# It's not all about sex, is it?



## littlelamb (Aug 13, 2013)

I've been married for 12 years. Ten years ago (after the first child), sex started to become less frequent. Over time it got down to once every few months until eventually it stopped altogether. The last time my wife and I were intimate was over three years ago.

I realize that there are other issues in our relationship, and over the past year we have been working on those. And that side of things IS improving. I'd say that we're pretty happy now, but every time I try to raise the issue of sex, I'm met with the same response...."It's not all about sex, you know", or "Is sex all you ever think about?". 

I gently raised the topic again yesterday (after not mentioning it for the last six months). She seemed genuinely surprised that it was still an issue for me. Once again though, I got met with the "it's not all about sex" argument. I've tried to explain, I've tried to show her that I agree with that statement (which I do!), but to me sex SHOULD be a part of marriage. She says she agrees, and keeps promising that it will happen when things are better.

It just never does.

Is it time to give up? I've been thinking more and more about divorce lately. It's something I don't really want. I love my kids, and I do love my wife. I just want to have the physical side of that love as well. 

Is that too much to ask for? Should I wait and keep hoping that one day she'll decide everything is "better" and she wants sex again? Or throw in the towel, upset everyone, and leave now before I'm too old to start again? I just don't know what to do anymore. 

Btw...I'm 43, she's 41.


----------



## deejov (Sep 24, 2011)

Is there any intimacy between the two of you? Hugs, kissing, cuddles? 
3 years. How have you coped in the past? Did the other issues include any affairs (either of you) or addictions? 

Over the past 6 months, what have you been working on specifically, and what is the "better" she is looking for? (do you know?)


----------



## mineforever (Jan 31, 2013)

Ok its not all about sex...but it is partly about sex! Marriage does include sex, oyherwise your just room mates. If you wanted live with a friend you could have found a buddy to live with and it would be less complicated. If you just wanted a maid you could have hired one of those also....if you wanted a companion you could have bought a pet. You married a wife because she was all of those things companion, friend, helper and lover. Lover is what made her different....she was everything wrapped up in one package!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## littlelamb (Aug 13, 2013)

I try to initiate as much non-sexual intimacy as I can, it seems like she puts up with it though, rather than enjoys it. It's never initiated by her.

I've coped by hoping, I guess. Hoping that it will somehow change. 

Other issues were mainly money (I'm tight with the $$, she's not). I discovered that she'd run up credit card debts that I knew nothing about. We've come to agreement about that now. Paid everything except the mortgage back, and agreed that we both need to help each other where finance is concerned. I need to loosen up a bit, and she needs to save a bit more. She has, and I have.

She can't seem to verbalize what the "better" is. She simply says that it's not something she physically wants right now. She wants it in theory, just not in practice. 

We're spending more time together (without the kids), going out on date nights etc, trying to reconnect and find whatever we've lost.

I'm just feeling more and more confused though.


----------



## littlelamb (Aug 13, 2013)

mineforever said:


> Ok its not all about sex...but it is partly about sex! Marriage does include sex, oyherwise your just room mates. If you wanted live with a friend you could have found a buddy to live with and it would be less complicated. If you just wanted a maid you could have hired one of those also....if you wanted a companion you could have bought a pet. You married a wife because she was all of those things companion, friend, helper and lover. Lover is what made her different....she was everything wrapped up in one package!
> _Posted via Mobile Device_



That's exactly my feelings! It's not everything, but it IS something! She just seems to feel it should be something that happens rarely, if at all. I feel like it's an integral part of a marriage.


----------



## I got this (Feb 25, 2013)

Right and it is partly about sex and its a big part. She is manipulating you. 

I suggest a 180. Go start a new hobby, work out, get some new clothes, read a good book, go do some fun things, be affectionate, take a class, but keep on keeping on pursuing things that make you happy with or without her. 

She will either notice, like it, koin in, find you interesting again or blow it all off in which case she has checked out of the marriage. 

Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result ... do I need to finish ? 

Hence the 180. Mix it up and become a better man. Either way you will imnprove your life for YOU and perhaps a future mate but hopefully your wife and she isn't completely checked out.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

lamb....read a LOT of threads here in this section. Get familiar with people's stories, many of which sound just like yours.

Get used to the idea that yes, she might never change and if you want a fulfilling sex life, it might require a divorce.

Once you really understand these things....you will be armed with more understanding of your own sitch.

By no means am I saying it is hopeless. Because your wife may simply not realize how close to walking out you really are and she might change her tune when she does.


----------



## littlelamb (Aug 13, 2013)

Thank you!

I am and have been reading a LOT on here. And yes, that's what I'm starting to think....I either accept that's the way she is, or I walk away.

We have discussed divorce, but she says she needs me, she wants me as her husband, and I suppose I'm the type of guy that likes to be needed. It's driving me insane right now though.

I do have a couple of hobbies, but they've caused issues too. She said I spent too much time on my car and withdrew from her. Maybe I did, so now I limit it. One morning or afternoon on the weekend for the car, and the rest is family time.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Have you tried counseling yet?

Sometimes, when one spouse suggests counseling, the other spouse suddenly understands the end might be near.

Sounds like you two will need counseling anyway so I'd suggest that right away. OR get an individual counselor to help you devise a game plan.

Read EVERYTHING you can find about sexless marriages, so that you can understand how really COMMON this is. Just understanding that helps a lot (or it helped me to know that, when I was in one).


----------



## littlelamb (Aug 13, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Have you tried counseling yet?
> 
> Sometimes, when one spouse suggests counseling, the other spouse suddenly understands the end might be near.
> 
> ...


I have thought about it, I think go ahead and look into some counseling. Even if it's just for me. I can't seem to resolve it on my own, that's for sure.

Funny thing is, I've never really thought of it as a sexless marriage. Just a dry spell. :scratchhead:

Thank you all so much for your thoughts.


----------



## deejov (Sep 24, 2011)

"When an individual’s external sexual protective boundary is a wall, he\she never responds to a sexual approach, walls off from sexual approaches, acts as if they were not happening, and refuses to be sexual." Same applies for initiating sex.

I agree with attempting to make some changes. 
Slight disclaimer that after 3 years, yeah things have been turned off, and it takes awhile to get used to even being comfortable with being that intimate with someone. 

You are right, it is an integral part of marriage. She just doesn't KNOW that, yet. Being sexual has not given her that opinion. Yet. So try to show it to her. By that I mean... some women do "get" that having sex makes things better in the relationship. You are closer, fight less, and it's fun. It's something you want to do, there is a reward to it, and it becomes an integral part of maintaining closeness.

Don't have a quick fix for that. It's personal in every case. If, big if, she is even willing to let you get closer to her, she might come around to the same opinion.

Assuming you have \ going to read other threads...as it will be suggested that she might just not have a desire for you. (stepping out?). It should be ruled out, if there are signs there. Just sayin.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

I think you are the one that needs convincing first. Being with someone so long telling you that what you feel is not important makes the average person doubt their own perceptions. 

You said that things have gotten better. was that with the help of a MC? if so, was the subject of sex ever discussed? 

I thnk you need assurance that your sexual feelings are normal. Then you can take a more self-assured approach with your wife. 

It may help to get the discussion with your wife off the ground by asking her why she thinks sex should not be important to you. Maybe talk about your future dreams, what you envision in the years to come Vs what she does. 

If your future dreams are incompatible, you can you both compromise or peruse your dreams separately. 

Hopefully, Simply Amorous will find this thread and comment. She is a wonderful source of reading material and wisdom. if she does not pipe in, then find her threads or PM her. 

It's important that you be convinced that you are a normal man.


----------



## littlelamb (Aug 13, 2013)

deejov said:


> "When an individual’s external sexual protective boundary is a wall, he\she never responds to a sexual approach, walls off from sexual approaches, acts as if they were not happening, and refuses to be sexual." Same applies for initiating sex.
> 
> I agree with attempting to make some changes.
> Slight disclaimer that after 3 years, yeah things have been turned off, and it takes awhile to get used to even being comfortable with being that intimate with someone.
> ...



I honestly don't think she's going elsewhere. We live in a small town, and we know where each other is pretty much all the time. And it's been going on since before we moved here. Anything is possible, but in our case I doubt it.

I agree that even if it happens now, after three years it's bound to be a little awkward. I'm more than happy to not rush her and let things go at a pace she's comfortable with. I'd be happy just to really know that it was something she cares about and is prepared to work at, rather than hearing the words and not seeing the actions match those words.

Thank you.


----------



## Zookeepertomany (Jun 27, 2013)

I wish you both luck and hope you both can fix this. It can be fixed.

Hypoactive sexual desire disorder - children, causes, DSM, functioning, therapy, adults, drug, examples
Sexual aversion disorder - children, causes, DSM, effects, drug, person, people, used


----------



## brokenbythis (Aug 21, 2011)

You're marriage is in a real bad place my friend. Get professional help now...


----------



## Theseus (Feb 22, 2013)

littlelamb said:


> She says she agrees, and keeps promising that it will happen when things are better.
> 
> It just never does.



Maybe it's time to ask the question: why do things need to get better to have sex? Won't sex also make things better by itself?

When I was in high school my GF and I had sex a lot. Like all the time. Like every time we saw each other. And this was in spite of the conditions never being ideal with curfews, homework, etc. We had no stable place for sex, were too young to get a hotel room, and had no money anyway even if we could. We had sex in my car, we had sex in each other's bedrooms, but had to sneak around avoiding both our parents. 

What is my point? The point is, in spite of all those difficulties, we still went at it like rabbits, because we wanted it so badly. That's what it looks like when people really want sex.

Maybe it's time to tell your wife that it's pretty obvious she doesn't want it.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

Basically the only way to fix it is by showing her you've got the balls to walk. You've got to start taking steps to divorce. Your words don't match your actions, and she's only ever going to believe your actions. It's not a problem after all. 3 years! And you're still there. What does that tell her?


----------



## barbados (Aug 30, 2012)

littlelamb said:


> We have discussed divorce, *but she says she needs me, she wants me as her husband, and I suppose I'm the type of guy that likes to be needed. * It's driving me insane right now though.


She needs you as a Beta Male provider, which is what she sees you as, not as a partner or a lover. Therefore this will not end.

And you being a "type of guy that likes to be needed" just reinforces this.

Sorry but 3 years ?? Would not rule out that she is cheating.


----------



## MissScarlett (May 22, 2013)

Sex may not be everything in a marriage - but its the only thing that defines marriage from other familial relationships and from other relationships in general.

I get so angry when I hear these stories - and there are so many here. I get so angry at these wives and husbands who swear to nurture and love a person and make them the most important person in their lives - and then blatantly neglect that person.

By the confines of marriage you are not allowed sexual activity except for with one person - and if that person shuts you down you are living as a monk for the rest of your life. Im pretty sure if you had wanted a celibate life you could have managed to get one with a lot less trouble.

I am the same age as you. The situation you are in is not normal and its not justifiable. Its wrong. Its irresponsible. I'm sorry you find yourself in this neglectful situation. Who would have the nerve to be so patronizing - oh sex isn't everything - after three ****ing years!


----------



## MissScarlett (May 22, 2013)

I seriously doubt she is cheating. When a woman gets turned off to sex she can go forever like that. In my opinion.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Make her life a bit, ehem, more interesting. At some point she'll get the message. Whether she'll do anything about it is another story but at least you tried. 

And, whatever you do, do not fall for the 'puppy eyes' sex to keep you quiet variety. Establish measurable conditions that you'll participate if X, Y, and Z happen. Else, continue detaching.


----------



## Entropy3000 (May 11, 2011)

littlelamb said:


> I've been married for 12 years. Ten years ago (after the first child), sex started to become less frequent. Over time it got down to once every few months until eventually it stopped altogether. The last time my wife and I were intimate was over three years ago.
> 
> I realize that there are other issues in our relationship, and over the past year we have been working on those. And that side of things IS improving. I'd say that we're pretty happy now, but every time I try to raise the issue of sex, I'm met with the same response...."It's not all about sex, you know", or "Is sex all you ever think about?".
> 
> ...


No sex = no marriage.

My wife may very well be my best friend. But I dod not marry her because of that.

Her are my priorities. They all matter. But without #1 the other just do not add up to being married.

1) Her exclusive lover
2) Her best male friend
3) Her husband

Oh and 3 years is way way way too long. But it is NOT just three years. You tapered off to three years of no love. Yes i said no love. Because for a man there is no connection and no love without sex. All the other love expressions add up to zilch if there is no love. No in love.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

Find a marriage counselor who is also a sex therapist. 

