Hi -

Thanks to all the men who responded to my "Marriage and lack of SEX" thread.  To go further with the question: why did you marry and why did you (or do you) stay in a sexless marriage? It seems so sad to me that this happens again and again.  

Thanks!

It was anything but sexless before and for the first year.  Now I have kids to consider and feel having mom and dad around 24/7 is good for them.  Seeing providers during my normal day has made it possible for me to stay married.  I don't think this is unique to marrige, just different in the US.  Many countries don't think wrong of this scenario, and I'm not sure it was even that taboo in our country years ago.

I married her because she was attractive, intelligent, ethical, honest, ambitious and at least at the time had a pretty good sexual appetite. Even though the last 8 years of our 13 year marriage was essentially sexless she still embodied all the other qualities listed.
  Why did I stay so long??. When life hands you lemons you make lemon-aid.  I'm old fashioned, I watched my parents go through unhappy times together. I also celebrated their 50th wedding anniversary along with their daughters, inlaws and grandchildren.
  Sex is certainly an important ingredient to a happy marriage. It also shouldn't be a deal breaker (there are options; IE:the hobby). life isn't perfect. there are accidents, illnesses disabilities. Thats why the wedding vows include "for better or worse, for richer or poorer, in sickness and in health."

Believe me I'm not criticizing...I think I would do the same thing under the circumstances.  I just thought it was funny that the next phrase in the vows which you omitted pertains to fidelity.

cheers

I think people are kidding themselves when they say they are staying together for the children. Do you really think your children don't see your unhappiness? Children are incredibly perceptive, especially when it comes to their own two parents.  Children probably know best whether two parents are happy or not. Honestly, I think most people stay because they aren't courageous enough to leave. They are afraid to live alone, to pay child support, to pay alimony, and to do dozens of other tasks that come with divorce.

-- Modified on 8/14/2003 6:34:05 AM

Interesting that the Priest who married us forgot the fidelity line  in the vows.  Not that it matters anymore...but I have the video tape to prove it!  my soon to be ex toyed with the vows a little and he must have forgotten it.

of the parents abuse the children because of their unhappiness in the marriage, the parents have violent fights, etc, the children are better off if the parents stay married, at least until the children have grown up.  My wife and I waited until our youngest went off to college before deciding to divorce, and that has proven to be a very good decision.

I don't mean to sound critical, but people are much too quick to divorce.  The idea that "Whatever I want is best for my kids" reflects the self-absorption of too many people today.

-- Modified on 8/14/2003 7:37:02 AM

I don't believe that is the case in every circumstance.  There are sexless (or almost sexless) marriages where the couple may have a somewhat normal relationship otherwise.  In those cases, I feel that the stability of having a two parent home is much better for the kids.  Sex, though a big part in a marriage, is not the only driving factor in a happy marriage.  This is why I believe that this "industry" has its place in society.  "Ain't nobody happy if momma ain't happy" also applies if poppa ain't happy.  The situation has nothing to do with child support or even alimony, and certainly, nothing to do with courage or fear in my case.  How about a certain amount of sacrifice, loyalty and putting the family first?

Now off I go to file my papers to run for the Governor's job.  Anybody willing to sign my petition?

I married at age 24, separated at 37..didn't even divorce until a couple of years later.  She was a warm, beautiful woman in every way, & a wonderful mother to our son.  For the first 11yrs of marriage I was as happy as I've ever been.  Yeah, those may have been what the old song refers to as "the hungry years" (that's financially speaking for those not familiar with the song) but that made no difference...we had a helluva lot more than money can ever buy.  Sex?  Hell, I looked like any normal guy would, but never once touched until close to the end when it was obvious the marriage was going to end...& even then it was mostly an attempt at a brief escape from the reality that the end was close at hand.  

We didn't even break up for any one specific reason.  As trite as it sounds, we simply grew apart.  I never understood what that really meant until it happened to me.  But plainly put, our outlooks & goals had changed by our mid-30s & they weren't as similar to each others as they had been when we were in our 20s.  Facing up to the fact that the time had come for the marriage to end was painful to both of us, but we both knew it was best in the long run.

As for our son, we both agreed that she have legal custody..but because she remained in the area he spent nearly half the time with me--even was able to stay in the same schools, & as parents we both remained as involved in his activities as we would have if we were still married.  We made every attempt to keep things as normal for him as possible.  And not once did I ever speak badly of his mother to him, & I'm positive she never did of me.  Hell, I had nothing to blame her for..what happened to the marriage was simply a part of life, there was no blame to be placed.  

Even though some of what I felt for her had changed, I never lost an ounce of respect for her or felt that she was anything less as a person than she had always been.  Hell, we still have lunch together once in a while, always remember birthdays, Christmas...& there's always a phone call on our wedding anniversary.  None of this because there's even the slighest thought about ever getting back together..we've simply progressed to the point we love each other as friends.  

So don't think for a minute that all marriages that end in divorce were cases of prolonged unhappiness or that they were void of satisfactory sex.  Neither were those marriages necessarily mistakes.

very real and common for many. It's heartwarming to see that you two have a good relationship since your divorce and that is based on a mutual respect you have for each other as people.

On a different note, I often wonder why people continue to marry - and the numbers INCREASE! Can anyone answer that? I don't see that most people would find much reason TO marry, unless, of course, to begin a family, when young..interested in what you all would say..

which there are no universal answers to.  

