Slog
News & ArtsWednesday, May 11, 2011
Savage Love SL Letter of the Day: You Better Sit Down
Posted by Dan Savage on Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM
I'm a 34 y.o. woman married to a man with severe Secondary Progressive Multiple Sclerosis. When he first got sick and started losing function, we found creative solutions to keep our sex-life alive. But as the disease progressed, he lost the ability to move all but his left arm. When he became bedridden I became his full time caregiver. MS is an obscene disease. I spent 24 hours a day changing his catheter, his diapers, manually extracting feces, washing up vomit, feeding him, etc. I couldn't sleep more than two hours at a time because he needed to be turned in bed. Please understand that I'm not mentioning this as some plea for symapthy, just to illustrate why I felt basically asexual at that time. I was too exhausted, angry, and devestated to even think about sex for the most part. After a few years of this it became clear that the disease had progressed to the point where I could no longer care for him at home. And we made the gut-wrenching decision to move him to a nursing home.
This was a year ago. Although, he is safe and well-cared for, I still have some serious guilt-issues about this. But I have admit—I kind of feel reborn. I can work. I can go out. I can have friends. I CAN HAVE SEX. Fabulous, fun, spontaneous, life-affirming SEX. I literally forgot it could be this way. It feels wonderful that I can do these things but horrible that he can't. And here's the big problem: lately he has been asking me to let him use his mouth on me. He wants me to sit on his face. I've been able to demure up to this point, but he's being pretty persistant. And I just have NO interest in doing that. I don't see him in a sexual way at all. After years of being his caregiver, the thought of being sexual with him almost feels like the thought of being sexual with a child. Thinking about it makes me feel depressed and I hate to say it but... kinda sick. But how can I deny him a pleasure when he has so few? Am I being a selfish bitch? I don't see anyway to refuse him without hurting him but... I can't imagine doing what he asks. Can you help?
Multiple Scleroisis Sucks
My response after the jump...
············
I'll drive you to the nursing home myself, MSS, and I'll buy you a shot before you march in there and I'll buy you two shots after you stumble out. But you gotta do this.
You gotta sit on his face.
You may not see him in a sexual way anymore, MSS, but he is still a sexual being, and he still sees you in a sexual way (obviously), and he still has needs and desires—you know, kinda like you do. But unlike you, MSS, he doesn't have the option of jumping out of bed and running off to have fun, spontaneous, life-affirming sex with someone else. You are all he's got, the only sexual option he has between now and oblivion, you gotta come through for him.
You don't have to see him as sexual. All you gotta do is sit. You don't have to enjoy it, you don't have to get off (although you may have to fake it), and you don't have to get an erection (which makes faking it so much easier). You can sit there and think of England or the errands you have to run or the fun, spontaneous, life-affirming sex you'll be having later that same day with someone who isn't your bed-ridden, terminally-ill husband.
Denying your husband this small pleasure, after all he's been through, and with all he has yet to get through, is just cruel. There's no way to refuse him without hurting him. And there's no excuse for refusing him.
Don't get me wrong: your squicked out feelings are completely understandable. I'm sure, however, that you felt just as squicked out the first time you had to manually extract his feces. But you did that because it had to be done and you got through it. And you did that—something that had to be so much squickier than setting your ass down on his face—because you loved him. And you still do, right?
Right. You do. You love him. But I suspect that, as much as you love your husband, on some level you resent him. Even that's understandable. And you may be angry with him—subconsciously—for what his illness did to your life. Also understandable. But please ask yourself, MSS, if you're denying him this small pleasure to punish him or because you see him as a child and literally can't bring yourself to do this. And then, regardless of the answer, go to that nursing home and...
Sit on his face.
And I'll be waiting for you outside with a bottle of Maker's Mark, MSS, at least in spirit.
1
There's always the option to hire someone (or get a friend involved), but I do think that MSS doing this herself is the better option. Have a drink, maybe do a little dance or makeout session to build the mood, and go for it.
3
Dan's right on this one. Just do it. He's probably not going to be with us for much longer anyway, and you'll regret it for the rest of your life if you don't do it.
5
I feel so for this woman. And I feel so for this man. He still loves you. He still wants you. That is sweet. And it's what he needs to affirm his life. If you can't find it in your heart to do this one last thing for him, you'll regret it. Seriously regret it. And regrets like that have a way of tainting our lives forever.
6
Dan, that may be one of the most beautifully charitable pieces of advice I've ever read. It's so easy to forget how much mercy matters in these matters. Every prompt of evolution seems to tell us to not find the disabled or sick sexually attractive, but they don't see themselves this way. Maybe the best thing about the admittedly sometimes awful business of prostitution has been the way that prostitutes have sometimes offered sexual mercy to those who can't, for whatever reason, find it otherwise. Maybe we can start a charity of lovely people who help out in these situations. Hummers Without Borders? The Red Light Cross?
7
Sad situation, great advice. I'm happy she's been able to (hopefully with her husbands acceptance) find her own sexual satisfaction during this tough time. This isn't too much to ask on his part.
9
*Slow clap* Bravo, Dan, you've come a long way.
I'd like to get up on a soapbox here for a minute and say that it's wrong that our laws and societal expectations made it necessary for LW to become her husband's fulltime caretaker in order to keep him alive. A just society would do better than that.
I'd like to get up on a soapbox here for a minute and say that it's wrong that our laws and societal expectations made it necessary for LW to become her husband's fulltime caretaker in order to keep him alive. A just society would do better than that.
10
I can't judge her, but I'll add my voice to those asking her to please do it.
If he can get over the knowledge that of course you're doing it out of pity, not sexual attraction, then you can remember why you married him, and all the good sex you had before, and do this for him once in a while. Give him something besides pudding to look forward to, for whatever short time he has before the disease progresses further and he can't even ask for this.
If he can get over the knowledge that of course you're doing it out of pity, not sexual attraction, then you can remember why you married him, and all the good sex you had before, and do this for him once in a while. Give him something besides pudding to look forward to, for whatever short time he has before the disease progresses further and he can't even ask for this.
11
Family and friends who are caregivers for people with serious, debilitating illnesses are the unsung heroes of the modern age. The physical work was even harder for our grandparents, who often cared for THEIR parents in their own homes long before disposable diapers and microwaves and Ensure, but I think the emotional burden is greater now because we as a society are so isolated from disease and death until a crisis strikes and the learning curve is much steeper. Also, extended families are smaller and relatives live further away.
First, LW, I hope you know that you are entitled to your feelings. And if you haven't been involved with a caregiver support group heretofore, you might consider joining one even now.
Second, if you feel able to follow Dan's advice (and it's your own business if you don't), first contact your local long-term-care ombudsman for a private, sympathetic discussion of how best to go about arranging conjugal time at the nursing home where your husband lives. S/he will be able to put you in touch with the social-services coordinator or other appropriate person. If your husband has a roommate, they should be able to make appropriate privacy arrangements and in any case make sure no one barges in on you. Not every place, whether state or individual facility, is enlightened, so you may find roadblocks. If so, it might awaken righteous anger in you which can actually help you along.
Good luck, and be gentle with yourself, however things go.
First, LW, I hope you know that you are entitled to your feelings. And if you haven't been involved with a caregiver support group heretofore, you might consider joining one even now.
Second, if you feel able to follow Dan's advice (and it's your own business if you don't), first contact your local long-term-care ombudsman for a private, sympathetic discussion of how best to go about arranging conjugal time at the nursing home where your husband lives. S/he will be able to put you in touch with the social-services coordinator or other appropriate person. If your husband has a roommate, they should be able to make appropriate privacy arrangements and in any case make sure no one barges in on you. Not every place, whether state or individual facility, is enlightened, so you may find roadblocks. If so, it might awaken righteous anger in you which can actually help you along.
Good luck, and be gentle with yourself, however things go.
12
Wow. That is such a tough situation, and I feel for them both. You're right Dan, she needs to give him this. He's locked in hell and she's all he's got. I guess this is what they mean by "in sickness and in health." I would hope, were the situation reversed that he would do the same for her.
14
Another thought: how about she sits with him, masturbates, and then puts her panties on his face so he can smell her scent... That doesn't seem to be asking so much, and he'd probably like it...
15
I, too, am a caregiver/spouse for an MS sufferer. While our circumstances are nowhere near as dire as yours, MSS, her doctor and therapist both make the point that we BOTH have the disease, in effect. It can be life-consuming, and cause resentment for both parties. I agree that it is difficult to feel like a spouse, when you have been involuntarily forced into the role of nursemaid by this condition. Nonetheless, Dan is right. You need to "suck it up" and do this for your husband, because, no matter how much MS has damaged your relationship, and it DOES damage it, your husband didn't choose to have MS, and he is blameless in getting it. Unlike many other preventable conditions (like being a meth-head), no one knows why people get this disease, and there is no cure, only treatments for some, which vary in effectiveness from person to person.
As long as he is your husband, you need to try to meet his limited sexual desires, as hard as it may seem to do so.
As long as he is your husband, you need to try to meet his limited sexual desires, as hard as it may seem to do so.
17
@11 exactly what I was about to say. Obviously it is much worse to be the person with the debilitating disease, but people often underestimate how difficult it must be to be the person who loses them and watches the slowly decline. You have given up so much of your life for him, it is great that you have started to get back to normality.
If you can't bring yourself to do it that is fine, it is really ok, but try and remember the relationship you used to have with him. Ultimately, you should do it for yourself, because he will be gone and the only person it will affect is you. I think everyone else is right, you will regre it if you don't.
If you can't bring yourself to do it that is fine, it is really ok, but try and remember the relationship you used to have with him. Ultimately, you should do it for yourself, because he will be gone and the only person it will affect is you. I think everyone else is right, you will regre it if you don't.
18
No. Be honest, tell him it's over and how you feel about him. Then hire a sex worker, a whore of some kind, to do that. Make sure the whore's clean...lol
19
I'm going to be really pissed if tomorrow I read in the news that some nursing home employee called the cops on an MS patient's wife for indecent exposure or public lewdness or some bullshit like that.
21
This is one of those letters where I would really like to leave a profound comment, but Dan's already said everything that needed to be said. We could try to unpack the possible reasons for the husband's persistent requests to give her oral - and I suspect some people will - but regardless of the reason, it's still what he wants. And I think the bottom line is that if your bed-ridden spouse asks you to do something you're perfectly capable of doing, you do it out of love.
22
Dan savage,
there is no "in spirit" when one is making false promises about being there for someone with some makers mark
also telling someone to do something they are sexually uncomfortable with is so messed up.
i dont get you anymore dan savage
there is no "in spirit" when one is making false promises about being there for someone with some makers mark
also telling someone to do something they are sexually uncomfortable with is so messed up.
i dont get you anymore dan savage
23
Tough situation. I know you feel sucked dry by his disease, like it has eaten almost all of you up, and you are just now finding out there is a you left and life can be good again in some ways.
But Dan's right. Just do it.
Afterwards, you'll be glad you did.
But Dan's right. Just do it.
Afterwards, you'll be glad you did.
24
Wow, Dan, you've gotten all rigid and "You must do for family" lately ... something going on? Sure feels like it.
I didn't agree with you in the recent podcast when you told that guy to "Man the fuck up" and be a father to a child whether he wanted to or not, and I don't agree with you now when you tell this woman that she is obliged to submit to a sexual experience she finds nauseating because she's married.
MS is a cruel disease, yes, but there are two people here, and I'm frankly pretty disturbed by the very idea of forcing yourself to do something you find sexually revolting out of a sense of duty. Is that what marriage means to you? She also has a life, and a point of view, and her own sorrows to bear.
The thing that I find disturbing in both of these cases is where I see you appeal to a rigid axiom as though it removes all the ambiguity from the problem. Who the hell are you to say anyone "must do" anything? It's out of character, and doesn't mesh at all well with your otherwise situationalist ethics.
No one "must do" anything, unless you're some kind of fundamentalist. We're talking about real people here, not principles.
I didn't agree with you in the recent podcast when you told that guy to "Man the fuck up" and be a father to a child whether he wanted to or not, and I don't agree with you now when you tell this woman that she is obliged to submit to a sexual experience she finds nauseating because she's married.
MS is a cruel disease, yes, but there are two people here, and I'm frankly pretty disturbed by the very idea of forcing yourself to do something you find sexually revolting out of a sense of duty. Is that what marriage means to you? She also has a life, and a point of view, and her own sorrows to bear.
The thing that I find disturbing in both of these cases is where I see you appeal to a rigid axiom as though it removes all the ambiguity from the problem. Who the hell are you to say anyone "must do" anything? It's out of character, and doesn't mesh at all well with your otherwise situationalist ethics.
No one "must do" anything, unless you're some kind of fundamentalist. We're talking about real people here, not principles.
25
After years of being his caregiver, the thought of being sexual with him almost feels like the thought of being sexual with a child. Thinking about it makes me feel depressed and I hate to say it but... kinda sick.
I hope he never finds out how you really feel about this, MSS. This is tragic for both of you. Good luck and all my best wishes.
I hope he never finds out how you really feel about this, MSS. This is tragic for both of you. Good luck and all my best wishes.
27
I really, dearly hope that I'm not that man a decade from now. (Well, setting aside the fact that I'm a woman.) I'm twenty-one right now, but I already have a fair number of health problems, and it's all too easy to imagine...
I know it's hard, MSS. But it's hard to be the one who's sick all the time. I feel so guilty when people have to take care of me. It's incredible that you were there for him through all of that--it sounds unimaginable. But he had to live through the shame and embarrassment of needing to have you do those things. You get to have amazing sex now, but he, as Dan said, can't just jump up and get that. I really think you'll look back on it and regret it if you don't try being sexual with him at least one more time. If you can't do it, you can't do it, but even talking dirty with him (while thinking about someone else?) or something would probably help.
EricaP (@14) had a good suggestion that you could maybe start with, and @11 had some good advice, too. Dan's advice was really great this time around, as well.
I just wish you and your husband the best. This is a really awful situation all around...
I know it's hard, MSS. But it's hard to be the one who's sick all the time. I feel so guilty when people have to take care of me. It's incredible that you were there for him through all of that--it sounds unimaginable. But he had to live through the shame and embarrassment of needing to have you do those things. You get to have amazing sex now, but he, as Dan said, can't just jump up and get that. I really think you'll look back on it and regret it if you don't try being sexual with him at least one more time. If you can't do it, you can't do it, but even talking dirty with him (while thinking about someone else?) or something would probably help.
EricaP (@14) had a good suggestion that you could maybe start with, and @11 had some good advice, too. Dan's advice was really great this time around, as well.
I just wish you and your husband the best. This is a really awful situation all around...
28
Dan is right on with his advice. This poor husbands choices are so limited, I doubt he could even use his hand. Those who are whining about the wife not being obligated to do as her handicapped husbands requests, do you give the same advice to men who's wives have put on weight/let themselves go? At least she doesn't have to produce an erection
29
It's fascinating (and utterly bewildering) to me that picking feces out of his ass is more palatable to her than sitting on his face when she's not in the mood.
But it's not really surprising - I imagine a lot of women would feel that way.
But it's not really surprising - I imagine a lot of women would feel that way.
30
Great compassionate advice, Dan. This is a situation that no one deserves, MSS, but I agree with the others who say you'll probably regret it if you don't make an effort to accommodate your husband's request.
In addition to the use of liquor, you might want to consider taking some additional steps to prepare for the encounter. While men can get turned on watching porn or other simple things (own it, guys!) research indicates that many women need a combination of factors to get in the mood. It's probably different for every woman, but think about what used to get you hot and bothered about getting it on with your husband and what gets you in the mood now.
Is there an aftershave he used or an old t-shirt he wore when he was healthy that still has his smell on it? Or video of the two of you together that triggers romantic or happy memories? Or maybe a hot porn video you can watch to get yourself worked up or even watch together to build the mood?
Finally, if you've got an understanding friend with benefits, ask them for some intense foreplay to get yourself in gear before visiting the nursing home and some affectionate sex for you as a reward afterward.
Good luck and best wishes.
In addition to the use of liquor, you might want to consider taking some additional steps to prepare for the encounter. While men can get turned on watching porn or other simple things (own it, guys!) research indicates that many women need a combination of factors to get in the mood. It's probably different for every woman, but think about what used to get you hot and bothered about getting it on with your husband and what gets you in the mood now.
Is there an aftershave he used or an old t-shirt he wore when he was healthy that still has his smell on it? Or video of the two of you together that triggers romantic or happy memories? Or maybe a hot porn video you can watch to get yourself worked up or even watch together to build the mood?
Finally, if you've got an understanding friend with benefits, ask them for some intense foreplay to get yourself in gear before visiting the nursing home and some affectionate sex for you as a reward afterward.
Good luck and best wishes.
31
Difficult but good advice Dan.Your suggestion is the most charitable solution, and I think it will help her avoid guilt down the road, after he's gone.
Has anyone mentioned yet that his request may be a way of wanting to stay connected to her ... to still feel a part of her life? He must feel terribly isolated knowing that she's enjoying life without him. He may need to give her what he knows (or suspects) other men already are.
Has anyone mentioned yet that his request may be a way of wanting to stay connected to her ... to still feel a part of her life? He must feel terribly isolated knowing that she's enjoying life without him. He may need to give her what he knows (or suspects) other men already are.
32
@28 wow, what a level of ignorance you have shown. You compare what this women has had to go through, caring for years for a deteriorating husband, to a spouse gaining weight? You are a fucking idiot.
33
@24: I'm frankly pretty disturbed by the very idea of forcing yourself to do something you find sexually revolting out of a sense of duty.
LW forced herself to do revolting non-sexual things out of a sense of duty (e.g., dealing with his feces). Why does it suddenly become disturbing when sex is involved?
LW forced herself to do revolting non-sexual things out of a sense of duty (e.g., dealing with his feces). Why does it suddenly become disturbing when sex is involved?
34
You know, I think people who are all "no one should have to do something they don't want to" are the reason this world is such a shithole sometimes. No, you are actually not entitled to have it your way, all the time, every time. Sometimes you have to do things you really don't want to do, because it's the right thing to do. This being sexual doesn't make it suddenly subject to different rules.
This isn't some boyfriend who gets into a car accident 5 months in, whom you don't want to nurse forevermore. This is a person with whom you share(d) your life, and his disability doesn't make him a non-person whose needs you no longer have an obligation to fulfill. You still owe him the opportunity to be intimate with you, whether or not that still turns your crank.
He's not victimizing her. He's her husband, whom she made vows to, who is the victim of a fucked-up disease that is in no way his fault. Her inability to separate him as a person from his (lack of) physical/sexual appeal seems immature to me. Where's your compassion? He just wants to connect with his wife. She seems to just want to move on.
I think she should thank her lucky stars that she gets to have a life and not be shackled to personally caring for him for the rest of it. Fire up the imagination, close your eyes, and remember the love and devotion you promised him. It really sucks to be in this situation, but here you are, and your part sucks way less than his.
This isn't some boyfriend who gets into a car accident 5 months in, whom you don't want to nurse forevermore. This is a person with whom you share(d) your life, and his disability doesn't make him a non-person whose needs you no longer have an obligation to fulfill. You still owe him the opportunity to be intimate with you, whether or not that still turns your crank.
He's not victimizing her. He's her husband, whom she made vows to, who is the victim of a fucked-up disease that is in no way his fault. Her inability to separate him as a person from his (lack of) physical/sexual appeal seems immature to me. Where's your compassion? He just wants to connect with his wife. She seems to just want to move on.
I think she should thank her lucky stars that she gets to have a life and not be shackled to personally caring for him for the rest of it. Fire up the imagination, close your eyes, and remember the love and devotion you promised him. It really sucks to be in this situation, but here you are, and your part sucks way less than his.
35
That would be precisely Dan's advice.
Those who are whining about the wife not being obligated to do as her handicapped husbands requests, do you give the same advice to men who's wives have put on weight/let themselves go?
That would be precisely Dan's advice.
36
I don't know how to feel about this. It would certainly be the kind, merciful thing to do it, but I really couldn't blame her if she didn't.
37
@30: Your post made me cry thinking of her smelling his t-shirt and remembering what they once had together.
@ 34: Amen. Like I said this is what they're talking about when they say in sickness or in health.
@ 34: Amen. Like I said this is what they're talking about when they say in sickness or in health.
38
@34 I get your point, but she has really not got it her way, I assume her way would be for her husband to not have MS. She has been not having her way for years, doing essential things for him for years. If she just wants to move on I think she deserves it, where is your compassion for her?
Ultimately, as I said, I agree, she should do it, for herself and for him but I certainly wouldn't judge her if she couldn't bring herself too.
Ultimately, as I said, I agree, she should do it, for herself and for him but I certainly wouldn't judge her if she couldn't bring herself too.
40
seandr @29/33 Women expect to do a lot of ass-cleaning throughout life, whether for their children, their parents, or eventually their partners. Women no longer expect to have to put up with unpleasant sex... I don't see why her reaction is bewildering to you. Would you rather change an adult diaper or go down on someone who smelled disgusting?
Please, people, some compassion here. If you haven't been in her shoes, please don't tell her that she is required to do this. Literally, she is not required to do this. She can divorce him. So, ask her to be compassionate, but, you know, be compassionate towards her too. Otherwise you make it hard for us to believe that you (@34) would step up if you were in her shoes.
Please, people, some compassion here. If you haven't been in her shoes, please don't tell her that she is required to do this. Literally, she is not required to do this. She can divorce him. So, ask her to be compassionate, but, you know, be compassionate towards her too. Otherwise you make it hard for us to believe that you (@34) would step up if you were in her shoes.
42
A whole lot of respect and sympathy for you and your husband, letter writer. Two small things:
Perhaps read the book _Mambo Kings Sing Songs of Love_, which is, in the first place, a vastly sexy book, and also has some sympathetic detailing of how a very sick man still wants to be virile and sexual.
Second, ask for Makers 46 instead of Makers Mark, since it is way better.
Good luck. You were both dealt a terrible hand. I wish you weren't.
Perhaps read the book _Mambo Kings Sing Songs of Love_, which is, in the first place, a vastly sexy book, and also has some sympathetic detailing of how a very sick man still wants to be virile and sexual.
Second, ask for Makers 46 instead of Makers Mark, since it is way better.
Good luck. You were both dealt a terrible hand. I wish you weren't.
43
Love and honor, for better or for worse, in sickness and in health, until death do you part. I don't know what vows you made but wasn't that the gist of it?
You sound like you're back on your feet so I think you can handle receiving oral from your husband.
You sound like you're back on your feet so I think you can handle receiving oral from your husband.
44
I have to say that "not wanting to do this for your husband" sounds so very Randian that it makes me cry for humanity. The very definition of rational egoism. And rational egoism is very very bad.
45
@34,
He should thank his lucky stars that she didn't abandon him like many husbands do their sick wives.
He should thank his lucky stars that she didn't abandon him like many husbands do their sick wives.
46
@40: Would you rather change an adult diaper or go down on someone who smelled disgusting?
I'm not sure how this question is relevant. If you are wondering whether I'd rather sit on my disabled wife's face even though I'd lost all attraction to her, or clean shit out of her ass, I'll take choose the face sitting every time.
I mean, I just have to sit there and tolerate a little tongue on my balls, maybe moan a bit if I'm feeling charitable. And this is somehow worse than cleaning shit, waking up every 2 hours, washing up vomit, etc? Yes, that's really bewildering to me.
And to be clear, I'm not judging this woman at all. Given all she's done and gone through, she's a better person than I am regardless of whether she gives him a taste of pussy. I'm just trying to understand how a person could be willing to go through hell on behalf of her husband but would find it such a struggle to sit on his face.
I'm not sure how this question is relevant. If you are wondering whether I'd rather sit on my disabled wife's face even though I'd lost all attraction to her, or clean shit out of her ass, I'll take choose the face sitting every time.
I mean, I just have to sit there and tolerate a little tongue on my balls, maybe moan a bit if I'm feeling charitable. And this is somehow worse than cleaning shit, waking up every 2 hours, washing up vomit, etc? Yes, that's really bewildering to me.
And to be clear, I'm not judging this woman at all. Given all she's done and gone through, she's a better person than I am regardless of whether she gives him a taste of pussy. I'm just trying to understand how a person could be willing to go through hell on behalf of her husband but would find it such a struggle to sit on his face.
47
Ugh. What a horrible place to find yourself in.
99% of the time, I'd say you were not obligated to have sex if you don't feel like it. But Dan is right. Sitting on his face is the kindest, most merciful thing you can do right now. Take one for the team.
But I so, so hear you when you say you've been through so much already. If you can't bring yourself to do this, I wouldn't blame you at all.
I've worked in hospice before. I agree with @11. If you haven't already, it would probably help a lot if you joined a caregivers support group of some sort. This has been a huge, slow-moving trauma in your life. An understanding shoulder to cry on, besides your husband's, can help a lot.
99% of the time, I'd say you were not obligated to have sex if you don't feel like it. But Dan is right. Sitting on his face is the kindest, most merciful thing you can do right now. Take one for the team.
But I so, so hear you when you say you've been through so much already. If you can't bring yourself to do this, I wouldn't blame you at all.
I've worked in hospice before. I agree with @11. If you haven't already, it would probably help a lot if you joined a caregivers support group of some sort. This has been a huge, slow-moving trauma in your life. An understanding shoulder to cry on, besides your husband's, can help a lot.
48
Great advice.
As someone who took care of his dying-of-a-debilitating-disease-boyfriend, MSS, I can say with some authority that anything he desires but that you won't do is something you'll definitely regret not having done once he's gone, no matter how you feel about it right now.
Fifteen years later, I still find myself wondering about silly little details that I could have handled better... and this isn't a silly little detail, it's a big one - maybe only for him at the moment, but one day you too will realize how it important it is. (I'm happy to report that I did right on the big ones.)
If you can't do this for him, do it for yourself. You'll feel much better for the rest of your life. Trust me.
As someone who took care of his dying-of-a-debilitating-disease-boyfriend, MSS, I can say with some authority that anything he desires but that you won't do is something you'll definitely regret not having done once he's gone, no matter how you feel about it right now.
Fifteen years later, I still find myself wondering about silly little details that I could have handled better... and this isn't a silly little detail, it's a big one - maybe only for him at the moment, but one day you too will realize how it important it is. (I'm happy to report that I did right on the big ones.)
If you can't do this for him, do it for yourself. You'll feel much better for the rest of your life. Trust me.
