In fairness to LS, I do think the "for women sex is generally an abundant opportunity, for men generally scarce" was germane to this thread. In virtually every thread that discusses a dynamic where a WW was significantly more sexual in the A than she has been with her BH, the discussion reveals a stark gender divide. Male commenters, especially BH, usually maintain that the only logical explanation for the fact that she returned repeatedly (and in this case eagerly) for the higher degree of sex is that she was enjoying and therefore craving the sex, specifically with the AP. That she was sexually attracted to the AP specifically.
Female commenters maintain that the high amplitude of A sex is an artifact of the internal noise of neurotic feedback that drives a WW to cheat in the first place. They point out that most women of at least average attractiveness could have sex pretty much whenever and wherever they'd like. If they were driven to cheat solely by sexual lust, they'd be doing it all the time, everywhere.
I get that point, but it still, to my mind, doesn't answer the next question, which is: "Okay, clearly she doesn't choose everything everywhere all at once, so why, out of the wide universe of possibilities, did she choose the specific AP?" HO describe her choice as being sparked by the AP's sense of humor. There is a poster in an active Wayward thread who describes her choice as physical -- the AP was her favored somatotye, the kind of man she dated until she met her BH, who was a different somatotype. The point being that the mixture of vectors, in my observation, includes an element of attraction specific to the AP, at least initially, which belies the oft-stated "it could have been anybody".
I point that out because Mr. AN stated:
WW attempted to explain that the A was more about herself than the AP. That she did not find the AP "particularly attractive" or special at all. She actually says she loathed him at times and didn't really think much of him or care what he thought of her at all.
Versions of this meme are said all the time in infidelity forums, but pretty much only by spouses struggling to R in the face of profound trauma. Never by BS's who choose to D. It defies logic here in light of the rich written record of this affair. How the very first sex act Mrs. AN bestowed upon the AP -- only her second ever sexual partner -- was an act to give one-sided sexual pleasure to the AP (in other words, designed to elicit a pleasure response), an act that was and still is streng verboten in the marriage. How Mrs. AN eagerly craved the next command from the AP, to the point where she became depressed when it tapered off. WW's answer that by saying that "cheating isn't logical", which I can get on an intellectual level but not on a visceral one. I do believe that people generally tend to act in a manner they perceive to be in their own self-interest. I do acknowledge that in the context of a cheating wife with a giant Madonna/whore complex, self-interest could be served by choosing an AP about whom the WW does not care with respect to his opinion of her. I'll leave that dangling for now.
On the point of Mr. AN being chafed by her statement "you won", I completely understand why that would piss him off. First, it is inconsistent with the timeline. Per Mr. AN, the A ended because of covid lockdowns. AP became bored and began to disengage, leading Mrs. AN to fall into a depression and, at the suggestion of her loving and concerned husband, then seek counseling. Based on that timeline, Mr. AN didn't "win". He was simply the default. The fallback. Plan B. The timeline suggests that if there had been no covid, the A would have continued apace until it was caught out by Mr. AN or the OBW. Second: "I won what? An opportunity to soak in the vomitous aftermath of a marriage to a woman who just betrayed me in the most profound and awful way a wife could possibly betray a husband?"
This particular line leapt out at me:
I believe it's clear she wasn't doing the tasks etc. for him - she was doing it for her. he was just the convenient excuse or vehicle/catalyst to do so.
Some of the things she did, especially later in the course of the A, were directly and openly disrespectful to unwitting Mr. AN. If she was disrespecting him in that way, for her own benefit, that's deep. Food for thought.
End of the day, I think everybody on this thread agrees that successful R for this couple depends in large part on them creating a new marital sex life that Mr. AN is happy with, or at least his unhappiness level is low enough to remain married. I have stated many times, and I still maintain, that the odds of this succeeding are low, and therefore the risk of investing even more of his valuable life into a low-odds prospect is illogical. To that end, I would suggest that, going forward, Mr. AN keep in mind these statements from his various posts:
you are gonna throw everything away coz I won’t give you [oral sex]?"… and then the killer "all you guys are the same… everything is about sex!
She definitely sees that a wife should be prim and proper, and that only "wh—-s act like she did".
WW explained how IC had helped her see that she had lost her way over the past many years, turning away from her faith, leaving her rudderless, and in a place where her "darker impulses" were allowed to flourish by her.
...that she has returned to her faith to help her follow the "right path" and why can’ti accept it?
So vanilla sex between WW and I basically consists of Missionary PIV only, with WW adopting a passive role. Lights off, in bed, quietly so teenagers do not hear. Exploration of new positions, OS (giving or receiving) or any other things many other couples consider routine have never been part of our bedroom activities.
I should add that vanilla is offered freely and frequently which is a key difference to before, and is clearly part of the work she is putting in.
and, finally:
WW has committed to entering into sex therapy (she has stated that she refuses to "become the whore" again
As I said above, her commitment to enter sex therapy is merely a commitment to take the first baby step toward reinventing their sex life. To my knowledge, she has not yet taken that first baby step. However, in anticipation of taking the step, Mrs. AN has forewarned Mr. AN that, no matter what, she will not "become a whore". In context of this thread, I interpret Mrs. AN's definition of "whore" as a woman who engages in any sex act other than lights-out, bedroom door closed and locked, starfish sex after the kids are asleep.
I'll admit to a personal bias here springing from my unhappy childhood deeply infused with hardcore Evangelical religion. I've endured mountains of fearmongering and guilt porn, while simultaneously watching the adults who inflicted this garbage onto my generation engage in rampant adultery, back-stabbing, financial impropriety, and even sexual grooming of young women. In my experience, the only path out is to cast off that belief system. Here, it feels like Mrs. AN is redoubling her commitment to it.
I hope I'm wrong about Mrs. AN. However, in fairness to me, I don't know if I've read a thread that evidenced such a textbook "Madonna/whore" complex as this thread, and my experience is that this specific psychological complex almost always has its roots in fervently held religious beliefs. That sort of belief system can be rigid and intractable. When a person sincerely believes that the salvation of her mortal soul can be compromised by, say, providing oral sex to her husband, there's simply no getting past it. There isn't room for compromise in a belief system built around absolutes that dictate the outcome in a binary heaven/hell scenario.
I point that out because, in choosing a sex therapist, I'd suggest you choose one that has a grounding in religion. A therapist who can explain biblically how a joyous sex life between a husband and wife can be not just consistent with a religious faith but, as the Jews say, a Mitzvah -- a sacred yet blessed duty of both spouses.
[This message edited by Butforthegrace at 10:10 PM, Wednesday, March 22nd]
