Some poly, some kink, some other stuff ...

[KimGordon67]

Absolutely true about the ability to "try" new things in a safe environment. I suspect all of us would be quite more repressed and bored with our lives without the opportunity to learn these things about ourselves. And I agree that the learning is a transferable concept regardless of what color of the stripe on the flag.



I'm sorry, but I would just have to say that he was an a-hole. Given enough time, people tend to eventually reveal what they truly are...and I suppose this is a very valuable aspect of an online-relationship. He screwed up his marriage and then his deeply rooted selfishness sort of unbalanced you too. So actually, you were lucky he showed his true heart when he did...and not after even more duplicity. Your advice above is certainly good...but it's also good to remember to vet a Dom very carefully. In my own rather limited experience with this, I would never want to be associated with a Dom who wasn't operating out of love and an abundance of intelligence. Broken hearts hurt too

I guess I've never seen him (nor anyone else I've had a relationship with) as 'a dom'. Clearly I'm interesting in the whole power/control dynamic, but I kind of resist framing it as a 'd/s' thing. And it's never what I've been looking for, so the whole 'vetting' concept doesn't really apply ... in every instance where a relationship has developed in that way, it's started without that aspect to it, so I guess that involves some element of vetting.
I don't think what we did had anything to do with his marriage needing work - I'm pretty sure that was a pre-existent condition. I just sort of wish I'd know - it may have changed how I approached things.

 

[yukonnights]

I guess I've never seen him (nor anyone else I've had a relationship with) as 'a dom'. Clearly I'm interesting in the whole power/control dynamic, but I kind of resist framing it as a 'd/s' thing. And it's never what I've been looking for, so the whole 'vetting' concept doesn't really apply ... in every instance where a relationship has developed in that way, it's started without that aspect to it, so I guess that involves some element of vetting.
I don't think what we did had anything to do with his marriage needing work - I'm pretty sure that was a pre-existent condition. I just sort of wish I'd know - it may have changed how I approached things.

Just to clarify, I'm assuming his marriage was already on the rocks before he met you. It sounds to me like his personality is such that neither she nor you were his first casualties. Some men are just jerks...yes, I'm making a judgement call based only on a few written words, so it's just an assumption. Still, it sounds like a blessing that he bailed out when he did. (hope I'm not ASSuming too much )

 

[RacyWilde]

*

I think this is one of the things I hate about building a relationship online... the powerlessness. You always feel that you have to keep one foot out of the relationship so you can withdraw (your heart) at anytime in case the other person disappears or decides in an instant they don't want to continue.

I'm real. I don't play games, and I put my heart into everything I do. It means I'm very careful when connecting with people. I had one guy that I trusted. I thought he was amazing and he seemed to completely get me - not in terms of my interests but in terms of what I emotionally needed. I'm not the usual girl, but yet he could talk to me in such a way that gave me great comfort. The problem was one day he suddenly realised that I would never be completely his. He was a Dom and I'm not a submissive. His greatest desire was to collar me and I just couldn't give myself away like that. I told him that sure a bird can survive being caged but its colours will become dull and its song less bright. The fact that I related collaring to being caged changed everything. He said 'goodbye' to me immediately... after all we had been through, after all we had built... he just gave me up. I had no choice in the matter. It was like everything we had built meant nothing. He said he knew I didn't like explanations and so wouldn't give me one. I was left hanging. It was a great lesson, but I'll be damned if it sours me (though if I ever meet him in RL I would slap his face). I've accepted that my heart will get broken a thousand times, but the one where it doesn't will be worth all the others.

... and then that the was the last time. The next day I got a three sentence email saying that he very much enjoyed the time we'd had, but he'd decided to refocus his attentions on his marriage (which I had no idea was in bad shape). And that was it - no opportunity for me to respond, no indication of any appreciation of the impact this might have on me. I did respond, of course, but I very much doubt that, nor any of the subsequent emails I've sent at random moments over the years since when I think of him have been read. I was surprised at how hurt I was ... as I said in my initial response "I'm really mostly fucked off with myself - I know the rules of this game, but I essentially let myself forget that it is a game. I will be more circumspect in the future." (Note - that last point turned out to be entirely untrue.) I suspect the pain was amplified by the fact that I'd gone down a previously unexplored path with him, and that entailed a certain level of trust ... so, yeah.

