Where do the vows begin/End?

[njlauren]

Another thread where someone posted about how to stop guilty about cheating brought another topic to mind, the question where do the marriage vows with sex begin and end? Are those vows the be all and end all for behavior? Given that sex is a powerful need, not something you can easily turn off as some (especially religion) wants to tell us, what about causes where a spouse cannot have sex? What about the partner of someone who has been sexually abuse or raped and is incapable of not only having sex now, but may be screwed up for a long time if not forever (and yes, folks, that does happen). What if the spouse/partner has ALS or MS and cannot function sexually? What if they are simply asexual?

The other person still loves them, cares for them, is there for them and is otherwise coupled, but isn't able to get their sexual needs met......is the answer throwing away the spouse because of sex? Is the answer living with it and 'taking care of yourself? Are the marriage vows even true here, since in effect, through no fault of their own, the other partner is violating the vows by not being able to give the other person sex that is part of being married....

When I hear people judging others for cheating, calling it a cheap thrill, etc, it got me to thinking, because in some ways that is as cold as the person who cheats because it is a thrill, it is the forbidden, and they justify it saying "it is just sex"......that trivializes what sex to me should be to a married couple (I am not prude, having sex is also hot and fun, and I make no judgements about couples who have open relationships, do threesomes, swing, etc....since that is consensual), but telling the partner of someone who cannot give them sex that they have to 'deal with it' as if sex is like doing without a new tv or whatever, is just as trivializing (disclaimer, this is not about the other thread per se, and this is not about any specific post or poster).

It is hard, and I have lived through it, I went through many years with a nonexistent sex life because of horrible abuse my spouse suffered as a child, it tinged many things in our lives, and it meant I ended up taking care of myself as best I could. I never physically cheated, nor would I do that, I couldn't, most of what I did was in my head, fantasy or online play when that became an option later on and it isn't a great alternative but it was what I had, and my spouse understood that.

Maybe because I went through it, I find the ironclad judgements about cheating leave out those gray areas. Religion loves to lay down hard and fast rules (to their credit, members of said religions often are more pragmatic and smart then the leaders) but are they really? Like I said above, marital sex is supposed to be a two way street, and if that isn't there, then aren't the vows already breached? Some couples when faced with this have a tacit agreement...but what about where the spouse the other person loved is so fucked up they are asexual, where they can't even recognize how powerful sex is, so think that while they don't want sex, it is no big deal for their spouse not to have it.....Should the other spouse hang out in a sexless marriage like that, not have it, simply because vows said he/she cannot cheat, when perhaps even through no fault of their own, the other party has broached those vows...and if the other party has done so, does that mean the only recourse if the other partner wants sex, is to walk away from someone they otherwise love?

I don't condone cheating when there are alternatives, I think a spouse if they aren't getting their needs met have every duty to try and make it work, try and get their spouse help, a book for partners of survivors of abuse I read when in the thick of dealing with the horrors that happened to my sweetie, said that is when your head and your imagination are all you have, and for many they can do that....but what if there really is no hope? At that point quite honestly I think throwing away a spouse because of the issue of sex is the lesser of two evils, that getting sexual needs met outside the marriage might be the less cruel thing. I can say that if I was laid up with MS or ALS or something like that, if there was no way for me to express physical joys to my spouse, I would tell them they had my blessing to find what they needed as long as they were discrete and didn't make me feel badly about not being able to do what I should be able to, or emotionally pull away from me.

i know of real world cases like that, the Pianist/Conductor Daniel Berenboim was married to Jacqueline DuPre, the great cellist, who tragically got hit with MS when in her early 20's and by the time she hit 30 was physically in such bad shape they couldn't have sex.....by the end of her life, Berenboim already had in effect another family while still taking care of his wife as best he could....can I judge him? Not really sure, though I have heard it said that he had cheated on her before this time, that she had cheated on him, but looking at this in the abstract what should we expect spouses to do?

Like I said, I don't airily promote cheating or condone it, but I can see cases where as a kind of last resort it may work out better then leaving a marriage.

Thoughts?

 

[heavyhitter01]

Whatever happened to simply talking to your spouse? When did communication go out of style?

