The “shortage of Mormon men”

[JohnnyL]

I was simply stating that my experience has been vastly different than many who are posting here with regard to this: Some posters are putting out the opinion that the church is overlooking women’s sins and compounding men’s. (Which is completely untrue. Even if you find examples of this is in individual areas and wards, it does not mean THE CHURCH is doing it or that it is pervasive.)

Why then are women allowed to teach a primary class alone, but a man cannot? I think the point of the thread is that you can prove beyond any reasonable requirement that the church does in fact treat men and women very differently and it is very pervasive. Just go listen/read a random sampling of talks from the priesthood session of conference vs the Women's session. There is a night and day difference.

Here is an example for you.

First, president Monson talking to the priesthood in 2011.

Now, brethren, I turn to another subject about which I feel impressed to address you. In the three years since I was sustained as President of the Church, I believe the saddest and most discouraging responsibility I have each week is the handling of cancellations of sealings. Each one was preceded by a joyous marriage in the house of the Lord, where a loving couple was beginning a new life together and looking forward to spending the rest of eternity with each other. And then months and years go by, and for one reason or another, love dies. It may be the result of financial problems, lack of communication, uncontrolled tempers, interference from in-laws, entanglement in sin. There are any number of reasons. In most cases divorce does not have to be the outcome.

The vast majority of requests for cancellations of sealings come from women who tried desperately to make a go of the marriage but who, in the final analysis, could not overcome the problems.

Why does he seem to automatically assume the Women's requests are truthful? How do they truly know the women are doing all they can to make it work and the men are not? Why not berate the women for all these divorce requests? If you read between the lines a bit here, it boils down to men suck, women are great, its all the Men's fault that these divorces are happening. That is exactly the kind of stereotyping everyone has been complaining about. You won't find a talk like that speaking against the women in this way. Here's another snippet from the same talk.

Now, I have thought a lot lately about you young men who are of an age to marry but who have not yet felt to do so. I see lovely young ladies who desire to be married and to raise families, and yet their opportunities are limited because so many young men are postponing marriage.

This is not a new situation. Much has been said concerning this matter by past Presidents of the Church. I share with you just one or two examples of their counsel.

Said President Harold B. Lee, “We are not doing our duty as holders of the priesthood when we go beyond the marriageable age and withhold ourselves from an honorable marriage to these lovely women.”6

President Gordon B. Hinckley said this: “My heart reaches out to … our single sisters, who long for marriage and cannot seem to find it. … I have far less sympathy for the young men, who under the customs of our society, have the prerogative to take the initiative in these matters but in so many cases fail to do so.”7

Again, its the Men's fault that they are putting off marriage, no mention of it being on women at all and in this snippet he quotes two other past presidents saying much the same thing.

Contrast that to what women hear in their sessions. Its nothing but an endless stream of praises.

Holland, 2015.

To all of our mothers everywhere, past, present, or future, I say, “Thank you. Thank you for giving birth, for shaping souls, for forming character, and for demonstrating the pure love of Christ.” To Mother Eve, to Sarah, Rebekah, and Rachel, to Mary of Nazareth, and to a Mother in Heaven, I say, “Thank you for your crucial role in fulfilling the purposes of eternity.” To all mothers in every circumstance, including those who struggle—and all will—I say, “Be peaceful. Believe in God and yourself. You are doing better than you think you are. In fact, you are saviors on Mount Zion,13 and like the Master you follow, your love ‘never faileth.’14 ” I can pay no higher tribute to anyone. In the name of Jesus Christ, amen.

or here's an even more egregious example from Holland, April 1997 general conference.
http://www.ldschurchnewsarchive.com/art ... thers.html

"May I say to mothers collectively, in the name of the Lord, you are magnificent. You are doing terrifically well. The very fact that you have been given such a responsibility is everlasting evidence of the trust your Father in Heaven has in you.

This is straight up pandering. Lets apply an ounce of critical thinking and its clear its not true at all. Mothers collectively are doing terrifically well? Really? What about the mothers who dump their kids in daycare every day all day so they can buy nicer stuff and barely bother to raise them at all? Who's raising all the whining snowflakes, criminals, etc then? That must be the work of the fathers I guess. Society abounds with poorly raised children, but that's not what women want to hear so sure, mothers are all just great. Then he says that being a mother is evidence of the trust God has in them. What about women who cannot have children? God doesn't trust them I guess, but he does trust mothers who murder their babies, get them addicted to drugs before they are born, abuse them, etc. If you believe this statement is an honest assessment of mothers I'd like to sell you some ocean front property in Arizona.

So there are two night and day differences in how the church talks to men vs women. I think they are both pretty typical, but I'd love to be shown wrong. Show me the talks where women are blamed for all the divorces like the men are, or where they are blamed for much of anything bad. Show me where women are berated for porn like men are constantly. Sure, its a bigger problem for men, but its growing fast among women, but I have yet to hear a church talk ever associate that problem with women or talk about their problems with it.

As another fun exercise, something I've done several times while attending church in the Idaho/Utah area, try counting how many disparaging remarks are made toward men in church vs women. You have to be thinking about it and paying attention to get a good count because its so commonplace that most people hardly even notice it anymore; all the crappy jokes about women being the better half, etc. It adds up. In most of my tests, there are at least 4-5 disparaging remarks about men throughout one weekend of church meetings. For the women, it is usually zero, but sometimes 1-2 comments will pop up in priesthood or something if some guys start joking about their wives shopping too much or something like that. It has never gone beyond that very mild level of criticism though, and really isn't harmful either because it isn't stating that women are inferior, just teasing a little about a common trait many have. Unlike the jokes about men, that often allude to or outright state women are better. I also know from talking to others that many men actually truly do feel second class to their wives in the church these days and think that is good and right.

