# Reasoning behind not being open about past



## alexm

Asking this in the ladies forum, as I'm hoping for a more female-oriented take on this.

First, let me say that this is not something that is truly bothering me, it's more curiosity than anything. I also trust my wife and have no reason to distrust her. The caveat is that she is not, nor ever has been, an open person with anybody. Just the way she was brought up (I see this very clearly in her parents and family...)

So basically, my wife never talks about her past willingly, and the few times I've ever inquired, she gets defensive. She has given up few details, and generally gets annoyed if the issue is pressed.

For those who don't know, incidentally, we were each others first girlfriend/boyfriend, way back in high school. 3 years together, broke up at the end of school, went our separate ways. I was with someone for 14 years, she had several long term relationships, and we rediscovered each other (when we were both single, fyi) and have since married. That's the background.

When we got back together, I was, of course, curious as to her past, after our first go round. So I asked, innocently, never accusingly or in any way that (I thought) would come across as our relationship or how I thought of her depending on the answer. In other words, I wouldn't move on regardless of her answers.

Initially, I got very cagy answers, the usual "none of your business" and some white lies. Over the first 6 months of our relationship, I genuinely thought she had stuff to hide and it wrecked me inside. I made it clear to her that if she had a dodgy past, it would not impact how I felt about her (and it wouldn't have). Her answers (or lack of) actually did the opposite, and I did start to wonder if she was right for me. I stuck it out, because everything else is great, and I'm glad I did.

I have learned over the years that she is like that about everything, and to everyone. She really doesn't talk about, discuss, or vent to anyone, about anything. It's a family thing. I'm a talker, and a venter, and a solution-finder, so we are total opposites when it comes to this. She has made concessions in regards to our relationship (which is great of her), as I made it clear that if this is the way she is when we have relationship issues, I won't stand for it. When it comes to US, she needs to talk and communicate. So far, so good.

But what's always bothered me is her lack of trust, I guess, in regards to being open about her past. It leaves me wondering and drawing my own conclusions, which isn't a good thing.

Now I want to be clear - past history means very little to me. I won't say "nothing", because that's not true. There are a handful of things that would put me off of a relationship, but they are on the extreme end of things. (like serial cheater, escort girl, etc.)

I also want to mention that I have accepted this about her, and I do NOT obsess - I really don't. I love her for who she is, and we're happy.

However, it will always slightly hang over me that she can not be open to me about her past - it's THAT that bothers me, not her actual past, whatever it may be.

If it helps matters at all, what little information I have come by is that she has had many more partners than I have. I've had 4, plus 2 that did not result in piv sex. So 6, total. She has had 3 longterm relationships (3 years plus), an undetermined # of shorter ones (a few weeks to a few months, 3 that I know of), at least one fwb relationship, and an undetermined # of ONS.

What I am having a hard time with, as well, is whether her number means anything, at all. She did go through a period (less than a year, when she just hit the bar age) in which she did not have a boyfriend, and she had several, or more, ONS. The "wild years", which we all have to varying degrees. No problem. Over a 15 year period, between our first time around, and now, I've estimated her number at 20-30. Which isn't really THAT out of whack. 6 of those years were spent with 2 partners, about a year with another. 3 partners over 7 years. The one "wild" year, with 5-10 partners, maybe. Leaving 6 years to make up another, say 10-15.

Over all, the number is high, I know, especially given the 6-7 years with 3 partners. But she's far from a sex addict, which leaves me to believe it's more an esteem thing, or being wanted, or being non-committal, etc. Our sex life is infrequent BUT it's good. She says she's never been into sex, ever, and I believe her. However I find that she's always had a poor attitude towards it. It's just something you do with your partner, and it doesn't mean a whole lot. It's part of the relationship, but also it's not, if that makes any sense. It's separated somehow.

So am I missing the forest for the trees here? Is it really a case of it not mattering to her? Is she ashamed? (I don't think so, I really don't, I know her well enough). Is she keeping it from me because of my relative inexperience because she doesn't want me to see her in a bad light? Or is it, to her, just not of my damn business?

(addendum: I don't disagree with people who say it's none of their partners business, however I also don't think it's necessarily something people have to hide. Kind of on the fence about it. To me, it's not necessary to know one's past, it's really only the present that matters, however it's almost insulting to have things hidden, even if they don't ultimately matter)


----------



## Mavash.

It's hard because if we tell the truth we are judged for it. If we withhold we are judged for that too.

Lose/lose.

I recognize that I'm generalizing. Many people are open and honest but some are very private. Then there is variances between the two extremes.

Most of this is rooted in childhood. Learning to trust is harder than it sounds.


----------



## samyeagar

The problem with the past is that it tends to become the present...at the most inopportune times.


----------



## Mavash.

The past ALWAYS comes back to haunt you.

Absolutely.


----------



## samyeagar

So many people fail to understand that while it is one persons past, they have had maybe years to deal with and process it, and store it in their past, when things come up, it becomes their partners present. It is new, and fresh to them. They have not had the benefit of time to process it, and to expect them to just leave their new present in the past is unfair.


----------



## RandomDude

Not a woman but having married a woman with a past + having a past myself, from my experience:

She won't open up to you unless you make it known that you are the type of person who would understand/never judge and from sounds of things I don't think you will ever understand. So what's the point in her sharing her story to you? Not to mention it doesn't matter now, why keep poking at something she has no intention of remembering? Does it cause issues in your marriage? If not, leave it be.


----------



## tiredwife&sahm

1) I honestly don't think it is your business.

2) You are being disingenuous. I believe your wife is smart enough to know that you will hold it against her even if you say you won't. Based on what I've read here, you will. You won't come off that way initially, but you will end up letting it eat you up inside and soon as an argument ensues throw it in her face.Not only that it won't just stop at knowing the basic stuff. You are going to want to get graphic and the more graphic the more jealous you are going to get. It will change your relationship drastically from the point she shares any of this stuff with you and yes, you will see her differently even if you don't want to. That's something that's not your fault, men are territorial. Realize that your wife has been with other people, you have her now so leave it at that. Don't go seeking for something you don't want to find.


----------



## Openminded

I am not a trusting person due to childhood abuse. And I very strongly would resent anyone prying into my past. If I choose to volunteer information that's a different story. 

Let go of it. She doesn't want to discuss it and that's her right. She wasn't with you then so if she chose to do every male in your town that's on her. 

You accept her life during that period or you don't. It certainly can't be changed now.


----------



## COGypsy

I think that the odds are that you'll be very judging if you're poking at numbers, motivation, timing, reasoning. To me, that's a huge red flag in a partner. Talking about past experience generally is one thing. But I can't see any benefit to rehashing the psychological motivation behind events from decades ago. Someone that wanted that kind of information is someone that would be off my island pretty quickly.


----------



## samyeagar

Motivation and mindset can be important. My STBW has a rather full past and I am aware of some of it, mostly generalities. There were a couple of extreme situations that were likely to come up where her motivations, feelings and mindset were very important to understand to put things in the proper context.


----------



## COGypsy

And see...if someone needs "context" in order to accept me, then I don't see how I can accept them feeling entitled to make that judgement on something that didn't have a thing to do with them.

Everyone's dealbreakers are different. I feel that you're either in or you're out and I'm not going to spend my time convincing someone that I deserve their time and affection if they have any doubts. If someone's past or present isn't a fit for my ethics, morals or lifestyle, I'm not going to spend my time trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Not everyone has such a black or white approach though and I get that.


----------



## samyeagar

COGypsy said:


> And see...if someone needs "context" in order to accept me, then I don't see how I can accept them feeling entitled to make that judgement on something that didn't have a thing to do with them.
> 
> Everyone's dealbreakers are different. I feel that you're either in or you're out and I'm not going to spend my time convincing someone that I deserve their time and affection if they have any doubts. If someone's past or present isn't a fit for my ethics, morals or lifestyle, I'm not going to spend my time trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Not everyone has such a black or white approach though and I get that.


Context...my STBW had a revenge/exit affair with her ex husbands son...her step son a couple of years before we met. Said step son was going to be living with her and her kids for a period of time. That is one of those things that was likely to come up in some way, and understanding her mindset, emotional motivations and such were crucial to understanding and accepting that situation.

That situation had nothing to do with me, but oh boy would that have been a shock if I had not been prepared for it. Her past did have a direct affect on MY PRESENT.


----------



## samyeagar

COGypsy said:


> *And see...if someone needs "context" in order to accept me, then I don't see how I can accept them feeling entitled to make that judgement on something that didn't have a thing to do with them*.
> 
> Everyone's dealbreakers are different. I feel that you're either in or you're out and I'm not going to spend my time convincing someone that I deserve their time and affection if they have any doubts. If someone's past or present isn't a fit for my ethics, morals or lifestyle, I'm not going to spend my time trying to fit a square peg into a round hole. Not everyone has such a black or white approach though and I get that.


This also comes off as very defensive and un empathetic. Context doesn't have anything to do with passing judgement. I did not judge my STBW in the above situation example. I have never judged her because of her past.

This is tied hand in hand with Retroactive Jealousy and so many people have absolutely no understanding of RJ what so ever, though many of them think they are experts at it and have all the answers.


----------



## COGypsy

samyeagar said:


> This also comes off as very defensive and un empathetic. Context doesn't have anything to do with passing judgement. I did not judge my STBW in the above situation example. I have never judged her because of her past.
> 
> This is tied hand in hand with Retroactive Jealousy and so many people have absolutely no understanding of RJ what so ever, though many of them think they are experts at it and have all the answers.


I don't understand jealousy of any type. In my mind it's tied so closely to power and control that I find it to be a dealbreaker. Since I'm single, my first priority is my happiness and satisfaction. If something is angst-filled and not generally enjoyable, I move on--whether it's a job, a boyfriend or a friendship. Like I said, I'm pretty black and white about how I want my own life to go.


----------



## samyeagar

COGypsy said:


> *I don't understand jealousy of any type*. In my mind it's tied so closely to power and control that I find it to be a dealbreaker. Since I'm single, my first priority is my happiness and satisfaction. If something is angst-filled and not generally enjoyable, I move on--whether it's a job, a boyfriend or a friendship. Like I said, I'm pretty black and white about how I want my own life to go.


Retroactive jealousy, as those of us who are familiar with it have explained in other threads, it really is a hugely misnamed thing. Jealousy has nothing to do with it at all.

As far as jealousy of any type being a bad thing...I think many will disagree with that. You are correct, jealousy CAN be used to fuel power and control issues, but one does no lead to the other. They are mutually exclusive.


----------



## COGypsy

I worked with abused women and their kids for nearly 5 years. In every relationship there were extremely high levels of jealousy from the abuser. In my observation, jealousy is a means of changing the behavior of their partner which is pretty much power and control. That to me makes it a huge red flag in a relationship. Respectful and considerate behavior in a relationship is one thing. If I feel the need to tell the person I'm with, or be told by the person I'm with who can be spoken to, what should be worn or where one can go--that's a serious problem and a good indication that we're not a good match. Jealousy to me is rife with demands and implied threats. Not something I deal with very well.


----------



## samyeagar

COGypsy said:


> I worked with abused women and their kids for nearly 5 years. In every relationship there were extremely high levels of jealousy from the abuser. In my observation, jealousy is a means of changing the behavior of their partner which is pretty much power and control. That to me makes it a huge red flag in a relationship. Respectful and considerate behavior in a relationship is one thing. *If I feel the need to tell the person I'm with, or be told by the person I'm with who can be spoken to, what should be worn or where one can go--that's a serious problem and a good indication that we're not a good match*. Jealousy to me is rife with demands and implied threats. Not something I deal with very well.


That can be a serious problem for sure, but not necessarily jealousy, or even controlling. Too many people throw out the word "controlling" as a way to shame others for simply saying what they are not OK with.

I understand where you are coming from as I was raised by parents who are a sociologist and psychologist. My mother spent many years as a court advocate for women who were victims of domestic abuse.

I can see how the experiences you saw could color your views on this, and it is perfectly fine and understandable for you to set those boundaries for yourself, but not necessarily for someone else. That is why I feel that context IS important.


----------



## Therealbrighteyes

samyeagar said:


> That can be a serious problem for sure, but not necessarily jealousy, or even controlling. Too many people throw out the word "controlling" as a way to shame others for simply saying what they are not OK with.


It's perfectly okay to enforce your own boundaries of what is and is not okay for you. When you try to enforce other peoples boundaries is when it becomes controlling and dangerous.


----------



## COGypsy

samyeagar said:


> That can be a serious problem for sure, but not necessarily jealousy, or even controlling. *Too many people throw out the word "controlling" as a way to shame others for simply saying what they are not OK with.*
> 
> I understand where you are coming from as I was raised by parents who are a sociologist and psychologist. My mother spent many years as a court advocate for women who were victims of domestic abuse.
> 
> I can see how the experiences you saw could color your views on this, and *it is perfectly fine and understandable for you to set those boundaries for yourself, but not necessarily for someone else. * That is why I feel that context IS important.


Stating one's boundaries is one thing. That opens a door to discussion. My perception is that jealousy is demanding or threatening to induce the desired changes and that is what I won't tolerate.

My point all along is that this is a huge dealbreaker for me. Other people have dealbreakers that wouldn't even be a blip on my radar. And we all have a vast range of borderline issues to work out on a case by case basis. But in answer to the original question about why someone wouldn't be open to rehashing old news, that's a big part of my answer.


----------



## samyeagar

Over the summer, my STBW was going to the beach with one of her friends she hadn't seen in a while. She was trying to figure out which suit she was going to wear. She pulled out this one really tiny bikini that I had not seen before. It was TINY. I was like No way in hell are you wearing that without me there to enjoy it too. She wore one of her other ones that wasn't quite so tiny. I wasn't being controlling or jealous, and she knew that. I didn't freak out and demand she wear a burka or anything like that. In fact, the motivation behind what I said was more to express how good she looked to me. As it was, she understood that. If she really wanted to wear that suit, I would not tried to stop her, or really cared ultimately.

Mate guarding should not be confused with jealousy or controlling behavior. Again, it can turn into that, but one does not necessarily lead to another.


----------



## Caribbean Man

COGypsy said:


> *I don't understand jealousy of any type. In my mind it's tied so closely to power and control that I find it to be a dealbreaker.*


I get that it's a dealbreaker for you. But you do understand that the fundamental premise behind your perception of jealousy is seriously flawed.
Jealousy is a very NATURAL human emotion, like love. In fact if one cannot feel jealousy they have not truly loved.

Loving someone makes one vulnerable. Along that spectrum of vulnerabilities , lies jealousy.


----------



## samyeagar

COGypsy said:


> Stating one's boundaries is one thing. That opens a door to discussion. My perception is that jealousy is demanding or threatening to induce the desired changes and that is what I won't tolerate.
> 
> My point all along is that this is a huge dealbreaker for me. Other people have dealbreakers that wouldn't even be a blip on my radar. And we all have a vast range of borderline issues to work out on a case by case basis.* But in answer to the original question about why someone wouldn't be open to rehashing old news, that's a big part of my answer*.


One thing you have to be very careful of in keeping to a no disclosure of the past stance is taking into consideration that it will quite likely come up at some time not of your own choosing, and not by your partner. Depending on what it is, that could make for a very uncomfortable conversation that goes down the road of trust, deceit, character.

Keeping your past to yourself is a choice that is fine to make, but you really do need to find a partner that is ok with that, and that will be ok with it popping up as well.


----------



## Caribbean Man

I think quite a few on this thread are forgetting that relationships only thrive when two independent people become interdependent .

Two independent people CANNOT have a successful intimate relationship.
Interdependence is one of the key pillars which defines a relationship as intimate.

If you cannot depend or don't need your partner for emotional support in _anything_ then your relationship is lacking real intimacy.


----------



## TikiKeen

Oddly, you all are discussing fear-based emotions: jealousy, anger, protectiveness (as an emotion and as an action), avoidance (OP's gal), and controlling behaviors. Together or apart, they're all fear-based insecurity rearing its head.

OP gal's fear and high walls are a concern, not her past itself, I think is what he's saying.

My guy and I both come from abusive backgrounds. Things we had mostly dealt with were easy to discuss. Hidden, shame-based, fear-based experiences...not so much. Had he demanded to know my exact number, I'd have bailed. It was an intrusive question, and "a lot" or "over __ number" had to suffice for an answer. He bore the brunt of my experiences, which came out in a negative way until I had dealt with them more.

Once he realized that a side benefit is that he also bears the very positive brunt of my experiences (in the bedroom), things went more smoothly. It's all for him, now, and that's what's important.

OP, approach her with empathy. Hiding doesn't mean she was a criminal or something; it likely means that revealing the hidden stuff is very painful for her.


----------



## samyeagar

Caribbean Man said:


> I think quite a few on this thread are forgetting that relationships only thrive when two independent people become* interdependent* .
> 
> Two independent people CANNOT have a successful intimate relationship.
> Interdependence is one of the key pillars which defines a relationship as intimate.
> 
> If you cannot depend or don't need your partner for emotional support in _anything_ then your relationship is lacking real intimacy.


Just to clarify for what may come next...

Interdependence is NOT co-dependence.


----------



## COGypsy

Caribbean Man said:


> I get that it's a dealbreaker for you. But you do understand that the fundamental premise behind your perception of jealousy is seriously flawed.
> Jealousy is a very NATURAL human emotion, like love. In fact if one cannot feel jealousy they have not truly loved.
> 
> Loving someone makes one vulnerable. Along that spectrum of vulnerabilities , lies jealousy.


I would have to counter that with if one does not feel trust, then they are not truly loving. To me, trust and jealousy are mutually exclusive in an intimate relationship. Lots of feelings are natural, that doesn't always make them appropriate.

I've never had a partner that behaved in such as way that I felt I needed to attempt to influence their choices or behavior. Perhaps I'm just lucky like that. Perhaps I just run colder than other people. Maybe it's a basic difference between men and women.


----------



## Caribbean Man

samyeagar said:


> Just to clarify for what may come next...
> 
> Interdependence is NOT co-dependence.


You are quick on the draw and know your stuff!


----------



## Caribbean Man

COGypsy said:


> I would have to counter that with if one does not feel trust, then they are not truly loving. To me, trust and jealousy are mutually exclusive in an intimate relationship. Lots of feelings are natural, that doesn't always make them appropriate.
> 
> I've never had a partner that behaved in such as way that I felt I needed to attempt to influence their choices or behavior. Perhaps I'm just lucky like that. Perhaps I just run colder than other people. Maybe it's a basic difference between men and women.


That's why I said your fundamental premise is wrong.

There is a healthy type of jealousy and there is an unhealthy jealousy.
The key to differentiating between the two is motivation. One is the by product of insecurity and low self esteem, the other is connected to desiring intimate love and attention ,exclusively to oneself , especially when it is withheld.

If your SO, paid attention to some other woman instead of you , then you feel disrespected. That feeling of disrespect stems from jealousy. If you feel nothing or are indifferent , then you were not in love with your SO.

Here's another example,
There's good, well earned trust and there's downright stupid , blind , trust.


----------



## samyeagar

Caribbean Man said:


> You are quick on the draw and know your stuff!


In it's simpleist form, I think interdependence is the ability to function with a person, codependence is the inability to function without them.


----------



## COGypsy

Caribbean Man said:


> That's why I said your fundamental premise is wrong.
> 
> There is a healthy type of jealousy and there is an unhealthy jealousy.
> The key to differentiating between the two is motivation. One is the by product of insecurity and low self esteem, the other is connected to desiring intimate love and attention ,exclusively to oneself , especially when it is withheld.
> 
> If your SO, paid attention to some other woman instead of you , then you feel disrespected. That feeling of disrespect stems from jealousy. If you feel nothing or are indifferent , then you were not in love with your SO.
> 
> Just like there's good healthy trust and downright blind, stupid trust.


Then it sounds like I've been lucky in that I haven't experienced my partners paying a level of attention to other people that would make me feel jealous or disrespected. 

In my opinion, you either want to be with someone or you can leave at any time, you trust or you don't. If you're not secure in either yourself or the relationship--why bother? It's not benefiting either of you at that point, so it's better to find someone that's a closer match that to spend time and energy on something that isn't a good fit.


----------



## samyeagar

COGypsy said:


> Then it sounds like I've been lucky in that I haven't experienced my partners paying a level of attention to other people that would make me feel jealous or disrespected.
> 
> In my opinion, *you either want to be with someone or you can leave at any time, you trust or you don't. If you're not secure in either yourself or the relationship--why bother?* It's not benefiting either of you at that point, so it's better to find someone that's a closer match that to spend time and energy on something that isn't a good fit.


I think this gets to the heart of what CM was saying about interdependence.

It sounds an awful lot like you are suggesting that one should not have to try, actually work at the relationship. If you don't like me EXACTLY as I am, then why bother.

An example...I never got into the habit of saying "Bles you" when people sneezed. I never did it. My STBW and I were talking one day about things that bugged us about the other. That was the one she came up with. She had been raised to say that when people sneezed. From that day on, I have said it every time I have heard her sneeze.

I tried. I changed something about myself for my partner. What exactly does that make me?


----------



## COGypsy

Reasonable discussion isn't nearly the same thing as jealous demands. In the example that CM gave, with a partner paying attention to someone else to the point of feeling disrespected and jealous, I do feel that we're free to choose who we want to be with. 

There are a thousand compromises that we make in relationships. My BF doesn't like anything spicy or vinegary tasting. So I fix my Mexican food and hot wings on the days he isn't around. That's reasonable to me. My ex was hugely fixated on having the bed made to military precision every morning whereas I was more of a "pull up the covers and fluff the pillows" person. I learned to at least try to make the bed to his specifications. Irrational to me, important to him, so I did it.

A compromise like that is a long, long way from "No way in hell are you wearing that/going there/talking to that person". I'm confident enough that no matter what my BF wears, that he's coming back to me regardless of what he might wear or who he might talk to when he's out somewhere. If that ever changes, I trust he would leave before anything else happened or believe me--shortly thereafter. I just don't understand how a relationship could be anything but an emotional drain if you have to worry all the time about who they see, what they wear, who they are talking to, who might be talking to them.... Why is that something you would want in your life? I can worry about work, my family, or any number of immutable parts of my life, why pour my time into a voluntary arrangement that causes me so much stress?


----------



## ntamph

If my hypothetical future wife is good to me, ****s me regularly, is honest and open about US then I wouldn't care if she had furry BDSM orgies with Martians.


----------



## samyeagar

COGypsy said:


> Reasonable discussion isn't nearly the same thing as jealous demands. In the example that CM gave, with a partner paying attention to someone else to the point of feeling disrespected and jealous, I do feel that we're free to choose who we want to be with.
> 
> There are a thousand compromises that we make in relationships. My BF doesn't like anything spicy or vinegary tasting. So I fix my Mexican food and hot wings on the days he isn't around. That's reasonable to me. My ex was hugely fixated on having the bed made to military precision every morning whereas I was more of a "pull up the covers and fluff the pillows" person. I learned to at least try to make the bed to his specifications. Irrational to me, important to him, so I did it.
> 
> A compromise like that is a long, long way from "No way in hell are you wearing that/going there/talking to that person". I'm confident enough that no matter what my BF wears, that he's coming back to me regardless of what he might wear or who he might talk to when he's out somewhere. If that ever changes, I trust he would leave before anything else happened or believe me--shortly thereafter. I just don't understand how a relationship could be anything but an emotional drain if you have to worry all the time about who they see, what they wear, who they are talking to, who might be talking to them.... Why is that something you would want in your life? I can worry about work, my family, or any number of immutable parts of my life, why pour my time into a voluntary arrangement that causes me so much stress?


This is the beauty of differences among people, and why there is someone out there for everyone.

Personally, I like a bit of possessiveness from my SO. It lets me know she cares and is not taking me for granted. A certain level of discomfort with things helps keep one from falling into the trap of taking your partner for granted. When one starts taking the other for granted, they tend to get complacent, quit trying. Jealousy in particular is the motivator for many people to ensure they don't get lazy.


----------



## samyeagar

ntamph said:


> If my hypothetical future wife is good to me, ****s me regularly, is honest and open about US *then I wouldn't care if she had furry BDSM orgies with Martians*.


Ahhh...would it be different if you knew nothing about it before hand, and then one day, five years later, out drinking with some friends, one of them starts talking about the good times they had, and what if the friend who brought it up was a guy who was involved in one of the orgies with your wife?


----------



## COGypsy

samyeagar said:


> This is the beauty of differences among people, and why there is someone out there for everyone.


Exactly! There's someone out there for everyone!


----------



## LadyDee

Sometimes things from our past are meant to stay there and if your wife wants to keep those things there, in her mind in the past, then you need to leave it alone. 

Since many of these things we went through in our early childhood and on cannot be changed, there is no reason to dig it all up, when nothing but more hurt will come from it. 

We have to live for the future and enjoy what we have now!


----------



## samyeagar

LadyDee said:


> *Sometimes things from our past are meant to stay there* and if your wife wants to keep those things there, in her mind in the past, then you need to leave it alone.
> 
> Since many of these things we went through in our early childhood and on cannot be changed, there is no reason to dig it all up, when nothing but more hurt will come from it.
> 
> We have to live for the future and enjoy what we have now!


It would be great if it worked that way in reality huh? As I said earlier though, the past has a way of turning into the present at the most inopportune times.

My STBW and I were getting ready to go out on the boat with some friends. She asked me if I was going to be ok with it. It was a curious question, so I asked why wouldn't I be. Well, it turned out that she had thought she told me about something from her past but she hadn't.

One of the women who was going to be there was one of the women my STBW had had a threesome with in a misguided attempt to control her husbands fidelity. My STBW was concerned that the friend might bring it up since one of the guys who was going to be there was the friends husband at the time, and the friend wanted my STBW to be in a threesome with them for the same reasons.

Well, sure enough, the friend got drunk and started talking about it. I'm glad I had the warning before hand or it would have been really awkward to say the least. The threesome and suggested threesome had happened nearly a decade earlier.


----------



## samyeagar

ntamph said:


> If my hypothetical future wife is good to me, ****s me regularly, is honest and open about US then I wouldn't care if she had furry BDSM orgies with Martians.


Thinking more about it, if my wife had orgies with Martians, I'd be selling that story to every talk show and reality show producer out there...I digress


----------



## Caribbean Man

samyeagar said:


> In it's simpleist form, I think interdependence is the ability to function with a person, *codependence is the inability to function without them.*


:iagree:


I never looked at it that way.
lol,
I think I can learn quite a lot from you!


----------



## Caribbean Man

COGypsy said:


> Then it sounds like I've been lucky in that I haven't experienced my partners paying a level of attention to other people that would make me feel jealous or disrespected.
> 
> In my opinion, you either want to be with someone or you can leave at any time, you trust or you don't. If you're not secure in either yourself or the relationship--why bother? It's not benefiting either of you at that point, so it's better to find someone that's a closer match that to spend time and energy on something that isn't a good fit.


I can identify with your thinking in this post, in the past I used to think like that.
But in reality finding someone to match your fixed mindset in not that simple.
But then we find someone we're really attracted to,
And in comes compromise.
Compromise => Horse Trading => Give & Take.
The ability to compromise is directly connected to our emotional maturity.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

samyeagar said:


> Over the summer, my STBW was going to the beach with one of her friends she hadn't seen in a while. She was trying to figure out which suit she was going to wear. She pulled out this one really tiny bikini that I had not seen before. It was TINY. I was like No way in hell are you wearing that without me there to enjoy it too. She wore one of her other ones that wasn't quite so tiny. * I wasn't being controlling or jealous, and she knew that. I didn't freak out and demand she wear a burka or anything like that. In fact, the motivation behind what I said was more to express how good she looked to me. As it was, she understood that. If she really wanted to wear that suit, I would not tried to stop her, or really cared ultimately.
> 
> Mate guarding should not be confused with jealousy or controlling behavior. Again, it can turn into that, but one does not necessarily lead to another.*


Your motivation was Flirtatious, uplifting but a word of caution in it as well - because you DO care, you know how men think...and this is healthy.. this is what loving husband's / Bf's DO.. expressed in this write up...



> *Two types of jealousy*
> 
> Jealousy can be either healthy or unhealthy. Healthy jealousy is a means to guard your territory and comes from a sincere care and commitment to a relationship. On the other hand, unhealthy jealousy manifests itself through lies, threats, self-pity, and feelings of inadequacy, inferiority and insecurity.
> 
> *The good kind*
> 
> Healthy jealousy guards the heart of a marriage because it:
> 
> *1*. shows your commitment to the relationship protects your marriage by safeguarding the relationship against evil attacks
> 
> *2.*. deepens your openness with each other and makes you accountable through honest communication
> 
> *3*. helps you confront major threats to your marriage and head them off before they become major problems
> 
> *4.* If we care, we will respect our spouse’s jealousy -this can be a warning of danger ahead. If your spouse is a secure person and desires to protect your marriage against cracks, you need to listen. Confront the issue head-on by finding the reason for the jealousy, then making changes to keep you both out of danger.
> 
> *Wives*: *Trust your husband’s instincts*. He knows how men think, what they want and how they pursue it. So, it would be foolish of you not to heed his warning.
> 
> *Men:* *Trust your wife’s instincts.* If she suggests that another woman is behaving inappropriately, your wife is probably right. Most women have radar, an innate alertness to nonverbal communication and an ability to translate body language and tone into emotional facts. Your wife probably is able to see these things clearly, so don’t criticize or blame her warnings on insecurity.
> 
> *The bad*
> 
> Unhealthy jealousy is altogether different. It stems from comparing yourself to others and feeling inadequate, unimportant, inferior and pitiful. Some spouses have experienced a lot of loss in life – whether divorce, death or abandonment in childhood – and they may bring unresolved issues into the relationship in the form of jealousy. Yet when a person carries this jealousy to pathological extremes, it will dominate a relationship.
> 
> A chronically jealous spouse will try to control a relationship through exaggeration, self-pity, lies, threats and/or manipulation. When the other partner resists, the jealous person reacts by becoming even more controlling. Then the other partner resists further by confiding in a friend or seeking relief outside the marriage. Sometimes this can become a downward spiral.





samyeagar said:


> This also comes off as very defensive and un empathetic. Context doesn't have anything to do with passing judgement. I did not judge my STBW in the above situation example. * I have never judged her because of her past.*


 From all I have read of his story & his STBW....Samyeagar is quite the example to uphold for a man NOT putting a woman's past against her.. and she..is also a fine example of a very truthful willingly transparent woman who has trusted him enough to share IT ALL... the good, the bad and the ugly..and because of this... their intimacy has grown ..these things can not be underestimated in a healthy relationship.

We all need to be accepted and understood for who we are...and where we came from... how can we even begin to do that by shielding ourselves...projecting an >> "it's none of your business" attitude with the one we profess to love more in this world above anyone else..... 

I read the Op's post like everyone else here ,and it didn't scream to me he was judging his wife ......it was more about her being secretive about MANY things, even to her friends, her family...(not just him)... I bet many women on here would have just as hard of a time with a husband/ bf who was this "emotionally closed" in comparison... 

Can you all see that her lack of coming forth...a willingness to share... is something he would appreciate as HE himself is this sort of person... He doesn't understand it.. it has a way of his drawing darker conclusions.. 

It also has a way of speaking to us....they do not trust US... and this can hurt a spouse as well..feeling "shut out " at every turn.... it's like feeling an impenetrable wall between 2 people...this can not help but take a blow to emotional intimacy in other areas as well.


----------



## Faithful Wife

Jealousy is seen in other mammals, it is totally natural, and actually samyeager, it is the basis for mate guarding.

But who cares?

It really is ok for some of us.

