SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

The people who are ok with sharing this info should be with other people who are ok with sharing this info.

I am not ok with sharing this info so I don’t, and would not be with someone that needs to know about my past sexual history, obviously, since I am not willing to answer the questions. I don’t ask a new partner about their sexual past. If it happened before me, it isn’t my business.

And this takes us back to the original topic. So am I, without question, reservation or caveat. I am, however, equally supportive of the right of their partner to decide that their partners sexual autonomy as exercised in the present (I will not do X with you), past (I did X with 85 women before) or future (I will never do X) is a deal breaker and decide to move on regardless if they, themselves, have done (or not done) X before.

RIO - I actually do agree with you on this. I think if two people are sexually incompatible to a degree that it causes pain for one of the partners, that's serious enough to bring on a divorce. I would personally hope that both partners tried to work on it and have communicated effectively, but if they come to an impasse, then that's sometimes just the way things are going to be.

I have said this before - my first husband and I were not sexually compatible. Getting him to have sex took an act of congress. After all the rejection and the fights surrounding it, I just couldn't stay married to someone if that was what life was going to be like with him. There were other problems too, but I don't think they would have seemed as big at the time. I can look back now and think they all could have really stood on their own for grounds of divorce.

But- don't cheat, don't be conflict avoidant about it, get professional help if possible, and really try and empathize with one another. I don't think divorce should be an easy decision by any means. In my case, I was 22, we hadn't had any kids, and I knew that all around what was happening wasn't at all what I signed up for. We loved each other, we were actually first loves, but I couldn't just take care of everything and anything (be his mom) and also have no sex on top of it. We were simply too young to have gotten married in the first place. Love is not always enough to be able to live with someone the rest of your life.

Its something I won't participate in and I don't want my SO to be into that either.

Yep this makes sense. Totally. A true moral feeling is one that you also do not feel is okay for you to do not just your wife. I think that's completely fair.

I love getting oral. It's my very favorite thing,sexually.

If, upon meeting my husband, he had told me he hates it, it would then be my choice to decide if I wanted to continue the relationship.

If I decided to continue the relationship anyway, based on what I believed to be the truth, then I could be happy in that marriage.

However, if I were to find out that just prior to meeting me, he had licked every woman from here to Ohio, yes, I would probably divorce him.

It would be because he lied, sure. But, mostly, it would be due to the flat out rejection of ME, that would put that nail in the coffin. I would never not wonder what it was about me,and my vagina, that he disliked so much,that he wouldn't go down on me.

It would devastate me. The loss of self esteem would be severe. Also, considering oral is one of the only ways I can orgasm, it would tell me he didn't care about my sexual satisfaction at all.

I really don't understand why some on here don't understand how devastating it would be,to find out your spouse had no problem doing certain things with everyone else, but won't do them with you.

I'm not talking about painful things, or things that involve other people, however.

No one is owed any sex act. But, if you are the one being denied something that was so freely given to people they didn't love, people they didn't commit their life to, then what does that say about how they feel about you?

But, if you are the one being denied something that was so freely given to people they didn't love, people they didn't commit their life to, then what does that say about how they feel about you?

Right or wrong it tells me "everything I need to know" about continuing a relationship with that person.

[This message edited by Rideitout at 11:23 AM, December 6th (Friday)]

But, if you are the one being denied something that was so freely given to people they didn't love, people they didn't commit their life to, then what does that say about how they feel about you?

Right or wrong it tells me "everything I need to know" about continuing a relationship with that person.

100% how I feel about it. My partner doesn't owe me oral, either giving or receiving, but yeah, a solid 'no' on that would be a dealbreaker. I wouldn't have a satisfying sex life, and I'm not going to enter into another relationship like that.

What's so amazing to me about threads like this one, is that even past the point where people can agree on one issue (the wife lied) or even two (people deserve the opportunity to assess compatibility), we still end up with the "fallen woman owing sexual acts whether she enjoys them or not as proof of her love" fallacy. It's a frankly disgusting piece of misogyny every time I see it. It's so disingenuous to reject the Madonna/Whore complex as explanatory, but then to see it fully enacted once a woman has done something which puts her in the "whore" context of that particularly delusional equation.

Women are PEOPLE, and nothing one does or doesn't do transforms her into some kind of sexual vending machine. Full stop.

Chamomile

Women are PEOPLE, and nothing one does or doesn't do transforms her into some kind of sexual vending machine. Full stop.

YES!!!

Yet we've also just seen a female say the same thing about if her H refused her oral but she found out he did it all the time before.

Men are PEOPLE... not sexual vending machines. Happy?

So, if a woman marries a man and they have already established that he doesn't give oral, sorry... but that doesn't change based on anything he might have done before. He tried it, he didn't like it, whatever. If you've married vanilla, you've MARRIED vanilla. No one made you do it. Shotgun weddings aren't a thing anymore, so no one forces anyone to marry a person they don't find sexually acceptable. If you want oral, marry someone who loves giving it. Simple. It's not like premarital sex is unheard of these days. Test drive for compatibility.

