This week, I published two different perspectives on infidelity on Medium. In my first piece, I’m Sympathetic to Those Who Cheat on Their Sexless Marriages, I express compassion for people who seek extramarital affairs because their spouses won’t have sex with them.
But then I came right back a day later to publish, Cheating on Your Spouse Means You’re a Weakling.
In the first piece, I write why I have sympathy for cheaters—but only if they’re in sexless marriages.
The sexually denied spouse simply wanted to stop feeling neglected. They simply wanted to feel desired.
They wanted sex. It’s a very human need.
Maybe you’ll say they should have just left the marriage. But you and I both know it’s not that easy.
Cheating is simply a way to hold on to a marriage. In that case, I’m asking if we’re being too hard on cheaters?
Should we have more sympathy?
And yet, I always acknowledge that I don’t agree with cheating. I see it as but a Band-Aid being used to heal the far greater wound of the broken marriage.
In short, adultery is not a good remedy to one’s marital lack of bliss.
Perhaps this is why in my second piece about cheating, I write why I think cheaters are weaklings.
Divorce means seriously disrupting your life. It means suffering.
So cheaters tell themselves they’re staying for the kids. They might even claim they still love their spouse.
The truth is they want the easy life. They don’t want to leave the big house. Two salaries are better than one. And those vacations…
You can have something on the side and still stay living in the nice neighborhood, enjoying your cushy life.
But doing that means you’re a weakling.
So I have this opinion that cheating makes you a weakling — however, I also have compassion for people who cheat to stay in sexless marriages.
Still, I assent that infidelity is not a good cure.
Could there be another solution to the sexless marriage?
Give your partner a hall pass.
A few months back, I also wrote this piece: In a Sexless Marriage, the Spouse Who Wants Sex Should Get a Hall Pass.
I write:
With a hall pass, you have permission to have sex with other people.
It’s different than swinging because a couple is not playing with other partners while together. Why would they? Their marriage is sexless.
Instead, one partner knowingly allows the other to stray. Therefore, it’s not really straying. It’s consensual non-monogamy.
I thought this was a logical solution — which is the problem: it may be too logical.
Most couples, even those in sexless marriages, do not feel comfortable allowing their partner to have sex with other people.
In this piece, I cite jealousy as one of the biggest issues against opening one’s marriage.
Jealousy is in our nature… Even when couples stop having sex, the partner who’s no longer interested in sex often wants to keep the relationship completely monogamous.
And yet, I think honesty is the best way to move forward in a sexless marriage, especially if it can’t be fixed.
If one partner simply doesn’t want to have sex with their spouse anymore, why not permit them to sleep with other people?
The thing is, non-monogamy is becoming more mainstream. As that happens, perhaps “…more people in sexless marriages will open their minds to giving each other hall passes.”
I assert:
To me, it now seems like the ethical thing to do. Consent to allow your partner to have sex with other people if you no longer want to have sex with them.
It’s only fair.
What’s your opinion?
I would love to hear your take on the subject. Should a person get a free pass to cheat if their spouse won’t have sex with them anymore?
And what about the solution of the hall pass as a way to solve the issue of the sexless marriage? Do you think in the future more people will adopt this fix?
Please let me know in the comments.
Thanks for reading!
I wish it wasn't so difficult to step outside of a marriage. I fully understand jealousy, but I was dying inside before I cheated, and there was no way we were going to have "that" discussion. I've picked the path I've picked and I will pay for it if I have to. I do regret not being able to do it openly.
My beloved Witt, I think you know my answer.
Open it.
Fraught as it is with a number of different land mines, my partner and I have (very) briefly discussed the possibility, whether as a return to swinging, basic ENM, or outright polyamory. In that (very) brief exchange, she immediately went to Boundaryville in such a way as to preserve the slight tilt-in-her-favor of our power dynamic. Essentially, as she has done with so many such ideas, she reduced the notion to a financial issue.
A little prequel: I am currently unemployed , and not for lack of trying; when I bitched about it and confessed to being ashamed of it, my partner said, "Stop the shaming. Declare yourself semi-retired, and just find a job, even part-time, just to get out of the house and help with the bills."
And now, back to the (very) brief discussion:
When I asked about non-monogamy, she replied,"Given how we met (on a swinger site), I have no problem with it; but you can't do it with my resources."
Knowing that we live in a community-property State, I said, "Don't you mean *our* resources?"
"I'm not going to pay for you to go out on any dates, no more than you would you help pay for me to sleep with another man. You'll have to find a job to make it happen."
In a later, (much) more heated exchange, she revisited that statement, calling the underlying idea "disgusting"---she used the word three times at once.
Let's unpack this:
1. In almost every other situation, her go-to phrase is "It all comes out of the same pocket." Apparently, that is not so universal.
2. If we proceeded with ENM, her paramour might likely be the one buying dinner or the hotel room. One of our rules would be "no overnights." Regardless, I would, without heartburn, be amenable to shelling out whatever might (within reason) be necessary for her rendezvous, as a way of supporting that upon which we decided to embark.
3. Although she emphasizes her lack of sexual desire toward *anyone*, this puts her in the "catbird seat," a position of potential advantage. She can go galavanting here and there, while I stay at home and wait for a hiring, regardless of whether I can find a date.
I have to ask your opinion: is it truly "disgusting," or is she seeking a means to nip the idea in the bud?
Thanks for reading.