayed spouses would also figure out how to adopt that mantra (me included). Imagine if you did? How on earth could you be accused of coercion while setting a boundary? The boundary is set to protect oneself, not control another person.

Doesn't really work that way for the BS. The BS is choosing to R or D. They are controlling THAT outcome. Except in my case, where WS left for AP immediately. Most people do not have that situation.

So the BS gets TT, gets false R, gaslighting, whatever, and again is faced with a fresh decision to R or D. That can be wrenching for a BS. Let go of the outcome I do not think applies well to BS.

For the OP, I feel that sex for BW can be more wrenching. For a BH it would seem more straightforward. The BH that are disgusted by WW, don't want to touch them, a lot of those end in divorce IMO. No problem there for BH. Some BH want to go back to sex right away. Not really a problem there either. Some BH want sex, but there's a conflict, so they have ED. A problem, but it's clear what the problem is. I think it's tougher, more fraught for BW, and they have my sympathies.

Doesn't really work that way for the BS.

Of course it does. If the wayward does not offer, without lists or requests, what the BS is looking for, they have their answer. If you have to ask (or god forbid, insist) then you have already crossed your own boundary. It's not real R.

Eta: the BS needs to simply detach and live each day for themselves. Period. They spend way too much time explaining what the WS needs to do, and that is THE biggest issue. If the WS is R material, they will keep up. No lists required.

This forum is filled with BS trying to figure out how to save their Ms, and that is exactly the problem. It's the BS that value the M, usually over their own person. The WS needs to do what is required to be allowed to stay and try. With very little verbal direction, just some gentle guidance. While the BS lives for themselves and watches.

[This message edited by OwningItNow at 9:18 PM, November 29th (Sunday)]

owning it now, i am so disappointed in your answer.

there are so many things that have to be considered when

deciding recovery or divorce.

and it is not the BH's place to put words into his WW mouth.

those questions are for her to answer.

what now a WW is suppose to care how those words affect her

BH when she is to answer those questions?

The WW did not care about how doing those things with the

OM would hurt her BH before D day.

Talk about wanting to have her bread buttered on both sides.

There cannot be recovery without honest talk.

RIO,

You need to expand your horizons.

I know, given your circumstances, there is no way you will ever believe your WW's current sexual behavior with you is fully genuine. I wouldn't believe it either. She blew that with you.

You could just D her. I guarantee you that you could find a woman that would give you your full menu, without the baggage you have with your WW.

Please just don't respond "But I love my WW." What, exactly, do you love. I kind of feel you love the "She's the one" aspect that so many players ultimately fall for, and you feel it would be devastating for you to give that up. I think you need to give that up.

You can stay with your WW, it's your life. But please, use some other criteria than "She's the one." Tell us about some other personality characteristics she has, other things she has done in recovery. Other reasons to stay. Because sex is just not a good reason. In that respect, she clearly ain't the one. Don't stay for sex.

getting even is not recovery?

Is this a real question? I don't remember "getting even" in the healing library anywhere....

How does a WW justify that she gave her OM full menu sex,

porn star sex, better sex than she gave her BH?

You can never, ever justify bad behavior in regards to infidelity. I just don't believe evening the score is every really possible, or a helpful. At least if R is the ultimate goal. If the WS is onboard, go for it! I guess I can see some reasons why a WS may never, ever want to experience something sexually again.

What if the WS explained certain acts bring shame and anxiety to them now? Or they feel less than human afterwards? This goes back to the main topic (at least a little). Is the BS expected to be the bigger/better person and not expect/force/coerce them to do it anyway? I don't want to hurt, hurt people anymore. I didn't feel pleasure or satisfaction from hurting my xW. If she was hurting, then I hurt more. So personally, it wouldn't have found it helpful to force acts on her. As a BS, what would you sacrificing of yourself to force or coerce your WS?

What if the WS explained certain acts bring shame and anxiety to them now? Or they feel less than human afterwards?

Neanderthal, I thank you for bringing this up. There are several of us who have asked the same thing over the years. Prepare to be lambasted for it, but I appreciate it all the same.