49
Congratulations, Dan. You finally published one that made me cry.
And yeah, I couldn't agree more.
And yeah, I couldn't agree more.
50
Re: 45, since Newt Gingrich just threw his hat in the ring, let's take a moment to contemplate how he dealt with the illness of a spouse, not once but twice:
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010…
http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010…
51
seandr@46 – ah, but receiving oral is not a simple task to many women. It's not just sitting. A lot of women have issues around receiving oral. (Me, for instance, due to having been orally assaulted as a teen) Maybe she's overweight, and the process will involve asking the staff for help getting supporting furniture in place. Regardless, she says it makes her feel sick -- can't you use your imagination to consider an act that makes you feel sick (going down on someone who smells bad), and bring your compassion on that basis, rather than telling her that sitting is easy, anyone can sit, suck it up? If this were easy, she would just do it. It's not easy.
52
Jesus, Dan, when you're wrong, you're WACKO WRONG!
Absolutely hire someone. Work with him, you're going to have to be honest - gently, kindly, and not easily - and find him someone else. Dan: this is one where some thoughtful consideration would have been called for. Take a break/hire an assistant/use the time you save by reposting letters. Jezefuckinlouize!
Absolutely hire someone. Work with him, you're going to have to be honest - gently, kindly, and not easily - and find him someone else. Dan: this is one where some thoughtful consideration would have been called for. Take a break/hire an assistant/use the time you save by reposting letters. Jezefuckinlouize!
53
I can't stop thinking about this. I'm so uncomfortable telling her that she should do anything, but she did ask for advice. I think that she'd regret it if she looked back and hadn't done this. Telling anyone that they're required to do anything sexual just gets under my skin.
But I don't think that she's required to do anything--I just thinking that going through with it would be the best thing for both of them in the long run, I think.
Mostly, though? The whole situation is just awful. I don't know what I'd do. I don't mind giving a blow job or hand job when I'm not feeling turned on, and it can be a lot of fun. But I don't like being touched sexually at those times, except to the extent that turns on my partner and gets them off. Maybe you two could find some way to connect sexually that works for both of you?
But I don't think that she's required to do anything--I just thinking that going through with it would be the best thing for both of them in the long run, I think.
Mostly, though? The whole situation is just awful. I don't know what I'd do. I don't mind giving a blow job or hand job when I'm not feeling turned on, and it can be a lot of fun. But I don't like being touched sexually at those times, except to the extent that turns on my partner and gets them off. Maybe you two could find some way to connect sexually that works for both of you?
54
@51 EricaP
It's not easy for the reason she said it isn't: She no longer sees her husband as the sexual being he once was. That's because up until a year ago she was more of a mother to an infant than a wife to a husband.
But that was then. She doesn't do that now and she's had her own sexual and mental health reawakening. She's in a much better place now. Shouldn't she try to get back to that view of him that she had when they married?
It's not easy for the reason she said it isn't: She no longer sees her husband as the sexual being he once was. That's because up until a year ago she was more of a mother to an infant than a wife to a husband.
But that was then. She doesn't do that now and she's had her own sexual and mental health reawakening. She's in a much better place now. Shouldn't she try to get back to that view of him that she had when they married?
55
MSS,
My heart goes out to you and to your husband. I think you are wonderful. I don't feel like I can add anything to Dan's advice or even suggest that you must do this.
If I was wearing your shoes I would do it with enthusiasm. I'd notify the staff that we needed privacy. I'd spend a lot of time fantasizing about all the wonderful sex that we had before, look through albums, etc. Put on simething that framed my assets. I'd bring some kind of romantic lighting and music. I would give my life partner this gift. I would do it for all the reasons you listed, sex is very life affirming. His life is worth affirming, as is your's, and so is the life you made together. It would also allow him to give back, which I think is so important for his spirit.
I wish you all the best. I'm so sorry for the cards that life as handed you. Be good to yourself, please.
If it was possible I would do it for you, take your place, but it isn't, he wants his life partner and he wants to liove you.
Now, I'm going to have a good cry!
My heart goes out to you and to your husband. I think you are wonderful. I don't feel like I can add anything to Dan's advice or even suggest that you must do this.
If I was wearing your shoes I would do it with enthusiasm. I'd notify the staff that we needed privacy. I'd spend a lot of time fantasizing about all the wonderful sex that we had before, look through albums, etc. Put on simething that framed my assets. I'd bring some kind of romantic lighting and music. I would give my life partner this gift. I would do it for all the reasons you listed, sex is very life affirming. His life is worth affirming, as is your's, and so is the life you made together. It would also allow him to give back, which I think is so important for his spirit.
I wish you all the best. I'm so sorry for the cards that life as handed you. Be good to yourself, please.
If it was possible I would do it for you, take your place, but it isn't, he wants his life partner and he wants to liove you.
Now, I'm going to have a good cry!
56
I think it's pretty clear that it would be great if she did this - and she's fully aware of this.
But the idea that she's somehow a bad person if can't get herself to is just mind boggling. People can only take so much and do have the right to say "I can't do it". If whatever coping mechanisms she used in the time she was a full time caretaker for her husband have made it impossible for her to be with him in a sexual intimate way, at some point one has to accept that's how it is.
That some people would actually see her as a selfish person and judge her is, no matter what she ends up doing, what makes me cry about humanity. I really hope she finds it in her, but the sniping of the anonymous back-bench Pharisees here is really hard to take.
But the idea that she's somehow a bad person if can't get herself to is just mind boggling. People can only take so much and do have the right to say "I can't do it". If whatever coping mechanisms she used in the time she was a full time caretaker for her husband have made it impossible for her to be with him in a sexual intimate way, at some point one has to accept that's how it is.
That some people would actually see her as a selfish person and judge her is, no matter what she ends up doing, what makes me cry about humanity. I really hope she finds it in her, but the sniping of the anonymous back-bench Pharisees here is really hard to take.
57
One of the reasons why we're averse to having sex with our siblings is that we've seen them vulnerable as children. That is relevant here. Would you want to fuck your sister or brother?
58
EricaP I totally get that you have issues but seriously? Sometimes a situation isn't about you (the general 'you). Sometimes the kind, merciful thing to do is be a little uncomfortable on behalf of the person you claim to love. LW says she's not doing without. Speaking as a disabled person I cannot tell you how comforting it is to have someone who puts aside the ick factor to be kind to me. I'm sure it's not that thrilling for them but they don't complain. I'm sure there's a lot of pretending on their part and I truly appreciate that they don't have to do anything to make me happy. I can only hope you never end up in the the situation LW's husband is in.
59
Never have I so profoundly disagreed with Dan.
Disgust is the most primative and powerful emotion. The writer feels disgust at the thought of sex with her husband. Deep disgust, disgust worse than that she felt at having to be his nurse and literally extract his shit. Telling her she should relieve her sick husband is pretty much the same as telling her she should relieve her sick dad. Biologically it may be no big deal but psychologically it could be devastating. Again she's not just 'not into' the husband anymore, she's completely skeeved out by the thought of it.
So pay a sex worker, maybe give him some pictures of herself or recordings of herself talking dirty, or sit by his bed and talk while the sex worker goes to work, whatever she can do without disgusting herself.
Yes his life sucks, maybe he has no quality of life at all, maybe he'll die soon or seek to end his life, maybe this would give him a few last moments of joy. None of that matters. She has a right to keep sex as a special thing, a thing which she does out of joy, a healing thing. She shouldn't be pressured into polluting that.
Disgust is the most primative and powerful emotion. The writer feels disgust at the thought of sex with her husband. Deep disgust, disgust worse than that she felt at having to be his nurse and literally extract his shit. Telling her she should relieve her sick husband is pretty much the same as telling her she should relieve her sick dad. Biologically it may be no big deal but psychologically it could be devastating. Again she's not just 'not into' the husband anymore, she's completely skeeved out by the thought of it.
So pay a sex worker, maybe give him some pictures of herself or recordings of herself talking dirty, or sit by his bed and talk while the sex worker goes to work, whatever she can do without disgusting herself.
Yes his life sucks, maybe he has no quality of life at all, maybe he'll die soon or seek to end his life, maybe this would give him a few last moments of joy. None of that matters. She has a right to keep sex as a special thing, a thing which she does out of joy, a healing thing. She shouldn't be pressured into polluting that.
60
How about a compromise? She offers to bring in a vibrator, or other toy of her choice, and masturbate for him, up close where he can see/smell it. That way, she avoids the actual sexual encounter with someone she can't see as a sexual being any longer, and he doesn't need to know that she's squicked by the very idea of doing the nasty with him. Everybody wins.
61
To those, like #22 and #24 above, who think Dan is either too stringent ("do it!") or who are "distrubed" by him advising someone to do something sexual they're discomfortable with...
You really have no sense of proportion.
You really consider sex to be the one defining thing in life? The one thing that never, ever has to be subordinated to something else? The one thing that never, ever, ever could be done for reasons other than self satisfaction?
Is sex then necessarily selfish? Does it always have to be self-centered: sex for sex's sake?
Can you really not imagine anything, anything at all, that you would sacrifice sex at least once? Can you really not imagine anything, anything at all, that might make it OK to tell someone like this one to accept the discomfort or disgust of this act? Not the love and concern that led to her clearning his excrements; not the belief that giving a terminally ill person -- one whom we at least at some point were in love with! -- something is in itself a good action and can be enjoyed as such (besides being morally good)?
Is sex really the summit of everything? Is there really no circumstance, absolutely no circumstance, in which it would be OK for someone to put up with something sexually disturbing? No purpose higher than sex itself, that would allow a person to make this sacrifice? Is it necessarily the case, under any circumstances, that someone like Dan, who is advising her to do that, has to be a douchebag?
I am really sorry for those so infatuated with sex as a self-centered thing ('sex for sex's sake, sex for the satisfiaction of the self') that they really can't see any purpose higher than justifying every orgasm, every masturbation, every sexual behavior as being oriented towards the sexual satisfaction of the person performing it. They are people who probably would accept all kinds of other sacrifices -- sacrifice your time, your money, your career, whatever; but don't sacrifice your sex, or your sexual feelings. No -- sexual disgust is so horrible (a fate worse than death, they'd probably say); and anything else is so much easier in comparison; that this should never, never, never be suggested, let alone strenuously advised as Dan did.
I am really sorry for people who think like that. You're missing something really fundamental about what it means to be a human being.
More...
You really have no sense of proportion.
You really consider sex to be the one defining thing in life? The one thing that never, ever has to be subordinated to something else? The one thing that never, ever, ever could be done for reasons other than self satisfaction?
Is sex then necessarily selfish? Does it always have to be self-centered: sex for sex's sake?
Can you really not imagine anything, anything at all, that you would sacrifice sex at least once? Can you really not imagine anything, anything at all, that might make it OK to tell someone like this one to accept the discomfort or disgust of this act? Not the love and concern that led to her clearning his excrements; not the belief that giving a terminally ill person -- one whom we at least at some point were in love with! -- something is in itself a good action and can be enjoyed as such (besides being morally good)?
Is sex really the summit of everything? Is there really no circumstance, absolutely no circumstance, in which it would be OK for someone to put up with something sexually disturbing? No purpose higher than sex itself, that would allow a person to make this sacrifice? Is it necessarily the case, under any circumstances, that someone like Dan, who is advising her to do that, has to be a douchebag?
I am really sorry for those so infatuated with sex as a self-centered thing ('sex for sex's sake, sex for the satisfiaction of the self') that they really can't see any purpose higher than justifying every orgasm, every masturbation, every sexual behavior as being oriented towards the sexual satisfaction of the person performing it. They are people who probably would accept all kinds of other sacrifices -- sacrifice your time, your money, your career, whatever; but don't sacrifice your sex, or your sexual feelings. No -- sexual disgust is so horrible (a fate worse than death, they'd probably say); and anything else is so much easier in comparison; that this should never, never, never be suggested, let alone strenuously advised as Dan did.
I am really sorry for people who think like that. You're missing something really fundamental about what it means to be a human being.
62
I don't see too many people saying she HAS to. A lot of people are pointing out that she'll probably regret not having done this for him later on and I do agree with that. But she is not under an obligation to do this -- any more than she was under the obligation to care for him earlier. Both of these are/were her choices.
I'm just hoping somewhere in Dan's reply and all these comments there's something helpful for her.
I'm just hoping somewhere in Dan's reply and all these comments there's something helpful for her.
63
For the "hire a sex worker" crowd: Her husband doesn't want a sex worker. He isn't looking for someone to get him off. What he is looking for is intimacy with his wife, in the only way he sees that he can have it now.
There are few times that I think it is appropriate to bust out the "you don't know what it's like until you've been there," but this is one of them. Watching the person you love sicken and die is unimaginable until it happens. And being the one who is getting sick, knowing you are going to die... is just plain unimaginable.
He needs to feel close to his wife. If she can, if she can do anything to bear it, she should grant his request. I agree with all those who say she will regret it later if she does not.
There are few times that I think it is appropriate to bust out the "you don't know what it's like until you've been there," but this is one of them. Watching the person you love sicken and die is unimaginable until it happens. And being the one who is getting sick, knowing you are going to die... is just plain unimaginable.
He needs to feel close to his wife. If she can, if she can do anything to bear it, she should grant his request. I agree with all those who say she will regret it later if she does not.
64
Cloudgazer, you're a good example of what I mention. Really, this disgust is the worst thing you can think of, ever? Nothing ever could justify putting up with it, for no reason, no purpose? No cause so holy to deserve this sacrifice? Let humanity die in a nuclear holocaust, but do not face sexual disgust?
I am really sorry you feel like this. Maybe you were harmed, or know someone who were harmed, and for whom sex became a difficult enterprise, laden with all kinds of fears and flash-backs and PSTDs. I can understand that a harmed person could not do that.
But a normal, healthy, sexually active and sexually unharmed person? Do you really think such a person could never, ever see a worthy reason to put up with something 'sexually disgusting'? Not love, not one's ideals, not one's soul, not a loved one's live or happiness, nothing ever?
The whole 'express your sexuality' movement started out fighting against repression: against people who were afraid, or disgusted (ah! disgust again..) by their own sexual impulses actually accepting them and learning to take joy in them and their expression. But this repression (as a form of harm) still remains in the background: it probably is the source of the impression that sexual disgust is the worst possible thing, a fate worse than death itself.
But it is a misperception, based on a misunderstanding of what human beings are and what sex is for them.
I can only hope that, as people heal from their old socially-based repressions and grow to see sex as something really natural, such ideas will slowly disappear from our minds, together with the boogeymen and the monsters under our beds.
I am really sorry you feel like this. Maybe you were harmed, or know someone who were harmed, and for whom sex became a difficult enterprise, laden with all kinds of fears and flash-backs and PSTDs. I can understand that a harmed person could not do that.
But a normal, healthy, sexually active and sexually unharmed person? Do you really think such a person could never, ever see a worthy reason to put up with something 'sexually disgusting'? Not love, not one's ideals, not one's soul, not a loved one's live or happiness, nothing ever?
The whole 'express your sexuality' movement started out fighting against repression: against people who were afraid, or disgusted (ah! disgust again..) by their own sexual impulses actually accepting them and learning to take joy in them and their expression. But this repression (as a form of harm) still remains in the background: it probably is the source of the impression that sexual disgust is the worst possible thing, a fate worse than death itself.
But it is a misperception, based on a misunderstanding of what human beings are and what sex is for them.
I can only hope that, as people heal from their old socially-based repressions and grow to see sex as something really natural, such ideas will slowly disappear from our minds, together with the boogeymen and the monsters under our beds.
65
Backyard Bombardier, in principle I agree with you, with one caveat: we don't know for a fact that he wouldn't accept, or want, a sex worker instead of his wife. I would find it in general valid to ask the question (though in these circumstances one might imagine the husband quickly coming to the conclusion that the wife was 'too disgusted' by it and couldn't bring herself to do it -- with all the depressing consequences thereof).
Maybe the husband would like a sex worker. But indeed what he asked for was his wife. Communicating about this must be terribly difficult for them; it's difficult for her to express any displeasure with it without depressing him and making him suffer further, but if she can't talk about such things then the situation isn't fair for her either.
Is this really a situation in which a sincere discussion of the options would be so depressing and sad that it is better avoided? Do you think so?
If so, I suppose there's no way of asking about the sex worker. And this is yet another aspect of this situation that is terribly sad -- for him, and for her, too. Both people who suffer terribly without having done anything to deserve it.
Maybe the husband would like a sex worker. But indeed what he asked for was his wife. Communicating about this must be terribly difficult for them; it's difficult for her to express any displeasure with it without depressing him and making him suffer further, but if she can't talk about such things then the situation isn't fair for her either.
Is this really a situation in which a sincere discussion of the options would be so depressing and sad that it is better avoided? Do you think so?
If so, I suppose there's no way of asking about the sex worker. And this is yet another aspect of this situation that is terribly sad -- for him, and for her, too. Both people who suffer terribly without having done anything to deserve it.
66
BB is a sensitive feminist "male". Anyone who rests an argument on, "you need to feel it to understand," has lost. Disregard the no substitute will do crowd and hire a whore. Stimulate the, er--economy. Turn the lights out and be in the room talking. There are many ways to trick this gimp into a qualitatively identical experience without doing the disgusting...and it truly would be like fucking an immediate relative at this point. You don't want that, do ya? You won't forget it, and not in a good way.
67
Hopefully she'll act like a human being and do this for her husband. If you don't feel obligated to fulfill your partner's sexual needs you have no business being in an adult relationship.
68
@46: You don't have to understand it. Getting oral is a very different experience for women than it is from men. This might just be one of those things you have to accept at face value.
Also, won't he know she's faking it? These are people who've had a lot of sex together for a lot of years. He's gonna know she's not enjoying it. Maybe a gentle conversation along the lines of, "Honey, I'll do it, but I may not respond the way I used to..." is in order. I mean, wouldn't it be worse if he realized mid-act that she was trying not to gag?
And what if he wants to do this weekly from now on? He sounds like he's in a terrible way, but people with MS can stabilize at certain stages and remain there for a long time.
Also, won't he know she's faking it? These are people who've had a lot of sex together for a lot of years. He's gonna know she's not enjoying it. Maybe a gentle conversation along the lines of, "Honey, I'll do it, but I may not respond the way I used to..." is in order. I mean, wouldn't it be worse if he realized mid-act that she was trying not to gag?
And what if he wants to do this weekly from now on? He sounds like he's in a terrible way, but people with MS can stabilize at certain stages and remain there for a long time.
69
PugilistPuck, you're talking about deceiving her husband. I don't know -- maybe she'll be OK with that. But there's at least some chance that her love for him will make it so that she won't forget having lied to him about his last sexual desire. And not in a good way either.
It all depends on the kind of relationship and love these two people had.
It all depends on the kind of relationship and love these two people had.
70
And what if he wants to do this weekly from now on? He sounds like he's in a terrible way, but people with MS can stabilize at certain stages and remain there for a long time.
That is for them to work out between themselves. Personally, I'd continue to do it for as long as he could take it, as a sign of respect for the love we shared, just as I took care of him all this time. But I can understand her wanting to move away from this, and I think, if I were in his position, I could also understand that and actually let her go.
That is for them to work out between themselves. Personally, I'd continue to do it for as long as he could take it, as a sign of respect for the love we shared, just as I took care of him all this time. But I can understand her wanting to move away from this, and I think, if I were in his position, I could also understand that and actually let her go.
71
The nursing-home aspect of this for someone so young also made me think of former Slog commenter "elswinger" (Larry Davenport). Just wanted to mention him as it's a little over two years since he died.
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
http://elswingers-world.blogspot.com/200…
http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archive…
http://elswingers-world.blogspot.com/200…
72
Wowowow.
If ever I am in this situation, I will sit on my husband's face so fast he'd be mumbling into my muff mid request. For him, for the love I have for him, and probably, selfishly, for a flashback of what we once had. And here's the deal: my heart would fucking BREAK if I was the one in the hospital bed and I found out that my spouse would change my diaper but wouldn't let me lick his dick because he didn't "see me that way anymore." Then why the fuck are you still married to me? Jesus, you could have divorced me and cared for me as a good fucking friend, then. Just another blow of how a disease took away part of me.
Damn, we put a giant box around sex and make it into this hugely personal, private thing that we aren't allowed to give away (for free, anyway) except in the strictest circumstances. What's so bad about having a quickie to help a partner out when he or she is super horny and you are notnotnot in the mood? And how is MSS's situation different than that example? Because someday you WILL be in the mood in the quickie example? But MSS is already getting good sex! Can't she facilitate good sex for the man she still loves?
Gah.
If ever I am in this situation, I will sit on my husband's face so fast he'd be mumbling into my muff mid request. For him, for the love I have for him, and probably, selfishly, for a flashback of what we once had. And here's the deal: my heart would fucking BREAK if I was the one in the hospital bed and I found out that my spouse would change my diaper but wouldn't let me lick his dick because he didn't "see me that way anymore." Then why the fuck are you still married to me? Jesus, you could have divorced me and cared for me as a good fucking friend, then. Just another blow of how a disease took away part of me.
Damn, we put a giant box around sex and make it into this hugely personal, private thing that we aren't allowed to give away (for free, anyway) except in the strictest circumstances. What's so bad about having a quickie to help a partner out when he or she is super horny and you are notnotnot in the mood? And how is MSS's situation different than that example? Because someday you WILL be in the mood in the quickie example? But MSS is already getting good sex! Can't she facilitate good sex for the man she still loves?
Gah.
74
@54, @58 I have encouraged her to do it, I just think we should have compassion for her, as well as him. I really appreciate advice from people who have been there, like Ricardo @48, saying that she should do it so that she can live with herself later. I like the other suggestions we've seen as far as getting privacy, talking dirty, masturbating for him, getting in the mood, even raising the idea of hiring a sex worker (11, 27, 30, 42, 60).
Contra 67, humans fall short all the time – anyone else ever put off a condolence note, or a visit to a sick friend or new mom? Just because we haven't been in her particular situation, doesn't mean that we all haven't let people down, one time or another. Be constructive; acknowledge the amazing work she has done for him; don't just tell her to suck it up.
MS sufferer by proxy@15 -- any ideas for other acts she could do with/for him?
Contra 67, humans fall short all the time – anyone else ever put off a condolence note, or a visit to a sick friend or new mom? Just because we haven't been in her particular situation, doesn't mean that we all haven't let people down, one time or another. Be constructive; acknowledge the amazing work she has done for him; don't just tell her to suck it up.
MS sufferer by proxy@15 -- any ideas for other acts she could do with/for him?
75
@ 74, since she said that she regards him more like a child than a sexual adult, I'm not sure why any of the other suggestions you list, save for hiring a sex worker, would be any more appealing to her.
76
Someone made a good point (can't re-find it in this sea of comments) That her husband could still stabilise in this condition for a long time. That really makes a difference, I guess I was kind of thinking of it as a one off. In that case maybe it is worth going through the pain of talking about the issue with the husband (maybe with a therapist) in order to find a solution that gives him satisfaction. Sucking it up and just doing it may work a couple of times, but for months or years? That will just end up making her resentful and miserable, which i am sure the husband doesn't want.
@72 read 63
@72 read 63
78
The "hire a sex worker" idea is fairly revolting. Sorry honey, I can't bear to have your tongue touch me during your last painful days but I'll bring you a hooker. The folks above who thought that this might be acceptable are classless, selfish, frigid shells of a human beings.
79
Very upsetting that she wouldn't do it. Looks like almost everyone here agrees that she'll regret it. She asked for advice and yeah, she should do it. What a decent thing to do, and so much more important than handling shit.
80
@68: You don't have to understand it.
Umm, no, but I'd sure like to! And I'll bet it would help LW if she better understood what's beneath her reaction to her husband's request. Perhaps it's possible for her to mentally reframe the situation so that she feels less conflicted about obliging him.
Umm, no, but I'd sure like to! And I'll bet it would help LW if she better understood what's beneath her reaction to her husband's request. Perhaps it's possible for her to mentally reframe the situation so that she feels less conflicted about obliging him.
81
I disagree about hiring a prostitute. It isn't only about sex for this man. His wife has been taking care of him for years, and she's probably not the only one who feels guilty. He wants to do something ADULT for her. He is trying to give back.
It won't work, but she should let him try.
Have a few drinks first, MSS. You'll be fine.
It won't work, but she should let him try.
Have a few drinks first, MSS. You'll be fine.
82
@32 I wasn't comparing a horrible disease to a wife letting herself go, you freaking mongoloid. Dan has posted some letters from husbands saying they no longer found their wives sexually attractive after putting on weight or not just looking desirable. Almost everyone calls the husband an asshole for not wanting to have sex with his wife anymore. While the wife , in this situation, is in a really horrible position, it's not like she has to conjure up an erection to help her poor husband out.
83
Give him something besides pudding to look forward to
This. So funny and sad and right on the nose all at the same time.
I've never confessed it before, but I always find that scene in Fight Club where the dying woman in the cancer support group asks if anyone in the group will have sex with her before she dies ("I've got weed!") to be seriously moving.
It's so easy for me to imagine why, nearing the oncoming descent into helplessness and death that leaves us alone even when the hospital bed is surrounded by family, the desire for sex, the life-creating act driven by a hunger that's strongest in our youth when death is so distant, would be so strong and made all the more painful by its unliklihood. If this woman can bring herself to do it, it'd be one hell of a gift.
This. So funny and sad and right on the nose all at the same time.
I've never confessed it before, but I always find that scene in Fight Club where the dying woman in the cancer support group asks if anyone in the group will have sex with her before she dies ("I've got weed!") to be seriously moving.
It's so easy for me to imagine why, nearing the oncoming descent into helplessness and death that leaves us alone even when the hospital bed is surrounded by family, the desire for sex, the life-creating act driven by a hunger that's strongest in our youth when death is so distant, would be so strong and made all the more painful by its unliklihood. If this woman can bring herself to do it, it'd be one hell of a gift.
84
Thank you, Kim @55 and weatherwax @72, for putting it so eloquently. As a female married for 21 years, I would respond as you have said. I don't really understand any other response for someone still in a marriage. Just my limited imagination, I guess.
85
Many of us end up doing these we really did not want to do for the sake of loved ones.
I am reminded of the sometimes immense profoundness of life in matters as this. So I am happy to be alive. And so I disdain self-loathing. I cannot help thinking that love of life would be meaningless without misery.
