Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
User avatar
Sarah
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6706

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Sarah »

brianj wrote: March 23rd, 2017, 10:06 pm
Sarah wrote: March 23rd, 2017, 1:55 pm The commandment is no sexual relations with anyone or anything other than your wife, and for you both to multiply. You are not commanded to have regular sex. The Law of Chastity is more cut and dry and spiritually serious than how many children are attempted at conceiving, so this is an acceptable expectation in marriage - fidelity, and that children will be attempted at. With the commandment to multiply, and most women's desire to have children, at least that gives you sex during your marriage a few times. I know that is not what you expected out of marriage, but that is where the problem is, despite thinking that boredom is your wife's problem. Your wife might even think that her boredom with you is the problem, but it is your expectations and the way you are projecting that onto her that are really turning her off, and the pressure she feels to give and receive something that she cannot appreciate.

Here is how you can become not boring - Come up to her and tell her that you realize that you have been putting pressure on her to have sex/be intimate with you, and that you don't want her to feel pressured anymore. You want her to only do it if she wants to, and not feel ashamed or guilty about not wanting to be close to you. You then need to reassure her of that every time you give her any kind of physical affection. Start treating her like you did when you were dating with no expectations of anything physical, but get close enough that she will start to want that closeness. Take up a hobby together etc. That is how you can stop being boring.

When you finally do have sex, you need to focus on giving her that gift. This is not about you, but your focus should be giving a good gift that she can appreciate and not on receiving from her. If she cannot appreciate what you are doing, then you need to figure out what she does appreciate and love her that way. Love is about giving gifts that someone will appreciate. And sex is not a gift meant for one person to just give another. It should only happen if both can appreciate or "receive" it.
I am going to disagree with you on two points here. I'll start with you claiming there is no commandment to have regular sex. Look at 1 Corinthians 7:5. It isn't clear in the King James version of the Bible what's meant by "depart ye not one from another..." The International Standard Version translates that line to: "Do not withhold yourselves from each other..." The Holman translation says: "Do not deprive one another sexually..." Several other translations say something very similar to: "Do not deprive one another..."

It seems pretty clear that Paul is saying we have an obligation to not refuse ourselves to our spouse. Verse 4 also seems pretty clear: "The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife."

Let me try another approach: Is it okay for us to intentionally hurt our spouse? Considering the evidence that withholding sex hurts both your husband and your marriage then are you hurting your husband and your marriage by withholding sex? After all, one of the easiest barometers to measure the health of a marriage is the frequency of sexual intimacy.
If you think it is okay to hurt your husband and marriage in this way then can I assume you also believe it is okay with you if your husband does things that hurt your feelings and mental well being?

The second thing I disagree with is the beginning premise of your last paragraph: "When you finally do have sex..." It is typical that as a woman ages, particularly after she's had the kids she desires, she loses interest in sex. If she decides that neither she nor her husband need sex, no matter what her husband does she may not decide to fulfill her marital obligation. And some women are just plain unreasonable; no matter what their husbands do it isn't good enough for them. These women often know that they are hurting their husbands but they think getting the impossible things they want is all that matters.
Whether or not it is a commandment really doesn't matter. Do you want your wife to feel like it is her duty and threatened with consequences if she doesn't give to you, or do you want her to give to you joyfully without any hesitancy and full of love? She can't really do that if sex is one-sided and making her feel used or sexually frustrated. Sex is a gift meant to be given and received at the same time, so if one person is unable to receive, the giver should not give.

It is kind of like the commandment to give to the poor and needy. Are you obeying it grudgingly or are you doing it joyfully? If you are doing it grudgingly, it is not going to do you any good! So a woman giving to you grudgingly is not going to help her, except in maintaining your mood. Now maybe if she does it with an attitude of loving sacrifice, then that will be accounted to her as righteousness, but when a husband has this view that it is his wife's duty to sacrifice her body to him, and when she doesn't he withdraws his love, that is when the husband is going to be held accountable for withholding love from her to punish her for not sacrificing for him. It is no different than a wife who expects her husband to sacrifice more time than she is sacrificing. She too would be expecting an imbalance at her husband's expense.

A husband should not act like a poor person who feels resentful or angry that the rich man is not giving to him. Yes, the rich man is commanded to give, but that has no bearing on how the receiver should feel. The receiver needs to focus on giving - we all do - and not on receiving with an attitude of entitlement or with an expectation of receiving in payment for our giving. Love is about giving without expecting something in return.

My guess is that Paul's words were not meant to convey that there is a commandment to give sexually to your spouse. You are to stay and remain with each other. Most likely men have translated it to mean that because they want that to be the message. We have a culture of sexual entitlement. You read any marriage book or listen to any marriage seminar given by a man, and the message is that it is wrong to withhold sex, that a man deserves it, that it is the woman's problem, that sex is deserved for all the work you do or for all the listening/talking time you give your wife. Baloney! This message has been around so long that that is what everyone believes, and it is most likely one of the causes of the rising feminist attitude in women. Attitudes of entitlement and expectation provoke more of that from all parties. Selfishness in one sex begets selfishness in another - simple as that.

I would not interpret verse 4 to mean that we have no choice when it comes to how our partner will use our bodies. Rather I think it means that we are not allowed to stimulate or control our own sexuality. That our spouse is the only one allowed to control that power within us. It doesn't mean we must give into demands or even requests. Agency and freedom are what govern the giving and receiving of love. Compulsion has no place. Even when we make covenants, and receive commandments, the Lord ultimately wants us to obey for the right reasons. Not obey out of selfishness - wanting something in return for ourselves - or fear - fear of His love going away or of a punishment - but out of unselfish love for Him and for others.

You asked the question, "is it okay to hurt your spouse," and I would respond with the question, 'is it okay to hurt your child?" You have to be specific in what kind of hurt you mean. Is it hurtful to not give the child what he wants? Is it hurtful to put some boundaries on how much your wife can spend?

So you say, well it isn't hurtful to have some boundaries on spending, but it would be hurtful and selfish to deny her any money, and I would agree. It comes down to which actions of giving and receiving are selfish, and what are appropriate boundaries to have on giving. Boundaries are necessary if there is an imbalance that is causing one person to be selfish or more focused on self. And with sex, the appropriate boundary should be that if both husband and wife cannot receive with appreciation, then the gift should not be given. And that is why I try to keep hammering away the message that sex is a different kind of love gift than work, time, money, communication, or even non-sexual physical intimacy. It is completely different kind of gift, one that you cannot just give another to be loving. The giver must receive it at the same time.

Let me ask you a question. What do you tell your children to do if they want something? You teach them to ask politely right? And to not demand, or whine and complain if you refuse their request. Whining, demanding and expecting show a lack of respect for our agency as parents, and it shows in them an attitude of entitlement. But like our Father in Heaven, we like to be asked nicely, and see our children desiring our will above their own.

So, now the next question. If you want to be intimate with your wife, what do you do? Do you ask politely if she will be intimate with you? Probably not. You just start "giving" physical affection to her, which demonstrates my point. But are you really giving her a gift, or is that a request, expectation, or demand? If she is withdrawing from your affection it is because she is not interpreting your gift as a gift but as a request. You are better off just asking for what you want. She's more likely to give you what you want, rather than deal with your constant expectations to receive in return for your giving. But instinctively you know intimacy shouldn't be just about you, that she should enjoy your gifts, so you don't just ask. It would kind of be humiliating right? And that is why God requires that we ask - so we show our humility and respect for His agency. So that's why I keep saying, if she can't appreciate your gifts, stop giving those gifts because they are not gifts to her, they are requests or expectations. If you really love her you will give her things that she appreciates receiving. One sided sex is always going to be selfish if the receiver feels entitled to that. If she is willing to sacrifice for you, you better see if for what it is and that it is a great sacrifice. The better option is to make sure it is always great for her too or just don't do it.

User avatar
WhereCanITurn4Peace
captain of 100
Posts: 369

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by WhereCanITurn4Peace »

Wow, Sarah...your post is powerful and insightful. Thank you!

I would speak from personal experience that what you are saying is true. My husband and I have an amazing relationship in that we have a mutual respect, love and caring for one another and strive to demonstrate to each other our appreciation through words ("I love you" "You are an incredible husband" "You look beautiful" "Thank you" "I appreciate you") and actions (he takes out the trash without being asked, I give him a massage for an hour when his back hurts).

While neither one of us is perfect, our marriage is fulfilling, solid, compassionate and happy. There is no tit-for-tat, demanding or unrealistic expectations. We just give to each other (physically, emotionally, verbally) because we have a natural affection and love that we want to constantly help, uplift, share with one another. I am truly blessed to be his wife.