Get the book "His Needs, Her Needs" both of you read it. It talks about the importance of sex in marriage along with a lot of other things.


----------



## Hicks (Jan 14, 2011)

Divorce is a process.
Your wife is bs'ing you and manipulating you. It's like stockholm syndrome. She says someing completely ridiculous and you belive it.

Divorce is a process. You can start that process and make it clear that she has the choice to act as a wife and end the process. Every day as part of the process, your wife will have to decide if a sexual marriage with the man she wants as her husband is better than being single. Going through that process, and making it clear to her that she has a choice to end it by becoming sexual with you... At the end of this process if it comes to completion you will know that it was unfixable. If it does not go to completion, you will find out it was fixable.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Three years! Are you kidding me?

Don't give her one more penny until she starts having sex with you.
Stop cleaning up after yourself until she starts having sex with you.
If necessary, refuse to shower until she starts having sex with you.

That's just a start. No way would I put up with that type of treatment.


----------



## nogutsnoglory (Jan 17, 2013)

littlelamb said:


> I have thought about it, I think go ahead and look into some counseling. Even if it's just for me. I can't seem to resolve it on my own, that's for sure.
> 
> Funny thing is, I've never really thought of it as a sexless marriage. Just a dry spell. :scratchhead:
> 
> Thank you all so much for your thoughts.


Read no more MR. Nice Guy immediately.

Stop giving her what she wants all the time and allow her to shut you down cold and try to act like a victim every time you ask for sex from her.
This is ridiculous and if she will not see it as such and look toward repair then it is time to file for divorce and go find a healthy partner to enjoy life with.


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

littlelamb said:


> I've coped by hoping, I guess. Hoping that it will somehow change.


How's that working out for you? My dad used to say, "Wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one fills up faster."



> She can't seem to verbalize what the "better" is. She simply says that it's not something she physically wants right now.


So, she has sentenced you to a life of celibacy until things get "better," which she won't give you specifics on. The reason she won't give you specifics is that you might meet them. If she told you that she would start having sex after the mortgage is paid off, you might actually pay off the mortgage and expect sex. If she told you that "better" meant after you lost 20 pounds, you might actually lose the weight and expect sex. As it is, she can just say, "Not now," and you will accept that. So, you have to stop accepting that.

Usually, when wives stop wanting sex, they just stop wanting sex with their husbands. They usually don't become completely asexual. They can get turned on by other men. They can masturbate. They can have affairs. But they just don't want sex with their husbands. Their husbands don't turn them on anymore.

I recommend you go to Married Man Sex Life | How to have the marriage you thought you were going to have. By which I mean doing it like rabbits. and read up.


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Your needs, including the need to have sex with your wife, are just as important as hers. All of these responses have been smack on the money...except not showering until she agrees to sex...Umm that will get you no where FAST!


----------



## lifeistooshort (Mar 17, 2013)

Sex isn't everything, until it sucks or disappears.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## brokenhearted118 (Jan 31, 2013)

No sex in your marriage for 3 years? Oh my!! I suggest you show her the door and tell her to not let the door hit her where the good lord split her. (By the way...That split is there for a reason!) Good luck. I hope you get this resolved ASAP or move on. 3 years of a sexless marriage is unacceptable. I'm scratching my head wondering how you survived.


----------



## Sanity (Mar 7, 2011)

littlelamb said:


> Thank you!
> 
> I am and have been reading a LOT on here. And yes, that's what I'm starting to think....I either accept that's the way she is, or I walk away.
> 
> ...



So she needs your paycheck or YOU? Time to sit her down and ask her if she is willing to meet your sexual needs and stop with this "Its not all about sex" BS. Be clear and to the point.


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

Sanity said:


> So she needs your paycheck or YOU? Time to sit her down and ask her if she is willing to meet your sexual needs and stop with this "Its not all about sex" BS. Be clear and to the point.


When we boil it down to this particular nitty-gritty... The answer to this could be so disheartening, or you could continue on disrespecting yourself.


----------



## ladybird (Jun 16, 2010)

There are a ton of stories just like yours OP.. I can't offer any advice, i can't even fix my own marriage =(


----------



## MaritimeGuy (Jul 28, 2012)

Life isn't all about eating either...but try doing without for an extended period of time and see what happens. 

From what I've read when sex in a marriage is good it accounts for 10% of the issues in that marriage...when it's bad it accounts for 90%.


----------



## ClimbingTheWalls (Feb 16, 2013)

I did a 3 1/2 year stint of no sex, and before then it had long dwindled to annually at best.

Eventually I threatened to leave (and meant it) and that was the wake up call my husband needed to do something about it.

In the end, however well my husband and I got along the lack of sex and intimacy started eating into the rest of the relationship and poisoning it.

After 3 years, and discussions on the subject, if it hasn't got better, I don't think it will without drastic action.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

wilderness said: "Stop cleaning up after yourself until she starts having sex with you."


Why in the world would anyone stop cleaning up after THEMSELVES to coerce sex out of their spouse? Sheesh.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> wilderness said: "Stop cleaning up after yourself until she starts having sex with you."
> 
> 
> Why in the world would anyone stop cleaning up after THEMSELVES to coerce sex out of their spouse? Sheesh.


Well the point is that this woman is not living up to her obligations as a wife. If she isn't obligated to have sex, he also isn't obligated to do things like clean up, fix things, pay bills, go to work, etc..

I used the example of cleaning up after himself, because most men don't require the same level of order and cleanliness in a home that women do. Personally, I don't like dirty, but I can definitely ignore clutter better than most women. I also will never make the bed unless I get married again. So if my wife was refusing sex, I wouldn't be making the bed, either.

Please understand I've never had to contend with a sex starved relationship. I honestly believe a big reason for this is that I let it known up front to any woman that I date that I would never put up with it.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

It is still really weird to think that it is his WIFE's duty to "clean up after him" at all. Why would that be an assumption?


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

ClimbingTheWalls said:


> I did a 3 1/2 year stint of no sex, and before then it had long dwindled to annually at best.
> 
> Eventually I threatened to leave (and meant it) and that was the wake up call my husband needed to do something about it.
> 
> ...


What's really messed up, is simply the addition of sex alone greases so many auxilarry wheels in your relationship and your life.


----------



## SadSamIAm (Oct 29, 2010)

wilderness said:


> Please understand I've never had to contend with a sex starved relationship. I honestly believe a big reason for this is that I let it known up front to any woman that I date that I would never put up with it.



I think this is key. If you put up with it, you are giving approval to being rejected. 

You have to make it very clear that sex at least once a week is a requirement in a marriage. That less than that equates to a bad marriage. 

The discussion has to change from "all you want is sex" and making you feel inadequate to wanting sex is normal and not wanting is inadequate.


----------



## Fozzy (Jul 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife's suggestion of counseling I think is a minimum at this point. If you've already talked about divorce, and that STILL didn't change anything, she either:

A) Still ranks sex as worse than divorce.
or
B) Is convinced you won't follow through, and doesn't feel the need to fix anything because of it.

I'm on a pretty dry spell myself, but not anything like 3 years. I'd give her one chance to agree to fix this issue through professional help (and i'd make the professional part a hard stipulation) or I'd start divorce proceedings, and be prepared to follow through. That might be the wake-up call she needs. If that still doesn't wake her up, then it's time to get on with your life without her.

Good luck friend.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> It is still really weird to think that it is his WIFE's duty to "clean up after him" at all. Why would that be an assumption?


If she is working outside the house, no. But if she's staying home...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

If she's staying at home, the husband has no responsibility to clean up after HIMSELF? Bull crap. 

But sure....stop cleaning up after YOURSELF, that will make a wife want sex. Knock yourself out, make sure to report about how that went down.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

My wife works outside the house but rest assured if I were the only wage earner I would not expect to move one fingertip around the house... 

And that's from an enlightened European..

As it is she works monstrous hours from home but a lot of it is busy work around the house while I'm gone during the day and actual work til 10 at night every night to minimize potential couple or family time...


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> It is still really weird to think that it is his WIFE's duty to "clean up after him" at all. Why would that be an assumption?


I don't make that assumption. 
I make the assumption that it is the husband's responsibility to clean up after himself.

However, if the wife feels that it is not her responsibility to have sex with her husband, because it is uncomfortable for her, I don't think it's a big leap to also conclude that she should have no problem with the husband not doing things that are also uncomfortable for him.

So this is what I would do (and obviously I'm speaking only after the train has crashed into the building, which it has in this particular thread):

I'm not comfortable making the bed, because I don't like making a bed for a wife that won't have sex with me.
(totally true, btw, I don't like making the bed)

I'm not comfortable paying your credit card bill (or pick whatever bill you don't feel like paying), because I don't like paying credit card bills for a wife that won't have sex with me.

I'm not comfortable picking up the newspaper off the coffee table after I'm done with it, because I don't like picking up the newspaper for a wife that won't have sex with me.

I'm not comfortable staying home tonight, because I would rather go to the bar with the boyz.

etc etc etc


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

john said: "My wife works outside the house but rest assured if I were the only wage earner I would not expect to move one fingertip around the house... 

And that's from an enlightened European.."


You would not expect to move one fingertip around the house if your wife didn't work, huh? Again...that's bull crap. There is NO SAHM or SAHW anywhere who does literally everything and who cleans up after her husband's specific messes EVERY time.

What a fantasy land that would be! How sexy for those wives to get to clean up after EVERY single mess their husband made....just because she "doesn't contribute money". Yep. That's hot.

Wilderness....I totally get your POINT....MY point is that NONE of those strategies make you SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE TO YOUR WIFE.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> Wilderness....I totally get your POINT....MY point is that NONE of those strategies make you SEXUALLY ATTRACTIVE TO YOUR WIFE.


Well neither do these other strategies, based on most of these threads! It seems like these threads are all the same. Many of these men put up with no sex for years and years which I think it is insane. The way I look at it is, at least if the wife isn't going to do what she doesn't feel like doing in the marriage- neither am I.

It's like the movie Office Space- Jennifer Aniston asks the main character what he's going to do about bills...
Him: "I've never really liked paying bills. I'm just not going to pay them anymore."


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

The only thing that actually works in these situations is clear, honest communication. Passive agressive crap will just get you passive agressive crap behavior in return.

Communication in the form of: "this will end in divorce eventually if we don't get on the same page with sex". And then holding TO THAT no matter what happens.

But sure...try just being passive agressive first. That will waste more time and cause more hard feelings.

"Men putting up with this" have only themselves to ask why they are putting up with it. No one has a gun to their head in marriage.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

In a happy marriage where the wife stays home I would have no problem helping out. 

The operative word here is happy.

Maybe my view of SAHM's is tainted by my wealthy neighbors whose SAHM'S have nannies, maids, lawn service and the such... But I would not expect to help much, if at all, if my wife decided to not participate fully in the marriage (ie LD).

There's a huge difference between marriage and room and board.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> The only thing that actually works in these situations is clear, honest communication. Passive agressive crap will just get you passive agressive crap behavior in return.
> 
> Communication in the form of: "this will end in divorce eventually if we don't get on the same page with sex". And then holding TO THAT no matter what happens.
> 
> ...


It's not passive aggressive to do what I suggested. Not at all. I'd be upfront about it to the fullest.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

You claim is it not passive agressive to do these things:

_I'm not comfortable making the bed, because I don't like making a bed for a wife that won't have sex with me.
(totally true, btw, I don't like making the bed)

I'm not comfortable paying your credit card bill (or pick whatever bill you don't feel like paying), because I don't like paying credit card bills for a wife that won't have sex with me.

I'm not comfortable picking up the newspaper off the coffee table after I'm done with it, because I don't like picking up the newspaper for a wife that won't have sex with me.

I'm not comfortable staying home tonight, because I would rather go to the bar with the boyz._


(end quote)

Yet, what would really need to be said is:

*"This marriage is going to end in divorce if we don't get on the same page regarding sex."*


How is it NOT passive agressive to do a "tit for tat" with home chores, when the TRUTH of what needs to be said is as simple as the statement I made above?


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

What needs to be said already HAS been said. Not difficult to connect the dots.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

This OP did not indicate that he EVER said what HAS to be said, as in "This marriage is going to end in divorce if we don't get on the same page regarding sex."


