SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

For the record, my husband is not vanilla. He has no problem with oral. I was using it as an example. Because some of the arguments being made in this thread are Beyond ridiculous.

Hellfire with the REAL mike drop!

Bc if I loved her and it was something that she objected to, I could sacrifice for love.

To later find out she only objected to it WITH ME, I'd feel like I was duped. I'd feel like crap knowing that I just didn't do it for her sexually the way every other guy she's been with did.

To know that I'm dead last in her sexual preference of all her partners would emasculate me 100%

Golden, I do get what you're saying here. MY point here is that you shouldn't have to 'sacrifice for love' - no one should unless they know exactly what that sacrifice is about***. If she presented herself as vanilla and you found out down the road that she was actually not vanilla at all, you would have every right to feel duped and hurt and pissed because wife should have been honest about her sexual activities/proclivities/preferences from the get-go!

Now if it was something that one had tried in a previous relationship and didn't enjoy and was honest and forthcoming with that info to their current SO, that is different than deliberately lying about previous sexual activity and presenting yourself as something you know you aren't. Hope that makes sense...

And goose and gander - this type of deception is not ok no matter who does it.

***ETA - before all the people start coming after me with pitchforks - compromise is a different thing. Compromise is fine so long as everyone is in agreement about it. But compromise without honesty is sacrifice, and that is NOT ok.

[This message edited by EllieKMAS at 1:57 PM, December 6th (Friday)]

Why would you marry someone who wasn't providing the sex acts you require in order to feel good about yourself then? Why would you marry a vanilla gal and then bitch about it when vanilla was good enough to MARRY?

I can agree with this, and that noone owes anyone a sexual act. And, I think if you marry someone expecting something to change that's always a recipe for disaster. Everyone should have their own sexual agency.

I think though, if someone goes out and cheats on you, obviously all deals are off. I don't think the woman or man should submit if they really don't like something. BUT, You have though made it hard for your spouse to then believe you don't really like it when you were just doing it with your AP a month ago. That's a consequence of infidelity. And, what the betrayed person was willing to accept before (Vanilla) may not be what they are now willing to accept moving forward. Infidelity breaks all deals, even sexual ones.

If someone did things before they got with you and took them off the table, that may have nothing to do with how much they like you. I have from time to time done a sex act with my H, once in a while ever since before we have been married. And, I would do it again, it's just not my favorite thing in the world. I always take compromise in our marriage to mean, if it's more important to the other person and you are kind of like "meh" then maybe they get their way on that one. And the see saw should go in the other direction for you at other times when something is important to you. But, I can tell you it's not something I will likely do if I ever have another relationship, it will be off the table from day 1. I just didn't see that it was worth trying to take it off the menu for a man who I love and trust and have done that with many times. He hasn't done anything that makes me not feel generous with him (which would maybe change if he cheated on me).

As for sexual pasts, like prior to dating/marrying you, preferences change. You have that information to work with and if you see it's vanilla, don't go expecting it to be chocolate later. That being said, marriage is long...people do change and if you are woman who offers a smorgasboard prior to marriage, and then go vanilla after marriage. Well, that's certainly your prerogative and your choice. You do not "owe" something you don't want to do. Bodies change, people change. But, compatibility can be re-evaluated at any time and your spouse may want out at that point. I have seen sexual incompatibility work to some degree in marriages, but typically it's because everything else fires on all cylinders. But, whether we want it to be or not, sex is part of the joy and the glue of a marriage. It's as fundamental as communication, shared responsibilities, quality time, and any of the other aspects of a relationship. It's worth renegotiating from time to time, as long as everyone is being respected in the process.

[This message edited by hikingout at 2:10 PM, December 6th (Friday)]

Some people, marry someone who is poor. And then later down the line, they might start to bitch about having no money.

God forbid, anyone expect to grow, and change with their spouse. We hear all the time, that it's a good thing to try to spice up your sex-life on occasion. Especially couples that have been together for many years. There's nothing wrong with that. But, from some of the comments here, I guess some people think that that would be wrong. If you marry them, they are never expected to change ever.

