There ain’t no good guys, there ain’t no bad guys.
There’s only you and me and we just disagree. – Jim Krueger
A.S. writes:
I’m in a “lukewarm” marriage. I love my wife and do not want to hurt her, but ever since we had kids 11 years ago, I have been frustrated most of the time. 10 years ago, I started visiting massage parlors, and 4 years ago, escorts; I now meet with an escort I have known for the past 3 years, and after each meeting, I feel happier, better able to work, and happier to see my family afterwards. I know I am betraying the promise of sexual exclusivity I made to my wife when we married, and that she would be hurt if she found out. However, I feel it is better for our kids if we stay together, and as long as my wife doesn’t know what I’m doing, everyone will be happier. Should I try harder to stop seeing escorts, and focus on rekindling romance and intimacy in my marriage? Or continue seeing an escort and risk discovery and pain later on?
Marriage was designed to serve an economic purpose, not a sexual one; up until the 14th century absolutely nobody pretended otherwise, and until the late 19th century the idea of “love-matches” was largely a conceit of the economically-secure European upper middle class. But about a hundred years ago the rather absurd and untenable idea that marriage should be based only on love and no other reason became the norm throughout Western society; even this wouldn’t have been so bad if not for the “social purity” movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, which insisted that men could be held to standards of marital fidelity and premarital chastity which didn’t even work for some women. Prior to that time, it was universally understood that the average man wanted a lot more sex than the average woman, and that’s what whores were for; prostitution was recognized as “the lesser of two evils”, a practice which helped to prevent rape and lessen affairs with other men’s wives and virgin daughters. The “social purists” and their political wing, the “progressives” (yes, that’s the origin of the term) insisted that mankind was perfectible, and that laws inspired by “science”, drafted by wise and educated “experts” and imposed on the population at gunpoint under threat of “correction” in “rehabilitative” prisons, could be used to “improve” and “re-educate” people. I’m sorry for all the scare quotes, but I think all reasonable people can see what this misguided belief-system has done to the United States, the country which (because of its unique sociology) embraced it most wholeheartedly: busybody laws that make literally everyone into criminals, 25% of the world’s prisoners (though we only have 5% of the world’s population), and a war on our own citizens that has resulted in the destruction of millions of lives and the waste of trillions of dollars worldwide.
Human beings are not perfectible; we are flawed, human and individual. Even if we were perfectible it could certainly not be achieved through coercion (either through state violence or via the sort of emotional blackmail favored by manipulative wives). And even if some foolproof method of coercion could be developed, who gets to decide what “perfection” means? Some ruling elite selected by birth, doctrinal orthodoxy, wealth, physical strength, education or skill at winning popularity contests? Such a system would destroy the souls of its subjects and reduce humans to automata.
If you’re wondering what this has to do with your question, I’ll spell it out. In a perfectly-matched marriage, the husband would be able to focus all his libido on the wife and she in turn would be excited enough by his interest to want sex every time he did, or else be wise enough to provide him with it every time he wanted it simply because she loved him and/or understood that it’s part of her economic contribution to the marital arrangement. But no person and no arrangement is perfect, and that includes you, your wife and your marriage. It’s not unusual for women to lose interest in sex after several children; it’s just biology, and your inability to just settle for what little boring sex she chooses to dole out is likewise biological. Neither of you is the “abuser” or “victim” as feminists and MRAs both pretend; it’s simply normal, imperfect, frustrating human life. You could have attempted to badger your wife into more sex, or displayed your frustration through constant arguments, or turned it inward so you could become mentally and physically ill and possibly lose your job or be arrested once your judgment was eroded enough that you did something stupid. But you instead did the wise thing: you hired professionals to deal with the issue, just as you might hire a guy to cut your grass if you couldn’t do it or day-care people to care for your kids if your wife had to work. Because that’s what sex workers are: professionals. We’re not “homewreckers”, or criminals, or the pathetic victims of evil men who dare to commit the sin of having a sex drive higher than that of their wives; we’re caring professionals who help human beings to deal with the necessities of mortality.