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

And besides....the next step would be separation, not passive agressive chore withholding.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

So withholding chores is PA but withholding sex is not? 

I am confident both partners know the tit for tat game. That's what SLA's are there for, implied or otherwise.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> And besides....the next step would be separation, not passive agressive chore withholding.


No way. I totally disagree that next step would be separation. That doesn't benefit most men, it actually harms them as there are 2 sets of expenses to contend with. I'd much rather just live in the same house and do my own thing then separate.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

john...Do you (the sexless husband) just want to wallow in misery about the situation forever, endlessly going back and forth with "punishments", withholding needs being met, and passive agressive nonsense?

Or do you actually WANT to LEAVE a marriage that isn't meeting your needs?


Oh that's right....you aren't actually going to leave. Then sure! By all means...stay together and torture each other for years...."for the children".



wilderness....Same thing to your point. Sure, if a husband has no intention of actually divorcing over the sexlessness, then yeah just stay in the home and continue to torture each other.

So sexy.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> john...Do you (the sexless husband) just want to wallow in misery about the situation forever, endlessly going back and forth with "punishments", withholding needs being met, and passive agressive nonsense?
> 
> Or do you actually WANT to LEAVE a marriage that isn't meeting your needs?
> 
> ...


Well, the point I'm trying to make (and probably doing a lousy job), is that it's not about torture of the other person, it's about worrying about oneself. 
For example, I'm not a fan of expensive furniture. I've always believed it's a waste of money. But I love nice television sets, because I like to watch sports. So if I was in the situation of OP, I would sell the nice furniture if we had it, buy used cheap replacements, and buy myself one of those new 3D tvs.

Also, I would stop giving spending money to my wife, and save up for a new Golden Tee video game, which I enjoy.


----------



## Wiserforit (Dec 27, 2012)

So the operation was successful. I mean where your balls were removed, and "hope" was implanted in their place. 

Fortunately, that operation is reversible and you'll find that it attracts women. If they see that they can feed you poop while telling you it is ice cream, they have no respect for you. 

Curious that your name here is littlelamb. A guy who picks out a name like "Bonecrusher" is probably not going to wait three years without sex.


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

OP, it won't get better. She's content without sex, and unless you can be too, the marriage is an empty shell if there's no intimacy. I have more affectionate platonic friends!

Lack of sex, intimacy, and affection - along with other problems - was the basis for divorcing my ex. There is happiness to be found out there, even if it means being alone where there is no one else holding you back.

Yes, there is more to marriage, but without mutuality on this subject, there is no marriage IMO.


----------



## TiggyBlue (Jul 29, 2012)

Has she had her hormones checked?


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

this kind of disrespect goes way way deeper than any hormone issue. It's long past time to put out or get out. They'll both be better off out of a dead relationship.


----------



## TiggyBlue (Jul 29, 2012)

Better place to start than selling all the furniture for a 3D tv IMO.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

2 1/2 years ago I'd agree with you. But it's been over 3 years. The only thing left to do now is call the lawyers to finalize what the reality already is. Op's life is wasting fast.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

I don't think most women realize what a truly horrible deal divorce is for most men.


----------



## MissScarlett (May 22, 2013)

I don't think most women realize how much they deserve to be divorced. (Not to generalize of course.)


----------



## littlelamb (Aug 13, 2013)

Thank you all so much! This has certainly given me plenty to think about.

I think I've known that divorce is the only way to solve my situation for a while, I was really wanted to avoid it if possible. If it was just me and her then I would've left years ago, but my kids are my world (my little lambs  ) and the thought of not seeing them every day just kills me.

She read me a list last night of what she wanted, and asked me to do the same. One thing struck me about this....her list was full of possessions....new car, big holiday, maybe a new house in a few years. Mine was things like more time as a family, more fun together, and yes...sex! 

I've booked myself into a counselor, she won't join me...says it's between us and no one else. 

But I do think the writing is on the wall. I'm getting so angry, so frustrated, so down on myself about all this. I feel like I can't do anymore to make her happy.

Thank you all so much, I've been hunting round the net for ages for a place like this. Sometimes it helps to know that I'm not some crazed sex maniac. That's what I feel she thinks I am!!

Thanks again!!
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

So you still can't pull the trigger? You're still showing with your actions that its all ok with you. Well, you can lead a horse to water....

Good luck.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

littlelamb said:


> Thank you all so much! This has certainly given me plenty to think about.
> 
> I think I've known that divorce is the only way to solve my situation for a while, I was really wanted to avoid it if possible. If it was just me and her then I would've left years ago, but my kids are my world (my little lambs  ) and the thought of not seeing them every day just kills me.
> 
> ...


At least if you gave those to a high priced escort, you'd get sex in return, and hell, she might even swallow


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> john...Do you (the sexless husband) just want to wallow in misery about the situation forever, endlessly going back and forth with "punishments", withholding needs being met, and passive agressive nonsense?
> 
> Or do you actually WANT to LEAVE a marriage that isn't meeting your needs?
> 
> ...


There are some things more important than sex, hard as it may seem to believe. 

At this point all I need is another 10 years of dual income to cover around half a million dollars worth of college tuitions in the next decade. While there are cheaper options available, I would be doing my kids a disservice. My parents worked very hard to put me thru college in the US so I guess I'm just carrying the torch. I could take my friends' approach, pop five kids and pray for scholarships at the obvious schools but that's not me. 

I figure 25 good and 15 bad years is still well above the .500 territory; Ty Cobb was considered awesome at .366... 

There's also the issue of abandoning someone with BPD. Sort of pick up the cardboard box with the kittens abandoned in the parking lot type situation. 

Finally, while I'm not a behavioral or clinical psychologist I am intrigued by the low level functions in play here applicable to my own branch. Just like watching my girls grow was an incredible experience, this, too, is one. Maybe I should have chosen clinical instead of cognitive psych ...

Walking out is a great option and I almost did it five years ago. That is where the Rapture started. Nothing better to convince even the most rabid individual that you mean business than to casually prepare the paperwork on the dining table.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

wilderness said:


> I don't think most women realize what a truly horrible deal divorce is for most men.


It's not a good deal for either side, and depending on one's age etc the next relationship may not be much better.

Heck, there's this vivacious 50 year old lady that has worked in my department for a decade. During this time she buried two husbands and married for the third time. Nothing more uplifting than hearing her flirt with the interns two weeks after #2 bought the proverbial farm...


----------



## the guy (Aug 3, 2010)

Yes it is all about sex! IT'S THE GLUE IMHO!

Someday your old lady might screw around on you and her excuse will be "we didn't have enough sex" and you will be like "WTF"

or

Someday your old lady will walk a way cuz she is done being roommates, and has found someone else to emotionally meet her needs and before it get physical she want to be honest and leave you.

or 

Someday your wife will meet a girl friend that is more attractive then you and you loss your old lady to the other team.


My point is before this bull crap happens make your boundaries and state them clearly. Stop getting all this fitness test bull crap from your old lady. Needs need to be met...on both sides !!!! RIGHT????

You just have to communicate...cuz so often there a lot of virginas out there that don't have the balls to make a statement and stick by a statement for better of for worse and end up causing more damage by sticking around and cheating then manning up and bailing.

At the end of the day chick like confident men and you chick sees your confidence go lower and lower as she turns you into a beta.

Not saying you have to be a complete @sshole...just telling her like it is with out worring about lossing a women who gives you no sex cuz she is going to lose a man that wants sex.....

Its funny how chicks act when you start standing up for your self.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

littlelamb said:


> She read me a list last night of what she wanted, and asked me to do the same. One thing struck me about this....her list was full of possessions....new car, big holiday, maybe a new house in a few years. Mine was things like more time as a family, more fun together, and yes...sex!


Have you read “His Needs, Her Needs” yet? It sounds like her ‘needs’ list is in dire need of refinement (or reworking). 


littlelamb said:


> I've booked myself into a counselor, she won't join me...says it's between us and no one else.


Yep, she wants it kept between the two of you because this way she can continue to abuse you and manipulate you. She does not want anything to change.. has you right were she wants you. Or at least she thinks she has you right where she wants you.


littlelamb said:


> But I do think the writing is on the wall. I'm getting so angry, so frustrated, so down on myself about all this. I feel like I can't do anymore to make her happy.


Start taking care of yourself and prepare for divorce. 
I have not read a lot of the thread so forgive me if this has been covered. What are you doing to prepare for divorce? You might want to see an attorney and start planning.



littlelamb said:


> Thank you all so much, I've been hunting round the net for ages for a place like this. Sometimes it helps to know that I'm not some crazed sex maniac. That's what I feel she thinks I am!!
> 
> Thanks again!!


No you are not a crazed sex maniac. You are a normal human. Many consider it emotional abuse to withhold sex often or for a long period of time. Have lived through it, I think it is as it does terrible things to a person.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

wilderness said:


> Well the point is that this woman is not living up to her obligations as a wife. If she isn't obligated to have sex, he also isn't obligated to do things like clean up, fix things, pay bills, go to work, etc..
> 
> I used the example of cleaning up after himself, because most men don't require the same level of order and cleanliness in a home that women do. Personally, I don't like dirty, but I can definitely ignore clutter better than most women. I also will never make the bed unless I get married again. So if my wife was refusing sex, I wouldn't be making the bed, either.
> 
> Please understand I've never had to contend with a sex starved relationship. I honestly believe a big reason for this is that I let it known up front to any woman that I date that I would never put up with it.


Please don't do this under any circumstances. 

I am speaking as a woman. I would instantly lose repect for a man who would do this in response to conflict. It would seem childish and petty.

That will not get the sexual juices flowing in the average woman. It is more likely that the dirty clothes will accumulate in a pile until you ran out. Then what's your next move? 

You have to think several moves ahead and remember what you want as an endpoint. You may have said this in jest but if you seriously think this is ok, I wanted to let you know that it is more likely than not to fail.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

My ole' lady would not mess with me if Brad Pitt, Harrison Ford, and Anderson Cooper walked into her home office naked and panting (I know I know we did not have the heart to break it to her about Anderson yet )

If you have ever seen the movie "G-Force" remember the scene where the guinea pig agents leave the hamster's cage and the hamster is so elated it is once again alone it is spread eagle on the cage litter (bedding) doing snow angels. 

My girls and I saw the movie in 2009 and they both turned to me when they saw the hamster doing snow angels and said in unison "that's Mom!!!"


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

john117 said:


> My ole' lady would not mess with me if Brad Pitt, Harrison Ford, and Anderson Cooper walked into her home office naked and panting (I know I know we did not have the heart to break it to her about Anderson yet )
> 
> If you have ever seen the movie "G-Force" remember the scene where the guinea pig agents leave the hamster's cage and the hamster is so elated it is once again alone it is spread eagle on the cage litter (bedding) doing snow angels.
> 
> My girls and I saw the movie in 2009 and they both turned to me when they saw the hamster doing snow angels and said in unison "that's Mom!!!"


John I don't understand. Why did they think that?

I don't think she would be upset about Anderson.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Ah, Catherine, you must not have had hamsters ever. Hamsters and Chinchillas are solitary animals that are happy when alone. The same for my wife. She is just not a social person. Very few friends, in general does not get along with others very well, does not read people well, and so on. My older daughter is a bit like her, my younger one is pretty much like me, very sociable. 

The lack of social skills is part of a more general line of defense of not opening up. That's why even therapy is a waste of time with her. She participated in a few 'family' sessions when my older one did therapy for 3 years and the therapist basically told us it's a lost cause, hard as it may sound to believe. 

It is bewildering because fundamentally she's a very simple person, very predictable. When your 7 year old makes a game of predicting mom's behavior in any social or commercial situation and is mostly right, then you know you're in trouble. 

She eventually found out about Anderson Cooper and was not very happy .


----------



## CuddleBug (Nov 26, 2012)

littlelamb said:


> I've been married for 12 years. Ten years ago (after the first child), sex started to become less frequent. Over time it got down to once every few months until eventually it stopped altogether. The last time my wife and I were intimate was over three years ago.
> 
> I realize that there are other issues in our relationship, and over the past year we have been working on those. And that side of things IS improving. I'd say that we're pretty happy now, but every time I try to raise the issue of sex, I'm met with the same response...."It's not all about sex, you know", or "Is sex all you ever think about?".
> 
> ...



Could be after having the kids, her hormones have changed and she needs to see a Dr. and get meds.

Menopause?

