I was wondering if the poor woman found out she was a "beard" for someone who was in the closet. That would be pretty devastating, enough to sue over perhaps?
Not sure I'd sue at all for this... would try to "fix" the problem if I could. Hurt people do things though....right or wrong. If he was in the closet, it's a shame there wasn't enough love there for him to be who he was. Wouldn't be able to stay married to him but an amicable split would have been good. If he had medical issues, then she absolutely shouldn't have sued. In sickness and in health, right? Though perhaps they could've/should've discussed other options to fill her sexual needs?? Maybe?
Didnt take no time for for a bunch of (women most likely) to accuse him of being gay. This idiotic false hood perpetuated by every single women against every single man that has any issues in the bedroom at any time is complete horse @!$%#!
Women get trained in their teens to think men always have hard ons and that if they dont then they are gay or something is very wrong with them or they are sick or over 65. That is HORSE @!$%#! Men 13 - 23 can think a hard on in 10 seconds on a 747 crashing into the ocean, this ability decreases DRAMATICALLY every 5 years after this age. In his mid thirties it really changes and again it gets worse in his forties and the fifties again, men brag that they are the same as they were when they were young is an complete lie even though 90% of men will scream this is not the case with them. The equipment is in PEAK performance at those young ages and women WRONGLY base their judgements of mens equipment in their 30s-40s based on their experience with men in their younger days ie. teens and 20s. Not to say some men do very well in their 30s and 40s but even so it is NOT the same as when they were 18- not even close.
If men blame womens sexual issues on being lesbians every time they failed to orgasm or enjoy sex with them ---how many gay women would there be? Fact is women just need ky jelly to perform and men can ignore their issues and get what they need and just try to sympathize/empathize with their womens sex problem. On the other hand men that have sex issues/stress (mental) issues/health issues can not easily get a hard on(pharmaceuticals do get them one but the QUALITY is no where CLOSE to a spontaneous REAL erection-it feels like it does for a women who is not in to sex and has to use ky) and it is 100% noticeable to women because men can not FAKE that. What if womens unit closed up and was very painful/ very NOTICEABLE unless they were working in perfect order? Then there would be 65% lesbians then.
Men lose their performance sexually BIG TIME as they age, they do not talk about this to ANYBODY and in fact 98% of men LIE constantly about anything that has to do with their sexual prowess and abilities even when they are 65-85 years old......they brag and lie if the topic ever comes up almost predictably 100% of the time. NO MAN ADMITS he has any issues with sexual performance EVER and they do everything humanly possible to HIDE it from their women and every one else including their DOCTORS!. So for all you women that claim every man that has not shown you interest or been able to perform as you THOUGHT he should WHEN you thought he should is gay ---you are 90-95% of the time WRONG.... if that is the only reason you are making that assumption--- ie no other real substantial- as in actually catching him pursuing live men and actually having gay relations- proof.
This is a public service announcement for any men who have been accused of being gay when they are NOT; which is a hell of a lot of men.
I would agree with you. However, this man stopped having sex with his wife when he was 31 years old and she was 26. I could see if it started when they were in their 50’s or even in their late 40’s.
The guy did not have sex with his wife for the entire 21 years of their marriage. 21 years, 1,092 weeks, I won't even go into the days. If a guy can't have sex once in 21 years then there is a huge problem. You try to compare a woman's problem of not being able to orgasm to a guy's problem with not being able to get an erection but the thing is a woman can still have sex and not have an orgasm. They make an effort. No erection, no sex - the situations aren't the same. Not to mention what mental stress persists for 21 years? And you go on about how men lie about their sexual problems, well then he now has 15,000 reasons not to do it again, because unless you forgot lying is suppose to be a bad thing.
Well cost really comes back to how much does a women actual usage rather then a mans worth to her. Most men are willing to throw down at the slightest of hints married or not where as women statistically point to sex decreases after marriage.
I'm amazed that any Americans are breeding at all these days. American sex is like two massive nasty hippopotamuses trying to hook up. Why would either participant want to engage? No wonder that porn is so popular.
Yes, Im sure Kevin is quite the fatty (who thinks squatting on his greasy sofa as having a life) complaining about his wife being 10 lbs heavier than when he married her.
It's a mental thing for us not always physical. If we like your personality and sense of humor we can overlook the weight, hair etc. and just want to wiggle on that :)
You can keep feeding somebody else the "I like his personality" BS. If that was the case most un-attractive men wouldn't have a problem getting a woman.
