"A lot of men would like to be touched more, seduced more. Everyone wants to feel wanted."
I usually avoid stuff like this because it's usually so obvious but I took a look at 9 "harmless" habits that age you (via Instapundit). However, "harmless habit #9 looked important enough to mention to my readers--especially the female ones:
9. You can't recall when you last had sex
Yep, sex feels good and does wonders for your mood, but it's also fantastically great for your health. Research shows that people with active sex lives have stronger immune systems, less pain, a lower cancer risk, healthier hearts, and less stress. The best news: It can even make you look younger—up to 12 years, a study shows.
Act your age: Rekindle the romance between you and your partner. To shake things up, try making the first move next time. "Some women are not active participants in their sex lives," says Pat Covalt, PhD, author of What Smart Couples Know: The Secret to a Happy Relationship. "A lot of men would like to be touched more, seduced more. Everyone wants to feel wanted."
Labels: good advice
posted by Helen at 6:57 PM
211 Comments:
Seconded. One would think it is "so obvious" that couplehoods work best when each is trying to put the other first...but judging from my experience, it's hard for a lot of people to let go of their control enough to do it.
One big element of putting the other first is abdicating the initiative because you don't want to do the thing that the other person would like (whether it's sex, or cooking, or cleaning or home repairs or watching a movie or whatever). Once you break that wall, you start a feedback loop of mutual fulfillment.
From this busy man's perspective, I think it's critical a woman understand what her man's real passions are (for me it's coaching kids in football) and support him in those - the accomplishment and support both make him "feel like a man" which has incalculable benefits when it's time for him to pay it back to you. Some women are good at this, some are harpy and controlling about it, and some botch it and come off as doormats.
File under "no shit Sherlock."
This should be a given, yet somehow many seem to have gotten the notion in their heads that a man who fails to meet any of his wife's needs is a pig, while a woman who tries to meet any of her husband's needs is a slave.
Tom Leykis gave a female listener "eight words for marriage" to head off major problems:
"Long hair; stay slim; hot sex; shut up."
It's not hard to come up with similar aphorisms for men going into marriage
"Ample time; stay fit; keep tidy; have hand."
Start swallowing
It's too bad both the male and female can't stay on "their best behavior" as happens in the beginning of a relationship. Of course, they'd both burn out or explode over time.
I don't think the "have sex" suggestion is quite that simple. You could write a book on why women don't always want to have sex.
Is there some explanation for what it is about sex that's supposed to keep one young looking and healthy? Is it simply hormonal (in which case masturbation would probably be adequate), or emotional, or the caloric burn from a vigorous roll in the hay, or some combination thereof?
Jason: I had the same questions. If the stress one is resulting with one's relationship with their romantic partner do you think the stress would be minimized and add years to one's life by forcing oneself to have sex with that person? It would probably make the stress worse. If that is the case I think masturbation would be a better source of caloric burn.
Rob said...
Start swallowing
Learn tact.
You could write a book on why women don't always want to have sex.
We've heard it all already. Why would we want to readi about it. I have a headache, it's too late, it's too early, it'ls too hot, it's too cold, the children might hear us, the neighbors might hear us, people might see us, what if a bear comes along, the slightest inconvenience trumps having sex,...
DADvocate said...
"the slightest inconvenience trumps having sex,..."
THIS!
That said, a healthy relationship should be able to work it out on a semi-regular basis. Even with the impending danger of kids and bears.
"Research shows that people with active sex lives have stronger immune systems, less pain, ..."
http://xkcd.com/552/
Correlation doesn't imply causation, but we all know that right?
It's just as likely that successful emotional relationships result in those effects and those same successful relationships also happen to result in lots of sack time.
That doesn't mean increasing sack-time is going to somehow repair your broken relationship.
It might, however, help prevent prostate cancer.
http://www.psa-rising.com/med/prevention/ejaculation72003.shtml
Although you apparently don't need a partner to get that benefit.
I have a headache, it's too late, it's too early, it'ls too hot, it's too cold, the children might hear us, the neighbors might hear us, people might see us, what if a bear comes along
Not one of those reasons were the ones I was think about, all those might be the words that actually come out of a person's mouth.
From the media sources in just the last two weeks I read articles about sex that made the following claims:
1) 1 out of 4 women have trouble either reaching orgasm or having an orgasm.
2) Weight gain and age affect sex drive in women.
3) 80% of women claim they fake orgasms.
Now, these are all articles about women, I am sure men have their own concerns. If one doesn't like doing something especially if it is extremely physical, lasts for more than a few seconds and involves a great deal of effort emotionally would one agree to do it only because some yutz on the Internet claimed it would extend your lifespan? I think probably not.
DADvocate and Cham are both right.
There's major ignorance about sexual hardware and its operation, expected for a society that has major sexual hangups.
Alongside that, there's a lot of "combat sex" going on where sex is used as a strategic weapon for male behavior modification. Duh, if you're using it for ulterior purposes it's not going to be very good.
Whatever the reason, we as a society go way too easy on the sexless marriage. Sexless relationships should shock us. When we hear about couples not doing it we should say "WTF???"
As for the kids hearing, well, I'm not a parent but I think there are worse things kids can find out about than their parents loving one another. Part of setting a good example for your children's future relationships.
...would one agree to do it only because some yutz on the Internet claimed it would extend your lifespan?
Heck, there goes that line.
Topher: The down side of shaming people into having sex, especially when sex for whatever reason repulses them, is you might encourage people to divorce. If people who don't want to have sex feel socially obligated to have sex in order to keep their marriage stabilized they may be more likely to give up on the marriage.
If a medically-healthy couple is not into having sex, something is wrong with the marriage (unless they both have the same low drive). Not all divorces are unjustified.
I'm not advocating shaming individual couples, just that the social idea of a sexless marriage should be foreign and shocking to us. There should be a social expectation that healthy couples are having regular sex.
Topher said...
"Sexless relationships should shock us."
I'm rarely shocked by the nature of others relationships. If people can be happy in a sexless relationship then that's great for them.
There are numerous reasons why sex might be removed from a relationship. Injury, emotional trauma. I suppose even general lack of interest, although I find that one hard to swallow considering human biology.
The key is that all parties have to be in that same sexless boat. If someone is sacrificing so the other doesn't have to endure sex I'm pretty sure that's going to be a problem at some point
Topher: I've always been a bit miffed about our weird societal expectations of people regarding sex. When one is single they are supposed to practice abstinence, keeping their legs tightly shut. One is expected not to marry until they are financially stable and finished with their education, well into their 20s. Yet, once people are married the floodgates are supposed to open in terms of frequency of sex. We are supposed to mysteriously turn into nightly sexual beings endlessly desiring our marital partner until we die in our 80s. Do you see anything wrong with this picture or is it just me?
Cham --
"I've always..."
Apparently you live in a very different weird society than I. The picture you paint don't ring true.
Hey, Topher and I agree on something!
Cham,
I agree with your sentiment, as I said before our society has major hangups about sex.
What I'm concerned with, and it should be clear how this is different from other situations, is the bait-and-switch model...turning the sex on until the wedding day or soon after, then squeezing it off to nothing (with a concomitant problem of putting everything in your life before your spouse).
This is not behind all cases of sexless marriages, but it's a major archetype, as profiled here:
http://www.nomarriage.com/marriedsex.html
Like this case:
"My GF was damn good to me, in and out of the sack. We probably had sex, on average, 10-15 times a week. Anywhere and everywhere. Even a once a day BJ on average. Things were great.
That was, until we got married. A day later, everything had changed. Got it once on the honeymoon, and she told me to "hurry up and finish". When I ask her why she never initiates anything, never even flirts anymore, when she used to before, she says "I was trying to get you to marry me then". "
Or this:
"My little sis is married and has two kids under 6 years. She says that sex to her is "just one more person wanting something from me"."
Topher: Your bait and switch model is worth discussing, but we don't. We're just supposed to have sex, only after marriage of course, early and often. And it we don't then there is something wrong with us.
Doctors can help. But in one of those article I mentioned the author said that our clinical research on sex or lack thereof is abysmal. The way doctors talk to patients about sex also needs work. Sex therapist can help but people loathe to seek them out. Marital counseling can help but people hate to talk them too.
Then there are those people that like to be married but don't like sex. They learn to keep their mouths tightly shut lest the be shunned by society.
Then there is the problem that many many people have and that is weight gain. If one is a fattie they are less likely to feel sexy, and the act of sex becomes much more difficult.
There is a lot to discuss but nobody wants to talk about it. In our society sex is a beautiful wonderful expression of love between two committed caring people, or we are supposed to think that is what it is. I'm more prone to think it is a physical act hopefully resulting in a happy-fun orgasm, but I rarely agree with everyone else.
what if a bear comes along
Having been through that I can tell you that it is simple. Scare bear away and resume "activities." In my experience my woman appreciated the manly art of scaring away the bear and found it a bit of a turn on.
Cham said:
When one is single they are supposed to practice abstinence, keeping their legs tightly shut.
Unfortunately, this is true, and critically important. It's actually worse than that, of course. Society sends multiple constant conflicting messages on this subject, often totally opposite messages in the same movie or story or personal interaction.
A guy who isn't sleeping around ia wimp, a girl who isn't sleeping around is an ice-queen...and she's a slut if she does, of course. Likewise, girls are told they should want the combined 'player' and 'loyal husband' type that rarely goes together in one person by the romance industry (which is just as fantastical as the porn industry, though superficially more respectable and possibly a few notches less honest.)
Likewise, guys are told they're supposed to want a virginal bride (after they sleep around throughout their 20s) who suddenly morphs into insatiable sex-hunger, but only with them.
Women should dress sexily but modestly but also matching their age and professional status but not too much so as to be boring but also remember not to be a tease or a cold fish, etc.
Many religions have firm beliefs about what is, and is not, acceptable sexual behavior as well, what is allowed and what is forbidden, and that passes into a popular culture that retains the message while disdaining the source and reasons.
Men are told that they shouldn't tolerate a sexless marrage, and at the same time told that 'it's just life, women hate sex and those who claim otherwise are lying to you to get you to marry them, get ready for it'.
Women are told to do whatever it takes to get a guy to marry you, you can relax after you're married...and also to be virginal and remember that men don't respect women who like sex in the first place.
And on, and on, and on, and on.
Some of it is cultural, ancient rules still trying to assert themselves, much of it is money driven, a lot of it is politically or ideologically driven, some of it is just frustration at basic biological differences.
Cham said: [i]Doctors can help. But in one of those article I mentioned the author said that our clinical research on sex or lack thereof is abysmal.[/i]
Too true, and inevitable. Human sexual behavior, by nature is extremely difficult to study, not least because anyone willing to permit such study is by definition an outlier in our society.
I have long had a suspicion about the biological male/female difference in libido, one I can not prove, but that I strongly suspect is true. Clearly there are women with high libidos and men with low ones, but the trend is the other way, or so most anecdotal and much statistical evidence indicates.
OK, if on a scale of 1 to 10 one is the libido of a rock and 10 is a gonad with legs attached, I suspect that the large majority of males cluster toward the high end of the scale with a smaller 'tail' down the scale, and women, OTOH, spread pretty even up and down the scale.
Thus it's not that 'men love sex and women don't, it's that there are a lot of men with a libido of around 7-10, and a few below that,
and a very broad and wide spread of women from 1 to 10.