My advice to you, then, is to be as careful as you can so that your wife doesn’t find out. Keep trying to get her interested in sex, enough to let her know you still want her but not so much that you annoy her. Make sure she knows you still love her, but only to the extent you sincerely feel it; excessive displays are not only deceptive, they’re suspicious. Of course, she may find out despite your precautions; she may already know but is simply wiser than you give her credit for, and understands that what you’re doing is for the best. You mention “the risk of pain later on”, but that will exist no matter what path you choose; all of our lives are full of sorrow, pain and disappointment, often from those we care most about, and all any human can do is to try to minimize the harm his actions cause others…which is exactly what you’ve been doing for the last ten years.
(Have a question of your own? Please consult this page to see if I’ve answered it in a previous column, and if not just click here to ask me via email.)
Good answer. “Marriage was designed to serve an economic purpose, not a sexual one; up until the 14th century absolutely nobody pretended otherwise”
Actually I can’t trace the phrase “plight my troth” any earlier than the publication of the Book of Common Prayer in 1549, so I would have said 16th century.
Chaucer and his circle were major players in the promotion of the whole romantic love package; in fact, it was they who first re-purposed Valentine’s Day for it. That’s why I chose the 14th century, though as you say it took a while for the idea to gain widespread acceptance.
Many have traced the origins to the concept of modern romantic love to the troubadours of the 11-12th centuries, with their idealized notions of “courtly love” — which, ironically, involved aristocratic women having love interests outside of their arranged marriages.
Hi 🙂
You mention the MRM in passing – what’s your stance on those?
Basically similar to feminists of the 1970s: some of what they say is very important, while some is whining. And like ’70s feminism their movement is divided between sensible moderates, ranting radicals and raving loonies.
Wise words. I agree 100%, though in my opinion, many of the things they stand for are vital. One can find a myriad examples of how men are being given the short end of the stick in todays society – and that does need to change. 🙂
“some of what they say is very important, while some is whining.”
Said the Grand Jury investigating a County’s DV/Family Court system. Close enough to the Foreman’s exact words, that is. What the GJ found was consistent with another Maggie quip:
“Neither of you is the “abuser” or “victim” as feminists and MRAs both pretend”
Rather than present evidence that this preliminary finding was incorrect, the MRA orgs involved simply refused to answer the GJ’s repeated requests for more information. So, if there were any actual “male victims” that had fallen through the cracks, they were left hanging.
Thus Maggie’s ongoing criticism of neofeminists applies as well to organized MRA – both sides will throw their “victims” under the bus when it suits a political agenda.
My parents had this kind of arrangement. My father played around with a few steady girlfriends (and a few others) and my mother basically ignored his digresses. My sister has always been pissed about the arrangement, but it never really bothered me.
Two thoughts: arranged marriages are still common in South Asia. Arranged, not forced; the parents and potential mates have lists of essential and desirable criteria. The (potential) couple meet, but are under no obligation; rather they can choose to accept or decline the partner. They “like” eachother, but need not initially feel “love”. Less than 2% of such couples divorce. I don’t know if this is an accurate statistic, or if it represents the reality of marriage; but it does seem a more appropriate way of gaining a mate.
Secondly, by visiting massage parlours and escorts has your correspondent avoided a “mid-life crisis”?
“I know I am betraying the promise of sexual exclusivity I made to my wife when we married”
It’s worth noting that she is betraying her promise, too. Sure, a man doesn’t have a “right” to sex. But this changes when someone has asked that man to promise exclusivity.
Excellent point. For an agreement to be valid there needs to be value on both sides. She gets exclusivity. What’s he get? Well a date with rosy palm, apparently.
You can’t blame it all on the wife. My wife went through a two-year long period after menapause where she had zero desire in sex. Not her fault – but that’s when I went out the first time to find an escort. I even contacted Maggie before I did because I was scared shitless of STD’s. Maggie helped me a lot.
But now – my wife’s condition seems to have reversed – yet I still see escorts. I mean, my wife will drop it for me anytime – all I have to do is wink at her. It’s not her fault that I see escorts.