I love that my husband and I jealously guard the boundaries of our marriage. I'm not gonna share, and neither is he.

My husband doesn't let me wear sl*tty clothes when he isn't around, either. And frankly, I'm glad he doesn't because if there weren't those kinds of rules in our marriage I would definitely be testing every boundary. My whole life before him, I wore clothes that showed far too much skin. I loved it and I loved the attention. I wasn't ashamed of my desire to wear those clothes, either. But when we met and he started saying "hmm...can you please not wear that shirt, it is too revealing for the place we are going tonight and the guys we are going to see will be trying to look down your shirt all night"...this was the first time any guy in my life had shown any desire to "own" me like that before.

I handed him my leash after that and have never been sorry for it. He keeps me in line and I love it!


----------



## JustSomeGuyWho

I have noticed that some freshly divorced woman go into wild and freaky NSA sex party mode. Lots of different guys. I anticipate a divorce is in my near future. I'm sort of a one woman at a time person so if you ( a future woman I'm dating) have done this it's fine ... but please, I don't want to know about it, lol.

_Posted via *Topify* using Android_


----------



## samyeagar

Faithful Wife said:


> *Jealousy is seen in other mammals, it is totally natural, and actually samyeager, it is the basis for mate guarding.*
> 
> But who cares?
> 
> It really is ok for some of us.
> 
> I love that my husband and I jealously guard the boundaries of our marriage. I'm not gonna share, and neither is he.
> 
> My husband doesn't let me wear sl*tty clothes when he isn't around, either. And frankly, I'm glad he doesn't because if there weren't those kinds of rules in our marriage I would definitely be testing every boundary. My whole life before him, I wore clothes that showed far too much skin. I loved it and I loved the attention. I wasn't ashamed of my desire to wear those clothes, either. But when we met and he started saying "hmm...can you please not wear that shirt, it is too revealing for the place we are going tonight and the guys we are going to see will be trying to look down your shirt all night"...this was the first time any guy in my life had shown any desire to "own" me like that before.
> 
> I handed him my leash after that and have never been sorry for it. He keeps me in line and I love it!


Just a point of clarification, I used the term 'jealousy' in my post regarding mate guarding with the connotation that COGypsy was using, the unhealthy type she was describing, not the healthy type SA pointed out above


----------



## samyeagar

JustSomeGuyWho said:


> I have noticed that some freshly divorced woman go into wild and freaky NSA sex party mode. Lots of different guys. I anticipate a divorce is in my near future. I'm sort of a one woman at a time person so if you ( a future woman I'm dating) have done this it's fine ... but please, I don't want to know about it, lol.
> 
> _Posted via *Topify* using Android_


Just make sure she doesn't drag you around anywhere that her hookups could be, or you just may find out any way...the hard way.


----------



## JustSomeGuyWho

samyeagar said:


> JustSomeGuyWho said:
> 
> 
> 
> I have noticed that some freshly divorced woman go into wild and freaky NSA sex party mode. Lots of different guys. I anticipate a divorce is in my near future. I'm sort of a one woman at a time person so if you ( a future woman I'm dating) have done this it's fine ... but please, I don't want to know about it, lol.
> 
> _Posted via *Topify* using Android_
> 
> 
> 
> Just make sure she doesn't drag you around anywhere that her hookups could be, or you just may find out any way...the hard way.
Click to expand...

Lol ... I'll be sure to mention that. I'm sure I can bring that up in a way that isn't awkward or insulting 

_Posted via *Topify* using Android_


----------



## samyeagar

All these people that try and argue that the past is the past, I can sort of see where they are coming from, but the reality is, the past is never really the past.

I agree that most of the mundane details never really have any need to be explored for most people, but the more broad and colorful that past is, the more problematic it becomes hiding it, burying it, ignoring it or what have you.


----------



## alexm

Bang, and there it is. Precisely why this has become - not an issue, but - something that pops up with me from time to time.

When we first started dating (the second time!) I was in the midst of a divorce where my wife of 14 years had had at least one affair, and left for another man. Perhaps it was too soon for me to start dating (a bit less than 5 months after), but my mindset was on protecting myself from that happening again. Thus, I asked questions, that in retrospect, I should not have.

However, I did eventually (within a few months) "get over" the lack of response, and learned to trust in other ways. I forgot about it, and didn't think about it.

Now this is where samyeagar's post makes sense to me - some of this stuff ultimately has trickled out over the years, and it's not pleasant to seemingly be the only one who isn't part of that conversation, when her friends or family or whomever mention "so-and-so".

It's not jealousy, and I don't think it's even retroactive jealousy (though I fully understand what that is). It's more parts of a life that I am not aware of - whether I should be or not is moot - that I asked about, and was given a "no comment" type of answer, or a whitewash, or lies.

I just don't quite understand where some people come from in terms of this. I don't volunteer information like this myself, but if my partner wanted to know, I'd answer. If it's nothing to be ashamed of, so what?



samyeagar said:


> One thing you have to be very careful of in keeping to a no disclosure of the past stance is taking into consideration that it will quite likely come up at some time not of your own choosing, and not by your partner. Depending on what it is, that could make for a very uncomfortable conversation that goes down the road of trust, deceit, character.
> 
> Keeping your past to yourself is a choice that is fine to make, but you really do need to find a partner that is ok with that, and that will be ok with it popping up as well.


----------



## alexm

Thank you! You said it exactly how I was thinking it, but didn't have the where-with-all to put into words 

Every sentence is spot on.



SimplyAmorous said:


> I read the Op's post like everyone else here ,and it didn't scream to me he was judging his wife ......it was more about her being secretive about MANY things, even to her friends, her family...(not just him)... I bet many women on here would have just as hard of a time with a husband/ bf who was this "emotionally closed" in comparison...
> 
> Can you all see that her lack of coming forth...a willingness to share... is something he would appreciate as HE himself is this sort of person... He doesn't understand it.. it has a way of his drawing darker conclusions..
> 
> It also has a way of speaking to us....they do not trust US... and this can hurt a spouse as well..feeling "shut out " at every turn.... it's like feeling an impenetrable wall between 2 people...this can not help but take a blow to emotional intimacy in other areas as well.


----------



## alexm

I agree with this.

However, I can also see the other side now, too. 

The few things that have come up over the years, to which I was not privy to initially, even though I inquired, did not hurt me in the way that some of you think. As I already said, it was more me not having any knowledge, even though it seemed to me that the friend/family member/whomever who mentioned them in passing assumed I would have known.

People GENERALLY know about their partners pasts. It's not a given, but it's assumed more often than not. And it's also assumed that if they are still together, and know about some sordid details, then the one partner is okay with it and doesn't care. Therefore when these things are brought up in passing by a friend, it is assumed that his/her partner knows and has not been secretive.

For me, these situations were awkward, especially when it became obvious to the third party that I did not know.

I would never, ever, be mad or upset at my wife for something she did before me (and long ago, for that matter). What does make me upset is keeping me in the dark.

If I never asked, I would never expect her to be forthcoming. But I did ask, for reasons that made sense at the time, and I did expect some sort of response. Didn't have to be the whole story of her life or anything, or any details. But "no comment" is worse than any answer, in my opinion. I love and adore everything about my wife - everything - except her closed-off demeanour and "none of your business" attitude.

We're partners. We're not each other's possession. We're in this together, and there's nothing wrong with knowing who they are, who they were, what guided them to be the person they are today, all of that.

It's not my right to know all of this, I know that. She can offer up what she wants, if at all. Marriage does not mean I get to know everything. But partnership means implied trust, including in being okay in talking about things like this.

So often we hear people who say they didn't know anything about their ex-wife/husband. (I know, I was one of them). So getting to know what makes our partners tick IS important. We don't need to know everything. It's just important to have someone who trusts YOU enough to talk about things like this, instead of "it's none of your business".





samyeagar said:


> All these people that try and argue that the past is the past, I can sort of see where they are coming from, but the reality is, the past is never really the past.
> 
> I agree that most of the mundane details never really have any need to be explored for most people, but the more broad and colorful that past is, the more problematic it becomes hiding it, burying it, ignoring it or what have you.


----------



## jay1365

alexm said:


> I agree with this.
> 
> However, I can also see the other side now, too.
> 
> The few things that have come up over the years, to which I was not privy to initially, even though I inquired, did not hurt me in the way that some of you think. As I already said, it was more me not having any knowledge, even though it seemed to me that the friend/family member/whomever who mentioned them in passing assumed I would have known.
> 
> People GENERALLY know about their partners pasts. It's not a given, but it's assumed more often than not. And it's also assumed that if they are still together, and know about some sordid details, then the one partner is okay with it and doesn't care. Therefore when these things are brought up in passing by a friend, it is assumed that his/her partner knows and has not been secretive.
> 
> For me, these situations were awkward, especially when it became obvious to the third party that I did not know.
> 
> I would never, ever, be mad or upset at my wife for something she did before me (and long ago, for that matter). What does make me upset is keeping me in the dark.
> 
> If I never asked, I would never expect her to be forthcoming. But I did ask, for reasons that made sense at the time, and I did expect some sort of response. Didn't have to be the whole story of her life or anything, or any details. But "no comment" is worse than any answer, in my opinion. I love and adore everything about my wife - everything - except her closed-off demeanour and "none of your business" attitude.
> 
> We're partners. We're not each other's possession. We're in this together, and there's nothing wrong with knowing who they are, who they were, what guided them to be the person they are today, all of that.
> 
> It's not my right to know all of this, I know that. She can offer up what she wants, if at all. Marriage does not mean I get to know everything. But partnership means implied trust, including in being okay in talking about things like this.
> 
> So often we hear people who say they didn't know anything about their ex-wife/husband. (I know, I was one of them). So getting to know what makes our partners tick IS important. We don't need to know everything. It's just important to have someone who trusts YOU enough to talk about things like this, instead of "it's none of your business".


There is much wisdom in this post. Sometimes things that are not said are way worse than things that are. Especially if one has a vivid imagination.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 2ntnuf

ntamph said:


> If my hypothetical future wife is good to me, ****s me regularly, is honest and open about US then I wouldn't care if she had furry BDSM orgies with Martians.


This is only important in how it relates to the happy sex life you two want. If she still wants BDSM without the orgies naturally, since you would be married, and you don't, it may be a dealbreaker for your relationship. If not talked about somehow, before marriage, you are in for a world of hurt later when she longs for that kind of sex, if you have no desire for it.


----------



## 2ntnuf

> It's not jealousy, and I don't think it's even retroactive jealousy (though I fully understand what that is). It's more parts of a life that I am not aware of - whether I should be or not is moot - that I asked about, and was given a "no comment" type of answer, or a whitewash, or lies.



It's more like a feeling of betrayal of sorts. It's kind of like being disrespected. At least it feels that way. No one needs the details, but just a general "heads up" before getting too serious and while in that relationship is usually well respected by a partner who loves you.


----------



## ntamph

Faithful Wife said:


> Jealousy is seen in other mammals, it is totally natural, and actually samyeager, it is the basis for mate guarding.
> 
> But who cares?
> 
> It really is ok for some of us.
> 
> I love that my husband and I jealously guard the boundaries of our marriage. I'm not gonna share, and neither is he.
> 
> My husband doesn't let me wear sl*tty clothes when he isn't around, either. And frankly, I'm glad he doesn't because if there weren't those kinds of rules in our marriage I would definitely be testing every boundary. My whole life before him, I wore clothes that showed far too much skin. I loved it and I loved the attention. I wasn't ashamed of my desire to wear those clothes, either. But when we met and he started saying "hmm...can you please not wear that shirt, it is too revealing for the place we are going tonight and the guys we are going to see will be trying to look down your shirt all night"...this was the first time any guy in my life had shown any desire to "own" me like that before.
> 
> I handed him my leash after that and have never been sorry for it. He keeps me in line and I love it!


You're a very mysterious woman FW, but "mysterious woman" is kind of redundant.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

alexm said:


> It's not my right to know all of this, I know that. *She can offer up what she wants, if at all. Marriage does not mean I get to know everything. But partnership means implied trust, including in being okay in talking about things like this.
> *
> So often we hear people who say they didn't know anything about their ex-wife/husband. (I know, I was one of them). So getting to know what makes our partners tick IS important. *We don't need to know everything. It's just important to have someone who trusts YOU enough to talk about things like this, instead of "it's none of your business".*


Can I say... .you are more generous than I.... I wouldn't brow beat anyone for information ... no point in that.. but in dating...the 1st hint / vibe I'd get of ..."*It's none of your business*" ...where intimacy is attempting to grow, trust is flourishing....we've been good to each other...sleeping together...sharing about life, love, where we've been, what we've learned...OMG.....huge waving red flag ...a glimpse into the future forever more...a wall...such a person will always hold you at a distance....sharing the parts he/she feels "acceptable" -leaving you in darkness... as you have walked the fruits there of..

Granted...I can understand *some hesitation* from someone who is *not comfortable* early on, expressing this..... but there is a huge difference between an attitude of ..."*I am not comfortable sharing this just yet ...please be patient with me...I want to let you in.. I care about you *" (and the 2 of them work on slowly building their trust with one another...and in this... the other must show beyond a shadow of a doubt how understanding he/she is so such a foundation of trust CAN BE LAID...allowing the other to feel that comfort and acceptance to go there ).....it does take 2 !

In comparison to being met with ....a slap in the face attitude of "*it's none of your business"*... I can see this as nothing more than defensive WALL-ish behavior that screams "there are parts of me that ONLY BELONG TO ME , understand this now buddy and don't go here again". It's final... and it's ..in my opinion, a scream against building a foundation of true acceptance & a lifetime connection that no other can permeate, because it's you 2 against the world... you know every secret place... and still love that person as your own life... 

It's true...we shouldn't openly share with another who will throw "our pearls before swine"...someone who will turn around and use it against us ..giving our deepest shared vulnerabilities to the dogs... it shouldn't be -that when we go on to marry someone, we still feel this way... Hopefully this person has proven they are your greatest friend in life...greatest alley....

I realize this is not always the case though... but it should be, was meant to be.


----------



## Cosmos

Mavash. said:


> It's hard because if we tell the truth we are judged for it. If we withhold we are judged for that too.
> 
> Lose/lose.


:iagree:

And it doesn't end there. From what I've seen on TAM, then comes the digging for details... Should a woman have experimented with a certain act in the past that she (for whatever reason) isn't willing to repeat, she's expected to do so anyway because she somehow 'owes' it to her spouse. 

In some cases, the penance for making and admitting to mistakes in the past can become a life sentence.


----------



## RandomDude

Cosmos said:


> Should a woman have experimented with a certain act in the past that she (for whatever reason) isn't willing to repeat, she's expected to do so anyway because she somehow 'owes' it to her spouse.


Guilty


----------



## Cosmos

Personally, I wouldn't withhold information, but I'm also the sort of person who wouldn't allow someone to manipulate or punish me for something I'd done in the past. I was reared a Catholic, and know all about hair-shirts and eternal damnation, and frankly don't buy into either of them.


----------



## samyeagar

alexm said:


> I agree with this.
> 
> However, I can also see the other side now, too.
> 
> The few things that have come up over the years, to which I was not privy to initially, even though I inquired, did not hurt me in the way that some of you think. As I already said, it was more me not having any knowledge, even though it seemed to me that the friend/family member/whomever who mentioned them in passing assumed I would have known.
> 
> People GENERALLY know about their partners pasts. It's not a given, but it's assumed more often than not. And it's also assumed that if they are still together, and know about some sordid details, then the one partner is okay with it and doesn't care. Therefore when these things are brought up in passing by a friend, it is assumed that his/her partner knows and has not been secretive.
> 
> For me, these situations were awkward, especially when it became obvious to the third party that I did not know.
> 
> I would never, ever, be mad or upset at my wife for something she did before me (and long ago, for that matter). What does make me upset is keeping me in the dark.
> 
> If I never asked, I would never expect her to be forthcoming. But I did ask, for reasons that made sense at the time, and I did expect some sort of response. Didn't have to be the whole story of her life or anything, or any details. But "no comment" is worse than any answer, in my opinion. I love and adore everything about my wife - everything - except her closed-off demeanour and "none of your business" attitude.
> 
> We're partners. We're not each other's possession. We're in this together, and there's nothing wrong with knowing who they are, who they were, what guided them to be the person they are today, all of that.
> 
> It's not my right to know all of this, I know that. She can offer up what she wants, if at all. Marriage does not mean I get to know everything. But partnership means implied trust, including in being okay in talking about things like this.
> 
> So often we hear people who say they didn't know anything about their ex-wife/husband. (I know, I was one of them). So getting to know what makes our partners tick IS important. We don't need to know everything. It's just important to have someone who trusts YOU enough to talk about things like this, instead of "it's none of your business".


I think you really nailed it in that it is more a feeling of being on the outside of an inside joke than anything else. I have been in several social situations with my STBW where the conversation has turned to past relationships, and it is very uncomfortable. Sitting there listening to them talk about who is with who now and someone asking my STBW if she thought so and so was still as good in bed as they used to be. Finding out that a funeral she had gone to, the guy who died she had been with and also the guys brother who was at the funeral, and the living brother was better in bed, was bigger in the **** department and really knew how to use it.

Yeah, tasteless conversations for sure given the company. None of them initiated by my STBW except for the funeral one where she was completely plastered and upset when she brought it up. The thing is, it has left me often wondering when I meet a guy she knows if they had been together. Simply knowing they had been is not the real issue, it's when things go beyond a mention in passing from someone else, that there is actual reminiscing, and the more detailed it gets the more on the outside it makes me feel.

The past is the past and it should be someones right to keep it buried there, but the past made the person who they are today...how can both of those things be true at the same time?


----------



## samyeagar

Cosmos said:


> :iagree:
> 
> And it doesn't end there. From what I've seen on TAM, then comes the digging for details... Should a woman have experimented with a certain act in the past that she (for whatever reason) isn't willing to repeat, she's expected to do so anyway because she somehow 'owes' it to her spouse.
> 
> *In some cases, the penance for making and admitting to mistakes in the past can become a life sentence*.


Which is why I think it is important to get it out there before it becomes a life sentence. Find the right partner before the commitment is made.

I do think it many cases, people who feel like they are being shamed are not actually being shamed at all. They are projecting their own feelings of discontent with their own past onto the other person...blame shifting.


----------



## alte Dame

I think we grow and change not just from experience, but from a natural aging process. We are different people with different outlooks at the various stages of our lives.

When we are married, we go through these things together. We may not have known one another the whole time, but we are now connected to not just the present with the person, but the past and future as well. This is part of intimacy to me. This is part of closeness and commitment.

I think being a completely closed book about such a long stretch of time before the marriage is a barrier to intimacy. Not knowing at least the basics of how your SO evolved over so many formative years would not be a positive thing for the marriage. It serves to distance & it looks like it has.

I will be an outlier here and say that I would not want to accept this black hole of past information either.


----------



## samyeagar

alte Dame said:


> I think we grow and change not just from experience, but from a natural aging process. We are different people with different outlooks at the various stages of our lives.
> 
> When we are married, we go through these things together. We may not have known one another the whole time, but we are now connected to not just the present with the person, but the past and future as well. This is part of intimacy to me. This is part of closeness and commitment.
> 
> I think being a completely closed book about such a long stretch of time before the marriage is a barrier to intimacy. Not knowing at least the basics of how your SO evolved over so many formative years would not be a positive thing for the marriage. It serves to distance & it looks like it has.
> 
> *I will be an outlier here* and say that I would not want to accept this black hole of past information either.


You are not an outlier. Myself and many others here do not accept it either.


----------



## COGypsy

samyeagar said:


> I think you really nailed it in that it is more a feeling of being on the outside of an inside joke than anything else. I have been in several social situations with my STBW where the conversation has turned to past relationships, and it is very uncomfortable. Sitting there listening to them talk about who is with who now and someone asking my STBW if she thought so and so was still as good in bed as they used to be. Finding out that a funeral she had gone to, the guy who died she had been with and also the guys brother who was at the funeral, and the living brother was better in bed, was bigger in the **** department and really knew how to use it.
> 
> Yeah, tasteless conversations for sure given the company. None of them initiated by my STBW except for the funeral one where she was completely plastered and upset when she brought it up. The thing is, it has left me often wondering when I meet a guy she knows if they had been together. Simply knowing they had been is not the real issue, it's when things go beyond a mention in passing from someone else, that there is actual reminiscing, and the more detailed it gets the more on the outside it makes me feel.
> 
> The past is the past and it should be someones right to keep it buried there, but the past made the person who they are today...how can both of those things be true at the same time?


I think our viewpoints may be based on having vastly different social interactions. Even in the company of my college friends where I KNOW that over the past 25 years or so, many of us have dated the same people in the circle, it is absolutely inconceivable to me that we would ever, ever have a conversation about the size and skill of someone we'd dated back in the day. Conversations like that would never happen in mixed company or even same-sex company. I can't even recall having a conversation that graphic with _anyone_. 

I have no problem telling my boyfriend that the guy we run into all the time was my college boyfriend and we dated all through college. I can't imagine just chit-chatting about how he was the first person I ever tried this or that or whatever--either with my current boyfriend and/or my ex or anyone else around. 

I think at least some of your perspective might have to do with being around what I would say is a pretty unique crowd of people.


----------



## samyeagar

COGypsy said:


> I think our viewpoints may be based on having vastly different social interactions. Even in the company of my college friends where I KNOW that over the past 25 years or so, many of us have dated the same people in the circle, it is absolutely inconceivable to me that we would ever, ever have a conversation about the size and skill of someone we'd dated back in the day. Conversations like that would never happen in mixed company or even same-sex company. I can't even recall having a conversation that graphic with _anyone_.
> 
> I have no problem telling my boyfriend that the guy we run into all the time was my college boyfriend and we dated all through college. I can't imagine just chit-chatting about how he was the first person I ever tried this or that or whatever--either with my current boyfriend and/or my ex or anyone else around.
> 
> I think at least some of your perspective might have to do with being around what I would say is a pretty unique crowd of people.


I understand what you are saying, and for the most part, the conversations don't go there. I'm not sure it's a unique crowd of people so much. The conversation about the guy who died was a very extreme situation. 

My STBW found out the guy died. He had two kids and she had really liked his mother, so the sadness wasn't really related to her relationship with him. A friend of my STBW wanted to talk to my STBW about it because he was the first guy the friend had slept with who was now dead, and it shook her up a bit. Their conversation was in private, and they had both been with that guy, and also had both been with his brother. Those two guys were among the few they had both been with.

Seeing the mother so horribly upset during the funeral hit my STBW pretty hard as she is a mother as well, and couldn't imaging losing a child. We went out the night of the funeral, and my STBW drank a whole lot, and then the stream of consciousness started on the half hour drive home. If she hadn't been drinking, she never would have said a word. When I asked her about it the next day, she didn't remember it at all. Since then, she has not drank to excess by her own choice to never do that to me again.

The moral of this is that the past always has ways of becoming the present at some of the least expected times, in some of the least expected ways...


----------



## Caribbean Man

I takes two equally skilled partners to to execute perfect dance moves that's worthy of a standing ovation.
And even with two skilled partners, communication is the key, much of this communication being non verbal.

I think that this entire issue is a very delicate , sensitive one, both partners need to be very aware of it's intricacies.

Firstly, we must underst5and that not everyone is made for everyone in relationships. Some relationships are simply not meant t6o be.
Sometimes this is the hardest thing for some to understand, and accept.
It makes no sense a woman revealing deep aspects of her personal life to a so called lover she feels would be judgmental of her. But it also makes no sense she's in a relationship with a man who judgmental of any part of her, _anyway_.
As the relationship progresses and begins to grow, questions would be asked, she gets defensive and puts up an offensive front. None of your business.
Catch 22.

My take is that any woman who's fully self aware , knows intuitively which man she could trust, or when a relationship is 
" safe enough "to fully expose herself.
I think a man is supposed to make a woman feel comfortable enough in a relationship ,to share her deepest most intimate secrets.
That's part of his job.
I think a woman who despite a man creating a loving , secure environment , refuses to open up about her past , has not come to terms with it or is deeply ashamed of it.
She's in need of counseling.
Relationships thrive best when there is complete trust.
Trust can only grow, when there is an open non judgmental atmosphere , where there are no secrets.

Judgmental attitude by men=> Love Buster.
Secretive , withholding attitude by women =. Love buster.

The answer comes down to this.

Women, find a man who would not judge you in any way , because of your past, who you are comfortable sharing it with.If you are personally not comfortable with your past , then you cannot realistically expect to want to share it with any lover , no matter how loving and good that person is to you.. First find peace with yourself ,professional counseling might help.

Men, find a woman who loves you enough to entrust you with her deepest secrets , and whose past you are willing to handle as the relationship progresses. Find a woman who respects you enough not to withhold secrets from you , while expecting you to invest emotionally in the relationship.

This calls for a high level of honesty and emotional maturity in both the man and the woman involved in that relationship.
These things are best discussed before marriage , somewhere along where the relationship reaches the " _point of no return_" zone, where two partners are emotionally heavily invested into the relationship.


----------



## Caribbean Man

alte Dame said:


> I think we grow and change not just from experience, but from a natural aging process. We are different people with different outlooks at the various stages of our lives.
> 
> When we are married, we go through these things together. We may not have known one another the whole time, but we are now connected to not just the present with the person, but the past and future as well. This is part of intimacy to me. This is part of closeness and commitment.
> 
> I think being a completely closed book about such a long stretch of time before the marriage is a barrier to intimacy. Not knowing at least the basics of how your SO evolved over so many formative years would not be a positive thing for the marriage. It serves to distance & it looks like it has.
> 
> I will be an outlier here and say that I would not want to accept this black hole of past information either.


But it's also a tricky area to navigate in a relationship.
It can make a relationship stronger or break it apart.
That's what frightening to people.


----------



## Cosmos

samyeagar said:


> Which is why I think it is important to get it out there before it becomes a life sentence. Find the right partner before the commitment is made.
> 
> I do think it many cases, people who feel like they are being shamed are not actually being shamed at all. They are projecting their own feelings of discontent with their own past onto the other person...blame shifting.


Absolutely. I also believe in openness and honesty.

But if you DO 'purchase' the goods 'as is,' you don't get to take them home and then kvetch about them being ''used' or having had previous 'owners' some years down the line.


----------



## BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN

I have been burned by this "retroactive jealousy" BS. It is sad when one party is honest and open and the other has ulterior motives. Six months into a relationship that I was led to believe was exclusive, we had a conversation one night about our past. (He brought it up) He told me he had been sexually abused as a teen, that his first wife past him around to her friends, etc, etc. We shared things we were "ashamed" of. I shared some things that happened 30 years ago that I was not too proud of. (I was raped when I was 13) so I ran a little wild as a teen. But nothing so shameful that I still "carry" it with me. A few ONS a 3some. I got married at 18 and my party days were pretty much over. In the past 25+ years, I can count on less than two hands, my sexual partners.


Sharing with him, what a big MISTAKE.


It was all a ruse. Seems he thought that I was keeping something from him. (Still not sure what). The next day he was GONE and I received the most vile and disgusting email I had ever read in my entire life! I was called EVERY name in the book! And he proceeded to tell me that the things he told me were all lies, he was "interrogating" me to get to the "truth". (what a dbag). 

Some people need to knock you down to their size in order to feel better about themselves. It's called leveling. As it turns out, he had 3 times plus the amount of lifetime partners I had. He was seeing someone else (at least one that I know of, could have been more) and feeding her the same lines as me. He was pursuing relationships with no less than 32 other people. He would leave my bed at 2-3am and before he left the driveway, he was texting someone else. Just about EVERYTHING he told me about himself was a lie or his warped "view" of the truth.

So, I would say tread lightly in this arena. Be cautious of people who need details. He was a charmer, a master of telling you what he thinks you want to hear. I was completely blindsided. But he told me when I first met him that he had been a "bad" boyfriend/husband. (When people tell you who they are, you should believe them!) That he had been single for a long time trying to become a better man. Turned out, this leopard was still covered in spots! 

So, in the future, should a man ask me about my past, not sure how I will approach the subject, my first thought is to say "it's none of your f...ing business!" Of course, I would never say that, but it would be my first thought and with good reason! :scratchhead:


----------



## samyeagar

BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN said:


> I have been burned by this "retroactive jealousy" BS. It is sad when one party is honest and open and the other has ulterior motives. Six months into a relationship that I was led to believe was exclusive, we had a conversation one night about our past. (He brought it up) He told me he had been sexually abused as a teen, that his first wife past him around to her friends, etc, etc. We shared things we were "ashamed" of. I shared some things that happened 30 years ago that I was not too proud of. (I was raped when I was 13) so I ran a little wild as a teen. But nothing so shameful that I still "carry" it with me. A few ONS a 3some. I got married at 18 and my party days were pretty much over. In the past 25+ years, I can count on less than two hands, my sexual partners.
> 
> 
> Sharing with him, what a big MISTAKE.
> 
> 
> It was all a ruse. Seems he thought that I was keeping something from him. (Still not sure what). The next day he was GONE and I received the most vile and disgusting email I had ever read in my entire life! I was called EVERY name in the book! And he proceeded to tell me that the things he told me were all lies, he was "interrogating" me to get to the "truth". (what a dbag).
> 
> Some people need to knock you down to their size in order to feel better about themselves. It's called leveling. As it turns out, he had 3 times plus the amount of lifetime partners I had. He was seeing someone else (at least one that I know of, could have been more) and feeding her the same lines as me. He was pursuing relationships with no less than 32 other people. He would leave my bed at 2-3am and before he left the driveway, he was texting someone else. Just about EVERYTHING he told me about himself was a lie or his warped "view" of the truth.
> 
> So, I would say tread lightly in this arena. Be cautious of people who need details. He was a charmer, a master of telling you what he thinks you want to hear. I was completely blindsided. But he told me when I first met him that he had been a "bad" boyfriend/husband. (When people tell you who they are, you should believe them!) That he had been single for a long time trying to become a better man. Turned out, this leopard was still covered in spots!
> 
> So, in the future, should a man ask me about my past, not sure how I will approach the subject, my first thought is to say "it's none of your f...ing business!" Of course, I would never say that, but it would be my first thought and with good reason! :scratchhead:


Ugh that is a tough one. It is horrible how your trust was violated and how that is going to shape you in the future. I do feel for you.

Another part of me, a very small part, feels that you completely ignored red flags for what ever reason, and are blaming him for it.


----------



## BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN

Yeah, hindsight is 20/20. But to be honest, the "sign posts" were small. A few I did not give a second thought because I completely trusted him. However, there was a large sign I thought I saw, a gut feeling that told me something was not quite right. When I asked him about it, he jokingly said "did you think I was with someone else?" I said no, but that is exactly what I thought and it turns out I was right. Do you really think that if I would have said yes, he would have been honest with me?

So, yes, I take some ownership here, but I came into this relationship honest and was led to believe he was also. I realize that men lie for one of two reasons: to avoid trouble or to feel better about themselves. But how could I have know the depths of his deceit????

As I move forward in life, it is not my intention to hold every man accountable for this man's transgressions. I don't want to be the crazy lady who over reacts to every flag I see. Once bitten twice shy is hard to overcome.


----------



## Catherine602

Let's be real, it's women who are interrogated about their past not men. One poster here proudly stated that he had 100 partners before he got married. It was said with pride. He had obviously been admired for his pump and dumping or he would not have said it with such pride. 

A woman is unlikely to reveal her pump and dumping with pride. Her past experience of shamming would make her cautious. 