Unless they cheat right? LOL

we still end up with the "fallen woman owing sexual acts whether she enjoys them or not as proof of her love" fallacy

And that is a full stop for everyone, male or female. Sexual acts that make you uncomfortable or that you don't like are not owed to your SO, ever. And that is regardless of whether you participated in them before your current relationship or not.

Except in fairness, many in this thread have explicitly said not this. I think most are in full agreement that there should be no expectation of acts that make the person uncomfortable, that they don't like, that they did under duress, that they can't physically do any more. No one really seems to be saying that a person is owed things regardless of circumstance.

I think many times when this type of subject comes up, there are communication breakdowns where the two sides end up just talking past each other. Where articulating points is clumsy at best.

I think most would agree that not only do we want, but we expect the best our partners have to give. In my situation with my wife, she showed an awful lot of thought and planning, and spent an awful lot of time and energy on her sex life with her physically, emotionally, sexually, abusive, violent, druggie and adulterous ex husband. It was a very unhealthy relationship for sure, and much of the specifics were done from a very bad place. I get that, and I do not ever want her to feel that kind of duress or desperation in our relationship. However...

All that shows exactly how driven she can be, how much effort she can put in to please someone who was horrible to her. I don't want or need anything from her that she would have to give from a place of fear. Even though it might appear totally differently in her actions, compared to her ex husband, I do expect to feel as if she is giving her all to our relationship and sex life. I don't think it is unreasonable to expect a level of enthusiasm, engagement, and initiative that is at least at the level it was for past partners.

The one thing, given everything else about my wife's past, but the one thing that was right on the verge of having me walk away just a couple of months before our wedding was when it was mentioned in casual conversation among friends that my wife had been regularly sexually involved, including all the bells and whistles with her ex husband for the entire six years between when they got divorced and when we started dating. Talk about a mind fuck.

What I'm driving at, is if I tell my SO that I am vanilla, but I know in myself that that isn't true, then my SO has a right to feel pissed and hurt if he finds out that I lied to him about it. That kind of withholding is not ok IMHO in a healthy relationship.

If I am forthcoming about my sexual history and preferences with my SO and we communicate openly about that, including any change in said preferences, that is fine.

It is also ok for a change to become a non-starter. My xshitbag 'changed' in that he decided that he was polyamorous and that in order for him to want to stay married to me, I had to be perfectly ok with him dating and fucking other women. He also said in the course of all this that this had always been something he was interested in, but hadn't felt comfortable discussing with me.

Now, I had issues with that shit - 1. At no point in our nearly 8 years together had he EVER mentioned an interest in this, despite the fact that I asked him many questions along those lines (even if I did not use the specific word 'polyamorous'), 2. He 'changed' and then had the expectation that I would respect that and green light whatever he wanted.

He can be poly if he wants. Of course that is a change he is allowed. But that is not something I want or am interested in. It is not what we agreed upon when we married, nor was it a preference that I was even aware he had until DDay. Now, had he told me that from the get-go and I chose to marry him anyways even though I knew it wasn't what I wanted, then that would be on ME.

Bc if I loved her and it was something that she objected to, I could sacrifice for love.

To later find out she only objected to it WITH ME, I'd feel like I was duped. I'd feel like crap knowing that I just didn't do it for her sexually the way every other guy she's been with did.

To know that I'm dead last in her sexual preference of all her partners would emasculate me 100%

So, what you're saying is that you've made some kind of huge sacrifice in what you want out of life in exchange for what you deem to be good enough. AKA "settled". How is that fair to your wife? Do you think she wanted your sacrifice?.. to be "settled" for? I know I wouldn't.

"Dead last in her sexual preference"??? Isn't that a bit melodramatic and less than credible given the fact that no one put a gun to her head and made her marry you? Chances are, if she chooses to marry, she's satisfied with what she's getting. That is, unless you two waited until the wedding night. Did you wait until the wedding night?

Please understand that while I can feel pity for those guys who cite "emasculation" as a problem, I view it as an issue of sexual insecurity which is best resolved by a man defining masculinity for himself, rather than by the diktats of the locker room.

