Ugh, I'm very reluctant to say this but, are you sure he's actually been 'abused'?
I’ve always made huge allowances for the fact that he has been abused as I would hope someone would for me but I don’t know why it seems his abuse is more important or relevant than my own
This is all very convenient for him, isn't it?
He has issues with sex with you unless there is risk/jeopardy involved; despite his issues around sex, he has managed to cheat on you more than once; he claims to have been sexually abused in relationships by more than one woman.
Firstly, it is very unusual for a man to be sexually abused by a woman. I can't even imagine the probability of one man being sexually abused by multiple women.
Secondly, I have met several men in my 51 years on the plant who have 'some funny ideas' when it comes to sex. This thread has brought to mind a couple of them - mainly, the one who didn't believe women should initiate sex and regarded women doing so as doing something wrong (because they were performing the masculine/dominant role and it's a man's role to want and a woman's role to resist sex so a woman initiating sex is coercive and abusive) and the one who talked about an ex being sexually abusive because she expected sex to result in an orgasm for her if it had for him and he felt that was abusive) when he was just a lazy, shit lover who didn't care.
Basically, some men have co-opted the language around abuse because they know women respond supprtively to it and so it enables them to get away with being shit and blaming it on their experiences of abuse without challenge.
It's very convenient for him that his experience of 'abuse' enables him to behave in ways that deman you whilst simultaneously allowing him to disregard your experiences of abuse.