How easy it for a married sub in a vanilla marriage to conceal her bdsm affair?

[cymbidia]

Probably best.

geo.fraser is a nilla who is fascinated with us and our way of loving and living and interacting with each other. He's also very much a product of his generation, class (i did mention that 'South Africa' location, right?), and educational background. He thinks he knows as much as any of us thinks we know about some of our kinda things.

We all have a right to air our opinion, even if few others agree, as long as it's done in a tolerably flameless fashion. You'll find that geo.fraser sometimes toes that line but consistently stays just this side of it. He says what he thinks, whether or not anyone else agrees with him. Gotta give him some grudging credit for that, perhaps.

 

[monster666]

Yes I suppose, if he actually stayed within that line, but I think he clearly crossed it.

Saying "sneaking around secretly to get the jollies" a bit uncalled for given the situations of many people.

Saying he "too fucked up a marriage of 20 years" insinuates that he thinks we too are fucking up marriages, without his consideration of any of the facts of the marriages, which he doesn't know.

Saying "disdain to blame my sexually boring ex-wife for the break-up; likewise, it seems unfair to blame your Nilla spouses for not giving you what you want (sorry! *need*)" is mocking, condescending and arrogantly assumes we lay blame, and that if we do we lay it erroneously. It minimizes a very basic human need, and even mocks the use of the word need.

I could go on and on and on, but I am done. This post of his just isn't one I'll give him that grudging credit for.

Probably best.

geo.fraser is a nilla who is fascinated with us and our way of loving and living and interacting with each other. He's also very much a product of his generation, class (i did mention that 'South Africa' location, right?), and educational background. He thinks he knows as much as any of us thinks we know about some of our kinda things.

We all have a right to air our opinion, even if few others agree, as long as it's done in a tolerably flameless fashion. You'll find that geo.fraser sometimes toes that line but consistently stays just this side of it. He says what he thinks, whether or not anyone else agrees with him. Gotta give him some grudging credit for that, perhaps.

 

[RisiaSkye]

Oy.

This is why questions of infidelity are so difficult to discuss.

*keeping quiet*

 

[Wyatt]

I have been having an "Affair" for several months now.I am single,she is married ,two children.I am that naieve I have never heard of a "Vanilla"relationship but got the gist.That is how I would explain her situation.Our sex life has been great but she wanted more which is how I found myself posting here.I am worried about marking her.Her husband is not interested in her sexually and has told her so.He has told her to find someone younger to take on his "duties".

worried about his reaction she hasn't told him however.She is 31 I am 38.I am as a matter of fact older than him but more than willing to take on his "Duties".I am faithful to her and she wants me do be the man she never had as her husband is not too forceful if you get my drift.

I am new to the BDSM scene but enjoying the little I have practised.I have no intention of letting her other half in on our liasons.Everyone seems content.I have read other postings on this thread by geo fraser but consider my actions as specific to me.

and judging by postings here I have a LOT to learn

 

[Sandia]

I posted on this subject a while back, on the "Poly" thread, and got a similar reaction; something that to me felt judgmental and critical. Since I'd sorta screwed up my courage to post it in the first place, I'll admit it sorta hurt.

It's dangerous to pass judgment on people you don't know; people who's situation you don't understand.

I have no doubt there's assholes who are also cheaters. And the situation is inherently unfair and dangerous.

But there's also people who are just trying to make the best out of a bad situation. And as far as why someone would stay?

There could be any one of many reasons; one of which could be love.

~S.

 

[apple3141]

Get ready with your next batch of Brickbats

It's dangerous to pass judgment on people you don't know; people who's situation you don't understand.

I have no doubt there's assholes who are also cheaters. And the situation is inherently unfair and dangerous.

But there's also people who are just trying to make the best out of a bad situation. And as far as why someone would stay?

There could be any one of many reasons; one of which could be love.

~S.

I think we are getting somewhere.

There is an overlying attitudinal problem, which is the spectrum of opinion about the importance of sex. At one end, lets say the violet end of the spectrum, Sex is considered the most important part of a relationship, the very essence of love. At the red end of the spectrum is the opinion which says it's only sex, that has nothing to do with love. A doyenne of the BDSM and Lit scene told me that love is what happens between sexual episodes.