Cheating is never a last resort. It should never happen, period. (Sure, it does, people do it all the time, yada yada...I know all of that, so no need for lectures.)

Things happen. In every relationship and every marriage, things happen that are out of the control of one or both parties. It might be something simple that blows over quickly, or it might be something like MS, that can be devastating. No matter what it is, if you truly care about your spouse and your marriage, you absolutely must talk about the things that aren't working, and find some way to fix it that does NOT include infidelity, lying, or any other kind of deception.

What if your spouse doesn't want to hear it, or they have fundamentally different views on what the marriage vows mean? If someone can't work it out, or can't even bring themselves to talk to their spouse about the issues, or if the spouse is simply not open to listening, then maybe they don't need to be married anymore.

In that case, it's time to end the marriage. End it before moving on -- keep your integrity and do not cheat.

 

[JamieJ424]

I love it when people talk about morality in absolute terms. Riddle me this, Batman.

I know a guy. His wife works part time from their home and cares for their two sons and his daughter from a previous marriage. One of his sons has autism, on the milder end of the spectrum. She works with him daily to improve his social skills and get him ready for school. She's active in the Catholic church and the PTO. Beautiful lady, smart, well read, funny.

He is very successful but his career is extremely demanding. He travels 30 weeks a year to various parts of North America, Europe and Asia. Great guy. Funny, smart, generous, grills a mean steak.

His wife suffers from a condition called vaginismus, which means sex for her ranges from tolerable to excruciating. She never enjoys it, even when she uses the medicine the doctor prescribed...it's basically a topical anaesthetic. She does her best to do what she calls her "wifely duties," but it's exactly that, and she takes zero pleasure in it.

They have had numerous conversations about it, and as a good Catholic, she steadfastly refuses to accept the option of him seeking another outlet, be it online, another lover, or what have you. She even looks askance at him if she catches him masturbating in the shower.

So in your world, he either throws away his family and community, emotionally devastates his kids, especially his autistic son...with his schedule it's questionable how often he would even see his kids at all if he and his wife split...OR he suffers through the rest of his life without ever being with a woman who appreciates him sexually. Do I have that about right?

For the record, he chooses door #3. Judge away.

J

Whatever happened to simply talking to your spouse? When did communication go out of style?

Cheating is never a last resort. It should never happen, period. (Sure, it does, people do it all the time, yada yada...I know all of that, so no need for lectures.)

Things happen. In every relationship and every marriage, things happen that are out of the control of one or both parties. It might be something simple that blows over quickly, or it might be something like MS, that can be devastating. No matter what it is, if you truly care about your spouse and your marriage, you absolutely must talk about the things that aren't working, and find some way to fix it that does NOT include infidelity, lying, or any other kind of deception.

What if your spouse doesn't want to hear it, or they have fundamentally different views on what the marriage vows mean? If someone can't work it out, or can't even bring themselves to talk to their spouse about the issues, or if the spouse is simply not open to listening, then maybe they don't need to be married anymore.

In that case, it's time to end the marriage. End it before moving on -- keep your integrity and do not cheat.

 

[amofiga]

As I recall, there's this line about "in sickness and in health". The sickness part can be pretty awful, especially as you get older and things like Alzheimers and heart disease and other crippling things can send any sort of sex life into the dumper. Some would say at older ages it doesn't matter, but I'm here to tell you that sexual needs continue well into your 60's and 70's and for some even later. Some of the diseases, accidents, etc and happen early in life and it's even worse.

I'm not one who has a right to preach because I've not been the best of husbands in the past. I let physical needs get in the way of vows and feel the worse for it now. I do know that there have been some couples that have the love to let their spouse satisfy their needs outside the marriage when they can no longer do it. It comes from love though and the caring about the other that transends personal jealousy. That's rare though. Most people don't have that level of security, especially when they themselves are limited. It takes strength both to remain loyal and honor vows and it also takes strength if you are willing to understand your partner's needs that might be taken care of by another. It's a very tough call, but I would not recommend "cheating" without the knowledge and concent of the partner. It's tough enough to accept cheating when you're healthy and strong. It would probably be even more devistating when you're not and you feel like you're being kicked when you are down and out. Some people seem to come to some sort of "understanding" while others cannot. It's a case by case thing.