You can ignore the problem all you want, but it will only get worse. It is affecting all men in the states to some degree or another. Some will go with it and just roll over and accept their second class status, others will leave the church, etc. Either way, its a lie and its not doing anyone any good, least of all, the prideful women who go around talking about how there will be more women in the CK, openly criticize their husbands to the other women, etc while being completely oblivious to their own glaring pride and faults.

I firmly believe feminism has been mostly a huge attack on men, women, and the family from Satan from the get go and has only gotten worse. Yes, in the past there probably were a few legitimate grievances mixed in, but those issues are long past and it has morphed into an all out assault on both gender's roles and the family in general, and the evidence shows very clearly that the church has been caught up in that as well. We can't do anything about the disparity in conference talks, but we can at least make sure our own comments on our own wards are as fair as possible and we can choose our responses to others' comments as well. Imagine if when some dumb guy tries to joke about how much better women are, we all didn't laugh and encourage more of that stereotyping. What if we just let the awkward silence hit him to show disapproval and help him learn that that is wrong. We could make a difference on this problem, or, we can do nothing and keep pretending all is well.

I really like that you give evidence to back up your complaint and give a practical solution as to how we can combat unequal treatment of men and women. We shouldn't all be laughing or agreeing when someone makes a disparaging remark about his or her spouse or the opposite sex. Personally, when I hear someone say his or her spouse is the better half, I think that that person probably sees and acknowledges his or her own weaknesses, and wants to acknowledge that. Lately in our new ward and in past wards, I hear a lot of women praising their husbands. So I don't think it's just men praising their wives.

As for men not being let alone with children, I know at least when working with the cub scouts, the rule is the same for men and women - you have to have two adults at all times. So I don't see why this couldn't be a policy change to make things equal, but you then put a huge burden on the Primary for filling callings. So I'm fine with this rule, even though it is unequal. I think if you expect the brethren to call out women and point out woman's differences and responsibilities, you have to be willing to accept that men are different, and now-a-day's their weaknesses have made it harder for women and children to be able to trust them.

And yet nowadays I hear about all kinds of female teacher-male student affairs, and little of the other (not helping Feminism!). I also know that while much is true, some is not--I know of girls who accused male teachers and laughed that they had won the power struggle.

And, I'd like to take this opportunity to show that whatever might be true, in MY experience, and therefore anyone with an opposing point of view needs to check themself, , I have never known a male teacher do anything to anyone (except a stake presidency counselor who groomed his next wife from older YW), but I have had a few female teachers that did some really... un-lady-like things to my children, such as dragging one crying and rug burning across the church and handing them off to me because "they wouldn't obey me." I also had a 2nd grade teacher who made me sit on her lap--yes, very uncomfortable, especially for a guy. I never wanted to sit on a female teacher's lap at that age, but I've had lower grade elementary girls nowadays want to sit on my lap, or that have touched me inappropriately.

[JohnnyL]

I think the seemingly profuse praises give to women during talks by GAs is a result of the fact that only men hold the priesthood in the Church and ultimately it is men who have the final say in what happens in the Church. I think GAs feel that they need to go out of their way to make sure that women feel important, wanted, and needed in the Church. For men who can obtain the priesthood and by its virtue, they are important, wanted, and needed in the Church as a given. This what we are seeing in my view is a result of a patriarchal society/structure and making sure that in a society where men have the final say, women feel equal and satisfied.

-Finrock

I agree with that. Lack of priesthood and the people in charge at the top being all men, is definitely a sore spot for many women and no doubt is one reason as to why they pander to women so much to try and counter that perceived unfairness, but that doesn't address the growing problem with how men are treated; that simply explains part of their reasoning for doing so nor does it justify the way men vs women are treated. It simply shows that they are willing to pander to women in this way to try and ease their concerns without really addressing the problems.

Rensai, thank you for your posts. (In guy talk, that means they have been beautiful, succinct, powerful.)

I think that is the KEY. The real problems on both sides are not being addressed.

[JohnnyL]

I seriously wish someone would talk to us sisters about avoiding porn.

I was in a stake conference where a GA noted that many women were looking at porn in the Church but he also noted that it was more serious for men because they had the priesthood.

I listen to my husband and male friends and hear the familiar discouragement in their voices.

I feel sorry for men who have high empathy and high levels of guilt. I believe such men wind up hurting and thus are weeded out of our religion far more than those who do not have such high levels of these emotions.

Wow. That's the first I've heard.

And then you're left with many men who are the typical jerks that are preached against, lol. Hey, we need them too, but we need a balance in each sex, not just between the sexes.

[JohnnyL]

and now-a-day's their weaknesses have made it harder for women and children to be able to trust them.

and it is attitudes like these that have taught LDS men that the church is no place for them.

If you can't understand how this very statement typifies the entire discussion then there is not much more I can say.

Are you effing kidding me???????

Not sure, is that 'effing' from "female empowerment?"

Sarah is 100% correct. THis is not an 'attitude' some selfish, insensitive LDS women have and they are destroying their husband's fragile egos!!!!!

Let's look at this again for you, since I have to assume you didn't understand Sarah's point.

'Now-aday's their weaknesses have made it harder for women and children to be able to trust them."

Now-aday' means today and the temptations and trials that face LDS men today. The biggest temptation good striving to do right LDS men face today would be Pornography.

Ha, that right there shows how little understanding you have of men. And that's where I stop.

[JohnnyL]

...and why for generations women were not allowed to divorce or work outside of the home. It's so the man could control and manipulate the woman and not give her the choice of leaving.

Interesting. Could you provide some reference for where you learned this? Thanks.

Now it's the guys turn to resent the fact that sex is not something that comes easy after marriage.

This sums it up doesn't it? Sometimes it's not about "being equal", but about getting even. Making it "fair". To make something "fair", we have to push it too far the other way it seems.

If your wife is requiring checklists of you and is being needy or demanding, it is probably in response to how you are approaching her about sex.

This is offensive. Sorry, but it just is. A diagnosis with "probably", followed by the cure.