If I were in a position to date again, I would dump a man with such high numbers. He bases his manhood and skills as a lover on criteria that mean nothing.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## norajane

In my personal experience, the men who ask the most questions about my past and want the most details, are precisely the people who are going to later make me regret telling them _anything_ and who make me regret dating them. Those relationships did not last long as we were obviously not a good match. 

I have no idea exactly how many women my SO has been with. He doesn't know exactly how many men I've been with. We don't know who each and every person is that the other has dated or had sex with. We don't know many details about the relationships, either. We have discussed some of the more significant relationships in more detail, simply because they were part of our lives for a long time. If we ran into each other's exes at a party or something, so what? We wouldn't be bothered. In fact, we are friends with some of the exes and socialize occasionally. We've been together for a long, long time despite not having or caring about details of all past lovers. So, we are a good match.

My dating days are over, but I would not date someone who asked all kinds of questions and details about my past, especially if they became insistent about it. For me, that would be a red flag that he will make me regret saying a word.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Catherine602 said:


> Let's be real, it women who are interidated about their past not men. One poster here proudly stated that he had 100 partners before he got married. It was said with pride. He had obviously been admired for his pump and dumping or he would not have said it with such pride.
> 
> A woman is unlikely to reveal her pump and dumping with pride. Her past experience of shamming would make her cautious.
> 
> *If I were in a position to date again, I would dump a man with such high numbers. He bases his manhood and skill as a lover by a criteria that means nothing.*


Right, and you should because that's _your_ right, the right to a proper choice based on facts, and not a misrepresentation of the facts.

But here's the flip side.

Suppose you dated that same man with a particular perception of him, and later found out that he had either lied about his past or minimized it whenever you asked.
Then you found out that he was indeed a " _pumper and dumper_ " and treated women like sh!t.

How would _you_ feel?
See?

That's why it's important to be open and honest about these things before marriage, where you can either decide to call it quits because you cannot handle it mentally ,or continue moving forward, fully aware of what you are investing in.

Should you decide to talk about your past with your partner , and he decided to accept it as part of you and continue, he does not get to throw anything back at you , and even if he does you can walk away with your head high because you did the right thing.
His actions are filled with pusillanimity , cowardice and disrespect.


----------



## Faithful Wife

catherine said: "If I were in a position to date again, I would dump a man with such high numbers. He bases his manhood and skill as a lover by a criteria that means nothing."

Having a high number doesn't always mean this. It is an individual thing. People can have a lot of casual sex without "using" people or "basing their man/womanhood" on it. It all depends on the character of people. There are plenty of people to have concensual unattached sex with who will not feel used, if you are ethical about how you are doing it.

People can also have casual sex in some periods of their lives, and then be totally commited in other periods. The two types of experience do not rule out the presence of each other.

Having said that though...I think we all should get as much info as we need in order to make informed decisions about getting more involved with someone.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Faithful Wife said:


> catherine said: "If I were in a position to date again, I would dump a man with such high numbers. He bases his manhood and skill as a lover by a criteria that means nothing."
> 
> Having a high number doesn't always mean this. It is an individual thing. *People can have a lot of casual sex without "using" people or "basing their man/womanhood" on it. It all depends on the character of people. There are plenty of people to have concensual unattached sex with who will not feel used, if you are ethical about how you are doing it.*


Although casual sex is not for me ....

I do agree with you FW ...that one can have "integrity" engaging in casual sex with a variety of partners... this was well explained in 'Bringing Sex into Focus" - examining the various sexual views....when 2 mature people want the same thing.. *JUST SEX*...Lust for the pleasure.. they have talked about their intentions, No strings, they are happy & enjoy it for what it is... no one gets hurt... 

And very true...they will NOT use terminology such as "*being USED*"... - it is the Romantics (like myself)... that would feel "used" ...when a woman uses this terminology , it is a dead give away... she associates Sex with emotional strings... and is capable of getting hurt when the man walks away.


----------



## GettingIt_2

I don't do insecurity. Fortunately, my (somewhat insecure) husband respects me and himself enough to not go there. 

I'm married, I'm committed, I'm in love.

I'm also still very attached to my autonomy. 

No, I don't see that a "problem" for my marriage. If it's a problem, then I'm with the wrong person *for me. *


----------



## Catherine602

CM Did I say that dishonesty was appropriate? I made one statement about the difference in attitude towards men and women who have high numbers of sex partners before marriage. Men get a slap on the back for using women. Women get shamed for using men.

If you have issues with women having lots of sex before marriage then say so. Don't project your issues by jumping my post. I have enough of my own issues to deal with thanks.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## JustSomeGuyWho

Tough one. I would prefer not to know except sometimes the past raises red flags on it's own. Aside from the obvious things, there is a known correlation between previous promiscuity and infidelity. On the other hand, I wouldn't want her past to unfairly color my impression of her based on my preconceived notions. It would be a tough debate in my mind whether to inquire about the past or simply trust in what we have now.

_Posted via *Topify* using Android_


----------



## ConanHub

samyeagar said:


> I think you really nailed it in that it is more a feeling of being on the outside of an inside joke than anything else. I have been in several social situations with my STBW where the conversation has turned to past relationships, and it is very uncomfortable. Sitting there listening to them talk about who is with who now and someone asking my STBW if she thought so and so was still as good in bed as they used to be. Finding out that a funeral she had gone to, the guy who died she had been with and also the guys brother who was at the funeral, and the living brother was better in bed, was bigger in the **** department and really knew how to use it.
> 
> Yeah, tasteless conversations for sure given the company. None of them initiated by my STBW except for the funeral one where she was completely plastered and upset when she brought it up. The thing is, it has left me often wondering when I meet a guy she knows if they had been together. Simply knowing they had been is not the real issue, it's when things go beyond a mention in passing from someone else,that there is actual reminiscing,and the more detailed it gets the more on the outside it makes me feel.
> The past is the past and it should be someones right to keep it buried there,but the past made the person who they are today...how can both of those things be true at the same time?


 Holy crap dude! From some of the stuff you said, I hope your STBW Got some mental and emotional counseling. Also, Why do you guys keep wanting to be around Some of these not to savory characters from her past. It does not sound like the conversations are very high brow.
My wife and I have some pretty crappy pasts. Both our numbers are high And we both done things we regret, But there is just no way That either one of us wants to hang out with the people that we used to be banging. My wife does tell me about her past, And I tell her about mine, Those are however private conversations No one else gets in on them. And heaven help Anyone who tried to talk to my wife Or me About how good Someone was in bed with her!
They would probably never find the body" LOL!
Not trying to be too critical of you, I think your insights a really cool, I'm just trying to understand your thought process as you seem to put up with certain things I would not. You are different is all and part of the reason I am here is to learn about different people. Smiles.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## alexm

JustSomeGuyWho said:


> Tough one. I would prefer not to know except sometimes the past raises red flags on it's own. Aside from the obvious things, there is a known correlation between previous promiscuity and infidelity. On the other hand, I wouldn't want her past to unfairly color my impression of her based on my preconceived notions. It would be a tough debate in my mind whether to inquire about the past or simply trust in what we have now.


Yeah, that's pretty much how I felt going into the relationship. It never occurred to me to ask anything about her past, other than how she made out in long term relationships. (I think those types of things ARE important to know. How they ended, who broke up with who, etc.)

But... after a few months of dating and getting to know her and her friends, it was obvious that she/they were not shy about making casual remarks about certain things. Nothing graphic, no great detail, just enough to make me uncomfortable. Her best friend (who is an awesome woman) is very open and not shy, and sometimes the topic of conversation would veer to areas that made me feel uncomfortable. But being who I am, I did not "put my foot down", rather I would imply through body language and other things that this is the way it made me feel. They start talking about things like that, I'd leave the room, or remain there and get quiet all of a sudden. That sort of thing.

Problem is, as others have said here, the brain goes into curiosity mode, and sometimes "what have I got myself into?" After a few incidents of these types of conversations, I couldn't take it anymore, and basically asked my future wife a little about her past. I did tell her that hearing things like this particular ons/fwb (whatever it was) liked to spank her (which her friend and her found hilarious still, all these years later) was not the type of thing I wanted to hear about. I made it very clear that I have no problem with them reminiscing about times in their lives, but just don't include me in them, especially when it's new to me. It's a question of filtering for the sake of who's around you. I have some funny/interesting stories I could talk about as well, but I sure wouldn't bring them up to my buddy if my gf/wife was right there. If they want to have a laugh about their pasts, then by all means, go for it. I can't expect her to never talk about things like that ever again. Just don't do it in front of me.

The other problem is, is that her best friend is very much the type of woman who sees absolutely no problem with talking about things like this and has no use for any sort of jealousy whatsoever. I have talked to my wife about this, and although she feels the same way her friend does, she's respectful enough to see my point of view. Her friend, not so much. I gave her the example of what if I started talking about this girl I once banged and what she liked to do to me, and how would that make HER feel? And she got it. It would make her feel uncomfortable and disrespected.

The bottom line is, as already stated here, these things have a way of coming up over time, and it's always best to have a heads up. Some BASIC information is justifiable. Details are not necessary. Numbers are not necessary. But something is. Otherwise everything that eventually comes out is completely foreign, and it can have a negative effect. You do need to know the basics surrounding your partner's past.


----------



## Caribbean Man

alexm said:


> But... after a few months of dating and getting to know her and her friends, it was obvious that she/they were not shy about making casual remarks about certain things. Nothing graphic, no great detail, just enough to make me uncomfortable. Her best friend (who is an awesome woman) is very open and not shy, and sometimes the topic of conversation would veer to areas that made me feel uncomfortable. But being who I am, I did not "put my foot down", rather I would imply through body language and other things that this is the way it made me feel. They start talking about things like that, I'd leave the room, or remain there and get quiet all of a sudden. That sort of thing.


 I think your refusal to tackle this issue ,enabled this thing to continue and you must share some of the blame.
However, your wife , her friend's behaviour and attitude , especially towards you in this instance leaves much to be desired, and borders on disrespect .

Why didn't you tackle this in the bud , the very first time it happened , before it snowballed into this?
I might be wrong , but I sense some resentment building up in you.


----------



## alexm

It's just not in my nature, and it didn't bother me enough to pull the alpha male card out. It really, truly, isn't about her past. It's always been about her not feeling comfortable talking to me about it. When these things came up with others, in front of me, that's when I acted. If they never came up, then nothing for me to worry about.

Thing is, we men have to pick our battles. Women tend to have better friends than we do, and a lot of the time, their friends are highly influential, even when they don't mean to. Being on the good side of my wife's best friend is not all that different than being on the good side of her parents. Had I called them out right at that moment, then it's 2 against 1, and I'd lose, and she'd close up even more AND her friend would hate me.

I let the first time go. It happened again, I brought it up to my wife after the fact, casually. It happened a third time, I brought it up later, but more forcibly than before. This time I told her I did not want to hear about what other men liked to do to her, regardless of whether the context of the conversation was to make fun of him, and the situation, and wasn't about her reminiscing as such.

That's what clicked for her. To her and her friend, it was basically "hey, remember this loser?". To me, it was a mental image of somebody else doing my wife doggy style and slapping her a**. When I put it this way, she instantly got it, and it hasn't happened since.

It is not a jealousy issue as such, either. I've slept with other women, and done things with them I haven't done with my wife. Picturing her with somebody else doesn't raise my ire or make me jealous, it's just one of those things I can do without.

More importantly, it's a question of respect, which I am huge on. My ex wife was hot, (not that my current wife isn't!) and she was always getting checked out. I had no problem with that for the most part. It was when some guy did more than glance at her while I was right there, was when I'd take offense. I remember one older guy who basically swivelled his head around as he walked by and stared at her for a good 10 seconds until he nearly walked into somebody else. I called him out on it. Had he just glanced, then no problem. But showing that kind of disrespect really gets me going. I was RIGHT there.

It's important to mention that my wife has never talked about her past in a positive way in front of me (ie. "oh, I remember THIS guy, he was awesome in bed" etc. The few times it's happened, it's been in the context of a funny experience, or something along those lines.





Caribbean Man said:


> I think your refusal to tackle this issue ,enabled this thing to continue and you must share some of the blame.
> However, your wife , her friend's behaviour and attitude , especially towards you in this instance leaves much to be desired, and borders on disrespect .
> 
> Why didn't you tackle this in the bud , the very first time it happened , before it snowballed into this?
> I might be wrong , but I sense some resentment building up in you.


----------



## Caribbean Man

alexm said:


> It's just not in my nature, and it didn't bother me enough to pull the alpha male card out. It really, truly, isn't about her past. It's always been about her not feeling comfortable talking to me about it. When these things came up with others, in front of me, that's when I acted. If they never came up, then nothing for me to worry about.
> 
> Thing is, we men have to pick our battles. Women tend to have better friends than we do, and a lot of the time, their friends are highly influential, even when they don't mean to. Being on the good side of my wife's best friend is not all that different than being on the good side of her parents. Had I called them out right at that moment, then it's 2 against 1, and I'd lose, and she'd close up even more AND her friend would hate me.
> 
> I let the first time go. It happened again, I brought it up to my wife after the fact, casually. It happened a third time, I brought it up later, but more forcibly than before. This time I told her I did not want to hear about what other men liked to do to her, regardless of whether the context of the conversation was to make fun of him, and the situation, and wasn't about her reminiscing as such.
> 
> That's what clicked for her. To her and her friend, it was basically "hey, remember this loser?". To me, it was a mental image of somebody else doing my wife doggy style and slapping her a**. When I put it this way, she instantly got it, and it hasn't happened since.
> 
> It is not a jealousy issue as such, either. I've slept with other women, and done things with them I haven't done with my wife. Picturing her with somebody else doesn't raise my ire or make me jealous, it's just one of those things I can do without.
> 
> More importantly, it's a question of respect, which I am huge on. My ex wife was hot, (not that my current wife isn't!) and she was always getting checked out. I had no problem with that for the most part. It was when some guy did more than glance at her while I was right there, was when I'd take offense. I remember one older guy who basically swivelled his head around as he walked by and stared at her for a good 10 seconds until he nearly walked into somebody else. I called him out on it. Had he just glanced, then no problem. But showing that kind of disrespect really gets me going.
> 
> It's important to mention that my wife has never talked about her past in a positive way in front of me (ie. "oh, I remember THIS guy, he was awesome in bed" etc. The few times it's happened, it's been in the context of a funny experience, or something along those lines.


Ok I get what you're saying.
Almost like a catch 22.

In my personal experience, the past _always_ surfaces even long after we've left it.
People, Places , Events.
In our marriage, I was the one with the colourful past,that my wife had to deal with.


----------



## samyeagar

alexm said:


> It's just not in my nature, and it didn't bother me enough to pull the alpha male card out. It really, truly, isn't about her past. It's always been about her not feeling comfortable talking to me about it. When these things came up with others, in front of me, that's when I acted. If they never came up, then nothing for me to worry about.
> 
> Thing is, we men have to pick our battles. Women tend to have better friends than we do, and a lot of the time, their friends are highly influential, even when they don't mean to. Being on the good side of my wife's best friend is not all that different than being on the good side of her parents. Had I called them out right at that moment, then it's 2 against 1, and I'd lose, and she'd close up even more AND her friend would hate me.
> 
> I let the first time go. It happened again, I brought it up to my wife after the fact, casually. It happened a third time, I brought it up later, but more forcibly than before. This time I told her I did not want to hear about what other men liked to do to her, regardless of whether the context of the conversation was to make fun of him, and the situation, and wasn't about her reminiscing as such.
> 
> That's what clicked for her. To her and her friend, it was basically "hey, remember this loser?". To me, it was a mental image of somebody else doing my wife doggy style and slapping her a**. When I put it this way, she instantly got it, and it hasn't happened since.
> 
> It's important to mention that my wife has never talked about her past in a positive way in front of me (ie. "oh, I remember THIS guy, he was awesome in bed" etc. The few times it's happened, it's been in the context of a funny experience, or something along those lines.


Your last couple of posts could be you telling my experiences almost to the letter. It is almost uncanny.

Like you, I didn't call them out at the time but addressed it with my STBW later, and you're right, her mindset in the discussion was no different than if they were talking about the time they got detention in high school for being late to math class.

One of the other questions that comes to my mind when the subject of the past comes up like that is how am I portrayed by her. Does she brag about me, am I even discussed. I asked her about that right after the funeral drunk incident. She told me that they really don't talk about their current sex lives, but everything that has ever been said has left no doubts that I am the best by a long shot. I dug a bit deeperinto that with her because I wondered what the difference was, why she can talk openly about past lovers, but closed when it comes to me. Aside from saying that talking about the past really means nothing, there are no feelings of longing, reliving feelings, that to her, it really is no different than anything else. As to why she doesn't talk about me too much, part of it was she didn't want to give her friends mind movies of me and what I can do in bed.

I do know that there have been a few times where she has said some pretty flattering things about me. One in particular...she hosted a sex toy party for couples for one of her friends. I declined to stay because I knew better, that the conversations would go to places I didn't want to hear. She understood and was fine with it. When I got home, they were wrapping things up, and her friend, the same one from the funeral incident, called me out in front of everyone saying it was a good thing there weren't more men like me or she'd never sell another vibrator again. Apparently, my STBW had told everyone that I was better than any toy she'd ever used. She also confirmed that I would indeed have been very uncomfortable with the conversation, but that I was well represented.

Almost all of my STBW's past happened before she was 19 and married her ex husband. Aside from him and what all went on in that marriage and the step son situation, there was only one other in a rebound relationship after her divorce. Through high school though, she was pretty wild. I don't judge her, nor do I hold it against her or think anything less of her.

Like you said, the discussions that have happened are not terribly flattering, but I still don't want to hear about it. When we talked about it, I did try the same angle you did in asking how she would feel, and she said it wouldn't bother her in the same way it does me, but that she understood where I was coming from and that it made ME uncomfortable, and that was good enough for her to try and minimize my exposure if you will. She has lived up to that and when things start going in that direction, she will redirect, and on some occations, she has flat out said stop to her friends. They have gotten the hint and respect my STBW and our relationship enough to not go there any more.


----------



## samyeagar

Caribbean Man said:


> Ok I get what you're saying.
> Almost like a catch 22.
> 
> *In my personal experience, the past always surfaces even long after we've left it.*
> People, Places , Events.
> In our marriage, I was the one with the colourful past,that my wife had to deal with.


That is the thing I wish people would understand. The past is never truly the past. It always comes back. One persons past becomes anothers present the first time they experience it.


----------



## BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN

samyeagar said:


> One of the other questions that comes to my mind when the subject of the past comes up like that is* how am I portrayed by her. Does she brag about me, am I even discussed.* I asked her about that right after the funeral drunk incident. She told me that they really don't talk about their current sex lives, *but everything that has ever been said has left no doubts that I am the best by a long shot.*


*Here in lies the "crux of the biscuit"!* *"Am I the best?"*

It's funny how a man wants to marry a virgin, but wants her to be a sl*ut in the bedroom. If you want to marry a virgin, then you should be one yourself. I am 99.99% positive, they were "the best" when she was with them. And should there be another after you, he too will be "the best".

I realize how important "good" sex is to most men. In my case, and I would presume for many other women, "mind blowing sex" is not at the top of the list for staying in a relationship with a good man.


----------



## treyvion

BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN said:


> *Here in lies the "crux of the biscuit"!* *"Am I the best?"*
> 
> It's funny how a man wants to marry a virgin, but wants her to be a sl*ut in the bedroom. If you want to marry a virgin, then you should be one yourself. I am 99.99% positive, they were "the best" when she was with them. And should there be another after you, he too will be "the best".
> 
> I realize how important "good" sex is to most men. In my case, and I would presume for many other women, "mind blowing sex" is not at the top of the list for staying in a relationship with a good man.


It's not at the bottom either. A real man would not allow this part of him to be neglected if its important to him.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Caribbean Man

treyvion said:


> It's not at the bottom either. A real man would not allow this part of him to be neglected if its important to him.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


:iagree:

And that's the point.

It's not about " every man wanting to marry a virgin."

It's about every man wanting to feel just like every woman wants to feel in a relationship.

As if they're the only one that matters to their partner.

don't quite understand why that is so difficult for some to understand.

Nobody likes to feel like they're not the best, and the only one that could make them feel that way, in their partner's eyes, whether male or female.


----------



## samyeagar

BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN said:


> *Here in lies the "crux of the biscuit"!* *"Am I the best?"*
> 
> It's funny how a man wants to marry a virgin, but wants her to be a sl*ut in the bedroom. If you want to marry a virgin, then you should be one yourself. I am 99.99% positive, they were "the best" when she was with them. And should there be another after you, he too will be "the best".
> 
> I realize how important "good" sex is to most men. In my case, and I would presume for many other women, "mind blowing sex" is not at the top of the list for staying in a relationship with a good man.



You are incorrect here. The crux of the matter is more along the lines of equal time. If she is spending time talking about the past, I think it is resonable that her present get equal share.

Regarding marrying a virgin...huh? Where did you get that idea? I have never cared in my life whether or not the women I have been with are virgins or not, and don't pretend women don't care about being the best because a lot do, just as much as men do. Mind blowing sex is a reason some women stay in or leave a relationship.


----------



## BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN

The Past is the Past and does not ALWAYS surface. Time and space changes everything. I have different friends now, I live in a different state (and state of mind.) The chances of me running into an ex are ZERO. The only way my past will surface is if I bring it up.

I carry NO shame of my past. Youthful indiscretions should not be a life sentence. I only judge people for how they behave now and the recent past. I was recently harshly judged by a currently active male wh*ore/sl*t, for something I did 30 years ago. He tried to cut me down to his size to feel better about himself. It did not work!

Sure, if you want to know if you are marrying a prostitute, bar skank, or crack wh*re, that's one thing. But these types of women rarely change.

You are not their "first", get over it. This is a predominately "male" issue. This really has nothing to do with women. 

Check your ego! Mine is fine, thank you very much!


----------



## norajane

Caribbean Man said:


> :iagree:
> 
> And that's the point.
> 
> It's not about " every man wanting to marry a virgin."
> 
> It's about every man wanting to feel just like every woman wants to feel in a relationship.
> 
> As if they're the only one that matters to their partner.
> 
> don't quite understand why that is so difficult for some to understand.
> 
> Nobody likes to feel like they're not the best, and the only one that could make them feel that way, in their partner's eyes, whether male or female.


I would venture to say that if they truly are "the only one that matters to their partner" they ARE the best in their partner's eyes. You don't become the only the one that matters to a partner by being the worst or meh.


----------



## BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN

treyvion said:


> It's not at the bottom either. A real man would not allow this part of him to be neglected if its important to him.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


I never said "every" man. I never said it was at the bottom of the list. And I never said anything about neglecting a man.

My point was, men don't want to visualize their "woman" being with another man. Hence the virgin reference. They want "mind blowing" sex, but they don't want to know how you know how to do something. 

Yes, we all want to feel that we are the "only one" in our partners eyes. 

I am just saying that people should live in the present. Not all hung up on your partners past. Isn't this thread titled: Reasoning behind not being open about past ??? 

I speak in generalities, so I stick by my "men want a virgin... line. I do not mean the literally want a virgin! They want the feeling of thinking they are her one and only. :scratchhead:


----------



## samyeagar

BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN said:


> The Past is the Past and does not ALWAYS surface. Time and space changes everything. I have different friends now, I live in a different state (and state of mind.) The chances of me running into an ex are ZERO. The only way my past will surface is if I bring it up.
> 
> I carry NO shame of my past. Youthful indiscretions should not be a life sentence. I only judge people for how they behave now and the recent past. I was recently harshly judged by a currently active male wh*ore/sl*t, for something I did 30 years ago. He tried to cut me down to his size to feel better about himself. It did not work!
> 
> Sure, if you want to know if you are marrying a prostitute, bar skank, or crack wh*re, that's one thing. But these types of women rarely change.
> 
> You are not their "first", get over it. This is a predominately "male" issue. This really has nothing to do with women.
> 
> Check your ego! Mine is fine, thank you very much!


I am sensing a little bitterness here. I am also not sure you are understanding what this discussion is actually about. It's not about shaming, or holding anything against anyone. It's not about being upset about not being someones first, or being the best. It's about trust and openness in a relationship and how different people have different expectations.

You are perfectly ok to feel the way you do about your past, and what you would tolerate from a partner, and divulge to a partner. Your thoughts add a different perspective to this discussion for sure, but the combative and defensive tone is not really fitting considering this is not your issue that you are dealing with.


----------



## samyeagar

BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN said:


> I never said "every" man. I never said it was at the bottom of the list. And I never said anything about neglecting a man.
> 
> *My point was, men don't want to visualize their "woman" being with another man.* Hence the virgin reference. They want "mind blowing" sex, but they don't want to know how you know how to do something.
> 
> Yes, we all want to feel that we are the "only one" in our partners eyes.
> 
> I am just saying that people should live in the present. Not all hung up on your partners past. Isn't this thread titled: Reasoning behind not being open about past ???
> 
> *I speak in generalities*, so I stick by my "men want a virgin... line. I do not mean the literally want a virgin! They want the feeling of thinking they are her one and only. :scratchhead:


I think if you want to speak in generalities, you really should include women in that as well. Women generally don't want to visualize their man with another woman, nor do they care to think about where his skills came from.

I think most people do live in the present, myself and alexm certainly are. The problem is, a lot of people can't effectively bury their past in the way you have. Your claims to the contrary, the past usually does find a way to creep into the present, and again one persons past can become another persons present.


----------



## Caribbean Man

BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN said:


> My point was, men don't want to visualize their "woman" being with another man. Hence the virgin reference.


Do you, or any woman you know relish the idea of, or want to visualize your lover having sex with another woman or man?


----------



## Caribbean Man

samyeagar said:


> I think if you want to speak in generalities, you really should include women in that as well. Women generally don't want to visualize their man with another woman, nor do they care to think about where his skills came from.
> 
> I think most people do live in the present, myself and alexm certainly are. The problem is, a lot of people can't effectively bury their past in the way you have. Your claims to the contrary, the past usually does find a way to creep into the present, and again one persons past can become another persons present.



Lol, 
Apparently we were typing the same questions at the same time.


----------



## nogutsnoglory

samyeagar said:


> I am sensing a little bitterness here. I am also not sure you are understanding what this discussion is actually about. It's not about shaming, or holding anything against anyone. It's not about being upset about not being someones first, or being the best. It's about trust and openness in a relationship and how different people have different expectations.
> 
> You are perfectly ok to feel the way you do about your past, and what you would tolerate from a partner, and divulge to a partner. Your thoughts add a different perspective to this discussion for sure, but the combative and defensive tone is not really fitting considering this is not your issue that you are dealing with.


People that are going to share everything in their life 50/50 with another person have IMO the right to know anything they wish to know before entering marriage. Most get married for the intention of it happening one time, so I think wanting to know the answers to ANY question you want to ask is fair.
If people do not want to share certain info, that is fair for them, just not going to marry someone that you only know today who they appear to be is not enough for some people. For many people it is enough to just trust who you see in front of you is who you get to be with. Problem is the baggage some people bring or the polar opposite moral beliefs, if this stuff is not unearthed but discovered later, it can be damming.
Marriage is enough of a leap of faith, without doing it with someone that was sexually abused, or battered, or used to be a porn star, or whatever extreme we want to pick. Not that those are not good potential spouses, as they may be, but both partners deserve to make that informed decision about the other. Those past events may not be a big deal for some, for others it may, depending, be a huge red flag, or a deal breaker and a chance they do not want to take with the rest of their lives or the lives of future kids. So I do think prior to marriage occurring, people should know any and all important information, as they see fit, so as to know one another, help one another, feel genuinely in this life as a unit, and comfortable that we know more about our partner than any person we would ever run into anywhere. Give one another the gift of truly knowing who we are and how we got here. Just an opinion..


----------



## Caribbean Man

norajane said:


> I would venture to say that* if *they truly are "the only one that matters to their partner" they ARE the best in their partner's eyes. You don't become the only the one that matters to a partner by being the worst or meh.


The word " *if* " highlighted above is conjunctive and it implies uncertainty.

Every single person, man or woman wants to feel sure that they *are* the only person that matters to their partner.

There's no " *if* " in there.

A partner shouldn't have to _try_ to become "the only one that matters" to their partner.. 

It's either they are or not.


----------



## samyeagar

Caribbean Man said:


> Do you, or any woman you know relish the idea of, or want to visualize your lover having sex with another woman or man?


Funny this...before we started dating, my STBW and I had several talks about sex, general things mostly. Come to find out later, she was concerned about my relative lack of experience compared to her. I have only slept with three women. She was concerned that I would suck in bed. The first time we went beyond kissing, our second date, I went down on her and made her orgasm in less than five minutes. Her thoughts went to where did he learn to do THAT, and she really has no desire to go there.


----------



## norajane

Caribbean Man said:


> Do you, or any woman you know relish the idea of, or want to visualize your lover having sex with another woman or man?


I don't really care about the details or the visual. I know he's had sex with other women, and can imagine what it was like since we have sex. But the visual or the idea also doesn't fill me with stomach-churning angst or unease or anything else. The visual doesn't linger or cause distress, nor do I spend any time dwelling on it or even thinking about it in passing. I guess it's entirely neutral in effect.

Honestly, some people just don't care about this stuff.


----------



## norajane

Caribbean Man said:


> The word " *if* " highlighted above is conjunctive and it implies uncertainty.
> 
> Every single person, man or woman wants to feel sure that they *are* the only person that matters to their partner.
> 
> There's no " *if* " in there.
> 
> A partner shouldn't have to _try_ to become "the only one that matters" to their partner..
> 
> It's either they are or not.


Sure. But questioning people to death about their past and getting every detail isn't going to make them "sure" that they are the only one that matters. And having had great sex with other people in the past doesn't automatically mean that their partner doesn't see them as the only one that matters in their present.


----------



## samyeagar

norajane said:


> Sure. But questioning people to death about their past and getting every detail isn't going to make them "sure" that they are the only one that matters. And having had great sex with other people in the past doesn't automatically mean that their partner doesn't see them as the only one that matters in their present.


No one has said anything about questioning them to death. It is when a partner is a closed book to even general things, and then keeps being closed that make more questions start to come up.

You're right about great sex in the past, but where alexm and I started going is that neither of us really want to hear about it, but as oft happens, the past doesn't stay the past.


----------



## GettingIt_2

Caribbean Man said:


> Do you, or any woman you know relish the idea of, or want to visualize your lover having sex with another woman or man?


Alright, I'll admit it: I do. 

HUGE turn on for me. Finally, after almost 25 years of marriage, my H will tell me the details. While he's f*cking me. Because I've BEGGED him to. 

I love the stories. I love the details about his life from before I knew him. It's my husband being highly sexual. What's not to love?

I've even told him he can make up details if he runs out of the truth. I also love to meet women from his past--I've met several. I've become close friends with one. 

Yes, I realize I'm in the minority. And, for the record, he does not feel even remotely the same about hearing about my past. 

I realize, the more time I spend on TAM, that I am blessed with an unusually strong sense of self, security, and trust in my husband.


----------



## Caribbean Man

norajane said:


> I don't really care about the details or the visual. I know he's had sex with other women, and can imagine what it was like since we have sex. But the visual or the idea also doesn't fill me with stomach-churning angst or unease or anything else. The visual doesn't linger or cause distress, nor do I spend any time dwelling on it or even thinking about it in passing. I guess it's entirely neutral in effect.
> 
> Honestly, some people just don't care about this stuff.


Right.

And I'm one of them too just like you. It doesn't matter to me. 

However it did to _my wife_ and she flew into a rage and tore up all the old postcards, love letters and photographs I had of different exes , one day when I wasn't at home.