You'll be told some version of "Well they certainly didn't have anxiety/shame about it when they were fucking their AP did they?!" or "How about their BH, he feels less than human because his WW gave away her best! She should suck it up, just like she was sucking the AP off every chance she got!"

Notice how the genders got specific there? Even though you used WS, to be gender inclusive, not WW? Yeah, that's not an accident. It's just how these threads typically run their course.

You might reply, "But what if that isn't really their best? What if they have truly realized how traumatizing it is, and that they were just doing it because of their own psychological/FOO/trauma issues?"

Typical reply: "Well, I don't believe that because she clearly just did it all day/night with the AP, so she must have liked it! If she won't do it with me then she can walk her ass out the door!"

Again, gender specific reply to a gender neutral question. Again, making assumptions about loving it as if nobody on this planet has ever done things they don't like/know they shouldn't - out of fear, insecurity, self-hatred, self-sabotage etc. WWs and WHs included, btw.

We beg the waywards to dig deep and find out their "whys." Delve into FOO, trauma, CSA etc. to figure out what brought them to this point, what maladaptive coping mechanisms they need to unlearn - like using sex as a tool to hustle for their worth, for one. Except when it's a WW and her "why" has anything to do with something that may detract from her BH's "full menu" of sex. That "why" is fake.

We hear this chest-thumping bravado all the time. "I won't accept less than what he got! I won't be emasculated like that! Either she does it - all of it - with enthusiasm, or I'm gone! Put up, or shut up!" Putting their own value, self-esteem - hell, even their masculinity! - on whether or not someone will perform certain acts with them. Hustling for their own worth through sex.

Funny thing is, I don't think there's a single BH here who would say that they would be ok with finding out that their WW really didn't like the sex acts they were doing together, but was only doing them because he said he required them. Even if it's "what the AP got" so it "evened the score" so to speak, they wouldn't enjoy it knowing it wasn't their WW's true desire to engage in that act with them. At least that seems to be the consensus I've seen in the threads I've read.

Ipso facto the value is to be found not in the act itself, but in their WW's undeniable enjoyment of the act. Which is why I truly cannot wrap my head around why a WW saying, "No, I did not like that, I do not want to do it anymore," and the BH responding, "Yes you did, and you'll do it with me too or I'm leaving!"

To put it in the context that RIO loves to bring up - a WH spending a ton of money on lavish gifts, dinners etc. for their AP. If my WH spent a ton of money on the AP, buying her something I had always wanted, for example, some vintage Givenchy or YSL. I find out and I'm livid. "You never cared about those things with me! I like those things too! Why was she worth it and not me??" I scream.

In an attempt to R, WH buys me all sorts of gifts, items I love and would never normally buy for myself because they seem too indulgent. For months on end he buys them, so it seems as if he must "like" doing it. Then, WH comes to me and tells me:

"Look, I've come to realize that all of this outlandish spending is actually me hustling for my worth. I've been digging into my whys, and "buying" people's love and affection with "stuff" is one of my character flaws that I need to work on. Not only do I devalue myself by only thinking of my worth as what I can provide, but I belittle the receiver by assuming they can be bought with material things.

It doesn't feel genuine or healthy to "buy" you like this. It feels cheap, and beneath you. It also doesn't address my core issues of low self-esteem.

I understand that my spending money on my AP is a sore spot for you, and I can totally understand why you want me to "put my money where my mouth is" so to speak. Is there something else I can spend time/money on that could contribute positively to our relationship? Perhaps we can plan a trip for just the two of us? Maybe I can put my own money toward starting a home improvement project that we can work on together?

Ultimately what I really want is connection, so let's foster a healthy relationship, rather than a transactional one."

Now THAT's a real "why." That's getting down to the nitty gritty. It's pretty much an ideal "wayward who gets it" response. And yet, there are some here who would tell me - nope, tell him that you'll get what she got forever or you're out of there! I'll tell you, I value a WS who "gets" it much more than the "stuff" I might get from him, even if it's stuff I always wanted.

I guess the sex equivalent would be something like:

"Look, I really don't enjoy acts A, B and C. I know I did them with AP, and I can understand how that is confusing to you.