Fiannan
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12983

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Fiannan »

I have often wondered why people who shoot for two kids often divorce when the youngest enters grade school but the ones who shoot for three kids wait until the youngest is in grade school and the couples who shoot for however many Gods gives them tend to stay married for the duration.

Is there something wired into our brains that says that if our marriage isn't continuing to make babies then it is time to seek more fertile (emphasis on that word) ground? Naturally once the youngest is in school that makes it easier for the woman to file for divorce.

It is quite common that men go through a mid life crisis. However, that generally occurs not when he reaches 45 or 50 but is based on when his wife enters menopause. So if a man who is 45 is married to a 45 year old woman he may start showing those tell-tale signs then, but if a man is 45 and married to a 25 year old then he will not show those signs until he is 65 and the wife reaches non-fertility.

The reason the couples who aim for larger families may stay together is because grandchildren start appearing when that non-fertile point is reached and the couple have a re-birth of sorts of helping to raise babies.

In regards to female sexuality when the 40s hit that can either lead to a woman shutting off or really getting into sex. I read a while back that liberal couples tend to enjoy their sex lives almost two decades into old age more than conservatives. I think that may be due to liberals being a bit more adventurous, and the women not being so wired by their more conservative societies to only see sex as a means of reproduction while also polluted the the notion that sex is something to be endured rather than a vehicle for enhancing health, bonding, or metaphysical experiences.

Of course many of these variables overlap but it may provide some insights into the discussion.

User avatar
Sarah
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6706

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Sarah »

WhereCanITurn4Peace wrote: March 24th, 2017, 2:58 pm Wow, Sarah...your post is powerful and insightful. Thank you!

I would speak from personal experience that what you are saying is true. My husband and I have an amazing relationship in that we have a mutual respect, love and caring for one another and strive to demonstrate to each other our appreciation through words ("I love you" "You are an incredible husband" "You look beautiful" "Thank you" "I appreciate you") and actions (he takes out the trash without being asked, I give him a massage for an hour when his back hurts).

While neither one of us is perfect, our marriage is fulfilling, solid, compassionate and happy. There is no tit-for-tat, demanding or unrealistic expectations. We just give to each other (physically, emotionally, verbally) because we have a natural affection and love that we want to constantly help, uplift, share with one another. I am truly blessed to be his wife.
Thank you! Indeed you are very blessed to have a good husband, and he is blessed to have you!

User avatar
Sarah
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6706

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Sarah »

Fiannan wrote: March 24th, 2017, 2:59 pm I have often wondered why people who shoot for two kids often divorce when the youngest enters grade school but the ones who shoot for three kids wait until the youngest is in grade school and the couples who shoot for however many Gods gives them tend to stay married for the duration.

Is there something wired into our brains that says that if our marriage isn't continuing to make babies then it is time to seek more fertile (emphasis on that word) ground? Naturally once the youngest is in school that makes it easier for the woman to file for divorce.

It is quite common that men go through a mid life crisis. However, that generally occurs not when he reaches 45 or 50 but is based on when his wife enters menopause. So if a man who is 45 is married to a 45 year old woman he may start showing those tell-tale signs then, but if a man is 45 and married to a 25 year old then he will not show those signs until he is 65 and the wife reaches non-fertility.

The reason the couples who aim for larger families may stay together is because grandchildren start appearing when that non-fertile point is reached and the couple have a re-birth of sorts of helping to raise babies.

In regards to female sexuality when the 40s hit that can either lead to a woman shutting off or really getting into sex. I read a while back that liberal couples tend to enjoy their sex lives almost two decades into old age more than conservatives. I think that may be due to liberals being a bit more adventurous, and the women not being so wired by their more conservative societies to only see sex as a means of reproduction while also polluted the the notion that sex is something to be endured rather than a vehicle for enhancing health, bonding, or metaphysical experiences.

Of course many of these variables overlap but it may provide some insights into the discussion.
I don't know about the connection of menopause to mid-life crisis, but as for the 40 year-old woman going one way or the other, I can see how that would be common. Most likely because she has been so busy with babies and young children she hasn't had time to think about herself - her life feels like one big sacrifice. And she has more time to enjoy being with her husband. Then she wakes up to the fact that she no longer needs to just go through the motions and feel bad afterwards. She takes more charge of her sex life.

Fiannan
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12983

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Fiannan »

I don't know about the connection of menopause to mid-life crisis, but as for the 40 year-old woman going one way or the other, I can see how that would be common. Most likely because she has been so busy with babies and young children she hasn't had time to think about herself - her life feels like one big sacrifice. And she has more time to enjoy being with her husband. Then she wakes up to the fact that she no longer needs to just go through the motions and feel bad afterwards. She takes more charge of her sex life.
That is true. Some will turn their energies towards their husband and they will re-capture their time when they first married (but better since most, by this time, at least are financially better off than earlier). Others, sadly, either decide to go Catholic nun style, "discover" they are lesbian, or find a 25 year old guy while on a trip to Belize or Ghana.
What is even weirder, in a way, is often the alternative of the swinging as a lifestyle, I have read that it is it is quite often the woman who entices her husband to check out the lifestyle. Whatever the case may be in all of these divergences from the ideal of marriage as we see it should be we need to recognize that female sexuality is as powerful a driving force as male. The powers-that-be, including Lucifer himself, are aware of this and that is how they use every tactic in the book to tap into it and turn it to their ends, be it in Church minimizing its importance or in the media trying to turn it towards non-reproductive, consumeristic and selfish ends.

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by brianj »

Sarah wrote: March 24th, 2017, 2:30 pm Whether or not it is a commandment really doesn't matter. Do you want your wife to feel like it is her duty and threatened with consequences if she doesn't give to you, or do you want her to give to you joyfully without any hesitancy and full of love? She can't really do that if sex is one-sided and making her feel used or sexually frustrated. Sex is a gift meant to be given and received at the same time, so if one person is unable to receive, the giver should not give.

It is kind of like the commandment to give to the poor and needy. Are you obeying it grudgingly or are you doing it joyfully? If you are doing it grudgingly, it is not going to do you any good! So a woman giving to you grudgingly is not going to help her, except in maintaining your mood. Now maybe if she does it with an attitude of loving sacrifice, then that will be accounted to her as righteousness, but when a husband has this view that it is his wife's duty to sacrifice her body to him, and when she doesn't he withdraws his love, that is when the husband is going to be held accountable for withholding love from her to punish her for not sacrificing for him. It is no different than a wife who expects her husband to sacrifice more time than she is sacrificing. She too would be expecting an imbalance at her husband's expense.
Question: If we can't keep a commandment joyfully should we not bother with it until we can do so joyfully or should we keep that commandment anyway? Having grown up in the South, I miss sweet tea and feel a longing for it every time it's on a restaurant menu. Since I don't feel joyful in declining, what would you suggest?

I agree with you that one-sided sex is bad for the person on the other side, but instead of "no because I don't feel like it" or "you are such a terrible person for even asking" how about another approach: "let's talk about what we can do that will make me a willing partner."

You are right, if the woman is laying there unwillingly because she doesn't want to do it then it will not be good for her. But you have to accept that I am right: consistently refusing a husband, often over unreasonable and unrealistic expectations or an 'I don't care about it so you shouldn't either' attitude is very damaging to the husband in a wide variety of ways. And if a woman will not change her expectations to what is reasonable and realistic, or if she just plain doesn't value physical intimacy, then almost nothing her husband does will get her into the mood.
My guess is that Paul's words were not meant to convey that there is a commandment to give sexually to your spouse. You are to stay and remain with each other. Most likely men have translated it to mean that because they want that to be the message. We have a culture of sexual entitlement. You read any marriage book or listen to any marriage seminar given by a man, and the message is that it is wrong to withhold sex, that a man deserves it, that it is the woman's problem, that sex is deserved for all the work you do or for all the listening/talking time you give your wife. Baloney! This message has been around so long that that is what everyone believes, and it is most likely one of the causes of the rising feminist attitude in women. Attitudes of entitlement and expectation provoke more of that from all parties. Selfishness in one sex begets selfishness in another - simple as that.
I'm going to have to disagree with you because Paul says to do this so temptation won't arise. If he's saying to remain true with each other, no matter how neglected your needs are, then why is he mentioning the avoidance of temptation?
You asked the question, "is it okay to hurt your spouse," and I would respond with the question, 'is it okay to hurt your child?" You have to be specific in what kind of hurt you mean. Is it hurtful to not give the child what he wants? Is it hurtful to put some boundaries on how much your wife can spend?
Fine. Is it okay to hurt your spouse emotionally, physically, and spiritually by intentionally and knowingly ignoring their needs?
Let me ask you a question. What do you tell your children to do if they want something? You teach them to ask politely right? And to not demand, or whine and complain if you refuse their request. Whining, demanding and expecting show a lack of respect for our agency as parents, and it shows in them an attitude of entitlement. But like our Father in Heaven, we like to be asked nicely, and see our children desiring our will above their own.
Having older children, I was all set to discuss having a conversation to ask "How can you afford this, and is it right of you to have it?" But since wives aren't children, and they certainly shouldn't act that way though too many do, I think the more mature approach is the better approach. "This is really important to me, you really hurt me by neglecting my needs and wants, and your neglect is opening the door to a great deal of temptation every time I interact with that new secretary. I don't want to lose you or this marriage so what can we do to have a marriage where we both try to fulfill the needs of the other?" Of course, with the person I was married to, such a statement would have been met with screaming contention over admitting to temptation.