If she always gives you the, you want sex again?, or all you want is sex, etc.? yet you haven't had sex much in 3 years?!

She might be seeing someone else.

Give her a final ultimatum. Marriage counseling and see the Dr., and if that does nothing on her end, then.....divorce her already. You will find another woman that actually loves sex, and is adventurous and with you. Being in a relationship or marriage with a LD to no sex wife, is crap and move on. She is using you are her financial safety cushion and nothing more.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> Please don't do this under any circumstances.
> 
> I am speaking as a woman. I would instantly lose repect for a man who would do this in response to conflict. It would seem childish and petty.
> 
> ...


What difference does it make whether she loses respect for the guy or not? He hasn't had sex for _years._
And this woman has no job, all separation is likely to do is cause OP to live like a slave to alimony and child support payments. Plus I doubt she will voluntarily leave, so he'll lose his home, too.

If anything, I'd be more severe in my actions. Try to get fired or quit my job and be out of work for 3-5 years before divorcing to limit the economic damage. Also, totally cut her off from all money and try to get her working. The strategy of separation or divorce will hurt him much more than it will hurt her.


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

wilderness said:


> What difference does it make whether she loses respect for the guy or not? He hasn't had sex for _years._
> And this woman has no job, all separation is likely to do is cause OP to live like a slave to alimony and child support payments. Plus I doubt she will voluntarily leave, so he'll lose his home, too.
> 
> If anything, I'd be more severe in my actions. Try to get fired or quit my job and be out of work for 3-5 years before divorcing to limit the economic damage. Also, totally cut her off from all money and try to get her working. The strategy of separation or divorce will hurt him much more than it will hurt her.


Passive Agressive 101
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Wilderness said: "If anything, I'd be more severe in my actions. Try to get fired or quit my job and be out of work for 3-5 years before divorcing to limit the economic damage. Also, totally cut her off from all money and try to get her working. The strategy of separation or divorce will hurt him much more than it will hurt her."


HOW could THIS strategy be BETTER than a divorce or separation? :scratchhead:

You're saying.....quit your job, stop picking up after yourself, "make" your wife go back to work....but just still stay there in the painful, awful marriage you created...because DIVORCE would somehow be WORSE?

I do realize that many men here would rather do this than actually go through the pain and cost of a divorce. I don't know why they would do this. All I can figure is that they just aren't that sexual. Because if they were, they wouldn't willingly stay in a sexless marriage.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Faithful Wife said:


> Wilderness said: "If anything, I'd be more severe in my actions. Try to get fired or quit my job and be out of work for 3-5 years before divorcing to limit the economic damage. Also, totally cut her off from all money and try to get her working. The strategy of separation or divorce will hurt him much more than it will hurt her."
> 
> 
> HOW could THIS strategy be BETTER than a divorce or separation? :scratchhead:
> ...


Divorce is often very financially devistating to men...even more so than the purposeful sabotage being talked about here. Men are also very likely to have contact with their kids cut dramatically. Divorce often negatively affects men in more aspects than it does women.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

samyeagar....I am divorced myself. My parents were divorced. My current husband and my ex-h were both divorced once before I met them. I worked for several years for a divorce attorney.

I know what happens. I have seen every type of divorce. I don't feel any worse for the women who end up divorced than I do for the men or the children...*divorce sucks for everyone*.

But you know what?

There is life after divorce and if someone of either sex cares about having a sex life....they will divorce rather than stay in a pit of hell with a partner who isn't into them...further damaging their children and giving them a horrible example of what they can expect in their own marriages when they are grown. For anyone who believes it is "healthy" to show kids a war over sex between their parents who refuse to simply divorce, you are wrong.


----------



## TiggyBlue (Jul 29, 2012)

But couldn't the purposeful sabotage route end in divorce anyway?


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> samyeagar....I am divorced myself. My parents were divorced. My current husband and my ex-h were both divorced once before I met them. I worked for several years for a divorce attorney.
> 
> I know what happens. I have seen every type of divorce. I don't feel any worse for the women who end up divorced than I do for the men or the children...*divorce sucks for everyone*.
> 
> ...


I'd rather spend 100k on a lawyer than spend 1$ on alimony to an ex wife that doesn't work and caused the divorce in the first place. For a man, quitting his job can certainly hedge risk. Instead of being an indentured servant and working for an ex wife and children he is not allowed to participate in raising, he puts himself in a position where getting custody and no alimony is much more likely.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

I consulted a lawyer a few years ago regarding the Rapture. The issue was custody for our then 11 year old and 15 year old girls. In our very wealthy county, famous for executive fathers trading in wives, the family court system is stacked so much against men seeking full custody, that the lawyer (specialist for representing men in xwife-take-all divorces) basically told me unless the wife is like the mom in Houston that drowned her kids.... no luck getting custody without an epic and expensive battle. 

As we also have substantial assets and the mrs. also has the likely option of bailing out and returning to her country, things are not quite as simple as two kids splitting with zero assets...


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

"I'd rather spend 100k on a lawyer than spend 1$ on alimony to an ex wife that doesn't work and caused the divorce in the first place."


A. No divorce is 100% caused by one spouse.

B. Nice way to dodge what I said about modeling a war over sex for your children to grow up and then do the same in their lives.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> "I'd rather spend 100k on a lawyer than spend 1$ on alimony to an ex wife that doesn't work and caused the divorce in the first place."
> 
> 
> A. No divorce is 100% caused by one spouse.
> ...


Yet you so casually dismiss the actions that caused the war in the first place. And if one spouse totally cuts off the other from sex, yes in my mind they caused the divorce. Really it seems to me you are just indirectly supporting a spouse withholding sex; because you do not support them facing consequences for their actions. Sorry, I don't agree with that.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

LOL! You must not know much about me. 

Here I am advocating a nice, clean DIVORCE because there is NO SEX....and somehow you think I'm "supporting a spouse withholding sex".


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

The CONSEQUENCE of a sexless marriage is DIVORCE....not marital war.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> The CONSEQUENCE of a sexless marriage is DIVORCE....not marital war.


Problem is, divorce is not much of a consequence to many of these wives (especially SAHM)- yet it's a huge consequence to many of these men That's the whole problem with your argument.

The women get to maintain their lifestyle while the man is impoverished.
The women get to stay in the house, the man gets booted out (usually an apartment that isn't nearly as nice).
The women often get to maintain custody of the kids, while the man gets shafted.

These are not true consequences to the woman. If anything it could be argued that these are incentives.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

You are describing a co-dependant man who simply fears being out there on his own....meanwhile he clings to this notion that it is somehow better for him and his children to remain in a house full of war and conflict.

Most men just move on.

Most women just move on.

Many of them can end up happy.

Go on and cling to your fears. They will keep you stuck, which is what you really want.

(I know you aren't talking about your own sitch wilderness....but many men fit what I wrote above).

And by the way...it is well documented that WOMEN suffer more financially after divorce than men do. But you go on and tell yourself whatever you want, whatever you have to, to keep up your delusion that it is better to torture your children with a horrid example.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

I was married to a woman with diagnosed NPD. When we divorced, I got LUCKY in that I did not have to pay lifetime alimony. She cound have been granted that. I get to see my kids four days a month, and though my contact is supposed to be liberal and on demand, she has made it effectively impossible for me to see them outside of those times by loading up their schedules, so she has plausible deniability with the courts. At least with marital war, I would have been able to see my kids, and funnel money into hidden accounts for after the divorce when they were all out of the house.


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

wilderness said:


> Problem is, divorce is not much of a consequence to many of these wives (especially SAHM)- yet it's a huge consequence to many of these men That's the whole problem with your argument.
> 
> The women get to maintain their lifestyle while the man is impoverished.
> The women get to stay in the house, the man gets booted out (usually an apartment that isn't nearly as nice).
> ...


You have the financial setbacks and social setbacks, and the fact the women normally gets to deflect all the blame on a man.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> You are describing a co-dependant man who simply fears being out there on his own....meanwhile he clings to this notion that it is somehow better for him and his children to remain in a house full of war and conflict.
> 
> Most men just move on.
> 
> ...


You make it sound like these 'fears' are not based on reality. They are. As to women suffering more than men in divorce, that's a flat out bald faced lie. 
And I certainly don't appreciate the comment concerning delusion.

Shaming behavior= feminist agenda.
I can spot them a mile away.


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

wilderness said:


> You make it sound like these 'fears' are not based on reality. They are. As to women suffering more than men in divorce, that's a flat out bald faced lie.
> And I certainly don't appreciate the comment concerning delusion.
> 
> Shaming behavior= feminist agenda.
> I can spot them a mile away.


They hate up front too, it's all in the attitude. "Your wrong" and "no" is the phisod.

If we switched the laws around, maybe I can stay at home while my wife works a couple of jobs scared to leave me, because I still will get a cut out of her. Plus I could blame her for stuff she does to me, and control her through various systems and social structures like a slave.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

FrenchFry said:


> I love long papers describing social phenomena:
> 
> ]Marital Splits and Income Changes over the Longer Term
> 
> ...


Not ok. Those papers and studies are about as dishonest as it gets. Man's 'income' is not adjusted downward for child support, alimony, or legal expenses..
Woman's 'income' is not adjusted up for any of these things, either.
That's what is known as a double bubble. 

Can anyone deny that men pay alimony at a higher clip than woman?
Can anyone deny that men pay child support at a higher clip than women?
Can anyone deny that men pay legal bills at a higher clip than women?

I can prove those studies are loaded with those 3 questions alone.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

Yeah I'm just a big scary feminist. THAT'S what my entire point is all about....sure thang!


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

Faithful Wife said:


> There is life after divorce and if someone of either sex cares about having a sex life....they will divorce rather than stay in a pit of hell with a partner who isn't into them...further damaging their children and giving them a horrible example of what they can expect in their own marriages when they are grown. For anyone who believes it is "healthy" to show kids a war over sex between their parents who refuse to simply divorce, you are wrong.


It is not a given that the children of unhappily married couples are living in hell. Many unhappily married couples can keep their struggles private and present a happy front to their children.

In fact, children of divorce are statistically more likely to be worse off on practically every measure of well-being than children of parents who are still married. And a good portion of those marriages probably aren't blissful.

As for why men would stay in sexless marriages, most women don't announce that the possibility of sex has gone to zero. To the contrary. Most wives who withhold sex from their husbands insist that they love their husbands and find them desirable. They go to great lengths to find excuses for why they can't have sex right now and promise endless rain checks. Many men are taken in by the women they love.

And the men who aren't taken in, they still cling to some shred of hope. Sexless marriages do, sometimes, turn around. Anything is possible.

Also, some men are simply scared by the threat of alimony and child support. It's one thing to say that a man should walk away from his wife because of a lack of sex. It's a different thing to say that he should walk away and pay her $X thousand per month for the possibility, not certainty, that he can establish a healthy sexual relationship.

Last, the grass isn't always, or even usually, greener on the other side of the divorce. Studies have shown unhappily married people who divorce to be no happier than unhappily married people who remain married.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

My comments are ONLY about this proposed "solution", of acting passive agressive in a marriage where everything has clearly broken down and the man has no love left at all for the wife. As proposed by wildnerness.

If a man is in a sexless marriage, but still loves his wife and wants to stay....I have no problem with that. I know many men in this situation. They love and care for their wives and they are working through the sex issue, even while they understand it might not ever get better.

What I have a problem with is staying and making it an all out *WAR* between the parents....what IS what was suggested.

wilderness even suggested quitting his JOB and spending family money on electronics as WARFARE against the wife. THAT is a case that requires divorce, not warefare, simply because it is obvious that a man who would do this cares far more about money than his children.


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

Faithful Wife said:


> My comments are ONLY about this proposed "solution", of acting passive agressive in a marriage where everything has clearly broken down and the man has no love left at all for the wife. As proposed by wildnerness.


I see. I do think that wilderness's suggestions are radical. I do think that a man whose wife is refusing to meet his needs has a right to refuse to meet her needs as well. But he can do it in a way that isn't combative.

I agree that parents shouldn't turn the house into a war zone. Divorce would be preferable to that. But, if the OP has decided to divorce, I also understand the motivation to pursue the process slowly and deliberately to give himself as much of an advantage in court as possible.


----------



## Faithful Wife (Oct 31, 2012)

The OP hasn't said any of these horrible suggestions were ever even on his radar.


----------



## littlelamb (Aug 13, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> The OP hasn't said any of these horrible suggestions were ever even on his radar.


They're not! 