Sure "personality" might keep it going for the long term but I'm willing to bet if they didn't appeal to you at first you wouldn't give them the time of day.
I read a couple of different articles about this case and it wasn't completely NEVER it was just very infrequent. He constantly rejected her most of the time due to backache, headache, fatigue, stress, etc. she probably was being patient waiting for him to get over whatever current crisis he had until it became clear it wasn't going to get better. They did have 2 kids during their marriage (possibly a reason why she stayed as long as she did)
Maybe he was cheating on her. If he wasn't willing to give her sex and had no (medical) reason whatsoever (and unless he had a medical condition, chances are high that he IS getting sex somewhere), she should have either divorced him or spoken to him about having an open marriage.
How has no one mentioned the idea of consent? Even though it is expected that married couples will have sex, marriage is not legally tantamount to forfeiting the right to consent or not consent to sex at any given time -- that's why, in modern times, we have come to recognize that marital rape is still rape. Allowing someone to sue another for withholding sex flies in the face of the very important principle that an individual should not be compelled to have sex against his or her will and that consent to sex can be revoked at any time if someone is no longer willing. Would we be so amused if a man sued his wife for not putting out? It doesn't matter what we think of someone's choice to have sex or not; sometimes people don't want sex and that's a personal choice.
When an (ex)spouse pursues this kind of action, it seems to me that they don't care about the money, but they feel the need to hurt someone back for something that meant a great deal to them. That appears to be the case here and I don't begrudge her for doing so. In my opinion, she's perfectly justified; same for any man in a similar situations. Just my $0.02.
This case is clearly not about a medical condition. This case is clearly not about one party "having a headache" every now and again. This case is not about freezing out a spouse for a few days, weeks or even months because they've done something that makes the other spouse not want to touch them for a while. And this case in no way has application toward the status of marital rape for anyone with an ounce of common sense. If, indeed, for 2 decades, that's 20+ years, he refused to have relations with his wife and did not take steps toward freeing her from the marriage, then there is a serious issue there and a breach of contract (as unsavory as it is to think of marriage that way).There is no doubt No means No in the marital bed as elsewhere, but this was taken to such an extreme that it is a different situation altogether. It is not about forcing a spouse to have relations against their will. It is about failing to fulfill the terms of a marriage contract for a very, very long time. Maybe he had a good reason. Maybe she shouldn't have won. I don't know. I'm not trying to debate the merits of the case. I do, however, feel that equating it with rape is going too far beyond the bounds of this particular case.
Peel-Layer, your sexism is showing. It is not a "woman's job" to make sure her husband is taken care of. How 1950s of you! It is no less a man's job to see that his wife is taken care of -- whatever that means to her. Sometimes, that means respecting her desires or lack thereof occassionally. But again -- such situations have no bearing on this 20+ year refusal. Different situation.
And for all you guys posting on here about how unfair this is -- if the roles were reversed and the woman had to pay up, I've no doubt you'd all be crowing about how the b*tch got what she deserved.
I'm curious what this woman looks like. I mean, is she a mirror breaker? Do you have to put Vics Vapo Rub under you nose to get close, or roll her in flour to find the , uh sorry, getting carried away here, lol. There has to be more to this than meets the eye.
Wowza I get your point but Toosano has a point buried in the tacky humor.
What did the woman look like? Did she take care of herself or did she put on a 100 lbs after the wedding? No one is perfect but perhaps there was a complete loss of attraction. The real question is why did she wait that long to complain, if she wasn't happy she should have ended it much much sooner. She sounds like a bitter woman and he sounds like an insensitive dolt.
It may be none of the above. I'm just saying. Was something about her repulsive that turned the guy off? Let's see this woman so we can eliminate that thought, lol.
Interesting that the judge found in her favor! But then when he put the value as barely over $700 per year - less than $2 per day the judge was providing his perspective on what sex between them was worth! And it's even less than that if he factored in cost of living adjustments over the last 21 years!
It's really about breach of contract, for either sex. Sex is the fundamental part of the marrage contract.
Mistresses are acceptable in France and work well when the female spouse doesn't want sex but wants to stay married. It's costly however for the man.
No, a spouse can not be forced into having sex, but the spouse should have no reasonable expectation that the other's needs will cease to exist and not have those needs provided elsewhere.