I am reminded of the sometimes immense profoundness of life in matters as this. So I am happy to be alive. And so I disdain self-loathing. I cannot help thinking that love of life would be meaningless without misery.
86
If the tables are turned I hope every man offers to do this for a dying woman without being asked. For as long as she likes.
87
Absolutely not. No way is she obligated to do this. No one should ever do things sexually that they don't want to. Terrible advice.
88
@75 Other acts might appeal more, or they might not. I like seandr's suggestion @80 that she really think about what aspect of this is disturbing to her (the mechanics, the sexuality with someone who feels like her brother, the longing for who he used to be, his approaching mortality, the oral sex itself...) Maybe talking to other people who have watched loved ones endure this terrible disease could help her figure out what part is making her feel sick.
@82 Dan tells people they need to take off the weight they put on since marriage. He says we have an obligation to do our best to remain attractive to our spouses.
@82 Dan tells people they need to take off the weight they put on since marriage. He says we have an obligation to do our best to remain attractive to our spouses.
89
@87
Don't ever get married.
Buy yourself a T-shirt that says "I am not now and never will be GGG". Wear it on every first date as fair warning. Unless you're dating Newt Gingrich, then it's okay.
Find another column to comment on. I don't think you get this one.
Don't ever get married.
Buy yourself a T-shirt that says "I am not now and never will be GGG". Wear it on every first date as fair warning. Unless you're dating Newt Gingrich, then it's okay.
Find another column to comment on. I don't think you get this one.
90
Sometimes, something in you changes when you are faced with a situation like this. In order to deal with it, or because of dealing with it, a little bit of your heart hardens in a way you can't quite get back. If responders can't imagine it, I'm glad you'll never have the experience.
LW: Maybe it's as easy as reframing the request in your mind- he wants to be close to you, and you may not be ready to do it the way he wants. As suggested above, maybe take baby steps to remember the man you married and not just the person you helped stay alive will make it possible for you to get to where you can consider his request and meet it joyfully. But if it is a true disgust reaction, going on and doing it anyway will not be good for either one of you. Surely your husband will know and care that you are not coming willingly to it, and that probably isn't what he wants at the end of the day, either.
Be gentle, and kind, to yourself, and to him. Shut out things that hinder you from that. Try to find more compassion in yourself, and use it for both of you.
LW: Maybe it's as easy as reframing the request in your mind- he wants to be close to you, and you may not be ready to do it the way he wants. As suggested above, maybe take baby steps to remember the man you married and not just the person you helped stay alive will make it possible for you to get to where you can consider his request and meet it joyfully. But if it is a true disgust reaction, going on and doing it anyway will not be good for either one of you. Surely your husband will know and care that you are not coming willingly to it, and that probably isn't what he wants at the end of the day, either.
Be gentle, and kind, to yourself, and to him. Shut out things that hinder you from that. Try to find more compassion in yourself, and use it for both of you.
91
@81 He wants to do something ADULT for her. He is trying to give back.
Yes, though I disagree that it necessarily won't work. I'm not saying oral sex is going to magic away the horrible ravages of disease, but he's asking her - now that the pressures of full-time care are alleviated - to be intimate with him, and to revive something of the mutuality and sharing of their emotional and mental relationship. He's asking her to look beyond his body and see that he is still in there - the adult, giving, loving, attracted man (not the child or cripple) - and he wants to connect with her, take care of her, receive her.
Of course it would be easier for her to keep that part of herself - her intimacy, vulnerability, sexuality - away from him, given the pain of what they are going through. But if she can get herself to the place where she can *willingly* do this it could be the most extraordinary development possible in their emotional relationship, and a great gift for both of them. Letting go of the guilt about his being in care is an important part of this - he's in care because she is NOT his parent, but his wife, and although it's painful it could also be deeply healing for both of them if she can return to this role in some part.
Yes, though I disagree that it necessarily won't work. I'm not saying oral sex is going to magic away the horrible ravages of disease, but he's asking her - now that the pressures of full-time care are alleviated - to be intimate with him, and to revive something of the mutuality and sharing of their emotional and mental relationship. He's asking her to look beyond his body and see that he is still in there - the adult, giving, loving, attracted man (not the child or cripple) - and he wants to connect with her, take care of her, receive her.
Of course it would be easier for her to keep that part of herself - her intimacy, vulnerability, sexuality - away from him, given the pain of what they are going through. But if she can get herself to the place where she can *willingly* do this it could be the most extraordinary development possible in their emotional relationship, and a great gift for both of them. Letting go of the guilt about his being in care is an important part of this - he's in care because she is NOT his parent, but his wife, and although it's painful it could also be deeply healing for both of them if she can return to this role in some part.
92
@ 86. "If the tables are turned I hope every man offers to do this for a dying woman without being asked. For as long as she likes."
Yes, abso-fucking-lutely. If my wife was virtually paralyzed and on the verge of death and I knew that letting her roll my penis around in her mouth would make her feel loved and accepted then there's no fucking question that I'd do it and I wouldn't have to ask anyone for their advice about it. This is would be the woman that I stood across from and held her hand and promised that I'd be with her in sickness and health till death do us part. I can't even fathom letting her die not only frightened but rejected by her husband just to save myself 10 minutes a day of feeling "icky." Especially when you consider that I'd be out with my friends, having sex with whoever I want, virtually any time I want (as the LW is.)
Yes, abso-fucking-lutely. If my wife was virtually paralyzed and on the verge of death and I knew that letting her roll my penis around in her mouth would make her feel loved and accepted then there's no fucking question that I'd do it and I wouldn't have to ask anyone for their advice about it. This is would be the woman that I stood across from and held her hand and promised that I'd be with her in sickness and health till death do us part. I can't even fathom letting her die not only frightened but rejected by her husband just to save myself 10 minutes a day of feeling "icky." Especially when you consider that I'd be out with my friends, having sex with whoever I want, virtually any time I want (as the LW is.)
93
The LW has moved on.
Her husband doesn't know about the great sex she is scoring.
She no longer thinks of her husband as a husband or even a man.
Her husband doesn't know about the great sex she is scoring.
She no longer thinks of her husband as a husband or even a man.
94
Wow, I'm fairly ashamed of all of the selfish people who are offended by Dan's advice. That is pretty much the whole point of marriage, and I realize that, no, it's not sexy...but she's getting her sexy-times elsewhere. Regardless of the care she has given him, as 91 pointed out, he isn't her child, but her partner. Get stoned and fake an orgasm...is it too much to ask to let yr. terminally ill partner not be humiliated for 15 minutes?
95
My thing is that I don't think this is really a "sexual" request. Yes, it's about sex, but I can 150% understand her feeling and believing like she is being asked to give up yet another thing to her husband. First she gives up her future dreams, then she gives up a big part of her life, then she "gives up" her husband to the care of the nursing home. Now she's being asked to literally "give up" herself, even though she doesn't want to. I think it's a fine request, and if she can come to peace with it then it would be a very generous gift. But I also think it's totally reasonable for one person to say that there are things that they just can't "give up" even to a spouse. It's not his fault, but that doesn't mean she doesn't have to live with the consequences.
By this account, this woman has been a wonderful wife and still is. But being a wonderful wife does not mean that she cannot be her own person with her own limitations. If she had written to Dan and said "I just can't change my husband's diapers," I very much doubt that everyone on this board would insist that she had to do it. We can see how that would be beyond the pale for many people. But that isn't where MSS drew the line; her line is at sex. Again, if she wants to redraw the line to include sex, that's fine. But I totally support her decision to say that she is just a valid person in that marriage as her husband, even though her husband's life sucks so so much.
I wish they both weren't in such an awful situation.
By this account, this woman has been a wonderful wife and still is. But being a wonderful wife does not mean that she cannot be her own person with her own limitations. If she had written to Dan and said "I just can't change my husband's diapers," I very much doubt that everyone on this board would insist that she had to do it. We can see how that would be beyond the pale for many people. But that isn't where MSS drew the line; her line is at sex. Again, if she wants to redraw the line to include sex, that's fine. But I totally support her decision to say that she is just a valid person in that marriage as her husband, even though her husband's life sucks so so much.
I wish they both weren't in such an awful situation.
96
I hate to be a damper but, what happens when she doesn't get the least bit excited? What happens should he realize, either by look or reaction, that she finds the act disgusting? How will he handle that? Can she conceal it well enough that he won't find out? Because the only thing more devastating than your wife not wanting to have sex with you is finding out your wife secretly finds having sex with you disgusting mid-act. Especially if you've been fantasizing about it, fantasizing about the old days and the way it used to be. I can just imagine this going really, really wrong unless she is convincing, and im not sure that she can be.
97
This one crosses from "awesome advice" to "seriously skeevy advice" when it doesn't stop at, "It would be really great if you did, it's what I'd recommend, do your best to psych yourself up and see how it goes," etc. But when someone says that the idea of a sexual act disgusts them and they really don't want to do it, it's not okay to say that they "must" do it unless it's, like, to save the planet from nuclear annihilation or something.
Maybe she CAN psych herself up and it'll end up being a really positive thing. Maybe it will just be livable, which is fine. Maybe it will be an experience that makes her feel physically sick, violated, or traumatized. Maybe it will also damage what's left of her relationship with her husband and her future grieving process. I don't know. Maker's Mark or no Maker's Mark, it could go either way, which is why commanding her to do it and making it some imperative part of being a wife is not okay.
This woman has gone above and beyond for her husband already (because seriously, the point at which caring for me means my husband can't sleep for more than two hours at a stretch is the point at which I insist on getting help, not the beginning of YEARS of him doing just that). She's allowed to draw some boundaries.
Maybe she CAN psych herself up and it'll end up being a really positive thing. Maybe it will just be livable, which is fine. Maybe it will be an experience that makes her feel physically sick, violated, or traumatized. Maybe it will also damage what's left of her relationship with her husband and her future grieving process. I don't know. Maker's Mark or no Maker's Mark, it could go either way, which is why commanding her to do it and making it some imperative part of being a wife is not okay.
This woman has gone above and beyond for her husband already (because seriously, the point at which caring for me means my husband can't sleep for more than two hours at a stretch is the point at which I insist on getting help, not the beginning of YEARS of him doing just that). She's allowed to draw some boundaries.
98
I wish the folks who don't like Dan's advise would wear brightly colored armbands so prospective partners can avoid them like the frigid plague they are. Please do not get married. You don't deserve it.
101
@ 97 - Hey, it's just sex. With her husband. If it has the potential to make her "feel physically sick, violated, or traumatized", she definitely has some serious issues already.
And, I would dare to add, so do you if you really believe what you say.
And, I would dare to add, so do you if you really believe what you say.
102
Unfortunately, @98/99, no one can tell who will actually be able to make it through a few years of catheters, diapers, vomit, and lack of sleep with their GGG badge intact. Despite the confident claims of many on this thread.
103
@101 - do you think this woman, who has done so much for her husband, is holding back from doing something easy? Just on a whim? It's clearly not "just sex." For whatever reason, this act he wants is harder for her than years of manually extracting feces.
104
Way off the mark, Dan. She might regret not doing it, but telling her that is way different than suggesting that she HAS to do it because OMG! she's married! to him! She was and is with him in sickness and in health. That doesn't mean she has to fuck him (or let him tongue her) when she's clearly not GGG. If she can, yes, it would be an incredible gift to him. But she's already given him so much, and if this is more than she is able to give, she is still to be applauded.
#95, #96, #97 - right on. First of all, he will probably notice that she is not at all into it (even if she tries her best to contain her disgust) and that will make him feel worse than if she's upfront. Secondly, she deserves some damn dignity too! No one, including her husband, has rights to her body except for her. If it skeeves her out, too bad for him AND for her. She isn't winning some prize by being skeeved out. It makes her feel awful. But the disgust clearly outweighs that, from what she wrote. It's an awful situation for both of them and in the long run, it might help for her to be upfront with him. He doesn't have an expiration date stamped on his forehead - he could die tomorrow, or he could die 5-10 years from now. I think the real humanity would be for her to be truthful with him. She doesn't need to tell him that he "disgusts" her, but that doesn't mean she couldn't have a heart-to-heart with him about the reality of the consequences of her caretaking. But even before that, it really does seem that she would greatly benefit from being a part of a caretaker support group.
#95, #96, #97 - right on. First of all, he will probably notice that she is not at all into it (even if she tries her best to contain her disgust) and that will make him feel worse than if she's upfront. Secondly, she deserves some damn dignity too! No one, including her husband, has rights to her body except for her. If it skeeves her out, too bad for him AND for her. She isn't winning some prize by being skeeved out. It makes her feel awful. But the disgust clearly outweighs that, from what she wrote. It's an awful situation for both of them and in the long run, it might help for her to be upfront with him. He doesn't have an expiration date stamped on his forehead - he could die tomorrow, or he could die 5-10 years from now. I think the real humanity would be for her to be truthful with him. She doesn't need to tell him that he "disgusts" her, but that doesn't mean she couldn't have a heart-to-heart with him about the reality of the consequences of her caretaking. But even before that, it really does seem that she would greatly benefit from being a part of a caretaker support group.
106
@ 103 - No, that's not what I'm saying. My comment was actually directed at amazonvera, and I was basically saying that the words "physically sick, violated, or traumatized" are way over the top. Come on! "Violated?" Please!
I quite agree with what Ankylosaur said @ 61 and in a few other posts. Among other things, that sex doesn't always have to be about sex. Some women really need to learn that, as this thread will attest to.
For all the obvious reasons, that many have cited here and the she herself mentioned, the LW stopped seeing him as her husband, so it's clearly not that easy for her to indulge him. But it could be.
What I'm actually saying is that the thought of sex with her husband wouldn't be that shocking or repulsive to her if she gave it less importance. If she thought of it as just another thing she can do for him, like changing diapers, etc. Sex is obviously too emotionally charged for her. Please forgive the stereotyping, but she needs to think like a man right now: it's just sex, it's just a physical activity; it shouldn't involve her mind and all that baggage that she carries, albeit for obvious and understandable reasons.
I remember watching my boyfriend's body in the weeks before he died. We hadn't had sex for a year. I'd been changing diapers for six months. He had bedsores all over (turning him around in his bed every two hours wasn't enough by then), he was emaciated, and yet I could still see in my mind the body I had so desired, and he was still the man I loved.
And you know what? I would get an erection every time. And although he could no longer speak, I knew from his expression that he was glad I did. Because I still looked at him in the same way, and that's what he needed to feel.
More...
I quite agree with what Ankylosaur said @ 61 and in a few other posts. Among other things, that sex doesn't always have to be about sex. Some women really need to learn that, as this thread will attest to.
For all the obvious reasons, that many have cited here and the she herself mentioned, the LW stopped seeing him as her husband, so it's clearly not that easy for her to indulge him. But it could be.
What I'm actually saying is that the thought of sex with her husband wouldn't be that shocking or repulsive to her if she gave it less importance. If she thought of it as just another thing she can do for him, like changing diapers, etc. Sex is obviously too emotionally charged for her. Please forgive the stereotyping, but she needs to think like a man right now: it's just sex, it's just a physical activity; it shouldn't involve her mind and all that baggage that she carries, albeit for obvious and understandable reasons.
I remember watching my boyfriend's body in the weeks before he died. We hadn't had sex for a year. I'd been changing diapers for six months. He had bedsores all over (turning him around in his bed every two hours wasn't enough by then), he was emaciated, and yet I could still see in my mind the body I had so desired, and he was still the man I loved.
And you know what? I would get an erection every time. And although he could no longer speak, I knew from his expression that he was glad I did. Because I still looked at him in the same way, and that's what he needed to feel.
108
#91, diner mo, I totally agree! I don't think she should try to do this out of some sense of obligation or, worse yet, pity. Rather, the idea is to reconnect to her husband AS her husband, rather than as the person she had to care for in all these difficult ways. To prepare herself for this, she would have to re-think the experience of their relationship, going back to the connection they had together before the constant demands for physical care took a toll.
Mo is SO right that if she can find a way to do this--not as a chore, but because she decides she wants to--it could be incredibly emotionally healing for both of them. If they can find any way--this way or some other way--to reintroduce sexual connection or expression into their lives, then it's a symbol of the fact that they are and remain husband and wife, and not just caregiver and cared-for.
I can totally understand why she is disturbed by the idea. Sometimes to do one thing, like wiping up someone's vomit and poop, you have to flip some switch in your brain that otherwise allows you to feel sexual. I suspect a lot of new parents have a lesser version of this problem, when they have trouble flipping from "caring for helpless infant" mode to "wild and crazy sexual creature" mode! In this case, her switch was off for years, and so much pain was associated with that. It might take a long while to move back to an intimate relationship with her husband, but again, if she can find a way it could be so uplifting for both of them.
Mo is SO right that if she can find a way to do this--not as a chore, but because she decides she wants to--it could be incredibly emotionally healing for both of them. If they can find any way--this way or some other way--to reintroduce sexual connection or expression into their lives, then it's a symbol of the fact that they are and remain husband and wife, and not just caregiver and cared-for.
I can totally understand why she is disturbed by the idea. Sometimes to do one thing, like wiping up someone's vomit and poop, you have to flip some switch in your brain that otherwise allows you to feel sexual. I suspect a lot of new parents have a lesser version of this problem, when they have trouble flipping from "caring for helpless infant" mode to "wild and crazy sexual creature" mode! In this case, her switch was off for years, and so much pain was associated with that. It might take a long while to move back to an intimate relationship with her husband, but again, if she can find a way it could be so uplifting for both of them.
109
Retardo, that didn't sound like philadelphia to me. In which case, don't wanna read it. Don't care 'bout aids sob stories, and nobody is interested in you getting anything up, old n' gross. And nobody is giving out gold stars for sticking your post e vac boner into your aidsy boyfriend. You can't relate to this, so don't even try.
Hire a pro. She shouldn't hafta to do this, and she's not going to remember it fondly. The thrill is GONE, and tolerable situation of some affection is going to turn very sour if you follow dan's advice.
Hire a pro. She shouldn't hafta to do this, and she's not going to remember it fondly. The thrill is GONE, and tolerable situation of some affection is going to turn very sour if you follow dan's advice.
110
Okay, this totally made me cry. This is the most heartbreaking letter I can remember from the last decade of SL. I think Dan's advice is very wise, if not necessarily easy to take.
111
@87: You sound young, so take it from an older person - there's little chance your relationship will go the distance with that kind of simplistic, selfish, and strident attitude.
Relationships are an endless series of negotiation and compromises, particularly when it comes to sex. If you insist that your sex life is conducted strictly according to your terms, any man worth keeping will eventually walk.
Relationships are an endless series of negotiation and compromises, particularly when it comes to sex. If you insist that your sex life is conducted strictly according to your terms, any man worth keeping will eventually walk.
112
@89. This isn't about being GGG. The wife sounds like she's been through hell. She talks about being overwhelmed with grief and finally getting on with her life. It sounds like being sexual with her husband will add more truama on top of evyerthing else. She doesn't need it. She's been through enough. She doesn't have to do this and I don't think she should if it will add further injury to her.
113
@111 I'm in my early 40s and have expereince teaching people how to set healthy boundaries and how to verbalize what they want. I've done relationship coaching and sex education work as well. My comment was not an oversimplification. I don;t think pwoplw should willing engage in sexual behavior that they know they don't want, or suspect will result in psychological damamge. And it sounds like that's what's at stake for the wife.
114
I have been in this position, and it is horrific. Caring for someone you love 24/7 who needs everything done for them sucks the life out of you and I think damages you in many ways. It gets to the point that you do what you do because you love the person, but everything you have and are is squeezed out of you, your life becomes so overtaken with this person's needs that you begin to feel like you have nothing left to give. And of course, sexuality goes down the drain with every other normal aspect of the life you had. And when you are asked to be sexual, apart from the complete lack of sexual feeling and possible disgust, it begins to feel like you are being asked to surrender the last intimate part of yourself; you have given up your time, energy, sleep, interests and everything normal about you, and all you have left intact are your actual genitalia, and somehow they become the one last thing to be surrendered to the illness, and it becomes more than just disgust, it almost feels like all you have left of yourself and somehow the one thing you cannot have violated. It's nice for those who have never been through the horror of seeing a lover decline to the point of needing everything done for them and having to be the sole one doing this, to feel like this is a betrayal of the relationship and the love, but until you have you soul and heart shredded daily by this, I would advise you to refrain from judgement. As I said, I think this damages people, and when you are in this situation you are pushed to the very edge of your mental, emotional and physical limits, and it can feel like having one more thing taken from you, one more thing violated, will push you over the edge.
This woman had been and done things for another human being that fortunately, few have to. Making her feel obligated to do something that she feels she cannot should be respected. And I don't think she will feel guilty about refusing him, nor should she. I think she just needs to recognize that we all have limits and boundaries that need to be respected, and she had reached her limit.
While I feel sorry for her husband, he should be grateful for all she has done for him and give her the gift of respecting her limits.
More...
This woman had been and done things for another human being that fortunately, few have to. Making her feel obligated to do something that she feels she cannot should be respected. And I don't think she will feel guilty about refusing him, nor should she. I think she just needs to recognize that we all have limits and boundaries that need to be respected, and she had reached her limit.
While I feel sorry for her husband, he should be grateful for all she has done for him and give her the gift of respecting her limits.
115
@111...BTW, I agree with you when you say that relationships are in constant re-negotiation. In this case, the wife has re-negotiated her sexual relationship with her husband. She does not have an obligation to be sexual with him. If she did, marital rape would not be defined as a crime. And we all know what a long hard struggle that was, don't we?
116
@ Ricardo, unfortunately, people feeling sexually violated or traumatized by a spouse is not uncommon, even if the legal system didn't recognize that fact for centuries and many assholes the world over still don't. Marriage isn't a "get out of the need for freely given consent for any and every sex act free" card. That's where this advice crosses a line. Every spouse has the right not to take part in sexual acts that make them feel sick, even with their spouse and even when their spouse is dying.
She said she says that the idea of sex with him makes her feel depressed and sick. If you think, after everything this woman did for him, that that means she has "issues," then so be it. Frankly, consenting to have your spouse give up their entire life and the ability to sleep for more than two hours at a go is some seriously Jonestown-esque shit, and being surprised that they have "issues" about letting you lick their genitals after that is pretty rich.
She said she says that the idea of sex with him makes her feel depressed and sick. If you think, after everything this woman did for him, that that means she has "issues," then so be it. Frankly, consenting to have your spouse give up their entire life and the ability to sleep for more than two hours at a go is some seriously Jonestown-esque shit, and being surprised that they have "issues" about letting you lick their genitals after that is pretty rich.
117
There's a huge qualitative difference between "I believe that it is morally/ethically correct for you to do this unpleasant thing", and "if necessary someone should force you by threat of violence or other harm to do this unpleasant thing." If you are unclear on this difference, you are going to be confused or horrified by Dan's advice.
To MSS, nothing but my sympathies.
To MSS, nothing but my sympathies.
118
Ugh. No one should be pressured to perform a sex act that disgusts them and that makes them depressed and sick to think about. Even if it is for a 'noble cause'. Yeah, it would be nice, and giving, and ever so kind of her to do that for him, but this is obviously something that she can't bring herself to do. If she can't force herself to do it, it doesn't make her a bad person, or less of a wife. She took care of her husband for several years, around the clock, depriving herself of sleep all the time- I think that makes her a pretty fucking incredible partner.
The situation sucks all around, but just because her husband is dying an unpleasant death doesn't make her any less important. She's already sacrificed a great deal- at what point does is she 'allowed' to say that she can't do it, that for her own emotional and mental health she has to put herself first? Is she just supposed to keep slogging through, doing things that make her depressed and sick just in the name of being 'good and giving'?
The fact that she is his 'only sexual option he has between now and oblivion' doesn't obligate her to sexually service him. The fact that she married him doesn't mean she is obligated to sexually service him. Jesus fucking christ.
She does need to be more up front with him. Let him know that it's been exhausting for her emotionally and physically, and that she doesn't feel sexual at all (she doesn't need to tell him that it's him that disgusts her, or that she's been seeking sex elsewhere). At least get that out in the open. She should at least get a conversation going about the issue rather than just sucking it up and ignoring her feelings of depression and disgust.
The situation sucks all around, but just because her husband is dying an unpleasant death doesn't make her any less important. She's already sacrificed a great deal- at what point does is she 'allowed' to say that she can't do it, that for her own emotional and mental health she has to put herself first? Is she just supposed to keep slogging through, doing things that make her depressed and sick just in the name of being 'good and giving'?
The fact that she is his 'only sexual option he has between now and oblivion' doesn't obligate her to sexually service him. The fact that she married him doesn't mean she is obligated to sexually service him. Jesus fucking christ.
She does need to be more up front with him. Let him know that it's been exhausting for her emotionally and physically, and that she doesn't feel sexual at all (she doesn't need to tell him that it's him that disgusts her, or that she's been seeking sex elsewhere). At least get that out in the open. She should at least get a conversation going about the issue rather than just sucking it up and ignoring her feelings of depression and disgust.
119
@114: Your post drives something home for me - if I were in this guy's position, I would have ended my life once it was clear that was the only gift I had left to give her.
120
Well said, rebeccax and amazonvera. I'm wondering how much of Dan's attitude and the attitudes of everyone else agreeing with him here are at least partially due to that idea that women are ''supposed" to be the caretakers, they're "supposed" to be self-sacrificing.
Reading some of the comments here, I wonder if these people even partially comprehend what hellishness she's gone through for her husband, what an insane amount of sacrifice she's made already. To insist that she must do something that makes her depressed and sick to even contemplate is just vile.
It's just disgusting to tell her all she has to do is sit there, and put on an act for her husband's sake. Do these people get that she's a person with emotions and needs of her own? Forcing herself to perform a sex act that she dreads will only add to the emotional issues she's dealing with already.
Reading some of the comments here, I wonder if these people even partially comprehend what hellishness she's gone through for her husband, what an insane amount of sacrifice she's made already. To insist that she must do something that makes her depressed and sick to even contemplate is just vile.
It's just disgusting to tell her all she has to do is sit there, and put on an act for her husband's sake. Do these people get that she's a person with emotions and needs of her own? Forcing herself to perform a sex act that she dreads will only add to the emotional issues she's dealing with already.
