Am I over reacting- partner finished inside me

[MyRealBiscuit]

Bit of background, we conceived a child whilst I was using birth control so are now extra cautious and he doesn't finish inside me. He has demonstrated good control of this over 8.5 months of having regular sex but the other night he "got carried away" in his words... why do I feel so crap and out of control about it? Took the morning after pill which I was angry about as I've had it in the past and it really plays havoc with my hormones.

I seldom promise anything to make sure I don't break them. I'll say I'll do my best but I rarely promise an actual outcome, because it's really important for me to be true to my word and I won't give my word unless I can control completely whether I deliver that outcome. Living in a different way doesn't seem logical to me. It's not about "slights" but about honesty, trust, and integrity.

If breaking promises is OK, how can you trust someone to keep their marriage vows? Marriage vows are a promise. How can you trust someone to uphold a contract? The whole foundation of trust is destroyed if "I promise" doesn't mean certainty.

I agree that condoms are the practical solution in situations like this one. At the same time, OP's husband shouldn't have made a promise and then decided that he was having too much fun to keep it and never mind how OP felt about that. The two statements aren't in conflict.

I'm not going to get into a debate with you on this because I suspect you see the world as very black and white and need it to follow an order/logic, and I see the nuances. But you can break promises and still be honest, trustworthy and have integrity. Just like you can tell grey lies and be an honest person.

So the man is offered a sherbet lemon sweetie. The rule is he shouldn't salivate profusely while eating it. He accepts the offer as he loves lemonade & is thirsty. Half way through the sweetie he can stand it no longer He tries to spit it out & fails. Is he guilty of going against his partners wishes. Absolutely not. This whole thread that says otherwise is ludicrous.

I suspect you see the world as very black and white and need it to follow an order/logic, and I see the nuances.

You are correct that I rely on order and logic a lot. If you don't have consistent rules, I don't see how can you know what is and isn't OK. No one has ever satisfactorily explained neurotypical morality to me. As far as I can tell, "nuance" means a) "stuff usually neurotypical people say to justify being inconsistent when applying rules" and b) "a stick other usually neurotypical people will beat me with when I don't understand their inconsistencies and get caught out by them again". The idea that you can lie or break promises and still be honest and trustworthy makes as much sense to me as claiming that you can mug people without being a thief.

Observation so far indicates that you are neurotypical or mask extremely well. Our interaction here is a clear illustration of some of the cultural differences between autistic and neurotypical people and demonstrates why we fail to understand each other.

It's also interesting that, despite the popular belief that autistic people are incapable of empathy, I, an autistic poster, am one of several posters who empathise with the OP concerning her sense of betrayal. There's two distinct sets of posters on this thread: those who prioritise male entitlement to orgasm where he likes over trustworthiness, and those who don't.

Where did the OP say that he tried to stop and failed to? She didn't claim that. She said he "got carried away" in his words. "I got carried away" is not the statement of someone who wanted to stop and failed, it's the statement of someone who didn't want to stop. When someone tells you what they are, believe them.

Let's be charitable and pretend that he did try to stop and failed. What him making it right afterwards would look like, as another poster has suggested, would be for him to offer, unprompted, to wear condoms during sex from now on. Not for him to try to excuse himself with "I got carried away".

Honestly, the bar some of you set for male behaviour isn't just on the floor, it's on the basement floor.

Women aren't objects, sweets are. You might consider a less overtly misogynist analogy in future.

Stop having sex and expecting to stop. Man or woman into sex gets excited. If you don't want to do it or don't want either person to finish then don't let it start.

Literally made an account to point out that you people talking about rape are... INSANE.

But men are not objects either this idea of i will allow you to have sex with me but I has to be my way you do what I say

And yes I can imagine if this was reversed

If he is that bad stop sleeping with him it's simple

@selffellatingouroborosofhate It's futile to understand the morality of neurotypical people, or strangers on the internet.... Your general feelings towards men or relationships will lead you to empathise with any situation or OP that sees them in the same light you do. And anyone who sees a male partner as 'owner of cock and balls', and sees the orgasm of a loved one as 'male entitlement' is not going to have any positive feelings/experiences to guide their perspective.