It's really about breach of contract, for either sex. Sex is the fundamental part of the marrage contract.
Yeah? That should result in some more interesting case law. Like, what is the common law standard of performance? Once a day? Once a week? Is there an orgasm percentage requirement? Do faked orgasms count? For that matter, must the orgasm be caused by penetration? If so, where?
I really, really don't think the law is going to look at this as a contract issue. And, I really, really don't think most of us would want them to do so.
It's really about breach of contract, for either sex. Sex is the fundamental part of the marrage contract.
Yeah? That should result in some more interesting case law. Like, what is the common law standard of performance? Once a day? Once a week? Is there an orgasm percentage requirement? Do faked orgasms count? For that matter, must the orgasm be caused by penetration? If so, where?
I really, really don't think the law is going to look at this as a contract issue. And, I really, really don't think most of us would want them to do so.
Loss of consortium usually has little if anything to do with inability to have sex. At least the evidence presented in your run of the mill PI case where the claim is made focuses MUCH more on the loss of non-sexual services.
Funny, I divorced my 1st husband because sex wasn't a priorty to him AFTER he married me. I stayed a size 2-4 almost the whole marriage with a very brief jump to 6 & back down. I made his breakfast every day, fresh lunch, held a full time job & cokked when I got home. I also kept the place clean. He started dropping off then by our last year zippo, nada! ! yr celiabte not by my choice. I tried Dr.'s, therapists U name it. Finally I asked for a divorce. I loved the guy to death he was my best friend & now he's with a women 3-4 times my size found out what was wrong with him from a T.V frickin show, says he went to a DR. & now he's all better.
If anyone deserved a settlement it's me! I was without sex for OVER a yr (I don't cheat) &Â he gets fixed for a size 16? talk about destroying ones self confidence. Â Â
Hey Jon, no after 20 yrs of friendship before & after the divorce he dropped it on me. He lives in another state with his lady & we would talk every few months. I called him one day to say hey & he sounded kind of distant & cold. Very unlike him. I ask him how things are going that kinda stuff. He drops on me that he was watching an episode of Dr. OZ & the topic was about problems like his (no interest in sex at all). So he said he saw the Dr. & "flipped the switch that didn't work" ???? (not a pill I asked) Nothing else. Then says I've moved on. I was cluess. The person that always was my buddy said see ya! No reason & no explanation on why I went without but now he's fixed. Sorry, for the time I put into that relationship without beeotching I felt I was due an answer.
So I am sorry "flip of the switch is all I have as info.
I think it's very sad you would divorce your "best friend" because he was unable to have sex. Can't you be creative or deal with your "needs" on your own? There are way more important things in a marriage. There are also more important things than being a size 4, such as commitment and real love, and that's probably what he's found with his new mate. The size she wears is irrelevant. The fact that she loves him and wants to be with him just as he is is what's important.
Tabbi, i think it is possible your guy is still not working-flip the switch and you bought that line of crap? Perhaps his big women is ok with no sex and he has no desire to tell you that hes ok with little to no sex. The subject may be embarrassing for him? Telling you all is well may be a front. Move on.
You must be a woman to say the size she wears is irrelevant. I have yet to see a man say something like that on here. Every health blog I see, some guy is on there talking about women getting older, fatter, and disgusting. Somehow I doubt those same guys are at high school weight with all their hair. I am actually starting to think that women age much better than men.
Camille I will tell you flat out, I am married to my best friend. I have maintained a healthy weight of 200# at 6'5". My wife who is my best friend has increased in 3 pant sizes since we have married and I find her as sexy now as I did then. In noway would I do away with her because of her weight. We are becoming older she added on weight, I have lost my hair so it all equals out. Even though she is bigger she still wears clothing that looks great on her. She realizes she isn't built for the skinny jeans. So remember if they truely love you they are gonna be there with you.
Maybe she was fat. Oops, I'm sorry, is that politically correct? I remember when I was a skinny, zit-faced kid in school, no girl wanted me, but nobody has a problem with that. Now, if a woman is FAT? Guys are supposed to want them anyway. Or what if she's F-ing crazy out of her mind with meanness, ridiculing the guy to the point where she'd ultimately sue him for $15,000, after calling him "limp d_ck" for 21 years? After all, a guy's ding-a-ling DOES have a mind of its own, and it doesn't like to be criticized, so shouldn't she be suing his Johnson? "Uh, yes Your Honor... I could've made X amount of dollars hooking on the street corner for those 21 years, and I feel I'm owed my back pay." I mean, come on, money for no sex? Isn't that prostitution? I will be so glad when the bombs start falling.