Through IC and introspection, I've figured out that sex is one of the ways I tried to "buy" love and respect, and sometimes that means I have sex I don't want/like/even hurts me, just because the other person wants it, and I crave their approval so bad that I'll do anything to get it. I realize that is a very sick way of thinking. I also realize I should never have wanted approval from the AP in the first place, especially when I had love and approval waiting for me at home anyway.

I'm trying to unlearn this transactional way of thinking, because my self worth should not rest on someone else's approval - even yours. I understand that sex is highly important to you, and I do want to connect with you in that way. I just have some mental road blocks I need to work through in order to get there.

I want to have a loving and mutually enjoyable sex life with you, and for me that means I need to speak up for myself when I don't feel comfortable. I want to have a healthy relationship with my sexuality so that we can fully enjoy each other. Can we agree to explore that together, even if it means taking some acts off the table?"

Now, would you rather hear that and adjust your sex life accordingly, or just go on with your life in denial of her true feelings, as long as you're getting "the full menu"? I can tell you which one I would want, hands down. Even if it meant my WH never went down on me again. Yup, you read that correctly!

Both instances require seeing your WS as a flawed human being. One who did some seriously horrible, hurtful things, but is redeemable. Not as an eternally-condemned demon who can do no right.

I'll admit, I've taken part in some generalized WS bashing over the years. It's hard not to get sucked into it when you're raging angry over the injustice of it all. But I would like to think that we at SI are united in our hatred of wayward thinking and all of the brain rot that comes from it, NOT of the waywards as human beings.

I can't change the past and make your WSs not WSs. But I genuinely hope that all BSs end up with the kind of WSs who "get it." And I also hope that all WSs can earn the "former" designation, because damn it must be hell to live in that fucked-up mindset.

I'm probably going to be berated for this post. I hope not, but I'm cool with that if it happens. Hopefully something I write helps someone, somewhere understand that their self worth is not tied to what they "get" from others, sexually or otherwise. That's all I can really ask for at this point.

There doesn't seem to be room here for a discussion surrounding consent/bodily autonomy after infidelity. It turns any thread into a raging dumpster fire in a hot minute. I hope I'm wrong.

The fact is the WS is devaluing themselves in the eye of the BS by having the A. BS thinks I thought we were special to each other, I guess not so much.

I have pointed out to RIO and others that the sex they want is available from other women. Same would be true for women I suppose. If the BS no longer sees much difference between the WS and other potential partners, maybe the WS should think about what they have to do to compete in that marketplace.

I think some of the other arguments come from the WS taking advantage of the fact that the marriage is still intact, that even though WS cheated, the BS is still supposed to act like a married person even though the WS did not. This is actually closer to what the OP is complaining about in this post. She is suppose to be a "good wife" to someone who broke the marriage.

I feel for BW especially. I am a divorced BH, I have my own issues, but I am somewhat "compensated" by the fact that the women I have available to date are not likely to hold back much. That's a simple fact. A divorced BW who might want to go slow has to compete with other women who won't.

You could just D her. I guarantee you that you could find a woman that would give you your full menu, without the baggage you have with your WW.

First part, agree, I could D her if that's what I wanted. It's not what I want, but, no argument, that's a reasonable path forward.

As to your "guarantee", this is where it gets really sticky for me. Could I find a woman who I could have any sex I wanted with without an ultimatum? For sure, no argument there at all. But could I find a woman who's having that kind of sex and WANTS to, not "for the kibbles" and not "to keep me around" but because she really wants to? IDK.. Deep down, I really kind of doubt it.

We read 100's of stories here a month. With a few notable exceptions, it's almost always the same, "I had sex (anal sex, kinky sex, etc) with him to keep him coming around/keep the kibbles flowing". The proportion of women who report something like "Yes, I did all manner of debauchery with the OM because I really enjoyed that, he turned me on, and I wanted to" is vanishingly small. In fact, a whole lot report some version of "I didn't even want sex, just wanted him to keep me around".

So, if some proportion of women are having sex for that reason (including, of course, my WW), what are my chances of finding someone who actually, you know, wants to have sex? Yes, I'd have the plausible deniability of "I didn't demand it", but that's kind of like telling a cop you've not seen a speed limit sign in 5 miles and figured 150MPH was a reasonable pace of travel. You're expected to know better, and I kind of feel like I'm "expected to know better" when it comes to women and sex now. It's "for the kibbles", so let's try to not make it all that traumatic/kinky, right?