I suppose there's no easy and non-painful answer. I think it would even be hard to bring it up and maybe it's necessary for the "weakened" partner to offer it up as an alternative if he or she has the emotional strength and security. Very tough.

 

[Bramblethorn]

No matter what it is, if you truly care about your spouse and your marriage, you absolutely must talk about the things that aren't working, and find some way to fix it that does NOT include infidelity, lying, or any other kind of deception.

I tend to agree with this. IME, a healthy relationship is not so much about making vows and then blindly following them unto death. Stuff happens, people are imperfect, sometimes we only realise later that we can't do what we promised to do. It's more about being able to work together as a team to deal with those situations: okay, this isn't working, what else are we willing to try?

If I set out to deceive my partner, at best that deception says: I know what's good for you, better than you do, and I don't respect your judgement enough to share this decision with you. Dishonesty creates walls; especially when a relationship is already weakened by whatever-it-was drove the cheating in the first place, that combination of disrespect and dishonesty is not likely to mend things.

FWIW, while these are hard conversations, plenty of people do manage to renegotiate a relationship and figure out something that works and doesn't require deception. If it's good enough for Warren and Susan Buffett...

 

[heavyhitter01]

So in your world, he either throws away his family and community, emotionally devastates his kids, especially his autistic son...with his schedule it's questionable how often he would even see his kids at all if he and his wife split...OR he suffers through the rest of his life without ever being with a woman who appreciates him sexually. Do I have that about right?

In my world, he sits down for a serious heart-to-heart with his wife. If that has to include outside counseling, so be it. It sounds like it's well-past time that all cards were out on the table, yes?

They discuss what can be done to help the situation. If it means that she has to suck it up and deal with his masturbating, so be it. If it means she has to deal with bending her strict religious views to accommodate the vows she took, then so be it. If it takes serious counseling to get to a middle ground, so be it. Nobody said it wasn't hard work to make a marriage work.

The bottom line is that they should decide, together. As a husband, he should not simply make the choice to cheat on her, for whatever reason. How they manage to get through the problem should be a decision they make together.

When you marry someone, or commit to someone in a long-term relationship, you are making a commitment "for better or for worse." He's in a situation that happens to be worse...but so is she. BOTH of them have a responsibility to work it out...and that means communication, not cheating.

 

[heavyhitter01]

If I set out to deceive my partner, at best that deception says: I know what's good for you, better than you do, and I don't respect your judgement enough to share this decision with you.

I like this. Very elegantly stated.

 

[heavyhitter01]

If only life was that clean cut and we ALL lived in la-la land.

Why is communication with your spouse, partner, significant other, considered to be so fucking hard?

I mean, really. If you can't talk to them about what it is going on, then maybe you shouldn't be in the situation you're in.

Jesus Christ. Nothing about life is clean cut. That's why you need to TALK about it all. Why is talking about it and dealing with the problem apparently so difficult?

 

[Bramblethorn]

If only life was that clean cut and we ALL lived in la-la land.

Clean-cut? Hell no. Negotiating compromises is messy business.

But I've been with partners who were willing to do the hard work of talking, and I've been with partners who took the simpler option of making decisions unilaterally without telling me. I know which I'd rather have.

 

[JamieJ424]

So you recommend they discuss and work and go to counseling until....what? Until she somehow builds a context for sexual fulfillment, having never experienced it herself? Until she realizes that the Catholic moral framework on which she bases her world view is flawed and she needs to let go of some of her antiquated ideas about sexual interaction? Until he lets go of his need to to feel sexually desired and capable? And if there's no resolution, they just chuck an otherwise happy, symbiotic marriage and screw the kids?

Honestly I'm curious.

J

In my world, he sits down for a serious heart-to-heart with his wife. If that has to include outside counseling, so be it. It sounds like it's well-past time that all cards were out on the table, yes?

They discuss what can be done to help the situation. If it means that she has to suck it up and deal with his masturbating, so be it. If it means she has to deal with bending her strict religious views to accommodate the vows she took, then so be it. If it takes serious counseling to get to a middle ground, so be it. Nobody said it wasn't hard work to make a marriage work.