Sarah, it's not ALL about sex.

[Sarah]

...and why for generations women were not allowed to divorce or work outside of the home. It's so the man could control and manipulate the woman and not give her the choice of leaving.

Interesting. Could you provide some reference for where you learned this? Thanks.

Now it's the guys turn to resent the fact that sex is not something that comes easy after marriage.

This sums it up doesn't it? Sometimes it's not about "being equal", but about getting even. Making it "fair". To make something "fair", we have to push it too far the other way it seems.

If your wife is requiring checklists of you and is being needy or demanding, it is probably in response to how you are approaching her about sex.

This is offensive. Sorry, but it just is. A diagnosis with "probably", followed by the cure.

Sarah, it's not ALL about sex.

Yea, some women are just particular or demanding by nature - I get that. But my comments were in response to the following, and it sounded to me like some kind of power struggle was going on involving sex.

What you are ultimately saying as many women do today is I dont want to be told when to have sex, and I want it to be my idea. If I waited on my wife to instigate sex we would have it once a year. Dont give me ultimatums, check lists, whatever before I can have sex. I will give you check lists before you get the credit card back.

[Gage]

...and why for generations women were not allowed to divorce or work outside of the home. It's so the man could control and manipulate the woman and not give her the choice of leaving.

Interesting. Could you provide some reference for where you learned this? Thanks.

Now it's the guys turn to resent the fact that sex is not something that comes easy after marriage.

This sums it up doesn't it? Sometimes it's not about "being equal", but about getting even. Making it "fair". To make something "fair", we have to push it too far the other way it seems.

If your wife is requiring checklists of you and is being needy or demanding, it is probably in response to how you are approaching her about sex.

This is offensive. Sorry, but it just is. A diagnosis with "probably", followed by the cure.

Sarah, it's not ALL about sex.

Yea, some women are just particular or demanding by nature - I get that. But my comments were in response to the following, and it sounded to me like some kind of power struggle was going on involving sex.

What you are ultimately saying as many women do today is I dont want to be told when to have sex, and I want it to be my idea. If I waited on my wife to instigate sex we would have it once a year. Dont give me ultimatums, check lists, whatever before I can have sex. I will give you check lists before you get the credit card back.

Ah I was being sarcastic, I just wonder what makes a women resent sex so much she calls her husband selfish? I must admit I felt sorry for you Sarah if you went through all those feelings and emotions. What makes a woman get to that point? The way the husband goes about the whole thing? Did you feel you had no say or were never given the opportunity to instigate it yourself? Did you feel it was all about him? Obviously I guess you did and felt your feelings or needs were never considered.

[Fiannan]

Cinderella, and also Sleeping Beauty, were NOT originally Disney Princesses. They are far, far older than the Disney versions, and their plots do have some wonderful eternal truths. However, the current crop of Disney Princesses are crap. Feminists and SJW's.

Disney is the opiate of the masses.

At least for many LDS people.

[Fiannan]

And yet nowadays I hear about all kinds of female teacher-male student affairs, and little of the other (not helping Feminism!).

Not sure about that. In Europe old women are taking in young migrant men and feminists think it is wonderful. So if it is an old woman exploiting a man then it is okay.

[brianj]

Single/divorced, & widowed, A Question:


What are your biggest Red Flags about choosing a (new) partner?

-Religion ?

-Finances ?

- Personality/ character issues ? (specifically, please)

- Family conflicts/ expectations ?

Trust your gut.
Have faith that if your prayers are answered negatively, someone much better will come along.
If they treat their family like crap but promise they won't treat you that way, don't believe them.
Tell them no. A guy wants to go to an action movie you don't want to see? A girl wants to see a romantic movie you don't want to see? Tell them you don't want to go.
Skip out on them. Arrange a phone call from a friend, inviting you to do something fun with the guys/girls, while you are with your significant other and tell them you'll see them later. See how they react.
Criticize them. Tell him you don't like the way he drives. Tell her you didn't like the food she cooked. See how they handle it.
Find a way to provoke them, and do so until they react. See how they react.

Learn about things like narcissism and borderline personality disorder. Learn the warning signs of an oversized ego. If you are familiar with BPD and narcissism, you will recognize that most of what I just wrote would expose a borderline or narcissistic person.

[brianj]

Please know that the experiences many of you have shared here, about being made to feel less valued as a man and conversely seeing women as being put on a pedestal and given a pass on anything they do wrong, is not pervasive in the church. My husband has never in his life been made to feel this way, and neither have I or any of my teenagers (of both genders). I have never had any friends or family members mention anything of the kind happening in their experience. I have never heard this mentioned in any church classes or meetings. So please consider that while this may be your experience in your wards and lives, it is not mine, and it is not necessarily your neighbors'.

Sometimes we just find ourselves in difficult places and situations, surrounded by "difficult" people. I'm not saying that these things aren't happening to you, but I do think some of you have had some unfortunate experiences in the social culture of the church (as you've described), and now you are looking for it this particular problem, and have an ax to grind, and can't see that it isn't nearly as pervasive as you think it is. I am truly pained that some of you feel this way, and hope that you can find a way to look for the positive around you and see that things aren't as bad as you think.

I joined the church in southern California. Since then I have lived in four other states. I have attended church from the west coast to the east coast. I haven't had the opportunities to travel internationally that I have long dreamed of, but throughout the US I have been exposed to leaders, teachers, and talk givers placing women on a pedestal and debasing men.

I don't know how widely you have traveled, Crackers, or how your perspective may color your observation, but women treating men like crap is not an isolated phenomenon.

[brianj]

Can we even say the words, "head of the house" without some degree of Pavlovian societal cringe?

Wow, I would bet if you used those words in today's Sunday school class you will trigger more than a few women who will look at their poodle husbands and ask, "You don't agree with that, do you?"