I know somebody, maybe myself or another person, who was in a long term marriage that was very emotionally and spiritually damaging. No matter what he did it wasn't enough for her unrealistic expectations. He described how sometimes he would spend three to five weeks doing all the cooking and cleaning, taking care of the kids the entire time he was at home, spending far more than he could afford on flowers and dinners out, and wearing himself out. Finally, after those three to five weeks she would reluctantly lay down with him. But, once the deed was done, the moment he didn't pick up a plate she would scream at him for lying about loving her and accusing him of just using her. After leaving her husband, this wife spoke with relatives who told her about sexual abuse that she had experienced but she either repressed or her narcissistic mother had manipulated her memories to where she didn't believe it really happened. She has since sought therapy, but no amount of therapy has helped her develop a healthy libido.

Sarah, you give great advice. But is your advice based in your personal experience or is it based on observation of women infected with what I call "Disney Princess Syndrome?"
So, now the next question. If you want to be intimate with your wife, what do you do? Do you ask politely if she will be intimate with you? Probably not. You just start "giving" physical affection to her, which demonstrates my point. But are you really giving her a gift, or is that a request, expectation, or demand? If she is withdrawing from your affection it is because she is not interpreting your gift as a gift but as a request. You are better off just asking for what you want. She's more likely to give you what you want, rather than deal with your constant expectations to receive in return for your giving. But instinctively you know intimacy shouldn't be just about you, that she should enjoy your gifts, so you don't just ask. It would kind of be humiliating right? And that is why God requires that we ask - so we show our humility and respect for His agency. So that's why I keep saying, if she can't appreciate your gifts, stop giving those gifts because they are not gifts to her, they are requests or expectations. If you really love her you will give her things that she appreciates receiving. One sided sex is always going to be selfish if the receiver feels entitled to that. If she is willing to sacrifice for you, you better see if for what it is and that it is a great sacrifice. The better option is to make sure it is always great for her too or just don't do it.
Before I answer, let me ask you a question: Are you always entirely candid with your husband? Because most of the guys I know are continually frustrated with wives who think that a subtle and easily missed "hint" should be all that is necessary to communicate a desire or expectation. Very few of these men have been able to successfully convince their wives that "are you hungry" can't be taken at face value at some times but understood as meaning "take me out to a restaurant" at other times.

I can't give you an answer because I no longer have a wife. Here's what happened: I got tired of constantly having to give my gifts while receiving little to no appreciation for those gifts and almost never receiving the gifts I desire. Therefore I did as you suggested and stopped giving my gifts to her. Less than two months later she took our child, moved in with family in one of the most expensive cities in the Continental US (someplace I can't afford to move to) and filed for divorce. I haven't seen my son in nearly six months, I haven't been able to talk with him in over two months, and one of the best ways to provoke my almost ex-wife is to point out that she is keeping me from seeing my son. But, before the marriage dissolved, it didn't matter what I said or did. If I asked her, the answer was consistently no. If I tried asking her through more physical affection than usual, the answer was also consistently no. She was a convert to the LDS church, raised in a very wealthy family and used to getting whatever she wanted with no regard for what others want. Unfortunately church teachings never convinced her that putting others first wasn't just a commandment for other people.

User avatar
Rose Garden
Don't ask . . .
Posts: 7031
Contact:

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Rose Garden »

I've watched a lot of threads devolve into a back and forth between men and women about sex. Oh, wait, I wasn't watching, I was in the ring! But anyway, at one point I noticed something. When it got to the point of being an argument, the men were all talking about what the women should be doing and the women were all talking about what the men should be doing. Once I noticed that, I sort of lost interest in the fight.

I've been divorced from my first husband for about four years now. It took me about three years (and a failed second marriage) to finally turn my focus around to the person who I could actually change, myself. I look forward now to getting remarried when I can find the right man but this time I intend to keep my focus where it belongs.

I feel great confidence in my ability to succeed because I've learned something vital. I've discovered that if I trust the Lord enough, I won't need to worry about my husband or his apparent faults. I can trust the Lord to straighten him out and set things straight in his own due time. In the meantime, with my focus on my own shortcomings, I've got plenty of material to keep me occupied so I don't get bored waiting. I've been trying this strategy out on lots of other people and it's working great so I figure it should work when I'm married as well.

Fiannan
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12983

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Fiannan »

She was a convert to the LDS church, raised in a very wealthy family and used to getting whatever she wanted with no regard for what others want.
My advice to single men...

1) Be extremely careful, and I mean extremely careful, in dating a woman from a family of divorce.
2) Avoid Disney princesses. In fact, if a gal has a fixation on all things Disney then go the other way.
3) Avoid women from rich families unless the father might be into giving you a lucrative position in his company.

djinwa
captain of 100
Posts: 809

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by djinwa »

Good advice, Fiannan. I think more and more men will be avoiding marriage as they are regularly reminded of their deficiencies. Women generally are dissatisfied with the basic nature of men.

I recall when I was a kid my mom often complained about dad not being romantic or taking her on dates. She went to the bishop who told my dad to take her out, which lasted about a month.

The other women I know in the family I have heard over the years how they are disappointed with their husbands.

My wife's niece recently married. She is 5'2", about 250 lbs, emotional issues, and chronic back pain requiring surgeries. Yet her dad said she "settled" for her husband because he doesn't make much money. My kids said he is a very nice guy. I asked why don't we consider that he might have "settled" for her? I then realized I had never heard of a guy settling, probably because women are always considered to be better than their husbands.

Today I heard for the first time the song, Better Man, written by Taylor Swift. Can you imagine writing something like this about a woman?
http://www.metrolyrics.com/better-man-l ... -town.html
I wish you were a better man
I wonder what we would've become
If you were a better man
We might still be in love
If you were a better man
You would've been the one
If you were a better man
Yeah, yeah

User avatar
Sarah
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6706

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Sarah »

brianj wrote: March 25th, 2017, 1:42 pm
Sarah wrote: March 24th, 2017, 2:30 pm Whether or not it is a commandment really doesn't matter. Do you want your wife to feel like it is her duty and threatened with consequences if she doesn't give to you, or do you want her to give to you joyfully without any hesitancy and full of love? She can't really do that if sex is one-sided and making her feel used or sexually frustrated. Sex is a gift meant to be given and received at the same time, so if one person is unable to receive, the giver should not give.

It is kind of like the commandment to give to the poor and needy. Are you obeying it grudgingly or are you doing it joyfully? If you are doing it grudgingly, it is not going to do you any good! So a woman giving to you grudgingly is not going to help her, except in maintaining your mood. Now maybe if she does it with an attitude of loving sacrifice, then that will be accounted to her as righteousness, but when a husband has this view that it is his wife's duty to sacrifice her body to him, and when she doesn't he withdraws his love, that is when the husband is going to be held accountable for withholding love from her to punish her for not sacrificing for him. It is no different than a wife who expects her husband to sacrifice more time than she is sacrificing. She too would be expecting an imbalance at her husband's expense.
Question: If we can't keep a commandment joyfully should we not bother with it until we can do so joyfully or should we keep that commandment anyway? Having grown up in the South, I miss sweet tea and feel a longing for it every time it's on a restaurant menu. Since I don't feel joyful in declining, what would you suggest?