The ur-post of this thread implies that it is important that the sub in question not reveal to her husband the marks of her S/M activities. These are sexual activities, right? I guess we don't have to niggle and say, well, there was no actual penetration. The reason for hiding the activity has to be that the husband would be hurt/offended/angry/violent/inclined to divorce.

Those of us at the violet end of the spectrum (colour me blue) automatically jump in and say judgemental words like "betrayal", which seem a fair description for something done secretly when it is known that the marriage partner would object vigorously. Those whose opinions lie in the yellow, orange, red end will say no, no, not at all! It's just sex, and though she can't do without her thrills, she still loves her husband in OTHER ways, and cannot part from him.

Once the partner is privy to the situation, and gives tacit or explicit approval, or even encouragement, perhaps wanting to come and watch - well no-one can object to that, beyond calling that a bit kinky too.

The nub of this is: ye who insist on communication as being of the greatest importance in a BDSM relationship should perhaps think about it being important in a Nilla relationship, too.

And hiding play-marks is a deception somewhat more serious than colouring out a few of those first grey hairs.

 

[Sandia]

As Risia mentioned, infidelity is difficult to talk about; it's an emotional minefield. Anyone who's been cheated on can tell you how painful it is. I can tell you that myself.

It's easy to attempt to seize the moral high ground, and it's easy to get your feelings hurt, no matter which side you're on. All I can say is it's important to give folks the benefit of the doubt; if people are going to talk about it at all I mean. It's important not to judge people too harshly based on knowing just one or two things about them.

Geo, I think I understand where you're coming from. I had similar feelings when I read the original post. I'd be hurt if my SO came to me and said, "Oh, I went to someone else, because you're not providing me with exactly what I need." It'd be like adding insult to injury, especially if I'd been trying in the first place, and even more so if my SO had not given me a chance or talked to me about it before going outside the marriage.

I'm not defending that. I'm just saying that might not be the situation for everyone.

For example, I suspect that's not the case for Monster. It's not the case for me.

And I agree with you that merely being into BDSM does not give you a license to cheat.

What I am saying - in contrast to one of the points of your post, I think - is that sometimes the more important sex is to you, the more pressure you might feel to cheat.

It's easier for someone for whom sex is not important to say, "well, that's ok, I can live without it." It's harder for those, on the other hand, who value sex much more than that.

The easy choice is to say, "Well, either leave, or be unhappy."

I'm arguing sometimes it might be reasonable - maybe even ethical - to seek out a third option. Mind you, not in every case. Not even in most cases. But maybe once in a while. I'm not arguing that every cheater is a moral upstanding citizen, just that there might be exceptions to the rule. And it's hard to know which are which unless you get to know someone; unless you've walked a mile in their shoes.

I'm also arguing that there are some people who'd prefer not to know, and that their partners may be in a better position to know this about them than an outsider.

~S.

 

[Shadowsdream]

very well put Sandia

As in all of life there is never an answer that applies 100% of the time.

From this Dommes personal point of view...

I have had 2 married male subs long term...one was separated for several years and the other had been living a separate sexual life for thirteen years. Both had emotional ties to the SO and both hid their sub lives.

Neither was in love with the SO but habits of relationships are hard to break sometimes.

I doubt I would take on another sub that is in any kind of relationship outside of D/s. Not because I feel they have any less right to happiness and fullfillment but because in the back of My mind there is always the * honesty* issue.

 

[apple3141]

Yes, Sandia: but not absolutely

I'd be hurt if my SO came to me and said, "Oh, I went to someone else, because you're not providing me with exactly what I need." It'd be like adding insult to injury, especially if I'd been trying in the first place, and even more so if my SO had not given me a chance or talked to me about it before going outside the marriage.

For example, I suspect that's not the case for Monster. It's not the case for me.

And I agree with you that merely being into BDSM does not give you a license to cheat.

Just so. Obviously my first post was in no way directed at Monster, I know him not. The epithets I used were fair in relation to that first post, and were in no way specific to the BDSM community. It may be that the BDSM community, at least those in nilla relationships, have special needs; of course so do those of either gender who are strongly Bi, and so on, think of a fiercely promiscuous person married to a monogamous person.

What I am saying - in contrast to one of the points of your post, I think - is that sometimes the more important sex is to you, the more pressure you might feel to cheat.

It's easier for someone for whom sex is not important to say, "well, that's ok, I can live without it." It's harder for those, on the other hand, who value sex much more than that.