Should you ever find yourself in any kind of online relationship with anyone, and then feel the need to end it, can I suggest this isn't the best way to do so. Had he had an actual conversation with me about it, I still would have been upset, but I would have totally understood his reasoning. Just because someone is thousands of miles away, they're still an actual person ... although I guess the risk of them turning up on your doorstep at 2am in tears is minimised, so maybe that makes it OK?
Sigh.

 

[KimGordon67]

This speaks to another perennial problem ... being completely upfront about things, but other people still thinking they'll change you. Obviously, we all do change, but if someone is expecting you to change in a way that will make you a better fit for what they want, and that expectation forms the basis of their approach to the relationship, it causes a problem. There's a bit of a myth that women always want men to change, while men never engage in this sort of thing ... but that's just not the case.

*

I think this is one of the things I hate about building a relationship online... the powerlessness. You always feel that you have to keep one foot out of the relationship so you can withdraw (your heart) at anytime in case the other person disappears or decides in an instant they don't want to continue.

I'm real. I don't play games, and I put my heart into everything I do. It means I'm very careful when connecting with people. I had one guy that I trusted. I thought he was amazing and he seemed to completely get me - not in terms of my interests but in terms of what I emotionally needed. I'm not the usual girl, but yet he could talk to me in such a way that gave me great comfort. The problem was one day he suddenly realised that I would never be completely his. He was a Dom and I'm not a submissive. His greatest desire was to collar me and I just couldn't give myself away like that. I told him that sure a bird can survive being caged but its colours will become dull and its song less bright. The fact that I related collaring to being caged changed everything. He said 'goodbye' to me immediately... after all we had been through, after all we had built... he just gave me up. I had no choice in the matter. It was like everything we had built meant nothing. He said he knew I didn't like explanations and so wouldn't give me one. I was left hanging. It was a great lesson, but I'll be damned if it sours me (though if I ever meet him in RL I would slap his face). I've accepted that my heart will get broken a thousand times, but the one where it doesn't will be worth all the others.

 

[RacyWilde]

I have limited patience for unhappily married people. I tend to be of the 'if you're that unhappy, either do something to fix it, or leave' opinion. I think that a lot of people seek extra-marital relationships to address something they're not satisfied with in their marriage ... I'm sceptical about the success rate of that method. I could, however, imagine being in a truly poly situation (where the 'wife' knew me) where I might feel differently. I have, however, seen inklings of what you're talking about in my husband recently - it's getting a bit ahead of the narrative I'm constructing, but he has been able to evidence some concern about my external-to-the-marriage relationship. I would love to be able to be in situation where that was really embedded for everyone.

Oh no, I'm right there with you!! People in unhappy marriages have made their own bed and are too scared to get out of it. I don't understand how they can choose unhappiness just because of finances or family, etc. You only get one life and you are responsible for that one life first - a life lived in fear is a life half lived.

And, I don't understand the hundreds of thousands who decide to stay unhappy in a sexless marriage because they 'love their spouse'. They believe their marriage is perfect in every other way and are willing to live with that little unhappiness. What they don't realise is, that little unhappiness is actually a big deal and will eat at their souls every day until one day they can't change their life anymore... it's too late (or so they'll think). They use the excuse that they love their spouse and don't want to break up a perfectly good marriage to do nothing about their unhappiness. If they realise they are unhappy and do nothing about it, then they choose their unhappiness. Unfortunately, many people would rather be unhappy than alone.