Hmm, I'm not sure about that one. My initial thought is that I would agree that it is always better to obey, even if for the wrong reason, but when I think about it more, I'm not so sure. Ideally when you decline that tea, you would be rejoicing in the blessing of the Word of Wisdom in your life, and that it helps keep you physically and spiritually healthy. If you're obeying grudgingly, then obviously you can still enjoy some results of your obedience, but not all of it. So yes, you and your wife will get some benefit from obeying. You will not feel sexually frustrated, she will not have to deal with your frustration, and you both might get a baby out of it, but obviously you are not going to have all the blessings from obedience if you were both obeying for the right reasons.

I agree with you that one-sided sex is bad for the person on the other side, but instead of "no because I don't feel like it" or "you are such a terrible person for even asking" how about another approach: "let's talk about what we can do that will make me a willing partner."

It's the common advice but it rarely works, because the message is always, "what can I do to get you to give to me?" What she hears is "I want; I need." And I feel for you because I realize it is so hard to figure out and so complicated. The love gift of sex is really complicated. You can compare it to the ultimate love gift of the marriage offer, because it too is a gift in which the giver must receive the same gift, and the receiver must give. How would you feel if you were dating a woman and she was always wanting to talk about marriage. She says, "how can we get to the point so that you will want marriage?" "I really need you to marry me." Yes, she needs marriage, but does her message that she needs you and that she wants you to give her something make you inclined to pop the question, or does it make you more likely to go on another search for Mrs. Right? Deep down you might feel like she was just thinking about what she wanted and not what you wanted. Women can unknowingly feel the same way about their husbands when it comes to sex, but they don't have the choice of leaving to go find another Mr. Right, so they put up with the pressure, and either give in or resist to avoid the negative reaction from their husbands.

You are right, if the woman is laying there unwillingly because she doesn't want to do it then it will not be good for her. But you have to accept that I am right: consistently refusing a husband, often over unreasonable and unrealistic expectations or an 'I don't care about it so you shouldn't either' attitude is very damaging to the husband in a wide variety of ways. And if a woman will not change her expectations to what is reasonable and realistic, or if she just plain doesn't value physical intimacy, then almost nothing her husband does will get her into the mood.


My guess is that Paul's words were not meant to convey that there is a commandment to give sexually to your spouse. You are to stay and remain with each other. Most likely men have translated it to mean that because they want that to be the message. We have a culture of sexual entitlement. You read any marriage book or listen to any marriage seminar given by a man, and the message is that it is wrong to withhold sex, that a man deserves it, that it is the woman's problem, that sex is deserved for all the work you do or for all the listening/talking time you give your wife. Baloney! This message has been around so long that that is what everyone believes, and it is most likely one of the causes of the rising feminist attitude in women. Attitudes of entitlement and expectation provoke more of that from all parties. Selfishness in one sex begets selfishness in another - simple as that.
I'm going to have to disagree with you because Paul says to do this so temptation won't arise. If he's saying to remain true with each other, no matter how neglected your needs are, then why is he mentioning the avoidance of temptation?
You asked the question, "is it okay to hurt your spouse," and I would respond with the question, 'is it okay to hurt your child?" You have to be specific in what kind of hurt you mean. Is it hurtful to not give the child what he wants? Is it hurtful to put some boundaries on how much your wife can spend?
Fine. Is it okay to hurt your spouse emotionally, physically, and spiritually by intentionally and knowingly ignoring their needs?
Let me ask you a question. What do you tell your children to do if they want something? You teach them to ask politely right? And to not demand, or whine and complain if you refuse their request. Whining, demanding and expecting show a lack of respect for our agency as parents, and it shows in them an attitude of entitlement. But like our Father in Heaven, we like to be asked nicely, and see our children desiring our will above their own.
Having older children, I was all set to discuss having a conversation to ask "How can you afford this, and is it right of you to have it?" But since wives aren't children, and they certainly shouldn't act that way though too many do, I think the more mature approach is the better approach. "This is really important to me, you really hurt me by neglecting my needs and wants, and your neglect is opening the door to a great deal of temptation every time I interact with that new secretary. I don't want to lose you or this marriage so what can we do to have a marriage where we both try to fulfill the needs of the other?" Of course, with the person I was married to, such a statement would have been met with screaming contention over admitting to temptation.

I know somebody, maybe myself or another person, who was in a long term marriage that was very emotionally and spiritually damaging. No matter what he did it wasn't enough for her unrealistic expectations. He described how sometimes he would spend three to five weeks doing all the cooking and cleaning, taking care of the kids the entire time he was at home, spending far more than he could afford on flowers and dinners out, and wearing himself out. Finally, after those three to five weeks she would reluctantly lay down with him. But, once the deed was done, the moment he didn't pick up a plate she would scream at him for lying about loving her and accusing him of just using her. After leaving her husband, this wife spoke with relatives who told her about sexual abuse that she had experienced but she either repressed or her narcissistic mother had manipulated her memories to where she didn't believe it really happened. She has since sought therapy, but no amount of therapy has helped her develop a healthy libido.

Sarah, you give great advice. But is your advice based in your personal experience or is it based on observation of women infected with what I call "Disney Princess Syndrome?"

My advice is based off of my own experience. I realized what was going on and we were able to fix it. But, I'm a very easy-going person. I definitely acknowledge and call out princess behavior in women when I see it. But there are a lot of men out there too who expect to get what they want from their wives, so what would you call that? King behavior?
I would not excuse the behavior of this woman that you describe. What this woman or your wife did was selfish, and she was using you. But I'm just trying to point out that at least part of her behavior is the result of feeling used herself, if not by you then by others in her past perhaps. If her husband expects something from her at her expense, then she will expect things from her husband at his expense, and obviously some personalities take this to an extreme and are very demanding.

So, now the next question. If you want to be intimate with your wife, what do you do? Do you ask politely if she will be intimate with you? Probably not. You just start "giving" physical affection to her, which demonstrates my point. But are you really giving her a gift, or is that a request, expectation, or demand? If she is withdrawing from your affection it is because she is not interpreting your gift as a gift but as a request. You are better off just asking for what you want. She's more likely to give you what you want, rather than deal with your constant expectations to receive in return for your giving. But instinctively you know intimacy shouldn't be just about you, that she should enjoy your gifts, so you don't just ask. It would kind of be humiliating right? And that is why God requires that we ask - so we show our humility and respect for His agency. So that's why I keep saying, if she can't appreciate your gifts, stop giving those gifts because they are not gifts to her, they are requests or expectations. If you really love her you will give her things that she appreciates receiving. One sided sex is always going to be selfish if the receiver feels entitled to that. If she is willing to sacrifice for you, you better see if for what it is and that it is a great sacrifice. The better option is to make sure it is always great for her too or just don't do it.
Before I answer, let me ask you a question: Are you always entirely candid with your husband? Because most of the guys I know are continually frustrated with wives who think that a subtle and easily missed "hint" should be all that is necessary to communicate a desire or expectation. Very few of these men have been able to successfully convince their wives that "are you hungry" can't be taken at face value at some times but understood as meaning "take me out to a restaurant" at other times.

I don't hint like this although I know many women do. And all the feelings I had previously such as, "if he loved me then he would offer to do this," I realize came so much more because I felt his constant expectations and the same hinting behavior when it came to sex. That's really what you are doing when you kiss her and want something back - hinting.

I can't give you an answer because I no longer have a wife. Here's what happened: I got tired of constantly having to give my gifts while receiving little to no appreciation for those gifts and almost never receiving the gifts I desire. Therefore I did as you suggested and stopped giving my gifts to her. Less than two months later she took our child, moved in with family in one of the most expensive cities in the Continental US (someplace I can't afford to move to) and filed for divorce. I haven't seen my son in nearly six months, I haven't been able to talk with him in over two months, and one of the best ways to provoke my almost ex-wife is to point out that she is keeping me from seeing my son. But, before the marriage dissolved, it didn't matter what I said or did. If I asked her, the answer was consistently no. If I tried asking her through more physical affection than usual, the answer was also consistently no. She was a convert to the LDS church, raised in a very wealthy family and used to getting whatever she wanted with no regard for what others want. Unfortunately church teachings never convinced her that putting others first wasn't just a commandment for other people.
I believe you when you say that it didn't matter what you did, she was never going to warm up to you and give you want you needed. And I feel a lot of compassion for you, and think it must be awful not to be around your son. This was her choice and she will have to live with that choice. I just hope that going forward you can realize that every time you act disappointed, or withdraw other unrelated love gifts for not getting what you want sends the message that your love is conditional. That message is going to provoke your wife to making her love conditional as well.


JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9832

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by JohnnyL »

djinwa wrote: March 25th, 2017, 9:22 pm Good advice, Fiannan. I think more and more men will be avoiding marriage as they are regularly reminded of their deficiencies. Women generally are dissatisfied with the basic nature of men.

