D_Mongo Pubestrimmer
Account Disabled
ha yupp lol its true... something about a 8 inch cut cock and a nice set of abs works good
umm money, thats why i get sucked ; )
There are lots of reasons for infidelity, not all of which are indefensible. And there is no such thing as a homewrecker... a solid relationship can not be wrecked... either the cheater is amoral...
or the spouse is not meeting their mate's needs in some regard.
I have deemed this necessary for this topic. OP literally floored me with this question. I bring back the *facepalm*
http://images.cryhavok.org/d/14126-1/Implied+Facepalm.jpg
I agree that this can be a mitigating factor, but still think it is ultimately the fault of the one who cheats.
ha yupp lol its true... something about a 8 inch cut cock and a nice set of abs works good
For a wife to...use sexual access to manipulate him, is a form of psychological abuse.
After three years without any sex, I formally ended my relationship of 17 years. Three years of trying to win back her affection and desire.
I never cheated on her... but she fully believed I must have because what man will go three years without sex?
Or do you suggest that such a man should just say goodbye to any sexual life whatsoever?
Or, worse... tear apart his family and all they have built together over the issue of some human friction on his dick?
My primary ethical concern is that the couple should be able to openly discuss a lack of sexual intimacy and agree upon a remedy.
Sure. On television.Isn't this fairly common though?
umm money, thats why i get sucked ; )
I can not agree.
For a wife to refuse sexual congress to her man, or to use sexual access to manipulate him, is a form of psychological abuse.
Men have a deep need for physical intimacy... they have a stronger sexual drive than women, in general... and, for men, physical intimacy is a critical component in pair bonding.
For either gender to simply lose interest in sex with their partner, and do nothing about it, is to abandon them, emotionally.
Technically.. in contract law, the spouse who withholds sex is the person at fault for breaking the marriage covenant. If that spouse who can't get any subsequently meets a woman willing to provide what his contractual partner will not... then he/she can not really be in breach of a contract already broken.
After three years without any sex, I formally ended my relationship of 17 years. Three years of trying to win back her affection and desire.
I never cheated on her... but she fully believed I must have because what man will go three years without sex?
In other words... she fully expected and believed that I WOULD cheat, because she understood the just consequences of her refusal to put out.
I did not cheat, because I genuinely loved her and wanted only her...
And because I am the kind of guy who would end one relationship before starting another. But then, I had no children with her... no property to split...
Imagine the plight of a man getting no joy, who does not want to lose access to his children does not want them emotionally devastated... does not want to wreak financial disaster on everyone?
- who still loves his wife, despite her refusals.
There are situations where discretely getting your rocks off are actually the ethical choice. The one that does the least harm to the least number of people.
Or do you suggest that such a man should just say goodbye to any sexual life whatsoever?
Or, worse... tear apart his family and all they have built together over the issue of some human friction on his dick?
Back in the day there was the double standard. Genteel women were raised to dislike sex, ( or pretend to) so that they would stop having it and improve their chances of surviving long enough to make sure their children inherited the family legacy rather than those of some second wife.
The 'double standard' was an accommodation to the needs of both... the wife turned a blind eye to her husband's discreet philandering, and in return, the man would never divorce his wife. (the woman was supposed to remain chaste, but research suggest that many of them had at least one child that was not their husband's and whom he raised unknowingly as his own.)
My primary ethical concern is that the couple should be able to openly discuss a lack of sexual intimacy and agree upon a remedy.
But this is an emotional minefield, and I can have compassion for the fact that it usually is not addressable.