Would You Cheat on a Spouse?

[Dis]

I know there are a lot of people who say sex shouldn't be a priority in a marriage, but they are wrong. Sex is the glue that holds a marriage together.

If a spouse refuses to have sex, you need to find out why. It's not enough of a reason to say he/she doesn't feel like it. You shouldn't deny your spouse that physical closeness.

Worse comes to worse, you should at least let the spouse know that you will have to seek affection elsewhere.

If it's the glue that holds a marriage together, then what good will it do to seek affection elsewhere?

You make it sound like a business arrangement. "I'm sorry, but if you don't see things my way, I'll take my business elsewhere."

Eh?

Are you trying to justify a husband or a wife denying affection to his/her spouse? Unless your husband or wife is treating you horribly or being a bad parent, there should be no reason why you should have sex with him or her.

If you don't behave like a wife or husband, you shouldn't be treated as one.

When you make your vows, sex is implicit. No sex is grounds for divorce.

If those are your grounds for divorce, then get your divorce - FIRST. Don't use sex as a tool by saying "If you don't do give me sex, I'm going to get it elsewhere." and then stay married.

 

[William Joyce]

When you make your vows, sex is implicit. No sex is grounds for divorce.

Yes, some states even codify this. I'd be interested if that was ever put up as grounds in a complaint, 'cause I've never seen it... typically, it's the result of sex-refusal: adultery.

Anyway, I hear a lot of, "just get a divorce instead." BUT divorce is a massively disrputive, expensive, kid-hurting and destructive business. What if the marriage is OK, but the sex is just not even there in any decent form? Isn't the better solution a little satisfaction on the side?

It's definitely morally fraught... but I wonder if the French/Europeans don't have the better approach.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Some people aren't even acting as themselves when they marry in the first place. The terms of the marriage aren't even clear nor sometimes even discussed EXCEPT for one thing----you are to no longer have sex with anyone else. That seems to be crystal clear. ( what sex really is happens to only be known by Bill Clinton.)

Oh no! Lessons from Bill? Frankly, I'd much rather imagine sex between him and Monica than him with Hillary. Now I will go to one Hail Mary.

 

[elvis]

When you make your vows, sex is implicit. No sex is grounds for divorce.

Yes, some states even codify this. I'd be interested if that was ever put up as grounds in a complaint, 'cause I've never seen it... typically, it's the result of sex-refusal: adultery.

Anyway, I hear a lot of, "just get a divorce instead." BUT divorce is a massively disrputive, expensive, kid-hurting and destructive business. What if the marriage is OK, but the sex is just not even there in any decent form? Isn't the better solution a little satisfaction on the side?

It's definitely morally fraught... but I wonder if the French/Europeans don't have the better approach.

This came up in Gone with the Wind.

 

[Said1]

When you make your vows, sex is implicit. No sex is grounds for divorce.

Yes, some states even codify this. I'd be interested if that was ever put up as grounds in a complaint, 'cause I've never seen it... typically, it's the result of sex-refusal: adultery.

Anyway, I hear a lot of, "just get a divorce instead." BUT divorce is a massively disrputive, expensive, kid-hurting and destructive business. What if the marriage is OK, but the sex is just not even there in any decent form? Isn't the better solution a little satisfaction on the side?

It's definitely morally fraught... but I wonder if the French/Europeans don't have the better approach.

given to how hurtful it is, despite the bedroom situation, no. With some exceptions, there is usually a bigger issue at hand. Very common after a baby is born, too.

 

[elvis]

I think sex is usually a barometer for how the marriage is going.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If it's the glue that holds a marriage together, then what good will it do to seek affection elsewhere?

You make it sound like a business arrangement. "I'm sorry, but if you don't see things my way, I'll take my business elsewhere."

Eh?

Are you trying to justify a husband or a wife denying affection to his/her spouse? Unless your husband or wife is treating you horribly or being a bad parent, there should be no reason why you should have sex with him or her.

If you don't behave like a wife or husband, you shouldn't be treated as one.

When you make your vows, sex is implicit. No sex is grounds for divorce.

If those are your grounds for divorce, then get your divorce - FIRST. Don't use sex as a tool by saying "If you don't do give me sex, I'm going to get it elsewhere." and then stay married.