My preference would be to somehow get the woman I married back. Divorce is something I always promised myself I'd never do. I'm the child of an ugly divorce, and I refuse to do that to my kids.

I suppose I've been looking at divorce as a selfish thing. If my wife is okay, and the kids are okay, what gives me the right to upset their universe simply for sex? But my view is beginning to change. I guess sometimes you have to put some importance on your own needs.

Our home is not a war zone. It's simply a cold, sexless world for me. 

My kids are my sole reason for trying to hang on. 

It WILL be a slow process. I have my first appointment with a counselor tomorrow...I'm contemplating seeing an attorney.

Baby steps, one day at a time!!


_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

wilderness said:


> What difference does it make whether she loses respect for the guy or not? He hasn't had sex for _years._
> And this woman has no job, all separation is likely to do is cause OP to live like a slave to alimony and child support payments. Plus I doubt she will voluntarily leave, so he'll lose his home, too.
> 
> If anything, I'd be more severe in my actions. Try to get fired or quit my job and be out of work for 3-5 years before divorcing to limit the economic damage. Also, totally cut her off from all money and try to get her working. The strategy of separation or divorce will hurt him much more than it will hurt her.


I was addressing persons in general not the specifics of the OP. 

Some people are able to put things in perspective. A failed marriage is devastating in and of itself. The collateral damage of a vengeful scorched earth approach is hardly responsible or adaptive, no matter how sorely tempted you are. 

After all is said and done, you would not have to worry about your partner respecting you, not many people would. You wouldn't respect yourself either. 

I like a clean approach to conflict resolution. My proposal is to think ahead is to avoid descending into the type of thing you are so wiling to walk into. 

A series of attacks and counter attacks such that the cost of victory is too dear. Cant remember the term for that, from Greek Mythology or was it the victory of an Egyptian general over the Roman's. Anyone know?


----------



## techmom (Oct 22, 2012)

Pyhrric victory
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> What I have a problem with is staying and making it an all out *WAR* between the parents....what IS what was suggested.


As military history taught us, there are plenty of warfare techniques that are not designed to eliminate the opposing force's ability to wage war, but rather, to inconvenience the OpFor enough that their objectives cannot be met. Eventually the OpFor draws to a stalemate or gives up; The Iran Iraq war, Vietnam, Afghanistan in the 80's, and many other wars are full of such examples. It's a matter of resources versus time. 

It's not really war in the Kramer vs Kramer pop culture nomenclature; think of it as "good spouse, bad spouse" where one can never be sure if the good one will show up or the bad one.

These are standard behavior modification protocols - if a pet or a child can realize the difference in consequences between expected and unexpected behavior, then surely an adult human can put 2 and 2 together and infer that certain actions result in certain reactions, etc. 

This is no different than NMMNG or MMSL or any other manipulative way of getting others to do things that they are opposed to... Dishes not washed or homework not done? Consequences A, B, and C.


----------



## john117 (May 20, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> The CONSEQUENCE of a sexless marriage is DIVORCE....not marital war.


Divorce leaves the LD spouse usually better off than they are currently. Besides, how many stories have we seem where upon mention of D, the LD spouse may smell the roses briefly but returns to their frigid state after a while?


----------



## Cee Paul (Apr 11, 2012)

littlelamb said:


> I've been married for 12 years. Ten years ago (after the first child), sex started to become less frequent. Over time it got down to once every few months until eventually it stopped altogether. The last time my wife and I were intimate was over three years ago.
> 
> I realize that there are other issues in our relationship, and over the past year we have been working on those. And that side of things IS improving. I'd say that we're pretty happy now, but every time I try to raise the issue of sex, I'm met with the same response...."It's not all about sex, you know", or "Is sex all you ever think about?".
> 
> ...


This is actually a "normal" occurence in a lot of marriages, and I just finally came out of a 14 month sexual drought with my wife that ended this past June when I finally got laid(and we don't even have any kids).


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Faithful Wife said:


> My comments are ONLY about this proposed "solution", of acting passive agressive in a marriage where everything has clearly broken down and the man has no love left at all for the wife. As proposed by wildnerness.
> 
> If a man is in a sexless marriage, but still loves his wife and wants to stay....I have no problem with that. I know many men in this situation. They love and care for their wives and they are working through the sex issue, even while they understand it might not ever get better.
> 
> ...


So buying a big screen tv is creating a war, but withholding sex for 3 years isn't? C'mon, now. Where is your contempt, derision, and scorn for the actions that lead to my suggestions as opposed to the suggestions themselves?


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> I was addressing persons in general not the specifics of the OP.
> 
> Some people are able to put things in perspective. A failed marriage is devastating in and of itself. The collateral damage of a vengeful scorched earth approach is hardly responsible or adaptive, no matter how sorely tempted you are.
> 
> ...


A "vengeful, scorched earth approach"? Seriously? How is anything I suggested a "vengeful, scorched earth approach?"

Again, you have to go back to the original premise-

If a spouse that withhold's sex feels they are entitled to do so, because 'having sex isn't comfortable for them'...

The same reasoning applies to everything in the marriage, for both spouses.


----------



## jaharthur (May 25, 2012)

wilderness said:


> I'd rather spend 100k on a lawyer than spend 1$ on alimony to an ex wife that doesn't work and caused the divorce in the first place. For a man, quitting his job can certainly hedge risk. Instead of being an indentured servant and working for an ex wife and children he is not allowed to participate in raising, he puts himself in a position where getting custody and no alimony is much more likely.


This what clients always say--until they get the lawyer's bill for $100k.

And by the way, at least in my state, if the court finds the H reduced his income intentionally to avoid paying W, the resulting order will be made as if H were still making the larger amount.


----------



## jaharthur (May 25, 2012)

samyeagar said:


> At least with marital war, I would have been able to see my kids, and funnel money into hidden accounts for after the divorce when they were all out of the house.


If W has a decent lawyer, that won't work unless you are paid in cash. Otherwise there's a record of money in, money out, and if it doesn't balance . . . .


----------



## Married but Happy (Aug 13, 2013)

jaharthur said:


> This what clients always say--until they get the lawyer's bill for $100k.
> 
> And by the way, at least in my state, if the court finds the H reduced his income intentionally to avoid paying W, the resulting order will be made as if H were still making the larger amount.


Indeed. If you want to play this (probably unethical) game, you need to start a few years in advance. "Luckily" I was laid off after 9/11, and when I finally did find a comparable job, it paid about half what I'd been making. She made enough that alimony was no longer an issue.

It irks me that - if still married - you can change to a lower paying but more fulfilling job even if your spouse objects, but when divorcing, your life and career choices are no longer your own even if the change had been planned for and in the works for years.


----------



## deejov (Sep 24, 2011)

wilderness said:


> A "vengeful, scorched earth approach"? Seriously? How is anything I suggested a "vengeful, scorched earth approach?"
> 
> Again, you have to go back to the original premise-
> 
> ...


The concept of self awareness completely disagrees with this. 
That you are entitled to smash a square peg into a round hole, and if you do not, then the financial burdens of divorce are the consequences. You probably do feel like you have no other choice.

It's okay if you choose to think that way. It's solving the problem, in the end. Your solution, it works for you. (does it?)

Maybe there are other options. I don't give myself permission to just borrow other's values and match theirs. I have my own.
Which IS what you are saying with 

_The same reasoning applies to everything in the marriage, for both spouses_

And yes, I do know what it is like to be the spouse refused intimacy because "it's uncomfortable for them". And even though I am the woman, I am the money maker. And facing alimony payments to HIM. 

Lots of reasons why I would gently point out that you might hurt yourself more than her, in the long term. What do you have to lose? Just your integrity. If it matters to you.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

deejov said:


> The concept of self awareness completely disagrees with this.
> That you are entitled to smash a square peg into a round hole, and if you do not, then the financial burdens of divorce are the consequences. You probably do feel like you have no other choice.
> 
> It's okay if you choose to think that way. It's solving the problem, in the end. Your solution, it works for you. (does it?)
> ...


I don't mean to sound rude, but I literally have no idea what you are talking about. How is anything that I suggested untoward or lacking in integrity in the slightest?


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

wilderness said:


> What difference does it make whether she loses respect for the guy or not? He hasn't had sex for _years._
> And this woman has no job, all separation is likely to do is cause OP to live like a slave to alimony and child support payments. Plus I doubt she will voluntarily leave, so he'll lose his home, too.
> 
> If anything, I'd be more severe in my actions. Try to get fired or quit my job and be out of work for 3-5 years before divorcing to limit the economic damage. Also, totally cut her off from all money and try to get her working. The strategy of separation or divorce will hurt him much more than it will hurt





wilderness said:


> A "vengeful, scorched earth approach"? Seriously? How is anything I suggested a "vengeful, scorched earth approach?"
> 
> Again, you have to go back to the original premise-
> 
> ...


This. I really don't see how you can blind yourself to the pure spite of such a course of action. You propose getting fired thus ruining your career and bringing your family to the brink of financial ruin. 

What would make you do that? You fail to meet your obligations to care for yourself and your moral obligation to support your children. 

I'll bet that anyone who loves you, would attempt to talk you out of it. People with your best interest at heart would want to protect you from harming yourself and your innocent kids. 

Do you still think this is reasonable? 

I don't know if you are serious or making a point. Yes I agree with you. Being cheated out of a warm and intimate relationship with someone you elected to marry and have a family is wrong. 

I think it is enough to get out clean and find someone who appreciates the value of your love and support. Why spend energy on beating a dead relationship?


----------



## sinnister (Dec 5, 2010)

It is pretty much all about sex. Otherwise she wouldnt be upset if you had sex with somebody else now would she?

If sex doesnt matter than it shouldnt matter if you get it elsewhere.


----------



## Machiavelli (Feb 25, 2012)

littlelamb said:


> I've been married for 12 years. Ten years ago (after the first child), sex started to become less frequent. Over time it got down to once every few months until eventually it stopped altogether. The last time my wife and I were intimate was over three years ago.


"The Experts" tell us that women are prone to affairs at 4-7 and 12-14 years into a relationship. This is not to say that your wife is having an affair, but a fair portion of the time women lose sexual attraction for the husband around this times. Your wife has no sexual attraction to you and may not have had any for you ever. It has been hypothesized and demonstrated (IMHO) that women are primarily attracted to the "sexiest" tier of men, the so-called Alphas and Sigmas. Follow that link for an explanation. Your wife took you on as the best she could get, a Beta-Provider, as Barbados has pointed out already. Now that you have served your reproductive purposes by providing her with children, your only purpose is to provide material goods for the support of her and her children. If she can get these goods without a sex payment, so much the better. So far, you've made it clear that she does not need to fulfill the most fundamental need of a wife, which is sex.

Men get married for two reasons: 1) exclusive sexual rights to the woman, more or less on demand; 2) unadulterated children.

You aren't getting #1 and you may or may not be getting #2.



littlelamb said:


> I realize that there are other issues in our relationship, and over the past year we have been working on those. And that side of things IS improving. I'd say that we're pretty happy now, but every time I try to raise the issue of sex, I'm met with the same response...."It's not all about sex, you know", or "Is sex all you ever think about?".


Marriage is about nothing but sex and the resultant kids. Why do you think marriages must be consummated? She is deflecting sex with you because she finds you sexually repellant. You have to ask yourself, are you? What is your shoulder/chest/waist ratio? It should be close to 1.6:1.4:1. Women sexually respond to prehistoric limbic cues of upper body fighting capability. We may be modern, but what women find viscerally attractive is not modern, it's very, very primitive. 

When was the last time a woman came onto you for sex? Either asked for it, or sat in your lap, or pressed her boobs against your back while reaching around and playing with your chest? When's the last time a woman approached you at the grocery store and asked for your opinions on wine/steak/sliced bread etc?

If this doesn't happen to you, you need to get to work. 35-45 are your peak years for attraction and you should be able to pull much younger women. This assumes of course that the number on your blue jeans is no larger than 33W. If it is larger, what do you expect?



littlelamb said:


> I gently raised the topic again yesterday (after not mentioning it for the last six months). She seemed genuinely surprised that it was still an issue for me. Once again though, I got met with the "it's not all about sex" argument. I've tried to explain, I've tried to show her that I agree with that statement (which I do!), but to me sex SHOULD be a part of marriage. She says she agrees, and keeps promising that it will happen when things are better.
> 
> It just never does.