121
@rebeccax: I think in most situations you would be right. This is an exception. I don't know much about MS, but I'm pretty sure the husband still has (most of) his marbles, even while his motor function is going to shit. Assuming he's not an idiot, he probably knows exactly what he's asking of her, and probably also has a pretty good idea of how she feels about it. Everyone needs to get laid, but this isn't just about him getting laid. He wants to be intimate with his wife one last time while he still can, and knows he doesn't have much time left to do it. Under those circumstances, I think his request trumps a lot of other things. And I somehow doubt she will end up psychologically traumatized by it, although I'm sure the idea of being sexual with him when she's not into it emotionally is probably weird and sad and scary for her. But a lot of things about the illness and death of a loved one are weird and sad and scary. Nothing else in life prepares us for it. I think Dan's right, and I think his advice is compassionate to both of them. She took care of him for as long as she could, because she loves him, because (presumably) she takes the "in sickness and in health" part of marriage seriously, and because she thought it was the right thing to do. I'm guessing that if she follows Dan's advice (although I emphasize that I don't think any jury in the land would convict her if she decided she just couldn't do it) she will probably feel, somewhere down the road, that sitting on his face was the right thing to do, too.
123
@114, that was very eloquently stated and should be pondered by everyone on this thread.
One quibble: you said, "This woman had been and done things for another human being that fortunately, few have to."
It's the great hidden agony.
-An estimated 120 million adult Americans (57 percent) are either providing unpaid care to an adult family member or friend or have provided this care in the past.
-Family caregivers provide about 80 percent of all long-term care services in the U.S.
-On average, caregivers spend 21 hours per week on caregiving, with almost one-fifth of caregivers (17 percent) providing constant care of 40 or more hours a week. Caregiving falls disproportionately on women.
-The value of caregiving services to the U.S. economy is estimated at $306 billion a year, more than twice what is spent nationwide on nursing homes and paid home care combined.
-Yet, over the course of a caregiving “career,” family caregivers who provide intense personal care can lose as much as $659,000 in wages, pensions, and Social Security.
The numbing statistics go on and on.
One quibble: you said, "This woman had been and done things for another human being that fortunately, few have to."
It's the great hidden agony.
-An estimated 120 million adult Americans (57 percent) are either providing unpaid care to an adult family member or friend or have provided this care in the past.
-Family caregivers provide about 80 percent of all long-term care services in the U.S.
-On average, caregivers spend 21 hours per week on caregiving, with almost one-fifth of caregivers (17 percent) providing constant care of 40 or more hours a week. Caregiving falls disproportionately on women.
-The value of caregiving services to the U.S. economy is estimated at $306 billion a year, more than twice what is spent nationwide on nursing homes and paid home care combined.
-Yet, over the course of a caregiving “career,” family caregivers who provide intense personal care can lose as much as $659,000 in wages, pensions, and Social Security.
The numbing statistics go on and on.
124
I agree with everyone who's saying she should try and work herself up to it by doing things like masturbating near/for him. Did he have a favorite cologne or aftershave when they started dating? Maybe that scent would help take her back. She could start by just holding him and being physically close to him.
This story is tragic, and I can vaguely imagine how difficult this is for her, though thank goodness I've never been in a position anything like hers. But we are talking about a dying man here. If she can, in any way, give him back a tiny bit of his sexual agency, it would be the kindest thing she's done for him yet.
This story is tragic, and I can vaguely imagine how difficult this is for her, though thank goodness I've never been in a position anything like hers. But we are talking about a dying man here. If she can, in any way, give him back a tiny bit of his sexual agency, it would be the kindest thing she's done for him yet.
125
@115: Regarding this specific letter, I agree it's totally cool if she can't/won't go through with it.
Regarding your sweeping statement -- "No one should ever do things sexually that they don't want to." I don't really disagree with this either. However, if your primary concern with respect to relationships is setting boundaries, holding your ground, and refusing to compromise, that's a pretty good sign you aren't relationship material. Happy relationships are composed of flexible people who make a priority of seeking connection and common ground with each other. That sometimes means being open to persuasion with respect to sexual activity that might not, at first blush, be your thing.
Regarding your sweeping statement -- "No one should ever do things sexually that they don't want to." I don't really disagree with this either. However, if your primary concern with respect to relationships is setting boundaries, holding your ground, and refusing to compromise, that's a pretty good sign you aren't relationship material. Happy relationships are composed of flexible people who make a priority of seeking connection and common ground with each other. That sometimes means being open to persuasion with respect to sexual activity that might not, at first blush, be your thing.
126
Ricardo @106, She says it makes her feel "kinda sick." You take her resistance as a simple preference. I take it to mean, yes, she does feel physically sick at the idea, but she doesn't want to sound "over the top" (in your words) so she toned it down one notch.
You say: "Sex is obviously too emotionally charged for her...she needs to think like a man right now: it's just sex, it's just a physical activity." Well, for better or worse that's not something that most women can turn off. Or they'd be men. I don't know why it sometimes feels so icky to have someone going down on me. You can't get inside her head and know what it's really like for her. You can't know. So give her your advice (Do whatever you can because after he's gone you'll wish you had done it all), and then let her make up her mind. She's human, and she has already done more for him than most of us will do for our spouses in a lifetime.
You say: "Sex is obviously too emotionally charged for her...she needs to think like a man right now: it's just sex, it's just a physical activity." Well, for better or worse that's not something that most women can turn off. Or they'd be men. I don't know why it sometimes feels so icky to have someone going down on me. You can't get inside her head and know what it's really like for her. You can't know. So give her your advice (Do whatever you can because after he's gone you'll wish you had done it all), and then let her make up her mind. She's human, and she has already done more for him than most of us will do for our spouses in a lifetime.
127
Also I love the guy @92 who says "if I knew that letting her roll my penis around in her mouth would make her feel loved and accepted then there's no fucking question that I'd do it."
Got it -- that one's not hard for you. Can you imagine being asked something that was important to her, but actually hard for you? Like - "Apologize to my brother for that meaningless thing you two have fought over all these years." Hey, an apology's not hard. Me, I could give apologies all day long. When my dying husband asks me to apologize to anyone in his family, for anything, I'll be all over that. But -- I bet some men would have a hard time apologizing for something they didn't do. Even though it's just one sentence. How hard can that be? Damn hard, for certain people.
Got it -- that one's not hard for you. Can you imagine being asked something that was important to her, but actually hard for you? Like - "Apologize to my brother for that meaningless thing you two have fought over all these years." Hey, an apology's not hard. Me, I could give apologies all day long. When my dying husband asks me to apologize to anyone in his family, for anything, I'll be all over that. But -- I bet some men would have a hard time apologizing for something they didn't do. Even though it's just one sentence. How hard can that be? Damn hard, for certain people.
128
@Pinky:
"To insist that she must do something that makes her depressed and sick to even contemplate is just vile."
That's true as far as it goes, but there is a very, very big difference between a person's immediate feelings about a situation and how they will eventually feel about it in retrospect. She's squicked out now, but I honestly can't imagine her looking back on a mercy face-sitting years down the road, after her husband is dead, and wishing she hadn't done it. Making sacrifices for someone you love is not the same as being exploited, even if the sacrifice (in the case of this woman, doing something that makes her really uncomfortable) is real. And I don't see this as a gender issue either. Personally, I would agree with Dan's advice equally if the genders were reversed.
BTW, I think the "must" here is to be taken with a grain of salt. I think everyone here including Dan agrees that forcing someone to have sex they don't want is wrong, wrong, wrong. But I don't read "I absolutely don't want to do this" in her letter, I read something more like "I can't bring myself to do it," which is not at all the same thing. I think Dan's basically just saying "bring yourself to do it anyway."
"To insist that she must do something that makes her depressed and sick to even contemplate is just vile."
That's true as far as it goes, but there is a very, very big difference between a person's immediate feelings about a situation and how they will eventually feel about it in retrospect. She's squicked out now, but I honestly can't imagine her looking back on a mercy face-sitting years down the road, after her husband is dead, and wishing she hadn't done it. Making sacrifices for someone you love is not the same as being exploited, even if the sacrifice (in the case of this woman, doing something that makes her really uncomfortable) is real. And I don't see this as a gender issue either. Personally, I would agree with Dan's advice equally if the genders were reversed.
BTW, I think the "must" here is to be taken with a grain of salt. I think everyone here including Dan agrees that forcing someone to have sex they don't want is wrong, wrong, wrong. But I don't read "I absolutely don't want to do this" in her letter, I read something more like "I can't bring myself to do it," which is not at all the same thing. I think Dan's basically just saying "bring yourself to do it anyway."
129
MSS...this was surely not your intention, but sharing this letter with my husband tonight got us to do some serious love talking about 'the what ifs' and what we want 'if we ever ___'. it was a very necessary sober life and love affirming conversation we didn't know we needed until i shared your letter. i think you brave to ask this advice in this very public way. while we recognize that we might be able to fathom the difficulty of your situation, and its depth, we're also grateful that thinking of you helped us rev-evaluate our commitment. . we wish you continued strength and peace ..
always.
always.
130
#128, you don't think she'll regret it, because you see it as something she should do that will be a merciful act. But I think her feelings of depression, disgust, and dread regarding the topic are a good indication that this isn't something she'll look back on and be thankful for.
What you may see as a charitable act on her part, I can see as something that would be painful, awkward, and depressing for her. It isn't likely that he'll be satisfied with the act, more likely it will be a reminder to both of them of what they don't have anymore, and how far he's declined. If this is something she dreads so much, I doubt that she'd be able to put on a convincing act and pretend it makes her aroused and happy. Chances are she'd start crying and it would be a painful and emotional mess for both of them.
She should stop demurely sidestepping the issue when he brings it up and be honest. She doesn't need to lie and submit to things that horrify her in order to protect her husband's feelings. He knows he's dying. If he still loves and respects his wife, then he should want her to be able to discuss the hard things with him, and he shouldn't want her to be silently doing something that fills her with horror just because he requested it.
Seriously, all the people here saying she should do it and they would do it for their spouse- would you, if you were the incapacitated one, want your spouse to force themselves to perform a sex act with you if it made them depressed and sick to contemplate? Especially after they cared for you 24 hours a day for several years to the point of neglecting their own care?
What you may see as a charitable act on her part, I can see as something that would be painful, awkward, and depressing for her. It isn't likely that he'll be satisfied with the act, more likely it will be a reminder to both of them of what they don't have anymore, and how far he's declined. If this is something she dreads so much, I doubt that she'd be able to put on a convincing act and pretend it makes her aroused and happy. Chances are she'd start crying and it would be a painful and emotional mess for both of them.
She should stop demurely sidestepping the issue when he brings it up and be honest. She doesn't need to lie and submit to things that horrify her in order to protect her husband's feelings. He knows he's dying. If he still loves and respects his wife, then he should want her to be able to discuss the hard things with him, and he shouldn't want her to be silently doing something that fills her with horror just because he requested it.
Seriously, all the people here saying she should do it and they would do it for their spouse- would you, if you were the incapacitated one, want your spouse to force themselves to perform a sex act with you if it made them depressed and sick to contemplate? Especially after they cared for you 24 hours a day for several years to the point of neglecting their own care?
131
Telling the LW, who is just putting herself back together again, that the noble thing to do is to disregard all her own instincts of wrongness and permit her body to be used in a way that sickens her, is truly wrongheaded advice. If marriage conferred that absolute access, there'd be no such thing as marital rape.
Tossing around the term "GGG" in this instance, or recommending she masturbate while he watch, ignores the fact that she feels toward him as though he were her child. To those commenters saying it's "just sex", or that she's too emotional about a simple physical act: would you say that to someone who'd been coerced into incest?
A mate who's drastically ill or dying has a right to expect a reasonable amount of kindness, care, and effort on the part of their spouse. The LW has already gone far beyond that reasonable expectation. But even if you're dying, you do not have the right to emotionally coerce your mate into a sex act that disgusts them, and you sure as hell don't have the right to use your own sickness as a tool of coercion.
For those of you warning that she'll feel guilty after he dies, I'd like to present a different and likelier scenario: that if she does allow herself to be emotionally coerced into letting him use her body in a way that sickens her, then whatever real fondness she has for him will be damaged in the long run. Her memories of the good sexuality they shared before he got sick will be tainted by this act that she was too guilty to say "no" to, and by the fact that someone who supposedly loved her would coerce her in this way.
I'll say it again: suffering is not a free pass to guilt-trip the people who love you into giving more than they can give. Dying is not a permission slip to consider only your own needs.
More...
Tossing around the term "GGG" in this instance, or recommending she masturbate while he watch, ignores the fact that she feels toward him as though he were her child. To those commenters saying it's "just sex", or that she's too emotional about a simple physical act: would you say that to someone who'd been coerced into incest?
A mate who's drastically ill or dying has a right to expect a reasonable amount of kindness, care, and effort on the part of their spouse. The LW has already gone far beyond that reasonable expectation. But even if you're dying, you do not have the right to emotionally coerce your mate into a sex act that disgusts them, and you sure as hell don't have the right to use your own sickness as a tool of coercion.
For those of you warning that she'll feel guilty after he dies, I'd like to present a different and likelier scenario: that if she does allow herself to be emotionally coerced into letting him use her body in a way that sickens her, then whatever real fondness she has for him will be damaged in the long run. Her memories of the good sexuality they shared before he got sick will be tainted by this act that she was too guilty to say "no" to, and by the fact that someone who supposedly loved her would coerce her in this way.
I'll say it again: suffering is not a free pass to guilt-trip the people who love you into giving more than they can give. Dying is not a permission slip to consider only your own needs.
132
@Pinky
Good point that the face-sitting session might do more harm than good. That really depends on a lot of complicated stuff we're not privy to here. Of course, having an honest conversation about why she doesn't want to sit on his face might do more harm than good too (I'm a firm believer that there's such a thing as too much honesty). My feeling is she wouldn't be writing to Dan if she wasn't at least a smidge open to being talked into it, but then she may just be writing because she wants an affirmation that she is not a selfish bitch for having these feelings, which she definitely isn't. At any rate, if MSS were my friend, I'd probably still tell her "just shut up, suck it up, and sit on his face already (although I won't think less of you if you don't)." This is, of course, assuming that sitting on the same face you've sat on many times in the past isn't ultimately that big a deal, even if that person and the relationship have changed. Maybe it is a really big deal for MSS.
I have no idea what I would do if I were in MSS' place, or in her husband's place. It's a shitty situation either way. I think if I were MSS I would react pretty much the way she's reacting. I think if I were incapacitated with no chance of recovery, I *might* see fit to ask my long-suffering spouse for one last indulgence (on the grounds that, yo, I'm DYING here, while my spouse will get to live, love, and fuck for years to come). But I don't know.
Good point that the face-sitting session might do more harm than good. That really depends on a lot of complicated stuff we're not privy to here. Of course, having an honest conversation about why she doesn't want to sit on his face might do more harm than good too (I'm a firm believer that there's such a thing as too much honesty). My feeling is she wouldn't be writing to Dan if she wasn't at least a smidge open to being talked into it, but then she may just be writing because she wants an affirmation that she is not a selfish bitch for having these feelings, which she definitely isn't. At any rate, if MSS were my friend, I'd probably still tell her "just shut up, suck it up, and sit on his face already (although I won't think less of you if you don't)." This is, of course, assuming that sitting on the same face you've sat on many times in the past isn't ultimately that big a deal, even if that person and the relationship have changed. Maybe it is a really big deal for MSS.
I have no idea what I would do if I were in MSS' place, or in her husband's place. It's a shitty situation either way. I think if I were MSS I would react pretty much the way she's reacting. I think if I were incapacitated with no chance of recovery, I *might* see fit to ask my long-suffering spouse for one last indulgence (on the grounds that, yo, I'm DYING here, while my spouse will get to live, love, and fuck for years to come). But I don't know.
133
Some really amazing points have been raised on both sides. The only people who I disagree with are those who are so emotively on one side, saying that anyone who doesn't agree with them shouldn't get married or is an empty shell of a human.
This is clearly not a straight forward answer, I'm sure this is the same debate as the LW has being having in her head for ages. I hope the LW reads them and it helps her in someway. I have no fucking idea what I would do in her situation.
This is clearly not a straight forward answer, I'm sure this is the same debate as the LW has being having in her head for ages. I hope the LW reads them and it helps her in someway. I have no fucking idea what I would do in her situation.
134
Piling on here to say, do it, for the sake of everything you shared before the illness got too far. He didn't cheat on you or abuse you or start voting the wrong way, he got sick. If this were me, I imagine it would help to start by talking back over some sexual memories from when times were still good. Or maybe that's too sad, IDK. Whatever it takes, find a way to do it.
135
The posters - the significant majority of us - who urge her to do it, do understand what a horrible situation it is. Please reread our comments, and the compassion and concern therein, for her, for him, and for their relationship.
Maybe she will find that she can't do it. But by all that is good in humanity, and caring, and compassionate, she needs to try. For the love she once had for him - the same love that made her marry him and the same love that led her to take care of him until she felt like an empty husk - she has to try. She has to try to rise above her understandable human reluctance, intense as it is. No one is saying it will be easy. Many are offering ways to make it easier.
But it firmly remains the right thing to do.
"this isn't about GGG"? FFS! If GGG doesn't apply to a tragically dying spouse, then what does it apply to?
My God. My visceral disgust at people like rebecca and pinky and iris is because of the absolute selfishness of your position. It is clear that you don't see the husband as a real person. To you he is already a dead thing, to be cast away as irrelevant. Alive only as an emotional parasite, not a real person. Nice. And who said anything about him coercing her into this act? There's no evidence of that.
So, though adam disapproves, I will add to my statement to people like you. Don't get married, and don't take care of the very ill. You lack the capacity.
For the LW and rest of us, may we find the strength within ourselves, if and when the time comes, to love as ricardo did, to give as he did, to hold on to the passion and love even if the object of it has become a dying shell, that we can maintain our love enough in the tidal wave of devastating emotions such a horrible circumstance provides to do yet another thing we don't want to to help the one we love.
More...
Maybe she will find that she can't do it. But by all that is good in humanity, and caring, and compassionate, she needs to try. For the love she once had for him - the same love that made her marry him and the same love that led her to take care of him until she felt like an empty husk - she has to try. She has to try to rise above her understandable human reluctance, intense as it is. No one is saying it will be easy. Many are offering ways to make it easier.
But it firmly remains the right thing to do.
"this isn't about GGG"? FFS! If GGG doesn't apply to a tragically dying spouse, then what does it apply to?
My God. My visceral disgust at people like rebecca and pinky and iris is because of the absolute selfishness of your position. It is clear that you don't see the husband as a real person. To you he is already a dead thing, to be cast away as irrelevant. Alive only as an emotional parasite, not a real person. Nice. And who said anything about him coercing her into this act? There's no evidence of that.
So, though adam disapproves, I will add to my statement to people like you. Don't get married, and don't take care of the very ill. You lack the capacity.
For the LW and rest of us, may we find the strength within ourselves, if and when the time comes, to love as ricardo did, to give as he did, to hold on to the passion and love even if the object of it has become a dying shell, that we can maintain our love enough in the tidal wave of devastating emotions such a horrible circumstance provides to do yet another thing we don't want to to help the one we love.
136
While I certainly feel for the man in this situation, I can't help but feel very conflicted by the advice given. I mean, here we have a woman who very clearly DOES NOT WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH SOMEONE. The particulars of the why and whatfore are, to a certain extent, irrelevant. She does not want to give herself to this person. Using emotional blackmail to get her to do it is not that much better than physically forcing her to do it, and I have the distinctly uncomfortable feeling that's what a lot of posters here are doing.
Now, were I in that situation, would I do it for my spouse? Would I suck it up and bite the bullet and man up and all that? I hope so. I hope I could give myself in that way. But I'd never, ever recommend to another person that they do the same. Do what you want, MSS. Do what you can. And don't feel guilty if you can't make this sacrifice. It has to be YOUR choice and no one else's.
Now, were I in that situation, would I do it for my spouse? Would I suck it up and bite the bullet and man up and all that? I hope so. I hope I could give myself in that way. But I'd never, ever recommend to another person that they do the same. Do what you want, MSS. Do what you can. And don't feel guilty if you can't make this sacrifice. It has to be YOUR choice and no one else's.
137
@ 116 - I don' think she has issues. She wouldn't have written in if she did. I think you do, and you're projecting them onto her.
I'm not saying that no one should have the right to say no to their spouse at any given moment. I'm saying that you and those who use vocabulary like you do, "violated", "traumatized" etc. are creating a storm in a teacup about what is, after all, an act they must have performed quite a few times together in the past. (Oh, and before you go batshit crazy about me saying "storm in a teacup", I'm only using a common expression here, not trying to trivialize her situation. Read my other posts above, it's obvious I'd be the last person on earth to do that.)
In a situation like this, you end up doing a lot of things you'd never imagine you'd be doing. Really shitty things. And she has. For much longer than I had to. Her behaviour has been admirable for a long, long time.
Now there's one last shitty thing she "must" do, and that's how she needs to see this: just one more little effort. As I've said previously, it's for her own future peace of mind. Those stakes are much greater than her physical/sexual integrity for the 15 minutes it'll last, and I'm sure she can handle it - she's handled much worse already.
My point on sex is this: no one should grant sex so much importance on the psychological level so as to allow it to make you feel traumatized when it doesn't happen in the perfect conditions. And I've been raped, so I do know what I'm taking about. But I chose to see that event as a rather unpleasant evening instead of a traumatizing life-defining moment. So it never became one.
I'm not saying that no one should have the right to say no to their spouse at any given moment. I'm saying that you and those who use vocabulary like you do, "violated", "traumatized" etc. are creating a storm in a teacup about what is, after all, an act they must have performed quite a few times together in the past. (Oh, and before you go batshit crazy about me saying "storm in a teacup", I'm only using a common expression here, not trying to trivialize her situation. Read my other posts above, it's obvious I'd be the last person on earth to do that.)
In a situation like this, you end up doing a lot of things you'd never imagine you'd be doing. Really shitty things. And she has. For much longer than I had to. Her behaviour has been admirable for a long, long time.
Now there's one last shitty thing she "must" do, and that's how she needs to see this: just one more little effort. As I've said previously, it's for her own future peace of mind. Those stakes are much greater than her physical/sexual integrity for the 15 minutes it'll last, and I'm sure she can handle it - she's handled much worse already.
My point on sex is this: no one should grant sex so much importance on the psychological level so as to allow it to make you feel traumatized when it doesn't happen in the perfect conditions. And I've been raped, so I do know what I'm taking about. But I chose to see that event as a rather unpleasant evening instead of a traumatizing life-defining moment. So it never became one.
138
Going by what MSS is saying, her husband has no sex drive to speak of.
If his issue is control, MSS's disgust could be rooted in wondering, "Where the f-ck are the brakes on this nightmare?"
I've heard how the performances in the asteroid scene in the Empire Strikes Back portray the circumstances in which some people pick-up PTSD, and some don't. Because nothing responds to them, Leia and Chewbacca flip out. Because the ship responds to his piloting, Han Solo doesn't. The husband needs a better solution to nothing responding to him than to deny control from his wife.
Maybe the care facility can play a role in thwarting the husband, like how doctors will help an unwilling donor by telling the transplant candidate they aren't a match.
If his issue is control, MSS's disgust could be rooted in wondering, "Where the f-ck are the brakes on this nightmare?"
I've heard how the performances in the asteroid scene in the Empire Strikes Back portray the circumstances in which some people pick-up PTSD, and some don't. Because nothing responds to them, Leia and Chewbacca flip out. Because the ship responds to his piloting, Han Solo doesn't. The husband needs a better solution to nothing responding to him than to deny control from his wife.
Maybe the care facility can play a role in thwarting the husband, like how doctors will help an unwilling donor by telling the transplant candidate they aren't a match.
139
@ 126 - No, EricaP, I don't "take her resistance as a simple preference". I don't know where you got that. I understand how she got there, and stated clearly so ("for obvious and understandable reasons").
All I'm saying is that for her own sake, she has to get over her resistance. Please reread my post @ 48.
As I said, my post @ 101 was directed at amazonvera, who I do think is overreacting. More on that @ 137. What I qualified as "over the top" was amazonvera's choice of words, not the LW's. MSS said she felt "kinda sick." That's quite different from "violated" and "traumatized", wouldn't you agree? (And no, unlike you and amazonvera, I don't feel we have the right to decide what she meant by that other than "kinda sick".)
And one last thing: women constantly ask of men to see things their way and to behave accordingly. What's wrong with men asking the same of women?
All I'm saying is that for her own sake, she has to get over her resistance. Please reread my post @ 48.
As I said, my post @ 101 was directed at amazonvera, who I do think is overreacting. More on that @ 137. What I qualified as "over the top" was amazonvera's choice of words, not the LW's. MSS said she felt "kinda sick." That's quite different from "violated" and "traumatized", wouldn't you agree? (And no, unlike you and amazonvera, I don't feel we have the right to decide what she meant by that other than "kinda sick".)
And one last thing: women constantly ask of men to see things their way and to behave accordingly. What's wrong with men asking the same of women?
140
...oh, or maybe that could be part of the sexy game MSS needs to sit on her husband's face. "What do they mean I can't sit on my husband's face? No only do I lose my husband, I have to lose myself as well? Well, we'll show them!" They she winks at her husband, hikes up her skirt, and so on.
141
I think its safe to say that the Husband is not looking for sex, he is looking for sexual connection with his wife. A shared moment of intimacy when EVERYTHING else has been taken from them as a couple.
The wife can do what she wants but I tend to agree that after her husband dies and if she doesn't do this she is going to regret it the rest of her life. Some point down the road she is going pound on herself emotionally. For her own sake I hope she can find a way to do this.
The sex worker idea would be a disaster and the husband would feel, if I am correct on my read of this, as the ultimate rejection of him. It would be way worse than just saying no.
The wife can do what she wants but I tend to agree that after her husband dies and if she doesn't do this she is going to regret it the rest of her life. Some point down the road she is going pound on herself emotionally. For her own sake I hope she can find a way to do this.
The sex worker idea would be a disaster and the husband would feel, if I am correct on my read of this, as the ultimate rejection of him. It would be way worse than just saying no.
142
...or even better than playing lovers defying the heartless institution, you can do that AND bring in someone to play the frigid administrator. "Oh Mr MSS, I'm not just a cog in a heartless combine. I'm a woman, too. Let me show you. Mreowr, rowrrrr..."