Why go jump into divorce if a meaningful ultimatum might do the trick?

 

[elvis]

Are you trying to justify a husband or a wife denying affection to his/her spouse? Unless your husband or wife is treating you horribly or being a bad parent, there should be no reason why you should have sex with him or her.

If you don't behave like a wife or husband, you shouldn't be treated as one.

When you make your vows, sex is implicit. No sex is grounds for divorce.

If those are your grounds for divorce, then get your divorce - FIRST. Don't use sex as a tool by saying "If you don't do give me sex, I'm going to get it elsewhere." and then stay married.

Why go jump into divorce if a meaningful ultimatum might do the trick?

if you have to give an ultimatum for sex, it's almost like being turned down because her heart isn't in it.

 

[dilloduck]

When you make your vows, sex is implicit. No sex is grounds for divorce.

Yes, some states even codify this. I'd be interested if that was ever put up as grounds in a complaint, 'cause I've never seen it... typically, it's the result of sex-refusal: adultery.

Anyway, I hear a lot of, "just get a divorce instead." BUT divorce is a massively disrputive, expensive, kid-hurting and destructive business. What if the marriage is OK, but the sex is just not even there in any decent form? Isn't the better solution a little satisfaction on the side?

It's definitely morally fraught... but I wonder if the French/Europeans don't have the better approach.

I've never been there--What is their approach ?

 

[PoliticalChic]

When you make your vows, sex is implicit. No sex is grounds for divorce.

Yes, some states even codify this. I'd be interested if that was ever put up as grounds in a complaint, 'cause I've never seen it... typically, it's the result of sex-refusal: adultery.

Anyway, I hear a lot of, "just get a divorce instead." BUT divorce is a massively disrputive, expensive, kid-hurting and destructive business. What if the marriage is OK, but the sex is just not even there in any decent form? Isn't the better solution a little satisfaction on the side?

It's definitely morally fraught... but I wonder if the French/Europeans don't have the better approach.

But the French are very open about their mistresses. Remember when French President Mitterand died, both his wife and mistress were ostensibly present at his funeral?

To me, the solution is simple: just have sex. What is the big deal?

 

[Care4all]

When you make your vows, sex is implicit. No sex is grounds for divorce.

Yes, some states even codify this. I'd be interested if that was ever put up as grounds in a complaint, 'cause I've never seen it... typically, it's the result of sex-refusal: adultery.

Anyway, I hear a lot of, "just get a divorce instead." BUT divorce is a massively disrputive, expensive, kid-hurting and destructive business. What if the marriage is OK, but the sex is just not even there in any decent form? Isn't the better solution a little satisfaction on the side?

It's definitely morally fraught... but I wonder if the French/Europeans don't have the better approach.

I've never been there--What is their approach ?

A wife to bear your children and a mistress on the side for the other stuff...is my understanding....at least in the eyes of the French!!!!

Care

 

[dilloduck]

When you make your vows, sex is implicit. No sex is grounds for divorce.

Yes, some states even codify this. I'd be interested if that was ever put up as grounds in a complaint, 'cause I've never seen it... typically, it's the result of sex-refusal: adultery.

Anyway, I hear a lot of, "just get a divorce instead." BUT divorce is a massively disrputive, expensive, kid-hurting and destructive business. What if the marriage is OK, but the sex is just not even there in any decent form? Isn't the better solution a little satisfaction on the side?

It's definitely morally fraught... but I wonder if the French/Europeans don't have the better approach.

But the French are very open about their mistresses. Remember when French President Mitterand died, both his wife and mistress were ostensibly present at his funeral?

To me, the solution is simple: just have sex. What is the big deal?

Religious injunctions and misplaced priorities.

 

[elvis]

When you make your vows, sex is implicit. No sex is grounds for divorce.

Yes, some states even codify this. I'd be interested if that was ever put up as grounds in a complaint, 'cause I've never seen it... typically, it's the result of sex-refusal: adultery.

Anyway, I hear a lot of, "just get a divorce instead." BUT divorce is a massively disrputive, expensive, kid-hurting and destructive business. What if the marriage is OK, but the sex is just not even there in any decent form? Isn't the better solution a little satisfaction on the side?