Yeah, there are some poly arrangements I just couldn't live with (at the moment). I can't have another man's wife dictating my relationship with him. In that sense I think I'm a Solo Poly - as I don't want anyone influencing/governing my relationship with others. Of course, I want everyone to get on, but my relationship with each is sacred. As far as I'm concerned, no one, not even my primary, has power over my other relationships. And I don't think I could enter another relationship where my partner's partner has a say in how I can love.

Thanks so much for staring your story... I'm looking forward to more

 

[KimGordon67]

I can sort of get why people stay with people they love in the absence of sex - I don't think sex is necessary to a happy marriage - but if you're unhappy about the absence of sex, that's another story. I knew my husband was unhappy for the ... well, years really ... that I stopped wanting sex, and I did everything in my power to try to ameliorate the situation - I suggested he have sex with other women; I said I'd be fine about doing things to ensure he got off, even if I didn't, but none of that really seemed to work ... and I fully expected him to leave me at some point. In fact, I think we were months off that happening when the situation was resolved. So the flip side of that is how the women (or, I guess, sometimes men) who have stopped wanting the sex reconcile their lack of desire with their partner's clear unhappiness. Not that I think it's their fault - if you don't feel like sex, you shouldn't feel obliged to have it just to make another person happy - but I do think if they really love their spouses, its incumbent on them to try and find some other solution.

The fear of being alone is a constant puzzle to me. Obviously, I get that that's how people feel, but I don't understand why. I love being on my own ... and really, you're only 'alone' if you have somehow ended up with no friends, and no close family (which obviously does happen).

Oh no, I'm right there with you!! People in unhappy marriages have made their own bed and are too scared to get out of it. I don't understand how they can choose unhappiness just because of finances or family, etc. You only get one life and you are responsible for that one life first - a life lived in fear is a life half lived.

And, I don't understand the hundreds of thousands who decide to stay unhappy in a sexless marriage because they 'love their spouse'. They believe their marriage is perfect in every other way and are willing to live with that little unhappiness. What they don't realise is, that little unhappiness is actually a big deal and will eat at their souls every day until one day they can't change their life anymore... it's too late (or so they'll think). They use the excuse that they love their spouse and don't want to break up a perfectly good marriage to do nothing about their unhappiness. If they realise they are unhappy and do nothing about it, then they choose their unhappiness. Unfortunately, many people would rather be unhappy than alone.

Yeah, there are some poly arrangements I just couldn't live with (at the moment). I can't have another man's wife dictating my relationship with him. In that sense I think I'm a Solo Poly - as I don't want anyone influencing/governing my relationship with others. Of course, I want everyone to get on, but my relationship with each is sacred. As far as I'm concerned, no one, not even my primary, has power over my other relationships. And I don't think I could enter another relationship where my partner's partner has a say in how I can love.

Thanks so much for staring your story... I'm looking forward to more

 

[KimGordon67]

I don't really think he was a jerk - some people just don't deal with emotional stuff very well, not because they're arses, but usually because they're a bit scared, or find it all a bit confusing.

Just to clarify, I'm assuming his marriage was already on the rocks before he met you. It sounds to me like his personality is such that neither she nor you were his first casualties. Some men are just jerks...yes, I'm making a judgement call based only on a few written words, so it's just an assumption. Still, it sounds like a blessing that he bailed out when he did. (hope I'm not ASSuming too much )

 

[quietlylooking]

I don't really think he was a jerk - some people just don't deal with emotional stuff very well, not because they're arses, but usually because they're a bit scared, or find it all a bit confusing.

Just adding that I am enjoying this thread and finding lots that resonates here. Thanks, KimGordon, for starting it.

I think that it's totally possible to really love a partner yet still want more sexually. I am encouraged to hear about other woman who have successfully navigated these issues.

 

[KimGordon67]

Thanks ... I don't know that I really have anything to say that most people don't already know, but it's quite gratifying to have a space to say it. All of this stuff is so silent in the 'real world'.

Just adding that I am enjoying this thread and finding lots that resonates here. Thanks, KimGordon, for starting it.