I’m hooked on the variety now – and the “tabooness” of the activity. LOL – I wish I could explain all there is about me – about how much of a “stiff” life of “duty” I’ve lived. My life has been nothing but a set of rules others handed to me – and I suppose it’s my fault for accepting it but … I played the rules for 50 years fair and square.
When I was in Afghanistan and Iraq – I saw too many young kids in their early 20’s die tragic deaths. I’ve always had a guilt complex about that – “why not me?” it would have made a lot more sense for the Lord to have taken me, at my age, than those young kids who were just starting out in life. But – we can’t pick and choose and the Lord works in “WTF” ways …
I just try to live life to it’s fullest now … every day of it. I may not be here five minutes from now …
I agree with almost everything Maggie said, except ” be as careful as you can so that your wife doesn’t find out”. Your wife is not a child, and you shouldn’t lie to her “for her own good.” Especially when it’s not really for her own good, it’s for your own good.
Every man lies to his wife.
You live with a woman for more than two decades (as I have) and make love to her 3 to 5 times a week (average of course) … and eventually, somewhere in all those THOUSANDS of experiences – you’re going to find yourself thinking about a woman (or in some cases womEn) other than your wife right in the middle of having sex. You don’t tell her that … “Oh honey, I didn’t think I was gonna finish – but then I started thinking about Mary Louise Parker in French Maid’s outfit and … ta-da!!”
You don’t tell her that – she doesn’t need to know that.
The thought and the deed are enough different that I don’t think we obviously need to apply the same rule to both cases.
I think the “be as careful as you can” is in relation to if she does find out, she could use that as leverage in divorce proceedings and take his children from him entirely.
2 Comments:
Marriage practice in general is rather baffling. I just got married in October, and by the end of the whole affair I decided it was just a matter of wanting other people to treat me and my husband as a married couple. Everything else about traditional marriage is either contradictory, a slew of soon to be broken promises, or a business arrangement that would have been better served by a contract. Needless to say, we modified both the marriage contract (via pre-nup) and ceremony wording to remove said problems.
If you’ve entered into a bad marriage contract out of ignorance, it might be beneficial to your relationship to talk about it, but take that with a grain of salt- I think the only way for a relationship to work is with trust, so I belief that any lies or deceit that undermines this trust is a disaster waiting to happen. However, if you don’t trust your wife to stay with you even after you explain the need you have for extramarital sex, your already sort of up the creak, and Maggie’s advice is the best option you have.
Second comment:
The ideas that a perfect human society is ‘attainable’, or that humanity is irreparably imperfect are both nonsense. Perfection is when something no longer needs to change- it has gotten so close to the ideal that it cannot get closer.
Perfection is only attainable or unattainable if there is an ideal state- since there is no ideal state for humanity, perfection becomes a meaningless concept.
Could you say anything about the pre-nup? I’d like to know for my (possible) marriage in the future.
The biggest problem with the whole thing is that you can end up hurting your wife’s feelings. To me, that’s the only good reason not to cheat (certainly not some “morality” that I don’t actually believe in). It ends up being one of these situations like Hallmark holidays, where a lot of people are frustrated and sickened that they have to make big deal out of Valentine’s day, but you’ll feel like if you don’t you are a cad who is mistreating your lady.
Also, prostitutes occasionally fall in love with their clients, which is a risk you take when seeing them (or you could fall in love with her, but to me that’s less of a problem… Well except it might put a strain on your bank account).
Yes, this actually happens, I could even relate my own experiences in this regard, but it seems more interesting to point out that the reason the German government “burned” Mata Hari as a spy was that she fell in love with one of her Russian clients (she was also a prostitute) and that caused her loyalties to change to the Allied side in World War I. (One of the sad ironies of her life was that the French basically executed her because she had changed over to their side, if she had continued as a loyal German spy she might have survived the war. Although, she’s also normally portrayed in the history books as a somewhat useless spy for the Germans even when she was loyal.)
