Dear Literotica-LW Writers and Readers,
I am writing to say that the LW section is a giant Projection Project of the Male Thinking onto the Female. I am kindly asking you to live up to the "Male Logic and Objectivity" Mythos and quit projecting, if at all possible.
Examples are endless but here are a few selections from "Goodbye, Suzanna."
"But the actual marriage is the solemn oath."
No, it isn't. That's formal marriage: packaging, symbol, box under the Christmas tree postable on Insta, what society wants to hear, see and applaud, and what many people unfortunately confuse with the ACTUAL relationship (box content).
Swearing under oath can mean nothing in the long term.
The actual marriage - content, substance, meat and potatoes - is in the day-to-day relationship itself and the degree of pair-bonding, if it ever occurs. In many marriages it doesn't or it's weak.
Pair-bonding is facilitated by Compatibility: lots of similarities of all kinds - cultural, social, psychological - sprinkled with complementary differences, which are usually rooted in sex roles. These are symbiotic differences that make life easier as opposed to more frustrating. Wishing the other could change in some way is a sign of such frustrating differences.
Many people tragically confuse marriage with pair-bonding. This is distinct from mere attachment, habituation, or co-dependency ("we set up the family as a business together").
The content of the marital relationship isn't in the "oath" or any other symbolism like the marriage certificate, contract, ceremony with friends and family, social optics, calling each other "honeys," social expectations of spousal roles, God as Elvis who married you in Vegas (or sanctimonious equivalent).
The actual marriage is in the degree of psychological bonding between the two and the exchange of value it encourages.
Plenty of hollow marriages respect the oath of "no infidelity." However: monogamous marriage stands for MONO (One). This means 0 < 1 < 2+. No sex or intimacy and romantic emotional connection with more than one person OR... gasp, with less than one! (That would be zero).
Monogamy means no more and no less than ONE!
Less than one (<1) is also a form of cheating. You can't be in a monogamous relationship and feel like you're in none for the most part. The absence of either sex (especially important to men) or emotional connection/psychological intimacy (especially important to women) qualifies as cheating even if none of that happens with someone else, outside of marriage.
If your spouse refuses to have sex with you and she does not have it with anyone else either, it's still cheating.
If your spouse avoids closeness and psychological intimacy with you (meaningful conversations, openness, bonding, companionship, etc) and he does not do that with anyone else either, that's still a form of cheating. (Less often, there's sex role reversal here).
It's cheating as long as the two deprive each other of fundamental needs, leaving the other feeling lonely or deprived in some important way. It means failure to live up to the marital premise.
The "marriage contract" is ultimately delusion. Like any symbol, it can be broken, paper ripped to pieces and tossed into the trash bin, interpreted by the eye and mind of the beholder, or simply ignored, much like properties can be nationalized by a communist regime or banknotes affected by inflation.
The paper or "oath" mean nothing if it is not (or cannot) be backed up by sustainable actual value.
By contrast, pair bonding is value in itself and cannot be broken. Also, "alienation of affection" is scapegoating BS.
This is what happens when people confuse reality with symbols and wishful thinking.
"If she loved me, she'd sacrifice her wild fling to spare my feelings."
No, she wouldn't. If she loved you, she wouldn't have any "wild fling" to sacrifice to begin with. The "wild" thing would be with you. She would sacrifice absolutely NOTHING because complete fidelity wouldn't feel like sacrifice to her, much like a parent doesn't feel they are "sacrificing" a purchase for themselves to buy things for their child. It's actually fun to buy for the spoiled little brat instead of some boring stuff for yourself.
The fidelity would feel like indulgence since the idea of screwing "gym rat" would never appeal to a sane woman who loves her husband, which includes being "in love" with him. The attraction to gym rat wouldn't exist.
This is actual female biology, gentlemen, not what you project on LW; but historically, you are not there yet - ready to accept it for what it is.
This is difficult for men to understand because they ("think") they love wife (role), even with a wandering eye. They secretly wouldn't mind screwing a few other shiny, fresh perishables with a far-off expiration date, at least if the rules allowed it. No emotions, just sex. "It meant nothing, honey" is male thinking.
But since the rules don't allow it, they play the "good husband" role.
