View Single Post
Old 01-22-2010, 04:44 PM
GroundedSpirit GroundedSpirit is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: New England USA
Posts: 1,231

Hi Midnight,

Wow girl - you got a LOT going on here {{{hugs}}}

I think it's really important to state first that this is a prime example of why it's soooooo important to grasp the distinction between love/connection and sex. As I've no doubt said before - as have others - the two CAN go together and it's a beautiful thing when they do ! But neither is a 'requirement' of the other.
In the first quote below you allude to the fact that you choose NOT to acknowledge that.
And here we are...............conflicted......

Originally Posted by ;
I have always reserved sexual interaction for individuals with whom I feel a deep attraction and "chemistry" with and with whom I have developed a preliminary bond. I also prefer to have developed (or at least forsee developing) a meaningful bond with them.
I only know of one way to resolve that conflict. To take a view of "sex" as a 'complimenting' vs 'dependent' part of a bond/relationship.

Now - next.......
Originally Posted by ;
Stewy's criteria of attraction are far wider than mine and, although he is not into "casual" sex with people he doesn't care anything for, he is capable of developing a preliminary bond much faster with a far larger demographic of individuals.
I think there's (at least) two different elements in play here and it would be good to understand them. First - and that may play into the second also - is a gender thing. Men - in GENERAL - seem to have a wider variance in what can be felt as desirable and acceptable in the sexual arena. There isn't AS MUCH (again - in general) of a requirement on close emotional bonding for the sexual experience to be GOOD. Not to imply for a MOMENT that that desire is not also present for men -and critical - just not always in the same quantity.
Add to this the most common feminine perspective that sex should only (or primarily) occur in a closely bonded environment and you have the foundations of the conflict.
How much of that 'perspective' is societal programming and how much is inherent in the nature is beyond my knowledge. But it's enough to be said that it exists and has to be acknowledged and factored in.


Originally Posted by ;
To make matters worse, it became clear to me that the disconnect wasn't compartmentalized... it had carried over into the sexual and emotional aspects of my marriage as well.
Yes - every 'change/shift' that occurs within us carries over to all aspects of our life. Some are positive, some can be negative and SOME can be what we make of them.

Originally Posted by ;
I am "not capable" of having sex with someone that I don't feel that attraction, chemistry and preliminary emotional bond with. I placed that as a requirement on me participating in any sexual encounters with others, male or female.
Originally Posted by ;
Further complicating the situation is the fact that I'm submissive by nature. It is my driving force to wish to please others and to take pleasure in the process of them getting their needs met
Do you see any conflict with the above two quotes ?
The 'driving force' as you mention above - i.e. helping people out and taking pleasure that - based on the previous quote apparently does not (or didn't) apply to sexuality.
Now I'm not going to make ANY judgment on that one way or the other but only say that you need to just be aware that it's a 'choice'. A choice each individual may make but when making it, that's it a conscious, INFORMED choice and not coming from a place of dogma, early invalid programming etc. But in my opinion and experience it's every bit as ethical (and desirable) to offer someone sexual pleasure when in need as it is to offer them food when hungry. Society in general does NOT hold that view. We all get to make that individual choice.

The result being that the connection between sex and emotional bonding was severed for me...
Originally Posted by ;
exclude possible sexual interaction with others that I have a deep bond with, would it still be possible to reconnect the association between sex and emotional bonding for me?
Originally Posted by ;
It would probably help if sex between my husband and I ONLY happened when there is a simultaneous emotional connection between us. That *sometimes* happens now, but it is more the exception than the rule since the Disconnect.
Again, do you see any conflict/paradox between the elements of the three above quotes ? I bet if you see them lined up this way you will. One the one hand, you speak to your concept of the 'disconnect' - something you are afraid you have permanently lost, and on the other hand you fully acknowledge that in fact that 'connection' can and does still exist ! It's not always 'disconnected'. Confusion and confusing for you. But I bet if you were able somehow to rewind all of your sexual experiences with Stewy back to day one, you'd discover that not ALL of them were of the deep, bonding experiences. Some were just fun & pleasurable. Some probably weren't even that
Does this help clarify anything? It could also help clarity for you both in reference to the next quote.......

Originally Posted by ;
He fears that if I have lost that association with him, and (if) I find it with another person, that it will prevent me from being able to repair my bond with him
I seriously hope that you don't feel that the 'bond' that existed between you two has broken ! If the only 'bond' that existed was sexually based you have a whole bigger issue to deal with ! But I feel pretty comfortable saying I doubt that's the case

and finally.........
Originally Posted by ;
Also, there's clearly a trust issue that now needs to be resolved because I entrusted Stewy with considering my emotional needs and psychological well-being as my Dom and was let down... repeatedly (even tho I reiterrated my needs to him frequently.)
This is real and unfortunate. As easy as it would be to just come down here as this being cruel & insensitive etc etc, I think that would be ignoring some important things.
First, the whole lifestyle of BDSM and the understanding of the terms "Dom/sub" in particular is ripe with the possibility for hiccups. Not really being into that ourselves to any large degree, but dabbling at the edges at times, it's pretty apparent that the opportunities for missteps are all around you. It seems a LOT of detailed knowledge is important for traveling that path. It may well be possible that both your understandings of the roles of Dom/sub may have been lacking some of that real in depth knowledge.
In other words, I think there's an opportunity here to, while acknowledging that violation of 'trust', to talk a lot about WHO extended that trust and what that meant to both parties. You may well discover you both weren't 100% on the same page. Now you sure are ! (or closer to it)

So as traumatic as this all seems now, I do believe there's a big potential for something wonderful to come out of it. But THAT is primarily a 'choice'.

Hope this helps some..........


Last edited by GroundedSpirit; 01-22-2010 at 04:53 PM.
Reply With Quote