I was once in a Sunday School class where a man said something about presiding in the home and his wife responded by arguing with him! The world has been moving toward the destruction of the family, with contempt for proper roles being a major factor. Many women in the church treat their husbands with contempt and refuse to show respect or even consider his counsel.

Sadly, women know how to lie and have become expert at doing so. They will play the role of the ideal Mormon wife during courtship and into the beginning of the marriage, but once they get settled they start showing that they have no intention of submitting to or respecting their husbands.

I've even seen it on this board. Paraphrasing a post in a previous thread: "Physical intimacy is a very special thing so, even though it may be the most important thing a woman can do to show love to her husband, he should be thankful to have her show love in the way she feels like showing love instead of the way he needs love expressed. And if he ever withholds love just because his wife is consistently withholding her love, then he's showing that his love is conditional."

Sounds like You have issues with women and untrighteous dominion. I don't believe god simply makes someone submit to their council because they are a man or based on gender. Women aren't supposed to submit to men...you misunderstand scripture and the temple ceremony if u believe that. Priesthood is a power that is accesed...you don't hold it or control it...you become worthy and RECEIVE it.

Eve was pulled from Adams side....she was his equal. Help meet NOT helper. Adam in Hebrew is different that adam the man as a race....there are two different translation...ADAM referring to the "original" has male and female distinction. The word adam referring to "man" as flesh is masculine.

I'm a woman...and I'm not lying to you. I'm assuming you've had issues with your own female companion lying to you and withholding sex which is why you assume women are like that (I'm not, but you must have experienced it if you believe it's true...otherwise why would you claim women are that way ). It's probably because that is easier for her to lie than what she would have to deal with if she told you the truth. She believes she will never measure up...and you treat her like she won't. just a psychological perspective.

Respect is not submission...that's control and untrighteous dominion. Respect is earned, and agency is freely exercised and given. She doesn't respect you because you haven't earned it. As Mary washed Christ's feet, and as He washed the disciples, YOU should wash hers....then you will earn her respect.

I have a military background. I know that a good military leader will listen to subordinates and consider their ideas, but when a decision is made if people refuse to submit to it they are putting lives at risk.
These days I am in a corporate environment. I know a good business leader will listen to subordinates and consider their ideas, but when a decision is made if people refuse to submit they can damage or even destroy the company.

I am NOT defending unrighteous dominion! Women are to submit to their husbands, not completely obey them without question or hesitation!

If a husband discusses finances with his wife, points out their need to stick to a budget and her need to reign in spending for a while, then she gets angry and goes on a spending spree, was he committing an act of unrighteous dominion?
If a husband does whatever his wife needs him to do to express love the way she needs love expressed, but then he complains because she only expresses love to him the way she wants to instead of the way he needs her to and he complains about it, is he committing an act of unrighteous dominion?

I recall one time when I ordered my (almost) ex wife to do something immediately. She angrily refused and was nearly seriously injured because she didn't respect my order to do something necessary to safety and I didn't take five minutes to explain myself beforehand. Apparently, as a guy I am in a no-win situation. If I see an object flying toward her and order her to move, I am exercising unrighteous dominion. If I begin to discuss the large object flying rapidly toward her and explain that it is in her best interest to move out of the way, I didn't tell her to get to safety so her injury is my fault.

Additionally, RESPECT IS NOT EARNED. Respect should be given immediately, but the retention of respect should be earned. As a woman, how would you react if you were called as a Relief Society president and nobody would show you any respect until you earned it, making it impossible for you to earn that respect because you couldn't get anything done without respect to start with?

My situation is somewhat unique. She was in a bad situation, she never loved me, and she never respected me. One day she gloated that she only married me because she saw me as someone who could take me out of that situation. Having decided early on that I wasn't worth respect, there was nothing I could do that would ever earn her respect.

Finally, I don't assume all women are like that. But, before I faced my own divorce, I was talking with a man who was going through a divorce and said he's lucky to be able to escape it now instead of spending decades in a miserable home. He told me it was scary how many guys had said the same thing. And since she left me, just a couple weeks after reconnecting with an old boyfriend who had proposed to her before she met me, I have met a lot of men who have had similarly bad experiences with their wives.


Trueintent, please consider this: The day before we married, I was spending time with her and she got increasingly angry, to the point of screaming at me and saying that she didn't want to marry me. I went home absolutely crushed. My mother said it was just nerves and cold feet, and I (foolishly) felt relieved to see her at the temple the next day. Almost 25 years later, just before leaving, she screamed at me and said this whole marriage mistake was entirely my fault. She told me that she had said that she didn't want to marry me, therefore I had no business going to the temple.
I would willingly swear out an affidavit about this. Or, if you know a member of the First Presidency or Twelve, I would willingly meet with one of them in a temple to tell this story and testify that it is entirely true.

Knowing this, do you think that I was just an awful husband who never deserved her respect and got what I deserved?

[brianj]

As for men not being let alone with children, I know at least when working with the cub scouts, the rule is the same for men and women - you have to have two adults at all times. So I don't see why this couldn't be a policy change to make things equal, but you then put a huge burden on the Primary for filling callings. So I'm fine with this rule, even though it is unequal. I think if you expect the brethren to call out women and point out woman's differences and responsibilities, you have to be willing to accept that men are different, and now-a-day's their weaknesses have made it harder for women and children to be able to trust them.

Since I haven't seen anybody else point out the obvious, allow me to do so.

Cub Scouts are not a church organization. Cub Scout packs and dens are charted through wards, but are an organization of the Boy Scouts of America. As such, Cub Scout leaders have to follow BSA policies.

Until you can convince me that the church would require two deep leadership in Cub Scout programs without the BSA mandate, this isn't going to sway my opinion. And, since the church did not require two deep leadership in Cub Scouts before the BSA mandated it, you won't be able to convince me that this would have happened without the BSA mandate.