By the way, I noticed my information contradicts Maggie’s own short biography of Mata Hari, so I’ll just say I was going by this:
http://readordie.wikia.com/wiki/Mata_Hari
I actually don’t care if Mata Hari was actually a spy or not, because my position on World War I is “a pox on all their houses.” (Normally, I’d be sympathetic to the French, because they were the ones who got invaded, but there behavior during the war to their own troops was so awful that it basically destroyed the sympathy I had for them.)
If there are children in this then you risk destroying their lives in addition to the wife. I’m sorry but the way society is set up all a husband can do if he doesn’t want to destroy lives or be branded an ass is accept things as they are, find a hobby, get a part time job, become a gym rat.
the problem about many of todays feminist notions is that they dont get human nature and instead try to see simple natural things as problematic.the fact that men want sex more often does not make them disrespecful misogynists.yes,the woman is allowed to do as she feels but the man has the right to satisfy his needs as well.if the man is required to be there for her emotionally through hard times cant the woman do a far more simple thing for him?feminists keep telling us that unless the woman is horny as hell she shouldnt be having sex to please someone else,shes noones servant.but of course if a man advised other men not to listen their wives problems after a long day of work,when they are just tired,he would be branded by the same women as a chauvinist.i just cant remember how many times i want to scream to those women;”no,a man who desires a woman sexually is not a pervert,no men who want casual sex are not driven by misogyny and the market for sexual services or sexy shows,pictures etc is not because of some grand patriarchical conspiracy,which forces the men to sleazily partake in them nor the women who offer such services are poor brainwashed girls”
I think neofeminism is just a form of Puritan misanthropy that operates contrary to normal, natural behavior on purpose. The goal is to overthrow nature and replace it with a new form of living that is preferable to the neofeminists.
I say misanthropy as opposed to misandry because neofeminists hate women who engage in normal female behavior just as much as they do men. For example female display, which women often do just because they enjoy it for its own sake as well as to attract men. Well, for neofeminists like Gail Dines such behavior is evil and women who participate in it need to be re-educated (or brainwashed as the rest of us would understand it).
My experience of women is sometimes they’ll start out a sexual encounter not really in the mood and just to please their man, but then as they get into it, become enthusiastic and start having fun. If women listened to this logic “unless the woman is horny as hell she shouldn’t be having sex” some women will miss out on the best sex of their lives. (Although, I think neofeminists would consider that a desirable outcome.)
That’s my experience too. In fact, I can tell when my wife needs a flop. She doesn’t always even know it herself. But I’ve seen her depressed … ripped her clothes off … and in the beginning she’s like “wha?!” But afterwards she’ll say (and I wish I had dime for everytime she’s said this) … “THAT was EXACTLY what I needed!!”
And her whole mood will change for the positive for the rest of the day … or even the week. I don’t “understand” this phenomenon … nor do I really try. I just go with my gut. I think this is one of the FEW “superpowers” men have.
Yes, sometimes we have the best sex after our most awful fights (sadly, the only thing we ever really fight about is money). It usually happens after she’s done with the yelling and screaming and has started quietly crying, at which point I usually start comforting her… And there you go.
Our non-makeup sex is great too, but sometimes I wish we could have that much fun without all the drama…
Ordinarily, a woman’s tears awaken tremendous sympathy in me. And if the woman in question is one I particularly care for, then the effect is even greater.
But when the crying comes after the same damn fucking fight we’ve had a g’jillion times before: no. Don’t bother crying at me. If you didn’t want to feel this way, you shouldn’t’ve started the fight. If I started the fight, fine, cry. If you started the fight, crying is a wast of good salt. Don’t expect me to say something comforting.
I think the advice makes sense as others have commented, and agree the main risk is keeping things so your wife doesn’t get hurt.
But don’t you also risk bringing home a STD to your wife, even if you practice safe sex?
Krulac’s rules for messing with escorts …
1. Keep your wife’s health as the “prime directive”. Always practice safe sex.
2. At least part of what you make belongs to the woman you married. Do NOT spend anything more than “casual money” on escorts. I can keep my daughter in a private school and pay all my bills and put money into savings – and what’s left, can be optionally used for escorts in moderation.