I think that it's totally possible to really love a partner yet still want more sexually. I am encouraged to hear about other woman who have successfully navigated these issues.

 

[KimGordon67]

I've just checked some dates (because, yes, I'm so much of a masochist that I kept his 'goodbye' email), and it was literally a month later that I joined Lit. I was so happy to find this place ... the 'adult chat' I'd been using before was so feral and finding anyone even vaguely decent required wading through endless amounts of pig shit. All you had to go on was a screen name, and while some people were imaginative enough to make that work, others just went with 'BigCock1234', which isn't really super-helpful. I love how Lit lets you discover a bit about someone, and the lack of immediacy suits me well - I like getting to know someone before moving into a more amendable format for chatting/whatever. And the nature of the site means people are less likely to use text language, which brings me out in a rash. It was like I'd finally found my ideal online medium.

The power/control aspect of things increased incrementally over time, across a period of maybe five months (give or take) although it was only ever in relation to the sex - in all other respects, we were on an equal footing, and for me, the leaking of that dynamic into any other aspect of my life would be untenable. And obviously in the sexual area, there were the inevitable constraints of distance ... though I still remember his voice rolling over me with an amazing level of physicality. The last time we played, he described blindfolding me, and then the feeling of a shackling being attached around one ankle ... just that was enough to make me cum
... and then that the was the last time. The next day I got a three sentence email saying that he very much enjoyed the time we'd had, but he'd decided to refocus his attentions on his marriage (which I had no idea was in bad shape). And that was it - no opportunity for me to respond, no indication of any appreciation of the impact this might have on me. I did respond, of course, but I very much doubt that, nor any of the subsequent emails I've sent at random moments over the years since when I think of him have been read. I was surprised at how hurt I was ... as I said in my initial response "I'm really mostly fucked off with myself - I know the rules of this game, but I essentially let myself forget that it is a game. I will be more circumspect in the future." (Note - that last point turned out to be entirely untrue.) I suspect the pain was amplified by the fact that I'd gone down a previously unexplored path with him, and that entailed a certain level of trust ... so, yeah.

Should you ever find yourself in any kind of online relationship with anyone, and then feel the need to end it, can I suggest this isn't the best way to do so. Had he had an actual conversation with me about it, I still would have been upset, but I would have totally understood his reasoning. Just because someone is thousands of miles away, they're still an actual person ... although I guess the risk of them turning up on your doorstep at 2am in tears is minimised, so maybe that makes it OK?
Sigh.

 

[Green_Knight]

Thanks ... I don't know that I really have anything to say that most people don't already know, but it's quite gratifying to have a space to say it. All of this stuff is so silent in the 'real world'.

I'm sure that a lot of people have an inkling of it, deep down, but it's the way you're vocalising those thoughts and giving them meaning and context. I can certainly analyse – one of the bones of contention between my ex-lover and myself was my ability to analyse ad infinitum; maybe that forced her to think too deeply and uncomfortably about her own feelings – and I can write coherently, but I find it difficult to put the two together in the concise but full way that you're doing.

So many of your thoughts ring a bell with me: 'I'm so much of a masochist that I kept his 'goodbye' email'; 'I can sort of get why people stay with people they love in the absence of sex - I don't think sex is necessary to a happy marriage'; 'The fear of being alone is a constant puzzle to me'; 'being completely upfront about things, but other people still thinking they'll change you'.

Lots to think about.

 

[RedSilk69]

And the nature of the site means people are less likely to use text language, which brings me out in a rash.

Many good and deep things here - but this point rings a HUGE bell with me

Time is so necessary; being alone is a helpful luxury. I'm 2 years out from my marriage and am finally feeling emotional pulls as well as the physical (which started *far* earlier).

 

[RacyWilde]

I agree with everything you've said.