[brianj]

That little synopsis is just my logical conclusion, except the "legalized prostitution" phrase. I read that somewhere years ago and it always stuck with me because it really shocked me that someone would label marriage that way. But when I read Gage's description of his wife (he is apparently joking about) of her demanding things first and him threatening to withhold the credit card - money for sex, sex for money - not a good way to navigate a marriage.

I'm going to agree with you on the "legalized prostitution" thing. Wives are far more expensive than prostitutes.

In multiple threads on this forum I have seen women say that a man should do anything and everything his wife wants him to do so she feels loved, but if the most important thing she can to to express love to him is be physically intimate, it's his problem and he should deal with it. Spend the family into bankruptcy? He should let her because he loves her. Take her out during the biggest game of the year, instead of watching the game? He should do so because he loves her. Work until he dies because her poor spending habits won't let him afford retirement? It's called love. Work 40-60 hours per week then spend hours helping his stay at home wife with the housework (in addition to taking care of the house, yard, cars, etc) because 20 hours of housework per week is too much of a burden for her? Of course! But expect her to make love to him? That's not love!

Please tell me who is being selfish in this oft repeated scenario.

[Gage]

I'm going to agree with you on the "legalized prostitution" thing. Wives are far more expensive than prostitutes.

In multiple threads on this forum I have seen women say that a man should do anything and everything his wife wants him to do so she feels loved, but if the most important thing she can to to express love to him is be physically intimate, it's his problem and he should deal with it. Spend the family into bankruptcy? He should let her because he loves her. Take her out during the biggest game of the year, instead of watching the game? He should do so because he loves her. Work until he dies because her poor spending habits won't let him afford retirement? It's called love. Work 40-60 hours per week then spend hours helping his stay at home wife with the housework (in addition to taking care of the house, yard, cars, etc) because 20 hours of housework per week is too much of a burden for her? Of course! But expect her to make love to him? That's not love!

Please tell me who is being selfish in this oft repeated scenario.
[/quote]


All this. The sooner a man learns that a woman does not love they use, the sooner that man is better off in relationships and in life itself. I learned this at an early age and am thankful I did. I know without a shadow of a doubt my wife would leave me within days of the money running out. She would have a new man within a few weeks and would never miss a beat. Does she love me, ah maybe just a smidgen, does she love her situation? No question. So if we divorced she would miss her situation and not me so much. Its how a lot of women are, its just how they are wired. its how your ex can get a new man so quick and she seems so happy and you are on your couch crying your eyes out and suicidal after the break up.

[Sarah]

Interesting. Could you provide some reference for where you learned this? Thanks.


This sums it up doesn't it? Sometimes it's not about "being equal", but about getting even. Making it "fair". To make something "fair", we have to push it too far the other way it seems.



This is offensive. Sorry, but it just is. A diagnosis with "probably", followed by the cure.

Sarah, it's not ALL about sex.

Yea, some women are just particular or demanding by nature - I get that. But my comments were in response to the following, and it sounded to me like some kind of power struggle was going on involving sex.

What you are ultimately saying as many women do today is I dont want to be told when to have sex, and I want it to be my idea. If I waited on my wife to instigate sex we would have it once a year. Dont give me ultimatums, check lists, whatever before I can have sex. I will give you check lists before you get the credit card back.

Ah I was being sarcastic, I just wonder what makes a women resent sex so much she calls her husband selfish? I must admit I felt sorry for you Sarah if you went through all those feelings and emotions. What makes a woman get to that point? The way the husband goes about the whole thing? Did you feel you had no say or were never given the opportunity to instigate it yourself? Did you feel it was all about him? Obviously I guess you did and felt your feelings or needs were never considered.

Well, yes Gage, I did feel all those things because of my husband's behavior. And no need to feel sorry for either of us now because now that my husband freely admits he was acting selfishly, and has changed his behavior towards me, he now not only has a wife who has sex with him to make him happy because she loves him, he has a wife who really loves sex and initiates it most of the time. Obviously my husband is not like every man, but I suspect that some of the things that he was doing with me may also be a problem for some other couples. But yes, I think it is selfish to expect your wife to tolerate sex with you. Is she enjoying it just as much as you are? If not, then you are entering it with the mindset that this is really for you. When she senses that, it leaves her feeling that you are just fine with that, that you are putting your needs above hers. These feelings cause her to shut down. I'm going to respond to Brian's post and go into a little more detail about what my husband was doing in the hopes that this can help someone.

[iWriteStuff]

My assessment of this debate thus far:

Iknowyouare.jpg (10.17 KiB) Viewed 812 times

[Sarah]

I'm going to agree with you on the "legalized prostitution" thing. Wives are far more expensive than prostitutes.

In multiple threads on this forum I have seen women say that a man should do anything and everything his wife wants him to do so she feels loved, but if the most important thing she can to to express love to him is be physically intimate, it's his problem and he should deal with it. Spend the family into bankruptcy? He should let her because he loves her. Take her out during the biggest game of the year, instead of watching the game? He should do so because he loves her. Work until he dies because her poor spending habits won't let him afford retirement? It's called love. Work 40-60 hours per week then spend hours helping his stay at home wife with the housework (in addition to taking care of the house, yard, cars, etc) because 20 hours of housework per week is too much of a burden for her? Of course! But expect her to make love to him? That's not love!

Please tell me who is being selfish in this oft repeated scenario.

All this. The sooner a man learns that a woman does not love they use, the sooner that man is better off in relationships and in life itself. I learned this at an early age and am thankful I did. I know without a shadow of a doubt my wife would leave me within days of the money running out. She would have a new man within a few weeks and would never miss a beat. Does she love me, ah maybe just a smidgen, does she love her situation? No question. So if we divorced she would miss her situation and not me so much. Its how a lot of women are, its just how they are wired. its how your ex can get a new man so quick and she seems so happy and you are on your couch crying your eyes out and suicidal after the break up.
[/quote]

If you feel like your wife is using you, you might try to understand if your wife ever feels used by you, or has felt used in a previous relationship. When someone feels used, it tends to make the person want to try and use others.