Thus from the POV of the average male, near the high end, most women have low libidos, though some of them are much lower than others. From the POV of most women on that scale, most men want it more than they do, but there's a lot of variance as to how much more.
Why do I think this? Because throughout most of history and prehistory, the precise level of a woman's innate biological libido didn't have all that much impact on her chances of having children, unless for some reason she simply avoided males entirely (rare). A woman with a libido of '2' would be just about as likely as one with an '8' to pass on the genes for that trait in her female descendents, everything else being equal.
OTOH, since pursuing females is risky and expensive (in various terms) for males, a low-libido male throughout much of history was less likely to pass on that trait to his male descendants then a high-libido one, everything else being equal.
Of course even if my suspicion is right, there's far more to it than that.
Cham said: There is a lot to discuss but nobody wants to talk about it.
Partly for reasons of embarrassment or reticence, but also, I truly believe, because we're afraid of the answers, afraid to face up to certain things about ourselves and others.
In our society sex is a beautiful wonderful expression of love between two committed caring people, or we are supposed to think that is what it is. I'm more prone to think it is a physical act hopefully resulting in a happy-fun orgasm, but I rarely agree with everyone else
I tend to agree with you there, one of the things that's thrown this whole subject so out of kilter is precisely the unrealistic expectations wrapped around it by popular culture and personal fantasy.
Unrealistic fantasy is right. Sex is overrated. Not that it's not enjoyable. Not that it isn't an essential part of most adult romances.
But as an overall social phenomenon, one that people are spending ungodly time and money on, it's overrated.
"Rob said...
Start swallowing
Learn tact."
Tact has not gotten us far in the past 40 years, has it?
And, women are more sexual objects today than they ever were in the past - because women have lost all the other attributes that made them worthy of "higher than sexual beings."
Fuck you and your tact. You would likely vote for abolition. Typical.
Fact is, all that women offer now is SEX.
So, learn to do it right.
Women certainly aren't offering much more than short term sexual gratification nowadays, are they?
Then they should at least learn to do it right!
Prude!
Rob, get some help.
@DADvocate
You have it backwards, the excuse comes because she doesn't want to have sex, it is not that she wants to have sex but an inconvenience trumps it.
"A lot of men would like to be touched more, seduced more. Everyone wants to feel wanted."
Al Gore was unavailable for comment.
Much has been said of "society's expectations" of us, whatever that means. It really shouldn't matter, and I think it's a cop-out. Blaming some faceless mob for one's hang ups is inferior to not listening to said mob because one's wife's thighs are too firmly clamped around one's ears.
I found a woman I love and who loves me, everything else was easy.
You guys wander from the subject worse than my dog gets distracted while on a walk.
One could argue (and early on, some did) that the thesis is so obvious that it barely merits mentioning. Granted, and I fully agree - in principle. It should occur to everyone as blindingly obvious. However, since it is equally obviously a major failing, perhaps it is not as obvious to women as it is to me. Never attribute to malice, and all that.
Erf. Typo. Should read "...as it is to men." My apologies for accidental bizarreness.
Sex might not make you healthy, even though the stats show people having more sex are healthier.
Kind of like marriage doesn't make men healthy, even though men who are married live longer and report better health.
The reason is simple: unhealthy, mentally unstable and/or feeble men don't get laid often. They also don't marry nearly as much.
Healthy people have sex because they are healthy and all the parts are working better.
@DADvocate and Doc Merlin are almost there....
DADvocate is right that she makes excuses for not having sex, and Doc Merlin is right that she doesn't want to have sex, so she makes excuses. But that still doesn't answer WHY she doesn't want to have sex.
Here's why: She doesn't want to have sex (and she absolutely doesn't want to initiate sex) because she views her man darkly. Denial of sex is her most powerful tool to manipulate her man, and losing that sense of control is a perceived danger.
This is particularly prevalent where the woman's parents have divorced and she identifies with her mother. For her, the moral of the divorce was that losing control of your husband leads to divorce.
However, take that same woman's sister...who identifes with her father...and for her the moral of her parent's divorce is that making your husband miserable leads to divorce.
One attempts to control her husband by withholding sex, while the other attempts to control her husband initiating sex.
Neither woman realizes that there's no foolproof way to "control" a husband. Some women pick good men and deny them sex to the point that they divorce. Others pick bad men and shower them with sex...and they divorce.
I don't know...for me the sex went out the window when I found the condoms in my (now ex)husband's coat pocket at the dry cleaner. He'd had a vasectomy after all our children were born. Up until that day, our marriage wouldn't have been described as "sexless" but it sure was afterwards.
Cham said:
Rob, get some help.
Gee Cham, that's what the point of piece is.
It would appear you've been helping yourself so much lately, you've lost your perspective.
madeleine said:
I don't know...for me the sex went out the window when I found the condoms in my (now ex)husband's coat pocket at the dry cleaner. He'd had a vasectomy after all our children were born. Up until that day, our marriage wouldn't have been described as "sexless" but it sure was afterwards.
So let me get this straight (no pun intended): your husband has had for some time a vasectomy and he carries condoms.
Which means he's the poster boy for today's politically correct safe sex movement.
And you've now run him off over it.
Can we take bets that he's now happier than ever and you're not?
I like sex as much as anyone...what I get bored with is always having to initiate it. Thus I feel like I'm talking my wife into it most of the time. Thus, I also deal with all of the rejection. A little push from her would go a long way towards leaving me with the impression she likes sex as much and as often as I do.
You can't be serious, paul. So it's OK if your man is running around on you as long as he plays it safe?
I agree with P. Aaron because that's what shut down my interest in sex. It was always my idea and up to my wife to yea/nay it. Don't get me wrong, I adore my wife - we have three wonderful children, we have fun together, she's marvelous. Over the last decade, I can recall three times where it was her idea and on two of those occassions, she had had way too much to drink. It's been so long that I'm not sure how I would even try anymore.
P. Aaron, The Old Man - I discuss this exact topic on the more recent Dr Helen thread about curvy women. Men need to feel desired just like women, and initiating is a sign you are asking for your man's attention.
madeleine,
Sorry to hear your man was fooling around. Understand that you're not the kind of, er, non-performing woman we are talking about on this thread.
Paul, I don't get where you are going, it sounds pretty obvious her man was cheating. I don't think "running him off" is the appropriate connotation.
OldMan,
Dare I ask, have you discussed this initiation issue with your wife?
If sex is viewed as an important medium of emotional exchange in a relationship, it can be said that men get their “emotional needs” filled through the sex act. Women need most of their “emotional needs” fulfilled in a non-sexual way, outside of the bedroom. When women are not getting these “needs” filled, they are not “turned on” (lack of passion for their man). Therefore they are not interested in meeting his “physical needs” and stop having sex with him. Both are feeling profoundly alienated and disappointed, hungering for an intimacy that is lacking.
@ Topher--Thanks. You seem to be pretty level-headed on this subject most of the time.
Boy I feel sorry for you bitter bitter guys who feel all manipulated and stuff.
There's no guarantee perfect happiness will attend the rest of my life or my marriage, but the sex, if it is a tool, is a tool of connection and communion.
it really helps that I respect him, think he's smart and cool and funny and sensitive and strong. He encourages me, he protects me, and I try to do the same.
I adore him, find him irresistible. moreso than when I was in my salad days and he was hot stuff to me then.
All that said, there have been dry spells in my marriage... related to childbirth and life events.
The very thought was annoying to me, I had to be coaxed, I even slept on the sofa to get sleep and not grabbed.
At those times I put up with sex and pretended to like it; I usually traded it for backrubs.
Sometimes I wept (silently, in a concealed way) with frustration and unhappiness afterward.
Maybe it was a physical thing. Ending artificial birth control of any kind - including barrier methods, and getting in good shape restored me to my former libido and my happiness in my marriage. I tried some bupropion recently and it also had a salutatory effect on that aspect of life. I have a hard time separating my desire from a deepening appreciation of my husband and all he brings to my life, however.
I guess the good news is that low libido happens but it isn't necessarily permanent. Maybe it's not personal. Maybe its not a trick.
Boy I feel sorry for you bitter bitter guys who feel all manipulated and stuff.
There's no guarantee perfect happiness will attend the rest of my life or my marriage, but the sex, if it is a tool, is a tool of connection and communion.
it really helps that I respect him, think he's smart and cool and funny and sensitive and strong. He encourages me, he protects me, and I try to do the same.
I adore him, find him irresistible. moreso than when I was in my salad days and he was hot stuff to me then.
All that said, there have been dry spells in my marriage... related to childbirth and life events.
The very thought was annoying to me, I had to be coaxed, I even slept on the sofa to get sleep and not grabbed.
At those times I put up with sex and pretended to like it; I usually traded it for backrubs.
Sometimes I wept (silently, in a concealed way) with frustration and unhappiness afterward.
Maybe it was a physical thing. Ending artificial birth control of any kind - including barrier methods, and getting in good shape restored me to my former libido and my happiness in my marriage. I tried some bupropion recently and it also had a salutatory effect on that aspect of life. I have a hard time separating my desire from a deepening appreciation of my husband and all he brings to my life, however.
I guess the good news is that low libido happens but it isn't necessarily permanent. Maybe it's not personal. Maybe its not a trick.
" If sex is viewed as an important medium of emotional exchange in a relationship, it can be said that men get their “emotional needs” filled through the sex act. Women need most of their “emotional needs” fulfilled in a non-sexual way, outside of the bedroom."
I don't think I buy this. Biochemsistry and psychology has shown that women have a stronger connection than men between sex and the chemical releases that produce emotional bonding.
And I also don't think it's fair to say men get their emotional needs fulfilled by the act itself. Like I said above, men need to feel wanted and appreciated just like women.
SarahW,
Most of your post is heartfelt, but the first sentence:
"Boy I feel sorry for you bitter bitter guys who feel all manipulated and stuff."
is an example of how these discussions are always invaded by someone who says "well I'M not that way so you guys are all WRONG!"
Just because your marital history included some non-fault disruptions doesn't mean there aren't a lot of people denying their spouses out of lack of initiative or pure spite. If it doesn't apply to you, thanks for not being one of them. The world is big enough for both types of situations.
"The way to a woman's heart is through her vagina".
My husband and I are emerging from what we call "the decade of little kids": in our 30s, we had three children, moderately spaced, who ensured that I was either sleep-deprived or breastfeeding pretty much constantly. We're finally out of THOSE woods, but the habit has been set: I've been "touched out" and tired almost every night for a decade, leading to much less sex than we'd both theoretically like (my husband's desire has not been theoretical; mine has. Fortunately for me, he's got a good sense of humor and is the world's most understanding husband, since I have not been the world's most compliant wife). So now, we're working on finding our way back to the libido *I* used to have and the exercise of both libidos that *we* used to enjoy.
Hard work, changing a habit! But we're committed. And keeping the sense of humor going, for when it turns out to be, "Got something going there? Well, let's not waste it!"
Helen, you're one of the lucky 15-20% of women that like sex. And you're married to one of the 80% of men that like hetero sex. The war between the sexes started when they ran the whores out of town.All through history a man could trade a days wages for a non-negotiated roll in the hay and go home to his frigid wife and be good for a week.The reality is, a begged for roll in the hay is about 3 1/2% more satisfying than masturbation. The modern Oprah watcher thinks foreplay is abject begging. A man thinks foreplay is a blowjob. The twain shall never meet.