And I guess I want to clarify 'sexless marriage'. I think saying 'sexless marriage' is so broad a term. I'm finding when people use that term they often mean they are also missing intimacy. Not just physical but mental/emotional. I think intimacy is the crux of a happy marriage: sharing yourself - your thoughts, your feelings, your dreams, your learning, etc. But it is also receiving their thoughts, their feelings, their dreams, their learning... So yeah, when including this under 'sexless marriage' the reason why someone would stay in such a situation is unfathomable to me.

I do believe that it is good to allow reasonable time and space for a partner to change (I've seen it firsthand), but I believe that true change largely depends on the character of a person, not how much they love their partner. I always think doing things for yourself, such as changing your sex drive, is much better than doing it out of love (as you are doing it out of duty) because then the change becomes a part of who you are. For example, eating greens. Sure a man could eat greens for his health because his wife wants him too–he's doing it out of love–though, it is so much better that he does it for himself because he wants to. One is reactive, the other active. The problem with reactive change is that it depends on the action/wants of others.

I think it is admirable that a partner may have sex out of love, but after a while, their partner will know, will feel it, and will long for them to have sex because they want to. Having sex out of love and having sex because you want to are slightly different. So, that's why I thoroughly believe that if a woman/man wants to develop their sex drive, for example, they should do it for themselves.

Oh, I definitely get you about the alone time...lol. I love my alone time.

I can sort of get why people stay with people they love in the absence of sex - I don't think sex is necessary to a happy marriage - but if you're unhappy about the absence of sex, that's another story. I knew my husband was unhappy for the ... well, years really ... that I stopped wanting sex, and I did everything in my power to try to ameliorate the situation - I suggested he have sex with other women; I said I'd be fine about doing things to ensure he got off, even if I didn't, but none of that really seemed to work ... and I fully expected him to leave me at some point. In fact, I think we were months off that happening when the situation was resolved. So the flip side of that is how the women (or, I guess, sometimes men) who have stopped wanting the sex reconcile their lack of desire with their partner's clear unhappiness. Not that I think it's their fault - if you don't feel like sex, you shouldn't feel obliged to have it just to make another person happy - but I do think if they really love their spouses, its incumbent on them to try and find some other solution.

The fear of being alone is a constant puzzle to me. Obviously, I get that that's how people feel, but I don't understand why. I love being on my own ... and really, you're only 'alone' if you have somehow ended up with no friends, and no close family (which obviously does happen).

 

[KimGordon67]

Funnily enough, my husband was just saying the other day 'you think too much - stop it. I don't want to think about all that stuff about myself!' He was joking, but the similarities between that and your own experience are quite spooky.

I'm sure that a lot of people have an inkling of it, deep down, but it's the way you're vocalising those thoughts and giving them meaning and context. I can certainly analyse – one of the bones of contention between my ex-lover and myself was my ability to analyse ad infinitum; maybe that forced her to think too deeply and uncomfortably about her own feelings – and I can write coherently, but I find it difficult to put the two together in the concise but full way that you're doing.

So many of your thoughts ring a bell with me: 'I'm so much of a masochist that I kept his 'goodbye' email'; 'I can sort of get why people stay with people they love in the absence of sex - I don't think sex is necessary to a happy marriage'; 'The fear of being alone is a constant puzzle to me'; 'being completely upfront about things, but other people still thinking they'll change you'.

Lots to think about.

 

[KimGordon67]

Interesting analysis ... and possibly the reason my husband and I were OK for so long, in spite of the lack of sex, was that we were still very intimate, including physically.

I sometimes wonder if people worry about being alone because they really would be lonely. If I wasn't married, my weeks/months/years would still be full of people, including very close relationships with people who are very dear to me and with whom I have a very long history. I think sometimes people forget to nurture those relationships. I'm lucky that I'm part of a very solid group of friends who go back a long way, and really function like family (with a LOT of incest ), and offer a lot of the emotional and practical support that one tends to expect from one's spouse, and outside of that, I have other very important friends - in the absence of that, I might feel differently.

I agree with everything you've said.