143
Got it, Ricardo. People saying that this particular sex act makes them feel sick means they have "issues," except, you know, not when the OP says it, and people bringing up the possibility of that going ahead with unwanted, sickening, depressing sex acts could be traumatizing or cause someone to feel violated are totes over-reacting. Because a marriage license and/or MS negates the fact that those are really common feelings that go along with unwanted, sickening, depressing sex acts, not to mention in the context of a years-long nightmarish relationship scenario. Or something.
As far as your "Won't someone think of the men?" comment, if you look back at a lot of columns where it's a man writing in about his sexual problems and a bunch of women tell him how his body and various sex acts do or should work for him, you'll see a lot of men asking them to "see it their way."
As far as your "Won't someone think of the men?" comment, if you look back at a lot of columns where it's a man writing in about his sexual problems and a bunch of women tell him how his body and various sex acts do or should work for him, you'll see a lot of men asking them to "see it their way."
144
Hello to any that read. I was forwarded this from a friend of mine. That was read such a gut wrenching story I was crying in the end... For reasons some have no clue why...I hardly feel inclined to write on such blogs but I have to!
I have MS. I am a 41 year old women with 4 children 19, 17, 9, and 5. I moved to Seattle area originaly from Las Vegas about 6 years ago. The thing I fear the most are those things that womens husband lost. I am a lucky lucky women. I can do most anything.. I have my handicap but noone notices unless you know me, u will see little things I do apear clumsy uncoordinated at times. But this whole sexual thing bugs me.. I am a very sexual person, I walk into a room and I exude sexuality. It's me. I at times with my MS have not been able to feel from my arm pits down. Although I could feel my private area, I knew it would be a challenge at times to ever get me to that big O the way I used to. Sex is not the thing in life that makes us feel good, just laying next to someone, touching, caressing, loving, talking..all these things we carry with us to the next "whatever it is you believe".. Just give me a break, this women doesn't need to fullfill some sexual craving this man has..He is a man he will forever have the craving, like a caveman, sorry men. But seriously, I would never ask my husband get on top of me and to stick it in, any orifice because it makes ME feel better.. Because having MS is like haveing a knumbness all over, just depends on who you are as to where the areas are..but remains all the same feeling in our body changes.. We deal with it.. He does too...Thats life..
I have MS. I am a 41 year old women with 4 children 19, 17, 9, and 5. I moved to Seattle area originaly from Las Vegas about 6 years ago. The thing I fear the most are those things that womens husband lost. I am a lucky lucky women. I can do most anything.. I have my handicap but noone notices unless you know me, u will see little things I do apear clumsy uncoordinated at times. But this whole sexual thing bugs me.. I am a very sexual person, I walk into a room and I exude sexuality. It's me. I at times with my MS have not been able to feel from my arm pits down. Although I could feel my private area, I knew it would be a challenge at times to ever get me to that big O the way I used to. Sex is not the thing in life that makes us feel good, just laying next to someone, touching, caressing, loving, talking..all these things we carry with us to the next "whatever it is you believe".. Just give me a break, this women doesn't need to fullfill some sexual craving this man has..He is a man he will forever have the craving, like a caveman, sorry men. But seriously, I would never ask my husband get on top of me and to stick it in, any orifice because it makes ME feel better.. Because having MS is like haveing a knumbness all over, just depends on who you are as to where the areas are..but remains all the same feeling in our body changes.. We deal with it.. He does too...Thats life..
145
I think she's been GGG - although I don't really think this falls into the same category as accepting your partner's kink fetish - and she's certainly been there for him "in sickness and in health" so for goodness sake, don't throw that up in her face.
This is not a sex act anymore. This is not sex. This is a woman, sitting on a man's face while he licks her. There will be no loving caresses, no writhing, arching bodies, just her sitting on the face of an incapacitated man. It depresses her, and she doesn't want to do it.
And I can't blame her. No one can.
This is not a sex act anymore. This is not sex. This is a woman, sitting on a man's face while he licks her. There will be no loving caresses, no writhing, arching bodies, just her sitting on the face of an incapacitated man. It depresses her, and she doesn't want to do it.
And I can't blame her. No one can.
146
@139 - You've given your advice. And sure, you can ask of women (MSS in particular) that she see things like a man - it's just a physical act. But your asking doesn't make it so. You still got erections, thinking of him. That's great, lovely to hear. That's not her situation. Tell me about what you did for your lover that was "unimaginable" for you. If a woman you loved wanted you to talk about your feelings about her death, would you have done that? Or is sex "easy" and feelings "hard," because that's how it is for you? If she can choose this, I will cheer her on. If she can't, I will assure her that the guilt will not destroy her. People are not required to be saints.
148
Maybe she should just be upfront with him and ask him why he wants to do it. I can't imagine that he could enjoy it. He probably just wants to make her feel good, so this plan won't work out for anyone.
149
I lived with a family member who also had a very severe case of MS from which she inevitably died a few years ago. She suffered from the disease for over 20 years. Many, if not most, people with MS go through stages where you'd never be aware that they even have the disease. However, some poor souls never experience a remission and their disease is a gradual but consistent progression toward death. It sounds like this woman's husband is, like my sister, one of those poor souls. I find it hard to believe that at such an advanced stage of the disease that her husband would be interested in her sitting on his face. In fact, once you get to the point her husband is at you are completely miserable, with pain from bed sores and other gross complications. All of her hesitency is completely understandable and most caregivers inevitably build up some resentments to their loved one because of the lifestyle they've lost as well. Naturally, it's not the sick persons fault, but those resentments surface nonetheless. I'd tell her not to do it if that experience will deepen those resentments. If her last sexual experience with her husband turns into a horrific nightmare for her to remember long after he's gone then it's just as well she do what she's got to do to get through it all. I feel bad for her husband and for her. I say, don't do it! Besides, what if a nurse walks in and she's riding his face, they'll cart her off to the pokie saying she was trying to smother him or something.
150
Just a million times no.
But then, I have issues around oral sex anyway. Or sex generally. The idea of doing it even though I didn't want to? Helloooo ten years of therapy and periodic hospitalisations. It just feels profoundly wrong. No one should have sex that makes them feel "depressed" and "kinda sick".
But then, I have issues around oral sex anyway. Or sex generally. The idea of doing it even though I didn't want to? Helloooo ten years of therapy and periodic hospitalisations. It just feels profoundly wrong. No one should have sex that makes them feel "depressed" and "kinda sick".
151
He's going to die.... and you're worried about WHAT exactly???
MSS, when this is done, you'll have years and years and YEARS left to live. You'll have new partners, you'll have new love, you'll have new sex. The FUTURE is yours.
Your husband doesn't have that. He could die tomorrow. All he has left in the WHOLE WORLD is the present moment, pain, and YOU.
You've managed to avoid being selfish so far, please please PLEASE do not pick this as a time to start. He has so little time left, and so much pain left to experience....
MSS, when this is done, you'll have years and years and YEARS left to live. You'll have new partners, you'll have new love, you'll have new sex. The FUTURE is yours.
Your husband doesn't have that. He could die tomorrow. All he has left in the WHOLE WORLD is the present moment, pain, and YOU.
You've managed to avoid being selfish so far, please please PLEASE do not pick this as a time to start. He has so little time left, and so much pain left to experience....
153
@146 "If a woman you loved wanted you to talk about your feelings about her death, would you have done that?"
Ricardo is ""gay"".
Those are nested quotation marks, by the way. It's something I just invented.
Ricardo is ""gay"".
Those are nested quotation marks, by the way. It's something I just invented.
154
Ugh, I just can't stop thinking about this. I think I've changed my mind half a million times.
At the moment, I'm sort of inclined to say that @148 has a good point. Does her husband know that she's sexually fulfilled? He might be interpreting her demuring as more selflessness on her part. He might want to give back as an adult after everything she's done for him and reconnect with her as a spouse, rather than a patient, now that she's no longer his primary caregiver.
So I don't think this is necessarily about his sexual needs, and I'm not sure that sitting on his face would benefit either of them. I think that they need to talk about it and come to some sort of compromise or solution that works for both of them. Building up further resentment after everything they've been through may just backfire and hurt them both in the end.
I hate it when there's no good answer...
At the moment, I'm sort of inclined to say that @148 has a good point. Does her husband know that she's sexually fulfilled? He might be interpreting her demuring as more selflessness on her part. He might want to give back as an adult after everything she's done for him and reconnect with her as a spouse, rather than a patient, now that she's no longer his primary caregiver.
So I don't think this is necessarily about his sexual needs, and I'm not sure that sitting on his face would benefit either of them. I think that they need to talk about it and come to some sort of compromise or solution that works for both of them. Building up further resentment after everything they've been through may just backfire and hurt them both in the end.
I hate it when there's no good answer...
155
@34 put it perfectly. If you think life is about only wanting to do what YOU want to do, then you're in for a lonely life.
Long-term sex lives are often about doing it when you're not in the mood; it's called marriage. The nice thing about sex is that once you make the effort for your significant other, the foreplay almost always changes your mood and the sex you thought you didn't want is fantastic!
Putting out for your partner doesn't mean you're not a feminist, it just means you're a nice person.
Long-term sex lives are often about doing it when you're not in the mood; it's called marriage. The nice thing about sex is that once you make the effort for your significant other, the foreplay almost always changes your mood and the sex you thought you didn't want is fantastic!
Putting out for your partner doesn't mean you're not a feminist, it just means you're a nice person.
156
@154 - that's pretty much what I was going to say. I don't think he's making this request for his sexual gratification. He sees it as the one thing he can do to reconnect with his wife and perhaps re-establish some kind of intimacy. They need to stop skirting the issue and talk about it. Does she even feel comfortable just cuddling with him? Or does that squick her out too? Compromise is definitely the name of the game here.
And to the people accusing her of not being GGG - if there is an act that your partner is demanding of you, but you are not willing to do, then it's your partner that isn't being GGG. Good, Giving and Game does not mean giving into every request made upon you. It means that if you're willing to try, then try. And if the very idea makes you sick, or disgusted, then you don't. And your partner either accepts that you aren't going to go there, or goes and finds someone who will. Nobody has the right to infrige on your personal boundaries. Married or not.
And to the people accusing her of not being GGG - if there is an act that your partner is demanding of you, but you are not willing to do, then it's your partner that isn't being GGG. Good, Giving and Game does not mean giving into every request made upon you. It means that if you're willing to try, then try. And if the very idea makes you sick, or disgusted, then you don't. And your partner either accepts that you aren't going to go there, or goes and finds someone who will. Nobody has the right to infrige on your personal boundaries. Married or not.
157
This has nothing to do with the difference between male and female sexuality. Oy vey! Retardo, you're wrong again (like you were about scare quotes being grammatically incorrect). You don't understand healthy relationships, and you don't understand people.
EricaP, TAKE IT OFF!
EricaP, TAKE IT OFF!
158
@113 " or suspect will result in psychological damamge. And it sounds like that's what's at stake for the wife."
I don't think the wife in this case is 11 years old. She sounds like an intelligent grown woman. Unless she is emotionally fragile or a classic victim (and she doesn't sound like she is either), I seriously doubt sitting on her husband's face will result in psychological damage or "add further injury to her." This woman does not sound like a wimp, and I think Dan took that into account when he gave her the advice she asked for.
I don't think the wife in this case is 11 years old. She sounds like an intelligent grown woman. Unless she is emotionally fragile or a classic victim (and she doesn't sound like she is either), I seriously doubt sitting on her husband's face will result in psychological damage or "add further injury to her." This woman does not sound like a wimp, and I think Dan took that into account when he gave her the advice she asked for.
159
I get the sense that death is so unthinkable to some commenters it wipes every other consideration completely off the board. ( "He's going to die.... and you're worried about WHAT exactly???") We're all going to die, people. Some sooner, some later. While we're alive, we do what we can for each other, but the fact that you're nearer to death than I am doesn't mean you can pull out your death as the ultimate trump card. The caregiving spouse is a live human being with her own complex pain, not a sexual "Make a Wish" Foundation.
160
@153 I know he's gay, but we're stuck on this gendered issue ("sex is an easy thing to give" / "sex can sometimes be very difficult to give"). I'm trying to come up with examples gendered the other direction, so guys like Ricardo and bassplayerguy@92 can see that they might find other kinds of requests difficult, where MSS finds the oral sex difficult. We all have our hang-ups and issues. No one has answered my question @127 - how would men feel if they were asked to "suck it up" and apologize to a third party for something they didn't do, in order to please a dying woman?
161
Looks like the assumption is that she's his only chance at having his face sat upon. Or someone being paid. I wonder if she could find him someone who would be interested in, perhaps even enjoy, it. If he was down for someone else, it seems like a win-win. She doesn't have to be skeeved, he gets his face sat upon and the bonus is that it's by someone who wants to do the sitting. Unlikely? Probably, but maybe not impossible. Maybe she could consider pursuing this. Maybe it's too unlikely. Seems like the obvious compromise that accommodates her disgust and his desire.
162
I cannot believe the lack of compassion that a lot of commenters here are displaying.
Look, marriage is one of the biggest commitments one person can make to another. You open up your life to another person, you make them as important to you as you are to yourself. You make sacrifices for that person that you wouldn't make for anybody else, and while that might involve things you wouldn't necessarily do if you had your druthers you do them anyway because it is the right thing to do for someone whose life you value as your own. I get that. I do. And I think that if MSS can somehow manage to bring herself to this for her husband, for whatever pleasure or satisfaction it will bring him, then it would be a wonderful thing and a testimony to exactly how deep that bond can be.
But I don't think that the strength of that would be lessened any if she can't, either. And I don't think she's being selfish. And I don't think she needs to get over herself.
All of you who say that if you were in her place you would do it gladly for your spouse because that is how much you love them - I know we all want to believe that love gives everything and demands nothing in return. I know we want to think that love overcomes all obstacles. And I know that even contemplating a situation where the love that we never wanted to impose any limits upon against one is wrenching, and we don't want to believe it will happen.
But you know what? Most of us don't have to.
Dan is right and he's wrong. MSS's husband has suffered hugely, and he deserves to have as many pleasures as can be made available to him now because they are precious few. IF one of those pleasures is his wife sitting on his face - IF - then he should have it, and enjoy it, and good on them both.
But if it's NOT - if three years of being a full-time caregiver (and all of you saying this revokes a GGG pass, are you MISSING that they found ways around the lack of sex until he lost the ability to move?) mean that she can no longer see him in a sexual way and this is too big an ask for her - then she is not cruel, and she's not selfish. It is a cruel and horrible thing that the illness has taken even this from them both. But it is NOT her fault, any more than it is his.
It's not you in her situation. Maybe you could do it if you were her, and maybe you couldn't, and you're entitled to your opinions on what would, the best of all possible worlds, happen here. But maybe MSS going to decide that after having given up everything else for the man she married this is one thing that she can't do, and if you're seriously going to judge her for that, then shame on you.
More...
Look, marriage is one of the biggest commitments one person can make to another. You open up your life to another person, you make them as important to you as you are to yourself. You make sacrifices for that person that you wouldn't make for anybody else, and while that might involve things you wouldn't necessarily do if you had your druthers you do them anyway because it is the right thing to do for someone whose life you value as your own. I get that. I do. And I think that if MSS can somehow manage to bring herself to this for her husband, for whatever pleasure or satisfaction it will bring him, then it would be a wonderful thing and a testimony to exactly how deep that bond can be.
But I don't think that the strength of that would be lessened any if she can't, either. And I don't think she's being selfish. And I don't think she needs to get over herself.
All of you who say that if you were in her place you would do it gladly for your spouse because that is how much you love them - I know we all want to believe that love gives everything and demands nothing in return. I know we want to think that love overcomes all obstacles. And I know that even contemplating a situation where the love that we never wanted to impose any limits upon against one is wrenching, and we don't want to believe it will happen.
But you know what? Most of us don't have to.
Dan is right and he's wrong. MSS's husband has suffered hugely, and he deserves to have as many pleasures as can be made available to him now because they are precious few. IF one of those pleasures is his wife sitting on his face - IF - then he should have it, and enjoy it, and good on them both.
But if it's NOT - if three years of being a full-time caregiver (and all of you saying this revokes a GGG pass, are you MISSING that they found ways around the lack of sex until he lost the ability to move?) mean that she can no longer see him in a sexual way and this is too big an ask for her - then she is not cruel, and she's not selfish. It is a cruel and horrible thing that the illness has taken even this from them both. But it is NOT her fault, any more than it is his.
It's not you in her situation. Maybe you could do it if you were her, and maybe you couldn't, and you're entitled to your opinions on what would, the best of all possible worlds, happen here. But maybe MSS going to decide that after having given up everything else for the man she married this is one thing that she can't do, and if you're seriously going to judge her for that, then shame on you.
163
#135, Alanmt, the issue isn't that I 'don't see the husband as a real person'. I do see him as a real person, he is still her husband, and the 'rules' still apply. If he is still her husband, and still loves and respects her, then he shouldn't want her to do something that makes her feel depressed and sick to even contemplate.
The issue here doesn't even seem to be that he wants her to go ahead and do this despite her dread- although that seems to be what a lot of posters here as saying she should do. The issue seems to be that she isn't discussing this painful topic with him- she's being 'demure' and sidestepping the issue. Once he knows that she doesn't feel sexual, that's she's wiped out from the years of constant care-taking she's provided him with, then he most likely will be willing to discuss it with her and wouldn't want her to do something that would make her depressed and uncomfortable. THAT is what she needs to do.
I don't understand how ANYONE can think that it would be preferable for this already exhausted and depressed woman to suppress her emotions and force herself to engage in a sex act that she doesn't want to, rather than having them discuss the situation.
AGAIN, I'd like to ask anyone saying she 'must' do this- if you were in the husband's situation, and knew that your partner- depressed and exhausted after providing you with constant, 'round the clock care for several years- was depressed and horrified at the idea of engaging in further sex acts with you, would you want them suppress their emotions and put on an act despite their dread and disgust?
The issue here doesn't even seem to be that he wants her to go ahead and do this despite her dread- although that seems to be what a lot of posters here as saying she should do. The issue seems to be that she isn't discussing this painful topic with him- she's being 'demure' and sidestepping the issue. Once he knows that she doesn't feel sexual, that's she's wiped out from the years of constant care-taking she's provided him with, then he most likely will be willing to discuss it with her and wouldn't want her to do something that would make her depressed and uncomfortable. THAT is what she needs to do.
I don't understand how ANYONE can think that it would be preferable for this already exhausted and depressed woman to suppress her emotions and force herself to engage in a sex act that she doesn't want to, rather than having them discuss the situation.
AGAIN, I'd like to ask anyone saying she 'must' do this- if you were in the husband's situation, and knew that your partner- depressed and exhausted after providing you with constant, 'round the clock care for several years- was depressed and horrified at the idea of engaging in further sex acts with you, would you want them suppress their emotions and put on an act despite their dread and disgust?
164
@160: I don't think it's always as gendered as you seem to think: there are plenty of girls with no issue getting oral, plenty of guys who can't separate sex from emotion (or who don't see sex and emotion as the same thing? I can't get the stereotypes straight), plenty of girls who can separate sex and emotion, plenty of guys who have no problem apologizing, plenty of girls who do.
(I take it you read Choke?)
(I take it you read Choke?)
165
@164 - yes to all of your counter-examples, yes, they all exist. Nevertheless, I was trying to get through to some guys who say that they can't imagine not providing any & all sex acts their dying partner requested. (There are women on that side too, yes.) I was saying that we all have limits, and I tried to think of something that might feel like a limit to a stereotypical guy. I'm open to suggestions for how to remind posters who are saying "sitting on his face is easy" that they too have limits (which might look easy to other people, but are hard for them).
If this is her limit, that's her business. She wrote in because she hates to let him down, but she can't imagine doing what her husband asks. Nowhere in the letter does she talk about loving him. I think she is done with the marriage, as a marriage. Which may be sad, but it happens.
If this is her limit, that's her business. She wrote in because she hates to let him down, but she can't imagine doing what her husband asks. Nowhere in the letter does she talk about loving him. I think she is done with the marriage, as a marriage. Which may be sad, but it happens.
166
Wow.
1. Dan is spot-on, 100% right, and
2. Some of you commenters are COLOSSAL, self-justifying prick-holes. Yes, there are things you "must do" in this life. This is one of them.
1. Dan is spot-on, 100% right, and
2. Some of you commenters are COLOSSAL, self-justifying prick-holes. Yes, there are things you "must do" in this life. This is one of them.
167
@155 "The nice thing about sex is that once you make the effort for your significant other, the foreplay almost always changes your mood and the sex you thought you didn't want is fantastic!" Are you actually saying that the LW and her husband will have fantastic sex, if she does this for him?
@166 (and others)- What's the hardest thing you've ever done for a loved one?
@166 (and others)- What's the hardest thing you've ever done for a loved one?
168
EricaP @ 167,
I said earlier that I don't think that she must do this, and that she should be good to herself. I do think that there is a possibility that she could regret not doing it at some point.
What's the hardest thing you've ever done for a loved one?
That would be forgiveness and developing a relationship that stands today, one where I have not forgotten anything, but their actions are no longer the first thing comes to mind.
1) My family of origin that physically and emotionally abusing me.
2) Would be the young man who date raped me when I was in my teens.
While I walked away while in the process of becoming a doctor, because I decided it wasn't for me. I didn't walk away because I couldn't handle feces, blood, urine, phlegm, death, etc... I just realized that I was doing it for the wrong reasons.
So my comment way back there, was more about what I would aspire to be like, and a bit of brainstorming as to how to go about it.
Again, I don't think that she must do this, I'm not in her shoes. But, I think my personality is one that would do it and would do it with enthusiasm. I don't think that I could live with the regret of not doing it. If I was the one incapacitated, I would want my husband to move on. Although, I'd want his companionship and to hold my hand. I do hope that I will never have to experience MSS situation. It is is selfish I know, but I hope that I've met my quota for suffering already.
I don't know if my answers will be of help.
Take care.
I said earlier that I don't think that she must do this, and that she should be good to herself. I do think that there is a possibility that she could regret not doing it at some point.
What's the hardest thing you've ever done for a loved one?
That would be forgiveness and developing a relationship that stands today, one where I have not forgotten anything, but their actions are no longer the first thing comes to mind.
1) My family of origin that physically and emotionally abusing me.
2) Would be the young man who date raped me when I was in my teens.
While I walked away while in the process of becoming a doctor, because I decided it wasn't for me. I didn't walk away because I couldn't handle feces, blood, urine, phlegm, death, etc... I just realized that I was doing it for the wrong reasons.
So my comment way back there, was more about what I would aspire to be like, and a bit of brainstorming as to how to go about it.
Again, I don't think that she must do this, I'm not in her shoes. But, I think my personality is one that would do it and would do it with enthusiasm. I don't think that I could live with the regret of not doing it. If I was the one incapacitated, I would want my husband to move on. Although, I'd want his companionship and to hold my hand. I do hope that I will never have to experience MSS situation. It is is selfish I know, but I hope that I've met my quota for suffering already.
I don't know if my answers will be of help.
Take care.
169
EricaP, I agree with your "limits are limits" post. If for this woman doing this for her husband would be 'too much', for whatever reason, I suppose she has the right to go.
But thinking of limits, and whether or not we'd do "bad things" because we're reaching a limit...
Maybe a mother or father has the right to say "enough" and abandon their terminally ill child after years of caring for them. It's their lives, they get to say whether or not their son/daughter's illness has already turned their lives into a hell. Hell, maybe they even have the right to go even if they know this will depress the child so much s/he is likely to die. Because they've reached a boundary, because they "just cannot do it".
Is there a good reason ever to let go of your boundaries? To do the undoable? To be strong, swallow the horrible feelings that come with going beyond one's boundaries, and still doing it? Arguably there is. I suppose the word for people who do this is "heroes".
Should we condemn the people who couldn't? The wives/husbands who couldn't satisfy their dying spouse's last sexual fantasy? The father or mother who finally abandoned his/her sick child and ran away because s/he simply couldn't put up with it any longer?
I don't know. I may be being harsh. I may be being unfair. Maybe I'm inviting god, or any similar power, to test me by putting me in some situation in life where I have to face this harsh choice. Hubris, ate. Still, I can't stop thinking: doing what her husband asked in this situation would be the right thing. If she can't do it because it crosses a boundary for her, she's entitled not to do it. It's her body, it's her prerrogative. But as far as moral judgments go... I can't say I would support her on this. Despite all her suffering. Maybe she wouldn't be able to, maybe she couldn't force herself to; but she would miss the chance to do the right thing. (And as others point out, as time goes by she'll probably realize that and feel bad about it.)
Again, maybe I'm tempting fate to put me in a situation similar to hers and then see if I wouldn't behave like a coward and abandon my principles. But I cannot ignore what my heart tells me, and in this case, it is that the right thing to do is to fulfill her dying husband's wish.
More...
But thinking of limits, and whether or not we'd do "bad things" because we're reaching a limit...
Maybe a mother or father has the right to say "enough" and abandon their terminally ill child after years of caring for them. It's their lives, they get to say whether or not their son/daughter's illness has already turned their lives into a hell. Hell, maybe they even have the right to go even if they know this will depress the child so much s/he is likely to die. Because they've reached a boundary, because they "just cannot do it".
Is there a good reason ever to let go of your boundaries? To do the undoable? To be strong, swallow the horrible feelings that come with going beyond one's boundaries, and still doing it? Arguably there is. I suppose the word for people who do this is "heroes".
Should we condemn the people who couldn't? The wives/husbands who couldn't satisfy their dying spouse's last sexual fantasy? The father or mother who finally abandoned his/her sick child and ran away because s/he simply couldn't put up with it any longer?
I don't know. I may be being harsh. I may be being unfair. Maybe I'm inviting god, or any similar power, to test me by putting me in some situation in life where I have to face this harsh choice. Hubris, ate. Still, I can't stop thinking: doing what her husband asked in this situation would be the right thing. If she can't do it because it crosses a boundary for her, she's entitled not to do it. It's her body, it's her prerrogative. But as far as moral judgments go... I can't say I would support her on this. Despite all her suffering. Maybe she wouldn't be able to, maybe she couldn't force herself to; but she would miss the chance to do the right thing. (And as others point out, as time goes by she'll probably realize that and feel bad about it.)
Again, maybe I'm tempting fate to put me in a situation similar to hers and then see if I wouldn't behave like a coward and abandon my principles. But I cannot ignore what my heart tells me, and in this case, it is that the right thing to do is to fulfill her dying husband's wish.