Well, add me to the list of women who actually like sex. Always have.
Sadly, I am married to a man who suffered physical limitations... which have now led to psychological limitations (even though the physical situation has long since been corrected)...
...and my own total frustration.
Taking care of myself only led to additional frustration -- physical release absent the emotional connection. Not good. Fantasies became more and more about *other* men, leading to thoughts of actually following through. Now I understand why deprived men end up cheating.
Not wanting that outcome, I deliberately killed my own libido. Now instead of being frustrated and distant, I just feel distant.
Great guy, love him dearly, would never leave him, nor hurt him. But as the years (yes, years!!!) go by, and he seems more and more like a roommate, well, let's just say that this isn't what I pictured on my wedding day, either.
No room for stereotypes.
(p.s. I tried initiating it, too -- that only led to his repeated failure, destroyed his ego, increased the psychological aspect of the issue, and came to feel more like I was hurting/insulting him than making him feel good)
"A lot of men would like to be touched more, seduced more. Everyone wants to feel wanted."
The story of my current life, to which I'll add; I want to feel desired.
Do I feel bitter? Damn right I do. I didn't sign up for this. My wife knows this and gives in every now and then. I give in because at least I can pretend it's a genuine intimacy that I crave. You see, it's not all just about fucking but that's what my wife has reduced it too.
At this point, I'll stick it out until my last child graduates high school and then move on.
God knows I've tried. I've asked her to go to counseling, family members have told her to go to counseling, friends have told her to go. She won't. Yet, it will still be all my fault in the end; I was the selfish bastard who somehow thought emotional and physical intimacy was important to a relationship. I do wonder if she'll ever look back and wonder why she didn't even try.
So, hell yes, I'm bitter.
Not only "a bear might come by" but she won't even let me buy a bear rifle.
I'll respond to the some of the comments but I'm not going to cut and paste the quotes.
Somebody ran the whores out of town? You could have fooled me. In my city whores are on every corner in some neighborhoods. Use condoms and don't have any cash on hand more than you will think you need. These are some tough ladies. If you are looking for street walkers I suggest perusing this site, if anything its eye-opening.
I don't care what your church, culture or society tells anyone. Nobody goes through life hot and heavy for the same sexual partner all the time, and only after marriage. At some point every single person on the planet might not want sex, or will want to have sex with another person, or other people, or not in the bedroom, or with a multitude of toys and props. Whether we act on it or not is the choice people make but our cultural dictates are a load of crap.
As far as the bear in concerned, I know a great deal about bears having had enough of them stick their nose in my face. They are skittish creatures when it comes to noise, so if you are having sex and a bear comes by then I would wonder why there was so little noise and activity going on that a bear would feel confident to approach. Are you sure you are doing things right?
Hang in there, Jaime; the best may be yet to come. Correlation is not causation, of course, but exercise, good nutrition, the end of "Mommy mommy mommy" years, and libido dampening hormones seemed to work an enduring miracle in my own case.
To the complaining poster above, I think men jump too easily to the conclusion that their wives are wreaking some kind of revenge/contol game. I think more likely women have no desire and take so little pleasure as a result, that remaining " unmolested" becomes a point of self-dignity. Doing what you really don't want to do all the time to service another is degrading to body and spirit.
I think anger and spite in women might arise from, rather than precipitate, an imbalance of desire, at least much of the time.
Holy crap. I did not write the post by Joe, a few comments above.
But I could have.
"Helen, you're one of the lucky 15-20% of women that like sex. "
Is it really this low? I think is some more silly gender stereotyping. I would be really surprised if more than maybe 20% of women DIDN'T have the ability to enjoy sex (given that they had a proper partner, knew what pleased them, etc etc).
"But as the years (yes, years!!!) go by, and he seems more and more like a roommate, well, let's just say that this isn't what I pictured on my wedding day, either."
This is a huge anxiety for men about marriage, the "turning into roommates or siblings."
Peregrine John said...
Holy crap. I did not write the post by Joe, a few comments above.
But I could have.
Me too.
To the complaining poster above, I think men jump too easily to the conclusion that their wives are wreaking some kind of revenge/contol game.
I didn't have to jump to a conclusion. My wife told me. Right about the time she told me that all of our problems were my fault.
"To the complaining poster above, I think men jump too easily to the conclusion that their wives are wreaking some kind of revenge/contol game.
I didn't have to jump to a conclusion. My wife told me. Right about the time she told me that all of our problems were my fault."
This is the point where a marriage becomes a bait and switch game...what should be a regular part of a marital relationship becomes a bargaining chip. "I'm not going to let you have it with anybody else so you have to do what I want!"
Marriage is a binding of lives, not a suicide pact. It's F'd up.
JB, I feel for you, get your husband a penis pump, He'll protest at first but after a couple of good sessions he'll be good to go.Cham, you make my point for me. A few good whorehouses in town and there wouldn't be any hardened streetwalkers. Men like sex and go crazy without it. Lack of sex drives women crazy too, but women will never admit it.
"I think men jump too easily to the conclusion that their wives are wreaking some kind of revenge/contol game."
I haven't jumped to any conclusion--I've ascribed no reason. Most men suffering from this abuse aren't jumping to this conclusion either. Like me, they've tolerated years of emotional abuse--and yes, depriving your spouse of intimacy is emotional abuse and is every bit as destructive to the soul as physical abuse--and only reluctantly concluded that they are genuine victims of extremely cruel abuse, made worse by the flippancy of the abuser.
"...that remaining "unmolested" becomes a point of self-dignity. Doing what you really don't want to do all the time to service another is..."
Are you really arguing that sex is being "molested" (I don't know what the quotes mean except to suggest sex is almost rape.) The use of the word "service" is equally bizarre. Now a wife is a prostitute?
The irony is that you only reinforce my point. I don't want to be serviced by my wife and I don't want to molest her. I want an intimate, caring relationship both physically and emotionally. If my wife believes either of these propositions, I'm truly horrified and want an immediate divorce.
To the posters who make light of depriving their husbands of intimacy and claim that their husbands are understanding, here's some news--they aren't. You have caused him an emotional pain that tears his soul out. At one level, he utterly despises you and hates himself for that. But he puts on his happy face and tells you he's fine because he hopes it will change; that the woman he fell in love with will return.
He also stays because he loves his children more than he loves you and will do anything to keep from hurting them. Worse, if you divorce, you will take his children away and fill them with lies about him. In the end, he will have lost everything he loved, including you, even though he did everything he was supposed to do.
Joe, you're exactly right. I've always said some women are worth whatever costs to get rid of them. Unfortunately family court has reduced children to pawns to be used against their fathers.Taking all your assets is one thing, children are a whole different ballgame.
Joe,
Hang tough, when the kids are gone you can dump the bitch. I spent 25 years dating strong, independent, hairy women of academia. Needless to say it was nearly sex free. I went Woody Allen films, hip coffee shops and all the rest of that crap.Now I have a 32 yr old GF that likes men in general and me in particular, and has NO body hair. She looks at the women from our generation and wonders why they hate men. Of course she has 6 brothers and 3 sisters and loves her parents.
Sorry Helen,
Didn't mean to diss the women of the academy, obviously there are lots of exceptions.
it can be said that men get their “emotional needs” filled through the sex act. Women need most of their “emotional needs” fulfilled in a non-sexual way, outside of the bedroom.
Hmmm.... I don't buy this either. There seems to be this cultural idea that women are somehow less sexual than men and maybe that leads to women feeling sort of 'wrong' for wanting a good f*ck rather than some cheese ball Barry White bullshit.
On the other side of the coin, don't most men have emotional needs beyond sex sometimes? Like wanting to feel loved and needed and (perhaps above all) useful, and not just as a sex machine?
I think perhaps this idea of women needing most of their emotional needs met outside the bedroom (and obviously you need that as well as sex in a relationship) might just be some kind of perpetuated excuse for becoming too lazy to keep a man sexually satisfied. It also gets to strike me as a bit juvenile and manipulative, but maybe I'm just a cynical old bitch. ;) There's a big part of me that finds "relationships" a bit icky after a while.
ck,
"Didn't mean to diss the women of the academy, obviously there are lots of exceptions."
Oh, Helen well knows the nutjob women of academia.
"She looks at the women from our generation and wonders why they hate men."
I'm surprised nobody has brought this up, in ~80 comments. Feminism has taught women for 40 years to carry a grudge against men. Men are inferior beings, the cause of all their problems. A woman should never feel she owes anything to a man, nor submit to any request to a man as it's automatically chauvinistic. It has indulged women's projections that it's somebody else's fault into an art form and a right of womanhood.
Since pedestalizing feminism has pervaded all sectors of our society, conservative and liberal, it should not surprise us that lots of sexless wives are carrying a grudge and acting like their man desiring them is a form of harassment and assault.
Ladies, we're talking about 1 hour a week. That's all it takes to have 90% of the male population eating out of your hands. Instigate sex 3 times a week, a 5 minute blow job and 15 minutes of enthusiastic sex will make almost all men putty in your hands. But no,I can't do that, it would be an affront to the sisterhood.
"On the other side of the coin, don't most men have emotional needs beyond sex sometimes? Like wanting to feel loved and needed and (perhaps above all) useful, and not just as a sex machine?"
Remember the most common reason married men gave for cheating - the loss of appreciation at home. If he feels you see him as a robot, he'll find someone who makes him feel like a man (even if the feeling is just for a short while).
You see, Eleanor, there's a broad cultural tendency to judge all men by the few "bad boys" the girls all wanted in high school. Since bad boys go from partner to partner with seeming no ill emotional effect, this gets generalized to all men. And when guys try to stand up against the stereotypes and show how they really are, they are shamed and told to "be a man."
But no,I can't do that, it would be an affront to the sisterhood.
Ha ha ha! And what has the "sisterhood" done for me lately? *cue crickets* Surely real people don't think like that!
And when guys try to stand up against the stereotypes and show how they really are, they are shamed and told to "be a man."
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Eleanor,
"Ha ha ha! And what has the "sisterhood" done for me lately? *cue crickets* Surely real people don't think like that!"
A lot of people lack "intrapersonal leadership," the ability to live independent of the judgments of others. From what I've observed, most people crave social approval and so fit into whatever group will take them, regardless of what the group does to improve their lives. The same could be said of a lot of people who choose bad partners, out of a desperate desired to feel wanted.
"Damned if you do, damned if you don't."
So men are going their own way. Or learning game so as to be equally armed in the social battle.
Topher,
I'm not much of a joiner and never have been. The last time I joined a social group was in elementary school. Beyond that I tended to have individual friends, a good portion of whom were male. I miss my guy friends - all I talk to these days are other moms and it's boring.
The same could be said of a lot of people who choose bad partners, out of a desperate desired to feel wanted.
My first thought was, "that probably describes me." My second thought was, "But I've also been the bad partner." So it all evens out in the end, lol.
" If sex is viewed as an important medium of emotional exchange in a relationship, it can be said that men get their “emotional needs” filled through the sex act. Women need most of their “emotional needs” fulfilled in a non-sexual way, outside of the bedroom."
You're definitely onto something. Sexual fullfillment is an emotional need for both men and women.
It is the top emotional need for most men. Which is why husband's number one complaint is that they don't get enough sex.