And I guess I want to clarify 'sexless marriage'. I think saying 'sexless marriage' is so broad a term. I'm finding when people use that term they often mean they are also missing intimacy. Not just physical but mental/emotional. I think intimacy is the crux of a happy marriage: sharing yourself - your thoughts, your feelings, your dreams, your learning, etc. But it is also receiving their thoughts, their feelings, their dreams, their learning... So yeah, when including this under 'sexless marriage' the reason why someone would stay in such a situation is unfathomable to me.

I do believe that it is good to allow reasonable time and space for a partner to change (I've seen it firsthand), but I believe that true change largely depends on the character of a person, not how much they love their partner. I always think doing things for yourself, such as changing your sex drive, is much better than doing it out of love (as you are doing it out of duty) because then the change becomes a part of who you are. For example, eating greens. Sure a man could eat greens for his health because his wife wants him too–he's doing it out of love–though, it is so much better that he does it for himself because he wants to. One is reactive, the other active. The problem with reactive change is that it depends on the action/wants of others.

I think it is admirable that a partner may have sex out of love, but after a while, their partner will know, will feel it, and will long for them to have sex because they want to. Having sex out of love and having sex because you want to are slightly different. So, that's why I thoroughly believe that if a woman/man wants to develop their sex drive, for example, they should do it for themselves.

Oh, I definitely get you about the alone time...lol. I love my alone time.

 

[HornyProf]

I have not read this whole thread yet, but I wanted to say something about how having good sex with someone else can just trigger your sex drive for your spouse. This is not exactly the same thing, as I am single but I notice that if I have sex with a woman, after weeks of feeling asexual, my libido goes into hyperdrive, not just for that particular woman, but the whole world is alight again with sexuality..

 

[KimGordon67]

I have not read this whole thread yet, but I wanted to say something about how having good sex with someone else can just trigger your sex drive for your spouse. This is not exactly the same thing, as I am single but I notice that if I have sex with a woman, after weeks of feeling asexual, my libido goes into hyperdrive, not just for that particular woman, but the whole world is alight again with sexuality..

Sex definitely makes one want to have more sex ... it was a bit of a mystery to me as to why my sexual interest with my husband flagged so utterly, and it was great to get it back again.

 

[Green_Knight]

Interesting article on that sort of subject in yesterday's Guardian newspaper:

I agree with everything you've said.

And I guess I want to clarify 'sexless marriage'. I think saying 'sexless marriage' is so broad a term. I'm finding when people use that term they often mean they are also missing intimacy. Not just physical but mental/emotional. I think intimacy is the crux of a happy marriage: sharing yourself - your thoughts, your feelings, your dreams, your learning, etc. But it is also receiving their thoughts, their feelings, their dreams, their learning... So yeah, when including this under 'sexless marriage' the reason why someone would stay in such a situation is unfathomable to me.

I do believe that it is good to allow reasonable time and space for a partner to change (I've seen it firsthand), but I believe that true change largely depends on the character of a person, not how much they love their partner. I always think doing things for yourself, such as changing your sex drive, is much better than doing it out of love (as you are doing it out of duty) because then the change becomes a part of who you are. For example, eating greens. Sure a man could eat greens for his health because his wife wants him too–he's doing it out of love–though, it is so much better that he does it for himself because he wants to. One is reactive, the other active. The problem with reactive change is that it depends on the action/wants of others.

I think it is admirable that a partner may have sex out of love, but after a while, their partner will know, will feel it, and will long for them to have sex because they want to. Having sex out of love and having sex because you want to are slightly different. So, that's why I thoroughly believe that if a woman/man wants to develop their sex drive, for example, they should do it for themselves.

Oh, I definitely get you about the alone time...lol. I love my alone time.

 

[Green_Knight]

Putting 'analysis' and 'writing' together is pretty much the job description for what I do in the real world.

Me, too. My entire career was based on problem analysis and solving. I was taught never to take anything at face value and never to look at any situation without questioning 'why?'. Now I can't help doing it but I can understand why some people can't abide the constant dissection and my need for answers. It must be infuriating.