I recall when I was a kid my mom often complained about dad not being romantic or taking her on dates. She went to the bishop who told my dad to take her out, which lasted about a month.

The other women I know in the family I have heard over the years how they are disappointed with their husbands.

My wife's niece recently married. She is 5'2", about 250 lbs, emotional issues, and chronic back pain requiring surgeries. Yet her dad said she "settled" for her husband because he doesn't make much money. My kids said he is a very nice guy. I asked why don't we consider that he might have "settled" for her? I then realized I had never heard of a guy settling, probably because women are always considered to be better than their husbands.

Today I heard for the first time the song, Better Man, written by Taylor Swift. Can you imagine writing something like this about a woman?
http://www.metrolyrics.com/better-man-l ... -town.html
I wish you were a better man
I wonder what we would've become
If you were a better man
We might still be in love
If you were a better man
You would've been the one
If you were a better man
Yeah, yeah
I know a lot of guys who have settled, lol. Your niece is very lucky to have gotten married. I'm not sure why she didn't settle for a doctor who could have helped her with those surgeries... It usually takes 15 years for selfish/ pampered women to get around to start changing.

Fiannan
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12983

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Fiannan »

I think more and more men will be avoiding marriage as they are regularly reminded of their deficiencies.
This is why we are weeding empathy out of our religion. You see, you cannot teach empathy, not at all. It is biological (generally higher in women than men and may have something to do with hormones, or brain structure, or a variety of variables). However, let's say you have men who have high empathy, a weakness in our society, but high empathy nonetheless. And then you have the opposite side of the spectrum, men with little or no empathy. Of course people who are low on empathy (psychopaths and borderline psychopaths), let's say in Church, could not care less if they hear that something they are doing or not doing is against the general culture of the Church -- they may be very devout, many prophets such as Noah and Moses were likely psychopaths, but they will do what they feel God says to do. They will get the most desirable (looks and intelligence) women. They will not care if their wives nag - they figure they can be replaced, or manipulated to believe anything the man desires. The psychopath Mormon male will therefore marry and make babies, passing on their genes. Mr. Empathy Mormon will not compete, will feel guilty and will act like a whipped dog if chastised directly or indirectly. Such men may avoid marriage altogether or settle on the least desirable mating prospects. Given this trend over three or four generations then the LDS population will be as lacking empathy as any group of marketing executives, politicians or media people.

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9832

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by JohnnyL »

Fiannan wrote: March 26th, 2017, 7:54 am
I think more and more men will be avoiding marriage as they are regularly reminded of their deficiencies.
This is why we are weeding empathy out of our religion. You see, you cannot teach empathy, not at all. It is biological (generally higher in women than men and may have something to do with hormones, or brain structure, or a variety of variables). However, let's say you have men who have high empathy, a weakness in our society, but high empathy nonetheless. And then you have the opposite side of the spectrum, men with little or no empathy. Of course people who are low on empathy (psychopaths and borderline psychopaths), let's say in Church, could not care less if they hear that something they are doing or not doing is against the general culture of the Church -- they may be very devout, many prophets such as Noah and Moses were likely psychopaths, but they will do what they feel God says to do. They will get the most desirable (looks and intelligence) women. They will not care if their wives nag - they figure they can be replaced, or manipulated to believe anything the man desires. The psychopath Mormon male will therefore marry and make babies, passing on their genes. Mr. Empathy Mormon will not compete, will feel guilty and will act like a whipped dog if chastised directly or indirectly. Such men may avoid marriage altogether or settle on the least desirable mating prospects. Given this trend over three or four generations then the LDS population will be as lacking empathy as any group of marketing executives, politicians or media people.
While I disagree with prophets being psychopaths etc., I think that's a really interesting thought.

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by brianj »

Sarah wrote: March 26th, 2017, 12:38 am Question: If we can't keep a commandment joyfully should we not bother with it until we can do so joyfully or should we keep that commandment anyway? Having grown up in the South, I miss sweet tea and feel a longing for it every time it's on a restaurant menu. Since I don't feel joyful in declining, what would you suggest?

Hmm, I'm not sure about that one. My initial thought is that I would agree that it is always better to obey, even if for the wrong reason, but when I think about it more, I'm not so sure. Ideally when you decline that tea, you would be rejoicing in the blessing of the Word of Wisdom in your life, and that it helps keep you physically and spiritually healthy. If you're obeying grudgingly, then obviously you can still enjoy some results of your obedience, but not all of it. So yes, you and your wife will get some benefit from obeying. You will not feel sexually frustrated, she will not have to deal with your frustration, and you both might get a baby out of it, but obviously you are not going to have all the blessings from obedience if you were both obeying for the right reasons.
It sounds like we finally agree.
I agree with you that one-sided sex is bad for the person on the other side, but instead of "no because I don't feel like it" or "you are such a terrible person for even asking" how about another approach: "let's talk about what we can do that will make me a willing partner."

It's the common advice but it rarely works, because the message is always, "what can I do to get you to give to me?" What she hears is "I want; I need." And I feel for you because I realize it is so hard to figure out and so complicated. The love gift of sex is really complicated. You can compare it to the ultimate love gift of the marriage offer, because it too is a gift in which the giver must receive the same gift, and the receiver must give. How would you feel if you were dating a woman and she was always wanting to talk about marriage. She says, "how can we get to the point so that you will want marriage?" "I really need you to marry me." Yes, she needs marriage, but does her message that she needs you and that she wants you to give her something make you inclined to pop the question, or does it make you more likely to go on another search for Mrs. Right? Deep down you might feel like she was just thinking about what she wanted and not what you wanted. Women can unknowingly feel the same way about their husbands when it comes to sex, but they don't have the choice of leaving to go find another Mr. Right, so they put up with the pressure, and either give in or resist to avoid the negative reaction from their husbands.
I blame wives for this not working. What a husband hear when his wife asks how she can get him to take her out to dinner or a show more often, bring her flowers regularly, let her spend more at the mall, etc. is: "What can I do to get you to give to me?" There are a lot of women in the church who have become infected with the worldly attitude that they are more special than men and deserve everything from a husband whose primary duty is to slave away so she can keep up appearances. Djinwa described one of these people, his wife's niece. At five foot two and 250 pounds her BMI is more than 1.5 times the obesity threshold. What does she have that makes her worth so much more than her husband's income? Why do so many men complain that as soon as they get married their wives stop wearing makeup or attractive clothes, cut their hair short, gain wait, but demand that their husbands keep going to the gym? Why is the gynocentric attitude on relationships a one way thing?
Let me ask you a question. What do you tell your children to do if they want something? You teach them to ask politely right? And to not demand, or whine and complain if you refuse their request. Whining, demanding and expecting show a lack of respect for our agency as parents, and it shows in them an attitude of entitlement. But like our Father in Heaven, we like to be asked nicely, and see our children desiring our will above their own.
Having older children, I was all set to discuss having a conversation to ask "How can you afford this, and is it right of you to have it?" But since wives aren't children, and they certainly shouldn't act that way though too many do, I think the more mature approach is the better approach. "This is really important to me, you really hurt me by neglecting my needs and wants, and your neglect is opening the door to a great deal of temptation every time I interact with that new secretary. I don't want to lose you or this marriage so what can we do to have a marriage where we both try to fulfill the needs of the other?" Of course, with the person I was married to, such a statement would have been met with screaming contention over admitting to temptation.

I know somebody, maybe myself or another person, who was in a long term marriage that was very emotionally and spiritually damaging. No matter what he did it wasn't enough for her unrealistic expectations. He described how sometimes he would spend three to five weeks doing all the cooking and cleaning, taking care of the kids the entire time he was at home, spending far more than he could afford on flowers and dinners out, and wearing himself out. Finally, after those three to five weeks she would reluctantly lay down with him. But, once the deed was done, the moment he didn't pick up a plate she would scream at him for lying about loving her and accusing him of just using her. After leaving her husband, this wife spoke with relatives who told her about sexual abuse that she had experienced but she either repressed or her narcissistic mother had manipulated her memories to where she didn't believe it really happened. She has since sought therapy, but no amount of therapy has helped her develop a healthy libido.

Sarah, you give great advice. But is your advice based in your personal experience or is it based on observation of women infected with what I call "Disney Princess Syndrome?"