A woman's top emotional need is conversation. Which is why a wife's biggest complaint about her husband is that he doesn't talk to her. If her husband is meeting her need for conversation, then he is making big deposits in her love bank. When that happens, she wants to rock his world in bed.
Topher said..." Biochemsistry and psychology has shown that women have a stronger connection than men between sex and the chemical releases that produce emotional bonding."
This is true, but a man must get a woman to the place where she is wants to make this connection. If a husband fails to talk to his wife, she will not feel enough of a connection w/ him to try to make a bigger one w/ him.
"And I also don't think it's fair to say men get their emotional needs fulfilled by the act itself. Like I said above, men need to feel wanted and appreciated just like women."
Right. It is important that a woman knows what kind of sexual fullfillment her husband wants, and goes for it enthusiastically.
LOL!! Something to speak on topic of.
Gents. The sad fact is most women use sex to dominate and control. With the 'law' that a man having sex with his wife can go to jail for 10-15 if she claims 'rape' women have invited the state into the marital bed. Very dumb. A man having sex with his wife is now playing 'russian roulette' and most men know it. Women can be terribly, terribly abusive to a man with respect to sex. I worked in Saudi Arabia for 15 months and was only home for a total of 6 weeks across two occasions over that time. Each time I came home I, quite natrually, wanted to make love with my wife (not just have sex) and she would say things like "I need a few days to get used to having you home before I will have sex with you". Young men should know this is what they have to look forward to in marriage. You come home after 5 months of working your arse off in a desert and sending every single cent you have home and when you get back you will be put in a 'sex ban' just to make sure you know you are the slave around here. Yippeee...let's all get married..huh?
Outside of marriage? The game is completely different. When my fav#1 was working on getting me to marry her she asked me one time what was the MOST number of orgasms I had ever had in one weekend. Well, when my then gf (who became my wife) were first together she once gave me 6 orgasms in one weekend. I was 20 and that's what 20 year old boys can do! LOL! Anyway, fav#1 says "Ok, I will give you 7 orgasms in a weekend. Just you wait and see." Well, it took her quite a few months to find her way around my body and just exactly how to deal with me but she got there. I'm 46. If you told me 3 years ago, when I was a regular monk, that I would be regularly having 7 orgasms in one weekend I would have rolled on the floor laughing. Now? I just smile. All men should be so lucky as me to find a woman like this once in their life. I told a friend of mine the other day I'm quite ready to die as I have experienced the best life has to offer. And I am ahead of 99% of men on that.
On being intimate and touching? Like many men I like a woman to stroke the back of my neck and my back after making love or having sex. (BIG difference for me). One day fav#1 just starts singing in Ukrainian. No reason, she just starts singing and humming. It was really nice. So I asked her to sing for me. She really likes singing and she has an amazing voice so she agreed. She then proceeded to give me a lovely massage while singing me Ukrainian love songs. What a lovely way to spend an hour. She now does this on a regular basis. It's just lovely. Not that long ago she really pulled out all stops and gave me the best day of my life. Not many men can say that at the age of 46. Of course, after marriage my health has massively improved. For the last 5 years of my marriage it was 'normal' to be working 12-14 hour days 13 days a fortnight. I was consulting for clients and writing new software to sell. It was only when I was home that I would put my work away to be with my kids. Now? I only HAVE to work 300 hours in a year. If I sell some software even less.
I think it really sucks that women see relationships as a 'zero sum game'. That they must get more so the man must get less. Women have NO IDEA that relationships are like business partnerships. That when BOTH parties do their best then the overall result is a win-win situation. Pretty much all women look at it as a win-lose. And that's really sad. Since they look at it this way now I will never allow a woman to live in my house again.
"On the other side of the coin, don't most men have emotional needs beyond sex sometimes? Like wanting to feel loved and needed and (perhaps above all) useful, and not just as a sex machine?"
I think most husbands would love to be their wive's sex machine.
Sexual fullfillment is the fastest way to make your husband FEEL loved.
It doesn't mean SF is his ONLY need, just his number one need.
Like someone said earlier, if a wife took one hour a week and met her husband's SF need, he'd be eating out of her hand.
True True True.
Instead of spending hours cleaning the house and cooking big meals, I only need to "do" my husband's brains out a few times a week to make him happy.
Easy cheesy.
"Each time I came home I, quite natrually, wanted to make love with my wife (not just have sex) and she would say things like "I need a few days to get used to having you home before I will have sex with you". Young men should know this is what they have to look forward to in marriage. You come home after 5 months of working your arse off in a desert and sending every single cent you have home and when you get back you will be put in a 'sex ban' just to make sure you know you are the slave around here."
OR....
It could have meant that your wife needed you to connect w/ her emotionally first.
"It could have meant that your wife needed you to connect w/ her emotionally first."
---
It sounds like the typical thing: The wife can't put herself out one iota.
And it's absolutely right that young men should know what they are getting into with regard to marriage.
Maybe the man should first get emotionally comfortable with giving the woman any money. As in: Initiate divorce and fight her tooth and nail over every penny.
Topher
"Is it really this low? I think is some more silly gender stereotyping"
Topher, don't get 'liking sex' and 'domination and control' mixed up. Women like sex. A LOT. But it is their tool of choice for abusing a man.
Example.I could easily give my wife 20 or 30 orgasms in an evening even when she was a bit of a 'fatty'. Sometimes even 40. Often times she would phone me the next day and she would insist I take these calls, and then she would berate me over the phone, while I was sitting in a client, and tell me how badly her legs hurt and he back ached and her 'lets say private parts' were all 'stiff and sore' because I had given her 'too many orgasms'. When, of course, the case is a man can't give a woman a whole bunch of orgasms without her agreement. Indeed, enthusiastic participation. Women like sex and they like it a LOT. It's just that they don't like it with their husbands because, in todays world, the husband has far lower status than the wife. She knows that with one phone call she can have 90%+ over everything and he's now a 'loser divorcee'. So? She looks around for a higher status male as her hypergamous instincts tell her to. Are you familiar with www.womensinfidelity.com. Written by a woman. It tells you all about this if you know how to read it.
All the evidence points to women cheating just as much as men and not being one damned bit sorry about it either. Just remember, in wartime brittain the average wife would screw the average american serviceman for a pair of stickings while hubby was out risking his life in battle dreaming of his 'wife and kids' to keep him going.
The adultery was so bad in wartime brittain that the guvment used the police to take wives home and they banned any newspaper coverage of stories like this. American servicemen could also be severely punished for screwing married women. It was thought to be very important not to let the men at the front know their wives were sluts while they were gone. They might not want to fight any more. Imagine that!?! When mandatory blood testing was first brought in in brittain so many kids were found not the to be the child of the father that they quietly discontinued it. Today? Men who ask for a paternity test at birth, just to be sure, are furiously denigrated and villfied. Why? Because women know women are hypergamous sluts who are just as promiscuous as men and they don't want men finding out about it. All us older men know that women in offices will throw themselves at the high status males knowing full well they are 'married with children'.
"It sounds like the typical thing: The wife can't put herself out one iota."
There's a world of difference between this...
" just to make sure you know you are the slave around here"
and this...
"It could have meant that your wife needed you to connect w/ her emotionally first."
Most women don't understand/know that sex for a man is an emotional need. Most women think it is just a physical release.
If women understood it is an emotional need, she'd be more willing to meet it.
JG
"Maybe the man should first get emotionally comfortable with giving the woman any money. As in: Initiate divorce and fight her tooth and nail over every penny."
My book will make it plain how to divorce your wife and give her no money at all if that is what you have a mind to do. I think men are going to like it! I was unlucky enough to not know what I know now before my divorce so they scumbags stole my house. But I have a very good chance of getting a LOT of money out of the scumbags called 'lawyers and magistrates'. LOL!
"If her husband is meeting her need for conversation, then he is making big deposits in her love bank. When that happens, she wants to rock his world in bed."
Maybe on your planet.
To slaughter the metaphor, many of us have been making big deposits in our wife's love bank only to find she embezzled it all and hit us with overdraft fees.
"If women understood it is an emotional need, she'd be more willing to meet it."
---
Some would, but a lot just don't care. At all.
I see lots of men working their butts off, and trying to be reasonable husbands, and the wives cut them down in the most humiliating ways to anyone who will listen (mostly the other hens while they "do lunch" on their husband's dime).
I wouldn't take that for a second. I absolutely don't understand men who do take that crap and, on top of it, tell everyone how she has the "hardest job in the world" - sitting home on her fat ass.
Marsh
"If women understood it is an emotional need, she'd be more willing to meet it."
Women understand this perfectly well. One of the GREAT LIES of women is "I do not understand". Don't listen to this lie gents for lie it is.
When a woman says "I do not understand" what she is really doing is manipulating you to then attempt to 'explain it to her so she understands'. And guess what? That game can go on forever. My ex was in and out of counselling for nigh on 16 years of an 18 year marriage. Every single one of them told her that she should work harder on her marriage because she was being abusive. She understood JUST FINE! It was ME who did not understand. I did not understand that I was sold the 'demo model' and what was delivered was the 'real model'. My mate Mr. Truth has educated me on women over the last 2.5 years. He was there. He met my ex many times. He took an instant dislike to her to save time. His wife claimed 'they are such a nice couple, they are so happy and in love after all these years' while Mr. Truth could see the truth plain as day. It's why we picked the handle Mr. Truth for him. Wives don't meet their husbands needs because that's how they dominate and control them. I used to be a man known you would NOT tell you were having an affair with because I made it clear I thought that was wrong. Now? I tell any man that if his wife is not putting out what he should do is go get what he needs elsewhere. Since that position became known among my family and friends quite a few men have confided in me how horrible their wives have been. They would never speak to me before for fear of me being honest and telling their wives. Now they are very grateful to have someone to speak to that understands their positions.
Some of these men have shared with me that their solution has been to refuse their wife sex right back. I know a couple of men who simply will not give their wife sex no matter how much she beggs. They say "She did that to me? She claims she is equal? So I can to it right back to her." There are few things so soul destroying to a woman than to be told by her husband she is not wanted. Just like it is soul destroying to a man. I now tell men who confide this in me to try the same. Further, in Germany, the women tried to bring in a law that said a man must get 'permission' from 'Family Planning' to get a vasectomy. Since FP is ALL women this law said that a man must get permission from a woman before he's allowed control over his own body. My german mates were hysterical as to the hypocrisy of that position. When I got my vasectomy 2.5 years ago the doc told me he had been working overtime for 2 years, some times 6 days a week doing snips. The do them on no name, cash, no record basis. I know married men who got snipped and didn't tell their wives. Germany now has the lowest birth rate in Europe. Well done ladies. You showed those german men who is the boss. Now they date eastern european women and refuse marriage and children in such massive numbers some town have had birthrates fall 80% in the last 20 years. You should see how desperate german women are. And I mean DESPERATE.
"To slaughter the metaphor, many of us have been making big deposits in our wife's love bank only to find she embezzled it all and hit us with overdraft fees."
Well, you may be making alot of w/drawals through angry outbursts, demands, disrespectful judgements, independent behaviors...ect.
Love busters can suck the love out of any marriage.
The trick is to make deposits w/o with drawals.