Funnily enough, my husband was just saying the other day 'you think too much - stop it. I don't want to think about all that stuff about myself!' He was joking, but the similarities between that and your own experience are quite spooky.

That's why I enjoy this thread so much. We could almost be living parallel experiences but just at the moment – for reasons I won't bore you with – it's nice to have someone else to do my deeper thinking for me and make sense of a muddled world, so please do keep it up.

 

[Green_Knight]

...I sometimes wonder if people worry about being alone because they really would be lonely. If I wasn't married, my weeks/months/years would still be full of people, including very close relationships with people who are very dear to me and with whom I have a very long history. I think sometimes people forget to nurture those relationships. I'm lucky that I'm part of a very solid group of friends who go back a long way, and really function like family (with a LOT of incest ), and offer a lot of the emotional and practical support that one tends to expect from one's spouse, and outside of that, I have other very important friends - in the absence of that, I might feel differently.

I used to panic about being on my own - and I mean really panic. I think it stemmed from my very young days when I had a severe speech impediment which had a very limiting effect on friendships. As a result I developed a tendency to grab onto and dive into the deep end with anyone who did offer friendship, without too much forethought and sometimes with disastrous results.

I've learned in recent years that being on my own is actually rather nice. I got used to it when I had an alcoholic wife who spent most of the time we were together in drunken sleep and I realised that I was, in effect, on my own. Now, after two ended marriages, I cannot see myself wanting to make such a commitment again. My SO and I have a 'living together apart' arrangement that suits us both very well. There are some NQSSOs around and a good, if not extensive, bunch of friends in my life.

 

[RacyWilde]

Alone, not lonely...

I think for many couples their lives get too entwined so friends are shared. That makes it difficult when a couple separates - I've mostly seen one partner have to give up their shared friends to save conflict. So, not only do they lose a partner but also their whole support group and the life they have invested in for so long. That's scary for most.

Knowing the stats on divorce and the (uncountable) amount of unhappy marriages, I think it is very silly for partners to become too entwined in each other's lives. I think couples should support each other's independence - education, work, financial, social, emotional, etc. This will prevent a harder fall if the partners do break up. I think for people to do this for each other is a greater love. But, I also know, just because you love someone it doesn't mean it would be the best thing to stay together. I'm amazed that people don't get this. I was in one relationship where we both knew we were at the end but instead of just breaking up, leaving each other stranded, we worked together to set up each other's lives before moving on. It was hard, and even though we didn't love each other anymore, we did it out of the care and thankfulness for the love that we did share. Though, I have a different outlook on love and relationships than most...

I don't become immersed in someone - not knowing where each other ends or begins is suffocating to me. It's because I'm a thinker rather than a feeler. I like to see things from the outside in... I'm always thinking in meta mode...lol. It means I don't fall into relationships, I choose them. It's not very romantic but I am empowered, which is the most important to me. But this also means when I see something going wrong in a relationship, I don't just live with it, I try to fix it. And if I can't fix it, I'm not afraid to let it go.

Unfortunately, not many people think like me or understand, including my lovers. I do find my lovers may think I don't love them as much as they love me, especially because I can let go so easily, but that's simply not true. I love deeply, I just don't let it get in the way on my sanity. I prefer to nibble at the fruit, to wonder at it and savour it's flavour (and use the seeds to grow more ), rather than shoving the whole thing in my mouth at once and sucking out all the juice...lol.

@Green_Knight - my childhood was ravaged by alcoholism... I understand the neglect, and other things...

Interesting analysis ... and possibly the reason my husband and I were OK for so long, in spite of the lack of sex, was that we were still very intimate, including physically.

I sometimes wonder if people worry about being alone because they really would be lonely. If I wasn't married, my weeks/months/years would still be full of people, including very close relationships with people who are very dear to me and with whom I have a very long history. I think sometimes people forget to nurture those relationships. I'm lucky that I'm part of a very solid group of friends who go back a long way, and really function like family (with a LOT of incest ), and offer a lot of the emotional and practical support that one tends to expect from one's spouse, and outside of that, I have other very important friends - in the absence of that, I might feel differently.