But I fully understood how she felt and didn't tell her to " _get over it."_ I helped her get over it.
She wanted to feel like she's the one and only to me.

It also matters to _some people_.

I'm mindful enough to know that what matters to me might not matter to another and conversely, what matters to someone else might have absolutely no effect on me.

And I can humanly empathise with them.


----------



## Caribbean Man

norajane said:


> Sure. But questioning people to death about their past and getting every detail isn't going to make them "sure" that they are the only one that matters. And having had great sex with other people in the past doesn't automatically mean that their partner doesn't see them as the only one that matters in their present.


No.

Nobody, at least no me is saying that.

But how would you feel if like the OP, you and your husband and his friend were hanging out and they started talking about old flames and the sex they had with them and how great it was?


----------



## BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN

samyeagar said:


> I am sensing a little bitterness here. I am also not sure you are understanding what this discussion is actually about. It's not about shaming, or holding anything against anyone. It's not about being upset about not being someones first, or being the best. It's about trust and openness in a relationship and how different people have different expectations.
> 
> You are perfectly ok to feel the way you do about your past, and what you would tolerate from a partner, and divulge to a partner. Your thoughts add a different perspective to this discussion for sure, but the combative and defensive tone is not really fitting considering this is not your issue that you are dealing with.


Ok, let me put it a different way. Covered in roses and sunshine. Yes, I am a little bitter when it comes to this subject. I was badly burned. I do not mean to come off as combative and defensive. But I have some really strong opinions on this subject! I have done a lot of research on retroactive jealousy.

I feel men need to see what damage they can cause if they push for info of someones past. They may go into it with good intentions, but what they hear may haunt them. What one finds offensive, another may not. I have spoken to a lot of men who suffer from "retroactive jealousy". The bottom line is none of them realized their partners past was going to be an issue until it was too late. When it comes to your partners past, my advice is to tread lightly. You cannot un-ring a bell.

I realize everyone's experience is different. I don't talk to my girlfriends about any of my past sexual experiences. That would be a red flag for me in a relationship because you know they WILL be talking about you should your relationship end.

It's about trust and openness in a relationship and how different people have different expectations. 

Is it really? 

Here is an excerpt from the original poster:

********

When we got back together, I was, of course, curious as to her past, after our first go round. So I asked, innocently, never accusingly or in any way that (I thought) would come across as our relationship or how I thought of her depending on the answer. In other words, I wouldn't move on regardless of her answers.

Initially, I got very cagy answers, the usual "none of your business" and some white lies. Over the first 6 months of our relationship, I genuinely thought she had stuff to hide and it wrecked me inside. I made it clear to her that if she had a dodgy past, it would not impact how I felt about her (and it wouldn't have). Her answers (or lack of) actually did the opposite, and I did start to wonder if she was right for me. I stuck it out, because everything else is great, and I'm glad I did.

I have learned over the years that she is like that about everything, and to everyone. She really doesn't talk about, discuss, or vent to anyone, about anything. It's a family thing. I'm a talker, and a venter, and a solution-finder, so we are total opposites when it comes to this. She has made concessions in regards to our relationship (which is great of her), as I made it clear that if this is the way she is when we have relationship issues, I won't stand for it. When it comes to US, she needs to talk and communicate. So far, so good.

But what's *always* bothered me is her lack of trust, I guess, in regards to being open about her past. It leaves me wondering and drawing my own conclusions, which isn't a good thing.

Now I want to be clear - past history means very little to me. I won't say "nothing", because that's not true. There are a handful of things that would put me off of a relationship, but they are on the extreme end of things. (like serial cheater, escort girl, etc.)

I also want to mention that I have accepted this about her, and I do NOT obsess - I really don't. I love her for who she is, and we're happy.

However, it will always slightly hang over me that she can not be open to me about her past - it's THAT that bothers me, not her actual past, whatever it may be.

If it helps matters at all, what little information I have come by is that she has had many more partners than I have. I've had 4, plus 2 that did not result in piv sex. So 6, total. She has had 3 longterm relationships (3 years plus), an undetermined # of shorter ones (a few weeks to a few months, 3 that I know of), at least one fwb relationship, and an undetermined # of ONS.

What I am having a hard time with, as well, is whether her number means anything, at all. She did go through a period (less than a year, when she just hit the bar age) in which she did not have a boyfriend, and she had several, or more, ONS. The "wild years", which we all have to varying degrees. No problem. Over a 15 year period, between our first time around, and now, I've estimated her number at 20-30. Which isn't really THAT out of whack. 6 of those years were spent with 2 partners, about a year with another. 3 partners over 7 years. The one "wild" year, with 5-10 partners, maybe. Leaving 6 years to make up another, say 10-15.

Over all, the number is high, I know, especially given the 6-7 years with 3 partners. But she's far from a sex addict, which leaves me to believe it's more an esteem thing, or being wanted, or being non-committal, etc. Our sex life is infrequent BUT it's good. She says she's never been into sex, ever, and I believe her. However I find that she's always had a poor attitude towards it. It's just something you do with your partner, and it doesn't mean a whole lot. It's part of the relationship, but also it's not, if that makes any sense. It's separated somehow.

So am I missing the forest for the trees here? Is it really a case of it not mattering to her? Is she ashamed? (I don't think so, I really don't, I know her well enough). Is she keeping it from me because of my relative inexperience because she doesn't want me to see her in a bad light? Or is it, to her, just not of my damn business? 

********


SO, this is not about " It's about trust and openness in a relationship and how different people have different expectations. "

This is about his NEED to know DETAILS and have answers that make sense to him. It will NEVER make sense to him. This is not about "openness". *Everyone is entitled to some privacy in their lives. I do not have the right nor the desire to know EVERY detail of my partners life.*

It seems to me, he has plenty of DETAILS. More than he needs. Yet the final line reads: 

*****Is she keeping it from me because of my relative inexperience because she doesn't want me to see her in a bad light? Or is it, to her, just not of my damn business?*****

At this point, he may not have yet shamed her, but his line of questioning leads me to believe that unless he can come to peace with the knowledge he now has rolling around in his head, there is the chance he may.

Roses and sunshine 

So forget everything else I have said, here is my one line reply:

"Yes, it is none of your damn business!"


----------



## norajane

Caribbean Man said:


> No.
> 
> Nobody, at least no me is saying that.
> 
> But how would you feel if like the OP, you and your husband and his friend were hanging out and they started talking about old flames and the sex they had with them and how great it was?


Lol, been there, done that, didn't care. We go way back with overlapping groups of friends. But that sort of drunk bar sex talk was really limited to early-mid 20's. We're mid-40's now and it really doesn't happen anymore.

People have sex! It's fun! It's ok that they had fun - I hope they did, otherwise what's the point? I don't hold it against him or anyone else.


----------



## Catherine602

OP, I think your wife's sexual past is one of the most important aspects of her for you, if you keep asking her when you know she will not answer you. Do you show as much interest in her hopes, dreams, disappointments and concerns as you do about her sexual history? I feel sorry for your wife. 

she has to wall herself off from an interragwtor in a place that should be a relaxing safe harbor, her home. You are being dishonest. You told her her past was not important to you. Now that she is stuck, you reveal that it is. 

Your words say you don't care but your actions say otherwise. She must feel like a awful that her husband who claims to love her, can pick at her so relentlessly. 

Try to put yourself in her place. How would you feel if your wife claims that the amount of money you make is not important to her. However, she ask you to get all of your financial info for the yrs before your marriage so she can see if there is an upwards trend. She asks very little else about you as a human being, it's all about earning power. 

Try compassion. If you can't manage that try therapy, if that doesn't inspire you to let her rest then maybe you should D. That may be a great relief to your wife and you.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## 2ntnuf

What I don't get is why a man has to stick up for his wife's past when he had nothing to do with it? Why is he expected to defend her from her? He had no say in it. She put herself in that position. It isn't his business. So, if some guy from her past puts her down, her husband is expected to defend her? Defend what? "Hey, don't talk about my wife like that. I'll have to beat you up?" "Oh yeah, by the way honey, was what he was saying true? Never mind. I don't mind getting myself into an altercation because of the mistakes you made that I have nothing to do with, and am not allowed to know if I want to, or can deal with them. Let's just take a chance that I can. It's what men do anyway. We beat each other up over a woman so she can feel better about her mistakes."


----------



## Catherine602

What mistakes did she make? She had sex when she wanted and with whom she wanted. If she did things that she would not do if she were mature, is it a mistake or youth? 

Her husband is not concerned about any of the other things she did in youthful ignorance. She probably spent money foolishly or didn't study and failed a test, or she didn't reach her potential. 

Why is he not plaguing her about those "mistakes". 

Men are really weird about female sexuality. They fear it, they covet it and they try to control it. That's what this is all about.


----------



## BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN

Catherine602 said:


> Bride I think your wife's sexual past is one of the most important aspects of her for you, if you keep asking her when you know she will not answer you. Do you show as much interest in her hopes, dreams, disappointments and concerns as you do about her sexual history? I feel sorry for your wife.
> 
> ...[/i][/size]


Catherine602, I am assuming that the "Bride" you are referring to is me. 

Please re-read my post. Everything inbetween the *****'s is copied text directly from the OP's initial post.

I am a woman who had a horrible experience with a man who turned on me and tried to shame me after I told about some things that had happened to me over 30 years ago.

If there is another "Bride" on this thread, then nevermind.


----------



## Catherine602

BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN said:


> Catherine602, I am assuming that the "Bride" you are referring to is me.
> 
> Please re-read my post. Everything inbetween the *****'s is copied text directly from the OP's initial post.
> 
> I am a woman who had a horrible experience with a man who turned on me and tried to shame me after I told about some things that had happened to me over 30 years ago.
> 
> If there is another "Bride" on this thread, then nevermind.


Sorry Bride my reading skills are abysmal . A bride could not possibly be a man... most of the time. I corrected it.


----------



## 2ntnuf

Very telling how you focused on the one word, "mistake", and nothing else. hmmmmm...........


----------



## TiggyBlue

2ntnuf said:


> What I don't get is why a man has to stick up for his wife's past when he had nothing to do with it? Why is he expected to defend her from her?


IMO he isn't expected to defend her.


----------



## 2ntnuf

Then, he's a "cad". He's a wimp. He's a "nice guy". He's a boy with no guts. He's a coward. At least, that's what I've read and been told IRL.

Edit: And when these men say things which aren't so nice and you say, "hey, watch that", but nothing else because you realize it's her past that's confronting her, how do you separate that, in her mind. from the thoughts she will have that I don't care about her? It's an odd scenario, but I've actually been there IRL. I was thinking, "What do I do? He's bigger. He'll probably beat me to a pulp. I can show her I care by getting beat up or will I just show her I am an idiot and will defend anything she says and does? I don't even know why I have to defend her? She is an adult. He's not trying to get physical. She can make her own arguments in defense of herself. But, I'm supposed to defend her honor. Or...........Where does the thoughts about men and women being equal come into all of this?" Okay, you get the crazy ideas I had. Sometimes, it's easier to make a choice than to consider all of this. Men would say, "fight". "Kick his butt." "Man up." I'd say, make sure it's worth it before you get married. Cause you will be in these situations and need to know it's worth it. Otherwise, you won't want to fight and you will get you butt kicked unless the guy is really smaller than you. I don't know, just some thoughts. Sorry for the hijack.


----------



## treyvion

A reason to be open about it is so your partner doesn't get blind sided.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Cosmos

2ntnuf said:


> Then, he's a "cad". He's a wimp. He's a "nice guy". He's a boy with no guts. He's a coward. At least, that's what I've read and been told IRL.
> 
> Edit: And when these men say things which aren't so nice and you say, "hey, watch that", but nothing else because you realize it's her past that's confronting her, how do you separate that, in her mind. from the thoughts she will have that I don't care about her? It's an odd scenario, but I've actually been there IRL. I was thinking, "What do I do? He's bigger. He'll probably beat me to a pulp. I can show her I care by getting beat up or will I just show her I am an idiot and will defend anything she says and does? I don't even know why I have to defend her? She is an adult. He's not trying to get physical. She can make her own arguments in defense of herself. But, I'm supposed to defend her honor. Or...........Where does the thoughts about men and women being equal come into all of this?" Okay, you get the crazy ideas I had. Sometimes, it's easier to make a choice than to consider all of this. Men would say, "fight". "Kick his butt." "Man up." I'd say, make sure it's worth it before you get married. Cause you will be in these situations and need to know it's worth it. Otherwise, you won't want to fight and you will get you butt kicked unless the guy is really smaller than you. I don't know, just some thoughts. Sorry for the hijack.


What sort of men go around making insulting, disparaging comments about women they've slept with? I would rather be a s!ut than an immature douche who would do this:scratchhead:


----------



## ConanHub

This is an interesting thread.
To all you women that have been hurt by retroactive jealousy or trusting a man with your past only to have him hurt you, I am very sorry. 
I don't really understand why a man would hurt a woman that way, but I don't really understand why people hurt each other so much anyway.
I think OP might just want to get a barrier out of his marriage. He claims his wife might be affected by her history on the intimacy level.
My wife had a lot of junk in her history that was hindering her behavior with me, sexual and non.
It has taken love, time, and patience to draw her out and get her junk from between us. She does the same with me. We continue to improve as a couple. The more we know of each other, the more chances we have for compassion.

It is really sad that someone you are married to can be trusted for sex and having children with, but never with your history. Not slamming anyone, I just wish wives were fully loved and even if their history was embarrassing or hurtful, that wives would feel fully accepted by their husbands.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Caribbean Man

ConanHub said:


> My wife had a lot of junk in her history that was hindering her behavior with me, sexual and non.
> It has taken love, time, and patience to draw her out and get her junk from between us. She does the same with me. We continue to improve as a couple. The more we know of each other, the more chances we have for compassion.


This^^^right there is the crux of the matter.
The past does have an effect on who we are now. In fact the past is what has helped shape who you are presently , how you perceive yourself and how you relate to others. And its not just your sexual past , but your entire past.
And yes it spills over into the non sexual aspects of your life / relationships. A person's perception is often their reality. We tend to evaluate things through the lens of our past experience.

Like I said in my earlier posts, this is a very sensitive are of any relationship that requires trust , communication and a certain level of emotional maturity on both sides. Even talking about past non sexual hurtful experiences takes a certain level of trust , empathy and maturity to understand , especially if we personally have never experienced it. Every life has a story and every story is unique.

A couple's willingness or unwillingness to deal with such issues could very well be an indication of the strength of their bond and a barometer of their intimacy.


----------



## nogutsnoglory

BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN said:


> The Past is the Past and does not ALWAYS surface. Time and space changes everything. I have different friends now, I live in a different state (and state of mind.) The chances of me running into an ex are ZERO. The only way my past will surface is if I bring it up.
> 
> I carry NO shame of my past. Youthful indiscretions should not be a life sentence. I only judge people for how they behave now and the recent past. I was recently harshly judged by a currently active male wh*ore/sl*t, for something I did 30 years ago. He tried to cut me down to his size to feel better about himself. It did not work!
> 
> *Sure, if you want to know if you are marrying a prostitute, bar skank, or crack wh*re, that's one thing. But these types of women rarely change.*
> 
> You are not their "first", get over it. This is a predominately "male" issue. This really has nothing to do with women.
> 
> Check your ego! Mine is fine, thank you very much!


So these woman rarely change, but ones with a ton of ONS's or orgy's or 3somes, or whatever, those girls change and the past should be the past. That's a new brand of logic. :scratchhead:
Sorry, but a woman that is irresponsible with her body, is not a woman that many men would want. Unlike men, your bodies carry children, and this alone means you cannot just use sex for fun anytime you want. Too much risk. Many men see this type of behavior (past or not) to be telling of the type of woman they are marrying...Many woman act like it is a double standard, and that would be true if men carried children in their bodies, but they do not. Not that it is ok, it just is the reality.
Many men go out and target an easy lay, they also go out looking for a partner, a wife, a future mother of their child.
I have never heard a guy tell me he was going out to look for an easy lay to call his wife. Finding out after marriage that your wife slept with half the football team for many men, is telling of the woman they married. Sorry, I know I will get bashed by some, I am simply telling how it is.

I know, I know, woman can't have babies without the sperm donor, that argument is weak though.
I can't get into a bank to rob it if the door remains locked. Men do not hold the keys to the door. We just walk through the ones that are open for business.
It would be best if all things are equal involving the sexes, They are not and that is the reality, and any argument against, is pure fantasy IMO.
For the record I always treated sex even from the early years as something done when in love. I never took advantage of an insecure female that needed to use her body to prove her worth. I never ran around and slammed as many woman as I could. I had plenty of opportunity, but never took for granted the responsibility that comes with sex. I believe it came from good parenting. My father taught me that sex with a **** means you just had sex with a person that is willing to roll the dice on having a child and that type of irresponsibility is not to be trusted. He asked do you want to accidentally have a child with a bar *****? Answer was no, so I was always smart about the type of woman I allowed myself to be close to. Stuck to a lot of oral sex in my party years. Many men are complete pigs and that sucks, but if you better educated the woman for allowing the door to be open for these types of men, there would be much less to talk about. And many less unwanted children.
Now it seems woman are acting like men do, clubs, ONS, coworker affairs, and it is sad that instead of improving the issue it is only getting worse.


----------



## Cosmos

nogutsnoglory said:


> Sorry, but a woman that is irresponsible with her body, is not a woman that many men would want. Unlike men, your bodies carry children, and this alone means you cannot just use sex for fun anytime you want. Too much risk. Many men see this type of behavior (past or not) to be telling of the type of woman they are marrying...Many woman act like it is a double standard, and that would be true if men carried children in their bodies, but they do not. Not that it is ok, it just is the reality.


It's also a reality that many women (myself included) aren't interested in men who have a history of promiscuity, either. Men might not carry children in their bodies, but it could be similarly argued that a previously promiscuous lifestyle _might _ impact on a man's suitability as a reliable husband and father.

I am not saying that this _is _necessarily the case, but we can't expect a partner to bring to the table that which we're not prepared to bring to it ourselves.


----------



## alexm

BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN said:


> Here is an excerpt from the original poster:
> 
> ********
> 
> In other words, I wouldn't move on regardless of her answers.
> ********


I just want to mention that the above quote was written to be read entirely different. I used a poor choice of words.

What I meant by that was I "wouldn't move on FROM HER". As in, the answers wouldn't cause me to break up with her. Not "I wouldn't move on from this subject".

I think you're misrepresenting me here, a little bit. The answers meant nothing. It's the inability to be open with me (and this just happens to be the topic) that bothers me.




BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN said:


> SO, this is not about " It's about trust and openness in a relationship and how different people have different expectations. "
> 
> This is about his NEED to know DETAILS and have answers that make sense to him. It will NEVER make sense to him. This is not about "openness". *Everyone is entitled to some privacy in their lives. I do not have the right nor the desire to know EVERY detail of my partners life.*


Yes it IS about all of that. I have no desire to know details. I have said as much already. I asked a few questions, that to me, and most others, are not really all that out of line. I was met with an "are you kidding me?" response, so I dropped it. I even apologized. We are going back 5 years here, now. Over these past 5 years, I have asked her a couple of times as to why she's so closed off (about this AND other things). She's in denial that she's not an open person. I have ACCEPTED this about her. I am still here, and I married her.



BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN said:


> It seems to me, he has plenty of DETAILS. More than he needs. Yet the final line reads:
> 
> *****Is she keeping it from me because of my relative inexperience because she doesn't want me to see her in a bad light? Or is it, to her, just not of my damn business?*****





BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN said:


> At this point, he may not have yet shamed her, but his line of questioning leads me to believe that unless he can come to peace with the knowledge he now has rolling around in his head, there is the chance he may.


Shamed her???? Are you _____ kidding me? There is no "line of questioning".

I have peace. It is not about her past.

IT IS ABOUT THE INABILITY TO COMMUNICATE.

I have nothing "rolling around" in my head. The few times certain things have been brought up by others, yes, of course they gave me mental images I'd rather not have been subject to. That doesn't mean I'm haunted by it.

I mean this with all due respect, BoF, but you have changed my topic entirely to one that isn't at all what I have posted about. You are jumping to conclusions about me, and you have crossed a line into where you are now lumping me in with people who shame their partners, among other things. Not cool.

The past does not bother me. Again, for your benefit, what bothers me is the lack of trust in talking to me about these subjects. 5 years ago, she did not want to. Fine. I moved on from it. The point of this is - the things she did not want to tell me about have gradually come up over time.

What I have had a hard time grasping is that these things could, and would, not be told to me at one point, but at another, they are open topics of conversation - in front of me - with others.

I don't completely disagree - many topics, such as this one, are off limits - depending on one's personality. I ACCEPTED this (though I didn't like it) way back when. There was no shaming involved. There was no harassing and asking over and over. I moved on. However, it appears that they are not truly off limits if they are being discussed with others while I am right there.

Hence my confusion. Hence my post.


----------



## alexm

ConanHub said:


> This is an interesting thread.
> To all you women that have been hurt by retroactive jealousy or trusting a man with your past only to have him hurt you, I am very sorry.


I agree.

It's also occurred to me that her ex (a 4 year relationship right before me) could be the root cause of her inability to communicate with me.

Without going into TOO much detail, he's a fairly nice guy (he's the biological father of my step kids, so there's regular contact with all of us). However, what little I do know about him is that when they started dating 9, 10 years ago, he was coming out of a marriage in which his ex-wife allegedly cheated on him. He did not go into their relationship with a lot of trust, and it devolved over the years to where he accused my wife of cheating on him, as well. My wife denies she did, of course, and I do believe her. But apparently it got so bad that he'd constantly need to know where she was, with whom, when she'd be back, etc. He'd even show up occasionally at her friend's houses to make sure she was there. She ended it, with a 1 year old in tow. And I've been around him enough to see that he isn't the most confident man in the world.

In any case, I can see that by my inquiring these things to her early on in our relationship could have been seen as a repeat of her previous relationship, and she closed up. Totally acceptable and justified imo.

However, I feel slighted that somebody else could basically take away her ability to fully trust anybody else after him. I have discussed this with her, and in my eyes, she's blind to the fact that she's not open. With ME. As I've said before, she's discussed past events with others (in front of me), yet couldn't talk to me, and me alone, about them.




ConanHub said:


> I think OP might just want to get a barrier out of his marriage. He claims his wife might be affected by her history on the intimacy level.


Yup.


----------



## alexm

Going off topic here, but...

These two posts below, I find incredibly sexist. I hope I'm not in the minority.

I don't find that there's a double standard at all. It always take two to have sex. Both parties agree to it (say, at a bar).

The reason behind both men AND women having ons, getting around, etc. are exactly the same. It is rarely about the sex. It is almost always about being wanted. For men AND women. It is an ego boost. The whole act of preparing for sex, knowing you're going to have sex, etc. is what drives us human beings, not the actual act. The flirting, the touching and kissing, the anticipation. It's a drug. When it's over, there's a period of deflation, and sometimes regret. Then we move on and do it again the next time we have a chance, because it's intoxicating.

It's very similar to going out with your friends, and getting hammered drunk. You have fun while you're getting drunk, you have fun while you're drunk, you don't want the night to end. As soon as you get home and get into bed (or the couch, or the floor...) the feelings start to fade. Then you wake up the next morning and ask why on god's green earth did I do that?

But then we go out and do it all over again the next weekend... 

The thing is, there are people out there who don't think the consequences are worth the fun you can have (either with casual sex, or drinking). I am one of those rare men who fell into this category. I had one ons when I was a teenager, and the end result, the next day and going forward, was not worth the evening as a whole. So I had zero drive to ever do that again.

Some people either do think it's worth it, or simply can't help themselves. Alcohol doesn't help. Self esteem doesn't help. If it makes them feel better about themselves, so what? That's their prerogative. Is it healthy? I don't think most of us here would think so. But is it something that people should have to answer to for the rest of their lives? Absolutely not.

If a 20-something year old man or woman spends a year, or two, or three, sleeping with every person of the opposite sex who shows an interest in them, then "grows up" and realizes that their self esteem should not be based on others, is that not changing? How on earth does that mean that person 10, 20 years in the future is bound to repeat that behaviour and that they shouldn't be trusted?

If anything, I'd be less trusting of the guy or girl who didn't have these experiences in their younger days. What if you marry one of them, and at some point the marriage gets boring (as they often do!) and they start to have thoughts of what it was like to feel wanted? The person who has already done that will likely no longer wonder and long for those feelings, because they've "been there, done that". The one who's only ever had actual relationships will always wonder what it's like to have casual nsa sex, and feel desired "in the moment".

In any case, men and women do these things FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON. Calling out a woman for being a "bar ****" is in incredibly bad taste, when we men are doing the exact same thing - with these women. It's just as acceptable or unacceptable (depending on where you stand) for a person of either sex to be doing this. After all, it's solely about esteem and the need to be wanted and desired.

The only real opinion I have on this matter that may generate some backlash is that this behaviour should really have stopped at some point in your younger life. It's a question of growing up imo. If you're still doing this type of thing regularly when you're, I don't know, over 25? then you haven't matured and you need to re-evaluate your life. No, we don't want to marry the 40 year old bar cougar or Leisure Suit Larry, because the odds that they can assimilate into an actual relationship are slim. But if the man or woman we are into hasn't acted like this since they were 22, so what?

The only real difference is that the consequences, unfortunately, are far greater for women (ie. pregnancy, and sadly, the stigma attached to partaking in this type of thing).

People (cough, men, cough) need to get their heads out of their asses about viewing women in this light. A bar **** is about as desirable to men as a man **** is to most women. And if it doesn't bother you, then good on you. If it does, then stick with the guy or girl who didn't have self esteem issues in their past. And we all have, it's part of growing up. It's just that there are other avenues for attaining more self esteem. Sex, unfortunately, is the easiest, and the most fun. I got mine through sports. Some get theirs through music, or being good in school, or their jobs. But sex and hook-ups take the least effort, so it usually ends up being the "best" way for people to get a self-esteem boost. That's why this type of behaviour usually ends at a young age, because people move into the real world, start careers, etc. Their sense of self worth increases in other areas, therefore removing the need to obtain it through other means.






nogutsnoglory said:


> So these woman rarely change, but ones with a ton of ONS's or orgy's or 3somes, or whatever, those girls change and the past should be the past. That's a new brand of logic. :scratchhead:
> Sorry, but a woman that is irresponsible with her body, is not a woman that many men would want. Unlike men, your bodies carry children, and this alone means you cannot just use sex for fun anytime you want. Too much risk. Many men see this type of behavior (past or not) to be telling of the type of woman they are marrying...Many woman act like it is a double standard, and that would be true if men carried children in their bodies, but they do not. Not that it is ok, it just is the reality.
> Many men go out and target an easy lay, they also go out looking for a partner, a wife, a future mother of their child.
> I have never heard a guy tell me he was going out to look for an easy lay to call his wife. Finding out after marriage that your wife slept with half the football team for many men, is telling of the woman they married. Sorry, I know I will get bashed by some, I am simply telling how it is.
> 
> I know, I know, woman can't have babies without the sperm donor, that argument is weak though.
> I can't get into a bank to rob it if the door remains locked. Men do not hold the keys to the door. We just walk through the ones that are open for business.
> It would be best if all things are equal involving the sexes, They are not and that is the reality, and any argument against, is pure fantasy IMO.
> For the record I always treated sex even from the early years as something done when in love. I never took advantage of an insecure female that needed to use her body to prove her worth. I never ran around and slammed as many woman as I could. I had plenty of opportunity, but never took for granted the responsibility that comes with sex. I believe it came from good parenting. My father taught me that sex with a **** means you just had sex with a person that is willing to roll the dice on having a child and that type of irresponsibility is not to be trusted. He asked do you want to accidentally have a child with a bar *****? Answer was no, so I was always smart about the type of woman I allowed myself to be close to. Stuck to a lot of oral sex in my party years. Many men are complete pigs and that sucks, but if you better educated the woman for allowing the door to be open for these types of men, there would be much less to talk about. And many less unwanted children.
> Now it seems woman are acting like men do, clubs, ONS, coworker affairs, and it is sad that instead of improving the issue it is only getting worse.


----------



## BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN

alexm said:


> What I meant by that was I "wouldn't move on FROM HER".
> 
> *I completely understood what you meant by this statement.
> *
> 
> Shamed her???? Are you _____ kidding me? There is no "line of questioning".
> 
> *I did not say you have shamed her, I said you had the potential to.*
> 
> I have peace. It is not about her past.
> 
> IT IS ABOUT THE INABILITY TO COMMUNICATE.
> 
> *My statements are based upon your original post. I highlighted statements from that post that send up red flags for me. There was really nothing in your original post about basic communications skills. It was all about her past and how she would not open up to you about it.*
> 
> I have nothing "rolling around" in my head. The few times certain things have been brought up by others, yes, of course they gave me mental images I'd rather not have been subject to. That doesn't mean I'm haunted by it.
> 
> *I would say yes, you do have stuff rolling around in your head especially now that I am learning that these conversations took place FIVE years ago.
> *
> 
> Hence my confusion. Hence my post.


If you would have said right up front in your original post that she won't open up to you about her past sex life, but has no problem openly talking about it in front of you with her girlfriends, I would have came at this from a completely different angle.

Without that information, your thoughts do look a bit obsessive. I completely agree with you on your point. In my opinion, it is inappropriate to discuss past sexual experiences with anyone in front of your SO. But even more inappropriate if you cannot discuss those things with your SO.


----------



## BRIDE OF FRANKENSTEIN

to: nogutsnoglory

WOW! don't even want to dignify your post with a response. I may come off as combative and agressive.

I will just say, life is a two way street. I have no desire to be with a man who would have sex with anything that had a pulse.


----------



## Caribbean Man

Cosmos said:


> I am not saying that this _is _necessarily the case, *but we can't expect a partner to bring to the table that which we're not prepared to bring to it ourselves.*


And _that_,^^^ is the reality.
That is where the two people involved ability to openly communicate, understand and compromise becomes useful..


----------



## nogutsnoglory

Cosmos said:


> It's also a reality that many women (myself included) aren't interested in men who have a history of promiscuity, either. Men might not carry children in their bodies, but it could be similarly argued that a previously promiscuous lifestyle _might _ impact on a man's suitability as a reliable husband and father.
> 
> I am not saying that this _is _necessarily the case, but we can't expect a partner to bring to the table that which we're not prepared to bring to it ourselves.


Could not agree more.