Sad thing is, it's obviously not true in all situations. Many women have jumped on when I've said this with some version of "that's not me". But I have no idea how to tell the "kibble woman" from the "I actually want to have sex woman".

Please just don't respond "But I love my WW." What, exactly, do you love. I kind of feel you love the "She's the one" aspect that so many players ultimately fall for, and you feel it would be devastating for you to give that up. I think you need to give that up.

I need to ruminate on this for a little while. I can list off characteristics, of course, she's funny, she's pretty, we've got a great future ahead together, we enjoy similar hobbies, we're both hopelessly introverted. But I'm not sure that really answers the question. What I can say, while I can't put my finger on it, I've never met someone like her before, and her uniqueness is very attractive to me. I like that she's different, perhaps not the best "will you marry me" line, but I do really cherish that about her.

You're very good at using the English language in a way that fits your narrative. I won't even try to compete with that. Dictionary or not, I view coercion as something done for bad intentions by bad people. That is my opinion. I also don't feel "awful" about that.

My mother would be so proud (English teacher). But the way you view coercion is what I was getting at, and yes, if you add in "with bad intentions" to the definition, it makes sense why we're at odds in our views. I didn't have bad intentions, so, by that definition, no, I did not coerce her actions at all; I wanted us to continue to live a happy marriage together, and was willing to do whatever it took to get there. But I wasn't trying to up the ante sexually to hurt or punish her, I was doing it because I truly wanted a more open sexual relationship and was, after what she did, no longer willing to settle.

IMO, that's a condition of getting even, not R. Setting that condition leaves you now feeling awful. Was it beneficial? or worth it? I'm also not saying you should settle for less either. If those were requirements for you, but performing those acts now make her feel less as a person. Maybe divorcing and finding someone else to perform those acts would have been a better idea. FTR I dont really know how your WS responded to your demands.

I'd disagree. I wasn't trying to "get even" i was trying to build a relationship that more suited my needs. The old one was gone; it wasn't good enough to go through the pain of an A recovery, it had to get better. As an aside, the entire concept of "getting even" with sex makes my head hurt; akin to "getting even" with someone who wronged me at work by handing them a stack of 100 dollar bills. That'll show you not to mess with me! How can you get even by demanding something that someone wants/likes? Of course, if you go back to the first thing I said, it makes sense if you start from the frame of "Women don't really enjoy sex". But that's not the frame I've lived my life under. I could CERTAINLY be wrong here, I'm not a woman, and I can find 100's of quotes in the next hour pointing in both directions, "Women only have sex for kibbles/keep men happy" and "Women love sex and want it just as much as men". But I can tell you, if you (man or woman) like sex as much as I do, the concept of "getting even" with someone by sleeping with them a lot is, well, bonkers. The way you "get even" with someone like me is to NOT have sex with me, not have really kinky/experimental sex.

How can a WW justify saying no to doing full menu sex with her BH after D day?

Exactly. So then why would you still want her? You have your answer.

First off, there's no justification that I've heard other than "He forced me" (the OM) that holds any water at all. But, OIN, to your point, I agree with you, but how do we operationalize it? Just walk away the moment you find out "more" was on the menu with the AP? That's a reasonable answer, but, sadly, would result in a lot more D's. Wait for your WS to "figure it out"? Another reasonable answer, but also a bit fraught with issues. Wait how long? What if they try things that aren't right? How are they supposed to read your mind? (Incidentally, the last one is the value I see in these threads, you don't need to read your BS's mind, come here and ask other BS's what they would like and do that, it'll be more right than wrong).

The moment you cross from "waiting" and "mind reading" into "state what you want and see if they comply" your into the realm of coercion. I want to be clear here, while what I did sounds bad, I didn't stroll into the bedroom one day and say "Give me this sex act tonight or get out". Not at all, I stated, clearly and explicitly, our sexual relationship is going to include these things in it going forward. Not tonight, not this week, but I want these things together with you and I won't live the rest of my life without them. No "or get out" threat. No "do it right now". None of that; simply a statement of "This is what you need to do" (which could easily be rephrased as "These are my new boundaries") and waited for see what she did with it. I say this because I think people are picturing "Suck my d**k or get out" as what went on in our household, and why I feel guilty about what I did. No, I feel guilty about what I did because my wife is very smart, and she can easily piece together "these are my boundaries" into the actual component parts, "I need to do these sexual things with him".