My advice is based off of my own experience. I realized what was going on and we were able to fix it. But, I'm a very easy-going person. I definitely acknowledge and call out princess behavior in women when I see it. But there are a lot of men out there too who expect to get what they want from their wives, so what would you call that? King behavior?
I would not excuse the behavior of this woman that you describe. What this woman or your wife did was selfish, and she was using you. But I'm just trying to point out that at least part of her behavior is the result of feeling used herself, if not by you then by others in her past perhaps. If her husband expects something from her at her expense, then she will expect things from her husband at his expense, and obviously some personalities take this to an extreme and are very demanding.

[/quote]
I have never wanted to be a king, to be treated like a king, or to be obeyed like a king. I'm more of a dictator than a king.
So, now the next question. If you want to be intimate with your wife, what do you do? Do you ask politely if she will be intimate with you? Probably not. You just start "giving" physical affection to her, which demonstrates my point. But are you really giving her a gift, or is that a request, expectation, or demand? If she is withdrawing from your affection it is because she is not interpreting your gift as a gift but as a request. You are better off just asking for what you want. She's more likely to give you what you want, rather than deal with your constant expectations to receive in return for your giving. But instinctively you know intimacy shouldn't be just about you, that she should enjoy your gifts, so you don't just ask. It would kind of be humiliating right? And that is why God requires that we ask - so we show our humility and respect for His agency. So that's why I keep saying, if she can't appreciate your gifts, stop giving those gifts because they are not gifts to her, they are requests or expectations. If you really love her you will give her things that she appreciates receiving. One sided sex is always going to be selfish if the receiver feels entitled to that. If she is willing to sacrifice for you, you better see if for what it is and that it is a great sacrifice. The better option is to make sure it is always great for her too or just don't do it.
Before I answer, let me ask you a question: Are you always entirely candid with your husband? Because most of the guys I know are continually frustrated with wives who think that a subtle and easily missed "hint" should be all that is necessary to communicate a desire or expectation. Very few of these men have been able to successfully convince their wives that "are you hungry" can't be taken at face value at some times but understood as meaning "take me out to a restaurant" at other times.

I don't hint like this although I know many women do. And all the feelings I had previously such as, "if he loved me then he would offer to do this," I realize came so much more because I felt his constant expectations and the same hinting behavior when it came to sex. That's really what you are doing when you kiss her and want something back - hinting.

I can't give you an answer because I no longer have a wife. Here's what happened: I got tired of constantly having to give my gifts while receiving little to no appreciation for those gifts and almost never receiving the gifts I desire. Therefore I did as you suggested and stopped giving my gifts to her. Less than two months later she took our child, moved in with family in one of the most expensive cities in the Continental US (someplace I can't afford to move to) and filed for divorce. I haven't seen my son in nearly six months, I haven't been able to talk with him in over two months, and one of the best ways to provoke my almost ex-wife is to point out that she is keeping me from seeing my son. But, before the marriage dissolved, it didn't matter what I said or did. If I asked her, the answer was consistently no. If I tried asking her through more physical affection than usual, the answer was also consistently no. She was a convert to the LDS church, raised in a very wealthy family and used to getting whatever she wanted with no regard for what others want. Unfortunately church teachings never convinced her that putting others first wasn't just a commandment for other people.
I believe you when you say that it didn't matter what you did, she was never going to warm up to you and give you want you needed. And I feel a lot of compassion for you, and think it must be awful not to be around your son. This was her choice and she will have to live with that choice. I just hope that going forward you can realize that every time you act disappointed, or withdraw other unrelated love gifts for not getting what you want sends the message that your love is conditional. That message is going to provoke your wife to making her love conditional as well.

You may have misunderstood. Even though my needs and desires were mostly ignored, I still did my best to provide her wants and needs. The only thing I didn't give her was the big diamond she always complained about not having. On gift giving holidays I would give her exactly what I understood her to express that she wanted, but she would give me what she decided that I should want then get upset at me for not wanting it. It's not that I didn't give her what she expected because she was ignoring my needs; the day finally came when I just gave up trying.

I do have two big benefits going forward. From the experience of my past I know to make sure that, when I start into a relationship, we each have a very clear understanding of what the other will expect from a relationship. And, as a temple worthy guy who is didn't become addicted to porn or cheat on his wife, I've been told that I will find the odds very much in my favor so if I start a relationship with someone who turns out to be entitled I know I can walk away and look for someone who expects me to fulfill her needs and expects to fulfill my needs.

User avatar
Sarah
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6706

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Sarah »

brianj wrote: March 26th, 2017, 8:55 pm
Sarah wrote: March 26th, 2017, 12:38 am Question: If we can't keep a commandment joyfully should we not bother with it until we can do so joyfully or should we keep that commandment anyway? Having grown up in the South, I miss sweet tea and feel a longing for it every time it's on a restaurant menu. Since I don't feel joyful in declining, what would you suggest?

Hmm, I'm not sure about that one. My initial thought is that I would agree that it is always better to obey, even if for the wrong reason, but when I think about it more, I'm not so sure. Ideally when you decline that tea, you would be rejoicing in the blessing of the Word of Wisdom in your life, and that it helps keep you physically and spiritually healthy. If you're obeying grudgingly, then obviously you can still enjoy some results of your obedience, but not all of it. So yes, you and your wife will get some benefit from obeying. You will not feel sexually frustrated, she will not have to deal with your frustration, and you both might get a baby out of it, but obviously you are not going to have all the blessings from obedience if you were both obeying for the right reasons.
It sounds like we finally agree.
I agree with you that one-sided sex is bad for the person on the other side, but instead of "no because I don't feel like it" or "you are such a terrible person for even asking" how about another approach: "let's talk about what we can do that will make me a willing partner."

It's the common advice but it rarely works, because the message is always, "what can I do to get you to give to me?" What she hears is "I want; I need." And I feel for you because I realize it is so hard to figure out and so complicated. The love gift of sex is really complicated. You can compare it to the ultimate love gift of the marriage offer, because it too is a gift in which the giver must receive the same gift, and the receiver must give. How would you feel if you were dating a woman and she was always wanting to talk about marriage. She says, "how can we get to the point so that you will want marriage?" "I really need you to marry me." Yes, she needs marriage, but does her message that she needs you and that she wants you to give her something make you inclined to pop the question, or does it make you more likely to go on another search for Mrs. Right? Deep down you might feel like she was just thinking about what she wanted and not what you wanted. Women can unknowingly feel the same way about their husbands when it comes to sex, but they don't have the choice of leaving to go find another Mr. Right, so they put up with the pressure, and either give in or resist to avoid the negative reaction from their husbands.
I blame wives for this not working. What a husband hear when his wife asks how she can get him to take her out to dinner or a show more often, bring her flowers regularly, let her spend more at the mall, etc. is: "What can I do to get you to give to me?" There are a lot of women in the church who have become infected with the worldly attitude that they are more special than men and deserve everything from a husband whose primary duty is to slave away so she can keep up appearances. Djinwa described one of these people, his wife's niece. At five foot two and 250 pounds her BMI is more than 1.5 times the obesity threshold. What does she have that makes her worth so much more than her husband's income? Why do so many men complain that as soon as they get married their wives stop wearing makeup or attractive clothes, cut their hair short, gain wait, but demand that their husbands keep going to the gym? Why is the gynocentric attitude on relationships a one way thing?
Let me ask you a question. What do you tell your children to do if they want something? You teach them to ask politely right? And to not demand, or whine and complain if you refuse their request. Whining, demanding and expecting show a lack of respect for our agency as parents, and it shows in them an attitude of entitlement. But like our Father in Heaven, we like to be asked nicely, and see our children desiring our will above their own.
Having older children, I was all set to discuss having a conversation to ask "How can you afford this, and is it right of you to have it?" But since wives aren't children, and they certainly shouldn't act that way though too many do, I think the more mature approach is the better approach. "This is really important to me, you really hurt me by neglecting my needs and wants, and your neglect is opening the door to a great deal of temptation every time I interact with that new secretary. I don't want to lose you or this marriage so what can we do to have a marriage where we both try to fulfill the needs of the other?" Of course, with the person I was married to, such a statement would have been met with screaming contention over admitting to temptation.

I know somebody, maybe myself or another person, who was in a long term marriage that was very emotionally and spiritually damaging. No matter what he did it wasn't enough for her unrealistic expectations. He described how sometimes he would spend three to five weeks doing all the cooking and cleaning, taking care of the kids the entire time he was at home, spending far more than he could afford on flowers and dinners out, and wearing himself out. Finally, after those three to five weeks she would reluctantly lay down with him. But, once the deed was done, the moment he didn't pick up a plate she would scream at him for lying about loving her and accusing him of just using her. After leaving her husband, this wife spoke with relatives who told her about sexual abuse that she had experienced but she either repressed or her narcissistic mother had manipulated her memories to where she didn't believe it really happened. She has since sought therapy, but no amount of therapy has helped her develop a healthy libido.