JG,
"I absolutely don't understand men who do take that crap"
In my time most women only start this crap after the babies arrive. Once you have the babies you know the courts are going to nail your arse to the wall if you try to get out. THAT's why men put up with it. For the kids. That's why I did.
However, when I dated three western women my own age after divorce I now notice they start with this crap early. One on the FIRST date one on th SECOND date!!! I was shocked. Needless to say I didn't date either again...which, of course, they both presented as I was not 'worthy' of them because, you know, I didn't want to be their man-slave.
The third one took 5 months before she went wacko. It was only after that Mr. Truth suggested I have a 'bit of a fling' with a russian chick. I bumped into fav#1 near our marketplace that very weekend and we started dating on and off. After eastern european women? I could never touch a western woman ever again. Just can't do it. They are beasts by comparison.
"independent behaviors"
----
LOL, does that mean, translated, "not doing exactly what she says to do, precisely when she says to do it"?
And I like how it's turned right back around on the man. I knew that men were at fault - for everything - all along.
Men: DON'T ... GET ... MARRIED.
I said: "If women understood it is an emotional need, she'd be more willing to meet it."
"JG said...Some would, but a lot just don't care. At all."
Well, this is ONE wife who DID care. ALOT.
I honest to God did not know sex was an emotional need for a man.
Once I learned this, I made changes.
Marsh
"Well, you may be making alot of w/drawals through angry outbursts, demands, disrespectful judgements, independent behaviors...ect."
You have GOT to be a woman. Right? Or you must be nearly as big a mangina as I usd to be. LOL!
JG said...
"independent behaviors"
----
LOL, does that mean, translated, "not doing exactly what she says to do, precisely when she says to do it"?
And I like how it's turned right back around on the man. I knew that men were at fault - for everything - all along.
Men: DON'T ... GET ... MARRIED.
Both sexes are guilty of independent behavior. Do you like it when wives spend family money w/o your agreement?
"Well, you may be making alot of w/drawals through angry outbursts, demands, disrespectful judgements, independent behaviors...ect.
Love busters can suck the love out of any marriage.
The trick is to make deposits w/o with drawals."
No, I'm not and it makes me angry that the automatic assumption is that I'm doing it wrong, that I don't understand my wife, that I'm a failure. I've been through that and so have most of the spouses who are living in sexless or intimacy less marriages. It takes a while and a lot of courage to face the fact that you are being emotional abused, that the fault lies with your spouse and there isn't a damn thing you can do about it unless she (or he) wants to change and actively sets about doing so.
There is no trick.
(I should add that the only time my wife explicitly put a price on sex was when she said that if I hugged her more and was more non-sexually romantic, she'd make love to me more. I was. She didn't. To her credit, she's never brought it up again.)
"You have GOT to be a woman. Right? Or you must be nearly as big a mangina as I usd to be. LOL!"
Both sexes are guilty of these behaviors. Did you like it when your wife yelled b/c she was angry? Or when she DEMANED you do something you didn't want to? Or when she spent family income w/o your agreement?
Marsh said...
"I honest to God did not know sex was an emotional need for a man."
LOL! So you ARE a woman. Only women can think men are so stupid as to believe lies like this.
Gents. One of the GREAT lies women tell is "I honestly did not know ... ." This is almost NEVER true. It is one more device to deflect and dissimulate. Try reading shoepenhouers essay 'on women'.
http://www.theabsolute.net/misogyny/onwomen.html
The first time I read that my brain near melted. I was real angry that no-one had pointed it out to me before. Like BEFORE I was married. That essay tells any young man who reads it everything he needs to know about women.
One thing is that women lie ALL THE TIME. Indeed, it could even be said that they are incapable of deducing the truth so it's not really a lie as they are living in a fantasy land.
Once I realised that women are actually living in a fantasy land and are not at all connected with reality they made a lot more sense to me. And they became much easier to deal with. I deal with eastern women the same way I dealt with my children when they were small. And this works perfectly well while they want something from you. Once they really understand that you will NOT be their love-man-slave there is no dealing with them at all. You just have to trade them in and get another one who does not yet know you will not be her 'love-man-slave'.
"No, I'm not and it makes me angry that the automatic assumption is that I'm doing it wrong, that I don't understand my wife, that I'm a failure."
You are responsible for 50% of the condition of your marriage.
Since YOU are here complaining about your marriage and not your wife, I can only address your side of it.
If she were here, I'd tell her to start pleasing the hell out of you in bed.
But, since she's not, I can only point you in the direction that MIGHT help you make your marriage better.
If you meet her needs perfectly and avoid love busting her then there is nothing you can do to improve your marriage.
(I should add that the only time my wife explicitly put a price on sex was when she said that if I hugged her more and was more non-sexually romantic, she'd make love to me more. I was. She didn't. To her credit, she's never brought it up again.)
What she was asking for was more AFFECTION. That rates number two on most women's top emotional needs.
If you hugged her and then groped her, you were not meeting her need for affection the way SHE wanted you to.
It would be like if she undressed and lay beside you agreeing to have sex, but did not move, while you did the rest.
She could say she "had sex" w/ you, but it certainly wouldn't be the way YOU wanted her to.
Marsh said...
"Both sexes are guilty of these behaviors"
There you go doing the woman thing of collectivising behaviour rather than dealing with the individuals involved.
My wife ranted, screamed and raved like a psycho whenever she did not get her own way. She took 8 overseas holidays a year. Admittedly only from Ireland but they add up when you take two kids every time as well. She would regularly just stick things on the gold amex for them to turn up. She would spend the money we set aside for taxes. And of COURSE we do not like that.
But in return? I was a freaking saint in our marriage and every single one of our marriage counsellers said so. Hell even my WIFE said so. But women HATE beta-providers with a passion. Not long before we divorced I asked her to do the Landmark Forum again. In that class you talk to people around you about your relationships. One guy she talked to said to her "Wow, your husband must love you something fierce because you are a total f***ing bitch." She was 'jolted' into writing me a letter begging me to take her back. If Helen wants to publish it she can because I have put it other public places. In it she admits to 'complaining about being bullied while actually being the bully'. 'You have have been the Sampson holding up our world while I have been your delilah undermining your every effort while pretending to love you'...note PRETENDING....'I have enrolled the children in my stories about you to their detriment'. (ie Child abuse)
When discussing separation I put a pen and paper in front of her and said "Write down every complaint you have that has not been resolved." After 23 years together she could not think of one so she claimed I was 'oppressing her' by asking her to write something down. How many MEN are with one woman for 23 years and can not name ONE complaint not resolved? I'd bet less than 1%. When we went into the divorce court and she was saying I had been abusive for 18 years she denounced this letter as being a 'deserate attempt to get me to change'. The whole thing was laughable but the courts are there to destroy men and they are doing it very well.
So no Marsh. Not ALL members of BOTH sexes do this. And western women do this rubbish in MASSIVE numbers. You western women are horrible. It's about time you shut up and listened because us men are sick to death of your lies and hypocrisy. Men in the MRA area are so pissed off they are now talking about how a man has a better chance in life if his ex meets with a 'fatal accident'. How horrible do you women want to get? Is not talk of killing you enough to wake you up out of your slumber yet?
Marsh said...
"You are responsible for 50% of the condition of your marriage."
Cow-shit. When a woman wants to make a mans life miserable there is nothing he can do about it. My wife stole money and was lying to me. Yet women claim I am resposible for HER behaviour thereby making the claim she is a child. No. Both parties carry 100% responsibility their THEIR OWN ACTIONS AND WORDS. The result of each persons actions and words gives the condition of the marriage. If ONE PARTY is lying and stealing then the marriage is in pretty bad shape and the cow-shit you women go on with of holding he man 50% responsible for the 'condition of the marriage' when, like my ex, the woman is destroying the marriage, is just that. Cow-shit. Grow up. Adults are responsible as individuals. And every time you women do something wrong you look to put blame with the man. You are children and you are 'responsibility teflon'. I don't tolerate that crap any more.
"Not ALL members of BOTH sexes do this."
Your right, I should have said, Both sexes are CAPABLE of these behaviors.
Selfish Demands
Disrespectful Judgments
Angry Outbursts
Annoying Habits
Independent Behavior
Dishonesty
Doesn't mean everyone does all of these.
Marsh, that is another piece of your feminst cow-shit...talking about what people are CAPABLE of rather than what they actually do.
You women say ALL MEN ARE CAPABLE of being rapists, paedophiles, wife beaters, murderers...etc. But the fact remains ALMOST NO MEN engage in these behaviours. Indeed men are FAR MORE NOBLE than women in that we have selflessly laid down our very lives for 'women and children first' for the last 10,000 years. Every comment you make sounds like you are running a tape recorder of femnazi propaganda. Guess what? We've heard it all before. All men like me are asking is for women to be held accountable as equal before the law for their actions, contracts and words under oath. That is the ONE THING you women fight very, very hard. With ALL YOUR MIGHT you women divert attention from the rule of law and being equal before the law to men.
"Marsh, that is another piece of your feminst cow-shit...talking about what people are CAPABLE of rather than what they actually do."
And yet your posts are FULL of disrespectful judgements. So we know you are not just capable of them. But, that you make them a habbit.
"Cow-shit. When a woman wants to make a mans life miserable there is nothing he can do about it."
He can divorce her.
My wife stole money and was lying to me. Yet women claim I am resposible for HER behaviour thereby making the claim she is a child.
*I* never claimed it.
"No. Both parties carry 100% responsibility their THEIR OWN ACTIONS AND WORDS."
Agreed. And when two people bring their own personal responsibility into a marriage. They are each equally resposible for the condition they find it in. 50/50.
"The result of each persons actions and words gives the condition of the marriage."
Agreed.
If ONE PARTY is lying and stealing then the marriage is in pretty bad shape and the cow-shit you women go on with of holding he man 50% responsible for the 'condition of the marriage' when, like my ex, the woman is destroying the marriage, is just that. Cow-shit.
If your marriage is what you say it was, that you were a saint and your wife an evil bitch, then where is YOUR responsibilty for staying married to such a woman for so long??????
Why in the hell did YOU stay married to her long enough to become this resentful and bitter?
I'm going to repost this b/c I failed to put quotes around what you said, so I could distinguish between your posts and my reply.
"Cow-shit. When a woman wants to make a mans life miserable there is nothing he can do about it."
He can divorce her.
"My wife stole money and was lying to me. Yet women claim I am resposible for HER behaviour thereby making the claim she is a child."
*I* never claimed it.
"No. Both parties carry 100% responsibility their THEIR OWN ACTIONS AND WORDS."
Agreed. And when two people bring their own personal responsibility into a marriage. They are each equally resposible for the condition they find it in. 50/50.
"The result of each persons actions and words gives the condition of the marriage."
Agreed.
"If ONE PARTY is lying and stealing then the marriage is in pretty bad shape and the cow-shit you women go on with of holding he man 50% responsible for the 'condition of the marriage' when, like my ex, the woman is destroying the marriage, is just that. Cow-shit."
If your marriage is what you say it was, that you were a saint and your wife an evil bitch, then where is YOUR responsibilty for staying married to such a woman for so long??????
Why in the hell did YOU stay married to her long enough to become this resentful and bitter?
"He can divorce her."
----
That is really, truly an answer from a woman who has not understanding of what men's lives are like.
A woman can walk away from a marriage at any time. It's just a question of HOW MUCH SHE GETS OUT OF THE MAN.