170
Kim in Portland, I agree entirely with your viewpoint. If I were a woman and in this LW's situation, I would probably do exactly the same.
Probably.
Because, of course, I can't know that for a fact. One never knows.
At any rate, let me quote something another commenter said way, way above:
"Damn, we put a giant box around sex and make it into this hugely personal, private thing that we aren't allowed to give away (for free, anyway) except in the strictest circumstances."
I'm sure sex is inherently quite personal and private. And I'm also sure this LW is right in that we make it even more private and personal than it has to be. We often don't accept it for what it is, simply one of the facts of life, one of the things that happen between people; either because we had bad experiences with it that are difficult if not impossible to recover from, or because we've learned that in our society sex is super-duper-personal/private.
I wish it weren't so, but it is.
Anyway, I wish luck to this LW, and also to you, Kim, in your own path through life.
Probably.
Because, of course, I can't know that for a fact. One never knows.
At any rate, let me quote something another commenter said way, way above:
"Damn, we put a giant box around sex and make it into this hugely personal, private thing that we aren't allowed to give away (for free, anyway) except in the strictest circumstances."
I'm sure sex is inherently quite personal and private. And I'm also sure this LW is right in that we make it even more private and personal than it has to be. We often don't accept it for what it is, simply one of the facts of life, one of the things that happen between people; either because we had bad experiences with it that are difficult if not impossible to recover from, or because we've learned that in our society sex is super-duper-personal/private.
I wish it weren't so, but it is.
Anyway, I wish luck to this LW, and also to you, Kim, in your own path through life.
171
If the tables are turned I hope every man offers to do this for a dying woman without being asked. For as long as she likes.
I would, for my wife. Without any shadow of a doubt. And no matter how disgusting I found it, or how much she had become 'like a relative' in her illness.
I hope that answer makes you happy. :-)
I would, for my wife. Without any shadow of a doubt. And no matter how disgusting I found it, or how much she had become 'like a relative' in her illness.
I hope that answer makes you happy. :-)
172
#167, I don't think mitten (#155) really comprehends the situation, maybe they didn't read the letter or something. This isn't a matter of the wife has a headache and the husband is in the mood for sex, and maybe she should go along with the foreplay and then she'll be in the mood. The letter writer went through the hell of constant 24-hour care-taking for several years, watching her husband decline to the point where he can barely move at all, where he's forced to live in a care facility away from her, and she dreads the idea of any kind of sexual contact with him. For mitten to suggest that she just needs to go along with foreplay and gosh gee it'll be FANTASTIC! And it doesn't mean she isn't a feminist, it'll just mean she's a nice person, by golly!- well, that's a pretty fucking ignorant and patronizing thing for mitten to suggest.
And I'm guessing #166 has never had to care for a loved one 24 hours a day for several YEARS, cleaning their shit/ urine/ vomit many times a day, feeding them when they need to eat, administering medication as needed, waking every few hours in the night to turn them, and generally neglecting nearly every aspect of their own basic needs to care for that person. I've been in the position of caring for sick relatives- no one who I'd have to be in the position of worrying about requests for sex- and know how incredibly difficult it is. I don't think anyone who's done that would say, 'Oh no, that wasn't enough, you MUST do this other thing for them, even though it will devastate and depress you even further. Or else you're a self-justifying prick-hole'.
And I'm guessing #166 has never had to care for a loved one 24 hours a day for several YEARS, cleaning their shit/ urine/ vomit many times a day, feeding them when they need to eat, administering medication as needed, waking every few hours in the night to turn them, and generally neglecting nearly every aspect of their own basic needs to care for that person. I've been in the position of caring for sick relatives- no one who I'd have to be in the position of worrying about requests for sex- and know how incredibly difficult it is. I don't think anyone who's done that would say, 'Oh no, that wasn't enough, you MUST do this other thing for them, even though it will devastate and depress you even further. Or else you're a self-justifying prick-hole'.
173
Amazonvera, no one can force this woman to do something she thinks she can't do.
Just like no one can force someone not to abandon a sick child who s/he thinks s/he can no longer care for -- a child as sick as this woman's husband is, for instance.
Every person has their limits, what they can or can't do, where they will or won't take their heroism. That's personal, I won't debate that.
But what is the right thing to do in this situation?
To claim that sex is so important that it would be OK to refuse this just because it's sex (while, I assume, refusing some other disgusting task that is not sexual would be much less acceptable -- even if it violated another, non-sexual limit of hers?...), to me, goes against every concept of morality that I can think of.
And if it's the "cumulative heroism" thing: she's done so much already, can't we give her a break? Of course we can. I can. I wouldn't think ill of her for not being able to do this. And indeed she has done so much already. And indeed it is her right to refuse.
Just as in the case of the mother who decides she can no longer care for her sick child.
My main point, though: what would be the right thing to do? To my heart, the answer is obvious: to grant her husband's wish. I won't think ill of her if she can't do it -- for all the reasons you mention. But it would be the right thing to do; there is no doubt in my mind that it would. If she can't do it, then it is yet another example of how we sometimes just can't do the right thing. A tragedy.
Just like no one can force someone not to abandon a sick child who s/he thinks s/he can no longer care for -- a child as sick as this woman's husband is, for instance.
Every person has their limits, what they can or can't do, where they will or won't take their heroism. That's personal, I won't debate that.
But what is the right thing to do in this situation?
To claim that sex is so important that it would be OK to refuse this just because it's sex (while, I assume, refusing some other disgusting task that is not sexual would be much less acceptable -- even if it violated another, non-sexual limit of hers?...), to me, goes against every concept of morality that I can think of.
And if it's the "cumulative heroism" thing: she's done so much already, can't we give her a break? Of course we can. I can. I wouldn't think ill of her for not being able to do this. And indeed she has done so much already. And indeed it is her right to refuse.
Just as in the case of the mother who decides she can no longer care for her sick child.
My main point, though: what would be the right thing to do? To my heart, the answer is obvious: to grant her husband's wish. I won't think ill of her if she can't do it -- for all the reasons you mention. But it would be the right thing to do; there is no doubt in my mind that it would. If she can't do it, then it is yet another example of how we sometimes just can't do the right thing. A tragedy.
174
Ricardo, who said:
"I remember watching my boyfriend's body in the weeks before he died. We hadn't had sex for a year. I'd been changing diapers for six months. He had bedsores all over (turning him around in his bed every two hours wasn't enough by then), he was emaciated, and yet I could still see in my mind the body I had so desired, and he was still the man I loved.
And you know what? I would get an erection every time. And although he could no longer speak, I knew from his expression that he was glad I did. Because I still looked at him in the same way, and that's what he needed to feel."
Very beautiful, and very moving, Ricardo. I wished more people would come to see sex like this.
I hope it's not a "men" vs. "women" thing. I hope it is more of a "right thing to do" thing.
I am saddened by the thought that some people would see sex as such an important thing -- more important than death by terminal disease, more important than love, more important than commitment.
I can understand the "but she's done so much already" argument. She clearly deserves applause already. I will understand, and think no ill of her, if she can't do the right thing.
But this doesn't change the fact that it is the right thing. And that so many people here don't see this... I fault the Judaeo-Christian mentality of sexual prudishness, reversed to "sex-is-all-you-are", that some people have adopted to this very day. I hope this will change at some point in the future, after people realize that there is a difference between sex and soul.
"I remember watching my boyfriend's body in the weeks before he died. We hadn't had sex for a year. I'd been changing diapers for six months. He had bedsores all over (turning him around in his bed every two hours wasn't enough by then), he was emaciated, and yet I could still see in my mind the body I had so desired, and he was still the man I loved.
And you know what? I would get an erection every time. And although he could no longer speak, I knew from his expression that he was glad I did. Because I still looked at him in the same way, and that's what he needed to feel."
Very beautiful, and very moving, Ricardo. I wished more people would come to see sex like this.
I hope it's not a "men" vs. "women" thing. I hope it is more of a "right thing to do" thing.
I am saddened by the thought that some people would see sex as such an important thing -- more important than death by terminal disease, more important than love, more important than commitment.
I can understand the "but she's done so much already" argument. She clearly deserves applause already. I will understand, and think no ill of her, if she can't do the right thing.
But this doesn't change the fact that it is the right thing. And that so many people here don't see this... I fault the Judaeo-Christian mentality of sexual prudishness, reversed to "sex-is-all-you-are", that some people have adopted to this very day. I hope this will change at some point in the future, after people realize that there is a difference between sex and soul.
175
rebecax: "It sounds like being sexual with her husband will add more truama on top of evyerthing else. She doesn't need it. She's been through enough. She doesn't have to do this and I don't think she should if it will add further injury to her."
She, she, she... Me, me, me...
Sigh...
Here's my point. If she can't do it, then she shouldn't do it. If there's some trauma in her life that makes sex under these circumstances such a nightmarish ordeal -- worse than years of removing faeces and not being able to sleep without interruptions every 2 hours -- then she shouldn't do it.
But it's sad that she has such trauma already. If she were a normal, healthy human being, and if our society wasn't so full of messages telling us that sex is our soul, that there's nothing in us deeper or nobler than sex... Nothing more valuable than sex... then I think things might be different.
But you are in principle right. She shouldn't do what she can't do. If sex is her soul, let her keep her soul.
She, she, she... Me, me, me...
Sigh...
Here's my point. If she can't do it, then she shouldn't do it. If there's some trauma in her life that makes sex under these circumstances such a nightmarish ordeal -- worse than years of removing faeces and not being able to sleep without interruptions every 2 hours -- then she shouldn't do it.
But it's sad that she has such trauma already. If she were a normal, healthy human being, and if our society wasn't so full of messages telling us that sex is our soul, that there's nothing in us deeper or nobler than sex... Nothing more valuable than sex... then I think things might be different.
But you are in principle right. She shouldn't do what she can't do. If sex is her soul, let her keep her soul.
176
rebecax, on the cumulative argument ('she's suffered so much already'): again, I agree it's up to her to decide.
But this doesn't change what the right thing to do is in these circumstances. I have to agree with Dan. Life is more than sex. Much, much more.
But this doesn't change what the right thing to do is in these circumstances. I have to agree with Dan. Life is more than sex. Much, much more.
177
169/173 Do you think very few parents give up their ill children? Parents of very very ill or very very emotionally disturbed children usually do put them in residential care, after a while. It's too much for one or two people to bear, especially when they are untrained and emotionally involved.
Also, speaking for myself, I don't "put a giant box around sex and make it into this hugely personal, private thing." In fact, I have sex with strangers to please my (non-dying) husband. (I did, just this afternoon. I had diarrhea beforehand, I was so nervous. But it was surprisingly fun (the sex, not the diarrhea.)
But I do try to listen to people in pain, and take their concerns seriously.
Also, speaking for myself, I don't "put a giant box around sex and make it into this hugely personal, private thing." In fact, I have sex with strangers to please my (non-dying) husband. (I did, just this afternoon. I had diarrhea beforehand, I was so nervous. But it was surprisingly fun (the sex, not the diarrhea.)
But I do try to listen to people in pain, and take their concerns seriously.
179
Kim in portland @168 - oh, my dear. I wish there were a quota for suffering, and we could all know that our own lot wouldn't be any worse than everyone else's. If there were, I'm sure you would live a charmed life from now on.
For me, the hardest thing I've done for a loved one was to agree to have a second child. (Opening up our marriage runs a close second.)
For me, the hardest thing I've done for a loved one was to agree to have a second child. (Opening up our marriage runs a close second.)
180
hamish, who said: " It gets to the point that you do what you do because you love the person, but everything you have and are is squeezed out of you, your life becomes so overtaken with this person's needs that you begin to feel like you have nothing left to give."
Indeed. I'm sure this woman went through hell. I can vividly imagine what this was like.
But she's alive. She will have the opportunity of healing from this, even if only partially; even if it will never again be the same, it will get better. (I note she is already having life-affirming sex.)
He will not.
I am sure that, if he is in any way a decent human being, he is already very thankful for all she did. Anyone who wouldn't be thankful for that level of sacrifice would probably deserve some of the worst areas in hell.
As you point out, taking care of someone, being his/her support person, feels as if the life were being sucked out of you. And you also feel guilty every time you fail as a human being to be there for the sick person who needs you. I understand that very, very well, believe me.
But ultimately, when all is said and done...
She will have the opportunity (not the certainty -- the opportunity) to heal.
He won't.
For an appraisal of what the right thing to here (as opposed to what she is capable of doing) -- this is a very important fact.
As I said, I won't think ill of her if she doesn't -- the most important reason being, as you said, that she's given so much already.
But she'll be alive. And he'll be dead (even if his body is somehow kept alive in that nursing home). That is an important fact.
Indeed. I'm sure this woman went through hell. I can vividly imagine what this was like.
But she's alive. She will have the opportunity of healing from this, even if only partially; even if it will never again be the same, it will get better. (I note she is already having life-affirming sex.)
He will not.
I am sure that, if he is in any way a decent human being, he is already very thankful for all she did. Anyone who wouldn't be thankful for that level of sacrifice would probably deserve some of the worst areas in hell.
As you point out, taking care of someone, being his/her support person, feels as if the life were being sucked out of you. And you also feel guilty every time you fail as a human being to be there for the sick person who needs you. I understand that very, very well, believe me.
But ultimately, when all is said and done...
She will have the opportunity (not the certainty -- the opportunity) to heal.
He won't.
For an appraisal of what the right thing to here (as opposed to what she is capable of doing) -- this is a very important fact.
As I said, I won't think ill of her if she doesn't -- the most important reason being, as you said, that she's given so much already.
But she'll be alive. And he'll be dead (even if his body is somehow kept alive in that nursing home). That is an important fact.
181
What if he wasn't grateful for what she has done? What if, like many ill people, he has become bitter and demanding? She doesn't mention the word love. She doesn't say anything nice about him. What if she in fact hates him? Would that get her off the hook, in your opinion?
182
Amazonvera, who said: "people bringing up the possibility of that going ahead with unwanted, sickening, depressing sex acts could be traumatizing or cause someone to feel violated are totes over-reacting"
No, Amazonvera. People bringing up the possibility that going ahead with unwanted, sickening, depressing sex acts could be traumatizing or cause someone to feel violated are not totes over-reacting.
They are pointing out something that is true.
Like those who point out that risking one's life to save people from a burning building -- like 9/11 first responders did -- could also be traumatizing and cause one to feel violated. Not only psychologically: also very, very physically traumatizing.
You can of course decline to do it. You can stand in front of the burning building and say that attempting to save someone's life from it would traumatize you too much -- and there's a good chance that you are indeed right: it very well could. So I won't think ill of you if you say you would never have risked your life to save someone from such a building. Even if you say you would never have risked your life to save a loved one who was dying in that burning building.
It's entirely your choice. Your body, your rules. You decide. If you can't do it, you can't do it, and nobody can force you to be a hero against your will. And if you've already done a lot of other things to help -- called the police, taken care of wounded people, helped in other ways -- nobody can fault you. Really, nobody can.
But there is no doubt in my mind about what the right thing to do is. If you can't do it, I won't fault you. But not because it isn't the right thing to do. Just because you couldn't do it. A different thing.
No, Amazonvera. People bringing up the possibility that going ahead with unwanted, sickening, depressing sex acts could be traumatizing or cause someone to feel violated are not totes over-reacting.
They are pointing out something that is true.
Like those who point out that risking one's life to save people from a burning building -- like 9/11 first responders did -- could also be traumatizing and cause one to feel violated. Not only psychologically: also very, very physically traumatizing.
You can of course decline to do it. You can stand in front of the burning building and say that attempting to save someone's life from it would traumatize you too much -- and there's a good chance that you are indeed right: it very well could. So I won't think ill of you if you say you would never have risked your life to save someone from such a building. Even if you say you would never have risked your life to save a loved one who was dying in that burning building.
It's entirely your choice. Your body, your rules. You decide. If you can't do it, you can't do it, and nobody can force you to be a hero against your will. And if you've already done a lot of other things to help -- called the police, taken care of wounded people, helped in other ways -- nobody can fault you. Really, nobody can.
But there is no doubt in my mind about what the right thing to do is. If you can't do it, I won't fault you. But not because it isn't the right thing to do. Just because you couldn't do it. A different thing.
183
@148 above has made the most valid point of all. Would the husband feel any pleasure from this act, other than the impression he was pleasuring his wife? Probably no; because the wife would feel no pleasure, and I find it hard to imagine he doesn't know this. Is it to establish a connection of intimacy? I find it just as hard to imagine he wouldn't know that this is probably impossible now. So why is he asking for it? What is in it for him?
Good question.
Good question.
184
Pinky, who said: AGAIN, I'd like to ask anyone saying she 'must' do this- if you were in the husband's situation, and knew that your partner- depressed and exhausted after providing you with constant, 'round the clock care for several years- was depressed and horrified at the idea of engaging in further sex acts with you, would you want them suppress their emotions and put on an act despite their dread and disgust?
Yes. I would.
Why? Because I'm self-centered? Because I"m a man who thinks of women as little dolls to play with? Because I need to 'serviced' and that is more important than any traumas she might feel?
No.
Because I'm dying. Because my body will feel all kinds of strange things -- strange urges (I remember how horny my grandmother got when she died...). Because I'll be contemplating the big emptiness, and my heart will be full of fear. Because I may even still have to spend years incapable of doing anything physical, and that might be my last chance.
If my wife couldn't bring herself to do this for me, I wouldn't think ill of her. I love her. But I would ask her, and I think she would understand I'm not just asking for a cookie at the last moment.
Life and death. The rules do apply, Pinky. To me, the rules say: take into account how much the other party is suffering -- and how much you are -- before deciding what you can or can't do. I would willingly do that for my wife -- or, if EricaP prefers, I'd do something suitably difficult for men to do (you name it, I'll do it) -- for the woman I love, who is in pain, physcially debilitated, and may never get any pleasure from the fact she has a body in the few years left for her to live.
Nobody has to be a hero. And you, Pinky, don't have to be capable of doing what I would do. But it still doesn't change the calculations; it doesn't change the fact that two people are involved, two hearts, two potentially traumatizable souls, two sufferings. You have to take them into account, and somehow compare them, if you want to decide what to do. (The main difference between viewpoints in this comments thread seems to be how to compute the suffering of each party, and how to compare them.)
More...
Yes. I would.
Why? Because I'm self-centered? Because I"m a man who thinks of women as little dolls to play with? Because I need to 'serviced' and that is more important than any traumas she might feel?
No.
Because I'm dying. Because my body will feel all kinds of strange things -- strange urges (I remember how horny my grandmother got when she died...). Because I'll be contemplating the big emptiness, and my heart will be full of fear. Because I may even still have to spend years incapable of doing anything physical, and that might be my last chance.
If my wife couldn't bring herself to do this for me, I wouldn't think ill of her. I love her. But I would ask her, and I think she would understand I'm not just asking for a cookie at the last moment.
Life and death. The rules do apply, Pinky. To me, the rules say: take into account how much the other party is suffering -- and how much you are -- before deciding what you can or can't do. I would willingly do that for my wife -- or, if EricaP prefers, I'd do something suitably difficult for men to do (you name it, I'll do it) -- for the woman I love, who is in pain, physcially debilitated, and may never get any pleasure from the fact she has a body in the few years left for her to live.
Nobody has to be a hero. And you, Pinky, don't have to be capable of doing what I would do. But it still doesn't change the calculations; it doesn't change the fact that two people are involved, two hearts, two potentially traumatizable souls, two sufferings. You have to take them into account, and somehow compare them, if you want to decide what to do. (The main difference between viewpoints in this comments thread seems to be how to compute the suffering of each party, and how to compare them.)
185
AGAIN, I'd like to ask anyone saying she 'must' do this.
Pinky.
Noody "must" do anything. If my wife asks me for a glass of water, I don't "have" to bring her one. If I don't want to, I have the right to refuse to give her water. Even if she is desperately thirsty.
If someone falls down and breaks a leg, I don't "have to" call 911. I have the right to refuse to help, for whatever reason, and even for no reason.
So the question to me is not what she "must" do; because obviously she decides what she will do, and doesn't have to do anything, sexual or otherwise, that she doesn't want to.
She didn't have to care of him either. She had the right to dump him at the first sign of MS, too. Taking care of a person with such a disease can certainly traumatize and violate a person.
The question, therefore, is not what she "must" do. Nobody has to be a saint. Nobody even has to be a decent human being. There are no "must"s, really, other than what is described in the law.
The question is what the right thing to do would be. If she can't bring herself to do it -- if it would be too damaging for her -- then of course she doesn't have to. And I won't think ill of her.
But, I insist, that is not the question: the question is what the right thing is to do. Even if she can't do it, for whatever reason: what is the right thing to do?
Pinky.
Noody "must" do anything. If my wife asks me for a glass of water, I don't "have" to bring her one. If I don't want to, I have the right to refuse to give her water. Even if she is desperately thirsty.
If someone falls down and breaks a leg, I don't "have to" call 911. I have the right to refuse to help, for whatever reason, and even for no reason.
So the question to me is not what she "must" do; because obviously she decides what she will do, and doesn't have to do anything, sexual or otherwise, that she doesn't want to.
She didn't have to care of him either. She had the right to dump him at the first sign of MS, too. Taking care of a person with such a disease can certainly traumatize and violate a person.
The question, therefore, is not what she "must" do. Nobody has to be a saint. Nobody even has to be a decent human being. There are no "must"s, really, other than what is described in the law.
The question is what the right thing to do would be. If she can't bring herself to do it -- if it would be too damaging for her -- then of course she doesn't have to. And I won't think ill of her.
But, I insist, that is not the question: the question is what the right thing is to do. Even if she can't do it, for whatever reason: what is the right thing to do?
186
EricaP, I'm sure there are many parents who can't take care of their children and give them away. And I'm sorry for them and their children, because I don't think this is the right thing to do. Oh yes, there are cases in which it is. But my impression is, they're not the majority.
I am glad that you and your husband can have fun with you having sex with other men. It's something I enjoy very much, too, but, alas, not my wife. So I actually do envy your husband. :-)
To me, the question is not what the LW "must" do. As I said above, she doesn't even "have to" give her husband a glass of water if she thinks that's too much for her. The question is what the right thing is.
9/11 first responders didn't have to do what they did. Not everybody is a hero.
But they did do the right thing, and I appreciate them for that.
As for making sex this big important thing... Yes. I've often seen this attitude: sex is so important, it's basically what defines me as a sentient being; I could only have it under such-and-such circumstances, and I would never put up with any inconveniences, because, after all, it's sex, the most important thing in the whole world. Clearly that is not your case; very well. But there are people like that, and I pity them, because they give sex too much importance.
I am glad that you and your husband can have fun with you having sex with other men. It's something I enjoy very much, too, but, alas, not my wife. So I actually do envy your husband. :-)
To me, the question is not what the LW "must" do. As I said above, she doesn't even "have to" give her husband a glass of water if she thinks that's too much for her. The question is what the right thing is.
9/11 first responders didn't have to do what they did. Not everybody is a hero.
But they did do the right thing, and I appreciate them for that.
As for making sex this big important thing... Yes. I've often seen this attitude: sex is so important, it's basically what defines me as a sentient being; I could only have it under such-and-such circumstances, and I would never put up with any inconveniences, because, after all, it's sex, the most important thing in the whole world. Clearly that is not your case; very well. But there are people like that, and I pity them, because they give sex too much importance.
187
"you name it, I'll do it" -- No limit at all? Risking prison by killing her if she asks? Giving her an organ from your minor child, so she'll have 3 more months of life?
188
What if he wasn't grateful for what she has done? What if, like many ill people, he has become bitter and demanding? She doesn't mention the word love. She doesn't say anything nice about him. What if she in fact hates him? Would that get her off the hook, in your opinion?
That is a good question. Since love is usually part of the package, to the point that losing the love of one's loved one is a deal-breaker -- if my wife stopped loving me, or if I stopped loving her, why should we make sacrifices for each other, why should we even stay together? (One possible reason: our 8-year-old daughter. Any other reasons? Maybe not.)
So, if he stopped loving her and became what you described -- even if it wasn't his fault; even if his becoming this unloving thing was not a conscious development of his personality, but something that was imposed on him by his disease -- would that affect anything?
I don't know; I suppose it all depends on what kind of bond they shared, and how much she valued what they had before he became this unloving thing. She was willing to put with a lot for his sake; either she was just obeying social norms ('that's what a good person would do'), or (I'd prefer to think) she really loved him and was committed to what they had -- before he changed into an unloving thing.
If this happend to my wife, my impression is that I would still honor what he had and do this for her, even if she became an unloving thing. But I honestly must say that I don't know that for a fact.
That is a good question. Since love is usually part of the package, to the point that losing the love of one's loved one is a deal-breaker -- if my wife stopped loving me, or if I stopped loving her, why should we make sacrifices for each other, why should we even stay together? (One possible reason: our 8-year-old daughter. Any other reasons? Maybe not.)
So, if he stopped loving her and became what you described -- even if it wasn't his fault; even if his becoming this unloving thing was not a conscious development of his personality, but something that was imposed on him by his disease -- would that affect anything?
I don't know; I suppose it all depends on what kind of bond they shared, and how much she valued what they had before he became this unloving thing. She was willing to put with a lot for his sake; either she was just obeying social norms ('that's what a good person would do'), or (I'd prefer to think) she really loved him and was committed to what they had -- before he changed into an unloving thing.
If this happend to my wife, my impression is that I would still honor what he had and do this for her, even if she became an unloving thing. But I honestly must say that I don't know that for a fact.
190
"you name it, I'll do it" -- No limit at all? Risking prison by killing her if she asks? Giving her an organ from your minor child, so she'll have 3 more months of life?
:-)
You said: things that are as difficult for a man, as sex under those circumstances would be for a woman (more specifically, for her, since some women who answered here already said they would).
So: do you think these particular acts are things the LW (or even you yourself) would find easier than having sex under certain circumstances (the LW's)?
Personally, if she wanted me to kill her rather than live in pain with MS, I would. I am in favor of euthanasia. She wouldn't even have to be my beloved wife; a good friend would be enough.
Donating an organ from my minor child? If the level of suffering generated by this was inferior to the level of suffering she was going through, I would be in favor, yes. But even though the child is minor, by my moral code the decision is his/hers, not mine.