Sarah, you give great advice. But is your advice based in your personal experience or is it based on observation of women infected with what I call "Disney Princess Syndrome?"

My advice is based off of my own experience. I realized what was going on and we were able to fix it. But, I'm a very easy-going person. I definitely acknowledge and call out princess behavior in women when I see it. But there are a lot of men out there too who expect to get what they want from their wives, so what would you call that? King behavior?
I would not excuse the behavior of this woman that you describe. What this woman or your wife did was selfish, and she was using you. But I'm just trying to point out that at least part of her behavior is the result of feeling used herself, if not by you then by others in her past perhaps. If her husband expects something from her at her expense, then she will expect things from her husband at his expense, and obviously some personalities take this to an extreme and are very demanding.
I have never wanted to be a king, to be treated like a king, or to be obeyed like a king. I'm more of a dictator than a king.
So, now the next question. If you want to be intimate with your wife, what do you do? Do you ask politely if she will be intimate with you? Probably not. You just start "giving" physical affection to her, which demonstrates my point. But are you really giving her a gift, or is that a request, expectation, or demand? If she is withdrawing from your affection it is because she is not interpreting your gift as a gift but as a request. You are better off just asking for what you want. She's more likely to give you what you want, rather than deal with your constant expectations to receive in return for your giving. But instinctively you know intimacy shouldn't be just about you, that she should enjoy your gifts, so you don't just ask. It would kind of be humiliating right? And that is why God requires that we ask - so we show our humility and respect for His agency. So that's why I keep saying, if she can't appreciate your gifts, stop giving those gifts because they are not gifts to her, they are requests or expectations. If you really love her you will give her things that she appreciates receiving. One sided sex is always going to be selfish if the receiver feels entitled to that. If she is willing to sacrifice for you, you better see if for what it is and that it is a great sacrifice. The better option is to make sure it is always great for her too or just don't do it.
Before I answer, let me ask you a question: Are you always entirely candid with your husband? Because most of the guys I know are continually frustrated with wives who think that a subtle and easily missed "hint" should be all that is necessary to communicate a desire or expectation. Very few of these men have been able to successfully convince their wives that "are you hungry" can't be taken at face value at some times but understood as meaning "take me out to a restaurant" at other times.

I don't hint like this although I know many women do. And all the feelings I had previously such as, "if he loved me then he would offer to do this," I realize came so much more because I felt his constant expectations and the same hinting behavior when it came to sex. That's really what you are doing when you kiss her and want something back - hinting.

I can't give you an answer because I no longer have a wife. Here's what happened: I got tired of constantly having to give my gifts while receiving little to no appreciation for those gifts and almost never receiving the gifts I desire. Therefore I did as you suggested and stopped giving my gifts to her. Less than two months later she took our child, moved in with family in one of the most expensive cities in the Continental US (someplace I can't afford to move to) and filed for divorce. I haven't seen my son in nearly six months, I haven't been able to talk with him in over two months, and one of the best ways to provoke my almost ex-wife is to point out that she is keeping me from seeing my son. But, before the marriage dissolved, it didn't matter what I said or did. If I asked her, the answer was consistently no. If I tried asking her through more physical affection than usual, the answer was also consistently no. She was a convert to the LDS church, raised in a very wealthy family and used to getting whatever she wanted with no regard for what others want. Unfortunately church teachings never convinced her that putting others first wasn't just a commandment for other people.
I believe you when you say that it didn't matter what you did, she was never going to warm up to you and give you want you needed. And I feel a lot of compassion for you, and think it must be awful not to be around your son. This was her choice and she will have to live with that choice. I just hope that going forward you can realize that every time you act disappointed, or withdraw other unrelated love gifts for not getting what you want sends the message that your love is conditional. That message is going to provoke your wife to making her love conditional as well.

You may have misunderstood. Even though my needs and desires were mostly ignored, I still did my best to provide her wants and needs. The only thing I didn't give her was the big diamond she always complained about not having. On gift giving holidays I would give her exactly what I understood her to express that she wanted, but she would give me what she decided that I should want then get upset at me for not wanting it. It's not that I didn't give her what she expected because she was ignoring my needs; the day finally came when I just gave up trying.

I do have two big benefits going forward. From the experience of my past I know to make sure that, when I start into a relationship, we each have a very clear understanding of what the other will expect from a relationship. And, as a temple worthy guy who is didn't become addicted to porn or cheat on his wife, I've been told that I will find the odds very much in my favor so if I start a relationship with someone who turns out to be entitled I know I can walk away and look for someone who expects me to fulfill her needs and expects to fulfill my needs.
[/quote]

No worries. I was trying to speak in a general way using your wife as an example, but no doubt you were doing everything possible to make her happy. That's why I believe that perhaps for her and many women, it comes down to not trusting in your love and in the experience itself. She does not look at all those things you do for her has loving acts, but as payment for getting what you want in return. So your gifts are really requests, and a way to earn her love. You may be really trying to love her genuinely, but it will never be communicated that way until she trusts you. Ultimately she feels that what she is given from you is for one purpose - so you can use her body to feel good at her expense. You really can't understand what it feels like to be her when you have sex with her. Maybe if you were her you would understand.
I've been told that I will find the odds very much in my favor so if I start a relationship with someone who turns out to be entitled I know I can walk away and look for someone who expects me to fulfill her needs and expects to fulfill my needs.
If you both go into marriage with the expectation that you each will fulfill each other's needs, isn't that what entitlement is? I think you would be setting yourselves up for disappointment.

You both need to go into marriage with no other expectation than what you covenant - that you each will obey the law of chastity. All other expectations should be specific, agreed upon behaviors to happen within a certain time period. She should not expect that you will always be there to help with the kids, or to clean, or to buy her what she wants, and if she does, you need to lovingly explain why boundaries are needed on your giving and discuss ways that life can be fair for the both of you. But work gifts for work gifts, and money gifts for money gifts, not either of those earning you intimacy gifts. It is okay to agree that one person will take out the garbage, and another will make doctor's appointments for your kids. It is okay to request accountability if you request that your wife do something and she ends up forgetting or neglecting to do that task. It is okay to agree to spending or saving in a certain way, and likely you will have to compromise on those things. But to agree to meet all of another person's "needs?" I think you're setting yourself up for failure. Can you imagine having that same understanding when going into a business deal?

Fiannan
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12983

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Fiannan »

Some people complain of an ulcer while other people have stomach cancer. Both cause pain in the digestive system, and if you listen to people with either condition you would think they are suffering the same misery, but they are not. The latter is going though a far more pain and suffering. So how does this relate? Simple. There are some LDS women who feel justified in leaving their husband over their husband using any amount of porn, be it once a month or once a year. They feel violated and abused. Maybe these women should watch videos like this and count their blessings.

https://www.facebook.com/diplyvideo/vid ... f=NEWSFEED

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by brianj »

Sarah wrote: March 27th, 2017, 12:13 pm I believe you when you say that it didn't matter what you did, she was never going to warm up to you and give you want you needed. And I feel a lot of compassion for you, and think it must be awful not to be around your son. This was her choice and she will have to live with that choice. I just hope that going forward you can realize that every time you act disappointed, or withdraw other unrelated love gifts for not getting what you want sends the message that your love is conditional. That message is going to provoke your wife to making her love conditional as well.
I felt a desire to revisit this and point out a couple things.

First, what are "unrelated love gifts?"

I think it's pretty clear to you that if gifts, flowers, dinner out, and time on the couch watching chick flicks are important to a wife then the man is saying "my love is conditional" if he stops doing those things. Why is that? Why is it that if a man refuses to do the acts that his wife concludes are ways of showing love to her then his love is conditional? If you try to answer this, please keep in mind that for many men physical intimacy is the single most important thing a wife can do to show love to her husband.

No man is entitled to sex just because he is married. But no woman is entitled to dinners out, a nice car, a nice house, a generous shopping allowance, or chick flick dates just because she is married. Yet if a woman doesn't get what *she* wants then her husband is unloving and when a man doesn't get what he wants then he is unreasonable for wanting those things.

When a woman withholds sex she is either saying that her love is conditional, it doesn't exist, or her husband isn't worth being loved. You can check with current psychological research to have my words confirmed. We live in a society where women, even withing the LDS church, act so entitled that they believe they have a right to withhold sex and only love their husband in ways they find comfortable or desirable but if a man begins to do the same thing then he is unloving, neglectful, or abusive.