[This message edited by ChamomileTea at 2:17 PM, December 6th (Friday)]

Agree 100% with Ellie

[This message edited by hikingout at 2:16 PM, December 6th (Friday)]

So, what you're saying is that you've made some kind of huge sacrifice in what you want out of life in exchange for what you deem to be good enough. AKA "settled". How is that fair to your wife? Do you think she wanted your sacrifice?.. to be "settled" for? I know I wouldn't.

"Dead last in her sexual preference"??? Isn't that a bit melodramatic and less than credible given the fact that no one put a gun to her head and made her marry you? Chances are, if she chooses to marry, she's satisfied with what she's getting. That is, unless you two waited until the wedding night. Did you wait until the wedding night?

A huge sacrifice? Idk if I'd say it's huge. But it would become huge once everything came to light.

As far as how she feels...if she tells me she won't do oral and I reply that I'm disappointed but ok, I can live with it, she knows I'm sacrificing and she's ok with it.

And we hear about females marrying someone that they settled for all the time here on this site. There's even a current story in JFO where this happened.

[This message edited by GoldenR at 2:30 PM, December 6th (Friday)]

Please understand that while I can feel pity for those guys who cite "emasculation" as a problem, I view it as an issue of sexual insecurity which is best resolved by a man defining masculinity for himself, rather than by the diktats of the locker room.

As a bit of clarification, do you think that is the case with -all- feelings of emasculation, or just in this particular set of circumstances? Not wanting to assume or put words in your mouth, just wanting to follow that thread a little further.

[This message edited by Incarnate at 2:31 PM, December 6th (Friday)]

A huge sacrifice? Idk if I'd say it's huge. But it would become huge once everything came to light.

Why? Let's say, you found out that she used to do oral in her last relationship. How does that change what was acceptable to you when you entered into marriage together?

I wouldn't feel as if I settled if I thought I was getting her best. If I thought I wasn't getting her best, I would not have married her. If I had been led to believe that I was getting her best, only to learn after I married her that I was not getting her best, I would feel taken advantage of, deceived, duped.

As a bit of clarification, do you think that is the case with -all- feelings of emasculation, or just in this particular set of circumstances? Not wanting to assume or put words in your mouth, just wanting to follow that thread a little further.

You read it correctly. I do not believe that a man who is secure in himself can be "emasculated" by the actions of another. If a man knows who he is, respects himself, and is secure in his own definition of masculinity, it doesn't matter what other people do. Same thing for women regarding the feminine. We define ourselves and are not defined by others.

I think most would agree that not only do we want, but we expect the best our partners have to give. In my situation with my wife, she showed an awful lot of thought and planning, and spent an awful lot of time and energy on her sex life with her physically, emotionally, sexually, abusive, violent, druggie and adulterous ex husband. It was a very unhealthy relationship for sure, and much of the specifics were done from a very bad place. I get that, and I do not ever want her to feel that kind of duress or desperation in our relationship. However...

All that shows exactly how driven she can be, how much effort she can put in to please someone who was horrible to her.

This is definitely a common feeling. I can see how this would cause a deep feeling of rejection and hurt.

I'll use my stereotypical gender-based example from the previous page to illustrate another cause a deep feeling of rejection and hurt:

Let’s take this example: This guy bought his ex elaborate gifts and made wildly romantic gestures; he gave his wife vanilla gifts and never did anything more than dinner for on special occasions. His wife finds out and is obviously hurt because she is supposedly the love of his and yet he doesn’t make 1/4 of the effort he made with his ex. He tells her that is because he was trying to impress his ex but doesn’t need to put on airs with his wife because he knows she loves him for who he is. Moreover, he never enjoyed it, his efforts nearly bankrupted him, and now he is taking extra money to save for his family.

So the issue: Is sacrificing your discomfort for the benefit of your SO in every instance the same? In other words, is a woman expected to allow her husband to do sexual acts to her that she is uncomfortable with same as the man, in the above example, expected to perform romantic gestures that he is uncomfortable with for his wife's benefit?