A man, on the other hand, can have his whole life taken away from him. The woman takes the kids, the man pays for them. The woman gets the house, the man pays for it. The woman moves her new boyfriend in, the man pays for it.
A relative of mine was a friggin' VICE PRESIDENT of a mid-sized company and he moved into a 1-bedroom apartment and had to continue to pay the mortgage for his wife (who refused to work - at all).
That's the choice men have.
Utter lack of empathy.
"That is really, truly an answer from a woman who has not understanding of what men's lives are like.
A woman can walk away from a marriage at any time. It's just a question of HOW MUCH SHE GETS OUT OF THE MAN.
A man, on the other hand, can have his whole life taken away from him. The woman takes the kids, the man pays for them. The woman gets the house, the man pays for it. The woman moves her new boyfriend in, the man pays for it.
A relative of mine was a friggin' VICE PRESIDENT of a mid-sized company and he moved into a 1-bedroom apartment and had to continue to pay the mortgage for his wife (who refused to work - at all).
That's the choice men have.
Utter lack of empathy."
I don't disagree w/ you that men many times get a raw deal in the courts system.
But, if the choice is between living in a marriage w/ an evil bitch and losing half of what I have. I know what I would take.
And IF I can avoid both....IF there is another option out there for me... Like recreating my marriage, where both my husband am I are happy and in love....I will opt out for THAT one.
You are responsible for 50% of the condition of your marriage.
In a healthy marriage, yes. However, in an abusive marriage, one where one spouse has a personality or other disorder or if the expectations for particular things are vastly different, then that changes in actual practice.
Assuming that the only issue is wildly different libidos, there is a balance issue--in this case the person with the lower libido has more control than the person with the higher control. (This is the subject here, but it can apply to other things such as number of children, how children are disciplined, how bills are paid, who works and so forth.)
What she was asking for was more AFFECTION. That rates number two on most women's top emotional needs.
I fully understand that, which I related through specific actions. However, I thought I made clear that this, in fact, turned out not to be true. That, in fact, she didn't want more affection since when she got it, it didn't increase her intimacy.
Given how long we'd been married, it's obvious to me that by saying "you need to do this to me" my wife was attempting to put the failure of our sex life on my shoulders and avoid confronting and/or admitting her own failure.
This is a very common element in all forms of abuse; for the abuser to project the blame onto the abused. (You see this in physical abuse where the attacker will say, "I wouldn't have hit you if you'd done such and such.")
When emotional abuse is mentioned, withholding behaviors are often overlooked. Worse, when it comes to women doing this to men, it's very often perceived that the man did something wrong and is being rightly punished.
Unfortunately, withholding behaviors are too often dismissed as not being abuse at all, especially when it comes to sex (men withholding money from wives is often dismissed as well, though it can be abuse, depending on the circumstances.)
It would be like if she undressed and lay beside you agreeing to have sex, but did not move, while you did the rest.
You've described our sex life (except for the part when she nags me for not touching her just right.)
Again, though, I've made very clear that I am interested in both physical AND emotional intimacy and that when the spouse with the lower libido "services" (to use a word from earlier) their spouse, they have reduced making love and being intimate to fucking. Just fucking can be great, but it's not what relationships are built on (unless both partners agree.)
But, if the choice is between living in a marriage w/ an evil bitch and losing half of what I have. I know what I would take.
What if the wife/husband isn't an evil bitch?
And what about children?
When women flippantly say that if their husband does such and such "they'll take the kids and leave", they need to pause and put the shoe on the other foot. How would you like to have your kids ripped from you and, in the worse case scenario, being able to visit them only with a child welfare worker?
Yes, children can often see their parents are having problems, but quite often they don't (and sometimes some children in a family see problems and others are completely oblivious.) In the end, that is a judgment a husband, wife or both will have to make in a troubled marriage.
"But, if the choice is between living in a marriage w/ an evil bitch and losing half of what I have. I know what I would take."
------
Yeah, that would get lots of claps from the studio audience of Oprah.
On the other hand, if your choice is staying with a witch - or losing all control of your kids to a woman who has already beat them in front of you - and who would move a thug into the house - I bet you would rethink it. Oh, and by the way, you are going to work your butt off and fork over everything for that situation - court ordered - and even the work is court ordered (in violation of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution - it's called "imputed income").
But women are just not really put into that position, therefore you can't even picture that men may have different lives and problems.
It is unbelievable to me the lack of empathy that women have for men.
"In a healthy marriage, yes. However, in an abusive marriage, one where one spouse has a personality or other disorder or if the expectations for particular things are vastly different, then that changes in actual practice."
Agreed. Has your wife been diagnosed w/ a personality disorder?
"I fully understand that, which I related through specific actions. However, I thought I made clear that this, in fact, turned out not to be true. That, in fact, she didn't want more affection since when she got it, it didn't increase her intimacy."
That's not necessarily the conclusion you should draw from that.
Did your wife meet your emotional needs prior to marriage? Or at least in the beginning of your marriage? Were you in love w/ her when you married her?
"Given how long we'd been married, it's obvious to me that by saying "you need to do this to me" my wife was attempting to put the failure of our sex life on my shoulders and avoid confronting and/or admitting her own failure."
That may be true. Or she may have been trying to get you to HELP her want to have sex more.
"Unfortunately, withholding behaviors are too often dismissed as not being abuse at all, especially when it comes to sex (men withholding money from wives is often dismissed as well, though it can be abuse, depending on the circumstances.)"
I think w/ holding emotional needs from your spouse is CRUEL.
Especially ones that can NOT be met anywhere else but w/in the marriage...like sexual fullfillment.
Whenever I hear women complaining about how that is all their husbands ever want from them, I always ask them how they would feel if their husbands only talked to them once a week....or once a month.
Many times a lightbulb will go off for them. And they get it.
Marsh said...
"He can divorce her."
In my divorce, from assets that were worth EUR300K at the time I got MINUS EUR40K. My children were also kidnapped and abused. They were turned against me which is one reason I dis-owned them. They dis-respected me and dis-honoured themselves thereby waiving the privilege of having a father. Stupid women like you suggesting a man can divorce a woman are just that. Stupid.
"then where is YOUR responsibilty for staying married to such a woman for so long??????"
Gents, you can all clearly see I said I stayed with my wife for the benefit of my children. Marsh, like a typical woman, can not see that is the personification of responsibility. Further, since I was a christian man it was my SWORN responsibility UNDER OATH to stand in faith and pray that my wife, the woman I married, would one day come back to me. This was the only woman I ever wanted to be with for all my life apart from a 'teen infatuation' which so many of us have. I stayed because I took a VOW to stay. Notice how Marsh does not understand this concept. Men die on battlefields keeping their vows.
Why in the hell did YOU stay married to her long enough to become this resentful and bitter?
Gents, you can clearly see I am not 'resentful' or 'bitter'. This is the usual drivel presented by feminists. I have already said here I am happier than I have ever been. What I AM doing is saving OTHER mens lives by bringing the work I have done to the public.
"if the choice is between living in a marriage w/ an evil bitch and losing half of what I have. I know what I would take."
Please re-read. Of EUR300K in assets I got MINUS EUR40K. It took nearly 2 year to get my HAT collection back! You women who talk of 'men losing half' are liars and I label you a liar for saying so. In the end the criminals in the family court gave men back EUR12K of the proceeds of my 25 years of labour.
To put that in perspective I have had a stellar career. I am easily the most successful person in the business world from my school that I am aware of. As early as 1990 at 26 I was invited to work at NASA on the International Space Station project in my area of specialty at the time. I was one of the WORLD LEADERS in my area of specialty in IBM in 1990. I am now top 20 IN THE WORLD in my area of specialty. My clients are the 'whos who' of the business world. I have made more than EUR100K every year since 1995. And for the last 10 years have averaged about EUR150K. My last year before divorce I made EUR250K but that was because my son had cancer and to pay all the bills I once worked 47 days staight billable in that year.
My wife was not an 'evil bitch'. She was, by todays standards, completely normal. THAT is the point I am making to young men. My wife was not at all 'unusual'.
What if the wife/husband isn't an evil bitch?
And what about children?
When women flippantly say that if their husband does such and such "they'll take the kids and leave", they need to pause and put the shoe on the other foot. How would you like to have your kids ripped from you and, in the worse case scenario, being able to visit them only with a child welfare worker?"
Has your wife threatened you w/ this?
"Stupid women like you suggesting a man can divorce a woman are just that. Stupid."
I thought you said you divorced her????
"Notice how Marsh does not understand this concept. Men die on battlefields keeping their vows."
Did you die on the battlefield by staying married to her????
"Has your wife threatened you w/ this?"
----
Does she have to explicitly threaten it? Jesus Christ.
Marsh, you are starting to show your true colors.
Men should not even debate it with women like you, simply act against you in any way they can.
"Notice how Marsh does not understand this concept. Men die on battlefields keeping their vows."
Did you die on the battlefield by staying married to her????
I do believe you missed the point. The point I got was about the concept of keeping vows, not just marriage vows.
Has your wife threatened you w/ this?
A lot of people would not threaten this but just do it after getting out of the marriage.
"Does she have to explicitly threaten it?"
If she had it would give me more understanding into the woman he's married to.
"I do believe you missed the point. The point I got was about the concept of keeping vows, not just marriage vows."
Nope.
My point was that he eventually divorced her. He could have divorced her earlier and had alot less heart ache.
"The point I got was about the concept of keeping vows, not just marriage vows."
---
Right, I got that point immediately.
I think Marsh is just starting to throw out whatever she can.
As a side note, I've seen that behavior before: I dated a feminist (I know, I know) when I was in college.
Over the summer, she asked me if she should get a job or not (daddy paid for everything for her). I said, "The devil makes work for idle hands". What I meant was that instead of just fluffing away the summer, and maybe getting in trouble, she should find a job.
Much later, I heard her talking to her mother. "No, mom, he was calling me the devil or something, and all I did was ask a question".
There really are people like that.
He could have divorced her earlier and had alot less heart ache.
That may be true, but he also said he tried to keep it together and keep his vows. If he'd said "eh fuck it" sooner, he'd probably get lambasted for that too.
Another example of how men are damned if they do, damned if they don't.
'A lot of people would not threaten this but just do it after getting out of the marriage."
Yes, I know.
But, I wanted to know if that particular poster's wife had threatened that.
lol JG. That's just sad!
Mash,
"And yet your posts are FULL of disrespectful judgements."
My comments about western women are 'disrespectful' because I have no respect at all for western women and that is what they have earned. Respect is earned. My position on western women is that they are, in the main, cowards, liars and hypocrites and I have plenty of evidence to back that up. If you find my opinion 'dis-respectful' it can only be because you know it is true.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Marsh,
I am wrapping my experiences in with others that I know of and of which I've read about and making observations. Like others, I sometimes use personal experience explicitly while other times, I'm merely using reason with nothing personal implied. This latter was the case with my comment "[w]hen women flippantly say"
Since you missed my point, let me spell it out:
flippantly: frivolously disrespectful, shallow, or lacking in seriousness; characterized by levity
say: to speak (versus threaten)
I am not talking about direct threats, but an implied threat of future action. At it's simplest, this is phrased "If you ever cheat on me, I'll leave you." (Please don't claim you haven't heard this and if you really are a wife, I'll bet you've said it.)
