Slut Wife - One Woman's Guide

What do you mean by "The sexually intensive nature of your existence puts him in a heightened state of desire that he can not reasonably be expected to control. Whether he is constantly masturbating or seeking your sexual attentions, the result will be undesirable for both of you."

You don't want his sexual attention? The whole idea is to open up sexually but this seems like constraints for the guy.

Question 1: why does he have to wait at home? Why can't he be doing whatever else, or going on a date himself?

Question 2: why do the husband have to be controlled? What's wrong with him pursuing other women?

I dont think I’ve ever read such an intelligent and I think inspiring description of positive cuckoldry. If only more women were as aware of how easily and with what huge benefits to their lives and happiness, their husbands may be cuckolded. Not all husbands perhaps, , but I believe , most. And as a cuckold myself ( but in no way resembling the typical cuckold in 90% of stories) I know how much better it is for us to know our place. How much healthier is a marriage where neither partner is frustrated or resentful through the husbands inability to satisfy his wife’s healthy and natural sexual desires. Men are not equal , and pretending we are is neither honest nor wise. Nature has provided a small number with the characteristics necessary to fully satisfy women , and prompts women to desire such men. The rest of us are better suited to supportive and subordinate roles. Neither are men and women sexually equal: women hold the real power, and hopefully are now getting used to applying it.

Brava! I honestly think this would be helpful to a great many people, even those that aren't interested (or are unaware of their latent interest) in 'kink'.

Thanks for sharing.

Interesting POV. Hope you and your husband can continue on. For me, however, your entire philosophy of control is DOA.

Thank you for the woman's viewpoint. We are learning about the lifestyle and considering where we would like it to end up, for us. I don't anticipate that our journey will take us to same place as yours, but the encouragement and empowerment in your writing is fantastic.

It is interesting how this genre elicits such instinctive negative reactions and how people project their own experiences onto it. For instance, if mletrout's ex had followed this guide a critical part of her journey would have been to state clearly her desires and intentions in advance of acting on them so that mletrout could make an informed decision about whether she wanted to continue in the relationship. The lying, excuses and threats would not have been part of the dynamic. All that would be left would be the ex's legitimate decision to not be monogamous and mletrout's legitimate decision to exit that relationship and pursue one that is monogamous.

Consensual non-monogamy has nothing to do with cheating and emotional abuse. As near as I can tell this guide isn't advocating non-monogamy or the hot wife lifestyle in particular. It is information for those who are already interested in the lifestyle. And quite contrary to what many seem to assert or assume it highlights the need to be open and honest with one's partner and continually check in along the journey. Most comments I read here and in relation to similar stories in the genre start from a place of simply being hostile to the idea of a non-monogamous woman. People jump to conclusions about her motivation or conduct to provide cover for the negativity, but what they really hate is a woman who won't conform.

I was in a long term relationship, unmarried, but living together for almost six years. She was an alpha type personality and a serial cheater. A liar, too. I kept forgiving her because I thought I was in love, and I really was, but...she made all kinds of excuses, bargained, threatened. We could do 3somes if I wanted. I could cheat and “get even” or we could have an open relationship, etc. I didn’t want sex with anyone else. I don’t need sex, I need a healthy, loving, honest, respectful relationship.

The essay describes some female sexual utopia and that’s what I want, but without all the “I need more sex than any one man can provide!” bullshit. Because I don’t. And yeah, I get there’s more to it than that.

Anyway, I finally wised up and kicked my ex-girlfriend out of my life before she could drive me completely insane. I met some guys, dated some guys, and a couple years later, I married a guy. He’s not an alpha, just a regular honest, hardworking guy who loves me. I could cheat on him, easy. But I don’t think I could convince him that I’m sexually superior and eventually break him down to the point where he wants to see me fuck someone else.

And if I could break him like that? I’d leave him. I can’t respect a guy that’s willing to marry me, raise a family with me, share the triumphs and suffer the setbacks of a life worth living, and then allow me to have sex with someone else just because...What? It’s fun? I have needs? He has esteem issues? No thanks.

I’m not criticizing the couples who enjoy that lifestyle or the people who want the fantasy. It’s your life and you should live it. I’m just saying that the hotwife/cuckold relationship doesn’t offer anything of value to my marriage. Quite honestly, the article struck me as something my ex-girlfriend could have easily written. It was a little frightening actually.

Anyway, thanks for sharing. I give you a bunch of stars, but I should also add that when you confessed to cheating on your husband early on, I really struggled to believe anything you said subsequent to that admission. Like I said, I was stuck in an emotionally abusive relationship for a lot of years. Maybe now I can’t see the forest for the trees? But I’ll stand by convictions anyway; they were hard won.

a very well thought out scenario with many breakpoints.I don't see this minefield being crossed for any period of time in the real world. Yes for a few all these conditions can be meet but how long until the inevitable mismatch of desire and actuality cross and the paths digress. And really unlikely if children, illness, financial stress, emotional attachment for the dom whether she wants to or not, emotional exhaustion for the sub who probably doesn't live in a vacuum but will be subject to scorn and abandonment when friends and family interact. Perhaps Edward the abdicated King of England did it but his life was one of moving from one sycophantic person or couple to another. Rather like the life of Sisyphus.