Yes, absolutely.

The easy choice is to say, "Well, either leave, or be unhappy."

Isn't that the Ethical choice?

I'm arguing sometimes it might be reasonable - maybe even ethical - to seek out a third option.

And that third option would be....?

Mind you, not in every case. Not even in most cases. But maybe once in a while. I'm not arguing that every cheater is a moral upstanding citizen, just that there might be exceptions to the rule. And it's hard to know which are which unless you get to know someone; unless you've walked a mile in their shoes.

Well, Sandia, I have walked in the Cheater's shoes, and got sneered at for my pains when I mentioned it. If I understand you, we should not be chorusing "Cheater..Cheater..!" Jerry Springer fashion, because there just might be extenuating circumstances we don't know about. Are you saying that it is impermissible, nay impossible, to make any moral judgement without ever having experienced the case in point? I would remind you that Judges and Juries do that on an hourly basis.


I'm also arguing that there are some people who'd prefer not to know, and that their partners may be in a better position to know this about them than an outsider.

Yes, of course. That was certainly one possibility in the case of the woman in the launch-post, which I had not considered.

Nevertheless, as I was not the only one to point out, that marriage is pretty well on the rocks.

Edited for spelling mistakes in case cymbidia is watching.

morituri te salutant

 

[seXieleXie]

Re: Yes, Sandia: but not absolutely

morituri te salutant

i don't have anything to add on the matter of this thread, but please don't die geo.fraser, you're far too interesting to let go.

 

[Sandia]

Re: Yes, Sandia: but not absolutely

<sigh> I'm walking a fine line here, between arguing, uhm, discussing morality and ethics, and talking about me, so I hope you'll forgive me if I get a little wobbly.

You're right about judges and juries, Geo. Of course they make judgments after (hopefully) carefully considering the facts of the case. And defendants - in criminal cases - are "Presumed Innocent." (That was a wonderful book, btw - re infidelity.)

If A.) is Divorce,
and B.) is Misery,
then C.) is Infidelity.

This is where I step onto my soapbox, and begin a (hopefully) mild rant:

The idea that "telling" first is the only moral way to go, and that "telling" makes everything ok, is wonderful for some relationships, but hypocritical and cruel in others.

To put it slightly differently; it can mean nothing more or less than a cruel attempt to shift the difficulties - the emotional burdens - of the situation from the cheater to the cheatee. "I don't want to feel guilty or feel like a bad person, so I'll make my S/O miserable instead." That's dirty pool. Unfair.

I've got to go - r/l again - but I want to talk a little about relationships too. I'm not sure I believe they're about "meeting each other's needs." I'm not sure it's like two pieces of a puzzle, that fit together for a while, and then don't, so you each go off your merry way. There can be other things - connections, care, concern, history; love, that maybe don't die off or disappear just because "needs" are not being met. I realize I'm not speaking for everyone; I'm only speaking for me. But I'm not ready to lop somebody's head off over needs. At least not quite yet.

Sandia.

Just so. Obviously my first post was in no way directed at Monster, I know him not. The epithets I used were fair in relation to that first post, and were in no way specific to the BDSM community. It may be that the BDSM community, at least those in nilla relationships, have special needs; of course so do those of either gender who are strongly Bi, and so on, think of a fiercely promiscuous person married to a monogamous person.

What I am saying - in contrast to one of the points of your post, I think - is that sometimes the more important sex is to you, the more pressure you might feel to cheat.

It's easier for someone for whom sex is not important to say, "well, that's ok, I can live without it." It's harder for those, on the other hand, who value sex much more than that.

Yes, absolutely.

The easy choice is to say, "Well, either leave, or be unhappy."

Isn't that the Ethical choice?

I'm arguing sometimes it might be reasonable - maybe even ethical - to seek out a third option.

And that third option would be....?

Mind you, not in every case. Not even in most cases. But maybe once in a while. I'm not arguing that every cheater is a moral upstanding citizen, just that there might be exceptions to the rule. And it's hard to know which are which unless you get to know someone; unless you've walked a mile in their shoes.

