The more I contemplate the Monogamy Math Problem, the less sympathy I have for “victims” of a roving spouse. It isn’t something I can relate to what with the dysfunction of my upbringing. If such a victim counters infidelity with violence than my sympathy is further reduced, unless such “violence” is of the form which is arousal inducing, that is, negotiated BDSM between effective as well as actual adults.
The cure for alienation of arousal is not punishment!
If a couple are truly sexually incompatible, surely this is a justification for break up or divorce. It would seem to me that it ought to be written right into the bonding vow, of whatever form that might take, that it is the obligation of both parties to be both sexually pleasing and attractive, such that failure to perform on either scale is grounds for divorce.
Such pleasing behavior does not necessarily mean that one’s partner won’t find other parties to be similarly attractive. However, sexual desire does not need to decrease with use, but rather, usually, the opposite. Therefore, given my preference for masculine men, a man with a roving eye is what I would call a healthy specimen! It is therefore my job and inspiration to maintain myself both physically and spiritually as attractive and thereby inspiring of both his loving attentions as well as his lustful ones.
Similarly, if I am being neglected, then I would just assume walk away myself rather than “cheat”; however, I understand that when financial entanglements such as children hinder that possibility then some people are forced to compromise.
What this all means in practical terms is that if I feel I am being sexually neglected in favor of another, then acting out whether by tantrum or violence is counterproductive. If there is no “other” then I’m going to wonder whether there is a health issue or if I am simply no longer appealing. If it is the former, then it is time for some sort of negotiation, in my view, in that “vows of fidelity” are meaningful only to various Statists and Churchians when it comes to forced celibacy. Whereas this was the case in the majority of years of my marriage, given that my husband never really loved anything about me other than the superficial, I was not seriously tempted to cheat given that my own personal integrity generally outweighs my sexual desire. When I did finally leave or rather escape him however our “vows” ceased to have any meaning such that I was delighted to jump into the arms of Axel, who I met almost immediately afterwards.
I knew from the onset that Axel was accustomed to “servicing” a variety of aspiring submissives and that any attempts to curtail this practice were bound to be destructive. Therefore, the only parts of this randy equation that concerned me were financial and personal. With regard to the first, I vowed to trust Axel to see to our own financial interests. Without that trust, just how valuable is the gift of “submission” anyway? With regard to the second, I extracted a promise from Axel that all personal questions about me from his lovers were to be answered by the following phrase: “Buy the book.”
In the same vein I trusted Axel to ensure that he would not be a father to any future progeny, which would be both a financial and personal liability. Since he had already been tricked into fatherhood once, he knew better than to trust a mere lover in that regard and thereby took the pains of disposing of his own condoms off site. In my view, unwilling parenthood is also an act of violence.
Up until the height of his illness, Axel continued to sexually satisfy me, one way or another, and my own material needs given my lack of interest in competing with women on that level are minimal. I’d rather have male sexual attention than baubles. Why is that considered strange? I think it speaks toward the Statist and Churchian objectives in manufacturing an unending stream of bitter and damaged women for purposes of self-perpetuation and inflating sphere of influence. One’s feelings of rejection or possessiveness are manageable issues when one is getting plenty of loving and lusting as one’s reward. Therefore the actions and propaganda purveyed by the various megalomaniac utopianists would thwart those exercises.