I used to panic about being on my own - and I mean really panic. I think it stemmed from my very young days when I had a severe speech impediment which had a very limiting effect on friendships. As a result I developed a tendency to grab onto and dive into the deep end with anyone who did offer friendship, without too much forethought and sometimes with disastrous results.

I've learned in recent years that being on my own is actually rather nice. I got used to it when I had an alcoholic wife who spent most of the time we were together in drunken sleep and I realised that I was, in effect, on my own. Now, after two ended marriages, I cannot see myself wanting to make such a commitment again. My SO and I have a 'living together apart' arrangement that suits us both very well. There are some NQSSOs around and a good, if not extensive, bunch of friends in my life.

 

[RacyWilde]

Interesting article on that sort of subject in yesterday's Guardian newspaper:

I think it is funny that the couple are both quick to point out they are pretty and fit (masculine/feminine)...lol...and that they have their lives together to emphasise they are sexless by choice rather than an emotional or social hangup...lol. And, even though this article could be a godsend to some sexless couples, I can just see some wives looking up from their paper saying, 'See, if this couple can live like this, then so can we," or better still, "babe, I've decided to become asexual".

For most people in a sexless/intimate-less marriage... they want to know what to do, not that it is just okay to be in one...lol.

 

[Green_Knight]

I think it is funny that the couple are both quick to point out they are pretty and fit (masculine/feminine)...lol...and that they have their lives together to emphasise they are sexless by choice rather than an emotional or social hangup...lol. And, even though this article could be a godsend to some sexless couples, I can just see some wives looking up from their paper saying, 'See, if this couple can live like this, then so can we," or better still, "babe, I've decided to become asexual".

For most people in a sexless/intimate-less marriage... they want to know what to do, not that it is just okay to be in one...lol.

I wasn't convinced that both were happy with the sexless state of things. He seemed more relaxed with it than she did. Therein lies a risk.

A good few years ago I met a woman who was in a similar situation to that described in the article. Her husband had gone off sex 15 years earlier and she had accepted and lived with the situation for all that time. However, as soon as we met – in an entirely casual, public situation – I knew that sooner or later we would have sex. Maybe the pheromones started flying, I don't know, but it was enough to break her acceptance of not having sex. Very soon I got a text message suggesting that we meet up. That was the start of a fantastic six-year affair.

Interestingly, she told me later that she had only ever had an orgasm about once a year when she did have sex with her husband, so maybe that explains her easy acceptance of the situation. If the sex wasn't much good, was it worth bothering about? I suspect it wasn't in "Brian and Alison's" case in the article.

 

[Green_Knight]

...I think couples should support each other's independence - education, work, financial, social, emotional, etc. This will prevent a harder fall if the partners do break up...

I agree. A couple of years ago I was diagnosed with an illness that will mean that my SO and I will probably not have long together. The temptation in that case, of course, is for the well person to turn full-time carer and give up on all other aspects of life – but your idea is the right one.

 

[Iamsubmissive]

But, I also know, just because you love someone it doesn't mean it would be the best thing to stay together. I'm amazed that people don't get this. I was in one relationship where we both knew we were at the end but instead of just breaking up, leaving each other stranded, we worked together to set up each other's lives before moving on. It was hard, and even though we didn't love each other anymore, we did it out of the care and thankfulness for the love that we did share.

I also had a long term relationship that ended this way...we actually continued to cohabitate (just moved into separate rooms) for almost a year after our break up. We were very mature about it...split everything evenly (bills and assets), dated other people during that time but never brought them back to our shared home, respected each others privacy, and were still willing to help each other out (not sexually) if the other needed it. We're still friends to this day...best but saddest breakup I ever had.

Also agree with the other things said in your post. Relationships of any kind take hard work and mutual consideration and respect, and breakups shouldn't really change those rules.