Hello all, Sam here.

Before I begin, let all try to imagine that anything is possible and our thoughts are based off of our own unique life experiences. Now if this were true, then that would be that everyone's beliefs are personal. Hell, even facts would be nothing more than beliefs.

Now you can say" I know that the Sun will rise, that's a fact" that is true, but you didn't learn that. That is not knowledge, that is intuitive. Even animals are aware that the Sun will rise. So then, is what we learn true?

1. Policy wank has shared with us an incredible document. There is no right or wrong. It is her beliefs. Her :truth" if you will. It can't be wrong.

2. You cannot intellectualize this article because it is about emotion. Sex is a need. It's not an option. We are all made up of 50% semen, so how can it be gross. How can sex be bad, when that's how we all got here.

3. I will not try and touch religion. If you have religious beliefs I respect them.

4. You cannot define sex with words. You can try and talk about doing this or doing that but your words have no power over an erect penis or Lubricated vagina. Sexual energy is powerful and must be expressed in some fashion. Are there good ways and bad ways? Of course, but it is up to the individual to decide what is right for them.

5. I suppose when we try to impose absolutes on sex we miss the bigger picture. Sex is important and should be respected. Sex is fun. Sex is mysterious and a thousand other things. Through sex we create people. Wars are started over women. Even in modern times we fight over how women should be treated. Wars are never over men, they are about the infinite sexual power of the female that we men attempt unsuccessfully to harness.

Policywank should be praised for sharing this beautiful work of art. It has changed my life for the better. That's just me however. Don't make a decision yet. If you don't like it or understand it. Sit on it for a few years then check it out again. Perhaps you may change your mind. I for one am very grateful for her honesty, integrity and sincerity because we do not get very much of that these days.

In society we complain that people are no longer "real" and when a real person speaks up we tell them to pipe down. Weather you agree or not, isn't it beautiful how she spoke up? That's why we are all here commenting on it because it is fascinating. Can you believe the audacity she has in sharing this with us unapologetically. Isn't it sexy.

Is there any man who has read this who wouldn't like to have a coffee with her and hear more of her thoughts? She is incredible. Magnificent, interesting and we all know it. That is why we are here. So please, please do not say anything negative. I am not being a gentlemen and I know that she can speak for herself.

Even if a man wrote this, I would speak up for him. I speak up for mma fighters all the time and they appreciate it even though they are usually 20 or even sometimes 30 years younger than me. They appreciate someone articulating on their behalf.

Each and everyone of you that left a comment took time out of your busy life to express something. I think you are beautiful for that and I love you for it. I just ask that in 2019 and beyond, we don't censor what we don't agree with. Let's continue to have conversations.

Love and respect to all.

Until next time, your friend and brother

Sam

Enjoy the silence.

Ah yes the tired old trope that marriage in intrinsically monogamous followed by an insult to the intelligence of anyone who dare disagree. But the foundation this argument is built on is opinion. And the intensity with which that opinion is felt does not make it fact.

Truth is that there are many valid variations on marriage that don’t revolve around monogamy. This is the same narrow mindedness that tried to deny gay marriage then retreated to “ok they can get together but they have to call it something different like civil union”. No they don’t. At least not in many western countries including the one where I live.

Arguments of linguistic appropriation mean nothing absent proof positive that the original definition includes monogamy. The need to insult only underlined the weakness of the argument - a circular argument that is built on its own presumptions.

Policywank has written a useful antidote for much of drivel that appears in LW. Thank you. As for the anon "Marriage" comment, however, that comment relies on the "fatuous" notion that linguistic kidnapping is intellectually honest, when it is in fact a dishonest bit of politico/linguistic slight-of-hand.

What is being done is taking a term with a well defined meaning that enjoys many positive connotations and changing it's meaning in order to receive psychological rents (unearned psychological benefits) by attaching the positive connotations to something quite different.

An old example is the "kidnapping" of the term "liberal". Up until the early 20th Century "liberal" referred to those who advocated natural rights AND a very limited government. Socialists could get no social or political traction by referring to their social/political program as what it was, so they decided to "rebrand" themselves as "liberals". This muddied the waters enough that they began making inroads with this deception. Eventually, they gained a great deal of power by kidnapping the term "liberal". Bear in mind that this bit of linguistic theft was used to promote statism, the very antithesis of true liberalism. As is always the case with these sorts of linguistic appropriations, the intent is fundamentally dishonest - it's intended to confuse people and debate for the purpose of advancing something that wouldn't be easily accepted, if at all, on its own merits. But that's the point - the advocates don't want to have to defend their positions on their own merits.

As for the linguistic kidnapping of "marriage", the purpose is the same. Language could used honestly - say referring to "same sex unions" or "polyamorous unions". But, instead, rather than having to defend and advocate their desired policy change honestly, the advocates deliberately confuse people and the debate by kidnapping a well understood and defined term in the hope of appropriating its positive connotations and distracting people from the actual substance of the institutional changes they are advocating and the potential undesirable social and cultural consequences of those changes.