It's definitely morally fraught... but I wonder if the French/Europeans don't have the better approach.

But the French are very open about their mistresses. Remember when French President Mitterand died, both his wife and mistress were ostensibly present at his funeral?

To me, the solution is simple: just have sex. What is the big deal?

For some women, the relationship has to be right to be interested.

 

[PoliticalChic]

If those are your grounds for divorce, then get your divorce - FIRST. Don't use sex as a tool by saying "If you don't do give me sex, I'm going to get it elsewhere." and then stay married.

Why go jump into divorce if a meaningful ultimatum might do the trick?

if you have to give an ultimatum for sex, it's almost like being turned down because her heart isn't in it.

Her heart may not be in it, but people can change if they are motivated enough.

 

[dilloduck]

Yes, some states even codify this. I'd be interested if that was ever put up as grounds in a complaint, 'cause I've never seen it... typically, it's the result of sex-refusal: adultery.

Anyway, I hear a lot of, "just get a divorce instead." BUT divorce is a massively disrputive, expensive, kid-hurting and destructive business. What if the marriage is OK, but the sex is just not even there in any decent form? Isn't the better solution a little satisfaction on the side?

It's definitely morally fraught... but I wonder if the French/Europeans don't have the better approach.

I've never been there--What is their approach ?

A wife to bear your children and a mistress on the side for the other stuff...is my understanding....at least in the eyes of the French!!!!

Care

And this is commonly accepted as a norm in France and other parts of Europe ?

 

[elvis]

Why go jump into divorce if a meaningful ultimatum might do the trick?

if you have to give an ultimatum for sex, it's almost like being turned down because her heart isn't in it.

Her heart may not be in it, but people can change if they are motivated enough.

agreed

 

[PoliticalChic]

Yes, some states even codify this. I'd be interested if that was ever put up as grounds in a complaint, 'cause I've never seen it... typically, it's the result of sex-refusal: adultery.

Anyway, I hear a lot of, "just get a divorce instead." BUT divorce is a massively disrputive, expensive, kid-hurting and destructive business. What if the marriage is OK, but the sex is just not even there in any decent form? Isn't the better solution a little satisfaction on the side?

It's definitely morally fraught... but I wonder if the French/Europeans don't have the better approach.

But the French are very open about their mistresses. Remember when French President Mitterand died, both his wife and mistress were ostensibly present at his funeral?

To me, the solution is simple: just have sex. What is the big deal?

Religious injunctions and misplaced priorities.

I think misplace priorities is a good analysis. I've been guilty of that. Thankfully, my husband made it clear that I was not just a mother, but a wife as well.

 

[dilloduck]

Why go jump into divorce if a meaningful ultimatum might do the trick?

if you have to give an ultimatum for sex, it's almost like being turned down because her heart isn't in it.

Her heart may not be in it, but people can change if they are motivated enough.

People can overcome a "cheating spouse" if motivated enough too. I guess Americans are a bit fuzzy on how monogamous relationships are supposed to function.

I have a relationship with my son that would take some real damage if I went fishing without asking him along. SERIOUSLY.
He would be hurt.

 

[elvis]

if you have to give an ultimatum for sex, it's almost like being turned down because her heart isn't in it.

Her heart may not be in it, but people can change if they are motivated enough.

People can overcome a "cheating spouse" if motivated enough too. I guess Americans are a bit fuzzy on how monogamous relationships are supposed to function.

I have a relationship with my son that would take some real damage if I went fishing without asking him along. SERIOUSLY.
He would be hurt.

I MIGHT be able to overcome a cheating spouse if she could assure me it was over and wouldn't happen again.

 

[Againsheila]

When you make your vows, sex is implicit. No sex is grounds for divorce.

Yes, some states even codify this. I'd be interested if that was ever put up as grounds in a complaint, 'cause I've never seen it... typically, it's the result of sex-refusal: adultery.

Anyway, I hear a lot of, "just get a divorce instead." BUT divorce is a massively disrputive, expensive, kid-hurting and destructive business. What if the marriage is OK, but the sex is just not even there in any decent form? Isn't the better solution a little satisfaction on the side?

It's definitely morally fraught... but I wonder if the French/Europeans don't have the better approach.

I have a cousin that divorced her husband on the grounds of "impotency".