Well, Sandia, I have walked in the Cheater's shoes, and got sneered at for my pains when I mentioned it. If I understand you, we should not be chorusing "Cheater..Cheater..!" Jerry Springer fashion, because there just might be extenuating circumstances we don't know about. Are you saying that it is impermissible, nay impossible, to make any moral judgement without ever having experienced the case in point? I would remind you that Judges and Juries do that on an hourly basis.


I'm also arguing that there are some people who'd prefer not to know, and that their partners may be in a better position to know this about them than an outsider.

Yes, of course. That was certainly one possibility in the case of the woman in the launch-post, which I had not considered.

Nevertheless, as I was not the only one to point out, that marriage is pretty well on the rocks.

Edited for spelling mistakes in case cymbidia is watching.

morituri te salutant

 

[fallon2]

Not Easy

It is very difficult for a married sub to conceal an affair of ANY kind for a variety of reasons which vary from fear of being caught to feelings of cheating to the desires that she has that need fulfilling.
I once had an on line affair with a wonderful woman from the "biggest kitty litter box" state (smiling) in the country and one of the problems, I believe was that her husband was not willing at the time to step up to the plate and do what she needed done.
It got to the point that I had bought my plane ticket and was ready to go and meet her but for reasons regarding saving her marriage she passed. I hope that she is happy and that he has stepped up to the plate since she was and remains a wonderful person!
On a personal note I haven't posted in several months due to a major illness in my family but someday hope to post more eventually.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Seems this debate continues to haunt Literotica. So why resurrect another thread? I thought it had some not recently mentioned aspects to the debate, as well as a good presentation of views from both sides, as well as the neutral posters.

Catalina

 

[Lady Emerald]

Thank you Catalina---ever excavating away in the substrata of literorica for our benefit. This is an interesting discussion from the past with resonances in the present discussions.

 

[catalina_francisco]

Thank you Catalina---ever excavating away in the substrata of literorica for our benefit. This is an interesting discussion from the past with resonances in the present discussions.

Yes, old threads are always good to resurrect, sometimes more so than starting an identical new thread. To bring back an older one gives the benefit of seeing former responses, sometimes a new perspective or twist, and also allows newer members to contribute to a discussion they either hadn't thought of, wanted to raise but hadn't for a variety of reasons, or dispels the sometimes nasty feeling they are the only ones who are dealing with a particular issue. As a history lover, it also provides me with a much broader experience of Lit, a place I have come to love and respect for it's diversity and ability to overall approach topics in an adult manner and provide some realistic expectations. Added to that, to resurrect sometimes provides a wealth of topics and discussions in a somewhat otherwise slow period on the board.

Catalina

 

[Netzach]

I'm in the msub discretion beating racket, I don't think that married men and women have very different skin, as a rule either, interesting that the question was directed only one way.

Bastinado, the beating of the feet, the beating of the hands, and the thwacking of the asscrack with a cane produces strong sensation without marks. Violet wands and TENS units do the same.

I don't like having my range of sadistic activity hugely limited like that, nor can I necessarily guarantee that there WILL be NO marks, not EVER. I can minimize the likelihood though. I'll oblige when I don't really have a choice.

My partner prefers not to be marked, but tolerates his Mistress' marking fetish, little trooper that he is.

 

[Netzach]

I don't know how the fidelity topic always seems to rear its head on a thread about marks and extracurriculars, maybe someday people can answer the actual question if they have an actual answer.

 

[catalina_francisco]

I don't know how the fidelity topic always seems to rear its head on a thread about marks and extracurriculars, maybe someday people can answer the actual question if they have an actual answer.

How easy it for a married sub in a vanilla marriage to conceal her bdsm affair?
There have been several threads about hiding marks from the public. How does one go about hiding marks from their significant other? Or do you just not engage in any activity that would leave a mark? I hate to have my play limited that way.

I think in this instance, as posted above, the coupling of the two came from the original posted thread topic, that being if you were Dominant to a married sub who was involved with you without the knowledge of their SO, there might be some concern about keeping that secret if you sent them home marked after a good whipping, caning, or any action that left visible marks. That was how I read it anyway.

Catalina

 

[cremebrulee]

Wait wait!!!

Since we got onto the subject...
I have been in a 'nilla relationship with a WONDERful young man for a while now, but he has NO interest in BDSM.
Not all of my Dominant "activities" invlove sex. Putting two and two together, I have a fairly fulfilling SEX life with my young man, but the aspects of D/s are not there with us.
Isn't there anyone else who removes them selves sexually at times from the D/s relationship? I mean, I still feel I am lacking something, and although we are not "married" we are very comitted to each other. Still, I am missing a very important part of myself.......
Does anyone understand what I am trying to say? Cuz it sure is coming out wrong to me... sheesh.

