We have another thread in this forum named "260 yards".

I thought someone had started another Tiger thread.

At first I thought the subject would be how far Tiger can hit a golf ball with 2 iron.

Then I thought the subject would be how far Tiger can drive an Escalade while being wailed on with a 2 iron.

What do I know?

lol

No, it's NOT pitiful. As I argue in another thread, if a man denies his wife sexual satisfaction, she should be able to look elsewhere too. Only a selfish, inhumane tyrant withholds sexual favors from their spouse and at the same time expects him or her to remain faithful.

I've never once argued that men have a sexual monopoly. In fact, I argue all the time that women want sex far more than men do. Which is precisely why I say this. A woman who chooses no longer to have sex with her husband has made a deliberate decision to dishonor and disrespect him. If he gets lonely and looks for solace elsewhere, good for him. I wouldn't respect a man who was so pussy whipped that he'd put up with that kind of abuse. Nor would I respect a woman who let her husband get by with that.

---

ok - we agree then. 😃 sex is an integral part of my life - deprive me of it & somebody's in trouble!!! lol.

Well......i don't get "it", and i still haven't cheated on my wife.
Guess that makes me some kind of idiot or loser.

---

It does indeed, Cheesy, it does indeed.

I figured that.....oh well....

---

Each to their own... but in the above scenario it seems that there are more underlying reason beyond just being cruel to your mate.

IMO, wouldn't it be the correct course of action to properly communicate with your mate to resolve the underlying issues before just stepping out to fulfill your primal wants or needs?

Just straying from your commitment seems like the easy way out.. and to me shows more of a sign of weakness than up holding your vows.

Call it old school.

---

I have to side with Pack93z on this.

I agree with Non that it's almost natural for person to seek sexual fulfillment elsewhere if their spouse is withholding sex for whatever reason.

But, unless consented, seeking another sexual partner outside of the marriage is still wrong. And it doesn't help the marriage, either.

---

Hardly. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm sure a couple with as good a relationship as yours have voluntarily chosen and mutually agreed not to have sexual relations, or medical reasons have forced you to abstain. That is a completely different situation from what I'm talking about.

---

I agree wholeheartedly. As I said in that other thread, cheating is breaking the rules of your relationship. I'm very much against cheating, regardless of what the rules of your relationship are. (If your rules are you can't even flirt, then don't flirt.) By the same token, if you can't abide by the rules you've agreed to, you need to either end the relationship or renegotiate the rules.

I'm talking here about spouses who spitefully and maliciously withhold sexual relations, which are part of the agreement when you contract a marriage. In that case, the withholding spouse is also in breach of contract. So I think the offended spouse should be able to say, "Look, I married you because I love you and want to be with you, and I still do. But you have grown cold and distant and frankly, I'm lonely. If you can't provide that for me anymore, I'm going to look elsewhere."

If the spouse's pride won't allow that, then in my opinion, the right thing to do is simply to release the spouse from their marital bond to you.

Obviously, the situation is different in cases of, say, diabetes or spinal injury that cause impotence or radical hysterectomies that can destroy a woman's ability to be aroused. Martin Luther would argue that in that case, the compassionate thing is to allow the spouse to pursue their needs elsewhere, but it's certainly no moral obligation. That would be between the spouses -- and, as I said, would have to be done with mutual consent. I think personally, if I were incapacitated, I would make such a concession, though it wouldn't be easy for me, but I certainly don't think anyone else should feel obligated to. It's not like such a concession would be license to engage in sexual profligacy (any more than an "open" relationship is); there would still have to be accountability, respect, and understanding.

---