I'll also say, she says, all the time, that she loves our "new" sexual relationship. This is years ago now that all this happened, and I kind of think by now the mask would have dropped if she hated it. This isn't a battered wife cowering the corner and crying during sex, this is a woman who's engaged and active in the bedroom, often suggesting the things that were on the "do or die" list years after they were made conditional. I have little/no doubt that if we were to D, she'd take those "do or die" things right into her next relationship authentically and enthusiastically.

The problem is, I know what I had to do to get it. The next guy wouldn't have to do that. The AP didn't have to do that. It's the manner in which I got it that's at issue for me, not her enjoyment of it or enthusiasm about it. And that problem is ENTIRELY preventable, if she'd organically done them without the "do or die" talk, I wouldn't be in this place mentally. And I did wait, quite some time actually, from the date of NC to see if she would "break out the good stuff" in bed, she didn't; and eventually, I was at the breaking point and knew it was either D or make my desires known (which, given the power imbalance the A created, was an ultimatum in my eyes). That DID NOT need to happen, and I hope that other WS's read this, realize the damage this can do, and DO NOT put your BS into this situation! Do it first, before it becomes an ultimatum, you'll be in a MUCH better place.

If the wayward does not offer, without lists or requests, what the BS is looking for, they have their answer. If you have to ask (or god forbid, insist) then you have already crossed your own boundary. It's not real R.

Nice to say in principle, but in practice? How many of us are "lucky" enough to have a WS who could meet that criteria. First off, it requires mind reading, which, of course, is problematic. But just starting from D-day, how many willingly go NC on D-day? How many don't need to be monitored? How many willingly put together a timeline without being asked. Yes, you're presenting the "way it should go", no question, but if that's the "standard" well, almost no WS's would meet the criteria for R.

What if the WS explained certain acts bring shame and anxiety to them now? Or they feel less than human afterwards?

This is the really sticky point. Listen, the reason that my M didn't have "full menu" sex before is because of exactly what you said above. I asked, she said some manner of "shame, anxiety, "I don't do that", no interest, against her beliefs" and I accepted that and let it go. Made peace with it and moved on, building a life together. All fine, eventually stopped even really thinking about it that much, but, and this is HUGE issue; she was LYING. Things that brought her huge levels of "anxiety" she did with a virtual stranger on the first "date".

If I could read her mind and inside of it I found "Wow, I really dislike sex act A and wish I never had to do it again", I'd NEVER do it with her. But I can't do that, all I can do is look at her actions, both with me and the AP, and draw conclusions. While this is a circuitous route, the direct answer to your question is basically "I can't trust you when you say that this act makes you feel bad because you've lied for years about other things in the past".

You might reply, "But what if that isn't really their best? What if they have truly realized how traumatizing it is, and that they were just doing it because of their own psychological/FOO/trauma issues?"

Typical reply: "Well, I don't believe that because she clearly just did it all day/night with the AP, so she must have liked it! If she won't do it with me then she can walk her ass out the door!"

Again, gender specific reply to a gender neutral question. Again, making assumptions about loving it as if nobody on this planet has ever done things they don't like/know they shouldn't - out of fear, insecurity, self-hatred, self-sabotage etc. WWs and WHs included, btw.

Your noticing a gender difference, and, I agree with you, but probably not in the way your intending. Yes, this is typically a BH/WW issue (where sex acts denied the BS are given to the AP), but not exclusively. But the real "gender difference" is that we divide on this particular issue, some seeing a requirement for certain types of sex after an A as "reasonable" and others viewing it as "rape, or near rape". There's no such divide when it comes to a WH buying his AP gifts, we all basically agree, "If your wife values gifts, buy things for her that are nicer, more thoughtful than the AP got". It's not that WW's who go "full porn star" with the AP are held to a higher standard in the R, they are actually held to a much LOWER standard where there's room for "Yes, the AP got better and that's just the way it is". Where for other, non-sexual things, it's pretty unacceptable to all of us that the "AP got better", if it's possible for the WS to provide that thing to the BS, outside of sex, we all pretty much seem to agree, "Do it".