Ever look at the covers of the paperbacks women read? Steroided American Indian warriors popping the bodices off of swooning blonde beauties, while their beta husbands lie in the background bleeding out with a tomahawk buried in their skulls. That's what women want. They don't want a guy who has discussions about not being allowed in the honey pot for the last three years. That's a huge huge turnoff to women. The only sexual fantasies your wife has that include you are the ones where you're bleeding out and she is being swept away by the guy who does her a favor and takes you out.



littlelamb said:


> Is it time to give up? I've been thinking more and more about divorce lately. It's something I don't really want. I love my kids, and I do love my wife.


Not time to give up just yet. 




littlelamb said:


> I just want to have the physical side of that love as well. Is that too much to ask for? Should I wait and keep hoping that one day she'll decide everything is "better" and she wants sex again?


If you want to get physical, you have to be physically appealing to women. You also have to have an easy, ****y attitude with women. Your wife needs to see this and see other women responding to you in social situations. You wife isn't attracted to you and she's pretty sure in her own mind that no other women are attracted to you either. Is she right?



littlelamb said:


> Or throw in the towel, upset everyone, and leave now before I'm too old to start again? I just don't know what to do anymore.


Your wife wants to keep you hanging so you keep providing for her and her kids and not starting over with a younger woman, thus dividing the precious resources she wants directed to her children exclusively.



littlelamb said:


> Btw...I'm 43, she's 41.


Make yourself attractive and you can trade her in on a 31 year old or three.



littlelamb said:


> I try to initiate as much non-sexual intimacy as I can, it seems like she puts up with it though, rather than enjoys it. It's never initiated by her.


She knows you're angling for sex and that makes her cringe. Gammas always want women to initiate sex, but that is not how they are wired. They initiate for Alphas and Sigmas. Get the body and learn to ape the sexual clues and she will start initiating more. But generally, in LTRs women are responders.




littlelamb said:


> Other issues were mainly money (I'm tight with the $$, she's not). I discovered that she'd run up credit card debts that I knew nothing about. We've come to agreement about that now. Paid everything except the mortgage back, and agreed that we both need to help each other where finance is concerned. I need to loosen up a bit, and she needs to save a bit more. She has, and I have.


Again, your function is to be the provider, not the lover.



littlelamb said:


> She can't seem to verbalize what the "better" is. She simply says that it's not something she physically wants right now. She wants it in theory, just not in practice.


For all the reasons outlined above. Does your wife ever go out with friends or go on trips for any reason? 



littlelamb said:


> We're spending more time together (without the kids), going out on date nights etc, trying to reconnect and find whatever we've lost.
> 
> I'm just feeling more and more confused though.


There is no need for confusion, as the problem is manifest.



littlelamb said:


> I am and have been reading a LOT on here. And yes, that's what I'm starting to think....I either accept that's the way she is, or I walk away.
> 
> We have discussed divorce, but she says she needs me, she wants me as her husband, and I suppose I'm the type of guy that likes to be needed. It's driving me insane right now though.


She likes the status quo because you're on the hook to support her and her kids. You must change the status quo. Start by making yourself sexually attractive. Why do you think women are not sexually interested in you? I mean women in general, at work or on the street, not your wife.



littlelamb said:


> I do have a couple of hobbies, but they've caused issues too. She said I spent too much time on my car and withdrew from her. Maybe I did, so now I limit it. One morning or afternoon on the weekend for the car, and the rest is family time.


What kind of car? 



littlelamb said:


> I honestly don't think she's going elsewhere. We live in a small town, and we know where each other is pretty much all the time. And it's been going on since before we moved here. Anything is possible, but in our case I doubt it.


You'd be amazed. I would recommend that you look into things, just so you can cross of the obvious. This is like when a husband or wife ends up dead in the home, the spouse is the most obvious suspect and will almost always be guilty. However, cops are generally not smart enough to look beyond the generalizations that usually apply and occasionally they get burned. Either way, they have to cross off the spouse as a suspect first. You need to cross of the general likelihood that your wife is getting sexual satisfaction elsewhere. Do you know how to go about doing that? Does she ever go out with the girls? Go visit relatives without you? etc.




littlelamb said:


> I agree that even if it happens now, after three years it's bound to be a little awkward. I'm more than happy to not rush her and let things go at a pace she's comfortable with. I'd be happy just to really know that it was something she cares about and is prepared to work at, rather than hearing the words and not seeing the actions match those words.


That's not the way things work. A woman is either open to having sex with you or she's not. You can turn it around, though, but not by building up slowly or tearing down walls or becoming her maid or masseuse. You have to start upping your sex rank in body, attitude, threads, ride, etc. She needs to see women giving you the eye. You doing things that don't include her or the kids. I didn't say neglect the kids, but put on your leather jacket and ride off on your chopped Harley on Friday night without her and without an explanation. This will send her into orbit! She has to be taught that you can replace her with three younger women any day. If that's not believable, you need to get to work and make her believe it.



littlelamb said:


> I think I've known that divorce is the only way to solve my situation for a while, I was really wanted to avoid it if possible. If it was just me and her then I would've left years ago, but my kids are my world (my little lambs  ) and the thought of not seeing them every day just kills me.


It's too soon to say that divorce is your only option. It may be true in the end, but only after you have raised your value as a man to the point where she should be turned on. Kids are the only reason you would want to try to save this. Otherwise, I'd say you've got plenty of grounds for divorce, traditionally speaking.



littlelamb said:


> She read me a list last night of what she wanted, and asked me to do the same. One thing struck me about this....her list was full of possessions....new car, big holiday, maybe a new house in a few years. Mine was things like more time as a family, more fun together, and yes...sex!


This is an exercise in bullsh¡t. She has no idea what her problem is, because she can't admit the problem. This list is just something her rationalization hamster has spun up to justify her horrible behavior retroactively. As for her possessions list, well you are the beta-provider and this proves it. You seem to be good enough at it, but you don't have the sexual horses to go with it.



littlelamb said:


> I've booked myself into a counselor, she won't join me...says it's between us and no one else.


No surprises there, but while you may beat the odds, the odds are your counselor will be of little use, other than telling you to move on. At 41, you've been raised your whole life under the matriarchy and its relationship propaganda. You need to look at relationship reality. You already understand the part about sex making the world go around, but you need to understand how and why women respond sexually.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> This. I really don't see how you can blind yourself to the pure spite of such a course of action. You propose getting fired thus ruining your career and bringing your family to the brink of financial ruin.
> 
> What would make you do that? You fail to meet your obligations to care for yourself and your moral obligation to support your children.
> 
> ...


This to me is a great example of the prevailing sentiment out there among way too many people. The man is to be held uber accountable on every point, whether financial, moral, or otherwise. Yet the female is to be granted every quarter and every excuse to not fulfill her obligations.

As far as moral, ethical, and financial obligations, my counter to your point is that a contested divorce and custody battle is an absolute certainty to wreak financial devastation _at least_ as severe as what I've suggested. And in situations where there is a SAHM (like this thread), the man is likely to have to pay alimony- which in my opinion is slavery and about as immoral as it gets (again, especially when you consider that in many cases, like this one, the party getting the alimony is the same one that caused the divorce).

Any conversation pertaining to obligations has to begin with spouses obligations toward one another. Sex is absolutely one of those obligations. Failure to meet those obligations shouldn't result in a life of luxury and alimony payments.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

And unfortunately some SAHM's after a divorce fail to grasp the fact that they are now partly responsible for the financial support of the kids, and don't think they need to get a job.


----------



## Wiserforit (Dec 27, 2012)

Machiavelli said:


> Ever look at the covers of the paperbacks women read? Steroided American Indian warriors popping the bodices off of swooning blonde beauties, while their beta husbands lie in the background bleeding out with a tomahawk buried in their skulls. That's what women want. They don't want a guy who has discussions about not being allowed in the honey pot for the last three years. That's a huge huge turnoff to women. The only sexual fantasies your wife has that include you are the ones where you're bleeding out and she is being swept away by the guy who does her a favor and takes you out.


:smthumbup:


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

Catherine602 said:


> This. I really don't see how you can blind yourself to the pure spite of such a course of action. You propose getting fired thus ruining your career and bringing your family to the brink of financial ruin.


I don't agree that a man trying to ensure low support payments toward his wife after his divorce is spiteful.



> You fail to meet your obligations to care for yourself and your moral obligation to support your children.


I don't agree that the only way for a divorced man to meet his moral obligation to support his children is through government-mandated payments that must be made under threat of imprisonment.



> I think it is enough to get out clean and find someone who appreciates the value of your love and support. Why spend energy on beating a dead relationship?


I know many divorced men who are struggling to make support payments and would take issue with your suggestion for the OP to get out clean. Getting out clean in a divorce is rarely a possibility for a man who is the primary earner.

Now, I agree that wilderness's suggestions are unusual and fairly radical. But I don't agree that they're immoral, spiteful, or unjustified.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

wilderness said:


> This to me is a great example of the prevailing sentiment out there among way too many people. The man is to be held uber accountable on every point, whether financial, moral, or otherwise. Yet the female is to be granted every quarter and every excuse to not fulfill her obligations.
> 
> As far as moral, ethical, and financial obligations, my counter to your point is that a contested divorce and custody battle is an absolute certainty to wreak financial devastation _at least_ as severe as what I've suggested. And in situations where there is a SAHM (like this thread), the man is likely to have to pay alimony- which in my opinion is slavery and about as immoral as it gets (again, especially when you consider that in many cases, like this one, the party getting the alimony is the same one that caused the divorce).
> 
> Any conversation pertaining to obligations has to begin with spouses obligations toward one another. Sex is absolutely one of those obligations. Failure to meet those obligations shouldn't result in a life of luxury and alimony payments.





PHTlump said:


> I don't agree that a man trying to ensure low support payments toward his wife after his divorce is spiteful.
> 
> 
> I don't agree that the only way for a divorced man to meet his moral obligation to support his children is through government-mandated payments that must be made under threat of imprisonment.
> ...


You guys aren't playing the victim card are you? I find it difficult to mount a strong argument when I start from a weak position like victimhood. It effects my reading skills. 

That is what seems to have happened here, no?. Can you show me where I mentioned alimony in the post you quoted or any on this thread? 

It might be that you are having problems coming up with a cogent counter argument to my points? I handle that by just moving on. Try it, there is no shame involved.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

Catherine602 said:


> You guys are playing into the victim mentality. So much so that your reading skills are effected. Show me wear I mentioned alimony?
> 
> Does it make sense to you to quote my post and then object to points that are not there? It is customary to actually address the content of a post that you take the trouble to quote.
> 
> It might be better to accept that you cannot come up with a cogent counter argument and move on. I do that all of the time.


More shaming language. Those that _are_ victims have a 'victim mentality' _because they are victims or stand to be victims_. This is nothing to be ashamed of despite your insinuation to the contrary.

A man in a long term marriage that has a SAHM as a wife is almost certain to pay alimony in the event of a divorce. It's irrelevant whether you mentioned it or not, it's the reality of divorce in today's world. Furthermore, a man in this situation stands a very good chance of losing the opportunity to raise his children.

If these factors aren't legitimate concerns of a man in this situation, they should be. The notion of 'just move forward with a separation and/or divorce' as the panacea to solve the problem of a sexless marriage is one that I disagree with.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

wilderness said:


> More shaming language. Those that _are_ victims have a 'victim mentality' _because they are victims or stand to be victims_. This is nothing to be ashamed of despite your insinuation to the contrary.
> 
> A man in a long term marriage that has a SAHM as a wife is almost certain to pay alimony in the event of a divorce. It's irrelevant whether you mentioned it or not, it's the reality of divorce in today's world. Furthermore, a man in this situation stands a very good chance of losing the opportunity to raise his children.
> 
> If these factors aren't legitimate concerns of a man in this situation, they should be. The notion of 'just move forward with a separation and/or divorce' as the panacea to solve the problem of a sexless marriage is one that I disagree with.


Umm you did it again. But that's OK. Alimony is obviously something about which you feel much passion.

I had no intention of shaming you. In fact, I see no reason that you should be ashamed. You are voicing something that is of concern to you. 

There is no shame in feeling victimized. I was just surprised that men feel as victimized as women. 

There seems to be so little tolerance of women voicing their feelings of powerlessness that I wanted to check my perception by asking a question. You are the one who assumed I was shaming you. 

I simply pointed out that my post did not touch upon the sensitive topic of alimony. Is that shaming?