The bottom line is that they should decide, together. As a husband, he should not simply make the choice to cheat on her, for whatever reason. How they manage to get through the problem should be a decision they make together.

When you marry someone, or commit to someone in a long-term relationship, you are making a commitment "for better or for worse." He's in a situation that happens to be worse...but so is she. BOTH of them have a responsibility to work it out...and that means communication, not cheating.

 

[heavyhitter01]

So you recommend they discuss and work and go to counseling until....what? Until she somehow builds a context for sexual fulfillment, having never experienced it herself? Until she realizes that the Catholic moral framework on which she bases her world view is flawed and she needs to let go of some of her antiquated ideas about sexual interaction? Until he lets go of his need to to feel sexually desired and capable? And if there's no resolution, they just chuck an otherwise happy, symbiotic marriage and screw the kids?

Honestly I'm curious.

J

Until they figure out -- together -- what to do. I'm not suggesting that it will be one way or the other. I'm not suggesting what conclusions they might reach. All I'm suggesting is that they should approach the solution, whatever it may be, as a united couple, and not as one person deciding to simply step out and have an affair.

 

[heavyhitter01]

I believe Jaime has been down that path repeatedly.... I don't believe communication issues are anything remotely to do with the problem he is defining or the original OP was talking about. Many people with acquired Or adult onset disability can not communicate at all. Then what?

Then that is a tragic situation that deserves all kinds of sympathy. But that is not the hypothetical Jamie introduced...he described two people quite capable of communication.

Edited to add:

But let's run with your comment. Let's say that we're talking about someone who, for whatever reason, truly cannot communicate anymore. That's another argument as to why communication throughout the marriage, from long before the vows are said, is so important.

If you have already discussed where you both stand on things as important as "what happens if I become disabled/need you to make medical choices for me/would you remarry if I died/etc." then you can have a pretty good idea of where things stand if the unbelievable does happen.

I'm sure that might be seen as "clear cut" and "simplistic" but it makes perfect sense to talk with your life partner about how to handle the day when life might throw you a curveball.

 

[heavyhitter01]

Why do you care so much how other people live their lives? Why can't you discuss it without anger?

I was responding to a thread. About relationships. On an open forum. Tell me how that's giving a shit how people live their lives? I gave my opinion, and it is no less valid than anyone else's opinion.

And I'm not angry. I'm frustrated. I'm frustrated with the fact that most comments on the Lit boards that aren't immediately understanding of adultery are somehow wrong. Everyone who cheats thinks they have a special case, a special way of justifying their actions. "Yes, cheating is wrong, buuuuutttt...."

I come from the "no buts" crowd. Cheating is wrong. Period.

But of course, I have to keep reminding myself that many, many people here on Lit are actually here for that reason: To cheat, to get some sexual outlet, to bitch about how their spouses are just too "vanilla" or don't do it for them...so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised that saying "talk to him!" or "talk to her!" is seen as being overrated.

Almost every thread started on here boils down to lack of communication. That's ridiculously sad. I suppose those who actually talk to their significant others are too busy doing that to post on places like this.

 

[heavyhitter01]

This is where we differ... I saw him describe two people, crippled by various unbending beliefs that have made that communication impossible and unlikely to ever resolve anything to either parties sexual satisfaction. So when everything else works well in their life, apart from sex..they should just end it... or live without sex forever?

How can anyone not see the absurdity in that..

If communication is that fucked up, then sex is not the only problem. It's just the most glaring symptom of the problem. Nothing else is working well, unless you count going through the motions as "working well."

 

[JamieJ424]

Mine is not a hypothetical. This guy I described is a good mate of mine. We live far apart but see one another regularly, at least once a year, and trade emails often. He is a real guy in a real situation. Their issue in his marriage is not lack of love, lack of communication, lack of respect, or lack of commitment. He would lay down in front of a slow moving train for his wife. It's a simple matter of one need of his that she not only can't meet, she has neither the context for even understanding why it's important to him nor the moral flexibility to give him any latitude at all in that area.