:-)
You said: things that are as difficult for a man, as sex under those circumstances would be for a woman (more specifically, for her, since some women who answered here already said they would).
So: do you think these particular acts are things the LW (or even you yourself) would find easier than having sex under certain circumstances (the LW's)?
Personally, if she wanted me to kill her rather than live in pain with MS, I would. I am in favor of euthanasia. She wouldn't even have to be my beloved wife; a good friend would be enough.
Donating an organ from my minor child? If the level of suffering generated by this was inferior to the level of suffering she was going through, I would be in favor, yes. But even though the child is minor, by my moral code the decision is his/hers, not mine.
191
There are a few points to MSS's story that nobody has touched on. First of all is the tragedy that she did not seek the support of a caregivers' group early on in her husband's illness that could have helped her with coping skills and exercises to prevent the marital relationship from deteriorating. Though the physical expression of intimacy would still have been lost, she may have been able to retain some precious aspects of the former sex life with her husband. However, by becoming overwhelmed with the increasingly time-consuming nature of providing care to a man whose needs were more and more demanding, she ended up breaking the sexual link to him while thinking of him as a child and no longer the man she was married to.
Another sad thing is that neither of them apparently discussed his deteriorating physical condition and its effect on their lives together. I can see denial in his case, as the loss of virility is a huge blow for men when it involves not only the loss of functioning genitals but also the cessation of sensations. And now MSS's husband's only hope is to reach out to her, to show her that – even if he can't accept physical pleasure – he can still be the source of it for her. For her and not just any woman (to counter those who are proposing hiring a professional).
The reason I'm bringing this up is because I've witnessed the same kind of life-robbing disease that struck a couple of my friends. The one who began to deteriorate rapidly gave his partner of many decades permission to seek outside sexual relief – which his partner did ... discreetly. The love each had for the other was never diminished, even though they could no longer demonstrate it in physical terms.
The strongest sense I get from MSS is not revulsion from the thought of face-sitting. It's the guilt building up at the thought of face-sitting with her husband-in-name-only when compared to the vigorous life-affirming sex life she's having (without her husband's knowledge). Though she says she feels bad for him, I don't think it's anywhere near the height of relief she gets from having all this new sex to make her feel like a woman again, playing catch-up for the years of doing without. I can't entirely condemn her, but do feel she's at fault for basically burying her husband prematurely by unilaterally divorcing him emotionally. So, there, I have to agree that she IS being "a selfish bitch" - her words.
Is there any solution to her dilemma? Originally (before reading all of the comments), I agreed with Dan to suck it up (with liquid courage, if required) and do it. But I can't see her doing that. The very least she should do is to cheat emotionally on her current willing-and-able lovers by putting herself back into that emotional space where she can acknowledge that her husband is still alive. Not so that she can fulfill his sexual wish, but at least to the extent that she can feel comfortable kissing him and lying in bed with him. Both of these would be a lot easier to do than any overt sexual act in a nursing home environment.
Perhaps MSS's husband would like to hear her reminisce about their lives when he was still healthy. I'm sure he would feel reassured with a bunch of "remember when" stories to know that he would not be forgotten quickly after his death (which I believe is something we all fear). And if she has to give a goddamn Oscar-worthy performance for that (which does not require doing a sexual act that squicks her out), then that's her final gift to him.
And who knows. Perhaps the "remember when" stories will rekindle the love that was in her heart for many years, making it easier for her to have a small romantic connection (kissing and caressing him). Definitely the right thing for her to do ... for him. It may not have been the marriage she expected. But at least it will be a marriage that she honoured. And MSS's husband will know that he didn't die, abandoned by her.
More...
Another sad thing is that neither of them apparently discussed his deteriorating physical condition and its effect on their lives together. I can see denial in his case, as the loss of virility is a huge blow for men when it involves not only the loss of functioning genitals but also the cessation of sensations. And now MSS's husband's only hope is to reach out to her, to show her that – even if he can't accept physical pleasure – he can still be the source of it for her. For her and not just any woman (to counter those who are proposing hiring a professional).
The reason I'm bringing this up is because I've witnessed the same kind of life-robbing disease that struck a couple of my friends. The one who began to deteriorate rapidly gave his partner of many decades permission to seek outside sexual relief – which his partner did ... discreetly. The love each had for the other was never diminished, even though they could no longer demonstrate it in physical terms.
The strongest sense I get from MSS is not revulsion from the thought of face-sitting. It's the guilt building up at the thought of face-sitting with her husband-in-name-only when compared to the vigorous life-affirming sex life she's having (without her husband's knowledge). Though she says she feels bad for him, I don't think it's anywhere near the height of relief she gets from having all this new sex to make her feel like a woman again, playing catch-up for the years of doing without. I can't entirely condemn her, but do feel she's at fault for basically burying her husband prematurely by unilaterally divorcing him emotionally. So, there, I have to agree that she IS being "a selfish bitch" - her words.
Is there any solution to her dilemma? Originally (before reading all of the comments), I agreed with Dan to suck it up (with liquid courage, if required) and do it. But I can't see her doing that. The very least she should do is to cheat emotionally on her current willing-and-able lovers by putting herself back into that emotional space where she can acknowledge that her husband is still alive. Not so that she can fulfill his sexual wish, but at least to the extent that she can feel comfortable kissing him and lying in bed with him. Both of these would be a lot easier to do than any overt sexual act in a nursing home environment.
Perhaps MSS's husband would like to hear her reminisce about their lives when he was still healthy. I'm sure he would feel reassured with a bunch of "remember when" stories to know that he would not be forgotten quickly after his death (which I believe is something we all fear). And if she has to give a goddamn Oscar-worthy performance for that (which does not require doing a sexual act that squicks her out), then that's her final gift to him.
And who knows. Perhaps the "remember when" stories will rekindle the love that was in her heart for many years, making it easier for her to have a small romantic connection (kissing and caressing him). Definitely the right thing for her to do ... for him. It may not have been the marriage she expected. But at least it will be a marriage that she honoured. And MSS's husband will know that he didn't die, abandoned by her.
192
Well, ankylosaur, I have to say I think it would be pretty vile of a person to ask their partner to do something that that knew the partner dreaded, something that filled them with depression to just contemplate. I think it would be pretty creepy for a person to be able to take any satisfaction and comfort from that- if they knew the partner was just trying to put on an act and was filled with horror and loathing on the inside the whole time.
Why do you think you would be self-sacrificing enough to perform some request your sick spouse made, even though you would be disgusted and depressed by it, and yet at the same time you would not (were the situations reversed) be self-sacrificing enough to go without something that might comfort you, due to the fact that you knew it would cause your spouse depression and horror? That doesn't make sense.
The fact that someone is dying doesn't make them a martyr whose needs should be elevated above any and all needs of healthier people. We're all dying. The letter writer could easily be killed in a car accident, or die from a fatal brain aneurysm, or snap from the depression and kill herself tomorrow- and her husband could linger on for years more, or even potentially be stabilized if new treatments are discovered.
She NEEDS to discuss this with her husband. She has to stop demurely side-stepping the issue. The answer is not to just do as he says because she's somehow morally obligated to since he is dying. If they are still a couple, BOTH their needs need to be considered. If they aren't still a couple in anything other than their legal marriage, then she's REALLY not obligated to offer up her body at his requested, without question.
Why do you think you would be self-sacrificing enough to perform some request your sick spouse made, even though you would be disgusted and depressed by it, and yet at the same time you would not (were the situations reversed) be self-sacrificing enough to go without something that might comfort you, due to the fact that you knew it would cause your spouse depression and horror? That doesn't make sense.
The fact that someone is dying doesn't make them a martyr whose needs should be elevated above any and all needs of healthier people. We're all dying. The letter writer could easily be killed in a car accident, or die from a fatal brain aneurysm, or snap from the depression and kill herself tomorrow- and her husband could linger on for years more, or even potentially be stabilized if new treatments are discovered.
She NEEDS to discuss this with her husband. She has to stop demurely side-stepping the issue. The answer is not to just do as he says because she's somehow morally obligated to since he is dying. If they are still a couple, BOTH their needs need to be considered. If they aren't still a couple in anything other than their legal marriage, then she's REALLY not obligated to offer up her body at his requested, without question.
193
@188 - yes, if she still honors what they shared, I do believe she will decide to do the act (or something similar, if that act is particularly hard for her). But I can see circumstances where both people have changed so much, that she feels their marriage is over; her duty to him is done; and she has "unilaterally divorced him emotionally" (as Helenka put it so well @191). Under those circumstances, I wouldn't say she was any more of a "selfish bitch" than ordinary people who get divorced.
@190 Sorry for misunderstanding -- thanks for explaining that you meant something roughly equivalent to the difficulty MSS faces imagining the oral sex.
@190 Sorry for misunderstanding -- thanks for explaining that you meant something roughly equivalent to the difficulty MSS faces imagining the oral sex.
194
What is up with the people saying that others shouldn't see sex as important, and then claiming this woman should get sexhay with her husband because sex is SO important (his dying wish)? Hello, what? So is it important, or is it not important? Make up your mind already.
But really, it's not about sex. Sitting on someone's face while they move their tongue around your genitals, but you aren't aroused in any way, rather the opposite... that's not sex. That's just messed up. They need some damn honestly all up in their relationship. Yeah, his manhood has been taken from him. And it's not his fault. It *is* a shitty, shitty situation. But Jesus Christ. We're all going to die. He's terminally ill, but she might get in a car accident and die before him. Who the hell can say? And why is all of the focus on him? This is a shitty, shitty situation for BOTH of them. Don't for one second think that her life is ever going to be as carefree and joyful as it was before her husband, marriage, and life plans crumbled before her eyes.
I don't know that she'll regret not doing it, and I don't know that she'd be traumatized by doing it. In the end, it's 100% her call and doing it doesn't make her a hero and it won't fix any of her heartache, just as not doing it doesn't make her a selfish prick and won't ruin her life. In the end, he will be dead and she will have to pick up the pieces of her shattered former life. Without him. And whether or not she sat on his face? It's not going to matter much in the end.
I wouldn't want my wife to make herself sick trying to cater to a misguided wish. I would want her to be truthful with me. I would want her to hold my hand. I would want her to love me, and know that I love her. I would be so thankful for all that she'd done, and so sad that my days with her were running out. I'd want her to hold on to all of the good memories. It would hurt to see her moving on, but I would encourage it, because what's she going to do when I'm gone? I wouldn't want to leave behind a shattered shell of a wife. That is not what marriage is all about. Marriage is about BOTH parties involved. It's about unconditional love - not unconditional lust. If I were dying, sex isn't what would be important to me. Love is. And my love for her - MY unconditional love, as the dying party - that's gotta be there too. My unconditional love wouldn't want to cause her disgust or additional depression by pressuring her into doing something she didn't want to do.
More...
But really, it's not about sex. Sitting on someone's face while they move their tongue around your genitals, but you aren't aroused in any way, rather the opposite... that's not sex. That's just messed up. They need some damn honestly all up in their relationship. Yeah, his manhood has been taken from him. And it's not his fault. It *is* a shitty, shitty situation. But Jesus Christ. We're all going to die. He's terminally ill, but she might get in a car accident and die before him. Who the hell can say? And why is all of the focus on him? This is a shitty, shitty situation for BOTH of them. Don't for one second think that her life is ever going to be as carefree and joyful as it was before her husband, marriage, and life plans crumbled before her eyes.
I don't know that she'll regret not doing it, and I don't know that she'd be traumatized by doing it. In the end, it's 100% her call and doing it doesn't make her a hero and it won't fix any of her heartache, just as not doing it doesn't make her a selfish prick and won't ruin her life. In the end, he will be dead and she will have to pick up the pieces of her shattered former life. Without him. And whether or not she sat on his face? It's not going to matter much in the end.
I wouldn't want my wife to make herself sick trying to cater to a misguided wish. I would want her to be truthful with me. I would want her to hold my hand. I would want her to love me, and know that I love her. I would be so thankful for all that she'd done, and so sad that my days with her were running out. I'd want her to hold on to all of the good memories. It would hurt to see her moving on, but I would encourage it, because what's she going to do when I'm gone? I wouldn't want to leave behind a shattered shell of a wife. That is not what marriage is all about. Marriage is about BOTH parties involved. It's about unconditional love - not unconditional lust. If I were dying, sex isn't what would be important to me. Love is. And my love for her - MY unconditional love, as the dying party - that's gotta be there too. My unconditional love wouldn't want to cause her disgust or additional depression by pressuring her into doing something she didn't want to do.
195
@ ankylosaur, you seem to be so far up your own ass that you're not paying attention to what's being said by Dan and others and the fact that those comments, verbatim, are what people like EricaP, Pinky, myself, and others are responding to. Or maybe you do see that and you're such a pedantic mansplainer that you just want to educate us about the finer points of our ignorant wrongness anyway. It's a mystery.
If you feel like there's something righteous about women being morally compelled into unwanted, depressing, sickening sex acts because hey, they're married and that's what's "right," then I'd say that it might actually be you who's far too influenced by traditional Judeo-Christian sexual values. Your repeated insistence on treating wife and mother as analogous roles speaks volumes as well.
If you feel like there's something righteous about women being morally compelled into unwanted, depressing, sickening sex acts because hey, they're married and that's what's "right," then I'd say that it might actually be you who's far too influenced by traditional Judeo-Christian sexual values. Your repeated insistence on treating wife and mother as analogous roles speaks volumes as well.
196
@ 143 - No, you didn't get it. At all. Major comprehension fail. Or maybe it's your obvious personal issues that prevent you from reading correctly.
You're not very good at understanding rhetoric, either. I don't think that men have it bad, because they generally don't. I'm very much aware of all the privileges that come with having a penis. I was just asking EricaP not to judge by a double standard - especially since, having read many of her posts, I don't think she'd like it if I did. Again, your own personal issues got in the way, it appears.
I think the only one here who's "so far up [her] ass that [she's] not paying attention to what's being said" is you.
You're not very good at understanding rhetoric, either. I don't think that men have it bad, because they generally don't. I'm very much aware of all the privileges that come with having a penis. I was just asking EricaP not to judge by a double standard - especially since, having read many of her posts, I don't think she'd like it if I did. Again, your own personal issues got in the way, it appears.
I think the only one here who's "so far up [her] ass that [she's] not paying attention to what's being said" is you.
197
@ 153 - Anyway, the two QM's on each side cancel each other out and we're back to me being just gay. Phew!
198
@ 146 - "Or is sex "easy" and feelings "hard," because that's how it is for you? "
Is that rhetorical, or is that directed at me? If it's rhetorical, you certainly have deep stereotyping issues. And if it's directed at me, well, I thought you were more intelligent than that shows you to be. Didn't you read my posts?
You write extensively about every little problem you've ever had in your relationship(s), using slog as your own personal therapist - and that's cool, with one caveat: you should first learn to listen to others, too.
At this point, I suggest you take your own advice: "You can't get inside her head and know what it's really like for her. You can't know. So give her your advice [...], and then let her make up her mind."
Is that rhetorical, or is that directed at me? If it's rhetorical, you certainly have deep stereotyping issues. And if it's directed at me, well, I thought you were more intelligent than that shows you to be. Didn't you read my posts?
You write extensively about every little problem you've ever had in your relationship(s), using slog as your own personal therapist - and that's cool, with one caveat: you should first learn to listen to others, too.
At this point, I suggest you take your own advice: "You can't get inside her head and know what it's really like for her. You can't know. So give her your advice [...], and then let her make up her mind."
200
@198 If feelings are easy for you, as well as sex -- great. I apologize for using stereotypes rather than simply asking: What is hard for you? Can you imagine something being hard for you, that might be easy for someone else to do?
Maybe everything in life is easy for you. Apparently it was easy for you to redefine rape as just an unpleasant evening. But if you think that would be easy for everyone, you're wrong. I don't care if you think I'm stupid -- I'm just trying to understand you, to my limited ability.
Maybe everything in life is easy for you. Apparently it was easy for you to redefine rape as just an unpleasant evening. But if you think that would be easy for everyone, you're wrong. I don't care if you think I'm stupid -- I'm just trying to understand you, to my limited ability.
201
@198 >> you should first learn to listen to others, too.>>
I'm trying. This is what "learning" looks like, at least in me.
I'm trying. This is what "learning" looks like, at least in me.
202
@200 "redefine rape" is the wrong phrase... I'm referring to Ricardo's statement @137 "I've been raped...But I chose to see that event as a rather unpleasant evening instead of a traumatizing life-defining moment. So it never became one."
203
@ 200 - Lots of things are difficult for me and easy for others, you can't begin to imagine. The thing is, though, that when you're in such a situation, you stop thinking about what you can't do, and you start thinking about all those things that you actually CAN do. How else would you manage to do all that MSS did during all those years?
I did set boundaries when my BF got sick. There were lots of things I wasn't willing to sacrifice, so I didn't. But if I was in any way able to do something that was necessary, if my body could accomplish it, my mind accepted it. I made sure I set boundaries that would help me endure what I was facing, and not arbitrary limits to what I would do for him based on absolute principles like "no one should have to do that" that clearly come from cluelessness about real situations, not just theoretical ones (yes, talking about you, amazonvera).
To set the record straight: I don't think you're stupid - I've read enough of your posts to know you're not - but dismissing the value of my experience by saying "You still got erections, thinking of him. That's great, lovely to hear. That's not her situation." is, indeed, very stupid. And insulting.
You have no real idea of how erections work. As a woman, you simply can't, because observing the phenomenon is not the same as going through it (in the same way that I can't know for sure what a woman feels... at any moment.) But when you like your men plump and with clear skin, like me, getting an erection while watching a bedsore-ridden emaciated body (which would otherwise make me "kinda sick and depressed", if not thoroughly disguted), that means that I truly did overcome the problem the letter writer is facing.
You seem to believe that your experience as a woman, generally, and your issues with sexuality apply to the LW's situation, whereas MSS wrote in asking for advice as an individual, not a woman, about her specific situation, of which you have no apparent direct experience. Therefore, you shouldn't dismiss so offhandedly the comments of those who have actually gone through a similar situation just because those comments don't fit the way you PERCEIVE it.
This is an advice column. I'm confident that the LW can take the advice she asked for and say "I don't agree" or "Dan's right". If she has a brain, as she obviously does, she'll be able to figure out on her own how much of it applies to her. She can take it - she's definitely taken much worse.
And personally, I can't imagine anything worse than getting covered in your lover's shit, while trying to change his diapers, because he's no longer even aware that he's going to have a bowel movement. It's very hard to imagine him then as anything more than a source of constant suffering, an ordeal one has to go through even though "one shouldn't have to go through it", and it's very easy to forget what he used to be (that, I believe, is MSS's problem at the moment). But somehow, I never forgot the sexy little cub I had had so many great times with, in and out of bed. The man whom I loved so much and who made me feel loved so much. And I never lost sight of the fact that his suffering was much worse than mine, and that this was my last and only chance of helping him ever again, of showing him all the extent of my love. So I overcame my disgust, and did all I could.
It looks like MSS did all that too. There's just one little thing left. Of course she doesn't have to do it, but I'm 99% sure that her disgust at doing this now won't begin to compare with the moral disgust she'll feel for herself in 10 years time if she doesn't.
More...
I did set boundaries when my BF got sick. There were lots of things I wasn't willing to sacrifice, so I didn't. But if I was in any way able to do something that was necessary, if my body could accomplish it, my mind accepted it. I made sure I set boundaries that would help me endure what I was facing, and not arbitrary limits to what I would do for him based on absolute principles like "no one should have to do that" that clearly come from cluelessness about real situations, not just theoretical ones (yes, talking about you, amazonvera).
To set the record straight: I don't think you're stupid - I've read enough of your posts to know you're not - but dismissing the value of my experience by saying "You still got erections, thinking of him. That's great, lovely to hear. That's not her situation." is, indeed, very stupid. And insulting.
You have no real idea of how erections work. As a woman, you simply can't, because observing the phenomenon is not the same as going through it (in the same way that I can't know for sure what a woman feels... at any moment.) But when you like your men plump and with clear skin, like me, getting an erection while watching a bedsore-ridden emaciated body (which would otherwise make me "kinda sick and depressed", if not thoroughly disguted), that means that I truly did overcome the problem the letter writer is facing.
You seem to believe that your experience as a woman, generally, and your issues with sexuality apply to the LW's situation, whereas MSS wrote in asking for advice as an individual, not a woman, about her specific situation, of which you have no apparent direct experience. Therefore, you shouldn't dismiss so offhandedly the comments of those who have actually gone through a similar situation just because those comments don't fit the way you PERCEIVE it.
This is an advice column. I'm confident that the LW can take the advice she asked for and say "I don't agree" or "Dan's right". If she has a brain, as she obviously does, she'll be able to figure out on her own how much of it applies to her. She can take it - she's definitely taken much worse.
And personally, I can't imagine anything worse than getting covered in your lover's shit, while trying to change his diapers, because he's no longer even aware that he's going to have a bowel movement. It's very hard to imagine him then as anything more than a source of constant suffering, an ordeal one has to go through even though "one shouldn't have to go through it", and it's very easy to forget what he used to be (that, I believe, is MSS's problem at the moment). But somehow, I never forgot the sexy little cub I had had so many great times with, in and out of bed. The man whom I loved so much and who made me feel loved so much. And I never lost sight of the fact that his suffering was much worse than mine, and that this was my last and only chance of helping him ever again, of showing him all the extent of my love. So I overcame my disgust, and did all I could.
It looks like MSS did all that too. There's just one little thing left. Of course she doesn't have to do it, but I'm 99% sure that her disgust at doing this now won't begin to compare with the moral disgust she'll feel for herself in 10 years time if she doesn't.
204
@ 199 - One of the best things about the word gay is that it's short and uncomplicated. If you go on like this, we'll have to go back to catamite.
205
203 erratum - I meant "that clearly come from cluelessness about real situations, by opposition to theoretical ones" or something similar
206
Thank you for explaining. Since I didn't understand about your erections until you explained, I hope you will understand that I meant no insult when I suggested you were asking her to do more than you had had to do. The insult / stupidity was unintentional. But I apologize for hurting you.
I still don't see how your insisting that she should get over her resistance -- "just one more little effort" "it's just sex, it's just a physical activity" -- is really going to help her get over her resistance. (If she's reading.)
Helenka @191 makes the most important point for those of us who are tortured thinking about this: "The tragedy [is] that she did not seek the support of a caregivers' group early on in her husband's illness that could have helped her with coping skills and exercises to prevent the marital relationship from deteriorating."
I still don't see how your insisting that she should get over her resistance -- "just one more little effort" "it's just sex, it's just a physical activity" -- is really going to help her get over her resistance. (If she's reading.)
Helenka @191 makes the most important point for those of us who are tortured thinking about this: "The tragedy [is] that she did not seek the support of a caregivers' group early on in her husband's illness that could have helped her with coping skills and exercises to prevent the marital relationship from deteriorating."
207
@203 - also, don't you think it's odd that she doesn't say anything loving about him in the letter, or anything nice about how he treats her? She is a nice person, and she doesn't want to feel responsible for hurting him... but your enduring love just sounds so so different from her situation... Could you have written a letter like this, at the time?
208
@ 206 - The only advice I can offer her is : you've gotten so far already doing a lot of awful things you would never have imagined that you would one day be doing, or that you would have agreed to do if they'd been presented to you hypothetically; just condition yourself to do one more.
You might say it's not exactly practical advice, but I don't think we need to give her "tricks" on how to cope with disgusting situations. I'm pretty sure she figured out a lot of that by herself already. That's not the problem.
The problem is that she can no longer see him as her husband from "before". So her options are: get counselling, or convince yourself that you're doing it for you. The counselling would take too long (for that specific purpose), but she probably knows by now how to convince herself of many things that contradict her desires.
You might say it's not exactly practical advice, but I don't think we need to give her "tricks" on how to cope with disgusting situations. I'm pretty sure she figured out a lot of that by herself already. That's not the problem.
The problem is that she can no longer see him as her husband from "before". So her options are: get counselling, or convince yourself that you're doing it for you. The counselling would take too long (for that specific purpose), but she probably knows by now how to convince herself of many things that contradict her desires.
209
@ 207 -MSS has been in the caregiver role a lot longer than I was. I wouldn't have written such a letter because of the simple fact that I never got to the same point, but I totally understand where that apparent lack of love comes from: complete exhaustion, both physical and psychological. And the fact that you do need NOT to talk or think about the other person once in a while when you're constantly in that role, so that you don't feel you've totally lost yourself, your personality, your desires in it (as many people have mentioned here).
But it also comes from that mindset you need to acquire to survive such a situation: deal with one problem at a time, as it occurs, so as to never become overwhelmed by the enormousness of what you're faced with. At the moment, she has this precise problem she needs advice on, so she writes in about this precise problem. The rest is not essential to solving that problem, so she doesn't go over it.
But back to the lack of displays of affection... To quote myself: "It's very hard to imagine him then as anything more than a source of constant suffering, an ordeal one has to go through [...], and it's very easy to forget what he used to be."
It doesn't mean she doesn't love him, just that she had to shove that love aside for a long time and replace it with a "motherly" type of love, and right now she can't make the switch back. It's absolutely normal. She's only human - as you said yourself, I believe.
I'm not a therapist, I don't know how to help her make that switch. All I know, from my personal experience and that of my friends who went through the same thing, is that she must do it... or else she'll probably need a lot more counselling in the future. Now that he's in a nursing home, that she no longer needs to see herself as his caregiver, it's the only opportunity she'll ever have to reconnect with him as husband and wife. And it seems to me that this is all he's asking for.
More...
But it also comes from that mindset you need to acquire to survive such a situation: deal with one problem at a time, as it occurs, so as to never become overwhelmed by the enormousness of what you're faced with. At the moment, she has this precise problem she needs advice on, so she writes in about this precise problem. The rest is not essential to solving that problem, so she doesn't go over it.
But back to the lack of displays of affection... To quote myself: "It's very hard to imagine him then as anything more than a source of constant suffering, an ordeal one has to go through [...], and it's very easy to forget what he used to be."
It doesn't mean she doesn't love him, just that she had to shove that love aside for a long time and replace it with a "motherly" type of love, and right now she can't make the switch back. It's absolutely normal. She's only human - as you said yourself, I believe.