Largely I agree with you. But future use of condoms is something they both have to discuss. We don't know if the OP is happy with it, and we don't know if her partner knows whether she is happy with it. It seems the obvious solution for the peace of mind of both them to me, but they do both have a say in it.

Another who needs to educate him or herself.

If he didn't think he could hold up his end of the agreement, then he shouldn't have made the agreement.

Nobody forced him to have sex.

He knows the OP got pregnant before despite being on the pill.

He knows how important it is for her to feel sure she won't get pregnant

He knows he could easily have gone out and bought condoms.

But no, he apparently had to have sex, and then he decided his word wasn't important, and the consent of the OP certainly wasn't either.

Yes he was wrong. He was wrong at that point where he agreed to have sex that will always be interrupted at just THE moment. No wonder he struggles to finish!
That's like someone starting to blast Baby Shark every time the feeling is right.

But agree he did. Though I wouldn't hoist him over hot coal for this - it was an unreasonable ask after all.

It's time to have a serious talk about contraception and depending on the outcome of that talk, there's a question of compatibility within the relationship.
This is no way to live (have sex) for either of you.

That's not how consent works. You're allowed to change your mind at any point. So yes that's potentially going to mean an excited person having to stop what they're doing. If someone can't control themselves and remain respectful of their partner at all times, then they are the one who shouldn't be having sex.

You've misrepresented the nature of the OP's request there. She wasn't dictating every detail of the encounter, but was merely saying no to internal ejaculation. It's comparable to saying no to anal sex, or saying no to the man ejaculating on her tits.

Both partners have the right to say no to anything they don't want to do. This right is absolute.

This needs to be on billboards.

It would make just as much sense to say SHE raped HIM as he didn't realise the effect the brand spanking new sparkling special red panties she was wearing would have on him.

Spot the misogynist. A garment is not consent, nor is it an excuse to rape, nor does wearing new knickers (this is a British site) constitute an act of sexual assault.

I agree with this. The judgment is very clear about what in this context amounts to rape and what does not, but what the OP says happened isn't clearly in one category or the other. The OP is hurt because of the breach of trust, and I'm not sure that a discussion about the technicalities of the law is helpful to her.

It's a good thing we don't apply the adage "These things happen. They always have and they always will" to crime in general. Murder/ robbery/ arson, etc. have always happened after all, and probably always will. Whoever wrote that opinion needs to think his (or her) thoughts through a lot more thoroughly.

Nevertheless, the highlighted part of the opinion (garbled though it is, and confusing consent, contraception, and general musings about relationships in one hot mess) pertains to accidental or premature ejaculation that surprises the man.

This bloke has said he got carried away. In other words, he decided to carry on regardless of the OP's wishes. He had no reason to believe she had consented to sex if it meant he ejaculated inside her.

A woman doesn't have to have a reason (such as contraception or fear of sti) for not wanting sex without a condom or for wanting a man to withdraw before ejaculation, or for making consent conditional in any other way. It can simply be her preference, and if the man doesn't like the sound of her conditions he doesn't have to have sex, and she doesn't owe him sex.

The idea that men are powerless in the face of their sexual urges or in the heat of the moment is one that has too often excused sexual violation of women, and it is regrettable that this notion still has currency despite the fact that millions of men practice withdrawal successfully.

Why won't he get a Vasectomy? I would demand that or no sex.

OP did not consent to sex that could expose her to pregnancy. She consented to (mutually agreed) sex where he would pull out.

Rape doesn't always 'look' like we expect it to. Often it doesn't involve violence or a stranger. It can be the man you sleep next to every night.

OP I'm so sorry, this happened x

Excuse me? Are you serious? I hope you never experience this situation.

Withdrawal isn't the most effective method, even as a back up but that's not the issue. The issue is that OP didn't consent to sex where he would come inside her.