We are going to disagree on this final point. When you agree to get married, you are agreeing to love your spouse in the way they need to be loved. If you haven't read it, review the book The Five Love Languages and you will find an additional witness that it doesn't matter what else you do: if you don't give your spouse love in the way they need love expressed, they aren't going to feel loved. So a man has a duty to take his wife out to dinner, buy her flowers or jewelry, or watch chick flicks with her if that's how she feels loved (I doubt you disagree here). And a woman has a duty to be physically intimate with her husband if that's how he feels loved (here's where we will disagree).

DesertWonderer
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1178

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by DesertWonderer »

^^^correct brianj. The LDS women that I know well have completely adopted an entitlement mentality. Maybe it's just the socio-economic strata in which I find myself. Not sure.

A couple years ago while teaching the NT we came to the famous versus where Paul was explaining the marriage covenant. Husbands are to love their wives like Christ loved the Church and the woman is supposed to love her husband like the church is supposed to love Christ. The women we are very vocal about the first part of the equation then said nothing about the second. I asked specifically about the second part: what does that mean? Is it a one-sided arrangement? does it only go one way? DEAD SILENCE. i'm sorry and really don't mean to offend and I know there are some really wonderful ladies on this site but of the women that I know well enough to know what goes on in their homes they feel very entitled to be catered to w/o reciprocating.
Last edited by DesertWonderer on April 4th, 2017, 1:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

simpleton
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3074

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by simpleton »

A woman should be to her husband like a man should be to Christ... When that is not followed by both party's to the marriage then much more problems arise that I believe can be avoided. If the goal (and it must be mutual / by both partys) is not set upon eternal life and eternal increase then you have an agreement until death or divorce do we part.
God and his kingdom must come first , then He says all other things will be added. God is also a jealous God that requires man to think if Him first and foremost and even before his wife and children, as He says that if we do not think and serve God first and foremost then we are not worthy if Him.
So I would say if the above is not the goal and purpose in life then when couples do get married it is not a marriage of very long endurance.
What strikes me as interesting is it is never ending the continual back and forth ,"what a man wants" "what a woman wants", how about what God wants!!!! The promise is that if we seek His will and do it, all else will be added...

Fiannan
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12983

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Fiannan »

When a woman withholds sex she is either saying that her love is conditional, it doesn't exist, or her husband isn't worth being loved. You can check with current psychological research to have my words confirmed. We live in a society where women, even withing the LDS church, act so entitled that they believe they have a right to withhold sex and only love their husband in ways they find comfortable or desirable but if a man begins to do the same thing then he is unloving, neglectful, or abusive.
You know, it just occurred to me that maybe some LDS women dread any return to polygamy not for the fear their husband will find someone younger or prettier but instead they fear the husband might find someone who actually does love unconditionally.

Unfair competition?

A while back I posted an article that indicated that when men have sex they produce chemicals in the brain that connects them to spiritual impressions and thoughts. In esoteric literature sex is a method of connected to divine power and inspiration. I also read recently that there has been a sharp decline in marital intimacy over the past decade. There has also been a sharp decline in men feeling that religion has anything to offer them anymore. Correlation or causation? You decide.

User avatar
Thinker
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12975
Location: The Universe - wherever that is.

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Thinker »

djinwa wrote: March 5th, 2017, 7:25 amWhy do we ignore other fantasies that are more destructive? Who makes these arbitrary decisions and why?...

The leading cause of divorce is money issues. But who cares?

...Anyway, when Jesus was presented with an adulteress by the scribes and Pharisees, he seemed more concerned with their hyposcrisy than the sin of adultery. And that is the way I see it also. There is something evil about the way we emphasize one kind of sin and minimize the more serious ones that destroy families in greater numbers. Somehow by emphasizing the sins of others, we improve our own image or status, or are using it as a means of control and manipulation to our benefit. So while seeming to care about the sin or the sinner, we actually only care about ourselves.
I agree that you've addressed something essential - the unspoken heart of the matter - that which is so often overlooked. Why is it overlooked? Maybe because people expect to be commanded in all things and lack strength, ability or willingness to look honestly at themselves. I think there are many examples of this...
  • -Someone calls to talk, they're going through tough times, and answering the phone, the member yells at them for being so inconsiderate to call during conference (seen this). Can you imagine Jesus doing that?
    -Someone really overweight put somebody down for drinking coffee (The leading cause of death in the US is heart disease.)
    -Drinking red wine is condemned while abusing pain-meds (common in UT) is ignored.
    -One prides him/herself for never skipping a Sunday for attending church, but are rude to people and have no basic manners.
Sin is part of human nature - we ALL sin. And it's as God planned and even ironically saw it as "good" because through opposition is how we learn best, and get stronger. Mistakes have a way of teaching way better than successes. So, sin is not the real evil - the real evil is denying sin and pointing fingers, or trying to make another pay for our sins. That damns us (keeps us back) from correcting it, learning and becoming stronger. But it's so tempting to blame others! It makes us FEEL so right, so good, even when deep down, we KNOW we're not perfect either and we've screwed up too.

Maybe that's why Jesus said to whom it's been given, will be taken and "Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted"... If you demand to be right to lift yourself up in pride, ignoring the infection in yourself, you'll be brought down, but if you humble yourself and look squarely at your own problems, you'll fix them and be better for it.

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9832

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by JohnnyL »

Fiannan wrote: April 4th, 2017, 11:38 am
When a woman withholds sex she is either saying that her love is conditional, it doesn't exist, or her husband isn't worth being loved. You can check with current psychological research to have my words confirmed. We live in a society where women, even withing the LDS church, act so entitled that they believe they have a right to withhold sex and only love their husband in ways they find comfortable or desirable but if a man begins to do the same thing then he is unloving, neglectful, or abusive.
You know, it just occurred to me that maybe some LDS women dread any return to polygamy not for the fear their husband will find someone younger or prettier but instead they fear the husband might find someone who actually does love unconditionally. And someone who will then be easier to love...
Dating polygamy always worked well, I loved it. You want to act like that, I'm off to the other. It kept lots on better behavior, and me (and most of them) much happier.
When doesn't it work well for the man? When righteous women decide to hold an intervention for the husband. Ouch.


Unfair competition?

A while back I posted an article that indicated that when men have sex they produce chemicals in the brain that connects them to spiritual impressions and thoughts. In esoteric literature sex is a method of connected to divine power and inspiration. I also read recently that there has been a sharp decline in marital intimacy over the past decade. There has also been a sharp decline in men feeling that religion has anything to offer them anymore. Correlation or causation? You decide. Interesting. I wonder if this happened in most societies before homosexuality became big--you know, this feminism/ control/ sex stuff.

brianj
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4066
Location: Vineyard, Utah

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by brianj »

simpleton wrote: April 4th, 2017, 9:44 am What strikes me as interesting is it is never ending the continual back and forth ,"what a man wants" "what a woman wants", how about what God wants!!!! The promise is that if we seek His will and do it, all else will be added...
Immediately upon reading this I thought of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. I've heard of missionaries providing basic services like helping people get their own food and water to fulfill the bottom level of the pyramid, with the explanation that when people are starving their need for food will be such a big focus of their lives that they won't be open to the gospel message. They need those most basic needs met before they will really be open to the gospel.

Think of it as telestial, terrestrial, celestial. You don't just hop straight from the bottom of the telestial to the top of the celestial. You need to go up one level at a time. When one spouse is demanding to be treated like a king of queen while treating the other like a peasant, neither one of them is as likely to spiritually progress as when the marriage is balanced and loving.

Yes, there is a promise that if we seek His will then all else will be added, but there's a conflicting promise that our free agency will not be violated. I believe that even in the worst marriages Heavenly Father tries prompting the spouses to be loving to one another and to provide for the needs of the other, but do those promptings mean that every bad marriage will be healed? The divorce rate suggests otherwise. I've received a blessing while in a bad situation and I was told that Heavenly Father can give me what I need, but only by violating the free agency of others. And if you take a close look at the promise you referenced, that promise is given immediately after telling people to seek not for riches, but to seek first the Kingdom of Heaven. The context doesn't begin to suggest that people around you will treat you as you desire if you are righteous enough. Why else would higher level general authorities have bodyguards?

Fiannan
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12983

Re: Destructive fantasies and hypocrisy

Post by Fiannan »

Interesting. I wonder if this happened in most societies before homosexuality became big--you know, this feminism/ control/ sex stuff.
Some who have explored esoteric history and literature speculate that women had the priesthood in the era of Noah and this is why the Abrahamic religions have generally opposed the practice.

Post Reply