----------



## nogutsnoglory

alexm said:


> Going off topic here, but...
> 
> These two posts below, I find incredibly sexist. I hope I'm not in the minority.
> 
> I don't find that there's a double standard at all. It always take two to have sex. Both parties agree to it (say, at a bar).
> 
> The reason behind both men AND women having ons, getting around, etc. are exactly the same. It is rarely about the sex. It is almost always about being wanted. For men AND women. It is an ego boost. The whole act of preparing for sex, knowing you're going to have sex, etc. is what drives us human beings, not the actual act. The flirting, the touching and kissing, the anticipation. It's a drug. When it's over, there's a period of deflation, and sometimes regret. Then we move on and do it again the next time we have a chance, because it's intoxicating.
> 
> It's very similar to going out with your friends, and getting hammered drunk. You have fun while you're getting drunk, you have fun while you're drunk, you don't want the night to end. As soon as you get home and get into bed (or the couch, or the floor...) the feelings start to fade. Then you wake up the next morning and ask why on god's green earth did I do that?
> 
> But then we go out and do it all over again the next weekend...
> 
> The thing is, there are people out there who don't think the consequences are worth the fun you can have (either with casual sex, or drinking). I am one of those rare men who fell into this category. I had one ons when I was a teenager, and the end result, the next day and going forward, was not worth the evening as a whole. So I had zero drive to ever do that again.
> 
> Some people either do think it's worth it, or simply can't help themselves. Alcohol doesn't help. Self esteem doesn't help. If it makes them feel better about themselves, so what? That's their prerogative. Is it healthy? I don't think most of us here would think so. But is it something that people should have to answer to for the rest of their lives? Absolutely not.
> 
> If a 20-something year old man or woman spends a year, or two, or three, sleeping with every person of the opposite sex who shows an interest in them, then "grows up" and realizes that their self esteem should not be based on others, is that not changing? How on earth does that mean that person 10, 20 years in the future is bound to repeat that behaviour and that they shouldn't be trusted?
> 
> If anything, I'd be less trusting of the guy or girl who didn't have these experiences in their younger days. What if you marry one of them, and at some point the marriage gets boring (as they often do!) and they start to have thoughts of what it was like to feel wanted? The person who has already done that will likely no longer wonder and long for those feelings, because they've "been there, done that". The one who's only ever had actual relationships will always wonder what it's like to have casual nsa sex, and feel desired "in the moment".
> 
> In any case, men and women do these things FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON. Calling out a woman for being a "bar ****" is in incredibly bad taste, when we men are doing the exact same thing - with these women. It's just as acceptable or unacceptable (depending on where you stand) for a person of either sex to be doing this. After all, it's solely about esteem and the need to be wanted and desired.
> 
> The only real opinion I have on this matter that may generate some backlash is that this behaviour should really have stopped at some point in your younger life. It's a question of growing up imo. If you're still doing this type of thing regularly when you're, I don't know, over 25? then you haven't matured and you need to re-evaluate your life. No, we don't want to marry the 40 year old bar cougar or Leisure Suit Larry, because the odds that they can assimilate into an actual relationship are slim. But if the man or woman we are into hasn't acted like this since they were 22, so what?
> 
> The only real difference is that the consequences, unfortunately, are far greater for women (ie. pregnancy, and sadly, the stigma attached to partaking in this type of thing).
> 
> People (cough, men, cough) need to get their heads out of their asses about viewing women in this light. A bar **** is about as desirable to men as a man **** is to most women. And if it doesn't bother you, then good on you. If it does, then stick with the guy or girl who didn't have self esteem issues in their past. And we all have, it's part of growing up. It's just that there are other avenues for attaining more self esteem. Sex, unfortunately, is the easiest, and the most fun. I got mine through sports. Some get theirs through music, or being good in school, or their jobs. But sex and hook-ups take the least effort, so it usually ends up being the "best" way for people to get a self-esteem boost. That's why this type of behaviour usually ends at a young age, because people move into the real world, start careers, etc. Their sense of self worth increases in other areas, therefore removing the need to obtain it through other means.


sexist yes, honest very. I repeat, no man ever got pregnant. Woman are the keepers of the infants born. Woman need to be taught to take the consequences of sex very seriously fopr this reason. Listen- my wife is a teacher and if you only knew the amount of teenage girls using their chacha's to be popular it would disgust you. Boys are bad, I do not argue. But ladies, lock the damn door until you are responsible and prepared to have children. Or have babies and try to get shi**y guys to pay child support. 
I am not saying the men are at no fault here. I am just saying to expect men to not try to get laid is not the easier of the two solutions. Men are the hunters when it comes to sex, we have to go out and find a willing participant. It is seemingly getting easier for men to find these woman than it was 20 years ago. teenage pregnancy is up, out of wedlock children is up, adoption clinics are full. Abortion rates are through the roof. Men are not giving birth to these babies, they are asking if they can have sex with the mothers though, and apparently the answer was yes. I am saying ladies need to be saying no more often. Find good men, and take better care of the responsibility of being the ones that bare children. 
It is sexist, but it is what it is.


----------



## TiggyBlue

Cosmos said:


> I am not saying that this _is _necessarily the case, but we can't expect a partner to bring to the table that which we're not prepared to bring to it ourselves.


Totally 100% :iagree:


----------



## TiggyBlue

nogutsnoglory said:


> sexist yes, honest very. I repeat, no man ever got pregnant. Woman are the keepers of the infants born. Woman need to be taught to take the consequences of sex very seriously fopr this reason. Listen- my wife is a teacher and if you only knew the amount of teenage girls using their chacha's to be popular it would disgust you. Boys are bad, I do not argue. But ladies, lock the damn door until you are responsible and prepared to have children. Or have babies and try to get shi**y guys to pay child support.
> I am not saying the men are at no fault here.* I am just saying to expect men to not try to get laid is not the easier of the two solutions. *Men are the hunters when it comes to sex, we have to go out and find a willing participant. It is seemingly getting easier for men to find these woman than it was 20 years ago. teenage pregnancy is up, out of wedlock children is up, adoption clinics are full. Abortion rates are through the roof. Men are not giving birth to these babies, they are asking if they can have sex with the mothers though, and apparently the answer was yes. I am saying ladies need to be saying no more often. Find good men, and take better care of the responsibility of being the ones that bare children.
> It is sexist, but it is what it is.


But that's the problem, trying to put all responsibility on one gender isn't going to stop pregnancies ect because girls have hormones too. No boys/men don't give birth but the reality is they are just as responsible for a baby entering the world as girls are.


----------



## samyeagar

TiggyBlue said:


> But that's the problem, trying to put all responsibility on one gender isn't going to stop pregnancies ect because girls have hormones too. *No boys/men don't give birth but the reality is they are just as responsible for a baby entering the world as girls are*.


They are absolutely just as responsible, however, females have much bigger and longer lasting potential consequences.


----------



## Catherine602

Some men, not all, consider children burden but I have never heard a woman say this. Unfortunately, there are many who post on this forum grousing about child support. It is so sad that these men think that when the relationship with the mother ends their resposibility for their children ends too. 

Children are gifts and a lifelong responsibility. Maybe the consequences may cramp a men's lifestyle and ability to support another family. These men should consider having only the number of children they are willing or able to support. 

But I can't understand why this thinking is so common. 
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## treyvion

Catherine602 said:


> Some men, not all, consider children burden but I have never heard a woman say this. Unfortunately, there are many who post on this forum grousing about child support. It is so sad that these men think that when the relationship with the mother ends their resposibility for their children ends too.
> 
> Children are gifts and a lifelong responsibility. Maybe the consequences may cramp a men's lifestyle and ability to support another family. These men should consider having only the number of children they are willing or able to support.
> 
> But I can't understand why this thinking is so common.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


The other thinking is if they don't want to pay child support to raise the children themself.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

alexm said:


> Without going into TOO much detail, he's a fairly nice guy (he's the biological father of my step kids, so there's regular contact with all of us). However,* what little I do know about him is that when they started dating 9, 10 years ago, he was coming out of a marriage in which his ex-wife allegedly cheated on him. He did not go into their relationship with a lot of trust, and it devolved over the years to where he accused my wife of cheating on him, as well. My wife denies she did, of course, and I do believe her.* *But apparently it got so bad that he'd constantly need to know where she was, with whom, when she'd be back, etc. He'd even show up occasionally at her friend's houses to make sure she was there. *She ended it, with a 1 year old in tow. And I've been around him enough to see that he isn't the most confident man in the world.
> 
> In any case, *I can see that by my inquiring these things to her early on in our relationship could have been seen as a repeat of her previous relationship, and she closed up.* Totally acceptable and justified imo.
> 
> However, *I feel slighted that somebody else could basically take away her ability to fully trust anybody else after him. I have discussed this with her, and in my eyes, she's blind to the fact that she's not open. With ME.* As I've said before, she's discussed past events with others (in front of me), yet couldn't talk to me, and me alone, about them.


 This gives a background picture to the domino effect of *betrayal* starting with her ex's 1st wife...and how it affects/ wreaks havoc on many lives in it's path....

It's not fair...a new husband/ new wife (in her case) should have a clean slate......unfortunately, our lover's past experiences & the emotional hurts/baggage they carry too often spills over into our future relationships...


----------



## treyvion

SimplyAmorous said:


> This gives a background picture to the domino effect of *betrayal* starting with her ex's 1st wife...and how it affects/ wreaks havoc on many lives in it's path....
> 
> It's not fair...a new husband/ new wife (in her case) should have a clean slate......unfortunately, our lover's past experiences & the emotional hurts/baggage they carry too often spills over into our future relationships...


Some of those "hurts" build up "strengths" in the person who was hurt, which actually are walls. So you get cheated out of some of the person for things you did not commit to them.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

alexm said:


> These two posts below, I find incredibly sexist. I hope I'm not in the minority.
> 
> *It always take two to have sex. Both parties agree to it (say, at a bar).*
> 
> The reason behind both men AND women having ons, getting around, etc. are exactly the same. It is rarely about the sex. It is almost always about being wanted. For men AND women. It is an ego boost. The whole act of preparing for sex, knowing you're going to have sex, etc. is what drives us human beings, not the actual act. The flirting, the touching and kissing, the anticipation. It's a drug. When it's over, there's a period of deflation, and sometimes regret. Then we move on and do it again the next time we have a chance, because it's intoxicating.
> 
> It's very similar to going out with your friends, and getting hammered drunk. You have fun while you're getting drunk, you have fun while you're drunk, you don't want the night to end. As soon as you get home and get into bed (or the couch, or the floor...) the feelings start to fade. Then you wake up the next morning and ask why on god's green earth did I do that?
> 
> But then we go out and do it all over again the next weekend...
> 
> Some people either do think it's worth it, or simply can't help themselves. Alcohol doesn't help. Self esteem doesn't help. If it makes them feel better about themselves, so what?* That's their prerogative. Is it healthy? I don't think most of us here would think so. But is it something that people should have to answer to for the rest of their lives? Absolutely not.*
> 
> *If a 20-something year old man or woman spends a year, or two, or three, sleeping with every person of the opposite sex who shows an interest in them, then "grows up" and realizes that their self esteem should not be based on others, is that not changing? How on earth does that mean that person 10, 20 years in the future is bound to repeat that behaviour and that they shouldn't be trusted?*
> 
> In any case, men and women do these things FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON. Calling out a woman for being a "bar ****" is in incredibly bad taste, when we men are doing the exact same thing - with these women.* It's just as acceptable or unacceptable (depending on where you stand) for a person of either sex to be doing this. After all, it's solely about esteem and the need to be wanted and desired.*
> 
> The only real opinion I have on this matter that may generate some backlash is that this behaviour should really have stopped at some point in your younger life. It's a question of growing up imo. If you're still doing this type of thing regularly when you're, I don't know, over 25? then you haven't matured and you need to re-evaluate your life. No, we don't want to marry the 40 year old bar cougar or Leisure Suit Larry, because the odds that they can assimilate into an actual relationship are slim. *But if the man or woman we are into hasn't acted like this since they were 22, so what?*
> 
> The only real difference is that the consequences, unfortunately, are far greater for women (ie. pregnancy, and sadly, the stigma attached to partaking in this type of thing).
> 
> *People (cough, men, cough) need to get their heads out of their asses about viewing women in this light*. A bar **** is about as desirable to men as a man **** is to most women. And if it doesn't bother you, then good on you. If it does, then stick with the guy or girl who didn't have self esteem issues in their past. And we all have, it's part of growing up. It's just that there are other avenues for attaining more self esteem.* Sex, unfortunately, is the easiest, and the most fun. *I got mine through sports. Some get theirs through music, or being good in school, or their jobs. But sex and hook-ups take the least effort, so it usually ends up being the "best" way for people to get a self-esteem boost. That's why this type of behaviour usually ends at a young age, because people move into the real world, start careers, etc. Their sense of self worth increases in other areas, therefore removing the need to obtain it through other means.


Can I just say....I found your post *very gracious & understanding *to all women -for their sexual choices ......you are empathetic of their pasts, the why's.. understand the FUN..the need to feel wanted/ desired... the intoxication of it's grip....and standing to DEFEND those who speak anything fowl/ sexist or double standard-ish... you'd give them the sword! 

Any women who had a beef with your opening post, feeling you were judging/ being obsessive or this is somehow about a masked Retroactive Jealousy issue...I hope this will be laid to rest with this enlightening post...

It is as you have originally stated...*about her opening up to you*, *allowing you in.*.*.it's purely an emotional intimacy issue*.. 

Our oldest son is visiting... he is a Christian, non partier, does not believe in the Double standard... he liked your post (we talk about stuff like this as he is a Psychology student).... .we shouldn't judge... People can change...no one should be painted with a broad brush by their younger years..... this defines no one...as we grow, we learn, and may change our ways, our views.

Though he does feel, as I ...when a couple meets...Dates... goes on to marry, they should be on the same page sexually speaking .. as this will help in raising their children as well someday....not being divided on sexual views...whatever they may be. 



alexm said:


> If anything,* I'd be less trusting of the guy or girl who didn't have these experiences in their younger days. What if you marry one of them, and at some point the marriage gets boring (as they often do!) and they start to have thoughts of what it was like to feel wanted? *The person who has already done that will likely no longer wonder and long for those feelings, because they've "been there, done that". The one who's only ever had actual relationships will always wonder what it's like to have casual nsa sex, and feel desired "in the moment".


 I understand many feel this way...reasoning it out.. and with any of us.... we too, can change...the Good Girl going bad, suddenly wanting to experience what she might have missed...

Me & mine fall into this category ...thankfully we haven't gotten bored.. I feel it's paramount - ones beliefs/ what sex means to a person...for us it's always been about those STRINGS/ Love / Attachment, some things ARE worth waiting for...been together 3 decades now......we still feel the same after all these years.. 

I think I'd have to have a brain injury to want to try Casual sex... seriously... He has never been that type or felt he missed anything either.


----------



## alexm

SimplyAmorous said:


> Any women who had a beef with your opening post, feeling you were judging/ being obsessive or this is somehow about a masked Retroactive Jealousy issue...I hope this will be laid to rest with this enlightening post...
> 
> It is as you have originally stated...*about her opening up to you*, *allowing you in.*.*.it's purely an emotional intimacy issue*.. .


Thank you for your kind words and for understanding my pov  I do want to say that I don't fault those who automatically jump to the jealousy area, as it's quite common here, and a genuine issue for some.

I have had retroactive jealousy issues, though oddly enough, not about this particular area. I tend to have them when dealing with non-sexual issues in regards to my wife's relationship past. Go figure.



SimplyAmorous said:


> I understand many feel this way...reasoning it out.. and with any of us.... we too, can change...the Good Girl going bad, suddenly wanting to experience what she might have missed...
> 
> Me & mine fall into this category ...thankfully we haven't gotten bored.. I feel it's paramount - ones beliefs/ what sex means to a person...for us it's always been about those STRINGS/ Love / Attachment, some things ARE worth waiting for...been together 3 decades now......we still feel the same after all these years..
> 
> I think I'd have to have a brain injury to want to try Casual sex... seriously... He has never been that type or felt he missed anything either.


Good for you guys, honestly! I think that's so cool.

I don't think my example was warranted, in retrospect, and I could have worded it better.

I didn't mean to insinuate that if someone has less experience (or no experience) before getting married that they are not trustworthy. I should have said, they are no more or less trustworthy than the person with lots of experience. Though for me, personally, I would likely feel more comfortable knowing that I was the one chosen after several (or many) experiences. It would make me feel more confident in my ability to make my partner happy. Those of you with little or no experience probably have a higher hill to climb to ensure your partner is happy and satisfied in all aspects. Doesn't mean I get to put less effort into things! Just means that my partner already knows what's out there and will likely never wonder.

I based this upon my own experiences (which is not going to be the experience of others - something some people here should recognize from time to time. A+B does not always equal C...). However, my ex wife was with me from 16 to 30, and in the end, she DID wonder what else was out there, and acted, unfortunately. I did my best to make her happy, and certainly there were other issues at play, but the bottom line (in this case) was that the urge to explore other things/people was too much for her to ignore, and she found that the grass was greener on the other side. But, to be fair, going from a teenager to an adult during the same relationship is usually difficult. People change dramatically in that time frame, and we went from being two peas in a pod to nothing in common whatsoever by the end. I don't blame her in general, just that she didn't really handle it well or respect me at all.


----------



## Caribbean Man

I read this article almost one year ago when I had recently joined TAM.
It's an article about secrets in marriage,posted right here on TAM , since 2008.
Here's the link to the article;

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/articles/993-sex-lies-secrets-secrecy-destroying-your-marriage.html

I just copied and pasted the entire article , hope it can help those who are interested get a clearer understanding.

*Sex, Lies and Secrets: Is Secrecy Destroying Your Marriage?*

After the story broke that New York governor Eliot Spitzer was having sex with prostitutes, relationship experts popped up on every news channel, dispensing theories about Mr. Spitzer's behavior. Opinions about why a married man (and one with a great deal to lose) would behave this way ranged from him having unmet needs to sociopathic tendencies. One expert even suggested that "men are ruled by their genitals." In all the analyses of this scandal, though, what no one brought up was the role of secrets. 

The truth is we're never going to know why the ex-governor did what he did. But the reality is that Mr. and Mrs. Spitzer are not alone in having to deal with the devastating effects of an extra-marital affair. It is estimated that 60 percent of men and 40 percent of women will be unfaithful at some point in their marriage. 

In my therapy practice I've worked with both men and women who were unfaithful, and many who were on the verge of starting an affair. There are many reasons why someone makes the decision to cheat on their spouse or partner--one often overlooked dynamic has to do with the power and lure of living in a secretive world. 

*The Power of Secrets*

Some people are drawn to the idea of keeping secrets. Whether the secret involves an extra-marital affair, gambling, shopping, or alcohol/drugs, keeping a secret seems to hold a special meaning for the secret-holder, beyond the content of what is kept hidden. For obvious reasons, secrets spell big trouble for your marriage or relationship. 

True intimacy cannot exist when you build walls of secrecy around each other. 

Let's look at five reasons you might keep secrets from your partner (or vice versa): 

*1. The Secret as an escape*

Here the secret acts as an escape hatch from a mundane or distressing reality that you feel little control over. People who feel trapped in painful marriages are vulnerable to creating a secret life that promises relief from the heartache of a deteriorating relationship. For some, the secret might involve emotional infidelity; others might have a physical affair. The secretive relationship can exist for many years alongside one's marriage or the affair can act as catalyst to leaving an unwanted relationship. 

*2. The Secret as a source of energy *

The function of this type of secret is similar to escapism but the emphasis is on the charged energy you feel when you enter into the secretive world. The secret is seen as offering a much-needed adrenaline boost to a lackluster life. One client who had a gambling addiction (that was kept hidden from his family) described how his secretive life made him feel "alive" in ways that eluded him in his day-to- day life. People who remain overly repressed and constrained in their relationships (and in general) are prone to this type of secret.

*3. The Secret as affirmation of your disowned self*

Typically, people behave differently in their secretive world: The individual who feels stepped-on in his life seeks omnipotence; the high powered executive who bullied his/her way to the top becomes helplessly submissive; the dutiful, and highly ethical husband is transformed into the bad, punishable child. When deep- seated fears of rejection and shame block you from bringing all of yourself into your marriage or relationship, secrets become a powerful way to express these disowned (polar-opposite) parts of yourself.

*4. The Secret as an avoidance of intimacy*

For many, emotional intimacy is the life energy that makes them feel alive and whole; but for others, a deep connection to another becomes a strait jacket to be avoided--fear of intimacy is a reality for many couples. When you struggle with fears of intimacy, you struggle to maintain your autonomy, while also attempting to give of yourself emotionally. This is a balancing act that does not come easy. When intimacy is being avoided, the creation of a secretive life acts as a possession, a line drawn in the sand that delineates you from your partner or spouse. 

*5. The Secret as a means of control/power*

In a sense, all secrets give you a greater sense of control. At lease initially. This usually changes at some point, as your secretive life spirals out of control--which is often the case when you try to hold onto secrets while being in an intimate relationship. But for some, their secrets are designed to act as a means of power over their spouse--a way of controlling something, anything, that their partner cannot have access to. The importance of this secret is that you gain a sense of control over your partner by maintaining a secretive existence. 


The need to keep secrets originates out of an early need to protect yourself. When a relationship (or some aspect of a relationship) becomes intolerable to a child, s/he begins to retreat, hiding within the protective world of secrets. A child who has been emotionally injured learns to count on the reliability and safety of secrets. 

The challenge for all of us is to create a relationship that feels safe, a union that allows a deep and rich sharing of ourselves. When our hard work and commitment pays off in the form of a mutual haven of intimacy and respect, the heavy curtain of secrecy will lift, allowing a true connection to flourish. 

To receive tips on building deeper intimacy and a stronger relationship, visit Relationship Advice | Marriage Help | Dr. Rich Nicastro and sign up for Dr. Nicastro's FREE Relationship Toolbox Newsletter. 

As a bonus, you will receive the popular free reports: "The four mindsets that can topple your relationship" and "Relationship self-defense: Control the way you argue before your arguments control you." 

Richard Nicastro, Ph.D. is a psychologist and relationship coach who is passionate about helping couples protect the sanctuary of their relationship.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

alexm said:


> I didn't mean to insinuate that if someone has less experience (or no experience) before getting married that they are not trustworthy. I should have said, they are no more or less trustworthy than the person with lots of experience. Though for me, personally, I would likely feel more comfortable knowing that I was the one chosen after several (or many) experiences. It would make me feel more confident in my ability to make my partner happy. Those of you with little or no experience probably have a higher hill to climb to ensure your partner is happy and satisfied in all aspects. Doesn't mean I get to put less effort into things! Just means that my partner already knows what's out there and will likely never wonder.
> 
> I based this upon my own experiences (which is not going to be the experience of others - something some people here should recognize from time to time. A+B does not always equal C...). *However, my ex wife was with me from 16 to 30, and in the end, she DID wonder what else was out there, and acted, unfortunately. I did my best to make her happy, and certainly there were other issues at play, but the bottom line (in this case) was that the urge to explore other things/people was too much for her to ignore, and she found that the grass was greener on the other side.*


 It's Ok.... we all speak out of our experiences.... if it's been good for us... we praise.... if its been bad, often there is some shifting on how we view these things..... as you had a high school sweetheart (assuming *you *were her 1st & only)...meeting her at age 16... who went on to cheat on you down the line... feeling SHE missed out (though you mentioned other issues, so it was more / deeper than her just wanting some "strange"... 

So it makes sense you would feel as you do, since that didn't work out so well... it touches home... though kudos to you......unlike your wife's Ex (who was also cheated on)...it sounds you have been able *to separate* women/ relationships not showing overly controlling suspicious behaviors to your now wife...

Does she recognize how you have dealt here...given the betrayal done to you...in this way, maybe she could see ....we all deserve a new slate... Just my thoughts.. not that reason can change anything, but it's worth a try.

...I have a suggestion to jump start some intimate conversation.....only you know if she would be game though... Is it just past questions she hates or ALL questions, seeking her thoughts, opinions ?? 

I've bought books like these... beings we've been together for ages & have talked about it ALL....could use some fresh ideas...these questions are all over the map....and if she wants, she can refuse to answer what she doesn't like...

Just imagine ...hot summer day, outside on the porch, a swing together.. shooting some questions back & forth... we learn new things about each other...we laugh, we are having fun, and building intimacy at the same time...

*1. *


> 365 Questions For Couples: Books
> 
> How many things would you like to know—but don't—about your partner? Do you wish your partner would ask you about your past, your goals, your inner thoughts? When was the last time the two of you shared a dream, a memory, or a fantasy together?
> 
> 365 Questions for Couples shows you how to get closer to your partner by asking and answering thought-provoking questions on such subjects as:
> 
> Your relationship
> Relationship with others
> Goals and fantasies
> Life experiences
> Memories
> Sex
> 
> Remember, there are no right or wrong answers. The only rule is that you cannot ask a question that you refuse to answer yourself. So put some quiet time aside, make yourself comfortable, and enter together into the world of goals, dreams, emotions, and your previously hidden past!


*2. *


> Intellectual Foreplay: A Book of Questions for Lovers and Lovers-to-Be: Books
> 
> This solutions-oriented guide offers problem solving and behavior changing strategies for people working on their most intimate relationships.
> 
> The book provides readers with: enhanced knowledge of their own and their partners' beliefs, values, habits, desires, goals, likes, and dislikes; ideas for opening communication and deepening a relationship; skills for making healthy decisions about lifestyles and boundaries; an in-depth understanding of the role of self-esteem in relationships; increased ability to let go of the past and embrace the present; and the knowledge that it is important not only to choose the right partner, but also to be the right partner.
> 
> What distinguishes Intellectual Foreplay from similar titles is that it includes guidelines on what to do with the answers it gives. This makes it useful in both creating and sustaining a relationship.


They have games that just couples could play (or a party setting) ...I'd think stuff like this would be great FUN... 

*1. * Adult Loaded Questions: 

*2*. Would You Rather...? Ultimate SEX Edition: Over 700 Ludicrously Lustful Dilemmas to Ponder:


----------



## alexm

SimplyAmorous said:


> as you had a high school sweetheart (assuming *you *were her 1st & only)...meeting her at age 16... who went on to cheat on you down the line... feeling SHE missed out (though you mentioned other issues, so it was more / deeper than her just wanting some "strange"...


Well, here's the funny thing - my current wife and I were each other's firsts! We lasted 3 years, broke up at 18/19, and I met my ex-wife about 6 months later. My ex-wife had had some experience, though nothing long term. I was, I believe, her 5th or 6th partner, if memory serves. And she had maybe about the same # of partners that were nothing more than oral sex. So she had got around a bit by the time I met her (she was 16, almost 17, I was just 19). I had 2 other partners in between the two relationships.

After the divorce, about 5 years ago now, I bumped into my first love, and we hit it off all those years later, and we just married recently.

So it wasn't a case of my ex-wife not having experience in sex, it was my ex-wife not having experience in any relationships longer than a few months. In the end, she felt that us being together for that long (she was 16-30) robbed her of her "fun times" - which I don't disagree with. And also never being with anybody serious except me.




SimplyAmorous said:


> Does she recognize how you have dealt here...given the betrayal done to you...in this way, maybe she could see ....we all deserve a new slate... Just my thoughts.. not that reason can change anything, but it's worth a try.


Yes, she does, but I think she's also had similar experiences, or at least some bad ones. She's not a whole lot different than me. Just that how we go about dealing with it is markedly different. Neither of us come from families of talkers and people who show feelings, but I have taken a different path, whereas she has carried on her family tradition!



SimplyAmorous said:


> ...I have a suggestion to jump start some intimate conversation.....only you know if she would be game though... Is it just past questions she hates or ALL questions, seeking her thoughts, opinions ?? ]


In all honesty, she just doesn't talk about anything, really. She'll vent about work, but that's about it. She's really an "it is what it is" kind of person. And it's not just me she's like this with, it's everybody. If it was just me, I wouldn't be having this discussion, I'd be gone. I give her the benefit of the doubt in this regard, however, because it really is just her personality, as much as it's annoying. But we somehow work around it, and I have no doubt that she'd discuss something that really needed to be discussed, if it ever comes to that.

The good side to this is that she's pretty cool about everything. It really takes a lot for her to get mad at me, and she allows me more freedom than a lot of wives/husbands give their partners. Not that I take advantage of that (!!!) but I'm not scared of her like I was with my ex... That's a whole 'nother story!


----------



## Catherine602

nogutsnoglory said:


> So these woman rarely change, but ones with a ton of ONS's or orgy's or 3somes, or whatever, those girls change and the past should be the past. That's a new brand of logic. :scratchhead:
> Sorry, but a woman that is irresponsible with her body, is not a woman that many men would want. Unlike men, your bodies carry children, and this alone means you cannot just use sex for fun anytime you want. Too much risk. Many men see this type of behavior (past or not) to be telling of the type of woman they are marrying...Many woman act like it is a double standard, and that would be true if men carried children in their bodies, but they do not. Not that it is ok, it just is the reality.
> Many men go out and target an easy lay, they also go out looking for a partner, a wife, a future mother of their child.
> I have never heard a guy tell me he was going out to look for an easy lay to call his wife. Finding out after marriage that your wife slept with half the football team for many men, is telling of the woman they married. Sorry, I know I will get bashed by some, I am simply telling how it is.
> 
> I know, I know, woman can't have babies without the sperm donor, that argument is weak though.
> I can't get into a bank to rob it if the door remains locked. Men do not hold the keys to the door. We just walk through the ones that are open for business.
> It would be best if all things are equal involving the sexes, They are not and that is the reality, and any argument against, is pure fantasy IMO.
> For the record I always treated sex even from the early years as something done when in love. I never took advantage of an insecure female that needed to use her body to prove her worth. I never ran around and slammed as many woman as I could. I had plenty of opportunity, but never took for granted the responsibility that comes with sex. I believe it came from good parenting. My father taught me that sex with a **** means you just had sex with a person that is willing to roll the dice on having a child and that type of irresponsibility is not to be trusted. He asked do you want to accidentally have a child with a bar *****? Answer was no, so I was always smart about the type of woman I allowed myself to be close to. Stuck to a lot of oral sex in my party years. Many men are complete pigs and that sucks, but if you better educated the woman for allowing the door to be open for these types of men, there would be much less to talk about. And many less unwanted children.
> Now it seems woman are acting like men do, clubs, ONS, coworker affairs, and it is sad that instead of improving the issue it is only getting worse.


Interesting and revealing. Do you realize the far reaching effects of your attitude?. What happened to fathers rights movement? What about sex in marriage? Nothing to do with that? 

The prevailing belief, as you so elegantly stated above, is that women carry the children of men therefore they (the mothers) are responsible for them. Who is the father? Also that men have a right to enjoy sex but women don't. Who are these men having sex with? :scratchhead:

Can you see how that thinking makes men seem irresponsible parents? It makes favoritism shown to women in child custody perfectly sound.

You don't connect up what you are saying and the attitude that many women have about men and sex. The "men have a right to enjoy their body but women don't" beliefs should enter into the discussion about sex in marriage but rarely do.

The fathers rights movement should start at the conception of all of a mans children. It does not matter how the child is conceived. Two parents are responsible. 

Women have a right to enjoy sex as much as men. If you think they shouldn't before marriage why expect it after.?


----------



## Catherine602

I don't want you to think that I agree with hiding sexual history. Reveal it early before any emotional attachment of any type. 

. If the man seems uncomfortable but wants to continue then consider that he may have a late negative reaction. I think everyone has a right to fall in love with the real person not a representative. It's the fair thing to do.


----------



## alexm

One thing I do not understand is, in my case (and probably many other's) the reasoning behind hiding it, or lying about it.

For me, I have been told that my wife's past is not something she is ashamed or embarrassed of. It's just none of my business.

To me, this doesn't quite add up. I AM okay with it, now. I've dropped it, moved on, seen that some of her points are valid (ie. it really doesn't matter anymore). But it mattered THEN. To me.

So what doesn't quite make sense to me is the seeming lack of shame/embarrassment, yet the reluctance to divulge it and the little lies. Certainly she, or anybody else, would not be proud of it (I'm not proud of what little past I have), but if you're not ashamed AND it doesn't matter, then why hide it/lie about it?

Yes, it's personal, but sharing your body with me, among other things is far more personal imo.

In the end, the irony is that I am GLAD I don't know everything. I HAVE moved on from it as a whole, I'm just interested in the why's at this point.




Catherine602 said:


> I don't want you to think that I agree with hiding sexual history. Reveal it early before any emotional attachment of any type.
> 
> . If the man seems uncomfortable but wants to continue then consider that he may have a late negative reaction. I think everyone has a right to fall in love with the real person not a representative. It's the fair thing to do.