Did anyone consider the fact she might be butt ugly, have poor hygene, etc. No offence lady but if its a problem you DIVORCE the man you don't sue him. And what dumb ass sided with her?
No one should be allowed to sue their spouse for this after the fact. What a ridiculous case. It should have been thrown out of court for sure! Either you accept what your spouse is able (or willing) to give, or you get a divorce and move on, but suing them over it is wrong.
When I was a younger man there were"nt alot of males who could keep up with me in the sex department. After I got married I never ran around on my now ex wife. When the mood was right I performed right up to par. Then I noticed that there were other things in life that I wanted to learn such as the civilwar, baseball games , music, archeology, reading the bible etc! Now I know that sex is a part of life but the media overplays it to the extent of brainwashing people as to where being a decent family or human being is now being shunned as a boring way to live if people do"nt think about it 24-7! Perhaps this is why I"ve noticed that alot of single and married people have gotten rid of their tv"s . I am considering doing away with mine. Hollywood is trying to turn our whole nation into a nation of perverts! You can"t hardly find any decent shows that does"nt include sex to the point that what purpose is watching tv period! I have"nt given into what hollywood thinks they can persuade me to do. I am my own man and do"nt try to tell me that something I know is perverted is okay because I am not a weak minded individual and I know what is right from wrong. Before long hollywood will and has already tried to make it seem okay for an adult to have sex with underage girls and guys! I"ll just stick to my " John Wayne " movies and feel good about what I have viewed!
Excellent point! It's to the point where I can hardly allow my kids to watch TV at all, and I'm pretty tired of it myself. Even "prime time" shows seem centered on sex. (The latest Fran Drescher show was pretty much the last straw; we don't even watch network TV any more.) Sex is great, but there are lots of other things in life.
What about those couples where one partner has a medical condition that doesn't allow for sex? Clearly this particular judge didn't think about the precedent he would set.
Gays want to marry for many real reasons. Imagine being told that while your spouse is dying in a hospital bed that you have no legal rights to make decisions on their behalf and/or can't see them in their final hours....
Reading stories like this makes me wonder how anyone can make the argument that letting gays get married is going to destroy the institution of marriage. You heteros are doing well enough on your own.
Possibly porn induced erectile dysfunction?? Google it! Though we can only speculate....
I was wondering if the poor woman found out she was a "beard" for someone who was in the closet. That would be pretty devastating, enough to sue over perhaps?
Not sure I'd sue at all for this... would try to "fix" the problem if I could. Hurt people do things though....right or wrong. If he was in the closet, it's a shame there wasn't enough love there for him to be who he was. Wouldn't be able to stay married to him but an amicable split would have been good. If he had medical issues, then she absolutely shouldn't have sued. In sickness and in health, right? Though perhaps they could've/should've discussed other options to fill her sexual needs?? Maybe?
Didnt take no time for for a bunch of (women most likely) to accuse him of being gay. This idiotic false hood perpetuated by every single women against every single man that has any issues in the bedroom at any time is complete horse @!$%#!
Women get trained in their teens to think men always have hard ons and that if they dont then they are gay or something is very wrong with them or they are sick or over 65. That is HORSE @!$%#! Men 13 - 23 can think a hard on in 10 seconds on a 747 crashing into the ocean, this ability decreases DRAMATICALLY every 5 years after this age. In his mid thirties it really changes and again it gets worse in his forties and the fifties again, men brag that they are the same as they were when they were young is an complete lie even though 90% of men will scream this is not the case with them. The equipment is in PEAK performance at those young ages and women WRONGLY base their judgements of mens equipment in their 30s-40s based on their experience with men in their younger days ie. teens and 20s. Not to say some men do very well in their 30s and 40s but even so it is NOT the same as when they were 18- not even close.
If men blame womens sexual issues on being lesbians every time they failed to orgasm or enjoy sex with them ---how many gay women would there be? Fact is women just need ky jelly to perform and men can ignore their issues and get what they need and just try to sympathize/empathize with their womens sex problem. On the other hand men that have sex issues/stress (mental) issues/health issues can not easily get a hard on(pharmaceuticals do get them one but the QUALITY is no where CLOSE to a spontaneous REAL erection-it feels like it does for a women who is not in to sex and has to use ky) and it is 100% noticeable to women because men can not FAKE that. What if womens unit closed up and was very painful/ very NOTICEABLE unless they were working in perfect order? Then there would be 65% lesbians then.