3. Don’t let your wife find out about it. This means you have to be good at something men aren’t normally good at – keeping secrets from women. Especially since women are so adept at finding out those secrets.
4. Don’t do it in your wife’s face. I’ve heard stories of guys who call up a girl to come to their home when the wife is supposed to be away. EVEN IF she is away – it’s still disrespectful to trist with a call girl in your wife’s bed – or anywhere in her house. If your wife finds out about your activities – it will be a compound felony in her eyes if you also engaged in these activities in HER house. She might forgive you for straying – but if she senses disrespect in anything you’ve done – your goose is cooked because RESPECT is the number one thing most women demand. Simalarly – don’t do anything where your wife’s friends or relatives could possibly see you – or even your own friends and relatives.
5. If you can’t be a loving husband – then it’s not escorts you need – but a divorce. Escorts should simply fill a “void” – in my case, and it took awhile for me to figure this out but … it’s “variety”. It may also be because I have, for my entire life (and also now) been forced into following a strict code of conduct and moral behavior. My time with my ATF provider is a complete BREAK from that – and it’s goddamned welcome. With her – I can say anything that’s on my mind. I’m not supposed to be with her – yet, she’s the one that keeps me sane and able to deal with the cage of morality I live in.
However – my wife’s needs and what she gets out of the marriage comes first. So I bust my ass by helping her with anything I can. I’ll do housework, pick up the kid from school, etc.
I also reserve sex – FIRST – for her. My providers get what’s left of my sex drive (that’s fine with them – I don’t have to be on my “A” game with them). My wife is hot, my hands are always on her, I’m always saying dirty things to her and telling her how much she drives me crazy. And – it’s all true … she’s all those things. Actually, my number one fantasy right now is a threesome with my ATF and my wife. My ATF says she’s up to it … lol – but I know my wife wouldn’t be!!
If you can’t be a loving husband then I say, get a divorce. I know Maggie says otherwise … I respect that opinion but it’s not one I would follow personally.
6. Only see providers in the middle of the day when your wife thinks you’re supposed to be at work. Everyone gets leave … or compensation time for things. My dates with providers take place … LOL … from around 11am to 1pm. If you’re a good client most providers will happily accomodate you at that time. Coming up with excuses to leave your wife in your off hours is lame.
7. If I ever do get caught … then I will simply tell the truth. My ATF would probably be willing to talk to my wife if she’s too upset. I talk about my wife all the time to my ATF – and everything I’ve said about her is complementary. I tell her … “my wife is hot” … “perfect” … even mentioned to her that I would LOVE to have my wife in a threesome with her. My ATF can tell my wife how much I really love her – she knows.
8. Always take responsibility for your actions. If you fuck up – own it. If you get caught – you fucked up.
krulac,
that is an excellent set of rules, very much common sense as well and I believe in line with Maggie’s advice in the post.
my only concern has been, even if consistently practicing safe sex, I might still bring home herpes or something that the condom doesn’t catch. I suppose that’s where escort selection comes in.
Love in essence has its biological factors along with things like lust and attachment, so do you believe that it is perfectly possible and just for a man and a woman (or any coupling) to maintain a completely exclusive relationship that has its issues like every other relationship, but is still fulfilling? Do you think it is plausible as a woman who understands the evolution of marriage (and the valid points you made) to have the desire to enter into a completely exclusive relationship? Or is there no hope?
It’s possible to be in a completely exclusive relationship. For me it helps to think of her crying, and then bursting into the room and murdering me and whoever I was with (a promise she’s made to me more than once :-/ ).
As I often say, “Baby, I would expect nothing less!”
Excellent blog; well thought out; answered some or my own questions, and personal expectations.
My late sister quipped, “There are worse things than infidelity.” The North American system seems to be to marry, ignore men after birthing, rant when he dips his pen elsewhere, and then divorce for dollars.
You know. Poor me.
We were born in Europe. The odd discreet crush or dalliance kept the passion in our blood, as long as it was discreet, and nobody got hurt.
Divorce? Why? Never marry for love; marry for stability.