Interesting and thought provoking thread........

~Creme

 

[A Desert Rose]

Re: Wait wait!!!

Since we got onto the subject...
I have been in a 'nilla relationship with a WONDERful young man for a while now, but he has NO interest in BDSM.
Not all of my Dominant "activities" invlove sex. Putting two and two together, I have a fairly fulfilling SEX life with my young man, but the aspects of D/s are not there with us.
Isn't there anyone else who removes them selves sexually at times from the D/s relationship? I mean, I still feel I am lacking something, and although we are not "married" we are very comitted to each other. Still, I am missing a very important part of myself.......
Does anyone understand what I am trying to say? Cuz it sure is coming out wrong to me... sheesh.

Interesting and thought provoking thread........

~Creme

If I am reading you correctly, yes I do understand what you are feeling. A while back I tried to explain this in a different thread and my words were completely misrepresented and misunderstood.

If you are saying that when you engage in traditional (vanilla) sexual encounters, you feel as though you are missing something, and I am reading you correctly, then I completely understand your point of view. On the occassions when I "settle" for traditional sex, I am not fulfilled. I feel as though I am being dishonest to myself and my partner. I am not a switch, I do not like being one. I am a submissive.

Did I misunderstand you or do you feel as I do?

 

[cremebrulee]

Re: Re: Wait wait!!!

Originally posted by A Desert Rose
If I am reading you correctly, yes I do understand what you are feeling. A while back I tried to explain this in a different thread and my words were completely misrepresented and misunderstood.

If you are saying that when you engage in traditional (vanilla) sexual encounters, you feel as though you are missing something, and I am reading you correctly, then I completely understand your point of view. On the occassions when I "settle" for traditional sex, I am not fulfilled. I feel as though I am being dishonest to myself and my partner. I am not a switch, I do not like being one. I am a submissive.

Did I misunderstand you or do you feel as I do?

Yes I do think you are understanding Me. I have trouble with spontaneous words, that's why I write music....
I am definitely not going to lie to anyone here and say I am fulfilled either in or out of my nilla relationship. I think each situation is very "case sensitive". Mine is one difficult to explain unless you have been there, as I am sure was the case with the orginator of this thread.
BUT~I do not engage in BDSM strictly for sex, that's just the BONUS part. I should simply stop now while I am ahead, but wanted to clarify a bit. I'm just too tired to be sure if I did or not! LOL

Be well...........

~Creme

 

[A Desert Rose]

Re: Re: Re: Wait wait!!!

Be well...........

~Creme

You too. ;-)

 

[catalina_francisco]

Re: Wait wait!!!

Since we got onto the subject...
I have been in a 'nilla relationship with a WONDERful young man for a while now, but he has NO interest in BDSM.
Not all of my Dominant "activities" invlove sex. Putting two and two together, I have a fairly fulfilling SEX life with my young man, but the aspects of D/s are not there with us.
Isn't there anyone else who removes them selves sexually at times from the D/s relationship? I mean, I still feel I am lacking something, and although we are not "married" we are very comitted to each other. Still, I am missing a very important part of myself.......
Does anyone understand what I am trying to say? Cuz it sure is coming out wrong to me... sheesh.

Interesting and thought provoking thread........

~Creme

Yes, it was only when I had my lifestyle craving fed that I realised what it was that had been missing all that time and had driven me to try more and more to satisfy an indefineable hunger that could only be satiated in one way. Once I had that áha' moment there was no turning back as I already knew as wonderful as a vanilla may be, as much as we may care for each other, I would spend my life pining for something I was not getting...so I put all my energy into finding the one I knew was meant for me. I haven't looked back since.

Catalina

 

[Pure]

There was a thread with a slightly different version of the question--'pain with no marks' ---that might interest some. There are quite fiendish ideas.

https://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=176666


The other topic here, on good bad moral immoral bdsm affairs, their joy and heartbreak I don't think I want to go 'round again.

J.

 

[Lady Emerald]

I hear you---Pure! Its refreshing to discuss more than one aspect of an issue!