Interesting Lady, you recently made a post saying that you thought that marraige sounded like hell, and that you have never and would never marry.  It is therefore hard for me to feel that you aren't speaking from a very biased viewpoint.

Having said that, to a certain extent, I agree with you.  I think that there are many instances when a child is done more psychological harm than good by parents "staying together for the children".  I grew up in one such household,  dealing with my mother's alcoholism, my father's philandering (he moved into a hotel when I was ten for six months to pursue an affair with his secretary...and that was far from the only incident), and the skewered reality that this environment created.

There is no question that divorcing creates a new set of issues to cope with, and more often than not adversely affects the financial security of the parents and the children.  Depending upon the circumstances, these fears may not only be valid, they may sometimes need to take precedent, at least temporarily, and in a marraige where the partners are past reconciliation regarding intimacy, it may be best for both sides to pursue other avenues to address their needs.  I personally think this is the minority of cases, but it isn't inconceivable.  Unfortunately, it is grounds for costly divorce settlements.

On the flip side, institutionalizing sexual ambivilence towards your partner sends a clear message to your children.  It is a core part of the human psyche to hope, to want to obtain the highest a person can obtain.  In relationships, this generally means a happy, affectionate, secure, monogamous relationship. I think that most people who aren't already in a sexless marraige would agree that this is desirable, and that the concept of wanting to have a good physical relationship with your partner after years of marraige is not frivolous or idealistic but is mentally healthy.  Too many healthy couples have proved that it can happen for it to be dismissed as "new age propaganda".

Showing children that the natural hope they have to have a lasting intimate relationship with their love partner may be less important than security is simply a matter of values, and there are too many documented cases of all options in this issue being correct for the inviduals involved to say that "one way" is the way society should be.  Those that decry "modern family values" (or lack thereof) as the cause of all societal evils are avoiding the inevitability of societal evolution.  As long as a person really KNOWS what they want in the first place (which is a big hurdle in itself), I would say that a parent who has the guts to say "What I want for me is best for my kids" and is willing to sacrifice some comforts to fight for their ideals is less damaging than the thought that it is more important to sacrifice having affection be a centerpiece of your marraige (and your household) to be able to provide the security needed for your children to assimilate into the "American Dream"...which is one of the biggest causes of selfishness and the disintegration of family unit in the first place.  

If both partners in a couple are comfortable with intimacy playing a reduced or nonexistant role in their marriage, it may be viable and positive for them to stay married for other reasons.  Conversely, if both partners value affection, communication, and compromise enough, it is always possible to not have to endure a "sexless marraige".  Whatever course the couple takes, though, there are almost always ways that it affects your children and their views and development....no matter what you do.

I have read the many posts on this subject and all that I can
say is that all of the posts are very good and they all touch
on the truth. In my case all that can be said is that I began
to grow emotionally and my EX stayed basicaly the same.
I felt smothered and lonely, I didn't leave her for someone
else and I did not blame her for taking a lover behind my back,
But I do feel some amount of anger that she treats our children
as though they are use and throw away when done kind of
children. She is very selfish and demanding, but I no longer
have to live with it. I am happy that I ended my unhappy union.
It took along time for me to gather up the courage to divorce
but I found it and did what was best for all concerned.

There are huge liabilities that a man takes on when he marries. Unless he is young and looking to start a family
(A bigger liability yet)there is no logical reason to marry with todays options. However; Endless dating is very time consuming and often doesn't meet the intended goal. The hobby although incredibly enjoyable as well as being time and goal effective can be cost prohibitive on a regular basis to many of us who are in that Sub 6 digit income range.
  Even educated men well acquainted with the perils & pratfalls of marriage will again risk it in hopes of never having to look lonelyness in the face again.

We rarely fight, the kids are happy with their full time stay home mom, and we do normal family things as a group.  I don't see us getting separated after the kids are gone.

I'm not looking for a girlfriend or another companion.  I have always been very sexually active and seeing providers allows me to continue my desired level of activity.  I love my wife very much and would be very sad to split up.  Would I stay with her without sex with her and without providers?  Its hard to say now since that is currently the way it is.  It may sound bad, but I don't see it as cheating.  If we had sex together and I was still going elsewhere than I would feel differently (not to put my warped moral spin on guys who do).  

Some guys see providers because they are lonely.  Some guys see providers because they like the sexual thrill of doing something taboo or illegal.  Some do it because they have nothing better to do at lunchtime.  Whatever.  I do it because I like, or even need, the sexual release but want something more than the mechanical massage parlor (again, nothing against guys who like that).  I have one provider now that I continue to see and don't plan on changing anytime soon, which kind of kills the variety argument.

I am happy, my wife is happy, and best of all the kids are happy.

I guess I never looked at my marriage as being the reason to be or not to be happy - that has more to do with how I live generally.  I like my wife, except for when I don't.  Divorce would be whole lot worse for all of us - it'd just be a lose-lose-lose.  So if that's called "being afraid," so be it.  (I am also afraid of standing if freeways, so I generally avoid this as well.) I think that the whole romance bit is overblown.  We have sex when we do (leap years unless it's raining) and it's good.  I franly think the business and personal mix with you ladies is just about what the doctor ordered.