Men lose their performance sexually BIG TIME as they age, they do not talk about this to ANYBODY and in fact 98% of men LIE constantly about anything that has to do with their sexual prowess and abilities even when they are 65-85 years old......they brag and lie if the topic ever comes up almost predictably 100% of the time. NO MAN ADMITS he has any issues with sexual performance EVER and they do everything humanly possible to HIDE it from their women and every one else including their DOCTORS!. So for all you women that claim every man that has not shown you interest or been able to perform as you THOUGHT he should WHEN you thought he should is gay ---you are 90-95% of the time WRONG.... if that is the only reason you are making that assumption--- ie no other real substantial- as in actually catching him pursuing live men and actually having gay relations- proof.
This is a public service announcement for any men who have been accused of being gay when they are NOT; which is a hell of a lot of men.
Women are soooo lucky.... They have half the money and ALL the puzzie!!
The most powerful words in a man's vocabulary. NO THANKS!
I would agree with you. However, this man stopped having sex with his wife when he was 31 years old and she was 26. I could see if it started when they were in their 50’s or even in their late 40’s.
I wonder what she did to deserve such horrible treatment.
Yeah, with a woman, you say "No" and if continue, it's rape. Try suing her and see if it holds in court or not.
With a man, you say "No" and you can get sued. Even if she found a way to rape him, it's doubtful the police would even take it seriously.
Could it be that she became a house after they got married but he was nice enough not to divorce her for it?
@Fake media
The guy did not have sex with his wife for the entire 21 years of their marriage. 21 years, 1,092 weeks, I won't even go into the days. If a guy can't have sex once in 21 years then there is a huge problem. You try to compare a woman's problem of not being able to orgasm to a guy's problem with not being able to get an erection but the thing is a woman can still have sex and not have an orgasm. They make an effort. No erection, no sex - the situations aren't the same. Not to mention what mental stress persists for 21 years? And you go on about how men lie about their sexual problems, well then he now has 15,000 reasons not to do it again, because unless you forgot lying is suppose to be a bad thing.
Well cost really comes back to how much does a women actual usage rather then a mans worth to her. Most men are willing to throw down at the slightest of hints married or not where as women statistically point to sex decreases after marriage.
If men were to successfully prosecute this in the U.S., there would be a lot of male millionaires running around.
True that!
There's not enough cash that's ever been printed to cover that bill.
I'd be one of them...
Can we men start suing women because they put on weight after marriage, and become disgusting, so we don't want to touch them?
Of course not...it is absurd, as is the original case. Also, why did she stay 21 years with no sex if it was so important to her?
Can our wives do the same? We tend to get fatter AND lose our hair and they're supposed to still want us.
I'm amazed that any Americans are breeding at all these days. American sex is like two massive nasty hippopotamuses trying to hook up. Why would either participant want to engage? No wonder that porn is so popular.
Yes, Im sure Kevin is quite the fatty (who thinks squatting on his greasy sofa as having a life) complaining about his wife being 10 lbs heavier than when he married her.
@Ru-780672, First, clearly you missed the point. I was talking about the absurd.
Second, I am not married (but SHE did get fat after we divorced), and third, I am not overweight....so sorry, you lose.
No, I dont "lose" anything but I did miss your absurd point - my bad. :)
Frankly, even at my best, I'm still baffled as to why women would ever find men attractive.
It's a mental thing for us not always physical. If we like your personality and sense of humor we can overlook the weight, hair etc. and just want to wiggle on that :)
You can keep feeding somebody else the "I like his personality" BS. If that was the case most un-attractive men wouldn't have a problem getting a woman.
Sure "personality" might keep it going for the long term but I'm willing to bet if they didn't appeal to you at first you wouldn't give them the time of day.
Agreed JEFFINVA...There has to be that initial chemistry.
So, why would this wife stay in a sexless marriage for 21 years? Especially through her prime years...Money maybe?
Yeah, beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes clear to the bone.
