I am not frigid by any of the 5 above definitions. My husband has no problem with me finding a good looking man handsome. He's not insecure.
Indeed. Secure men would have no problem with this.
:chuckle:
I am not frigid by any of the 5 above definitions. My husband has no problem with me finding a good looking man handsome. He's not insecure.
Is yours ex-wife laughing as well?
Apparently his *needs* are more important than her health and well being.
Of his uncontrollable libido ... which ranked much higher than his wife.
NURSING HOME. Ill individuals receiving medical care. This wasn't the "Love Shack" or a motel room.
While it is certainly possible that the husband has dementia as well that doesn't mean he gets a pass to use the hospital for his own personal whims.
YOU are declaring medical tyranny because a man is not allowed to use a MEDICAL FACILITY as his own private love shack and disgusted with the woman who was in earshot of his rudeness.
It's bad enough that anyone (spouse included) would take advantage of a person with dementia. This is about HIS needs ... and HIS comfort. Comfort could have come in the form of holding her hand.
Well, taking these types of illnesses seriously is something that comes with maturity. I won't apologize for not being amused over the husband's lack of priorities in regards to his ill wife.
How much honor or love is being shown to person whose dementia is so serious she is hospitalized?
I can understand his missing her and being lonely, however, she was ill and it's probable she did not have the capability of consenting.
The OP title is trying to spin this as a romantic, honorable event. Was his love and support only offered under the condition of sex?
I agree that this husband shouldn't have been manhandling his sick wife.
Nah, I am not ashamed for defending patients against abuse. However, you feel free to keep defending the guy who confessed. :chuckle:
Why is it that you don't believe the accused rapist's confession? He admitted to sexual activity.
Why is his confession not enough for you? :think:
That's interesting ... and all Traditio. That you and few others are so concerned about "the man". Poor guy .... in such a state of mind that others had to make his decisions and physically care for him. How on earth could anyone be expected to forgo sex even though their loved one is on death's doorstep?
Here, let me clear it up for you. I am only interested in the helpless victim he had his way with.
Rusha is erring on the side of caution.
Indeed. Secure men would have no problem with this.
I understand the disease.
I would like to talk about the idea in general of consent and illnesses like dementia.
Since sex is healthy like exercise or even moreso ...
Could they have brought in help at their mothers home. Technically yes, but that is VERY expensive, and insurance will only cover so much.
Some of us get a second chance.
You think you can get your way by inferring if you don't the man is insecure?
What about caution where it concerns the heart of a grieving widower being accused of raping his deceased beloved wife? The trial is about to begin.
What about it? He will get as fair of a trial as any other individual being accused of this crime.
And the man himself can search online and read this potentially. He's alive and holding office right this minute.
I think you are about to get it...What's your point?
Anyway, I stand by everything I've said. I do not know the intimate details of his marriage. I can not definitively call him guilty or innocent .... More information may come out at the trial, we will just have to wait and see.
Why is his confession not enough for you? :think:
I think you are about to get it...
The honorable Rusha has already ruled for the court of opinion. This session is now in recess.
Rusha has spoken for no one other than herself, and unless you are saying that you share Rusha's opinion then she does not speak for all.
Rusha has spoken for no one other than herself
and unless you are saying that you share Rusha's opinion then she does not speak for all.
He confessed, and the decision is in the hands of the court. I stand by the fact that there is no good reason for a spouse to expect a medical facility to be his personal *love shack*.
Perhaps the guy is too befuddled
So when I sneak up on my beloved and start flirting physically to get his attention, it's assault? It's not like I wait for consent to start. I listen/watch for oral or unspoken withdrawal of intimate consent if he's not into me.... to understand that any sexual contact where the party in question is unable to consent is considered rape.
Also, I am going on record as stating that this is just another example of bashing the medical profession by pretending this isn't about illness, coherency but only about ... love.
Love=sex. Apparently. Nothing else. Without being able to have sex one cannot love their partner.
There is no tyranny. In the husband's case, there is no love or honor. Frankly, I feel sorry for the woman and empathize with her daughters.
That's the problem I am having too. I don't want people abused or taken advantage of, yet I also don't want rights taken away from the elderly. We'll all be there some day right? One of the issues with this case is that it is now in the open and people who don't know the couple and the state of their marriage can make pronouncements on it. Some are doing it definitively with absolutely no intimate knowledge.I don't see it as this clear-cut. Even the fact are unclear, with contradictory statements on both sides.
Maybe it's because I'm getting old, but I think it's annoying that I might have to leave some kind of statement that I wouldn't mind having sex, even if I was no longer capable of giving consent.
Anyone who know me, and my relationship with Mrs. B, would know that. But common sense no longer seems to count for much.