You want to talk about alimony. That is your right. I have the same right not to address it.


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

Catherine602 said:


> You guys aren't playing the victim card are you? I find it difficult to mount a strong argument when I start from a weak position like victimhood. It effects my reading skills.


Don't worry. I'm not playing the victim card. I'm just acknowledging some of the realities of divorce court. It would be foolish for any person (man or woman) to cavalierly head to divorce court without a realistic idea of what to expect, wouldn't you say?



> That is what seems to have happened here, no?. Can you show me where I mentioned alimony in the post you quoted or any on this thread?


You didn't mention alimony explicitly. But wilderness posted that he would consider quitting his job and earning little or nothing in order to minimize his support payments to his wife. You responded that that kind of action would be immoral and spiteful.



> It might be that you are having problems coming up with a cogent counter argument to my points? I handle that by just moving on. Try it, there is no shame involved.


Already handled. Can you present a cogent argument to my points? Or is your position that any man who objects to government-mandated support payments to his ex-wife is immoral and spiteful, but you just don't want to explicitly state it and would like to change the subject? If so, I'll just disagree.


----------



## Catherine602 (Oct 14, 2010)

My post was quite clear. There is nothing left for me to say. Bait someone else.


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

Catherine602 said:


> There is nothing left for me to say.


As long as your position is that women should be free to sabotage their own marriages and still expect cash and prizes, and any men who disagree are simply immoral and spiteful, I quite agree.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

Catherine602 said:


> Umm you did it again. But that's OK. Alimony is obviously something about which you feel much passion.
> 
> I had no intention of shaming you. In fact, I see no reason that you should be ashamed. You are voicing something that is of concern to you.
> 
> ...


To be honest, until I went through my divorce, I bought into the whole women are the vicitims in divorce thing too. As I started learning more about it, I learned that the divorce laws and courts in the US are very heavily stacked against men. It is MUCH easier for a woman to walk from her marriage than it is a man, especially if there are kids involved.


----------



## deejov (Sep 24, 2011)

I"m always curious when I talk to friends who are divorced (cuz that's my future)

Where I live, there are ground rules. Pretty much 50\50. To hear people (mostly men) complain they got screwed... now that I know the rules here... I'm appalled.

Umm, they SIGNED the agreement. They AGREED to "give her everything". There simply is NO law, rule, that says he is left destitute. 

It's all just one proposal written up, denied, re-written, and on and on. You can ASK for whatever you want: the moon, the house, alimony, everything. The other spouse has to sign and agree to do it. 

Are there really laws in the states that say you must pay alimony??


----------



## ocotillo (Oct 17, 2011)

deejov said:


> Are there really laws in the states that say you must pay alimony??


I'm not an expert by any stretch, but my understanding is that here it the States divorce is more closely akin to binding arbitration than the mutual agreement you describe.


----------



## MaritimeGuy (Jul 28, 2012)

I believe the situation we see in family court today evolved from a time when men were practically always the sole breadwinner, and let's face it with the wage disparity the only one in the household capable of being so while women took care of the house and the children. Women were no more capable of supporting the children and themselves financially then men were of raising the children on their own. In a divorce the woman would need to maintain a residence substantial enough both for her and the kids while the man required only something to house himself. Divorce settlements were structured around that premise.

As we know times are changing. Many more women are capable of supporting themselves while many more men are capable of raising their children. The court system is perhaps lagging today's reality. 

However I don't think you could say that in today's society women have equal earning power to men or that the average man is equally adept at raising children...at least not yet. We still have a ways to go. Until that day happens divorce settlements will continue to result in men having some obligations to support his former family..however distasteful that may be. 

Of course as with everything there are going to be exceptions to the rule however anecdotes are not statistical proof.


----------



## Wiserforit (Dec 27, 2012)

MaritimeGuy said:


> I believe the situation we see in family court today evolved from a time when men were practically always the sole breadwinner, and let's face it with the wage disparity the only one in the household capable of being so while women took care of the house and the children. Women were no more capable of supporting the children and themselves financially then men were of raising the children on their own. In a divorce the woman would need to maintain a residence substantial enough both for her and the kids while the man required only something to house himself. Divorce settlements were structured around that premise.


Amen, and I agree with it. For the justice it represented, and if a man didn't want to bear that cost then either don't get married or don't get divorced.




> As we know times are changing. Many more women are capable of supporting themselves while many more men are capable of raising their children. The court system is perhaps lagging today's reality.


Yes, they are changing. A lot. Considering how the courts operate (doctrine of stare decisis), lagging current events somewhat is expected, and even desirable. (So courts aren't operating by whim of current public opinion polls).




> However I don't think you could say that in today's society women have equal earning power to men or that the average man is equally adept at raising children...at least not yet.


Disagree, but it would be a derail. I mostly wanted to agree with your main observation about the history of family law and how it follows our family conventions, just not instantaneously. 

We go into marriage knowing the lay of the land. Either don't get married or don't get divorced if you aren't prepared to pay the price. This historical bias towards women in family court was reasonable, logical, and just for the most part and the feminists like to overlook this in the laundry list of historical wrongs against women. If you can slam-dunk the man in court for not just child custody and child support but also _alimony_ - you don't have to work. So what is this nonsense about earning power? The highest wage is not working at all, and just taking the money from someone who does!


----------



## brokenbythis (Aug 21, 2011)

Wiserforit said:


> Amen, and I agree with it. For the justice it represented, and if a man didn't want to bear that cost then either don't get married or don't get divorced.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My ex cheated on me and lied to me for years. I knew about the lying but only recently found out about the cheating. He didn't even bother to use protection and now one of the skanks he was having sex with is pregnant.

I had enough, I told him before we were married if he ever had sex with someone else I'd walk for good. He didn't take me seriously. He comes from a family with no boundaries and wasn't smart enough to see one when I set one. In his family there are no consequences to bad behavior and everyone rug sweeps and acts like all is peachy.

So I filed, and yes he pays me child support and alimony. No time limit on the alimony. I work but after being a SAHM for so many years, supporting him and his career, I earn 1/3 of what he does. I am in my mid forties and if someone tells me to go back to school... right... he left me with our special needs child who takes up all of my time. I have no time to myself, its very challenging raising a special needs kids, especially on my own.

So his choices have led to him having to pay me a small fortune, and in a few months he'll be forking over another small fortune for another child. He'll be lonely and alone, living in the shame of cheating on his family and getting another woman pregnant while married to me. His choices...

CHOICES. I would rather have a loving marriage and a healthy trusting relationship than his money. Any day. But he didn't choose it that way. I'm only getting what the court says I am due.

So while I see some of your points of view in where the man gets screwed - I also see those men that make the choices to do what my ex did and the law says he has to pay. I did not want it this way. Believe me.


----------



## WorkingOnMe (Mar 17, 2012)

You see Deejov they feel entitled. For "supporting his career".


----------



## john_lord_b3 (Jan 11, 2013)

brokenbythis said:


> My ex cheated on me and lied to me for years. I knew about the lying but only recently found out about the cheating. He didn't even bother to use protection and now one of the skanks he was having sex with is pregnant.
> 
> I had enough, I told him before we were married if he ever had sex with someone else I'd walk for good. He didn't take me seriously. He comes from a family with no boundaries and wasn't smart enough to see one when I set one. In his family there are no consequences to bad behavior and everyone rug sweeps and acts like all is peachy.
> 
> ...


Mrs. Broken, I am sorry to hear about your divorce. 

But why you didn't want it to be this way? You won and justice are served. Your cheating ex-husband got punished and you got alimony with no time limit, which means your cheating husband will spend the rest of his life paying you. Your National Law works to your advantage and perhaps rightfully so. Revenge is sweet isn't it?


----------



## brokenbythis (Aug 21, 2011)

john_lord_b3 said:


> Mrs. Broken, I am sorry to hear about your divorce.
> 
> But why you didn't want it to be this way? You won and justice are served. Your cheating ex-husband got punished and you got alimony with no time limit, which means your cheating husband will spend the rest of his life paying you. Your National Law works to your advantage and perhaps rightfully so. Revenge is sweet isn't it?


As I said: I would have preferred to have a healthy marriage than go thru divorce. I'm no tout for revenge, in out to simply survive.

You are making out women are out to marry men to set them up to divorce them later and collect support. That wasn't my hope for my life. I'm sorry if the women in your life cheated on you, then filed for divorce, then collected your money. I am all for bringing back at-fault divorce laws in all states. That would make it a little fairer on the men who were faithful and didn't want the split.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

My ex wife was a stay at home mom by her choice. I supported her. I worked 12 hours a day so we could live where she wanted, have the vehicle she wanted, have the kids in the activities she wanted, go to the schools she wanted. 

I didn't cheat, never hit her, never called her a name, was never disparaging, never pressured her to get a job, was never verbally or emotionally abusive, never raised my voice to her. I was the stereotypical beta nice guy. 

She was all of those things and finally cheated on me and after 17 years, decided she wanted a divorce. She tried to get 85% of my salary, my entire retirement, me to provide medical insurance. We could not agree on this so the courts decided that she deserved 33% of my paycheck beyond child support and her SUV payment in alimony. I keep less than the poverty level in income. I got lucky becase the alimony only lasts for five years. 

She constantly tells me she does not have any money, and demands more. Almost two years since the seperation and divorce, she still does not have a job.


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

deejov said:


> Where I live, there are ground rules. Pretty much 50\50. To hear people (mostly men) complain they got screwed... now that I know the rules here... I'm appalled.


I think it would depend on the scenario. If you're talking about a DINK couple, who each earned comparable incomes, then I think 50/50 is very fair. Personally, I know a couple where a rich man married a trophy wife 20 years younger than him. She never worked a day in her life. But, if she had, she would have been a waitress or something comparable (no skills and no education). As it was, she was a pampered rich wife. She has spent 20 years living the life of a "Real Housewife of ___."

She didn't raise children. She had nannies. She didn't keep house. She had a housekeeper. She just shopped.

Now, they're getting divorced and she is getting 50% of the wealth that he amassed over his life. I think that's a pretty raw deal for him. Even if she got nothing but the clothes on her back, she's spent 20 years living better than 99.99999% of the people in the world could ever dream of living.



> Umm, they SIGNED the agreement. They AGREED to "give her everything".


First, a man can contest a court-awarded settlement. But he still has to pay it, or go to jail. Second, even if he agreed to the agreement, he did it under duress. If he agrees to give up half of his wealth, rather than face a very good chance of losing even more money in a trial, does that mean he should be happy about his settlement? I don't think so.



> Are there really laws in the states that say you must pay alimony??


In some states, yes.


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

MaritimeGuy said:


> However I don't think you could say that in today's society women have equal earning power to men ...


We absolutely CAN say that.
The Gender Pay Gap is a Complete Myth - CBS News



> We still have a ways to go. Until that day happens divorce settlements will continue to result in men having some obligations to support his former family..however distasteful that may be.


I wouldn't hold your breath waiting for family courts to reflect the economic realities of the sexes.


----------



## MaritimeGuy (Jul 28, 2012)

My thoughts are as much attention to detail should go into marriage as goes into divorce. Both sides should get legal representation and the terms of the marriage as well as the terms of a divorce should the marriage fail be agreed to in advance.

The advantage is this will force communication on key issues. It could reveal expectations of your potential spouses that make the marriage untenable. It could be updated and renewed on a periodic basis, say every 5 or 10 years, as circumstances change. Most of all it takes hard feelings out of the process of divorce avoiding piling up massive legal fee's trying to spite a former spouse.


----------



## john_lord_b3 (Jan 11, 2013)

brokenbythis said:


> As I said: I would have preferred to have a healthy marriage than go thru divorce. I'm no tout for revenge, in out to *simply survive*.


Ah, if put this way, I understand better :smthumbup:



> You are making out women are out to marry men to set them up to divorce them later and collect support. That wasn't my hope for my life. I'm sorry if the women in your life cheated on you, then filed for divorce, then collected your money.


Eh, I think I never said such words, perhaps you are mistaken me for other poster? If I made that impressions, please let me assure you that was not my intention. 



> I am all for bringing back at-fault divorce laws in all states. That would make it a little fairer on the men who were faithful and didn't want the split.