I read a couple of different articles about this case and it wasn't completely NEVER it was just very infrequent. He constantly rejected her most of the time due to backache, headache, fatigue, stress, etc. she probably was being patient waiting for him to get over whatever current crisis he had until it became clear it wasn't going to get better. They did have 2 kids during their marriage (possibly a reason why she stayed as long as she did)
Kevin
not every woman becomes over weight after marriage either, i didnt, sooooo.....what? i dont get the point cause its not the same thing.
Maybe he was cheating on her. If he wasn't willing to give her sex and had no (medical) reason whatsoever (and unless he had a medical condition, chances are high that he IS getting sex somewhere), she should have either divorced him or spoken to him about having an open marriage.
How has no one mentioned the idea of consent? Even though it is expected that married couples will have sex, marriage is not legally tantamount to forfeiting the right to consent or not consent to sex at any given time -- that's why, in modern times, we have come to recognize that marital rape is still rape. Allowing someone to sue another for withholding sex flies in the face of the very important principle that an individual should not be compelled to have sex against his or her will and that consent to sex can be revoked at any time if someone is no longer willing. Would we be so amused if a man sued his wife for not putting out? It doesn't matter what we think of someone's choice to have sex or not; sometimes people don't want sex and that's a personal choice.
When an (ex)spouse pursues this kind of action, it seems to me that they don't care about the money, but they feel the need to hurt someone back for something that meant a great deal to them. That appears to be the case here and I don't begrudge her for doing so. In my opinion, she's perfectly justified; same for any man in a similar situations. Just my $0.02.
tsapience
If they don't plan on having sex then don't plan on getting married because it will cause further issues.
If there is no medical condition and you are married then, as a woman it is your job to make sure your husband is well taken care of.
Otherwise if you don't car about his feelings there are other woman out there.
Marriage isn't all about sex but it is a big part of it.
I don't know why this country pays for divorces????
This case is clearly not about a medical condition. This case is clearly not about one party "having a headache" every now and again. This case is not about freezing out a spouse for a few days, weeks or even months because they've done something that makes the other spouse not want to touch them for a while. And this case in no way has application toward the status of marital rape for anyone with an ounce of common sense. If, indeed, for 2 decades, that's 20+ years, he refused to have relations with his wife and did not take steps toward freeing her from the marriage, then there is a serious issue there and a breach of contract (as unsavory as it is to think of marriage that way).There is no doubt No means No in the marital bed as elsewhere, but this was taken to such an extreme that it is a different situation altogether. It is not about forcing a spouse to have relations against their will. It is about failing to fulfill the terms of a marriage contract for a very, very long time. Maybe he had a good reason. Maybe she shouldn't have won. I don't know. I'm not trying to debate the merits of the case. I do, however, feel that equating it with rape is going too far beyond the bounds of this particular case.
Peel-Layer, your sexism is showing. It is not a "woman's job" to make sure her husband is taken care of. How 1950s of you! It is no less a man's job to see that his wife is taken care of -- whatever that means to her. Sometimes, that means respecting her desires or lack thereof occassionally. But again -- such situations have no bearing on this 20+ year refusal. Different situation.
And for all you guys posting on here about how unfair this is -- if the roles were reversed and the woman had to pay up, I've no doubt you'd all be crowing about how the b*tch got what she deserved.
It's a two way street. They are supposed to take care of each other.
I'm curious what this woman looks like. I mean, is she a mirror breaker? Do you have to put Vics Vapo Rub under you nose to get close, or roll her in flour to find the , uh sorry, getting carried away here, lol.
There has to be more to this than meets the eye.
Yeah probably about 50lbs more.
What grade are you guys in? Just Sayin'.
Wowza I get your point but Toosano has a point buried in the tacky humor.
What did the woman look like? Did she take care of herself or did she put on a 100 lbs after the wedding? No one is perfect but perhaps there was a complete loss of attraction. The real question is why did she wait that long to complain, if she wasn't happy she should have ended it much much sooner. She sounds like a bitter woman and he sounds like an insensitive dolt.
The real question to me is why did HE choose to stay in the marriage if in fact she "put on 100 lbs after the wedding"?
It works both ways.
It may be none of the above. I'm just saying. Was something about her repulsive that turned the guy off? Let's see this woman so we can eliminate that thought, lol.
He could have put on 200# and too damn lazy to have sex.
That, too!
Interesting that the judge found in her favor! But then when he put the value as barely over $700 per year - less than $2 per day the judge was providing his perspective on what sex between them was worth! And it's even less than that if he factored in cost of living adjustments over the last 21 years!