Certainly honesty is important and a lot of people come up short in that regard. But you're putting total and complete honesty above absolutely everything else, as if that is the end-all be-all, and if you have a secret from your partner everything else is shite and worthless and a sham, and I simply, and with all due respect, disagree with that.

J

If communication is that fucked up, then sex is not the only problem. It's just the most glaring symptom of the problem. Nothing else is working well, unless you count going through the motions as "working well."

 

[heavyhitter01]

Certainly honesty is important and a lot of people come up short in that regard. But you're putting total and complete honesty above absolutely everything else, as if that is the end-all be-all, and if you have a secret from your partner everything else is shite and worthless and a sham, and I simply, and with all due respect, disagree with that.

J

Okay. Then we will just have to respectfully disagree.

 

[JamieJ424]

Good enough. Thanks for the debate. It's rare to go like that without it getting slanderous and ugly, so cheers.

J

Okay. Then we will just have to respectfully disagree.

 

[imemkay]

SHHHH.....Do you hear that? It's all the angels in heaven singing! People disagreeing respectfully....It's a How To Board miracle!

Well done!!

 

[bailadora]

Mine is not a hypothetical. This guy I described is a good mate of mine. We live far apart but see one another regularly, at least once a year, and trade emails often. He is a real guy in a real situation. Their issue in his marriage is not lack of love, lack of communication, lack of respect, or lack of commitment. He would lay down in front of a slow moving train for his wife. It's a simple matter of one need of his that she not only can't meet, she has neither the context for even understanding why it's important to him nor the moral flexibility to give him any latitude at all in that area.

Certainly honesty is important and a lot of people come up short in that regard. But you're putting total and complete honesty above absolutely everything else, as if that is the end-all be-all, and if you have a secret from your partner everything else is shite and worthless and a sham, and I simply, and with all due respect, disagree with that.

J

You didn't say, but have they tried counseling with a sex positive therapist? If he's unable to articulate to her the importance of a loving, sexual relationship, then perhaps professional help may be necessary.

WRT honesty: For me, it goes hand in hand with trust. If I have no faith in either of those characteristics within my partner, then there's nothing upon which to build a solid, healthy relationship. So for me, honesty and trust are paramount. If those two items are lacking, I'm just not going to be in a relationship with someone - period.

If things were bad enough that my spouse considered breaking my trust, then as painful as it might be, I'd rather be informed than robbed of the choice to 1) get serious enough to work with him towards satisfactory resolution, 2) agree to him getting his needs met elsewhere or 3) leave the relationship altogether.

 

[Desiremakesmeweak]

Okay... This is kinda up my alley...

Heavyhitter. I hope you're around the place.

Here is the fundamental Roman Catholic teaching in this matter: 'love thy neighbour as thyself; and do unto them as you would have them do unto you, for Love is the whole of the Law. And forgiveness is the commandment of god.'

So people are provided with a life in which a thing will happen that will confound them - they will desire to "talk" or to "communicate" with their spouse for instance, over the table and openly and honestly discuss on equal terms and negotiate a fair position, as you say. This spouse, having a child of say, six years age, and gifted with PROFOUND autism, has just spent the day - from 5.30 in the morning till 11.55 at night, pressing the return button on a DVD player every sixty seconds non-stop for a Wiggles' song over and over and over and over again. The child, although only six, can pull a grown man to the ground and gouge out the back of their lower jaw with a single finger - because that is what autistic children are able to do, until they grow out of this kind of thing. If... they do. In a few days, the child will learn to, and be able to, press the button themselves. It has taken them six years of intensive work to learn to point a finger. Over the last six years, this parent has not slept one single night straight - at all.

That someone first considers the position and feelings of the other person, is, the basis of traditional Christian morality, and that they always seek to treat the other as they would themselves be treated, is the ethical standpoint. That people make mistakes is the understanding of Christianity, and forgiveness is the commandment of god in that regard. And that is the official position and there is no other legitimate one that prescribes some more difficult way.

An atheist is in some ways placed in more demanding a moral and ethical position, because whereas a deist or theist presumes that god knows all things, and can adjust somehow or justify forgiveness - an atheist must themselves be the best he or she can morally and ethically be, in order merely to follow 'the Golden Rule' just on a secular basis as a moral code, not a religious one.