Sometimes this is said seriously; often the spouse has strong reason to suspect that the "If" should really be "Since" or at least "When". I am not referring to that, but when it is said as though in jest.
My sole point was that this implicit threat is said with casual levity, but is both cruel in the implications that the person is that casual about how separation will affect children and horrifying in the recognition that a wife can just pack her bags, leave her husband and is guaranteed custody of any children (and, depending on words, alimony.)
I note that it was in response to your comment "But, if the choice is between living in a marriage w/ an evil bitch and losing half of what I have. I know what I would take."
Putting aside the strawman use of "evil", if you have children, I was suggesting that you are doing exactly what I described.
Marsh said...
"I thought you said you divorced her????"
No. I didn't day that. I said we divorced. It was a mutal agreement. She claimed the right to lie and steal. Apparently 'womens rights' extend to lying and stealing from your family and husband now. I told her that it was completely unacceptable to me that my wife lie to me or steal from me. She had been caught lying to me one time previously and had me thrown in jail and quite severely injured in the process. She was offered, as my religion taught me, the opportunity of forgiveness based on a promise never to repeat the offense. That was 96. She repeated the offense in 07. The second time she was made 4 offers. Two of which were to remedy the lying and stealing, restore her honour, and stay married. Two of which would require divorce. She was told to choose from those 4 options. Of the 4 options she chose acrimonious divorce with a whole lot more lying and stealing. Even her FATHER called to me to apologise to me for her behaviour.
The message to young men is simple. This is 'normal' now. Crimes by women will NOT be punished. You can not enter into a contract with a person who will be richly rewarded for that breech of contract. You would do it with a man, you shouldn't do it with a woman. This is about honesty, honour and integrity. Items women seem to be totally devoid of in the west now. They are abundant in eastern women.
"If she had it would give me more understanding into the woman he's married to."
Are you talking to me? My ex relocated the children to places unknown. She was warned that if she did this she would face a jury on kidnapping charges to go with perjury. Further, my mother was elderly and slipping into dimensia at the time. She knew she had only a month or two left before she would lose her mind. We talked a lot at this time and I went and spent a month with her as my last chance to be with her. When my wife SHOULD have been supporting me in the loss of my mother she was making trouble for me.
I had the 'pleasure' of sitting in front of my ill and elderly mother watching her cry her eyes out begging me to get a phone number to call her beloved grand daughter to talk to her. My ex, her father, her mother, and ALL THE WOMEN AROUND HER refused to give my father, who on his word promised he would not give that number to me, a phone number so his wife of 50 years could speak with her beloved grand daughter. I was so furious that all those people would condone the abuse of an elderly and ill woman that I wrote an email to one of the largest social elite womens groups in Ireland, of which my wife was a member, and of which I had the mailing list as the man who maintained their web site and registrations and I told them EXACTLY how disgusted I was in ALL OF THEM that they would allow and elderly and ill woman to be abused and used as a tool of extortion. Now. Does THAT tell you men a little more about my ex and ALL THE WOMEN AROUND HER? I was astonished that there was not a single woman among that 100+ women who was like my grandmothers Astonished indeed. My grandmothers would have beat my ex with an umbrella. I've seen them do it to people they were disgusted with.
JG said...
"you are starting to show your true colors."
Yes JG. See how easy it is to 'poke a woman with a blunt stick' and see the hatred laying just underneath? I have done this with hundreds of women so that they reveal their true colours to the onlooking men. There is barely a western woman who does not show this underlying hatred when provoked a little bit. Interestingly NO eastern women respond like this. NONE.
JG,
"It is unbelievable to me the lack of empathy that women have for men."
It is entirely believeable to me. I have come to the conclusion that women are not capable of love. Not as us men understand it. Further, I have come to the conclusion that what women really want is a 'love-man-slave'. Someone they can convince to 'love' them and then submit to being a man-slave. I now teach young men how to look out for the signs of this. It is such phrases as 'If you love me you would '. This is one of hundreds of phrases that women use to ruthlessly and viciously manipulate a mans love to her own advantage. I can tell you. I was on the receiving end of plenty of this.
"My comments about western women are 'disrespectful' because I have no respect at all for western women and that is what they have earned. Respect is earned. My position on western women is that they are, in the main, cowards, liars and hypocrites and I have plenty of evidence to back that up. If you find my opinion 'dis-respectful' it can only be because you know it is true."
A disrespectful judgement is not an opinion that is true.
It happens when one tries to IMPOSE their opinions on others.
Saying that I was lying when I posted that I had once believed something that I no longer do is was one such example.
"I am not talking about direct threats, but an implied threat of future action. At it's simplest, this is phrased "If you ever cheat on me, I'll leave you." (Please don't claim you haven't heard this and if you really are a wife, I'll bet you've said it.)
Sometimes this is said seriously; often the spouse has strong reason to suspect that the "If" should really be "Since" or at least "When". I am not referring to that, but when it is said as though in jest.
My sole point was that this implicit threat is said with casual levity, but is both cruel in the implications that the person is that casual about how separation will affect children and horrifying in the recognition that a wife can just pack her bags, leave her husband and is guaranteed custody of any children (and, depending on words, alimony.)
Thanks for your clarification.
"I note that it was in response to your comment "But, if the choice is between living in a marriage w/ an evil bitch and losing half of what I have. I know what I would take."
Putting aside the strawman use of "evil", if you have children, I was suggesting that you are doing exactly what I described."
I was responding to a poster who said he was a "saint" in his marriage. And who painted his wife as someone who could only be called an evil bitch.
I realize that when contemplating divorce, a loving parent will consider what a broken family will mean to his/her children.
But, once a decision is made, I think it is to believe that you made the best decision you could make.
I also believe that in most cases, marriages CAN be turned around. Spouses can fall in love w/ each other again. And build a marriage that is passionate.
http://www.marriagebuilders.com/
"It happens when one tries to IMPOSE their opinions on others."
Gents, this is how women lie. Take a look because it's subtle. What they do is ASSUME the lie and make a statement about it. The lie here is that I have made an attempt to impose my opinion on others. This is the normal 'victim' mentality of women to manipulate and control men by prompting them to 'white-knight'. You will see this often when you look for it. Men do not attempt to 'impose their opinion'. Men express their opinion and other people can do with it what they will. Only a woman can claim 'victim status' as having an opinion 'imposed' on her. Keep an eye out for such lies and deception and you will find them all through womens speech.
"Saying that I was lying when I posted that I had once believed something that I no longer do is was one such example."
Saying that you had no idea that sex included emotional needs of men as an adult woman just isn't credible. I've taken to assuming western women are lying until they prove what they say is true. I am right about 20x more often than assuming they are honest and it saves me time. If western women wanted any credibility they would not 110% support perjury. Which they ALL do by not forming juries and punishing women who commit this crime. Any 12 women could get together and start lawfully punishing the TENS OF MILLIONS of women who have committed perjury. Guess what? In the whole world I have 6 women willing to do such. Ergo. Western women support perjury, ergo western women are liars. Sorry. While you women 110% support perjury in ALL the courts (false rape, DV, sexual harrassment, family court accusation which are NEVER punished) men like me are going to call you liars. You want me to stop? Then get started on your courts to give men a path to justice.
"It was a mutal agreement."
OK, then my suggestion to divorce her wasn't STUPID b/c you DID "mutually agree" to divorce.
"Further, since I was a christian man.."
And yet, you are having sex outside of marriage. And you are encouraging unhappilymarried men to resent their American wives. And you encourage young men not to marry, but to have sex outside of marriage w/ Eastern women.
"If she had it would give me more understanding into the woman he's married to."
Are you talking to me?"
Nope.
"I was responding to a poster who said he was a "saint" in his marriage. And who painted his wife as someone who could only be called an evil bitch."
Gents, again, here is a lie. I have never called my ex an 'evil bitch'. I never would. Stupid? Sure. Evil? No. Bitch? Frequently. LOL! This is the kind of lie and emotive language women use to prompt support for their 'argument'. My case, and millions of OTHER mens cases, are simple. My ex committed crimes. Perjury, kidnapping, extortion and theft to be precise. I insist she is brought to justice or I insist these 'crimes' can also be committed by men with impunity. In short, I insist that while women claim 'equality' that must include 'equality before the law'. By the way. I was not the only person who described me as a saint in my marriage. My ex described me in these terms frequently both publicly and privately. My FIL and step-son described me very positively all my married life. I was the epitome of a good husband. My wife NEVER had any 'complaints' as to what I was doing. Not ever. The lies she told in her affidavits were just that. Lies. She described herself as 'completely happy' in marriage. And why would she not be? She has a life enjoyed by less than 1% of women. Perhaps even less. It is only post marriage that she has come to earth with a thud. Cushioned by 95% of the assets of the marriage of course. But she is a terrible money manager and she will be broke soon enough.
"I realize that when contemplating divorce, a loving parent will consider what a broken family will mean to his/her children."
Mash, women file 75-90% of divorces depending on whos stats you believe. They ALMOST NEVER take into account the damage to the children. Your statement is true though because women are not capable of love like men are and understand it. Therefore women are not 'loving parents' like men are. On the titanic women put themselves into the lifeboats before the children. Women know the saying is 'women and children first' and they take that to mean 'women first'. Women have never, ever, fought and died in battle in large numbers to protect children. Indeed, when their own life is threatened women will give up their sons to be killed without a whimper. Please read your irish history with respect to Cromwell. In roman times women were known to throw their babies at soldiers who would then skewer the boys so they would not grow up and leave the women alone as the women posed no threat. There is no evidence of womens claim 'I would die to protect my children'. No. Women won't. Almost NEVER does that happen. When it does it is blown out of all proportion.
Women will happily kill their children for their own lifestyle. Or have you not heard of a little thing called 'abortion'? This is women killing their unborn baby in deference to their lifestyle. Many women use abortion as a form of contraception now. What does that tell you about the value placed on a baby now? Babies are garbage to be thrown in the trash now. It was not like this just 40 years ago. Just 40 years ago 'all babies were precious'. A girl who got herself pregnant was expected to go to term and adopt out the child and it was seen as a crime to kill an unborn baby. Now? Killing an unborn baby is a 'right'. Grrrrl power at it's best. Killing the most defenceless member of your society, your own baby. And all the feminist crap about how it's 'just a bunch of cells'. Try looking at photos of aborted babies. Why do you think the feminists scream blue murder and will not allow photos of aborted babies to be published?
"The lie here is that I have made an attempt to impose my opinion on others."
If you wanted to be respectful, you would use your powers of persuasion, rather than to try to IMPOSE your opinions by saying things like this: "you're lying" "You are stupid" "you women" "You Western women".
"I was responding to a poster who said he was a "saint" in his marriage. And who painted his wife as someone who could only be called an evil bitch."
Gents, again, here is a lie. I have never called my ex an 'evil bitch'."
Another LIE from YOU.
I never claimed you called her an evil bitch. I said you called yourself a saint, which you did, and PAINTED her as an evil bitch.
I think we should shut this thread down as it's become a flamefest between two people with irreconcilable perspectives who are beginning to ascertain meanings and motives that may not be there.