Wish I would of come up with that one. Worthless attorney-worthless husband.
They made him pay the court cost and legal fees ($14k)I read this somewhere else about this same couple.
This is an old story. He had health problems.
It's really about breach of contract, for either sex. Sex is the fundamental part of the marrage contract.
Mistresses are acceptable in France and work well when the female spouse doesn't want sex but wants to stay married. It's costly however for the man.
No, a spouse can not be forced into having sex, but the spouse should have no reasonable expectation that the other's needs will cease to exist and not have those needs provided elsewhere.
Yeah? That should result in some more interesting case law. Like, what is the common law standard of performance? Once a day? Once a week? Is there an orgasm percentage requirement? Do faked orgasms count? For that matter, must the orgasm be caused by penetration? If so, where?
I really, really don't think the law is going to look at this as a contract issue. And, I really, really don't think most of us would want them to do so.
Yeah? That should result in some more interesting case law. Like, what is the common law standard of performance? Once a day? Once a week? Is there an orgasm percentage requirement? Do faked orgasms count? For that matter, must the orgasm be caused by penetration? If so, where?
I really, really don't think the law is going to look at this as a contract issue. And, I really, really don't think most of us would want them to do so.
(Sorry, all. I didn't post twice - not sure what happened there.)
Did the guy seek out some help from a professional?
If so, he did his best & she ought to be forgiving.
Loss of consortium usually has little if anything to do with inability to have sex. At least the evidence presented in your run of the mill PI case where the claim is made focuses MUCH more on the loss of non-sexual services.
It's a regular occurence after marriage. Then, after the sex life ends, its just an interminable period waiting for the sweet release of death.Â
Only if you married for a reason other than love.
Funny, I divorced my 1st husband because sex wasn't a priorty to him AFTER he married me. I stayed a size 2-4 almost the whole marriage with a very brief jump to 6 & back down. I made his breakfast every day, fresh lunch, held a full time job & cokked when I got home. I also kept the place clean. He started dropping off then by our last year zippo, nada! ! yr celiabte not by my choice. I tried Dr.'s, therapists U name it. Finally I asked for a divorce. I loved the guy to death he was my best friend & now he's with a women 3-4 times my size found out what was wrong with him from a T.V frickin show, says he went to a DR. & now he's all better.
If anyone deserved a settlement it's me! I was without sex for OVER a yr (I don't cheat) &Â he gets fixed for a size 16? talk about destroying ones self confidence. Â Â
Tabi1966,
Sorry to hear about this. Do you mind sharing what his problem was? Sounds rather odd, to say the least.
Hey Jon, no after 20 yrs of friendship before & after the divorce he dropped it on me. He lives in another state with his lady & we would talk every few months. I called him one day to say hey & he sounded kind of distant & cold. Very unlike him. I ask him how things are going that kinda stuff. He drops on me that he was watching an episode of Dr. OZ & the topic was about problems like his (no interest in sex at all). So he said he saw the Dr. & "flipped the switch that didn't work" ???? (not a pill I asked) Nothing else. Then says I've moved on. I was cluess. The person that always was my buddy said see ya! No reason & no explanation on why I went without but now he's fixed. Sorry, for the time I put into that relationship without beeotching I felt I was due an answer.
So I am sorry "flip of the switch is all I have as info.
I think it's very sad you would divorce your "best friend" because he was unable to have sex. Can't you be creative or deal with your "needs" on your own? There are way more important things in a marriage. There are also more important things than being a size 4, such as commitment and real love, and that's probably what he's found with his new mate. The size she wears is irrelevant. The fact that she loves him and wants to be with him just as he is is what's important.
redmoth that was a deep and correct viewpoint.
Tabbi, i think it is possible your guy is still not working-flip the switch and you bought that line of crap? Perhaps his big women is ok with no sex and he has no desire to tell you that hes ok with little to no sex. The subject may be embarrassing for him? Telling you all is well may be a front. Move on.
Wow. That just sucks. I'm sure you have no closure, and for that, I'm sorry.
Hope you find a guy who will treat you the way you deserve to be treated!
You must be a woman to say the size she wears is irrelevant. I have yet to see a man say something like that on here. Every health blog I see, some guy is on there talking about women getting older, fatter, and disgusting. Somehow I doubt those same guys are at high school weight with all their hair. I am actually starting to think that women age much better than men.
