The dead bedrooms people, on the other hand, have all my sympathy. There are a lot of reasons why someone might stop being able or wanting to have sex—and you can't always figure that out before marriage, although getting to know the person you're going to marry for at least 2 years helps to mitigate that risk.
The dead bedrooms people, on the other hand, have all my sympathy. There are a lot of reasons why someone might stop being able or wanting to have sex—and you can't always figure that out before marriage, although getting to know the person you're going to marry for at least 2 years helps to mitigate that risk.
But it blows my mind that the rejecting spouse would still insist on monogamy. "I'm not going to meet your sexual needs, AND I won't let you go elsewhere." It's like saying "I don't feel like cooking dinner, therefore, you're not allowed to eat." That's abuse. And some of these people not only refuse sex, but won't even touch their partners, or express any affection. It's a nightmare.
I think the disconnect here between you and me is that I do actually put a lot of value on monogamy/commitment/etc., which might not be something we could come to terms with each other on, because it's a pretty fundamental value to change.
But I also think there's some complexity for the non-putting-out spouse when it's involuntary. Like, OK, you have some hormonal disorder or whatever. There's one aspect where the "abandon monogamy" thing is essentially saying "You are sick - let your husband cheat on you" to a lot of them; not everybody can deprogram decades of 'relationships are monogamous' programming on a dime, even if they want to/should. But there's also an aspect of, like, you are asking them to enter into an open relationship/poly thing in a situation where their spouse is already maximally unsatisfied/resentful/angry or whatever - that's a pretty good recipe for maximizing one's chances of getting left entirely. It's not going to happen that way every time, but I think that fear is valid and I'm not sure we can ignore it.
I'm on your side where monogamy is concerned, RC, but Kayla's point is still valid. If a partner is refusing any physical intimacy while the other wants it, it is a deep failure of consideration, and if there is some physical issue preventing it and they are both still committed to monogamy, she'd better make absolutely sure he knows she understands the sacrifice.
Oh, I definitely agree that it's a horror story for one or both partners, depending on cause. I'm all for acknowledging the "this marriage is not easy but I'm sticking with it" aspects, as well.
And let's say, in a given case, it is a hormonal or other bodily issue (which is not always or necessarily an easy/possible fix). Okay, so the "withholding" person is sick. Why is this different than if the person got in an accident that somehow left them unable to have/enjoy sex? In that scenario, I don't suspect most people's reaction would be, "You have a duty to let your spouse cheat on you."
The dead bedrooms people, on the other hand, have all my sympathy. There are a lot of reasons why someone might stop being able or wanting to have sex—and you can't always figure that out before marriage, although getting to know the person you're going to marry for at least 2 years helps to mitigate that risk.
But it blows my mind that the rejecting spouse would still insist on monogamy. "I'm not going to meet your sexual needs, AND I won't let you go elsewhere." It's like saying "I don't feel like cooking dinner, therefore, you're not allowed to eat." That's abuse. And some of these people not only refuse sex, but won't even touch their partners, or express any affection. It's a nightmare.
I think the disconnect here between you and me is that I do actually put a lot of value on monogamy/commitment/etc., which might not be something we could come to terms with each other on, because it's a pretty fundamental value to change.
But I also think there's some complexity for the non-putting-out spouse when it's involuntary. Like, OK, you have some hormonal disorder or whatever. There's one aspect where the "abandon monogamy" thing is essentially saying "You are sick - let your husband cheat on you" to a lot of them; not everybody can deprogram decades of 'relationships are monogamous' programming on a dime, even if they want to/should. But there's also an aspect of, like, you are asking them to enter into an open relationship/poly thing in a situation where their spouse is already maximally unsatisfied/resentful/angry or whatever - that's a pretty good recipe for maximizing one's chances of getting left entirely. It's not going to happen that way every time, but I think that fear is valid and I'm not sure we can ignore it.
I'm on your side where monogamy is concerned, RC, but Kayla's point is still valid. If a partner is refusing any physical intimacy while the other wants it, it is a deep failure of consideration, and if there is some physical issue preventing it and they are both still committed to monogamy, she'd better make absolutely sure he knows she understands the sacrifice.
Oh, I definitely agree that it's a horror story for one or both partners, depending on cause. I'm all for acknowledging the "this marriage is not easy but I'm sticking with it" aspects, as well.
And let's say, in a given case, it is a hormonal or other bodily issue (which is not always or necessarily an easy/possible fix). Okay, so the "withholding" person is sick. Why is this different than if the person got in an accident that somehow left them unable to have/enjoy sex? In that scenario, I don't suspect most people's reaction would be, "You have a duty to let your spouse cheat on you."