And I can just as easily say don't marry a man that you're settling for without telling him in advance.

And my point was that both sexes have people that see that POV. Not that men need defending.

What's so amazing to me about threads like this one, is that even past the point where people can agree on one issue (the wife lied) or even two (people deserve the opportunity to assess compatibility), we still end up with the "fallen woman owing sexual acts whether she enjoys them or not as proof of her love" fallacy. It's a frankly disgusting piece of misogyny every time I see it. It's so disingenuous to reject the Madonna/Whore complex as explanatory, but then to see it fully enacted once a woman has done something which puts her in the "whore" context of that particularly delusional equation.

Women are PEOPLE, and nothing one does or doesn't do transforms her into some kind of sexual vending machine. Full stop.

I guess I don't understand the owed part. It seems to me if you don't owe someone something that makes you uncomfortable and you get to be the arbiter of what that is. Then you can't say someone else owes you continued commitment if they don't feel like they're getting your best effort which they should get to be the arbiter of. Because all I'm seeing is people saying that it would be a deal breaker for some and not others. I haven't seen anyone say that a court should force whatever it is on her because it's owed.

Misogyny, really? The straight men on here are going to put themselves in the what if my wife....position. Like the straight women are going to put themselves in the what if my husband... position. So what about Hellfire's post above, is she also a misogynist?

Murky, I think Chamomile's post was specifically referring to sexual acts.

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.

As far as we know, regarding the OP, there wasn't any "settling" involved on the part of the wife. It's a huge and unmerited assumption that she genuinely enjoyed those acts given the fact that she didn't choose to continue them in her marriage. So, while it's possible that she looked like she was enjoying them in the video recording, it's probable that she wasn't truly , otherwise, she would have brought this behavior into the marriage. I find it very difficult to believe that alcohol (or even drugs) wouldn't have played a role in that kind of situation as well. And as we all know, what a person does when they're inebriated isn't necessarily an indictment on their true preferences.

If anyone "settled", it's the husband. If these acts were important to him, he should have married someone like-minded. It's on him that he didn't.

To be told that yes I did that in every relationship before you, but i denied you, my husband, that would make most any guy feel like shit.

[This message edited by GoldenR at 1:27 PM, December 6th (Friday)]

Yet we've also just seen a female say the same thing about if her H refused her oral but she found out he did it all the time before.

My ex husband had done oral with his ex girlfriend, and wouldn't do it with me. He didn't really like it and didn't want to do it. I found out after we got together. You know what my reaction was? Ok, cool. I didn't take it as some huge rejection of me in anyway. I also didn't force him to do it because he had done it before and now somehow owed it to me.

This overly dramatic, omg I must repulse them because they're different with me sexually than they were with others, is honestly just completely lost on me.

[This message edited by landclark at 1:29 PM, December 6th (Friday)]

To be told that yes I did that in every relationship before you, but i denied you, my husband, that would make most any guy feel like shit.

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?

Here's the thing. I get to decide what I will, and will not accept from my husband. I get to decide whether finding out he licked every woman in the world, except for me, is a deal-breaker for me.

I don't give a shit if you think it's judgmental. I don't give a shit if you think it's slut shaming him. I don't give a shit what you think at all. Because you are not in my marriage.

You can judge me, for judging him, all you want. I get to decide what I want in my life, and what I will, and will not, accept from the person I am married to.

You are totally missing the point, that while I might have thought I was marrying vanilla, if I found out he was anything but vanilla, after we got married, with every other woman he had been with, that would affect me. If it wouldn't affect you, then great. You go on and have a great little life. How it would affect me, is my business. And I'm allowed to have those feelings.

I guess that makes me a misogynist? LOL. Got it.

Guess what? I don't care. What it does make me is human. I don't care about all the little buzzwords going on on this thread. Any spouse, has the right to know their spouses sexual history. They also have the right to decide not to marry them, if they don't like that sexual history. They also get to dedide to divorce them. Because guess what, they are allowed to make decisions based on their well-being, for themselves, without worrying about how it might look to you. You don't get a vote in my marriage.

Let's look at the reason all of us are here. We all thought we were marrying a faithful spouse. Turns out we were wrong, right? So do we have the right to feel we were duped, and decided we want to divorce them, because they were not who we thought they were? Why does that change when it's something sexual? Why does it change, when we find out that our spouse has an extensive sexual history, that they lied to us about before they married us? How is that any different? Deception is deception. We have the right to say nope not for me, I'm out.

Don't like it? Again, you don't get a vote in my life.

[This message edited by HellFire 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?

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%

[This message edited by GoldenR at 1:47 PM, December 6th (Friday)]