Camille I will tell you flat out, I am married to my best friend. I have maintained a healthy weight of 200# at 6'5". My wife who is my best friend has increased in 3 pant sizes since we have married and I find her as sexy now as I did then. In noway would I do away with her because of her weight. We are becoming older she added on weight, I have lost my hair so it all equals out. Even though she is bigger she still wears clothing that looks great on her. She realizes she isn't built for the skinny jeans. So remember if they truely love you they are gonna be there with you.
.
I think the guy got rid of her on the cheap! Wow, wish my ex had only cost me the same, NOT.
Al Bundy? Is that you?
Forget it Peg, I checked the calendar and it's not our anniversary, so we're not going upstairs.
That show had some classic lines................
Hey, I'm all about "personal choice", but dude: Nobody has a Headache for 21 YEARS!!!
Maybe she was fat. Oops, I'm sorry, is that politically correct? I remember when I was a skinny, zit-faced kid in school, no girl wanted me, but nobody has a problem with that. Now, if a woman is FAT? Guys are supposed to want them anyway. Or what if she's F-ing crazy out of her mind with meanness, ridiculing the guy to the point where she'd ultimately sue him for $15,000, after calling him "limp d_ck" for 21 years? After all, a guy's ding-a-ling DOES have a mind of its own, and it doesn't like to be criticized, so shouldn't she be suing his Johnson? "Uh, yes Your Honor... I could've made X amount of dollars hooking on the street corner for those 21 years, and I feel I'm owed my back pay." I mean, come on, money for no sex? Isn't that prostitution? I will be so glad when the bombs start falling.
That's what I was thinking. This woman basically went to court to have herself officially declared a whore.
Nailed it, Charlie!
Did anyone consider the fact she might be butt ugly, have poor hygene, etc. No offence lady but if its a problem you DIVORCE the man you don't sue him. And what dumb ass sided with her?
I'm sure he would of known that BEFORE he married her-the Judge isn't stupid!
No one should be allowed to sue their spouse for this after the fact. What a ridiculous case. It should have been thrown out of court for sure! Either you accept what your spouse is able (or willing) to give, or you get a divorce and move on, but suing them over it is wrong.
She did divorce him the judge made him pay the cost of the divorce. Who do you think should pay?
When I was a younger man there were"nt alot of males who could keep up with me in the sex department. After I got married I never ran around on my now ex wife. When the mood was right I performed right up to par. Then I noticed that there were other things in life that I wanted to learn such as the civilwar, baseball games , music, archeology, reading the bible etc! Now I know that sex is a part of life but the media overplays it to the extent of brainwashing people as to where being a decent family or human being is now being shunned as a boring way to live if people do"nt think about it 24-7! Perhaps this is why I"ve noticed that alot of single and married people have gotten rid of their tv"s . I am considering doing away with mine. Hollywood is trying to turn our whole nation into a nation of perverts! You can"t hardly find any decent shows that does"nt include sex to the point that what purpose is watching tv period! I have"nt given into what hollywood thinks they can persuade me to do. I am my own man and do"nt try to tell me that something I know is perverted is okay because I am not a weak minded individual and I know what is right from wrong. Before long hollywood will and has already tried to make it seem okay for an adult to have sex with underage girls and guys! I"ll just stick to my " John Wayne " movies and feel good about what I have viewed!
Excellent point! It's to the point where I can hardly allow my kids to watch TV at all, and I'm pretty tired of it myself. Even "prime time" shows seem centered on sex. (The latest Fran Drescher show was pretty much the last straw; we don't even watch network TV any more.) Sex is great, but there are lots of other things in life.
The "For better or worse" defence didn't work? What a shame. If it's a man not getting any- well he wouldn't get anything.
What about those couples where one partner has a medical condition that doesn't allow for sex? Clearly this particular judge didn't think about the precedent he would set.
Get real!!
And so it is true:
lovesex and money make the world go round. This is just one f'ing thing after another.And, yet, gays want the right to marry. Stories like this one sort of make one wonder why.
Gays want to marry for many real reasons. Imagine being told that while your spouse is dying in a hospital bed that you have no legal rights to make decisions on their behalf and/or can't see them in their final hours....
Reading stories like this makes me wonder how anyone can make the argument that letting gays get married is going to destroy the institution of marriage. You heteros are doing well enough on your own.
And, to clarify my point, reading stories like this makes me wonder why gays would want to bother.