My understanding of the Roman Catholic position of the olden days - say of forty and more years ago - is this, that anyone can assume automatically to have a 'dispensation' from the black and white obligation of say a marriage vow on account of any of these natural world incapacities or hindrances, but that no one is free from this idea of caring about the feelings and position of the the (do unto others etc.) What does that mean in practice? It can mean a lot of things. 'In sickness or in health' does not mean 'come rain, hail or shine YOU MUST DO SUCH-AND-SUCH!' It means you must 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES - inclusive of forgiveness, theirs as well as yours.'

There is a huge - a vast gulf - between having sex with different people, and general promiscuity without any other consideration at all.

It is not generally acknowledged though, and I'm aware of that, that Christianity has always had an ascending sophistication of moral and ethical understandings depending on who is meant to be doing the hearing. For example, there is this stuff like 'what I teach to you do not speak to any of the others outside for causing them affront to their sensitivities.'

Human lives can be very complicated, and they are not less valid because someone or some people would prefer to have things simplified with a black and white moral code for all. Judgementalism, though, is NOT part of Christianity, like it or not, and in spite of political and sectarian views that gain a lot of attention and often take over whole brands of religions by force from time to time in history.

There is a childlike presumption, on behalf of most people most of the time, that 1. they are able to make a vow like a marriage vow at all, 2. and that they either did so or always would do, in full and complete, learned, experienced and wise knowledge of what they were undertaking to commit to...

And that is why - if you want to hear what the inner circle in the upper rooms say - the phrase that is used to describe the nature of relationships that are akin to what is 'outside of the world' is: 'to consecrate,' rather than 'to marry.'

Marriage, is, I'm afraid, a word that has been taken on by the illiterate and the ignorant and the Bourgeois, dare I say, on matters of Christian, especially Roman Catholic, tradition, to have greater importance than anything in Christian texts actually say. Jesus Christ was PREVAILED UPON to preside at the wedding feast at Cana, ancient Christian texts time and time again speak of 'the people of THIS Age eat and drink, marry and are given in marriage not seeing that the hour of their death is at hand, whilst those who attain to that other Age, et cetera.'

If there is anyone here, who can speak with greater authority having heard things from anyone above those that I know, please, let them step forward. Or otherwise, take it precisely as I have said it. Neither cast a stone, nor worry that one will be cast on you if think you might do wrong but wish to act according to divine law. Every single religious tradition of every kind says that those who seek the guidance of divinity will not be guided astray.

And those who are atheists are left to their own devices in any event.

But even islamic people the world over today, say that Abdul Wahab, the guy who pushed all of this modern restrictive nonsense onto muslims around fifty years ago, was a nutcase rather than a prophet or holy man. Religious prescriptive zealotry, comes from crazy people, who don't accept the reality of the world. And if you want to slander Christianity, at least realise that Jesus Christ never pointed the finger at any single individual over adultery or any other sexual matter, at all.

There is, as I say, a vast gulf between intelligent sexual activity, and rampaging stupidity.

DMMWk.

 

[JamieJ424]

I know they have been to counseling, but I don't know if they have seen a sex therapist in particular. The upshot of it was, she believes she IS giving him a loving sexual relationship, and in a limited way I guess that's true. She loves him enough to give him sex even though it's painful for her. What she can't grasp is the importance to him (and most men) of having a partner who actually enjoys the things they do together, coupled with the fact that he desn't want to cause her pain. It keeps coming back to her saying, in effect, "But I WILL do that, I LOVE to do that for him. So what's the problem?"

J

You didn't say, but have they tried counseling with a sex positive therapist? If he's unable to articulate to her the importance of a loving, sexual relationship, then perhaps professional help may be necessary.

WRT honesty: For me, it goes hand in hand with trust. If I have no faith in either of those characteristics within my partner, then there's nothing upon which to build a solid, healthy relationship. So for me, honesty and trust is paramount. If those two items are lacking, I'm just not going to be in a relationship with someone - period.

If things were bad enough that my spouse considered breaking my trust, then as painful as it might be, I'd rather be informed than robbed of the choice to 1) get serious enough to work with him towards satisfactory resolution, 2) agree to him getting his needs met elsewhere or 3) leave the relationship altogether.