----------



## couple

People need to be able to accept their partners for who they are. Sexuality is a very important aspect to one's life. Blocking out and hiding this whole aspect to one's life prevents true intimacy with your partner.

Some people don't want to know because they can't accept the truth about their partner. Some people don't want to tell because they are afraid that their partner won't accept them for who they are. Does this sound like a recipe for a good relationship? It doesn't to me either.

Some may say "well i'm not that person any more and it was the past". However, people are a sum of their experiences and your sexual history is a very important part of your sexuality. This argument is just trying to rationalize keeping important aspects of your life from your partner. We all know it was the past and adults should be able to accept this. Same for non-sexual things that you might have done as a teenager or young adult that you wouldn't necessarily do today.

If your husband can't accept that you, for example, had a few flings in college, had sex on spring break or got around a bit in high school, then the relationship is not meant to be and will likely not be successful.

If the real problem behind this is that he really wants a virgin or someone with different values than yours, hiding the truth is not the solution to this mismatch.


----------



## Caribbean Man

alexm said:


> *So what doesn't quite make sense to me is the seeming lack of shame/embarrassment, yet the reluctance to divulge it and the little lies. Certainly she, or anybody else, would not be proud of it (I'm not proud of what little past I have), but if you're not ashamed AND it doesn't matter, then why hide it/lie about it?*



Alex,
If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck , sh!ts like a duck, then it must be a unicorn..
Yes?


----------



## Caribbean Man

couple said:


> *If your husband can't accept that you, for example, had a few flings in college, had sex on spring break or got around a bit in high school, then the relationship is not meant to be and will likely not be successful.*
> 
> *If the real problem behind this is that he really wants a virgin or someone with different values than yours, hiding the truth is not the solution to this mismatch.*


As simple as that^^^.
In fact hiding secrets in a relationship, any type of relationship is a method of power and control.

1]In politics and government , hiding secrets is a criminal offence punishable by law. 

2]In business a contract is declared as legally null and void due to misrepresentation. A misrepresentation may be: 1) a false statement of fact, 2) *the deliberate withholding of information which a party has a duty to disclose, *or 3) an action that conceals a fact (for example, painting over water damage when selling a house).

How can that type of behaviour in marriage be justified?

If you don't think that your partner would accept your past, then why are you forcing yourself on them by deception?
There are other people who would have no problem with it, by withholding information you are just jeopardizing your own future marriage with that person.
If they won't accept it before, then they're not meant for you.
If they judge you, they weren't meant for you.
If they shame you , they weren't meant for you.


----------



## GettingIt_2

Caribbean Man said:


> As simple as that^^^.
> In fact hiding secrets in a relationship, any type of relationship is a method of power and control.


Not wanting to divulge some or all information about one's sexual history is not automatically tantamount to "hiding secrets." 

Using that sort of false equivalency to try and change someone's behavior is also a method of power and control. 



Caribbean Man said:


> 1]In politics and government , hiding secrets is a criminal offence punishable by law.
> 
> 2]In business a contract is declared as legally null and void due to misrepresentation. A misrepresentation may be: 1) a false statement of fact, 2) *the deliberate withholding of information which a party has a duty to disclose, *or 3) an action that conceals a fact (for example, painting over water damage when selling a house).
> 
> How can that type of behaviour in marriage be justified?


Because you are dealing with individuals entering into a voluntary emotional relationship. People are different than entities. You have no agency, there is no outside authority, to force your spouse to disclose information or secrets just because you want them to. The only agency you have is over yourself--you may choose to leave the relationship if you are unhappy with your partner's choices in the matter. 



Caribbean Man said:


> If you don't think that your partner would accept your past, then why are you forcing yourself on them by deception?
> There are other people who would have no problem with it, by withholding information you are just jeopardizing your own future marriage with that person.
> If they won't accept it before, then they're not meant for you.
> If they judge you, they weren't meant for you.
> If they shame you , they weren't meant for you.


There are many reasons, I am sure, for not "giving in" to any and all of a spouse's requests for details on sexual history. Your list is not exhaustive, but it is very pejorative. 

Finding a balance between one partner's need for disclosure and another's need for privacy can be a complicated dance. You might not get what you want. However, if you trust your partner, it is more likely you will find a way to deal with your insecurities so that they don't blow up your otherwise happy relationship. OR you might come to be able to share information that you had been unwilling to share at first. 

I'll say it again: trust is key. 

For years I was upset, annoyed, and frustrated because my husband would not share many details about his sexual past with me. He'd give round about, general answers to my questions and then change the subject. It clearly made him uncomfortable. For example: I so, so much wanted to hear the story of how he'd lost his virginity, but he'd never share it. It became a sore subject for me until I decided that my focusing on it was hurting our relationship, and I made the decision to accept that he was not going to tell me much about his past. 

I did ask him WHY he wouldn't tell me about his sexual history, and he finally said that he found it disrespectful to his past partners. This, too, frustrated me because I felt that he was putting their feelings above mine, or putting his sense of moral high ground above our intimacy. 

At any rate, I trusted him, so I decided to let it go. Mostly I was just curious anyway, and wanted to know what my husband had been like before I knew him. 

Here we are, 24 years later, and he is opening up to me. I so, so look forward to the stories that he has suddenly started to share. It's like a closetful of presents have been discovered, and we open them slowly, savor them together with so much wonder and laughter. Intimacy isn't something you just automatically get from someone when you say "I do." You earn it, and it can develop and become richer and deeper for as long as you are with someone. 

If I had demanded and cajoled and forced the issue years ago, I wouldn't be enjoying these gifts nearly as much as I am enjoying them now that they are freely given.

I share this story not because I don't think that secrets can be damaging, but that a need for privacy is not always as nefarious as many folks seem to believe.


----------



## Caribbean Man

GettingIt said:


> Not wanting to divulge some or all information about one's sexual history is not automatically tantamount to "hiding secrets."
> 
> Using that sort of false equivalency to try and change someone's behavior is also a method of power and control.
> 
> 
> 
> Because you are dealing with individuals entering into a voluntary emotional relationship. People are different than entities. You have no agency, there is no outside authority, to force your spouse to disclose information or secrets just because you want them to. The only agency you have is over yourself--you may choose to leave the relationship if you are unhappy with your partner's choices in the matter.
> 
> 
> 
> There are many reasons, I am sure, for not "giving in" to any and all of a spouse's requests for details on sexual history. Your list is not exhaustive, but it is very pejorative.
> 
> Finding a balance between one partner's need for disclosure and another's need for privacy can be a complicated dance. You might not get what you want. However, if you trust your partner, it is more likely you will find a way to deal with your insecurities so that they don't blow up your otherwise happy relationship. OR you might come to be able to share information that you had been unwilling to share at first.
> 
> I'll say it again: trust is key.
> 
> For years I was upset, annoyed, and frustrated because my husband would not share many details about his sexual past with me. He'd give round about, general answers to my questions and then change the subject. It clearly made him uncomfortable. For example: I so, so much wanted to hear the story of how he'd lost his virginity, but he'd never share it. It became a sore subject for me until I decided that my focusing on it was hurting our relationship, and I made the decision to accept that he was not going to tell me much about his past.
> 
> I did ask him WHY he wouldn't tell me about his sexual history, and he finally said that he found it disrespectful to his past partners. This, too, frustrated me because I felt that he was putting their feelings above mine, or putting his sense of moral high ground above our intimacy.
> 
> At any rate, I trusted him, so I decided to let it go. Mostly I was just curious anyway, and wanted to know what my husband had been like before I knew him.
> 
> Here we are, 24 years later, and he is opening up to me. I so, so look forward to the stories that he has suddenly started to share. It's like a closetful of presents have been discovered, and we open them slowly, savor them together with so much wonder and laughter. Intimacy isn't something you just automatically get from someone when you say "I do." You earn it, and it can develop and become richer and deeper for as long as you are with someone.
> 
> If I had demanded and cajoled and forced the issue years ago, I wouldn't be enjoying these gifts nearly as much as I am enjoying them now that they are freely given.
> 
> I share this story not because I don't think that secrets can be damaging, but that a need for privacy is not always as nefarious as many folks seem to believe.


".._Not wanting to divulge some or all information about one's sexual history is not automatically tantamount to "hiding secrets_." 
So then what is it? Full transparency?

Does having sex with someone else other than you spouse automatically constitute adultery or is there also some explanation that negates it under certain circumstances?
Does holding a wayward adulterous spouse responsible for their act amount to trying forcefully to change their behaviour?
Using your logic ,doesn't that too constitute manipulation , power and control?

My username on this website is Caribbean Man because I don't want strangers on the internet to know my real name. If I wanted them to know it I would simply tell everyone. You don't want someone to know something then you hide it.
The justification for not wanting them to know is an entirely different matter, but that does not mean it's not hiding secrets.

I have NEVER advocated seeking gory details of past relationships or even cajoling a partner for information about their past.


Maybe you can quote me?

What I'm saying is that if a relationship has that dynamic where secrets are kept from either partner, and the other is cajoling, then the relationship is a manipulative one , destined for failure.
Guess who's doing the manipulating?

Definitely not the person asking the questions.


----------



## GettingIt_2

Caribbean Man said:


> ".._Not wanting to divulge some or all information about one's sexual history is not automatically tantamount to "hiding secrets_."
> So then what is it? Full transparency?


No, it is not full transparency. Must all behavior be sorted into the opposite bins of secrets and transparency? There is much between the two, in my opinion, that is agreeable to many individuals. 



Caribbean Man said:


> Does having sex with someone else other than you spouse automatically constitute adultery or is there also some explanation that negates it under certain circumstances?


I can't think of any, unless you want to further narrowly define an adulterous relationship as one that implies going behind the back of one's spouse. So, for example, excluding consensual "open" marriages from the realm of "adulterous." One needs always ask for narrow definitions on forums such as this, I suppose. And one needs always make sure to be on the same page as one's spouse!



Caribbean Man said:


> Does holding a wayward adulterous spouse responsible for their act amount to trying forcefully to change their behaviour?


Yes.



Caribbean Man said:


> Using your logic ,doesn't that too constitute manipulation , power and control?


Yes.

But again, if you are holding out that not providing upon request every detail about your sexual past is tantamount to committing adultery, then I think the equivalency is false. 



Caribbean Man said:


> My username on this website is Caribbean Man because I don't want strangers on the internet to know my real name. If I wanted them to know it I would simply tell everyone. You don't want someone to know something then you hide it.
> The justification for not wanting them to know is an entirely different matter, but that does not mean it's not hiding secrets.


Then perhaps we have only a quibble of semantics. I don't think your real name is a "secret," only "private." 

So, in the case of my husband not wanting to discuss his past, I didn't consider what he was doing as "keeping secrets." I knew he had a sexual past that he was keeping from me for reasons of personal morality. I have had a need for privacy in my marriage, too, that has more to do with maintaining a sense of self than of wanting to deprive my husband of information for fear of how he'd react. He knows I feel this way. He is not always comfortable with it, but he respects it because he trusts me. 

In relationships where intimacy evolves and matures and expands, I think, each person will eventually bump up against the privacy boundaries of the other person. We all set our boundaries a little different. It's not that I have secrets on the other side of my boundary: I have my selfhood. My boundary has changed over the years as our intimacy changed, as has my husband's. I believe it's a thing to be celebrated and understood, not to be feared. 

And I think it bears repeating: you earn intimacy, you don't just "get" it. I've been married for 24 years and expect that we still haven't plumbed the depths of our intimacy potential. This was my mistake so many years ago: demanding a type of intimacy from my spouse that I was ready for but he wasn't. I could have damaged my relationship by continuing to demand that he be forthcoming with all the information that I wanted, but I recognized that the issue was one that I was capable of dealing with so that I could respect my husband's privacy needs. If I wasn't capable of handling it, I could have chosen to leave. 



Caribbean Man said:


> I have NEVER advocated seeking gory details of past relationships or even cajoling a partner for information about their past.
> 
> Maybe you can quote me?


I can't quote you, because I don't see where you have done this. I apologize if I have accused you of such; it was not my intent. 



Caribbean Man said:


> What I'm saying is that if a relationship has that dynamic where secrets are kept from either partner, and the other is cajoling, then the relationship is a manipulative one , destined for failure.
> Guess who's doing the manipulating?
> 
> Definitely not the person asking the questions.


Perhaps, perhaps not. It all depends on the individual. You see, we are not all the same. Again, it comes down to this: do you trust your partner?


----------



## Caribbean Man

GettingIt said:


> No, it is not full transparency. Must all behavior be sorted into the opposite bins of secrets and transparency? There is much between the two, in my opinion, that is agreeable to many individuals.
> 
> 
> 
> I can't think of any, unless you want to further narrowly define an adulterous relationship as one that implies going behind the back of one's spouse. So, for example, excluding consensual "open" marriages from the realm of "adulterous." One needs always ask for narrow definitions on forums such as this, I suppose. And one needs always make sure to be on the same page as one's spouse!
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> But again, if you are holding out that not providing upon request every detail about your sexual past is tantamount to committing adultery, then I think the equivalency is false.
> 
> 
> 
> Then perhaps we have only a quibble of semantics. I don't think your real name is a "secret," only "private."
> 
> So, in the case of my husband not wanting to discuss his past, I didn't consider what he was doing as "keeping secrets." I knew he had a sexual past that he was keeping from me for reasons of personal morality. I have had a need for privacy in my marriage, too, that has more to do with maintaining a sense of self than of wanting to deprive my husband of information for fear of how he'd react. He knows I feel this way. He is not always comfortable with it, but he respects it because he trusts me.
> 
> In relationships where intimacy evolves and matures and expands, I think, each person will eventually bump up against the privacy boundaries of the other person. We all set our boundaries a little different. It's not that I have secrets on the other side of my boundary: I have my selfhood. My boundary has changed over the years as our intimacy changed, as has my husband's. I believe it's a thing to be celebrated and understood, not to be feared.
> 
> And I think it bears repeating: you earn intimacy, you don't just "get" it. I've been married for 24 years and expect that we still haven't plumbed the depths of our intimacy potential. This was my mistake so many years ago: demanding a type of intimacy from my spouse that I was ready for but he wasn't. I could have damaged my relationship by continuing to demand that he be forthcoming with all the information that I wanted, but I recognized that the issue was one that I was capable of dealing with so that I could respect my husband's privacy needs. If I wasn't capable of handling it, I could have chosen to leave.
> 
> 
> 
> I can't quote you, because I don't see where you have done this. I apologize if I have accused you of such; it was not my intent.
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps, perhaps not. It all depends on the individual. You see, we are not all the same. Again, it comes down to this: do you trust your partner?


I don't think it makes sense continuing this conversation based on your interpretation of a marriage.
We both have the right to deal with issues as they arise in our own marriage the best way we deem fit, and I think we can both respect that.
If you can achieve intimacy in your marriage by vacillation between the two polar opposites of secrecy and transparency , then by all means, pursue that course.
However if you have read the OP in this thread and many others here on TAM , conventional wisdom dictates the opposite.

But then somewhere in your post you _did_ make reference to open marriages which is in itself an oxymoron....

I rest my case.


----------



## GettingIt_2

Caribbean Man said:


> I don't think it makes sense continuing this conversation based on your interpretation of a marriage.


Okay.



Caribbean Man said:


> We both have the right to deal with issues as they arise in our own marriage the best way we deem fit, and I think we can both respect that.


Yes. That is the definition of a healthy marriage and a healthy sense of self. The key is to be honest with yourself and your spouse about your needs. It takes a high level of self awareness and self respect in addition to trust in your spouse. 




Caribbean Man said:


> If you can achieve intimacy in your marriage by vacillation between the two polar opposites of secrecy and transparency , then by all means, pursue that course.


The polar opposites you describe simply do not exist in my marriage, so no vacillation is required. I understand that for some people, they do exist. I don't judge that; but nor do I believe it is the only right and true way of seeing things for every married person. 

The meaning of marriage (beyond its legal structure) is only important in so much as the two married people agree. It matters not if you respect my marriage or if I respect yours. 



Caribbean Man said:


> However if you have read the OP in this thread and many others here on TAM , conventional wisdom dictates the opposite.


I disagree with this. I don't think TAM is representative in many ways, no do I think that vocal or even eloquent postings dictate conventional wisdom. 

And even so, when one finds oneself on the side of conventional wisdom, it is a good and humbling exercise to always remember that other ways exist in this world that are as dear to their beholders as conventional wisdom is to you. 



Caribbean Man said:


> But then somewhere in your post you _did_ make reference to open marriages which is in itself an oxymoron....
> 
> I rest my case.


I'm sorry to see you make such an assumption, if indeed that is what you are doing--it seems intemperate and inconsistent with your character based on other posts of yours that I have read. Perhaps you make it out of frustration, but I am neither offended or very surprised, I suppose. You are passionate about this topic, I see that, and there is nothing wrong with that. 

Peace to you.


----------



## Caribbean Man

LOL,

Again,
I rest my case.

The jury will decide.


----------



## GettingIt_2

Caribbean Man said:


> LOL,
> 
> 
> The jury will decide.


Of your peers or mine?


----------



## nogutsnoglory

Catherine602 said:


> Interesting and revealing. Do you realize the far reaching effects of your attitude?. What happened to fathers rights movement? What about sex in marriage? Nothing to do with that?
> 
> The prevailing belief, as you so elegantly stated above, is that women carry the children of men therefore they (the mothers) are responsible for them. Who is the father? Also that men have a right to enjoy sex but women don't. Who are these men having sex with? :scratchhead:
> 
> Can you see how that thinking makes men seem irresponsible parents? It makes favoritism shown to women in child custody perfectly sound.
> 
> You don't connect up what you are saying and the attitude that many women have about men and sex. The "men have a right to enjoy their body but women don't" beliefs should enter into the discussion about sex in marriage but rarely do.
> 
> The fathers rights movement should start at the conception of all of a mans children. It does not matter how the child is conceived. Two parents are responsible.
> 
> And bigfoot, unicorns, and aliens all exist.
> Sorry, You want everything to be so equal, I get it, but I make my decisions, judgements, based on the real world.
> Although a world with unicorns would be nice.
> Men will never feel the same responsibility because we do not have the children grow in us, it is not in our DNA to be prepared to give birth, woman need to own this. It is like marriage, most men do not think or wish to be married until a woman wants that from us. We are just not wired this way. I am not absolving the responsibility of men, but to say it is okay for woman to act like men have for years is an abomination of an opinion.
> Should woman get to enjoy sex, yes. Should they be surprised, when they end up pregnant, with a man that will not take care of his share of the responsibility, no. I am not excusing the men, I am saying woman need to smarten up, on their end.
> Here we have men acting like sperm donors for generations, not taking care of children, not paying their fair share, and what are woman doing on their end, having more sex...makes perfect sense.
> I am off to feed my unicorn.


----------



## TiggyBlue

nogutsnoglory said:


> It is like marriage, most men do not think or wish to be married until a woman wants that from us. We are just not wired this way. I am not absolving the responsibility of men, *but to say it is okay for woman to act like men have for years is an abomination of an opinion.*


Having sex for enjoyment isn't a male trait, women who do so aren't acting like men and unless until recently in history men were always having sex with each other it's not a new development.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

GettingIt said:


> Here we are, 24 years later, and he is opening up to me. I so, so look forward to the stories that he has suddenly started to share. It's like a closetful of presents have been discovered, and we open them slowly, savor them together with so much wonder and laughter. *Intimacy isn't something you just automatically get from someone when you say "I do." You earn it, and it can develop and become richer and deeper for as long as you are with someone*.
> 
> *If I had demanded *and cajoled and forced the issue years ago, I wouldn't be enjoying these gifts nearly as much as I am enjoying them now* that they are freely given.
> *
> I share this story not because I don't think that secrets can be damaging, but that a need for privacy is not always as nefarious as many folks seem to believe.


I look at this a little differently.. It is wonderful that after all these years you have gotten to this place with your husband......his willingly opening up ... no forcing these things...(as you have explained here)... as it should never be this way when you find Love... and live it...I agree with that ! ...If we have to browbeat to get our questions/ answered, it's no good, very sad, counter productive and intimacy slowly dies..

I did a thread on Transparency - very very close to my heart *>>* 

http://talkaboutmarriage.com/genera...parency-what-means-our-marraige-what-you.html ....it's something my husband has given me from day 1... and I him... I describe it as a "willing / giving Transparency"... this is never forced... it's because we WANT to share every part of our lives with each other... I can not even imagine being in a relationship without this going forth....

..It means so much to me.. because I KNOW what it has done for me/ our marriage... I would even consider this in my top 5 deal breakers.. (I can be hard to please on some things, this is one of them).. of course we need to do all we can to assure our partner they can trust us with EVERYTHING... as yes,* trust is earned*.*.this takes TIME to build*.... I just feel it belongs in dating.. it's my expectations..before the 's ...

Some people are very open and forthcoming... and some are not..... when 2 get together like this... it can cause some issues...an area of incompatibility....it can even destroy some marriages -depending.. because 2 minds think so differently on it. 



> *The key is to be honest with yourself and your spouse about your needs. It takes a high level of self awareness and self respect in addition to trust in your spouse.*


 I agree with this statement 100% even though we have different ideas on transparency...or it's level of...and timing... so long as a couple agrees, it's all good. 

The Original poster...Alexm... does not find this a deal breaker - so he has said he can live with it... but it carries it's *intimacy price*... as this thread shows..


----------



## Catherine602

nogutsnoglory said:


> And bigfoot, unicorns, and aliens all exist.
> Sorry, You want everything to be so equal, I get it, but I make my decisions, judgements, based on the real world.
> Although a world with unicorns would be nice.
> Men will never feel the same responsibility because we do not have the children grow in us, it is not in our DNA to be prepared to give birth, woman need to own this. It is like marriage, most men do not think or wish to be married until a woman wants that from us. We are just not wired this way. I am not absolving the responsibility of men, but to say it is okay for woman to act like men have for years is an abomination of an opinion.
> Should woman get to enjoy sex, yes. Should they be surprised, when they end up pregnant, with a man that will not take care of his share of the responsibility, no. I am not excusing the men, I am saying woman need to smarten up, on their end.
> Here we have men acting like sperm donors for generations, not taking care of children, not paying their fair share, and what are woman doing on their end, having more sex...makes perfect sense.
> I am off to feed my unicorn.


There was a recent report of unique DNA extracted from hair believed to be from Bigfoot but I still don't believe that they exist. I like unicorns though, they're pretty. 

What a bleak reality you have, there are no unicorns but neither is there imagination, love or even humanity. Pregnancy is a woman's punishment for enjoying sex? Men are wired to have sex and run away from responsibility. Women have to maneuver them into marriage? That makes me feel wonderful, thank you. 

These are real - women enjoy sex. They are having sex with multiple partners. Sex is not a service women provide to men. Shaming women into not having multiple partners will not work. Men and women are a matched set. 

If heterosexual men are having sex with multiple partners, where do you think these women are coming from? :scratchhead: Where do they go? They are someone's wife. Scary huh? Do the math. 

No one escapes the consequences of their behavior. Paternity law suits, retroactive sexual jealousy, secrets and lies and women who learn to be sexually closed to men. Those may be consequences of dealing with men who think like you. 

I'll use your statement because it is good - men need to smarten up on their end too. 

Here is a novel solution I'll bet very few men or women have articulated. If men, as you say, don't want women to enjoy sex outside of marriage, all they have to do is not enjoy sex outside of marriage. That's applied math and equal responsibility. 

I may be in fairyland but I can do math and I do believe that men and women are equal. You are confused about what equality means - responsibility, self-control, respect, empathy, honesty, fairness and humanity.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Catherine602 said:


> Here is a novel solution I'll bet very few men or women have articulated. *If men, as you say, don't want women to enjoy sex outside of marriage, all they have to do is not enjoy sex outside of marriage. That's applied math and equal responsibility*.
> 
> I may be in fairyland but I can do math and I do believe that men and women are equal. You are confused about what equality means - *responsibility, self-control, respect, empathy, honesty, fairness and humanity.*


 I do wonder what nogutsnoglory's lifestyle was like BEFORE he married ?? 

What will he tell his children... do like me or learn from my mistakes? 

Our oldest son, 4th yr of college... still a virgin at 23.. imagine that...he does not believe in sex before marriage, he takes some slack for this..but holds his head high... I am even embarrassed saying this .... as people will conjure up thinking he is GAY.(NOT, he struggles with porn)....a buffoon... (NOT)...has a social anxiety...(nope)... an overweight nerd...(nope)...has had many women interested...he is just very choosy...the few he liked was not into him...so he waits.. . he just has strong beliefs.. though I do worry his pool of like minded woman is very very small... just ain't many of those around these days....

But yeah.. men can do it as well - if they want to speak like this.. walk it.. be an example. I know he feels this way, very much against men talking like this -if they can not keep it in their pants as well.


----------



## Catherine602

SimplyAmorous said:


> I do wonder what nogutsnoglory's lifestyle was like BEFORE he married ??
> 
> What will he tell his children... do like me or learn from my mistakes?
> 
> Our oldest son, 4th yr of college... still a virgin at 23.. imagine that...he does not believe in sex before marriage, he takes some slack for this..but holds his head high... I am even embarrassed saying this .... as people will conjure up thinking he is GAY.(NOT, he struggles with porn)....a buffoon... (NOT)...has a social anxiety...(nope)... an overweight nerd...(nope)...has had many women interested...he is just very choosy...the few he liked was not into him...so he waits.. . he just has strong beliefs.. though I do worry his pool of like minded woman is very very small... just ain't many of those around these days....
> 
> But yeah.. men can do it as well - if they want to speak like this.. walk it.. be an example. I know he feels this way, very much against men talking like this -if they can not keep it in their pants as well.


SA Have you and your husband guided him in any way about his choice of a lifetime partner? From all the posts that I have read about men with your sons values, it seems easy for them to let love cloud their vision. 

They may accept a woman who has had sexual partners before them while they are in the fog of love, only to have years of misery and D. 

This is a terrible way for a man with his principals to end up. If you say anything when he is already involved, it may not help. Maybe you and your husband can have a couple of frank communications with him to sound him out before he meets someone?


----------



## CouldItBeSo

alexm said:


> But what's always bothered me is her lack of trust, I guess, in regards to being open about her past. It leaves me wondering and drawing my own conclusions, which isn't a good thing.


Are you being totally open with her? For example, does she know that you are discussing about her past on a public forum with strangers?


----------



## nogutsnoglory

Catherine602 said:


> There was a recent report of unique DNA extracted from hair believed to be from Bigfoot but I still don't believe that they exist. I like unicorns though, they're pretty.
> 
> What a bleak reality you have, there are no unicorns but neither is there imagination, love or even humanity. Pregnancy is a woman's punishment for enjoying sex? Men are wired to have sex and run away from responsibility. Women have to maneuver them into marriage? That makes me feel wonderful, thank you.
> 
> These are real - women enjoy sex. They are having sex with multiple partners. Sex is not a service women provide to men. Shaming women into not having multiple partners will not work. Men and women are a matched set.
> 
> If heterosexual men are having sex with multiple partners, where do you think these women are coming from? :scratchhead: Where do they go? They are someone's wife. Scary huh? Do the math.
> 
> No one escapes the consequences of their behavior. Paternity law suits, retroactive sexual jealousy, secrets and lies and women who learn to be sexually closed to men. Those may be consequences of dealing with men who think like you.
> 
> I'll use your statement because it is good - men need to smarten up on their end too.
> 
> Here is a novel solution I'll bet very few men or women have articulated. If men, as you say, don't want women to enjoy sex outside of marriage, all they have to do is not enjoy sex outside of marriage. That's applied math and equal responsibility.
> 
> I may be in fairyland but I can do math and I do believe that men and women are equal. You are confused about what equality means - responsibility, self-control, respect, empathy, honesty, fairness and humanity.


Ok take a break, shave your arm pits, and then read.

Having a bunch of irresponsible sex IMO is a terrible choice for both sexes. I also understand and stated that men and woman enjoy sex equally. For woman to not take seriously the very simple fact that they, being the woman, are the last line of defense for unwanted children being born, is in no way excusable behind the guise of gender equality.
Men chase woman, woman have to give men permission, that simple.
Men would love for it to be the other way around, but it simply is not the case. We, men pile in to bars and all flirt and go after the same woman, it is up to the woman to make the call as to whom, and how far things go. So does that power come with responsibility? I say it does. 
I do believe, of course, that a man is equally responsible for the child once it is born, but even then, the courts favor the child being with the mother. Must be that the courts are sexist too.


----------



## Catherine602

I don't shave I use Neet. 

You mistake my meaning about equality. Men and women are equally deserving of fair treatment, respect and acceptance. Gender equality is viewed negatively by many men. 

There are elements of hostility, disrespectfulness and belittling of women when some men talk about equality. Your comment to me about shaving is a case in point. It's a not so subtle jab at me on a gender basis. 

Yet I sense that you want me to understand and accept your point of view. I can't because you are filled with hostility towards women, you don't get understanding in return. 

Ill state the obvious, the genders are not the same but they are equal in all things human. We are a matched set, you can't be hateful to one and expect respect and understanding from the other. 

When I talk about equality, I am not ignoring the far reaching effects of testosterone and estrogen on human beings. I am talking about about the equal need for understanding and respect of men and women. 

No man who feels that respect and like women could bring themselves to tear them down. There are many posters who are advocates for men that I respect enormously. I've learned a great deal from them.

They have as their mission to help men know their unique nature and accept it. Also, to help women understand men. There is never hostility towards women. 

I can feel their love and respect of women in their posts. That more than offsets the hostility from other posters but it still stings.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Catherine602 said:


> SA Have you and your husband guided him in any way about his choice of a lifetime partner? From all the posts that I have read about men with your sons values, it seems easy for them to let love cloud their vision.


I am really not sure what you are asking with this question, he is a Christian, in a worship Band... very involved with the church.. me and his dad were NOT as strict at him... we have always taught our Boys - don't use women.. find Love.. wait at least till you & the girl are 18...Be very responsible with sex..it has the power to create new life... 

We talk about everything.. not just STD's and condoms.. but the various sexual views... integrity, all of it...after 18--it's their life but don't come crying to me if you get a girl pregnant, cause you damn well better do the right thing.. same with my daughter, you allow a boy to stick it in..be prepared to be a mother... your life will change forever...and he could walk away...how will you feel afterwards? 

Also that teens can survive without sticking it in....there are other ways for pleasure (as me & their dad did)... we are very open with our teens.. most would find our discussions difficult, embarrassing... it's rather normal talk for us...They know I post on here even and enjoy this subject... our 2nd son has been with the same girl for 2 yrs..they are just 16... they wait. 



> They may accept a woman who has had sexual partners before them while they are in the fog of love, only to have years of misery and D.


 I am surprised to hear you say this... Here is how our oldest feels... of course he would love to find another who has waited for intercourse....(with a sex drive of course).... but he would NOT hold a girl's past against her.. he understands people make mistakes.. but if she doesn't feel those were mistakes.. proud of her sexual past not being married.. she would not be a good fit for him...

I've told him many a woman may lie to him about this.. knowing how strongly he feels... we had a deep discussion on that once... even showing him a thread on this forum about a man in that predicament -how he finds out later in life she has X amount of partners, husband blindsided and ready to leave her.. in that story, I actually felt sorry for the wife as the man was so brazenly strict to cut out any woman who was not a virgin....it just set them in a very bad place, her knowing she would be banished forever if she wanted this man.. hiding her secrets.. and this is no way to start a marriage.. so allow a woman to unleash it ALL --and listen carefully... ya know.. before we talked about that... he wanted a virgin, afterwards, he saw the depth of that discussion and realized it is so much MORE...