The anon fancies himself to be "sophisticated", but, in fact, he is just a dim-bulb with a delusional view of his own mental prowess, or he's intellectually dishonest...or perhaps some of both.

The comment right before this one relies on the tired and fatuous notion that the term “marriage” is reserved for those that subscribe to a certain definition of what it means to be married. In this case their focus is on monogamy but the argument is no different in substance (or lack thereof) than those that say it only applies to heterosexual couples. There is no basis for the claim. The intensity with which one group claims a restricted definition of marriage in no way invalidates alternative perspectives because that first group does not hold authority over others nor does it hold the authority to dictate the meaning of any given word..

As for all the other arguments they represent a legitimate point of view whether one agrees or not. To argue against the author’s notion of female sexual superiority is simply a matter of offering a valid alternative perspective - each of us is free to hear both and come to our own conclusion. I find plenty of issue with what the author and the last commenter says - I agree on some points and disagree on others.

But I note that author makes her arguments without claiming that right to declare alternative views invalid. The only thing I find “wrong” with either point of view is the spurious claim to the definitive interpretation of the word marriage.

While I do not claim to know why the last commenter feels empowered to make that claim it is reminiscent of the thought process that the author is trying to refute....the idea that because one set of perspectives is widely or intensely enough held that even those who disagree must be made to comply. Surely even is a plurality of people adopted the views of the author the last commenter would reserve the right to not comply? So why do they feel the need to impose their own view of marriage on others or denying the right of others to use the word if they don’t comply?

No. Everything here is up for debate. But the premise that marriage is intrinsically monogamous is patently false. No matter how firmly the Judeo-Christian perspective seeks establish that view the authority simply does not exist to do so on behalf of all mankind.

And I think that might be a bit of the author’s point - not to force her own view but to refute the right of others to impose theirs.

I don’t think her explanation of a husband’s jealousy dismisses his psyche. In fact, it focuses directly on his psyche and relative expectations. Anon takes it one step further to explore the element of something to lose or gain which is entirely valid. But that isn’t a different thing it is a different angle on the same thing.

Then anon goes on to make the classic mistake of associating abuse or insensitivity with cuckolding. Yes the circumstance is open to abuse by the wife or hurt on the part of the husband who is not as ready for it as he thought he was. But the author is very clear about that potential and the need to manage it and approach it realistically. Anon’s argument is like saying he knows someone who jumped out of a plane and died so that is what will always happen when someone jumps out of a plane when in fact the operative piece of information is that the guy wasn’t wearing a parachute or the pilot didn’t know what he was doing and let him jump under dangerous circumstances.

See any relationship model is open to abuse or insensitivity. I could just as easily cite examples of men or women having their sexual needs ignored and their feelings hurt within a monogamous relationship up to and including situations where it lead to a very unhappy ending. But the fact that it occurred in a monogamous relationship does not mean that monogamy alone was the cause.

What anon describes is a callous wife and/or a man who is not ready for the reality for cuckolding. Read the guide again - it is filled with cautions about proceeding in that situation.

Is this maybe the same anon the wrote the previous point? Yes of course fucking the mate of your own child or immediate family member is reprehensible. But that really isn’t the situation the author was addressing by any reasonable assessment. She said simply that it is the cheater who owes a responsibility of fidelity to their spouse rather than the person they cheated with. Whether that person also owes a duty of fidelity to the spouse is a separate question. But if they do it is because of their relationship with that spouse not because the person they fucked was married.

It may not be nice behaviour but if I fuck some woman whose husband I don’t know I don’t owe him anything. If he wants to be mad he should be mad at his wife not me because I have no expressed or implied obligation to him. If I fuck my brother’s wife he has every right to be mad at me but that is because I do have an implied obligation to him.

People who fuck their daughter’s fiancé or mistreat their partner are not representative of non-monogamous relationships anymore than men who bear their wives are representative of monogamous ones.

Hello Miss Policy Early in your Guide you asked why Husband is more jealous of lover than lover is of him. You explanation although true, dismisses a man

s psyche. The husband being cuckolded is more jealous because this other man wants to take the woman he loves away. He stands to lose everything. Whereas, the boyfriend has everything to gain and nothing to lose. He wants to humiliate the cuck so the cucks wife gradually loses any respect she ever had for her husband.

Very dangerous to healthy marriage, Changes everything. Wives do fall for the lover, Women become emotionally attached to their lovers.

The first time my wife had her boy friend come over she gave him oral and intercourse in our bed. After sex he went to bathroom as I cleaned up. When boyfriend came back my wife said "cucky Jim will be spending the night in our bed. You can sleep on the floor". I was stunned. I cried quietly. Once they were sleeping, I left the house from early Saturday AM until Monday night.

Cuckolding is a very exciting fantasy; however the reality is very different. It will break your heart in the end. The woman will eventually leave her husband if the chemistry is right. Men if it goes to far, make a stand. She will belittle you. Ignore her, she will respect you as a man later. You protect her from the enemy. All women like that.