I don't really have much knowledge about the divorce laws in your country, but I am certain that fairer laws will always be better than unfair laws.:iagree:


----------



## john_lord_b3 (Jan 11, 2013)

samyeagar said:


> My ex wife was a stay at home mom by her choice. I supported her. I worked 12 hours a day so we could live where she wanted, have the vehicle she wanted, have the kids in the activities she wanted, go to the schools she wanted.
> 
> I didn't cheat, never hit her, never called her a name, was never disparaging, never pressured her to get a job, was never verbally or emotionally abusive, never raised my voice to her. I was the stereotypical beta nice guy.
> 
> ...


By Allah, so sorry to hear this, Mr. Yeagar. You're lucky your former wife did not get all that she demanded, because that sounds very much unfair.


----------



## samyeagar (May 14, 2012)

john_lord_b3 said:


> By Allah, so sorry to hear this, Mr. Yeagar. You're lucky your former wife did not get all that she demanded, because that sounds very much unfair.


Thank you for your condolenses  The worst part was the fact that I did have an attorney, did fight it in the courts, and this is what the courts decided. I did not agree to any of it, AND what I got stuck with was not the worst case scenario. It could have been even worse...she could have been given my retirement, lifetime alimony, and more.

I think the thing that makes me the saddest, most bitter, pissed, is the fact that she feels very slighted by the courts. Like she got cheated out of what she deserves...


ETA: My state has a formula for determining child support that is almost never deviated from. She asked the courts for 50% above that formula...thankfully they did not give it to her.


----------



## john_lord_b3 (Jan 11, 2013)

samyeagar said:


> Thank you for your condolenses  The worst part was the fact that I did have an attorney, did fight it in the courts, and this is what the courts decided. I did not agree to any of it, AND what I got stuck with was not the worst case scenario. It could have been even worse...she could have been given my retirement, lifetime alimony, and more.
> 
> I think the thing that makes me the saddest, most bitter, pissed, is the fact that she feels very slighted by the courts. Like she got cheated out of what she deserves...
> 
> ...


Is there any enforcement or monitoring from the government to ensure that the child support money paid by you are totally utilized by your ex wife for your children's welfare? If yes, then surely it's a good thing!


----------



## Anon Pink (Jan 17, 2013)

Not in the state where I live. My late brother's psycho b!tch ex used child support to upgrade her master bath, then didn't have money for private school tuition and had the school go after my brother. The agreement was that his child support included enough to ALSO pay tuition. He ended up paying tuition for that year, then changed the agreement so he lowered his child support but he was responsible for tuition. She was not pleased because she wanted/needed a new car that following year.

Poor dear, if she hadn't been living in la la land and worked on her marriage instead of having an affair (with a man who could afford to keep her in the style she wished to be accustomed) she could be a much pitied widow instead of a scorned cheating ex. The OM dumped her about a year after my brother left her!!!! Love just desserts!


----------



## john_lord_b3 (Jan 11, 2013)

Anon Pink said:


> Not in the state where I live. My late brother's psycho b!tch ex used child support to upgrade her master bath, then didn't have money for private school tuition and had the school go after my brother. The agreement was that his child support included enough to ALSO pay tuition. He ended up paying tuition for that year, then changed the agreement so he lowered his child support but he was responsible for tuition. She was not pleased because she wanted/needed a new car that following year.
> 
> Poor dear, if she hadn't been living in la la land and worked on her marriage instead of having an affair (with a man who could afford to keep her in the style she wished to be accustomed) she could be a much pitied widow instead of a scorned cheating ex. The OM dumped her about a year after my brother left her!!!! Love just desserts!


 so sorry to hear this.. :scratchhead:


----------



## MaritimeGuy (Jul 28, 2012)

john_lord_b3 said:


> Is there any enforcement or monitoring from the government to ensure that the child support money paid by you are totally utilized by your ex wife for your children's welfare? If yes, then surely it's a good thing!


I've never heard of anything like that. It's my understanding a person receiving child support can spend it any way they want. The only recourse would be if they were neglecting the child altogether and you could prove it in court to alter the custody agreement.


----------



## john_lord_b3 (Jan 11, 2013)

I see. I think it would be nice and neat if the parent winning the custody are required by the State to prove that the money are actually being used for the children's welfare, ensuring fair treatment for the children, and also to prove to the parent paying child support, that her/his money are being spent in a good way.


----------



## MaritimeGuy (Jul 28, 2012)

I would hazard a guess it's probably one of the biggest sources of conflict in situations where support is being paid. It's definately frustrating to be sacrificing to be making the payments if you believe (whether accurately or inaccurately) that the money is being spent frivolously. 

Even if you were to try to verify though there are a ton of gray areas. A person could use child support to pay for a vacation for themselves and argue its making them a more balanced person to care for the children...thus is being spent for the childrens benefit. The person paying the support will most likely have a hard time with that...particularly if they have no hope of taking a nice vacation until the children are grown and child support ceases.


----------



## deejov (Sep 24, 2011)

PHTlump said:


> I think it would depend on the scenario. If you're talking about a DINK couple, who each earned comparable incomes, then I think 50/50 is very fair. Personally, I know a couple where a rich man married a trophy wife 20 years younger than him. She never worked a day in her life. But, if she had, she would have been a waitress or something comparable (no skills and no education). As it was, she was a pampered rich wife. She has spent 20 years living the life of a "Real Housewife of ___."
> 
> She didn't raise children. She had nannies. She didn't keep house. She had a housekeeper. She just shopped.
> 
> ...


Rich man, trophy wife. 20 years. He is lucky she stayed that long, 10 would have been enough without a pre-nup.

I'm sorry, but I know women who have been taken the same way. Taken. As in not the norm. 

Special needs children. Not the norm. SAHM's who probably cannot afford to raise the children.

I'm being biased here. 20 years ago, I was left with a baby on my own. Took me 7 years to get him to legally pay me $75\month. Every time I tried, he quit his job. I worked two jobs, went to night school. I didn't want a pampered lifestyle. I just wanted help with daycare, clothes, food on the table. 

The laws now in place are so that single moms don't have to do all these things, aren't they? Yes, some people abuse it. 

I'm glad the rules have gotten tougher, and more money has to be paid. He who has the best lawyer wins, as always. That hasn't changed. 

One of the reasons I will NEVER have a joint chequing account or be financially dependent on another person. 

Yeah, lots of men have worked hard and sacrified so "she" could stay home. It was for the kids. Now, it's okay for her to work two jobs, ignore the kids? That was the message behind the alimony. Acknowledgement that having one parent around more is beneficial to the kids. 

It's very sad that people take advantage of it. But your kids win, don't they, if your ex doesn't work as much as you do?

If you didn't pay alimony, what would happen?


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

deejov said:


> Rich man, trophy wife. 20 years. He is lucky she stayed that long, 10 would have been enough without a pre-nup.
> 
> I'm sorry, but I know women who have been taken the same way. Taken. As in not the norm.
> 
> ...


I'm very sorry for what happened to you. One thing I would like to say, however, is that the kids don't win in present day divorce. Quite the contrary. I find it disgraceful, for example, that if a man misses just 1 or 2 payments of child support in my state, he loses his driver's license. If he gets behind by just a few hundred dollars, they throw him in jail. Yet if a woman won't let a man see his child, he has to file multiple contempt motions against her and it's months- if not years- before anything happens to her. He has to spend thousands of dollars chasing after his rights, and they may never be enforced by the courts.

It's all about the money. The state receives dollar for dollar matching funds from the federal government for the child support they collect. This is the very definition of a conflict of interest.


----------



## bbird1 (May 22, 2011)

It is said:

A woman needs to feel loved to make love.
A man needs to make love to feel loved.

There is nothing more true about that. Maybe you need to share this with her that you are feeling unloved and you are a physical being and therefore the act is indeed important for many men. I know i feel closer to my wife when we have had sexual relations. But I also know I have to make her know she is loved for her to feel the same. 

Respect is a big key, 
>flowers for no reason but you love her or thought of her can help, 
>helping her with baby/house ect might help with that, 
>maybe give her a girls night out 
(call her sister or her close friends and tell them to not tell her but you would like them to plan a nice girls night with her and you will take the baby and housework over. Then that day her friends call and surprise her they are coming to get her.) 
>Maybe hire a baby sitter and take her out. When was the last time your dancing shoes left the couch? Dinner? Movie? Dancing? Treat her like a lady.

Was there any issues with child birth maybe she is afraid to get pregnant again? Many things can bring this on but you the husband need to help her with love and compassion past whatever the issue is. Mostly I find it's we guys get lazy with the courting stuff. Personally I remind myself daily to never stop courting my wife. Anyway this is maybe not the only answer and may not be your answer but it's some input.


----------



## PHTlump (Jun 2, 2010)

deejov said:


> Rich man, trophy wife. 20 years. He is lucky she stayed that long, 10 would have been enough without a pre-nup.


He's losing millions of dollars. He doesn't feel lucky. But I agree that the system is certainly stacked against him to the point that he could have done worse.



> I'm glad the rules have gotten tougher, and more money has to be paid. He who has the best lawyer wins, as always. That hasn't changed.


Women are the custodial parents about 85% of the time. I very much doubt that women have the better lawyer that often. I would expect a result much closer to 50/50 if it were really about the better lawyer.



> It's very sad that people take advantage of it. But your kids win, don't they, if your ex doesn't work as much as you do?
> 
> If you didn't pay alimony, what would happen?


I think, if we didn't have family courts that encouraged divorce and awarded child support to never-married mothers, that people would be more choosy about who they married and who they had children with. I think having mature, trustworthy parents who are committed to each other and the family is better for children than a system where the government interferes in families to lower the risk of having children with dead beats.


----------



## deejov (Sep 24, 2011)

wilderness said:


> I'm very sorry for what happened to you. One thing I would like to say, however, is that the kids don't win in present day divorce. Quite the contrary. I find it disgraceful, for example, that if a man misses just 1 or 2 payments of child support in my state, he loses his driver's license. If he gets behind by just a few hundred dollars, they throw him in jail. Yet if a woman won't let a man see his child, he has to file multiple contempt motions against her and it's months- if not years- before anything happens to her. He has to spend thousands of dollars chasing after his rights, and they may never be enforced by the courts.
> 
> It's all about the money. The state receives dollar for dollar matching funds from the federal government for the child support they collect. This is the very definition of a conflict of interest.


I didn't mean kids win in divorce. I meant they "win" by a spouse paying alimony so their custodial (mother) doesn't have to work two jobs to make ends meet.

I also meant... if you didn't pay alimony, what would happen to your kids? See above. They risk being latch key kids to a burnt out mother. 

But like I said, I'm biased. Yes, it PAINS you to give your ex alimony. Probably burns a hole right through you. 

Maybe the alternative is for your ex to work two jobs, and you look after the kids. Every night and every weekend. 

You are trading your time for money. Aren't you? 

I don't know anything about the state receiving matching funds.


----------



## wilderness (Jan 9, 2013)

deejov said:


> I didn't mean kids win in divorce. I meant they "win" by a spouse paying alimony so their custodial (mother) doesn't have to work two jobs to make ends meet.
> 
> I also meant... if you didn't pay alimony, what would happen to your kids? See above. They risk being latch key kids to a burnt out mother.
> 
> ...


Well, I don't pay alimony, thankfully. I still find alimony as distasteful as it gets. Yet I've been fighting with everything I've got for 3 years to get at least 50/50 custody with my daughter. Would I rather be married in a sexless marriage than unmarried and only able to see my daughter on weekends. YES!!!!!

The really sick and demented thing, from my perspective, is that my x feels emboldened and entitled to fight this legal battle with me. It is socially acceptable and even encouraged for women to keep their kids away from fathers.


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

wilderness said:


> Well, I don't pay alimony, thankfully. I still find alimony as distasteful as it gets. Yet I've been fighting with everything I've got for 3 years to get at least 50/50 custody with my daughter. Would I rather be married in a sexless marriage than unmarried and only able to see my daughter on weekends. YES!!!!!
> 
> The really sick and demented thing, from my perspective, is that my x feels emboldened and entitled to fight this legal battle with me. It is socially acceptable and even encouraged for women to keep their kids away from fathers.


Within that system, they keep them away until they "have all the power", so when you see them they still have "all the power" so that's how that goes.


----------



## treyvion (Apr 29, 2013)

treyvion said:


> Within that system, they keep them away until they "have all the power", so when you see them they still have "all the power" so that's how that goes.


It can be painful and gutwrenching as they do all the back and forth contrived efforts to release control and responsibility out of your children. I'm not sure if they are coached by someone(s) in that particular system, must be...


----------