[Sarah]

That little synopsis is just my logical conclusion, except the "legalized prostitution" phrase. I read that somewhere years ago and it always stuck with me because it really shocked me that someone would label marriage that way. But when I read Gage's description of his wife (he is apparently joking about) of her demanding things first and him threatening to withhold the credit card - money for sex, sex for money - not a good way to navigate a marriage.

I'm going to agree with you on the "legalized prostitution" thing. Wives are far more expensive than prostitutes.

In multiple threads on this forum I have seen women say that a man should do anything and everything his wife wants him to do so she feels loved, but if the most important thing she can to to express love to him is be physically intimate, it's his problem and he should deal with it. Spend the family into bankruptcy? He should let her because he loves her. Take her out during the biggest game of the year, instead of watching the game? He should do so because he loves her. Work until he dies because her poor spending habits won't let him afford retirement? It's called love. Work 40-60 hours per week then spend hours helping his stay at home wife with the housework (in addition to taking care of the house, yard, cars, etc) because 20 hours of housework per week is too much of a burden for her? Of course! But expect her to make love to him? That's not love!

Please tell me who is being selfish in this oft repeated scenario.

Hi Brian, I hope you noticed in some of my posts in this thread that I mentioned that you should not do everything your wife wants you to do, but that you need to stand up for yourself and not give in to her selfish desires, if indeed they are selfish. You can have boundaries on how much help-time you can give her for example (as long as you don't complain about her housekeeping) and you can set boundaries on how much she can spend. You just have to not fear the consequences and be willing to go without love to teach her that you have boundaries that aren't because of selfishness, but that are common sense boundaries. You reassure her that you still love her when you enforce your boundaries.

I think your reactions are what everyone reacts with when feeling unloved. My guess is that you feared not having her love, and so you tried really hard, doing everything you could think of to possibly please her, but you never received what you wanted in return. This is what a lot of people do when faced with a lack of what they want or need. They try to earn it, and it backfires because their gifts offered to earn it don't come across as gifts but as requests and expectations for something in return.

This is what I was doing with sex - trying to please my husband in the hopes he would love me. I feared his response if I did not perform. If he went too long without it, or I just wasn't in the mood, he would get mean and moody, and be more demanding of me, asking me to do errands for him and make phone calls and whatnot. I started to want things to make me happy, and I felt he always said no, or acted disappointed when I bought something he didn't approve of. He would take out his disappointment on me when I didn't respond physically to him, and so I feared that. That fear turned me off to receiving anything from him. I feared not being turned on enough, because the less into it I was the worse I felt afterwards. Gage asked me why I felt like I could never instigate what I needed, but if I wasn't feeling the need, why instigate anything. What woman is attracted to or gets turned on by a man who is focused on his own needs.

The one thing I did say about meeting woman's needs is that when a man meets his wife's physical needs, he automatically receives what he needs. And this is because when you meet her physical needs, yours will be met too. But what I neglected to add is that in order for her physical needs to be met, she usually needs to have her emotional needs met to some degree. She needs to feel understood, and she needs to completely trust you. So it isn't easy, I admit, to meet a woman's emotional needs. If you ask her what she needs, she might talk about all the help she wants from you or the things she wants to buy. She herself doesn't really understand what she needs. This help around the house (which she might be wanting because she feels your disappointment if things are done) and the things she wants, are like the porn for man. She turns into a wanting machine rather than a giving machine. What she really needs is your complete acceptance. And you do this by never acting disappointed by her lack of interest, or her lack of anything. You do this by not giving her the cold-shoulder or the disappointed face, but continue to show kindness when you don't get what you want. You have to earn her trust this way. You also don't start being all kind and affectionate, and ask her about herself only on the days you feel like having sex. And then on the days following a rejection, you obviously withhold or show kindness grudgingly as punishment. It becomes so obvious that you are giving in order to receive, which makes your "gifts" unattractive requests. And so, to sum things us, if you don't have your wife's trust and respect and love, and you feel like you have given everything possible you could think of, you have not really given her what she needs. All your gifts have come across to her as requests and expectations for something in return. She doesn't feel loved by that, and she doesn't trust that you genuinely love her when that is how you are "giving."

The man/woman relationship in marriage is to teach the man to love unconditionally, if he so chooses to take that opportunity to learn this. I have truly come to believe this. While your physical and emotional needs are likely to be met if her emotional and physical needs are met, if a wife meets a husband's physical and emotional needs, not only are hers not automatically met, but her physical and emotional state becomes worse off, and makes it harder and harder for her to come back and trust you. If, when you have sex with her, you are coming away satisfied, and she is feeling sexually frustrated, she fears that damage the next time. I was listening on the radio the other day to a couple who were Christian sex therapists, touting their book, and they said the number one reason women don't enjoy sex with their husband, is because of fear. You have to address the fears, and patiently help her overcome her fears or she will never truly love you. So, I know I keep hammering away the same message again and again, but perhaps for someone this will sink in and really change how they treat his or her spouse.

[Fiannan]

There is a lot I can agree with in regards to Sarah's post. However, I wonder if more traditional people put too much into the notion that one needs to feel highly emotional before they engage in relations.

There is something I originally heard from some female magazine executive on some documentary years ago. She said that sex was fantastic when love in involved but it is also really great even if it isn't. Then of course there is the popular phrase "fake it 'till you make it." What I mean by fake is that sometimes just doing it will make you feel closer. It is a biochemical thing. A spouse might actually really be mad but having sex will create bonding hormones that will reinforce the love they just ain't feeling at that moment.