Which is why I truly cannot wrap my head around why a WW saying, "No, I did not like that, I do not want to do it anymore," and the BH responding, "Yes you did, and you'll do it with me too or I'm leaving!"

Very simple. People lie. WS's have proven they are capable liars. If it's actually TRUE, that's a different discussion entirely; but taking a WS at face value on this ONE issue, and then questioning everything else seems a bit myopic. I'd argue their actions with the AP proved they "like it" at least with the right person they do. If I'm not that person, OK, but we need to D so I can find that person for myself and you can do the same. What's the incentive to have all manner of kinky sex with the AP? He/she doesn't have a gun to your head. I know plenty of cheating men; can't recall a single story of "I'm not going to keep seeing that AP because she only lets me do it missionary with the lights out". Nope, most AP's are plenty happy with whatever they can get.

. Is there something else I can spend time/money on that could contribute positively to our relationship? Perhaps we can plan a trip for just the two of us? Maybe I can put my own money toward starting a home improvement project that we can work on together?

It's a good analogy, but it's limited by the reality of the small list of sexual acts that two people can do together. Also, by the individual uniqueness of those acts. You can't substitute the experience of having sex in public for the experience of a BJ, for example. They are distinct and unique; if you did one with your AP and deny it to your BS, they will never get to have that particular experience with you, or, ever again if they choose to stay married to you (and don't cheat, of course).

As to your "guarantee", this is where it gets really sticky for me. Could I find a woman who I could have any sex I wanted with without an ultimatum? For sure, no argument there at all. But could I find a woman who's having that kind of sex and WANTS to, not "for the kibbles" and not "to keep me around" but because she really wants to? IDK.. Deep down, I really kind of doubt it.

Why else would she be with you?

Believe me, the sex is the easiest thing to come by. It's the "other stuff" that isn't. I have no doubt that my GF's own children are always going to be a higher priority than me. The sex is simply going to be a bigger part of the whole package because of baggage and complications everywhere else.

Why else would she be with you?

Money, status, power, I'm a nice guy, I'm decent looking, I have few complications. Can deliver a good ego kibble. Millions of other reasons that someone might choose to be with me other than sex. And that's honestly OK, that's not where the issue is. The issue is this, "I like RIO's lifestyle and he's funny, I'll let him have anal sex with me to keep him around" (sex for kibbles), rather than "RIO makes me horny and I want to do bad things with him".

Pre-ego kibble, I thought the reason that women did things with men was pretty much exclusively the 2nd; this guy makes me want to do more with him because he's hot/good in bed/makes me horny/whatever. Now, post-ego kibble, I realize that a lot of women, approaching all in affairs, have sex "for kibbles" rather than having sex because they want to/are horny/etc. That's the heatshot for me, it just takes all the enjoyment out of it to think "she doesn't actually want to do this, she just wants me to be nice to her/keep her around/etc".

Look, I really don't enjoy acts A, B and C. I know I did them with AP, and I can understand how that is confusing to you.

Through IC and introspection, I've figured out that sex is one of the ways I tried to "buy" love and respect, and sometimes that means I have sex I don't want/like/even hurts me, just because the other person wants it, and I crave their approval so bad that I'll do anything to get it. I realize that is a very sick way of thinking. I also realize I should never have wanted approval from the AP in the first place, especially when I had love and approval waiting for me at home anyway.

I'm trying to unlearn this transactional way of thinking, because my self worth should not rest on someone else's approval - even yours. I understand that sex is highly important to you, and I do want to connect with you in that way. I just have some mental road blocks I need to work through in order to get there.

how about the WW using IC to get over her reasons for

feeling dirty doing those off limit sex acts instead of trying

to get her BH to settle for less than she gave the OM.

your well laid out logic ignores how she did every thing she

could to keep her OM from dumping her but instead how

she will not to the same to keep her BH, family, finances,

and life intact.