One of his best friends used to sell drugs, womanizer, in Jail.. .now he is a youth leader, totally changed, he believes people can change... would he hang with this guy if he still lived like that.. of course not... if a couple is going to raise children together, they need to have similar sexual views... Last time he was here, I told him all about *Retroactive Jealousy*....taking Psychology in college, he never heard of this...he doesn't think this would bother him.. .so long as her lifestyle choices have changed...of course can a man predict this won't be an issue, I doubt it. 

I also don't want him to end up with a low driving prude ...so we this has been discussed at length too...many stories here that ...well.. he could be in a sexual prison after the vows if he is not careful...... He has a "courting" mentality, only if he thinks he would want to marry a woman .... .(she is attractive enough-her lifestyle meshes with his) would he ask for a date... and hopefully it would lead to marriage..the girl he really likes is just 16 right now, goodness, I hope is not waiting for her!



> This is a terrible way for a man with his principals to end up. If you say anything when he is already involved, it may not help. Maybe you and your husband can have a couple of frank communications with him to sound him out before he meets someone?


 This is rather amusing but this son has told me I am corrupt, I have told him to get out there and kiss as many girls as he can, to stop being so particular, some of the beauties he has brought home here, I told him he is going to kick himself for not going after.... but he just said - it wasn't there.. he has only found himself enthralled with about 3 , maybe 4 women since he was 16... and he is a bit passive about it...not going gong ho....he knows he has to step up a little more..with the ones he wants.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

nogutsnoglory said:


> Ok take a break, shave your arm pits, and then read.
> 
> Having a bunch of irresponsible sex IMO is a terrible choice for both sexes. I also understand and stated that men and woman enjoy sex equally. For woman to not take seriously the very simple fact that they, being the woman, are the last line of defense for unwanted children being born, is in no way excusable behind the guise of gender equality.
> Men chase woman, woman have to give men permission, that simple.
> Men would love for it to be the other way around, but it simply is not the case. We, men pile in to bars and all flirt and go after the same woman, it is up to the woman to make the call as to whom, and how far things go. So does that power come with responsibility? I say it does.
> I do believe, of course, that a man is equally responsible for the child once it is born, but even then, the courts favor the child being with the mother. Must be that the courts are sexist too.


What do you mean by "irresponsible sex?"

Do not fool yourself thinking you are talking for all men out there. Not even for the majority. Women can and should have as much sex as they please. It's not yours or anyone else's job to tell how to live their life. Just remember to use condoms.


----------



## Caribbean Man

CouldItBeSo said:


> What do you mean by "irresponsible sex?"
> 
> Do not fool yourself thinking you are talking for all men out there. Not even for the majority. Women can and should have as much sex as they please. It's not yours or anyone else's job to tell how to live their life. Just remember to use condoms.


" _Unfortunately, condoms do not do an adequate job of protecting against human papilloma or herpes simplex virus infections. Women diagnosed with HPV are often mystified and frustrated, having been "super careful," or picky, in choosing intimate partners and faithfully using condoms for all intercourse.._."

~Condoms not effective against HPV or herpes.
.
.


----------



## norajane

nogutsnoglory said:


> We, men pile in to bars and all flirt and go after the same woman, it is up to the woman to make the call as to whom, and how far things go. So does that power come with responsibility? I say it does.
> I do believe, of course, that a man is equally responsible for the child once it is born


So men have no power or agency or responsibility until a baby is born? You have a very low opinion of men.


----------



## samyeagar

When it comes to the repercussions of sex, men and women are different, and have a different set of options. Regardless of right or wrong, woulda, coulda, shoulda, the man CAN walk simply because he is not the one pregnant. The woman is the only one who absolutely MUST deal with it whether it is abortion, adoption, raising it on her own, finding a new partner, what ever. She has no choice what so ever in the matter. She is the only one who MUST deal with the emotional and physical consequences because she is the only one who gets pregnant, and the child is growing inside of her. 

She has no control over the man and his decisions. She can't force him to do anything. Can't make him carry the child. Can't make him go to the doctor. Can't make him take any responsibility for any of it. In uncommitted sex, and even in a committed relationship, the woman has the ultimate responsibility because it's her body. It may not be fair, or right, but it is an inescapable biological reality. Given the gravity of possible repercussions, I think it is foolish for a woman outside of a committed relationship to place any assumption of responsibility onto anyone but herself. The stakes are just too high is she assumes wrong.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

CouldItBeSo said:


> What do you mean by "irresponsible sex?"
> 
> Do not fool yourself thinking you are talking for all men out there. Not even for the majority. *Women can and should have as much sex as they please. It's not yours or anyone else's job to tell how to live their life. Just remember to use condoms.*


We all have our opinions... You are indeed very correct -in today's society, casual sex RULES *>>* have at it young man..& young woman...if it looks good, smells decent and it's willing.. .slam it !

THe majority of men don't care... why would they... then they don't even have to get married.. ...we know how to spoil them good.. then some complain yrs later *>>*
..."why won't he marry me ??" 

... so those of us who feel that morality is slipping badly (on both sides here -not just woman)... along with such a thing called "Sexual INTEGRITY"... 

...Yeah..the schools ought to offer a class on that...with some discussion.. .would be enlightening.... But no.. it's boiled down to ..."eat drink and Fvck" to our young people...... just don't forget the almighty condom.









Yet still... there is plenty of irresponsible Fvcking going around... how many kids do you know without a father in their lives ? I live in the country.. so the statistics are less here, a few more church goers who try to keep it in their pants I guess....but the cost of this on our society... who is paying for all these babies...and abortions... sexual diseases being passed... *everything WE DO effects society as a whole.. it all trickles down*...


----------



## CouldItBeSo

Caribbean Man said:


> " _Unfortunately, condoms do not do an adequate job of protecting against human papilloma or herpes simplex virus infections. Women diagnosed with HPV are often mystified and frustrated, having been "super careful," or picky, in choosing intimate partners and faithfully using condoms for all intercourse.._."
> 
> ~Condoms not effective against HPV or herpes.
> .
> .


_"Unless men identify a genital wart, they are not aware of harboring HPV, as we don't do Pap smears on men. Outside of research trials, we don't detect male high-risk HPV carriers.

Passing a virus without having any symptoms is why these viruses get spread far and wide. Like bees sharing pollen flower to flower, men regularly transmit HPV and HSV without knowing it."_

In other words, it practically impossible to have 100% protection against these, even if you're not having sex at all. Unless you live inside a bubble. You could have both those viruses and you don't even know it.

Even if you drive a safe car and use the safety belt you can still die in a traffic accident. Your solution is to not drive at all.

Edit: also during this fine age of science, both boys/men and girls/women *can get vaccinated against HPV*. Against herpes you should know there's no way to avoid it unless you cease all contact with other humans.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar said:


> When it comes to the repercussions of sex, men and women are different, and have a different set of options. Regardless of right or wrong, woulda, coulda, shoulda, the man CAN walk simply because he is not the one pregnant. The woman is the only one who absolutely MUST deal with it whether it is abortion, adoption, raising it on her own, finding a new partner, what ever. She has no choice what so ever in the matter. She is the only one who MUST deal with the emotional and physical consequences because she is the only one who gets pregnant, and the child is growing inside of her.
> 
> She has no control over the man and his decisions. She can't force him to do anything. Can't make him carry the child. Can't make him go to the doctor. Can't make him take any responsibility for any of it. In uncommitted sex, and even in a committed relationship, the woman has the ultimate responsibility because it's her body. It may not be fair, or right, but it is an inescapable biological reality. Given the gravity of possible repercussions, I think it is foolish for a woman outside of a committed relationship to place any assumption of responsibility onto anyone but herself. The stakes are just too high is she assumes wrong.


That's not true. If you are the father it can be proven with DNA test and you WILL take your half of the responsibility, forced by law. It's also ironic that the people who say what you just said often also want to take that "responsibility" away from women when it comes to abortion. Then it suddenly is not her body anymore to decide. Two faced logic.


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> That's not true. If you are the father it can be proven with DNA test and you WILL take your half of the responsibility, forced by law. It's also ironic that the people who say what you just said often also want to take that "responsibility" away from women when it comes to abortion. Then it suddenly is not her body anymore to decide. Two faced logic.


What I said is a biological fact and can not be disputed. The only thing the law can even remotely loosley enforce is financial, and that is only if you are found, identified, and ordered by the courts to be tested. And to accomplish any of that, the responsibility falls on you guessed it..the woman.

There are plenty of men out there in the US that have successfully evaded ANY responsibility what so ever. Other countries, it can be even easier.

I fully stand by my original statement.


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> That's not true. If you are the father it can be proven with DNA test and you WILL take your half of the responsibility, forced by law. *It's also ironic that the people who say what you just said often also want to take that "responsibility" away from women when it comes to abortion. Then it suddenly is not her body anymore to decide. Two faced logic*.


Not relavent to this discussion.


----------



## alexm

CouldItBeSo said:


> Are you being totally open with her? For example, does she know that you are discussing about her past on a public forum with strangers?


Semantics, and moot.

I have been totally open with her from the get-go, yes. I tend to not divulge information about myself PRE-relationship that I see no point in her knowing. On the occasions she has asked me about x or y, I have been open and honest.

The things I have volunteered, particularly at the beginning of the relationship, were important that she knew going in - that I was separated, filed for divorce, and the reasons why. I expected the same openness in return, and it was not given back to me. I had a huge issue with this AT THAT TIME. Simply because I felt that, coming out of a bad marriage that included adultery and zero communication, it would be in my best interests to have SOME indication of what type of person she was/is. To this day, I still feel that I didn't cross any boundaries in wanting to know. What I DO know is that I did not approach these subjects with the greatest of care.

Over the years, some stuff has come out through different avenues, and it's all okay with me. At this point, I think she has now realized that I was on the up-and-up way back then, but I was just clumsy and heavy-handed when it came to those topics. In other words, we both "get" each other in regards to that time period.

As for me posting here, no, of course she doesn't know. I have discussed with her, her reasonings behind why she was/still is closed off, especially when it surrounds the topic of past relationships/sex, etc. and it hasn't changed. My interest is solely in the "why's" of putting up this wall in the first place. I think I've partially answered it myself (as in, I didn't exactly exude intimacy or confidence way back then, when attempting to discuss those topics...), however the broad scope answer still remains to me.

To me, it's more about her (and others) building these emotional walls around ANY topic in a relationship. It just so happens this is what hers are built around. I have accepted that she has these walls, I have not accepted WHY she has these walls. Particularly when I've shown her time and time again that I do not have these walls myself, and that I'm no different than she is.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

SimplyAmorous said:


> We all have our opinions... You are indeed very correct -in today's society, casual sex RULES *>>* have at it young man..& young woman...if it looks good, smells decent and it's willing.. .slam it !
> 
> THe majority of men don't care... why would they... then they don't even have to get married.. ...we know how to spoil them good.. then some complain yrs later *>>*
> ..."why won't he marry me ??"
> 
> ... so those of us who feel that morality is slipping badly (on both sides here -not just woman)... along with such a thing called "Sexual INTEGRITY"...
> 
> ...Yeah..the schools ought to offer a class on that...with some discussion.. .would be enlightening.... But no.. it's boiled down to ..."eat drink and Fvck" to our young people...... just don't forget the almighty condom.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yet still... there is plenty of irresponsible Fvcking going around... how many kids do you know without a father in their lives ? I live in the country.. so the statistics are less here, a few more church goers who try to keep it in their pants I guess....but the cost of this on our society... who is paying for all these babies...and abortions... sexual diseases being passed... *everything WE DO effects society as a whole.. it all trickles down*...


Are you saying that in the 70s people were not having even more carefree and casual sex? I think todays youth is way more responsible than what we were in the past.

I agree with that colorful banner of yours, sex should be free for all as it's one of the most natural human interactions. 
Even though the powers that be have been trying to make money from it for a very long time. AKA the "nipple slip syndrome." Or can you explain why it's OK to show men's nipples but not women's?

Actually I don't know anyone who doesn't know who their biological father is/was. You seem to imply that church goers are "more responsible." I simply cannot agree with that notion considering all the sex and abuse scandals around religious institutions in the recent years.


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> That's not true. If you are the father it can be proven with DNA test and *you WILL take your half of the responsibility*, forced by law. It's also ironic that the people who say what you just said often also want to take that "responsibility" away from women when it comes to abortion. Then it suddenly is not her body anymore to decide. Two faced logic.


The courts can only force a financial contribution. They can't force him to take half the responsibility of feeding, bathing, taking to the doctor, playing with, or any of those things at all. A far cry from forcing half the responsibility.

And as far as financial goes...if the guy is unemployed living with his parents, then even if they find him, test him, put him on the birth certificate, she will get no money from him, and if he later gets a job, she has to make the effort to find out that he has a job, report it to the courts, and petition for child support.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar said:


> What I said is a biological fact and can not be disputed. The only thing the law can even remotely loosley enforce is financial, and that is only if you are found, identified, and ordered by the courts to be tested. And to accomplish any of that, the responsibility falls on you guessed it..the woman.
> 
> There are plenty of men out there in the US that have successfully evaded ANY responsibility what so ever. Other countries, it can be even easier.
> 
> I fully stand by my original statement.


If the responsibility falls on the woman, she's not irresponsible then. Therefore the "irresponsible sex" argument is not true. Only the man has had "irresponsible sex" in that case.

The woman can always have an abortion if the guy decides to take a hike. Don't say you are one of those people who try to stop women being responsible by owning their own body and doing this.




samyeagar said:


> Not relavent to this discussion.


Double standard.




samyeagar said:


> The courts can only force a financial contribution. They can't force him to take half the responsibility of feeding, bathing, taking to the doctor, playing with, or any of those things at all. A far cry from forcing half the responsibility.
> 
> And as far as financial goes...if the guy is unemployed living with his parents, then even if they find him, test him, put him on the birth certificate, she will get no money from him, and if he later gets a job, she has to make the effort to find out that he has a job, report it to the courts, and petition for child support.


The woman can always find a better dad candidate in that case. You are not irreplaceable. In Europe at least the goverments pay the mother and reclaim the money back from the father. If he can't pay he's going to jail.


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> If the responsibility falls on the woman, she's not irresponsible then. Therefore the "irresponsible sex" argument is not true. Only the man has had "irresponsible sex" in that case.
> 
> The woman can always have an abortion if the guy decides to take a hike. Don't say you are one of those people who try to stop women being responsible by owning their own body and doing this.
> 
> 
> 
> Double standard.
> 
> 
> 
> The woman can always find a better dad candidate in that case. You are not irreplaceable. In Europe at least the goverments pay the mother and reclaim the money back from the father. If he can't pay he's going to jail.


None of this counters my point at all.

The woman has biologically forced responsibility. The man does not. The woman has far more to consider, and many more possible repercussions in casual sexual encounters than the man does.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

alexm said:


> As for me posting here, no, *of course she doesn't know*.


No secrets then, huh?


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo,

Please do not mistake my pointing out biological fact as me saying women should not enjoy sex of any type or quantity just as much as men should, because I see nothing wrong with that at all.

As far as abortion, I am fully pro choice. The woman should have the ultimate decision making power in that regard precisely because of what I laid out regarding a womans responsibility.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar said:


> None of this counters my point at all.
> 
> The woman has biologically forced responsibility. The man does not. The woman has far more to consider, and many more possible repercussions in casual sexual encounters than the man does.


In your words then, she is having *responsible sex*.


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> In your words then, she is having *responsible sex*.


No. Those are your words and deliberate obfuscation.

For women having sex, it is ALWAYS weighing the risk of pregnancy vs reward of pleasure. She can take steps to minimize the risk by being on birth control, being solely with a partner whom she trusts to share her responsibility with her.

Every time a woman has sex, she goes through the risk vs reward. The more times she goes through it, the more times she risks pregnancy. For some women, the risk of pregnancy is not a concern at all. They may be OK with an abortion, they may be sterile, they may have a reliable partner.

At the point where the risk outweighs the reward, but she chooses to continue the behavior, it becomes irresponsible.

For example, she and he gets so caught up in the moment, he does not put on a condom and she gets pregnant. She was irresponsible in an absolute sense because she is the one who has the responsibility of the pregnancy. He does not unless he chooses to share it. For him, it is a choice. For her it is forced.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

CouldItBeSo said:


> Actually I don't know anyone who doesn't know who their biological father is/was.* You seem to imply that church goers are "more responsible." I simply cannot agree with that notion considering all the sex and abuse scandals around religious institutions in the recent years*.


You know what is funny... I KNEW that was coming... as soon as I hit reply.. I said to myself..here comes the backlash against the religious... 

Ok Listen, we all have our personal experiences right.. .Most of my friends are Christians... I was a Christian (I waited for intercourse - for years).. Yeah, you can call my husband a complete FOOL... he's a happy fool anyway) ....Our son is a Worship Leader- he hasn't screwed a woman yet .... Freud would say this leads to neurosis, a functional mental disorder... seriously... I'm going to say.. well at least for him....not the case.. 

Is this your position?...If so...YOu hold the "Expressive view of sexuality" -there you learned something today....If you click on my "HERE" link below, you can read in more detail... 

Again...back to those experiences ...We hold Large Bonfires at our house....youth groups, I know the parents.. these are DECENT people.. .. I would not open my private property to 80 teens & young adults who were going to bring Booze, be trying to stick it in their girlfriend in my upstairs bedroom...or in the backwoods...never had this issue.... I talk to these teens, they get made fun of in school.. my boys tell me how girls are today, how Boys are.. as young as 15 having random sex..

You agree with all this?? It's fine?? the one they talk about are not in the church.. .that's our experience. 

It's funny, so many are quick to say christians are so judgemental & BORING (Why...cause they are not the partying type)...yet you'll also be the 1st to point out all the Hypocrites, who make them all look bad.. 

..Don't get me wrong, they are DISGRACEFUL..OH yes..I'm on the band wagon..... that's why we can't lump a whole ANYTHING together, cause there are irresponsible and responsible people in every walk of life and every so called "belief"... a belief does not = Integrity in walking it....but it often helps... I know it helped ME back in the day....

All that really matters is ... are you practicing sexual Integrity....if you hold the "sex is just sex " view/ a romp for the night, no strings.. are you making sure your partner feels the same ? What if a baby did result?? What then? DOes it matter? I know 3 women who have gotten pregnant on the pill... 

These things take sexual awareness.. do you think the young have this...or do they more so just JUMP IN.... because they can't control their lusts.... no self restraint...and we applaud this?? Understand thy consequences, does not compartmentalizing sex have a PRICE down the line ? taking a hit on our empathy, our vulnerabilities with others ? 

Do you not feel a casual sex lifestyle can become habitual ? 

Just some food for thought....

Read about the 6 sexual views *HERE*

The problem is explained in the beginning of that post....where people come together with different lenses & how this has the potential to cause many misunderstanding in the sexual....leading to much hurt.... I am against such things..... 

Are you??


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> In your words then, she is having *responsible sex*.


There is a difference between responsible behavior, and taking responsibility for that behavior.

If I back out of a parking space without looking behind me, and hit someone, and then pay for the damage, my behavior was irresponsible even though I took responsibility.

Responsible and irresponsible behavior is different for every person. It depends on the risk vs reward. If I go out and have a couple of beers, I am responsibly drinking, while an alcoholic doing the same thing may not be.

The fact is, with sex comes the risk of pregnancy. That is a risk that unless sterile, women take every single time they have sex, and they are biologically 100% responsible 100% of the time. They have no choice as it is their body that gets pregnant. The man can choose to share the responsibility, but it is a choice and is not biologically forced upon him.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar said:


> For example, she and he gets so caught up in the moment, he does not put on a condom and she gets pregnant. She was irresponsible in an absolute sense because she is the one who has the responsibility of the pregnancy. He does not unless he chooses to share it. For him, it is a choice. For her it is forced.


That's rape you're describing.


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> That's rape you're describing.


You are kidding right?


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar said:


> being solely with a partner whom she trusts to share her responsibility with her.


Tell that to my sister whose ex-husband took a hike and left to another country two years ago, leaving her alone with their son. They were together and married almost ten years. Guess what? The goverment is paying the alimony and if the rat of a man ever comes back he pays them or goes in jail.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar said:


> You are kidding right?


No, rape is not a joke matter.


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> Tell that to my sister whose ex-husband took a hike and left to another country two years ago, leaving her alone with their son. They were together and married almost ten years. Guess what? The goverment is paying the alimony and if the rat of a man ever comes back he pays them or goes in jail.


So ultimately, he can get away without responsibility, while she is stuck with it all aside from what is given her by the government.

I am sorry for what happened to your sister, and I am not sure 'rat of a man is harsh enough.

She went through the risk vs reward and decided that the risk was worth it because she felt she knew him and trusted him enough. She was wrong, and she got left holding the proverbial bag, not him. Biologically forced responsibility.


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> No, rape is not a joke matter.


Then why would you say that what I described was rape? Two people getting caught up in the moment and forgetting protection is not anything close to rape. It is something that happens quite frequently.


----------



## TiggyBlue

samyeagar said:


> So ultimately, he can get away without responsibility, while she is stuck with it all aside from what is given her by the government.
> 
> I am sorry for what happened to your sister, and I am not sure 'rat of a man is harsh enough.
> 
> She went through the risk vs reward and decided that the risk was worth it because she felt she knew him and trusted him enough. She was wrong, and she got left holding the proverbial bag, not him. Biologically forced responsibility.


Well technically she could also leave her son. After pregnancy the responsibilities are pretty equal, either could abandon the child. Biological forced responsibility ends after pregnancy (or abortion).


----------



## samyeagar

TiggyBlue said:


> Well technically she could also leave her son. After pregnancy the responsibilities are pretty equal, either could abandon the child. Biological forced responsibility ends after pregnancy (or abortion).


True. Of course, even child abandonment is riskier and can have more repercussions for the mother because the father could be long gone before the child was even born with virtually no repercussions for leaving.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

SimplyAmorous said:


> You know what is funny... I KNEW that was coming... as soon as I hit reply.. I said to myself..here comes the backlash against the religious...
> 
> Ok Listen, we all have our personal experiences right.. .Most of my friends are Christians... I was a Christian (I waited for intercourse - for years).. Yeah, you can call my husband a complete FOOL... he's a happy fool anyway) ....Our son is a Worship Leader- he hasn't screwed a woman yet .... Freud would say this leads to neurosis, a functional mental disorder... seriously... I'm going to say.. well at least for him....not the case..
> 
> Is this your position?...If so...YOu hold the "Expressive view of sexuality" -there you learned something today....If you click on my "HERE" link below, you can read in more detail...
> 
> Again...back to those experiences ...We hold Large Bonfires at our house....youth groups, I know the parents.. these are DECENT people.. .. I would not open my private property to 80 teens & young adults who were going to bring Booze, be trying to stick it in their girlfriend in my upstairs bedroom...or in the backwoods...never had this issue.... I talk to these teens, they get made fun of in school.. my boys tell me how girls are today, how Boys are.. *as young as 15 having random sex*..
> 
> You agree with all this?? It's fine?? the one they talk about are not in the church.. .that's our experience.
> 
> It's funny, so many are quick to say christians are so judgemental & BORING (Why...cause they are not the partying type)...yet you'll also be the 1st to point out all the Hypocrites, who make them all look bad..
> 
> ..Don't get me wrong, they are DISGRACEFUL..OH yes..I'm on the band wagon..... that's why we can't lump a whole ANYTHING together, cause there are irresponsible and responsible people in every walk of life and every so called "belief"... a belief does not = Integrity in walking it....but it often helps... I know it helped ME back in the day....
> 
> All that really matters is ... are you practicing sexual Integrity....if you hold the "sex is just sex " view/ a romp for the night, no strings.. are you making sure your partner feels the same ? What if a baby did result?? What then? DOes it matter? I know 3 women who have gotten pregnant on the pill...
> 
> These things take sexual awareness.. do you think the young have this...or do they more so just JUMP IN.... because they can't control their lusts.... no self restraint...and we applaud this?? Understand thy consequences, does not compartmentalizing sex have a PRICE down the line ? taking a hit on our empathy, our vulnerabilities with others ?
> 
> Do you not feel a casual sex lifestyle can become habitual ?
> 
> Just some food for thought....
> 
> Read about the 6 sexual views *HERE*
> 
> The problem is explained in the beginning of that post....where people come together with different lenses & how this has the potential to cause many misunderstanding in the sexual....leading to much hurt.... I am against such things.....
> 
> Are you??


The bolded part has been happening since the 70s, at least. Don't be naive. Did you know the age of consent is:

13 in Spain

14 in Albania, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Montenegro, Portugal, San Marino, Serbia, Slovak Republic and Slovenia

15 in Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Faroe Islands, France, Iceland, Monaco, Poland, Romania and Sweden?

And it's 16 in most states in the US.

I don't read Freud, sorry.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar said:


> Then why would you say that what I described was rape? Two people getting caught up in the moment and forgetting protection is not anything close to rape. It is something that happens quite frequently.


If the man makes the woman belive he is using a condom but is not, it's rape. The woman can demand him to use one before engaging in intercourse, which means she IS being responsible. It's the man's responsibility to make sure he is using one the whole duration of the intercourse since it's his body part and there is no way a woman can know if it's on or not.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar said:


> So ultimately, he can get away without responsibility, while she is stuck with it all aside from what is given her by the government.
> 
> I am sorry for what happened to your sister, and I am not sure 'rat of a man is harsh enough.
> 
> She went through the risk vs reward and decided that the risk was worth it because she felt she knew him and trusted him enough. She was wrong, and she got left holding the proverbial bag, not him. Biologically forced responsibility.


So you disprove your own point here. She was being responsible by your standards by having a reliable partner (at the time), committed relationship and then married. All this did not stop the man being irresponsible. No difference to a one night stand where the guy takes a hike.

PS. Both my sister and the ex-husband are Christians, btw.


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> If the man makes the woman belive he is using a condom but is not, it's rape. The woman can demand him to use one before engaging in intercourse, which means she IS being responsible. It's the man's responsibility to make sure he is using one the whole duration of the intercourse since it's his body part and there is no way a woman can know if it's on or not.


Absolutely incorrect. You are deliberately changing what I said to fit your point. That is intellectually dishonest, and I would appreciate it if you stopped. 

The scenario you changed mine into is still not rape, and second, as I have been saying the whole time, the biologically forced responsibility is hers. Since she is the one who gets pregnant, it is irresponsible of her to assume he just put one on.

If she demanded it, certainly she would have verified right? Oh, then he may have slipped it off when she was not looking. Sure, it was sleezy of him, but he still has no biological responsibility. She does.

Biology and nature are neither right nor wrong, good nor bad, fair nor unfair, moral nor immoral. It just is. His actions may be wrong, bad, unfair, and immoral, but that still does not force any responsibility on him.


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> *So you disprove your own point here. She was being responsible by your standards by having a reliable partner (at the time), committed relationship and then married.* All this did not stop the man being irresponsible. No difference to a one night stand where the guy takes a hike.
> 
> PS. Both my sister and the ex-husband are Christians, btw.


No. This proved my point. Ultimately, she, the woman was stuck with the responsibility and he, the man, got stuck with none. It all comes down to risk vs reward, and she obviously minimized her risk by being in a committed relationship, but this proves there is no way to eliminate the risk short of infertility or abstenance. She gambled and lost.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar said:


> Absolutely incorrect. You are deliberately changing what I said to fit your point. That is intellectually dishonest, and I would appreciate it if you stopped.
> 
> The scenario you changed mine into is still not rape, and second, as I have been saying the whole time, the biologically forced responsibility is hers. Since she is the one who gets pregnant, it is irresponsible of her to assume he just put one on.
> 
> If she demanded it, certainly she would have verified right? Oh, then he may have slipped it off when she was not looking. Sure, it was sleezy of him, but he still has no biological responsibility. She does.
> 
> Biology and nature are neither right nor wrong, good nor bad, fair nor unfair, moral nor immoral. It just is. His actions may be wrong, bad, unfair, and immoral, but that still does not force any responsibility on him.


You are the one who's wrong.

WikiLeaks' Assange granted asylum: How consensual sex became rape - National Love and marriage | Examiner.com

_"He did not use a condom, a crime in Sweden... It seems that sex was consensual on the condition of his using a condom. And apparently he did not uphold his part of the bargain."_

As you keep saying, in your example the woman is being responsible.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar said:


> No. This proved my point. Ultimately, she, the woman was stuck with the responsibility and he, the man, got stuck with none. It all comes down to risk vs reward, and she obviously minimized her risk by being in a committed relationship, but this proves there is no way to eliminate the risk short of infertility or abstenance. She gambled and lost.


Actually, she won. We got rid of the manscumbag. Even their son doesn't like him. Doesn't change the fact she was being responsible by your standards and still is but it didn't change the outcome like was implied here.

Anyway I'm off this argument has been going on way too long to a point of ridiculousness.


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> You are the one who's wrong.
> 
> WikiLeaks' Assange granted asylum: How consensual sex became rape - National Love and marriage | Examiner.com
> 
> _"He did not use a condom, a crime in Sweden... It seems that sex was consensual on the condition of his using a condom. And apparently he did not uphold his part of the bargain."_
> 
> As you keep saying, in your example the woman is being responsible.


I will grant you that I was looking at that from a US-centric point of view...and in the US, I think it would be pretty difficult to get a rape conviction by simply saying it was consensual if he wears a condom, but he didn't put one on. Anyway, this is completely immaterial since you changed my initial premise. My initial premise was simply two people getting caught up in the moment. Not rape.

Again, you do not seem to grasp what we are talking about here. I made the claim that women have forced inescapable resonsibility and men do not, therefore, women need to be more careful and responsible. You claimed that men have half the responsibility.

I am talking about biological responsibility and consequences. Nothing to do with moral responsibility. Biology does not care, and since women are the only ones with biological repercussions of pregnancy, they are the only ones with forced responsibility.


----------



## alexm

CouldItBeSo said:


> No secrets then, huh?


Again, I have already had (or tried to have) this discussion with her, and it didn't go anywhere. As in, there was no clear cut definite response. The wall came up again, and I haven't pursued it any further, nor am I likely to, as it may damage our fairly solid foundation. (this wall business, aside).

I am here to get perspective(s) on the issue from others who may have similar experiences, or at least insight they can share.

This is not harmful to the relationship, it is an advice forum; this is not something I would hide or deny should the question ever arise; it is no different than her talking to her friends about us, or me talking to my friends about us. We certainly don't expect each other to divulge every time that we talked about our relationship with a friend or family member, or asked advice from somebody else. I am certain her good friends know WAY more about me than I think they do. The good and the bad.

However, if asked if I ever sought outside advice, I would tell her I did, and I presume the opposite would be true.

If you consider this a "secret", me (or anybody else) being here without their partner's express knowledge or consent, then so be it. But it's an open secret. And it's in the name of helping the relationship, not hurting it.


----------



## samyeagar

CouldItBeSo said:


> Actually, she won. We got rid of the manscumbag. Even their son doesn't like him. *Doesn't change the fact she was being responsible by your standards and still is but it didn't change the outcome like was implied here.*
> 
> Anyway I'm off this argument has been going on way too long to a point of ridiculousness.


She minimized her risk, made what she felt was a good decision at the time, and still got stuck with the responsibility of an ultimatley poor decision. 

This is the epitome of how women face far bigger, longer lasting consequences related to sex from a biologically inescapable fact.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar said:


> I am talking about biological responsibility and consequences. Nothing to do with moral responsibility. Biology does not care, and since women are the only ones with biological repercussions of pregnancy, they are the only ones with forced responsibility.