On a related note, I read an article a couple of years ago that compared how long conservative couples maintained a healthy sex life as opposed to liberals. The liberals continued having relations something like 10-15 years into old age longer than conservatives. What might be the variable responsible? How women are introduced to the idea of sex my just be it (and no, I am not talking about doing a casting call in Hollywood). What I am saying is that more conservative women have had the "give it to someone special someday" teachings which often translates to "give it when feeling special." This might actually interfere with the normal sex drive she has embedded into her psyche. Liberal women like emotion too, but they are more likely to see sex also as something you do to satisfy their bodies. So they might actually be in a period they really do not like their husband, but they will not let that interfere with getting the job done.

So maybe the problem really gets back to the fact we treat men and women different, when in reality the sex drive is far more equal than we might realize between males and females.

[Sirocco]

I have seen studies where on average though, conservatives have more fulfilling sex lives then liberals because detaching emotion from it may make it easier at times, but in the long run it hurts people.
Even when I was on the left I couldn't see someone who had sex like a dozen times to be attractive it was just gross to me.

[Rensai]

As for men not being let alone with children, I know at least when working with the cub scouts, the rule is the same for men and women - you have to have two adults at all times. So I don't see why this couldn't be a policy change to make things equal, but you then put a huge burden on the Primary for filling callings. So I'm fine with this rule, even though it is unequal. I think if you expect the brethren to call out women and point out woman's differences and responsibilities, you have to be willing to accept that men are different, and now-a-day's their weaknesses have made it harder for women and children to be able to trust them.

Since I haven't seen anybody else point out the obvious, allow me to do so.

Cub Scouts are not a church organization. Cub Scout packs and dens are charted through wards, but are an organization of the Boy Scouts of America. As such, Cub Scout leaders have to follow BSA policies.

Until you can convince me that the church would require two deep leadership in Cub Scout programs without the BSA mandate, this isn't going to sway my opinion. And, since the church did not require two deep leadership in Cub Scouts before the BSA mandated it, you won't be able to convince me that this would have happened without the BSA mandate.

I agree with your comments on this and i want to point out that the quote you're referring to isn't mine.

[Sarah]

There is a lot I can agree with in regards to Sarah's post. However, I wonder if more traditional people put too much into the notion that one needs to feel highly emotional before they engage in relations.

There is something I originally heard from some female magazine executive on some documentary years ago. She said that sex was fantastic when love in involved but it is also really great even if it isn't. Then of course there is the popular phrase "fake it 'till you make it." What I mean by fake is that sometimes just doing it will make you feel closer. It is a biochemical thing. A spouse might actually really be mad but having sex will create bonding hormones that will reinforce the love they just ain't feeling at that moment.

On a related note, I read an article a couple of years ago that compared how long conservative couples maintained a healthy sex life as opposed to liberals. The liberals continued having relations something like 10-15 years into old age longer than conservatives. What might be the variable responsible? How women are introduced to the idea of sex my just be it (and no, I am not talking about doing a casting call in Hollywood). What I am saying is that more conservative women have had the "give it to someone special someday" teachings which often translates to "give it when feeling special." This might actually interfere with the normal sex drive she has embedded into her psyche. Liberal women like emotion too, but they are more likely to see sex also as something you do to satisfy their bodies. So they might actually be in a period they really do not like their husband, but they will not let that interfere with getting the job done.

So maybe the problem really gets back to the fact we treat men and women different, when in reality the sex drive is far more equal than we might realize between males and females.

Perhaps some truth to your suggestions as well, but a lot of other factors might play a factor. Conservative men also come into marriage with more traditional views on women and sex, leading them to have unrealistic expectations. And conservative men and women also come into marriage with no to little sexual experience. It is a lot easier for me to "make it happen" now even if I'm not in the mood than it was before, because at least now those walls have been broken down. Conservative women have less expectations for themselves I think just because they are ignorant, (as well as the men are ignorant), so it is harder to learn what works and what doesn't. Another thing is that a lot of liberals just live together without the official marriage commitment, so what that means is that they see their partner not as much as a possession, and have a right to be loved because of the marriage commitment, but they respect that each want to be pleased equally and the woman is not going to put up with inequality in the sexual relationship if she is used to getting what she wants.

[brianj]

I'm going to agree with you on the "legalized prostitution" thing. Wives are far more expensive than prostitutes.

In multiple threads on this forum I have seen women say that a man should do anything and everything his wife wants him to do so she feels loved, but if the most important thing she can to to express love to him is be physically intimate, it's his problem and he should deal with it. Spend the family into bankruptcy? He should let her because he loves her. Take her out during the biggest game of the year, instead of watching the game? He should do so because he loves her. Work until he dies because her poor spending habits won't let him afford retirement? It's called love. Work 40-60 hours per week then spend hours helping his stay at home wife with the housework (in addition to taking care of the house, yard, cars, etc) because 20 hours of housework per week is too much of a burden for her? Of course! But expect her to make love to him? That's not love!

Please tell me who is being selfish in this oft repeated scenario.

All this. The sooner a man learns that a woman does not love they use, the sooner that man is better off in relationships and in life itself. I learned this at an early age and am thankful I did. I know without a shadow of a doubt my wife would leave me within days of the money running out. She would have a new man within a few weeks and would never miss a beat. Does she love me, ah maybe just a smidgen, does she love her situation? No question. So if we divorced she would miss her situation and not me so much. Its how a lot of women are, its just how they are wired. its how your ex can get a new man so quick and she seems so happy and you are on your couch crying your eyes out and suicidal after the break up.
[/quote]

I have seen a lot of genuinely wonderful wives within the church. They are a minority of the wives I have known, but when I see a woman looking at her man it isn't hard for me to recognize if a woman is or isn't genuinely in love with him and if she admires him or not.

What men need, but have never been given, is guidance on how to find tell the diamond from the cubic zirconia. Many of these pretenders do a great job of acting the part of the good wife, then showing their real side after getting married. Unfortunately many of these fake diamonds, like mine, begin to show their true selves before the marriage but since guys haven't been warned about this we often don't recognize the warning signs.