 

[SweetErika]

If the couple has communicated, sought therapy, etc., and is still at an impasse, then I think it's fair for the partner who wants to go outside the marriage to say, "I'm truly sorry, but I need to have at least some minimum needs met to be happy. Therefore, I'm going to seek fulfillment outside our relationship."

At that point, the partner who isn't meeting the needs can choose to either figure out how they can get themselves to the point of being OK with their spouse seeing someone else OR they can choose to walk away from the marriage. If they choose to work on being OK with it, I think it's right for the spouse who wants to go outside the marriage to hold off on doing so for a time (maybe a few months, or whatever's reasonable) while their partner comes to terms with their new situation.

I just think that everything should be done with honesty and people should be able to make choices for themselves based on having all of the pertinent information. It's often harder to be honest up front, but it's a hell of a lot easier and less painful to hear someone's truth than cope with the shattered trust and utter heartbreak that's often the result of cheating.

 

[SweetErika]

I know they have been to counseling, but I don't know if they have seen a sex therapist in particular. The upshot of it was, she believes she IS giving him a loving sexual relationship, and in a limited way I guess that's true. She loves him enough to give him sex even though it's painful for her. What she can't grasp is the importance to him (and most men) of having a partner who actually enjoys the things they do together, coupled with the fact that he desn't want to cause her pain. It keeps coming back to her saying, in effect, "But I WILL do that, I LOVE to do that for him. So what's the problem?"

J

If he doesn't want to cause her pain, he wouldn't be cheating. Finding out you've been betrayed by someone you love and trust is one of the worst types of pain in the world.

I'm guessing there's a lot more to this couple's story. The anesthetic cream is the very first and "easiest" treatment for vaginismus. Beyond that, there's dilation, antidepressants, biofeedback, meditation, hypnosis, and other treatments. For the husband, there are a host of other ways of getting sexual fulfillment. I realize vaginal intercourse is important to many men, but is that one act worth seriously harming a spouse you really love over?

 

[JamieJ424]

Well, there's this too: There's almost no chance she will ever know. He only does it when he's traveling. There's no paper trail because his hotels and meals are all business expenses. There's no overlap between his sexual partners and his domestic social circle. He doesn't see coworkers or friends of friends of friends. There's no suspicious incoming texts or email.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment. He is a great guy. They travel with and without the kids. Whenever there's a fundraiser at the school or for the team, he either participates or he writes a check, sometimes both. He supports his parents and hers financially. When he's home, he's fully engaged with the kids and his wife.

Suppose you were married to him. Imagine it's thirty years from now, and he dies. The funeral is standing room only. A week after he passes you and you alone find out about his affairs. Does that negate everything good about your lives together for the past three decades? Do you tell the kids and grandkids and all your friends that although he seemed nice, he was a manipulative bastard the whole time?

I am honestly curious. My position is there's no easy answer.

J

If he doesn't want to cause her pain, he wouldn't be cheating. Finding out you've been betrayed by someone you love and trust is one of the worst types of pain in the world.

I'm guessing there's a lot more to this couple's story. The anesthetic cream is the very first and "easiest" treatment for vaginismus. Beyond that, there's dilation, antidepressants, biofeedback, meditation, hypnosis, and other treatments. For the husband, there are a host of other ways of getting sexual fulfillment. I realize vaginal intercourse is important to many men, but is that one act worth seriously harming a spouse you really love over?

 

[heavyhitter01]

Well, there's this too: There's almost no chance she will ever know. He only does it when he's traveling. There's no paper trail because his hotels and meals are all business expenses. There's no overlap between his sexual partners and his domestic social circle. He doesn't see coworkers or friends of friends of friends. There's no suspicious incoming texts or email.

I just have to jump in and say: Don't count on this.

It's a much smaller world than your friend might think, and all it takes is one little thing that makes the wife suspicious -- then she starts connecting the dots. Besides that, if they are really as close as you say, she will eventually become suspicious anyway, even with no proof to speak of. Women have a knack for knowing when something is up, even if he never breathes a word of it to her.