How do you convert that to "irresponsible sex" then? What exactly do you mean by that, give a practical example.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

CouldItBeSo said:


> The bolded part has been happening since the 70s, at least. Don't be naive. Did you know the age of consent is:
> 
> 13 in Spain
> 
> 14 in Albania, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Montenegro, Portugal, San Marino, Serbia, Slovak Republic and Slovenia
> 
> 15 in Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Faroe Islands, France, Iceland, Monaco, Poland, Romania and Sweden?
> 
> And it's 16 in most states in the US.


I do not feel I am Naive ..I see the reality...it's shoved in our faces every day...I simply disagree with you and feel many people use Sex irresponsibly ...and our world will continue to suffer..most especially our children and so down the line it goes as these are their examples. 

I voice my views just as you...I feel it is wrong to charge ahead using others as "replaceable body parts"...just because one feels some LUST in a moment... devoid of love, emotion and affection.. 

You'd never be my type.. but then again, I'd Never be yours either. ...to each their own.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar said:


> She minimized her risk, made what she felt was a good decision at the time, and still got stuck with the responsibility of an ultimatley poor decision.
> 
> This is the epitome of how women face far bigger, longer lasting consequences related to sex from a biologically inescapable fact.


Taking a risk and being irresponsible are two different things. You take risks every minute in life.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

SimplyAmorous said:


> I do not feel I am Naive ..I see the reality...it's shoved in our faces every day...I simply disagree with you and feel many people use Sex irresponsibly ...and our world will continue to suffer..most especially our children and so down the line it goes as these are their examples.
> 
> I voice my views just as you...I feel it is wrong to charge ahead using others as "replaceable body parts"...just because one feels some LUST in a moment... devoid of love, emotion and affection..
> 
> You'd never be my type.. but then again, I'd Never be yours either. ...to each their own.


See, I'm not judging how you live your (sex) life. Why do you feel you need to judge others'?

I'm not your type... I thought you're already married if I remember right? That's not my type, only singles thank you.


----------



## alexm

samyeagar said:


> Biology does not care, and since women are the only ones with biological repercussions of pregnancy, they are the only ones with forced responsibility.


Forced responsibility for 9 months. For life, no. Once the child is born, the mother can basically do exactly what the father did, and split. Put the baby up for adoption, leave it on a church doorstep, etc. After the term is up, she can essentially shirk the responsibility at that point, just as the father did.

For that matter, rightly or wrongly, she can also have an abortion, especially if the father has disappeared entirely. She has that choice (depending on state/country/belief system).

In the end, though, it IS much easier for a man to have repercussion-free casual sex than a woman. It doesn't mean it should be that way, but unfortunately, it is. We don't carry the baby, have to be at numerous doctor's appointments, watch what we eat, stop drinking/smoking, feel nauseous, etc. Never mind having an abortion or giving the baby you carried up for adoption.

All of those things are difficult, and I imagine 1000x more so if there isn't a father in the picture. Or knowing your baby is the product of casual sex.

Being a man and having to pay child support is a pain in the ***, but it's not difficult.


----------



## TiggyBlue

samyeagar said:


> She minimized her risk, made what she felt was a good decision at the time, and still got stuck with the responsibility of an ultimatley poor decision.
> 
> This is the epitome of how women face far bigger, longer lasting consequences related to sex from a biologically inescapable fact.


So if a woman walks away from her family and the father is now solely responsible for raising their children was it ultimately a poor decision on his part? 
Does a parent abandoning their child have anything to do with gender? 
Having a baby and raising a baby are not the same thing.


----------



## alexm

The problem I have with the age of consent, is that it generally isn't the age at which a person can have sex with anybody.

I haven't researched each country individually, but I do know that many of these "ages of consent" are only applicable with someone who is under the age of 18 or 19.

As in, a 25 year old man can not have sex with a woman who is 14, even though that is the age of consent. It is implied that the older person is still close enough in age to the younger one to not imply forced or statutory rape. Or more likely, to prevent anybody in power (teacher, doctor, etc.) of abusing this power with a minor - which would not be difficult, unfortunately.

Generally, the law won't do much about it if, for example, the age of consent is 14, and a 13 and 14 year old are engaging in sex. It would really have to depend on the prosecutor/lawyer. If one JUST turned 13, and the other is almost 15, then there might not be a blind eye. But if the 13 year old turns 14 in 2 months, and the 14 year JUST turned 14, then there likely wouldn't be any legal issue unless the parties involved follow the letter of the law (and they don't always...). It's a grey area. You can't expect two 17 year olds to be dating for a year, and as soon as one turns 18, they stop having sex until the other turns 18. Technically, it's illegal and statutory rape. In reality, anybody in their right minds in the law profession wouldn't bother. 

If the age of consent is 14, then what that means is that it's technically illegal for two 13 year olds to engage in sexual acts, and I believe their parents would be held responsible. It also means that a 17 year old can not have sex with a 13 year old, and as said above, a 25 year old can not have sex with a 14 year old.

Those ages are usually chosen because it is difficult, if not impossible to prevent 14, 15, 16 year olds from having sex in ANY country. But you CAN prevent a 13 year old from having sex with a 17 year old, and anybody over 18/19 from doing the same with a mid-teenager.




CouldItBeSo said:


> The bolded part has been happening since the 70s, at least. Don't be naive. Did you know the age of consent is:
> 
> 13 in Spain
> 
> 14 in Albania, Austria, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Liechtenstein, Macedonia, Montenegro, Portugal, San Marino, Serbia, Slovak Republic and Slovenia
> 
> 15 in Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Faroe Islands, France, Iceland, Monaco, Poland, Romania and Sweden?
> 
> And it's 16 in most states in the US.
> 
> I don't read Freud, sorry.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

CouldItBeSo said:


> See, I'm not judging how you live your (sex) life. Why do you feel you need to judge others'?
> 
> I'm not your type... I thought you're already married if I remember right? That's not my type, only singles thank you.


Both sides judge... it is not only me... I have higher standards in the sexual....People often judge those holding sexual views similar to mine saying we are prudes or have sexual hang ups... been in a few discussions like that.. 

It's disheartening ....why because I feel one shouldn't jump until they have a commitment.. that makes one a prude.. F that..

So yeah...I have an opinion on those who jump from bed to bed to bed...they do not attach much emotion on the act...am I wrong in this? I don't really expect an answer, by the way. 

Yes, I am married.. stupid comment on my behalf.. it is just pleasant for me ....when I run into the very selective few that seems to hold similar views on this forum.. I don't feel I have much company in that... it's pretty narrow... so again...your views win the DAY, our future...


----------



## GettingIt_2

alexm said:


> I am here to get perspective(s) on the issue from others who may have similar experiences, or at least insight they can share.
> 
> This is not harmful to the relationship, it is an advice forum; this is not something I would hide or deny should the question ever arise; it is no different than her talking to her friends about us, or me talking to my friends about us. We certainly don't expect each other to divulge every time that we talked about our relationship with a friend or family member, or asked advice from somebody else. I am certain her good friends know WAY more about me than I think they do. The good and the bad.
> 
> However, if asked if I ever sought outside advice, I would tell her I did, and I presume the opposite would be true.
> 
> If you consider this a "secret", me (or anybody else) being here without their partner's express knowledge or consent, then so be it. But it's an open secret. And it's in the name of helping the relationship, not hurting it.


Ah, man, this hit a nerve. My husband was NOT comfortable when he came to TAM and read my posts about our marriage. We ended up staying up until 2 a.m. discussing it, and it wasn't pretty. I presumed he understood that I was here to learn and share, but he had much, much different ideas about what it was okay for me to share--even on an anonymous forum. 

Sometimes it's just not safe to assume where the other person draws their privacy boundaries. Doesn't matter if those boundaries make sense to you or not; they do still need to be negotiated in relationships. 

We ended up without much of a resolution. I offered to quit posting since it made him uncomfortable, but he wasn't happy with me changing my behavior for him. I think he wanted me to just "see it his way." But I don't. I'm me and not him. He opted to just stay away and let me use TAM as I found most beneficial. But now I'm always wondering if he's still reading here once in awhile, so I end up trying not to write things he'd find unacceptable. 

Ugh. Not a deal breaker for either of us, but it does demonstrate how sometimes things are gonna be muddy.


----------



## samyeagar

There is only one part of sex that is biologically gender exclusive, and that is pregnancy. Women are the only ones who face that. There is no biological exclusive for men.

It has been stated that that responsibility is only there for the woman until the end of the pregnancy, be it birth or abortion. That is quite true. At that point, biological responsibility ends, and men and women are back on equal footing as either or both can choose to abandon the child or take care of it or something in between.

Morality, the concept of right and wrong is a purely human construct, and biology, in this case pregnancy, trumps them both. Personaly, I think that men have just as much moral responsibility to their children as the mother, so in that regard, since sex can result in pregnancy, both have an equal responsibility.

Biology does not care about morality, and regardless of the best moral intentions, or lack there of, pregnancy can still happen, and when it does it is biologically solely on the woman.

Unless one of the partners is sterile, any woman who engages in PIV sexual intercourse is engaging in biologically risky behavior, more risky than the man who does the same. If the woman does not want to get pregnant, she can do the socially and morally responsible thing and minimize her risk as much as she wants through birth control, picking an equally morally responsible partner, but biologically speaking, she knows that engaging in that activity can result in pregnancy, and she is the only one involved with an exclusive biological affect, if she chooses to engage knowing that, then her behavior, while having socialy responsible sex, she is having biologically irresponsible sex.


----------



## samyeagar

TiggyBlue said:


> So if a woman walks away from her family and the father is now solely responsible for raising their children was it ultimately a poor decision on his part?
> Does a parent abandoning their child have anything to do with gender?
> Having a baby and raising a baby are not the same thing.


The father has just as many options as the mother. He can walk away just as easily. That is a moral issue, and not a biological one and I am talking about biology, not morality.


----------



## TiggyBlue

> View Post
> So ultimately, he can get away without responsibility, while she is stuck with it all aside from what is given her by the government.
> 
> I am sorry for what happened to your sister, and I am not sure 'rat of a man is harsh enough.
> *
> She went through the risk vs reward and decided that the risk was worth it because she felt she knew him and trusted him enough. She was wrong, and she got left holding the proverbial bag, not him. Biologically forced responsibility.*





samyeagar said:


> The father has just as many options as the mother. He can walk away just as easily. That is a moral issue, and not a biological one and I am talking about biology, not morality.


But the example CouldItBeSo gave about his sister was a moral responsibility not a biological one though, the father walking away from her child wasn't any more/less of a biological risk on her part than it a man who decides to have a child with their partner.
If the threat of the other parent abandoning their child is/would be seen as biologically forced responsibility it's a risk both gender's take.


----------



## Caribbean Man

samyeagar said:


> The father has just as many options as the mother. He can walk away just as easily. *That is a moral issue, and not a biological one and I am talking about biology, not morality.*


And I think this^^^is where some on this thread are getting confused or blindsided. Nevertheless, it workes the same way in life.
Woman gets pregnant for a scoundrel , and she begins to think maybe he'll change, maybe the cat , maybe the fiddle, maybe the cow will jump over the moon.

Then it dawns on her that she's stuck at home with his kid and he's out there chasing another skirt.

She's been duped,
And she doesn't get her money back.

It's a waste of time arguing if the man is responsible. Of course he is, the child belongs to him! That is understood.
But how's putting that line of argument to her going to help her purchase baby formula and baby pampers in the supermarket?

Clearly a different approach is needed.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

samyeagar, it seems you missed this post. Can you answer this and give a practical example? 


samyeagar said:


> I am talking about biological responsibility and consequences. Nothing to do with moral responsibility. Biology does not care, and since women are the only ones with biological repercussions of pregnancy, they are the only ones with forced responsibility.


How do you convert that to "irresponsible sex" then? What exactly do you mean by that, give a practical example.


----------



## CouldItBeSo

SimplyAmorous said:


> Both sides judge... it is not only me... I have higher standards in the sexual....People often judge those holding sexual views similar to mine saying we are prudes or have sexual hang ups... been in a few discussions like that..
> 
> It's disheartening ....why because I feel one shouldn't jump until they have a commitment.. that makes one a prude.. F that..
> 
> So yeah...I have an opinion on those who jump from bed to bed to bed...they do not attach much emotion on the act...am I wrong in this? I don't really expect an answer, by the way.
> 
> Yes, I am married.. stupid comment on my behalf.. it is just pleasant for me ....when I run into the very selective few that seems to hold similar views on this forum.. I don't feel I have much company in that... it's pretty narrow... so again...your views win the DAY, our future...


I haven't called you a prude. It's not my business how you conduct your sex life and I expect the same from you. Isn't that from the bible, treat others like you would want to be treated...? Obviously you think I'm one of "those people" or "irresponsible" and there is a strong judgement in your tone. Googles* "*Luke 6:31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.*" I can't believe I'm quoting the Bible...


----------



## alexm

Fair enough. I have no idea if my wife would be thrilled that I'm dishing some pretty personal stuff. But it is anonymous. Despite my first name being part of my nickname here (the M is not the first letter of my last name, as I've said once before on here) it's not like any potential creep on TAM could find real life me even if they really tried (apart from ip traces, I guess. Please don't do that!)

Point taken, but the original argument to me about secrets is still neither here nor there. No couple is 100% transparent, and from where I'm coming from, I'm here out of the desire to strengthen, not harm, my relationship by learning and sharing.




GettingIt said:


> Ah, man, this hit a nerve. My husband was NOT comfortable when he came to TAM and read my posts about our marriage. We ended up staying up until 2 a.m. discussing it, and it wasn't pretty. I presumed he understood that I was here to learn and share, but he had much, much different ideas about what it was okay for me to share--even on an anonymous forum.
> 
> Sometimes it's just not safe to assume where the other person draws their privacy boundaries. Doesn't matter if those boundaries make sense to you or not; they do still need to be negotiated in relationships.
> 
> We ended up without much of a resolution. I offered to quit posting since it made him uncomfortable, but he wasn't happy with me changing my behavior for him. I think he wanted me to just "see it his way." But I don't. I'm me and not him. He opted to just stay away and let me use TAM as I found most beneficial. But now I'm always wondering if he's still reading here once in awhile, so I end up trying not to write things he'd find unacceptable.
> 
> Ugh. Not a deal breaker for either of us, but it does demonstrate how sometimes things are gonna be muddy.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

alexm said:


> Point taken, but the original argument to me about secrets is still neither here nor there. No couple is 100% transparent, and from where I'm coming from, I'm here out of the desire to strengthen, not harm, my relationship by learning and sharing.


 Given your wife refuses to talk to you, and this coming from someone who believes in 100% transparency, it is possible in a marriage if 2 favor that sort of thing..... (what I mean is anything juicy, any /every question is welcomed, this doesn't mean we talk excessively, just the highlights we know they'd appreciate- the good, the bad, they ugly, the vulnerable...we enjoy the sharing of ourselves with the one we love)....

Your intentions are good coming here...this accounts for something... when one spouse is acting in the manner yours is... shutting you out, knowing it hurts you... .unfortunate as it may be...this can lead to your seeking your own outlet to cope, or deal with that...



> *CouldItBeSo said*: I haven't called you a prude. It's not my business how you conduct your sex life and I expect the same from you. Isn't that from the bible, treat others like you would want to be treated...? Obviously you think I'm one of "those people" or "irresponsible" and there is a strong judgement in your tone. Googles* "Luke 6:31 Do to others as you would have them do to you." I can't believe I'm quoting the Bible..


I'll shut up now... that scripture is my mantra for living...the Law of Reciprocity....

Living this however....still negates some form of moral conduct and feeling on ethics on every subject under the sun.. .....it doesn't mean we hide ourselves in a vacuum & never speak out... against issues that clearly are hurting the world around us....and it's fallout. 

You have not said anything to clue me in on you being irresponsible in your sexual lifestyle... IF you have always considered the emotions of every woman you have slept with -putting that condom on it...none walked away heartbroken, feeling "used"... not passed sexual diseases or babies resulted that neither of you wanted... yes one could say - you would be living up to your own standards on this Golden Rule...


----------



## Caribbean Man

CouldItBeSo said:


> I haven't called you a prude. It's not my business how you conduct your sex life and I expect the same from you. Isn't that from the bible, treat others like you would want to be treated...? Obviously you think I'm one of "those people" or "irresponsible" and there is a strong judgement in your tone. Googles* "*Luke 6:31 Do to others as you would have them do to you.*" I can't believe I'm quoting the Bible...


----------



## GettingIt_2

alexm said:


> Point taken, but the original argument to me about secrets is still neither here nor there. No couple is 100% transparent, and from where I'm coming from, I'm here out of the desire to strengthen, not harm, my relationship by learning and sharing.


Yes, I used the same reasoning to justify breaching the privacy boundary of my partner. I think most people set their boundaries in order to, as you say, "strengthen, not harm" our relationships. Getting the other person on board with the reasoning is the tricky part. We tend to want our partners to agree with us on matters of intimacy, but it's just not always possible. 

I guess my point is that privacy is always going to be a subject for negotiation and, hopefully, understanding and flexibility in relationships. We rarely are going to get exactly what we want, and when we don't get exactly what we want, that doesn't mean the other person is wrong or selfish. Just different. Each of us have to decide what we can live with, but shaming or making someone feel bad for privacy needs that are different than our own is a good way to harm a relationship. (I don't think that is what you are doing, by the way.)


----------



## CouldItBeSo

SimplyAmorous said:


> I'll shut up now... that scripture is my mantra for living...the Law of Reciprocity....
> 
> Living this however....still negates some form of moral conduct and feeling on ethics on every subject under the sun.. .....it doesn't mean we hide ourselves in a vacuum & never speak out... against issues that clearly are hurting the world around us....and it's fallout.
> 
> You have not said anything to clue me in on you being irresponsible in your sexual lifestyle... IF you have always considered the emotions of every woman you have slept with -putting that condom on it...none walked away heartbroken, feeling "used"... not passed sexual diseases or babies resulted that neither of you wanted... yes one could say - you would be living up to your own standards on this Golden Rule...


I think the very root of this dilemma is, why are you worried about my sex life (or anyone else's) and why do you feel that you are entitled to the moral position of judging me/them in the first place? Can you explain what you mean by "irresponsible sex" in practice for both men and women?


----------



## Catherine602

SimplyAmorous said:


> Both sides judge... it is not only me... I have higher standards in the sexual....People often judge those holding sexual views similar to mine saying we are prudes or have sexual hang ups... been in a few discussions like that..
> 
> It's disheartening ....why because I feel one shouldn't jump until they have a commitment.. that makes one a prude.. F that..
> 
> So yeah...I have an opinion on those who jump from bed to bed to bed...they do not attach much emotion on the act...am I wrong in this? I don't really expect an answer, by the way.
> 
> Yes, I am married.. stupid comment on my behalf.. it is just pleasant for me ....when I run into the very selective few that seems to hold similar views on this forum.. I don't feel I have much company in that... it's pretty narrow... so again...your views win the DAY, our future...


Maybe I should not post this but If I bite my tongue any more, it will be lost. I don't like to post anything that is contrary women posters. Women catch enough hell without me contributing. 

I will post this and say no more. Men like to see a cat fight between women. They think that women are fighting to curry favor with them. I'm not, I don't give a [email protected] ass what random men think of me. I do care what I think of me and what women think of themselves. 

SA You don't know how "the very selective few that seems to hold similar views on this forum" have conducted their lives. Many women who were virginal at marriage don't talk about it all the time for various reasons.

Some don't think being a virgin at marriage is their principal contribution to society. Some prize their empathy, humility and lack of pride. Some are too busy trying to recognize and work on their own demons. 

They may feel that characteristics other than their virginity at marriage defines their humanity. They may have a much wider criteria for finding good in people. I am not sure.

Just so you will know. You see, I was not a virgin when I got married. I was manipulated when I was a young teen into having sex with a man who was more than twice my age, married and had children .

I feel drawn to woman who do not judge other women who have had sex outside of marriage. On this site, I find these woman comforting and I feel less tainted.

They are warm, kind, helpful, and empathetic. They don't take every opportunity to tear women down. They are not bad people at all. They are what is good in people.

SA, This is not to say I don't respect you or your values. I mean no animosity towards you and I think your posts are very helpful.


----------



## SimplyAmorous

Catherine602 said:


> Maybe I should not post this but If I bite my tongue any more, it will be lost. I don't like to post anything that is contrary women posters. Women catch enough hell without me contributing.
> 
> I will post this and say no more. *Men like to see a cat fight between women. They think that women are fighting to curry favor with them. I'm not, I don't give a [email protected] ass what random men think of me. I do care what I think of me and what women think of themselves.
> 
> SA You don't know how "the very selective few that seems to hold similar views on this forum" have conducted their lives. Many women who were virginal at marriage don't talk about it all the time for various reasons*.


 the post you are referring to.... I was reacting to his words, his judgement...listen.... I am no different than any other person here, male or female who sometimes gets my feathers ruffled.. do I have bad moments...absolutely ! ...I am human and fuvk up at times.. . SA can get a little mouthy once in a while.. Believe it... we all do.... should I have said "a very selective few" ...NO, you are right Catherine... 

So how you feel in this is .... I speak just a little too freely, too often, too much about my state of waiting till marriage on this forum.....you think I am catering *to men*... My true motivations is not to cater to anyone... my views are not popular today....I even feel I alienate myself by speaking them (I KNOW I DO)...I might as well sit in a corner alone .... because many judge How I feel today...it's not about acceptance to me as much as being a voice for another view that is often shunned.. 



> *Some don't think being a virgin at marriage is their principal contribution to society. Some prize their empathy, humility and lack of pride. Some are too busy trying to recognize and work on their own demons*.


 Is this REALLY how I come off ...my world view this tiny ..this cold & intolerant ....you think I feel a girl keeping her legs closed before marriage attains some angelic status... that this is more important over how she treats others in her path.. in her daily life...over humility, over empathy, her contributions to this nasty world... WOW...that would make me a very UGLY woman indeed ... I am going to say....I am much deeper than this... 

I often speak of *empathy* on this forum, I often speak of *humility*....Pride is the ugliest of all....I think of the Prayers of Tax collector and Pharisee.. I've used these examples on this forum a # of times just to speak how destructive & ugly *pride* IS.... so in this...I so agree with you... these things ARE way beyond MORE IMPORTANT in this life, how we treat others IS MY JUDGEMENT to whether a person is decent or not... 

But can I say...a "put a condom on it" approach to life....this cavalier attitude does make *me *question just how much such a man cares about the woman he is going to have sex with... so you agree with CoulditBeSo's approach to teen sex then - he spoke of 13 yrs old being able to give consent ..hey if we are horny, why not, nothing wrong with it... does this factor in empathy - do we REALLY KNOW enough about another person to forge ahead with "sex is just sex" -cause we are in the mood...hell all of us get horny !! Sex is the grand utopia of conflict in this way... nothing is more pleasurable... YET nothing can do as much damage at the same time... 

I feel it is a worthy discussion...in contrast to *>>*



> *CoulditBeSo said*: *Are you saying that in the 70s people were not having even more carefree and casual sex? I think todays youth is way more responsible than what we were in the past.
> 
> I agree with that colorful banner of yours, sex should be free for all as it's one of the most natural human interactions*.





> *Catherine602 said*: They may feel that characteristics other than their virginity at marriage defines their humanity. *They may have a much wider criteria for finding good in people. *


 And so would I... no 1 thing can define any of us... we are multi-faceted ..every one of us... yet is it wrong for me to openly speak how I would not want to be with a partner that can easily separate *love & sex*, compartmentalizing it..who can move from one woman to another...after all it is free and it is FUN... 

.. I see the man who can not do this having more EMPATHY for those he sleeps with, attaching love strings..... NOT LESS... Do you disagree ?



> *Just so you will know. You see, I was not a virgin when I got married. I was manipulated when I was a young teen into having sex with a man who was more than twice my age, married and had children *.


what happened to you was utterly against integrity.....you was deeply betrayed, hurt and used... I abhor that sort of treatment from anyone, man or woman. 

My own Mother was manipulated , lied to, seduced, used & thrown away by MEN... she found herself in a tangled web & couldn't get out....even ended up sleeping with married men once it was underway....and beaten up when she wanted to stop....she was Raped 3 times, 1st was by my best friends Father who thought he could get some of the action......it left her self esteem on the ground...she lost me, her job, her house, and her sanity all at the same time...I watched her self destruct in front of me... I was taken off of her by my Father , I was only 9 or 10....I lost my best friend..... I also suffered with repressive sexual views because of how I have seen sex handled in this world by such men.... I can NOT blame this all on the church.. 

So maybe this will explain a little about me..... Do you think I hate my Mother & want to SL** shame her.. No... I just saw 1st hand the devastation that can come upon us when we are not careful, when sex is used carelessly, when EMPATHY is not there for whom we sleep with... I was a casualty of this mess.. she blames her choices on ruining her life.. I wanted better for myself.. this has far less to do with PRIDE over plain "self preservation"...

(I talk about this in post #2 of our story below)....my disillusioned growing up years...

This had a great impact on me as I vowed at a young age to NEVER allow a man to use me seeing what happened to HER. Just as you feel very strongly against MEN who take advantage of young impressionable teen girls... because of your experience... Can we ever UNshake the Injustice we felt -even if mine was not personal, it greatly affected my life none the less. 



> *I feel drawn to woman who do not judge other women who have had sex outside of marriage. On this site, I find these woman comforting and I feel less tainted.*


 I would not want you to feel this way because of anything I have ever spoken...it would be very misplaced .....sometimes we can read too much into another's post.. we all do this -depending on our own soft spots...and we all have them... I do on many *SAHM vs working Mom's* threads.. because I feel judged by other women by things they say (and it's just their own personal feelings.. I need to separate this & not feel they are talking to me).... they are allowed to FEEL any way they want... many express things like - they would find it foolish to put all their eggs in one basket and depend on a man... translation - I am a FOOL. Did they speak this to me.. NO.. I just can't help but feel I am being Judged... 



> *SA, This is not to say I don't respect you or your values. I mean no animosity towards you and I think your posts are very helpful.*


 Well I know you wouldn't say anything you didn't mean.. so I appreciate this 

I want to say a little more....

I believe strongly in "Sexual Integrity" no matter one's lifestyle or sexual views.... Integrity is very important in EVERYTHING We do, yet it is very rarely spoken in the sexual ....why is this?? Does it really not matter ? 

If I ever leave here, do a Blog/ write a book... this would likely be my focus.. I love the subject, I love to dissect it.. if my views are being misinterpreted to = I think I am better than you.. I am being gravely misunderstood. 

Example ....One poster here.. Trenton..she is gone now... her sexual past was ... well, very colorful...she was very open about it.. she was WILD.. she was carefree.. she was honest (loved that about her)... she even played mind games with her husband when they met , feared vulnerability something awful...but the love bug bit her ...and him anyway....and that's beautiful.. 

What I am trying to say is this... I greatly admire what she has done with her life... her volunteering her time, to help unfortunate kids...I've always seen her as one with a HUGE heart.. giving to others...(despite her demons she struggled with )... she was a class act... in my eyes... MUCH BETTER THAN MYSELF...

I stay home, busy myself with my own kids, sure I welcome their friends to spend the night & stuff... . but I don't put myself out in society to help "the least of these"...like Trenton is doing... ..Now who is contributing more to society... we know that answer... and it ain't ME.... . what little I do offer is to speak where I feel I can make a difference... small as it may be...

Though if I am coming off as a cold heartless judgemental witch to other women here.....I will accomplish nothing...might as well pack my bags & go. 

How people treat each other IS the most important thing in life...our influence, what legacy will we leave behind...

This >>









...it does go back to that Golden rule... Mercy triumphs over judgement also... Humility has been lost in this world today, couldn't agree with you more...I've always been for the underdog personally...and stick up for those who are beat down.... I hung around with 2 girls in high school who did sleep around.. one was a foster teen.... she was abused, didn't have many friends, people made fun of her...I didn't....another was called a SL**, she befriended me, and I spent a few nights at her house... we were very different yet we had other things in common....I genuinely liked her... I didn't go around talking about these girls, belittling them.....even if I took a different path with the boys....

None of us like to be misunderstood. I hope this gives a clearer picture to what I am made of...or my intentions.


----------



## Caribbean Man

There is a huge difference between Politics, Morality & Ethics.

For some people , politics govern their intimate relationships, and is the answer to any problem in their relationship.

For others ,like the OP, morality and ethics is the backbone of their interactions/ relationships with the opposite sex and helps shapes their beliefs.

To each his own.


----------



## Plan 9 from OS

I'm late to this party and I read through the thread. I am of the opinion that your pasts are important. I would want to know a woman's past prior to getting into a serious relationship and ultimately married. Granted, the last time I had to worry about something like this was back in the 20th century, so I'm not one of those posters who is having to navigate the dating scene today. 

The last time I was in the dating world, the only thing about pasts that I had to worry about was sexual past. These comments are for how I viewed things when I was in my late teens/early 20s. My motivation for wanting to know was simply to understand what I could be getting myself into if I pursued a serious relationship with a woman. If the experience levels were too different for me, I would walk from the relationship. Is that just me being shallow? Perhaps. However, I would like to think it's more about me knowing my limitations. I know myself enough to recognize that if the girl I was going to get into a serious relationship was WAY more experienced than me - it would bother me tremendously. Better to let the relationship go and keep your piece of mind than to pursue it with the hopes of "getting over it" and making you and your partner miserable.

Now, given the experiences I have now, I'd approach dating a little differently. I wouldn't feel the same levels of jealousy today if there was an imbalance in the number of partners. While I may only have had 2 sexual partners in my life, I probably had more sex with those 2 than most would have had with higher numbers of partners. So I wouldn't think I'd be losing out by not "experiencing life". Seriously, who would prefer to have to trudge out to the bar/nightclub trying to sift through the rif raf to hook up with someone when you can have a nice romantic time with someone you know and love - especially if you already are familiar with the lay of the land? For me, knowing is not so much for me to calculate if my partner is more experienced than me and had more "opportunities for fun" than I did (because seriously, I had A LOT of fun with the two partners I had/have), it's for those social situations where you may run into her ex. It's also based on boundaries and understanding if your GF has proper ones. Knowing her sexual history within the context of getting a better understanding of what makes her tick is crucial to me. As a 39 year old, if I was in the dating scene today, I would like to know if her friends "Rod, Joe and Bob" were former BFs (or fvck buddies). On top of that, if your GF or soon to be wife is regularly hanging out with people she used to sleep with, well that's NOT OK in my book.

It goes beyond just sexual pasts though too. As a 39 year old in the dating world, I would want to know if my GF had any psychological issues or even any history of abuse. Wouldn't yo think it would be prudent to know if your future bride suffers from BPD, schizofrenia, or something else that she's managing thru drugs? Surely you'd want to know about what could happen if she decides to go off her meds - and to decide if the risk of dating her is worth it.

Someone also made a quip about showing previous years of pay stubs to see if her future H was earning money at a good trajectory. Tongue in cheek to illustrate the ridiculousness of asking about sexual pasts. Ironically, her sarcasm is misdirected IMHO. Maybe the past salary history is silly to ask about, but what about employment history in general? Wouldn't it be prudent to know if your bride to be has gone thru 8 jobs in 2 years? What if every boss she ever had was an a-hole according to her? Or what about her credit card debt? Would you want to be newly married and find out that you just got a $30K credit card bill to deal with after marriage???

I realize the tenor of this thread was about sexual pasts predominantly. But IMHO, the game changes a lot when you are older, been married before and there is more on the line to make the right choice now than when life was simpler when you were 18 and trying to find that good GF. JMHO.


----------