[brianj]

That little synopsis is just my logical conclusion, except the "legalized prostitution" phrase. I read that somewhere years ago and it always stuck with me because it really shocked me that someone would label marriage that way. But when I read Gage's description of his wife (he is apparently joking about) of her demanding things first and him threatening to withhold the credit card - money for sex, sex for money - not a good way to navigate a marriage.

I'm going to agree with you on the "legalized prostitution" thing. Wives are far more expensive than prostitutes.

In multiple threads on this forum I have seen women say that a man should do anything and everything his wife wants him to do so she feels loved, but if the most important thing she can to to express love to him is be physically intimate, it's his problem and he should deal with it. Spend the family into bankruptcy? He should let her because he loves her. Take her out during the biggest game of the year, instead of watching the game? He should do so because he loves her. Work until he dies because her poor spending habits won't let him afford retirement? It's called love. Work 40-60 hours per week then spend hours helping his stay at home wife with the housework (in addition to taking care of the house, yard, cars, etc) because 20 hours of housework per week is too much of a burden for her? Of course! But expect her to make love to him? That's not love!

Please tell me who is being selfish in this oft repeated scenario.

Hi Brian, I hope you noticed in some of my posts in this thread that I mentioned that you should not do everything your wife wants you to do, but that you need to stand up for yourself and not give in to her selfish desires, if indeed they are selfish. You can have boundaries on how much help-time you can give her for example (as long as you don't complain about her housekeeping) and you can set boundaries on how much she can spend. You just have to not fear the consequences and be willing to go without love to teach her that you have boundaries that aren't because of selfishness, but that are common sense boundaries. You reassure her that you still love her when you enforce your boundaries.

I think your reactions are what everyone reacts with when feeling unloved. My guess is that you feared not having her love, and so you tried really hard, doing everything you could think of to possibly please her, but you never received what you wanted in return. This is what a lot of people do when faced with a lack of what they want or need. They try to earn it, and it backfires because their gifts offered to earn it don't come across as gifts but as requests and expectations for something in return.

This is what I was doing with sex - trying to please my husband in the hopes he would love me. I feared his response if I did not perform. If he went too long without it, or I just wasn't in the mood, he would get mean and moody, and be more demanding of me, asking me to do errands for him and make phone calls and whatnot. I started to want things to make me happy, and I felt he always said no, or acted disappointed when I bought something he didn't approve of. He would take out his disappointment on me when I didn't respond physically to him, and so I feared that. That fear turned me off to receiving anything from him. I feared not being turned on enough, because the less into it I was the worse I felt afterwards. Gage asked me why I felt like I could never instigate what I needed, but if I wasn't feeling the need, why instigate anything. What woman is attracted to or gets turned on by a man who is focused on his own needs.

The one thing I did say about meeting woman's needs is that when a man meets his wife's physical needs, he automatically receives what he needs. And this is because when you meet her physical needs, yours will be met too. But what I neglected to add is that in order for her physical needs to be met, she usually needs to have her emotional needs met to some degree. She needs to feel understood, and she needs to completely trust you. So it isn't easy, I admit, to meet a woman's emotional needs. If you ask her what she needs, she might talk about all the help she wants from you or the things she wants to buy. She herself doesn't really understand what she needs. This help around the house (which she might be wanting because she feels your disappointment if things are done) and the things she wants, are like the porn for man. She turns into a wanting machine rather than a giving machine. What she really needs is your complete acceptance. And you do this by never acting disappointed by her lack of interest, or her lack of anything. You do this by not giving her the cold-shoulder or the disappointed face, but continue to show kindness when you don't get what you want. You have to earn her trust this way. You also don't start being all kind and affectionate, and ask her about herself only on the days you feel like having sex. And then on the days following a rejection, you obviously withhold or show kindness grudgingly as punishment. It becomes so obvious that you are giving in order to receive, which makes your "gifts" unattractive requests. And so, to sum things us, if you don't have your wife's trust and respect and love, and you feel like you have given everything possible you could think of, you have not really given her what she needs. All your gifts have come across to her as requests and expectations for something in return. She doesn't feel loved by that, and she doesn't trust that you genuinely love her when that is how you are "giving."

The man/woman relationship in marriage is to teach the man to love unconditionally, if he so chooses to take that opportunity to learn this. I have truly come to believe this. While your physical and emotional needs are likely to be met if her emotional and physical needs are met, if a wife meets a husband's physical and emotional needs, not only are hers not automatically met, but her physical and emotional state becomes worse off, and makes it harder and harder for her to come back and trust you. If, when you have sex with her, you are coming away satisfied, and she is feeling sexually frustrated, she fears that damage the next time. I was listening on the radio the other day to a couple who were Christian sex therapists, touting their book, and they said the number one reason women don't enjoy sex with their husband, is because of fear. You have to address the fears, and patiently help her overcome her fears or she will never truly love you. So, I know I keep hammering away the same message again and again, but perhaps for someone this will sink in and really change how they treat his or her spouse.

Thank you for your words of encouragement. I do know a lot of men who get grief for wanting some time to relax when they get home instead of immediately having infinite energy to play with the kids so their wife can go do what she wants, or for "never helping" when they spend 50+ hours per week working to support a woman who expects him to work, take care of the cars, take care of the yard, maintain the house, then demands that he help with the housework because otherwise he's not doing his fair share. But that wasn't my experience. I was married to a princess who thought the role of a husband is to be her servant.

Most of the time I was doing what she demanded in an effort to appease her so I wouldn't get screamed at quite as much or hit as much.

Yes, I would do almost everything I could in a futile attempt to meet her needs. But most of the time I did what I did reluctantly, trying to not get yelled at quite so much. But it never worked.

I get a strong impression that your response generalizes what you experienced in your failed marriage. I fight to prevent myself from doing this, and the many wonderful women I have met help me to remember that there are a lot of women who are unlike the miserable person I was trapped with.