I'm not a therapist, I don't know how to help her make that switch. All I know, from my personal experience and that of my friends who went through the same thing, is that she must do it... or else she'll probably need a lot more counselling in the future. Now that he's in a nursing home, that she no longer needs to see herself as his caregiver, it's the only opportunity she'll ever have to reconnect with him as husband and wife. And it seems to me that this is all he's asking for.
210
#194, thank you for your beautiful comment. That is the sort of relationship I hope to be in.
I can't imagine being in a relationship with someone who would want me to do something that made me sick and depressed to contemplate. That isn't a loving relationship at all.
I've said multiple times here that I think she needs to discuss this with her husband. What if they do talk it over and it turns out that her husband doesn't care that it horrifies her? Does everyone here saying she should do it think she should go ahead and do it anyway for him, just because he's dying? And if you think she should, where is she 'allowed' to draw the line? Because he could linger on in the state he's in for a while- what if he demanded increasingly difficult things from her? A what point do you think she is 'allowed' to say, 'Yes, he's dying, but this is damaging to me and I have to put myself first'. See, I think she should draw that line at the first request that makes her depressed and sick to contemplate.
(BTW, I personally believe the chances are good that the husband WOULDN'T want her to do this is she was upfront with him about how she feels about the situation. I'm just wondering where all these people saying, 'This is something you MUST do, or you are a terrible, selfish prick' would expect her to draw the line.)
I can't imagine being in a relationship with someone who would want me to do something that made me sick and depressed to contemplate. That isn't a loving relationship at all.
I've said multiple times here that I think she needs to discuss this with her husband. What if they do talk it over and it turns out that her husband doesn't care that it horrifies her? Does everyone here saying she should do it think she should go ahead and do it anyway for him, just because he's dying? And if you think she should, where is she 'allowed' to draw the line? Because he could linger on in the state he's in for a while- what if he demanded increasingly difficult things from her? A what point do you think she is 'allowed' to say, 'Yes, he's dying, but this is damaging to me and I have to put myself first'. See, I think she should draw that line at the first request that makes her depressed and sick to contemplate.
(BTW, I personally believe the chances are good that the husband WOULDN'T want her to do this is she was upfront with him about how she feels about the situation. I'm just wondering where all these people saying, 'This is something you MUST do, or you are a terrible, selfish prick' would expect her to draw the line.)
212
Can we all just agree it’s a horrible situation for the both of them and the choices are not easy for her? My heart goes out to the both of them. It would be very GGG of her to sit on his face, but she’s not obligated to, and it could even backfire.
I have to agree with the few people so far who suggested that she talk to her husband about their sex life. Whether he’s in a nursing home or not, whether his condition is deteriorating or not, he’s still a human being who’s one half of a couple. He’s not a helpless infant who has to be lied to and coddled just because of his condition. He still has emotional and sexual needs, but more importantly (I assume) he still has a working brain. I’m guessing his emotional life has gone through the wringer, and I doubt he would be shocked to discover that his wife may not be as attracted to him as she used to be. I’m sure he’s given plenty of thought to death, disability, how he looks to other people, etc. Why not just talk to him about it? Have a conversation about in which both people talk about their needs and desires and feelings?
Maybe he’d be okay with a sex worker, maybe not. Maybe just having a conversation about sex would help set the mood – intimate negotiation can be excellent foreplay. Maybe there are all sorts of other compromises that we haven’t thought of but he has thought of. Maybe his deepest fantasy is to be treated as an equal in the time he has remaining. Maybe when he mentioned her sitting on him he was trying to open up a bigger conversation.
I don’t think she owes it to him to sit on his face, but she does owe it to him to talk about it.
I have to agree with the few people so far who suggested that she talk to her husband about their sex life. Whether he’s in a nursing home or not, whether his condition is deteriorating or not, he’s still a human being who’s one half of a couple. He’s not a helpless infant who has to be lied to and coddled just because of his condition. He still has emotional and sexual needs, but more importantly (I assume) he still has a working brain. I’m guessing his emotional life has gone through the wringer, and I doubt he would be shocked to discover that his wife may not be as attracted to him as she used to be. I’m sure he’s given plenty of thought to death, disability, how he looks to other people, etc. Why not just talk to him about it? Have a conversation about in which both people talk about their needs and desires and feelings?
Maybe he’d be okay with a sex worker, maybe not. Maybe just having a conversation about sex would help set the mood – intimate negotiation can be excellent foreplay. Maybe there are all sorts of other compromises that we haven’t thought of but he has thought of. Maybe his deepest fantasy is to be treated as an equal in the time he has remaining. Maybe when he mentioned her sitting on him he was trying to open up a bigger conversation.
I don’t think she owes it to him to sit on his face, but she does owe it to him to talk about it.
214
I'm in agreement with @22
"telling someone to do something they are sexually uncomfortable with is so messed up."
I often agree with Dan's advice. Not this time. This advice is off.
"telling someone to do something they are sexually uncomfortable with is so messed up."
I often agree with Dan's advice. Not this time. This advice is off.
215
@ Ricardo, here's your exact quote about the LW: "Hey, it's just sex. With her husband. If it has the potential to make her "feel physically sick, violated, or traumatized", she definitely has some serious issues already."
And yet she says right here in the letter that the idea of it, let alone the practical application, already makes her feel sick. Not to mention depressed. So please, Ricardo, amid your complaints about others being so insensitively dismissive about your experiences, tell us what her "serious issues" are and why someone must have "serious issues" to dare to feel violated by unwanted sexual contact, as well as my obvious "issues" and life experiences. And while we're on the topic of disparate male and female sexual physiology, amid your education to the women of slog about how we can't possibly understand erections (and I generally agree, though we do have them on a much smaller scale), please tell me more about how it's not a big deal for someone to have an organ with a concentration of nerve endings found nowhere in your body stimulated in a way that is unwanted.
And yet she says right here in the letter that the idea of it, let alone the practical application, already makes her feel sick. Not to mention depressed. So please, Ricardo, amid your complaints about others being so insensitively dismissive about your experiences, tell us what her "serious issues" are and why someone must have "serious issues" to dare to feel violated by unwanted sexual contact, as well as my obvious "issues" and life experiences. And while we're on the topic of disparate male and female sexual physiology, amid your education to the women of slog about how we can't possibly understand erections (and I generally agree, though we do have them on a much smaller scale), please tell me more about how it's not a big deal for someone to have an organ with a concentration of nerve endings found nowhere in your body stimulated in a way that is unwanted.
216
@215: Someone does not have to have serious issues to feel violated by unwanted sexual contact.
Someone may well have serious issues if sexual contact with their partner is unwanted.
Someone may well have serious issues if sexual contact with their partner is unwanted.
217
@ 216, take another look at the LW's story and explain to me what about her lack of sexual desire for this person isn't totally understandable and indicates that she "definitely had some serious issues already."
218
No. No no no.
Don't do it.
I don't know if it is some kind of mostly-gender based thing, but Dan's advice to suck it in and take one for the team with sex, is partly ok, but in some cases just so, so wrong.
There's a lot of times when I'm tired, and I don't feel like it, but I know if I go ahead, I'll get into it a tiny bit, even just for their sake, even if I'll still be miles off getting off.
Then there's the other times - where for unknown reasons, there is no chance* I will get even the slightest flicker of attraction when I have sex, and *if* I do that anyway, give a blowjob, or pretend to be into it, or just lie there if it's that bad - the handful of times I did that (because I'm GGG!) caused more relationship damage than any 5 all night arguments. Each time, it killed my sex drive for a while. Somehow the absolute non-sexualness of the touch made my skin crawl, at the same time as I could barely feel anything from my sexual organs - erogenous zones etc (I don't know why, but it did). And the worst bit, was the feeling of disgust that was directly associated with my partner. That was awful.
That's the key - if you do something that makes you feel *disgust* while you're doing it**, not dislike, not I don't feel like it, then you're doing something worse than not giving your partner that one particular sexual experience, you're fucking up the feeling, the emotion, and memories, you have for your partner. You will hate yourself more for hating the experience, when he's into it, and that will lead to a whole new category of guilty.
The exception is if you can get into it, even the tiniest bit. Give yourself every advantage, get yourself really worked up before you walk in (masturbate, masturbate, masturbate), don't tell him so you don't feel pressure, but if you walk in there and all your arousal flows away like water out of a bath? Don't do it. God, don't do it.
You'll just hate yourself, and him, and it will be this horrible memory of him trying to get you off and you trying to fake getting off for him while feeling disgusted inside that you will try and repress every time you see him and long after he is gone.
Sometimes the world just sucks.
* I'm talking about if I held a vibrator to my clit, it would feel like a buzzing, possibly irritating, and somehow even less sexual than holding it to my elbow. The Anti-Sexy-Time. I am not being theoretical about the vibrator, but the actual physical sensation.
** The way to build up to activities that previously caused disgust, is to take it in such small babysteps, that at no point, do you feel strongly disgusted by the activity. If you push yourself too hard, many people just intensify their reaction against the activity.
More...
Don't do it.
I don't know if it is some kind of mostly-gender based thing, but Dan's advice to suck it in and take one for the team with sex, is partly ok, but in some cases just so, so wrong.
There's a lot of times when I'm tired, and I don't feel like it, but I know if I go ahead, I'll get into it a tiny bit, even just for their sake, even if I'll still be miles off getting off.
Then there's the other times - where for unknown reasons, there is no chance* I will get even the slightest flicker of attraction when I have sex, and *if* I do that anyway, give a blowjob, or pretend to be into it, or just lie there if it's that bad - the handful of times I did that (because I'm GGG!) caused more relationship damage than any 5 all night arguments. Each time, it killed my sex drive for a while. Somehow the absolute non-sexualness of the touch made my skin crawl, at the same time as I could barely feel anything from my sexual organs - erogenous zones etc (I don't know why, but it did). And the worst bit, was the feeling of disgust that was directly associated with my partner. That was awful.
That's the key - if you do something that makes you feel *disgust* while you're doing it**, not dislike, not I don't feel like it, then you're doing something worse than not giving your partner that one particular sexual experience, you're fucking up the feeling, the emotion, and memories, you have for your partner. You will hate yourself more for hating the experience, when he's into it, and that will lead to a whole new category of guilty.
The exception is if you can get into it, even the tiniest bit. Give yourself every advantage, get yourself really worked up before you walk in (masturbate, masturbate, masturbate), don't tell him so you don't feel pressure, but if you walk in there and all your arousal flows away like water out of a bath? Don't do it. God, don't do it.
You'll just hate yourself, and him, and it will be this horrible memory of him trying to get you off and you trying to fake getting off for him while feeling disgusted inside that you will try and repress every time you see him and long after he is gone.
Sometimes the world just sucks.
* I'm talking about if I held a vibrator to my clit, it would feel like a buzzing, possibly irritating, and somehow even less sexual than holding it to my elbow. The Anti-Sexy-Time. I am not being theoretical about the vibrator, but the actual physical sensation.
** The way to build up to activities that previously caused disgust, is to take it in such small babysteps, that at no point, do you feel strongly disgusted by the activity. If you push yourself too hard, many people just intensify their reaction against the activity.
219
@217: You are moving the goalposts.
My point - and I believe, Ricardo's point - has to do with her reaction to sexual contact from her husband. I understand her lack of sexual desire for him. Where I see the issue is with her reaction to his sexual desire for her.
And reading her letter, she clearly has issues. The thought of sexual contact with her husband makes her feel depressed and sick. THAT IS AN ISSUE. It's an issue that is understandable; it is an issue that has a clear cause. But it is still an issue. She does not have a healthy sexual relationship with her husband. If he wasn't seriously ill, we'd recommend dumping him or seeking counselling. I don't see how his illness gives her a pass on respecting the fact that he is her husband.
I get that this is a tough, traumatizing, tragic situation for her. Believe me: I get it. I get that this may be something she cannot do. I just think it is something that she should try to do - that if there is a way she can get around her initial response to his request, she should.
My point - and I believe, Ricardo's point - has to do with her reaction to sexual contact from her husband. I understand her lack of sexual desire for him. Where I see the issue is with her reaction to his sexual desire for her.
And reading her letter, she clearly has issues. The thought of sexual contact with her husband makes her feel depressed and sick. THAT IS AN ISSUE. It's an issue that is understandable; it is an issue that has a clear cause. But it is still an issue. She does not have a healthy sexual relationship with her husband. If he wasn't seriously ill, we'd recommend dumping him or seeking counselling. I don't see how his illness gives her a pass on respecting the fact that he is her husband.
I get that this is a tough, traumatizing, tragic situation for her. Believe me: I get it. I get that this may be something she cannot do. I just think it is something that she should try to do - that if there is a way she can get around her initial response to his request, she should.
220
@218: Please register. Out of over 200 comments, that's the only one that argued for the other side that made any sense at all. That was really well said and I understand better now.
But if he's gonna die soon anyway, I still think she should deal with the disgust and sit on his face if at all possible. The constant caretaking and cleaning his shit also led to depression and disgust, and she managed to do that. Even if she looks back with disgust, she can tell herself she did something to made his last days better.
But I can see her side now, and though it would be great if she could do it, I can understand how she might not be able to.
I wonder if she should "break up" with him, that is, tell him that they are not in a dating or sexual relationship anymore and she is taking care of him as a friend. I can't decide if telling him that would be more cruel than not telling him. I think I'd want to hear the truth.
But if he's gonna die soon anyway, I still think she should deal with the disgust and sit on his face if at all possible. The constant caretaking and cleaning his shit also led to depression and disgust, and she managed to do that. Even if she looks back with disgust, she can tell herself she did something to made his last days better.
But I can see her side now, and though it would be great if she could do it, I can understand how she might not be able to.
I wonder if she should "break up" with him, that is, tell him that they are not in a dating or sexual relationship anymore and she is taking care of him as a friend. I can't decide if telling him that would be more cruel than not telling him. I think I'd want to hear the truth.
221
It may be that an honest conversation about this is as much a powerful bonding experience as the sex itself. And that may be a part of what he is reaching out for.
But I think there's one bit of important knowledge to take into that kind of conversation that is implied in Dan's advice, but not really acknowledged by those who are saying "if she's disgusted she shouldn't do it!" There's a powerful emotional connection between anger - more specifically resentment - and disgust. When you are angry and you can't straightforwardly face it, it often seems to morph into feelings of repellence - the need to push away the other person. It changes the way you see them - that's the tipping point where things that were once cute (a belly, a high-pitched voice) become horrible. And that may be the qualitative different between being able to 'go there' in your mind, even in very difficult circumstances, the way Ricardo has (very movingly) described, or not. Because no one is saying sick people are disgusting and don't deserve sexual closeness, right??
Facing more of the anger (and also the fear, pain and loss that makes it easier to turn away to others) could allow for the sexual-emotional connection to become viable again, and NOT damaging.
But I think there's one bit of important knowledge to take into that kind of conversation that is implied in Dan's advice, but not really acknowledged by those who are saying "if she's disgusted she shouldn't do it!" There's a powerful emotional connection between anger - more specifically resentment - and disgust. When you are angry and you can't straightforwardly face it, it often seems to morph into feelings of repellence - the need to push away the other person. It changes the way you see them - that's the tipping point where things that were once cute (a belly, a high-pitched voice) become horrible. And that may be the qualitative different between being able to 'go there' in your mind, even in very difficult circumstances, the way Ricardo has (very movingly) described, or not. Because no one is saying sick people are disgusting and don't deserve sexual closeness, right??
Facing more of the anger (and also the fear, pain and loss that makes it easier to turn away to others) could allow for the sexual-emotional connection to become viable again, and NOT damaging.
222
@ 219, I'm responding to your movement of the goal posts. I for one am not interested in comparing this woman's lack of desire to engage sexually with her husband to some general idea about sex with spouses rather than her specific situation. Please note that Ricardo, when faced with having to explain why she "already" had issues (issues commensurate with those of other posters here saying she doesn't "have to" have unwanted sex that disgusts her, whatever those issues may be), NOT why she has a totally understandable and normal reluctance to let this guy lick her pussy, then backpedals and says he doesn't think she has issues. That's what I'm addressing with him. I don't see how it makes sense to discuss his statements with him and then your very generous but unfortunately factually inaccurate spin on his statements with you and act like I'm the one switching things up.
223
@222 YOU are switching it up.
Ricardo's exact quote about the LW: "Hey, it's just sex. With her husband. If it has the potential to make her "feel physically sick, violated, or traumatized", she definitely has some serious issues already."
Was in response to you writing this: "Maybe it will be an experience that makes her feel physically sick, violated, or traumatized."
He was responding to your attempt to ratchet up LW's aversion to this sex act with her husband. In fact, he clarified in his very next post that what he was really getting at was how crazy it was for you imagine LW's reaction being that way.
That's fair. It actually is hard for me to imagine her having that reaction without any older baggage around that particular act.
Kinda sick is, I guess, a lesser degree of physically sick. Yet, the truth is that "depressed and kinda sick" is very different from "physically sick, traumatized or violated"
Ricardo's exact quote about the LW: "Hey, it's just sex. With her husband. If it has the potential to make her "feel physically sick, violated, or traumatized", she definitely has some serious issues already."
Was in response to you writing this: "Maybe it will be an experience that makes her feel physically sick, violated, or traumatized."
He was responding to your attempt to ratchet up LW's aversion to this sex act with her husband. In fact, he clarified in his very next post that what he was really getting at was how crazy it was for you imagine LW's reaction being that way.
That's fair. It actually is hard for me to imagine her having that reaction without any older baggage around that particular act.
Kinda sick is, I guess, a lesser degree of physically sick. Yet, the truth is that "depressed and kinda sick" is very different from "physically sick, traumatized or violated"
224
Dan what I admire about your commentary is the truthfulness of your honest reactions. I do believe the writer here was looking for just that. I know that I, as a woman, would be uncertain how to weigh the importance of the sexual request versus a personal instinctual reluctance to fulfill it. Your gut reaction is that the request had true life affirming importance. I think that that was valuable information. Though I would agree that having a stiff drink is a good way to release some inhibitions, I admire that some posters have also offered support through a brainstorming of ideas about how to get support from the nursing home and find ways to reconnect mentally to make the possible sexual moment life affirming for both of them and their marriage. If, at the last moment, it turns out to be impossible for the writer, I think everyone here seems to be in agreement that there is no foul and nothing to feel guilty about. I agree.
225
@ 223, I didn't say she already felt those other things, I said that she might feel one OR another OR another after doing it. I also said it might be a positive experience, though since she already feels sick about it, as well as depressed, I don't know how likely that is as opposed to some of the negative alternatives, as well as those put forth by other sufferers of chronic illness and care-taking partners here in the comments. But what do they know, right?
As for your belief that that it's fair to think it's "crazy" to posit that someone might feel traumatized or sick or violated after an unwanted sexual experience, please tell me more about what is or isn't a normal reaction for someone who's experienced an unwanted sexual encounter.
As for your belief that that it's fair to think it's "crazy" to posit that someone might feel traumatized or sick or violated after an unwanted sexual experience, please tell me more about what is or isn't a normal reaction for someone who's experienced an unwanted sexual encounter.
226
@225 "I didn't say she already felt those other things"
No, you didn't, did you? It was a hypothetical you proposed. It was that hypothetical that Ricardo was responding to. So, when you tried to call out Ricardo in his response to your hypothetical as though he were writing about LW herself, you were switching things up.
Pretty dishonest of you.
Pretty disingenuous, on the other hand, is also how I would describe your habit of describing this complicated situation between a husband and wife who may or may not volunteer to participate as "an unwanted sexual encounter."
No, you didn't, did you? It was a hypothetical you proposed. It was that hypothetical that Ricardo was responding to. So, when you tried to call out Ricardo in his response to your hypothetical as though he were writing about LW herself, you were switching things up.
Pretty dishonest of you.
Pretty disingenuous, on the other hand, is also how I would describe your habit of describing this complicated situation between a husband and wife who may or may not volunteer to participate as "an unwanted sexual encounter."
227
@ 226, Ricardo said that "if it HAS THE POTENTIAL," emphasis mine, to make her feel those things (including one thing that she already says she feels), then "she definitely has some serious issues already." Which does go pretty hand-in-hand with you dictating that bringing up the possibility of totally normal and common responses to unwanted sexual contact are "crazy," so I guess you guys do kind of make natural allies.
As for your last point, I don't know how much more clear she could have been about the fact that this is an unwanted sexual encounter. I don't think words like "I have NO interest in doing that," "the thought of being sexual with him almost feels like the thought of being sexual with a child," and "I can't imagine doing what he asks" are at all ambiguous.
As for your last point, I don't know how much more clear she could have been about the fact that this is an unwanted sexual encounter. I don't think words like "I have NO interest in doing that," "the thought of being sexual with him almost feels like the thought of being sexual with a child," and "I can't imagine doing what he asks" are at all ambiguous.
228
@227 SIGH
It's unwanted sex. It's also consensual sex between a man and a wife.
This next statement is unambiguous, factually correct and disingenuous. This next statement is me doing to you what you've done to me.:
You're taking issue with Ricardo for positing that, if consensual sex between a man and a wife leaves the wife feeling traumatized, she's almost certainly got some preexisting issues.
It's unwanted sex. It's also consensual sex between a man and a wife.
This next statement is unambiguous, factually correct and disingenuous. This next statement is me doing to you what you've done to me.:
You're taking issue with Ricardo for positing that, if consensual sex between a man and a wife leaves the wife feeling traumatized, she's almost certainly got some preexisting issues.
229
@228, no one has said that if she agreed it would be non-consensual, probably because it's pretty irrelevant in this particular scenario since people are not infrequently traumatized, violated, or sickened by sexual acts that they didn't want but went ahead with under pressure. I guess if you really want to discuss that I'd point out that consent isn't a black and white issue, but the bottom line is that technical consent doesn't have much of an impact on what's fucked up about someone being compelled into sex they very clearly and very deeply do not want, nor does marriage. Marriage doesn't eliminate the need for consent OR make every sex act wanted, and due to the major historical issues around those kinds of fucked up ideas, that's pretty dangerous territory to boot.
230
Experienced person speaking. Unique circumstances call for unique solutions. If you can possibly do it, then do it. You're giving a friend you loved deeply for a massage. That's all there is to it.
231
I'm with 218
maybe we have issues, but thats the way the cookie crumbles and only she knows if going forward would do more harm then good.
best for her and her husband is they can talk about is, he is still a grown man after all, not her child.
Perhaps talking to him about it would help her shift some of the burden of his happiness off her shoulders and make her feel less over whelmed by his request.
(oh, and this is just me, but oral sex feels really personal (I lack a better word) and there are days when I'm horny and ready to go, but oral, being the center of attention, is just not on the table.)
I'm with 218
maybe we have issues, but thats the way the cookie crumbles and only she knows if going forward would do more harm then good.
best for her and her husband is they can talk about is, he is still a grown man after all, not her child.
Perhaps talking to him about it would help her shift some of the burden of his happiness off her shoulders and make her feel less over whelmed by his request.
(oh, and this is just me, but oral sex feels really personal (I lack a better word) and there are days when I'm horny and ready to go, but oral, being the center of attention, is just not on the table.)
232
@amazonvera
If a man is attracted to smaller women, should he accept and embrace his wife is she happens to gain 100+ pounds during their marriage? If a woman is 115 pounds on her wedding day and 385 pounds on their tenth anniversary, is it acceptable for her husband to hire a gigolo (or ignore her sexual needs altogether) because he's squicked by her condition?
I ask for one reason: according to the fat acceptance movement, the idea that a person is more attractive/emotionally mature/intelligent/etc. at 130 lbs. than 310 lbs. is wrong. By their reckoning, people should be appreciated for their minds/souls, not their physical condition. Despite the fact that obese people are far more unwieldy than their smaller counterparts (akin to MS sufferers), are far more likely to suffer from personal hygiene issues (again, akin to MS sufferers), often require special accomodations to live (again, akin to MS sufferers), and are nigh-universally seen as less attractive than their smaller counterparts (despite the fact that the few cultures in which obese people are seen as attractive arose in nutrient-poor areas of the world in which larger sizes=power), the fat acceptance movement expects us to see them as being equal to everyone else.
Or, simply put, if a man who ends a relationship with a woman due to her drastic weight is seen as morally deficient, then what would you say about a woman who refuses even the slightest touch of her husband's tongue.
If a man is attracted to smaller women, should he accept and embrace his wife is she happens to gain 100+ pounds during their marriage? If a woman is 115 pounds on her wedding day and 385 pounds on their tenth anniversary, is it acceptable for her husband to hire a gigolo (or ignore her sexual needs altogether) because he's squicked by her condition?
I ask for one reason: according to the fat acceptance movement, the idea that a person is more attractive/emotionally mature/intelligent/etc. at 130 lbs. than 310 lbs. is wrong. By their reckoning, people should be appreciated for their minds/souls, not their physical condition. Despite the fact that obese people are far more unwieldy than their smaller counterparts (akin to MS sufferers), are far more likely to suffer from personal hygiene issues (again, akin to MS sufferers), often require special accomodations to live (again, akin to MS sufferers), and are nigh-universally seen as less attractive than their smaller counterparts (despite the fact that the few cultures in which obese people are seen as attractive arose in nutrient-poor areas of the world in which larger sizes=power), the fat acceptance movement expects us to see them as being equal to everyone else.
Or, simply put, if a man who ends a relationship with a woman due to her drastic weight is seen as morally deficient, then what would you say about a woman who refuses even the slightest touch of her husband's tongue.
Advertisement
Most Commented on Slog
-
It's Spring! Who's Ready for Street Harassment? by Cienna Madrid
-
New Gun Enthusiast... by Dan Savage
-
America Doesn't Care About Black People by Charles Mudede
-
SL Letter of the Day: Gonna Boil My Laptop After Answering This One by Dan Savage
-
All You Motherfuckers Complaining That aPodments Are Too Small at 200 Square Feet by Dominic Holden
-
Bigot Florist Files Countersuit by Dominic Holden
-
Slog Super Poll: Who Should Be Mayor? by Dominic Holden
-
SL Letter of the Day: Did You Think I Was Going To Tell You Not To Come Out? (PLUS: Help Free Kate!) by Dan Savage
-
America's Epidemic of Toddler-on-Toddler Gun Violence Continues by Goldy
-
Tim Burgess Quits the Mayor's Race by Dominic Holden
Stranger Personals
The Stranger
RSSSeattle Art & Performance Quarterly
A complete guide to Seattle's current art, film, dance, and theater season.
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (232) RSS