For purposes of this post, I'm not saying making an argument one way or the other. I'm only trying to get to the issue that is dividing people.

Why? Let's say, you found out that she used to do oral in her last relationship. How does that change what was acceptable to you when you entered into marriage together?

It tells me that she's just not that into me sexually. I wouldn't tell her to start or it's a dealbreaker bc who wants their SO doing a sex act bc they're scared of losing you and not bc they love you?

Knowing that I didn't do it for her sexually so much so that she won't dob things with me that she did with everyone else before me would probably result in D. Why would I want to stay with someone who, while she may love me, is totally turned off by me sexually?

I wouldn't feel as if I settled if I thought I was getting her best. If I thought I wasn't getting her best, I would not have married her. If I had been led to believe that I was getting her best, only to learn after I married her that I was not getting her best, I would feel taken advantage of, deceived, duped.

So, if pulling a train is her "best", why wouldn't that be included in the marital relations? Maybe, she makes it clear before the marriage that every other month or so you can invite 3 friends and have a go of it. Or maybe, just maybe... she views pulling a train as something she wouldn't want to include in an exclusive, emotionally-bonded marital arrangement. Should that change in view before the marriage occurs not be allowable?

Why? Let's say, you found out that she used to do oral in her last relationship. How does that change what was acceptable to you when you entered into marriage together?

I know this wasn't directed at me but...

For me, oral is something I really enjoy, and am always happy to have, but it is not a deal breaker for me if there are extenuating circumstances. If it wasn't something she could do because of traumatic experience, TMJ, or something like that, if the rest of our sex life was suitably engaging and active, I'd be fine with it, and would not feel as if I was settling, because I would be getting her best.

Going back to my wife regularly going back to her horrible ex husband for sex, including oral, for six years after their divorce, where there was no compelling reason for her to do so other than she wanted to... If she had an aversion to oral with me, I don't know how anyone couldn't take that very personally, and a direct personal rejection.

You read it correctly. I do not believe that a man who is secure in himself can be "emasculated" by the actions of another. If a man knows who he is, respects himself, and is secure in his own definition of masculinity, it doesn't matter what other people do. Same thing for women regarding the feminine. We define ourselves and are not defined by others.

In a perfect world, sure. Unfortunately, emotions and reactions come into play.

I'm an overweight guy. I have a belly. I'm not, like, morbidly obese, but weight is a struggle for me, and I HAVE been 322lbs before. I am not anymore (270 with a heavy frame), but I am a big guy. I refer to myself as 'fat' jokingly. I have a lot of muscle mass... and a lot of chunk as well.

Since DDay 2 and my separation, my ex has told me that I have a smaller penis than OM, that I was never able to sexually satisfy her, that she has never been attracted to me because of my weight, that every time we had sex it was against her will but she just gave in because I made her feel like she had to, that I performed oral poorly, that when we were in the BDSM scene, I was a terrible dom and the OM is better at it than I could ever be, that I am weak, that my C-PTSD is a sign of weakness and of me being not a real man, so on and so on.

I felt emasculated. I still do from time to time. Perhaps it does have to do with insecurities. Perhaps those insecurities are the result of what my ex did.

I mean, I've seen pictures of my ex in the act with the OM and OW. OM is less muscular than me, despite being thinner. OW is WAY fatter than I am. OM's equipment is no closer to Magnum than I am (roughly comparable), and I KNOW how to identify if a woman climaxes, and I KNOW that my ex has had her fair share of orgasms at my doing. Not saying I'm some sexual guru God of the Clitoris or anything, but I knew her buttons and how to press them if she let me.

I think feelings of emasculation, like the other parts of betrayal trauma, is an understandable and natural reaction to, well, betrayal.

while she may love me, is totally turned off by me sexually?

Golden, come on now. That is a total exaggeration. Say your wife had anal sex with previous partners but doesn’t want to do it with you (if you were into it/wanted it). Say, though, she enthusiastically gives & receives oral and PIV. Are you really going to say that that makes her “totally turned off by you sexually”?