As to a BW wanting expensive gifts from her WH. As long

as he can afford them he should buy them. What wife does

not want gifts. Using a spin to I need to value myself

so I can no longer buy you gifts because I do not want to

make our relationship transactional is pure baloney talk

just the way most of our politicians speak. Using false

justification.

There is a difference between buying love and showing

appreciation. Gifts for the OW was to get into her pants.

Gifts for the BW was to show her appreciation for all she

does for you.

[This message edited by oldtruck at 10:22 AM, November 30th (Monday)]

Money, status, power, I'm a nice guy, I'm decent looking, I have few complications. Can deliver a good ego kibble. Millions of other reasons that someone might choose to be with me other than sex. And that's honestly OK, that's not where the issue is. The issue is this, "I like RIO's lifestyle and he's funny, I'll let him have anal sex with me to keep him around" (sex for kibbles), rather than "RIO makes me horny and I want to do bad things with him".

Jesus, RIO, women can't fake everything. And actually, men can fake some things.

Yes, you can get a woman off by building trust, role playing, calling her nasty names when she wants that. You can be a good lover, mediocre, bad. It is going to make a difference for her.

What was the point of being a player if you really learn nothing about women? I'm a man, but the whole "everything must fit into my preconceived worldview" that so many men fall into drives me up the wall.

how about the WW using IC to get over her reasons for feeling dirty doing those off limit sex acts instead of trying to get her BH to settle for less than she gave the OM.

Exactly oldtruck! This is not the BS's "problem to solve" or "cross to bear" it's the WS's! I'm sure there are some communities out there (actually, I know there are, I've seen them) where they talk through ways to get your W accept cheating as "par for the course"; basically the same discussion, make it about "your need for internal growth". It's crazy, but, it's basically the same thing we're saying here. The BS in this situation needs to "train him/herself" to accept the unacceptable. My answer to that is a hard "no", it's NOT the BS's problem AT ALL to solve, with the WS's problem. They created this situation, and if buying flowers for their W makes them feel "icky" but buying them for the AP makes them feel great, well.. Fix it or get a D. Trying to make it incumbent on the W that "she shouldn't want flowers because it hurts him to do it" is so far into perpetrator coddling makes my head spin.

Using a spin to I need to value myself so I can no longer buy you gifts because I do not want to make our relationship transactional is pure baloney talk just the way most of our politicians speak.

Exactly what I thought when I read it, this is "politician speech" (closely related to "corporate BS"). Sure, I can spin a good yarn and twist this all up into knots about why "buying gifts for you damages my soul" and follow it with "But buying gifts for her was OK because my soul was already dead". I can do that, but I'd NEVER suggest anyone do it because, well, even if it's true, the damage to your "soul" from buying a dozen roses or giving your BS the kind of sex the AP got simply doesn't have standing compared to the damage done to my soul by your direct actions. Basically, in a nutshell, get over yourself.

Money, status, power, I'm a nice guy, I'm decent looking, I have few complications. Can deliver a good ego kibble. Millions of other reasons that someone might choose to be with me other than sex. And that's honestly OK, that's not where the issue is. The issue is this, "I like RIO's lifestyle and he's funny, I'll let him have anal sex with me to keep him around" (sex for kibbles), rather than "RIO makes me horny and I want to do bad things with him".

Pre-ego kibble, I thought the reason that women did things with men was pretty much exclusively the 2nd; this guy makes me want to do more with him because he's hot/good in bed/makes me horny/whatever. Now, post-ego kibble, I realize that a lot of women, approaching all in affairs, have sex "for kibbles" rather than having sex because they want to/are horny/etc. That's the heatshot for me, it just takes all the enjoyment out of it to think "she doesn't actually want to do this, she just wants me to be nice to her/keep her around/etc".

WW are horney for their OM. They want the sex, they like

the sex with the OM. They like the attention from the OM

that is how all of their feelings for the OM developed.

This relationship if fun, exciting, they do not want it to end.

so they enthusiastically meet the OM's needs.

After the PA when they can no longer hide behind their

false justifications to have sex with their OM that is when

they sing a different tune. They down play the sex. They

regret all the things that they said and did with their OM.

Then they use the Ego Kibbles Defense.

Which is very similar to the alcohol defense. I was to drunk

to realize what I was doing.