Marsh,
your comment was 'he can divorce her' and you put it right near 'lose half'. A man can not simple 'divorce a woman' like a woman can simply divorce a man. In divorce MOST women attempt to destroy the man and almost NO men attempt to destroy the woman. The women are ably abetted by criminals called 'the legal fraternity'. Hostilities are almost ALWAYS started by the woman by using the children as weapons. Try educating yourself. Read Stephen Baskervilles excellent book 'Taken Into Custody'. You will read that men are routinely given 'alimony and child support orders' that are 1.5-2x greater than his prior to divorce income. Many men are thrown in jail because they are poverty sticken and the 'arrears' builds up while they are there. This is how you get plumbers earning USD30K/year with an alleged 'arrears' of USD150K. This is what men face. And you don't care. And it shows.
In my case I was well aware that I faced financial ruin should I allow my ex to continue to steal money and lie to me over the next 20-30 years. One offer on the table that would restore her honour and keep her married was that all property be transferred to me exclusively such that I could financially manage the family for everyones benefit. She was given my word that I would take care of her until my death. By transferring all assets to me and trusting in me to take care of her she was offered the opportunity to be trusted again and to reestore her honour. She didn't take it. Another option was that she be given 50% at that time and that she have no future call on my assets and that I would care for her as my wife but I would never, ever trust her again. Not ever. She was told she would never be honoured and never trusted as my wife ever again if she took that 50% which she had given her word not to do. It was the second lie. Lying to me twice was once too many.
"And yet, you are having sex outside of marriage. And you are encouraging unhappilymarried men to resent their American wives. And you encourage young men not to marry, but to have sex outside of marriage w/ Eastern women."
I said I WAS a christian man. I am no longer. That too went out the door when I created the identity 'GlobalMan'. And I love how a woman would make the kind of comment 'and yet you are having sex outside marriage' while women are aborting babies at the rate of about 50M per year. LOL!! Yes. I encourage men to have much sex and they can get and NEVER MARRY. If you have a problem with that? GOOD!
I don't think it's a 'flamefest' Topher. I am certainly not bothered by Marsh. But it's worth letting the young men know this is what they are in for. It's nothing personal though women read it that way.
It's gotten waaaay off topic and is beginning to sound like a couple having a row.
Topher,
Back on topic. I believe most men dearly love their wives or gfs to be more intimate and loving with them. One of the reasons I am so happy is this. After separation I met a woman who looked like a cousin I had a crush on when I was 12. We dated a bit and we talked about all these things. I noted my wife would would not 'make love' with me and she asked me more about that. When I described what I meant and what I wanted....all the 'flowery' stuff.....she was aghast that my wife would not do that. She told me 'every woman wants a man to be so sensitive and caring in bed'. Well, apparently not all.
Somehow in the conversation we agreed to 'try this out'. It was like the proverbial batman comic. POW! WHAM! The experience was every bit as good as with my wife some 12 years earlier and I really didn't know this woman very well. About a month later (I was still very beta then) I shyly asked my fav#1 to try doing the same thing. I had grown very fond of her by this time. We had been dating about 6 months. When we 'made love' the earth moved. It really did. She had my brains scrambled. If she had hit on me for marriage around them I might have fallen. She can do this for me any time I want. I think a LOT of men are like me. Certainly many I talk to crave this similar experience. One czech woman I date is a complete natural at this. I have never been so comfortable with a woman ever. I wish the world were full of women like the women I have managed to find. Alas. They seem very, very rare. I have no idea why this is so.
"It's gotten waaaay off topic and is beginning to sound like a couple having a row."
LOL!! Yes. It would be a typical 'row'. Man presenting facts and a woman presenting distortions. That's how all my 'rows' went when I was married. ;-)
I would recommend to all young men to be much stricter on women and insist on 'honest or out'. I do now.
Marsh,
"If you wanted to be respectful, you would use your powers of persuasion"
I do not want to be respectful to western women and I do not wish to persuade western women to do anything. Western women are not relevant to solving the issues of mens rights. You made yourselves irrelevant. I tried that approach. It doesn't work. Us men are going to settle the issue and women are now bystanders. I have already created the remedy for mens rights. I thought I said that.
"I don't think it's a 'flamefest' Topher. I am certainly not bothered by Marsh. But it's worth letting the young men know this is what they are in for. It's nothing personal though women read it that way."
I'm on your side globalman but I like that the Dr Helen community is fiery without getting out of hand, and that Helen has a light touch when it comes to regulating the discussion. I would hate for that to end because a row between readers who have both since made their points drives other readers away.
That's my only concern.
Lol! You know, the biggest reason I still surf this blog is simply to read JG's thoughts.
Keep it up, sir.
And fuck you, Cham - you subversive shit.
"I WAS a christian man. I am no longer."
Ahhh, if you aren't a christian man now, you weren't one then. You were just a poser. A pretender.
"And I love how a woman would make the kind of comment 'and yet you are having sex outside marriage' while women are aborting babies"
And I love how a man who claims to care so much about aborted babies, would encourage men to have sex w/ women they are not married to. Especially in light of the fact that almost all abortions are performed on SINGLE women.
"Therefore women are not 'loving parents' like men are."
That coming from a man who disowned his own children.
That coming from a man who encourages other fathers to cheat on their children's mother.
I'm sure their children grow up and thank you for encouraging their father to betray their mother and destroy their family.
marsh,
You started making some good points, but you let yourself go beyond the edge of reason in trying to respond to globalman's arguments.
"That coming from a man who disowned his own children."
Disowned his children? There's nothing to disown. The state stole everything he has.
"That coming from a man who encourages other fathers to cheat on their children's mother."
You're buying into the "husband versus women+children" argument. Your insinuation that marital problems are crimes against the children has to go both ways. Through that lens, Globalman's ex-wife has clearly caused much more damage to the children's environment.
Why is it that people believe a wife can do whatever she wants - nag, withold, abuse - but the moment a man says "I'm done with this shit," he's the bad guy?
"I'm sure their children grow up and thank you for encouraging their father to betray their mother and destroy their family."
You seem to have no sense of moral balance. _Mrs Globalman_ destroyed the family, by refusing to be a decent marital partner and by lying and stealing from her husband in divorce.
JG,
"It sounds like the typical thing: The wife can't put herself out one iota."
That's why I put at the beginning of the thread that detente has to be practiced.
Again I blame infectious me-first feminism. The colleges and cluckers have told American women to not let men walk all other them or to ever consider their needs, so a lot of women carry a permanent chip on their shoulder and refuse to take the first initiating step towards healing. Instead they whine about how "they have to be in the mood" and put the responsibility on the man.
Then when the man they are married to initiates, they complain about being "molested."
I've seen it so many times it's not even funny. There's so much resentment underlying these issues, resentment pumped into them by the establishment. Then you get stupid books like The Rules that tell women to be _intentionally_ obstinate.
"Disowned his children? There's nothing to disown. The state stole everything he has."
I can only go by what he wrote. He said he disowned them b/c they disrespected him.
"You're buying into the "husband versus women+children" argument. Your insinuation that marital problems are crimes against the children has to go both ways."
Yes, I am buying into that argument. Are you going to tell me that a when a father cheats on his wife, that that has no effect on the children?
The pain suffered by infidelity has been compared to the pain of the death of a child. Do you think that a mother who has been cheated on is the SAME woman she was before her husband cheated?
"Why is it that people believe a wife can do whatever she wants - nag, withold, abuse - but the moment a man says "I'm done with this shit," he's the bad guy?"
I've already stated that I think it is CRUEL when either partner w/holds emotional needs from the other one.
I am not a big fan of divorce. However, I do believe there are occasions when divorce is preferable to staying married.
"You seem to have no sense of moral balance. _Mrs Globalman_ destroyed the family, by refusing to be a decent marital partner and by lying and stealing from her husband in divorce."
I don't fault him for divorcing her. I stated earlier that I thought he should have divorced her much earlier.
What I do find morally reprehensible is that he encourages fathers to cheat on their children's mother.
"Your insinuation that marital problems are crimes against the children has to go both ways."
And yes, it does go both ways. Absolutely.
The pain suffered by infidelity has been compared to the pain of the death of a child.
I find that absolutely ridiculous. Whoever said that is trying to justify something. You're losing this argument - you've made some valid points but the more you talk, the more you sound inflexible and desperate to 'win.'
Another thing is that it's very arrogant to accuse someone of not having been sincere in his faith because at some point he changed his mind. You have no way of knowing what is in another person's heart. And again, if he'd divorced her earlier, you'd probably just as readily criticize him for that, especially as you're "not a big fan of divorce."
Just let this one go.
Another thought, if people are told enough that they're meant to feel completely devastated by something, then that's how they will eventually take it. Obviously infidelity is painful, but it's definitely possible to recover from it. I don't think one recovers from losing a child in anywhere near the same way. That comparison is bordering on offensive.
"I find that absolutely ridiculous. Whoever said that is trying to justify something. "
Tell that to women who have suffered from both. I personally know three women who have. And each one said their husband's affair was more painful.
"And again, if he'd divorced her earlier, you'd probably just as readily criticize him for that, especially as you're "not a big fan of divorce."
Again, my objection has nothing to do w/ his divorce.
My objection is to his encouraging fathers to cheat of their children's mothers.
"infidelity is painful"
Good to know you can acknowledge that.
Eleanor, I'm glad you are checking in about this. I know from my own experience how hurtful relationship dishonesty and infidelity are, but too many people want to use that pain as a sort of "get out of jail free" card. As if they are justified keying his car, trashing his stuff, taking his children, levying false accusations, or even killing him.
Comparing it to the death of a child? Total sophistry.
It's a lot like Catch 22 - they want to show the world that they are insane, so they can get away with whatever they want. So they have a vested, vengeful interest in playing up the emotional pain to justify their.
I have talked with several women about their revenge fantasies against men who have cheated or even just dumped them. When they are finished, I say calmly "infidelity is wrong and hurtful, but it is not an act of violence, and you are not justified in committing violence to get back at him. Your best move for your own happiness is to accept that it's over and move on."
I always get sort of empty looks, followed by bellowing "well he deserves it!!!" in anger.
"I know from my own experience how hurtful relationship dishonesty and infidelity are"
And yet, you're OK w/ GM encouraging fathers to cheat on their children's mother?
Tell that to women who have suffered from both. I personally know three women who have. And each one said their husband's affair was more painful.
I'm only going by how I think I might react, since I haven't had either situation to deal with. Nevertheless, there is a point where people create their own suffering. You can choose how you react after a point - you can replay everything over and over in your mind and cause yourself more suffering that way, for example. We've all done it; it doesn't mean that amount of suffering in inevitable.
This may sound cold, but it isn't. If you really take an honest look at things, you can see how you allow things to hurt you. To take a light example, somewhere back up in the comments Rob called me a prude. I could have got all indignant about what a ridiculous assumption that was, and gotten into a flame war over it, but I chose instead to pay it no mind. I might have taken offence 10 years ago, but now I can't muster up giving a shit, but I would have been causing my own suffering by reacting to it. Sure, I'd blame Rob for being a jackass, but really, I'd be the one making myself suffer needlessly.
This principle can be applied to all sorts of things, including infidelity. Of course, the more serious the event, the harder it is to apply, but that doesn't mean we don't cause ourselves unnecessary suffering in relationships and when relationships come to their (perhaps inevitable) end. Furthermore, the higher the expectations, the harder the fall when those expectations are disappointed. The more unforgiving we are, the more we will suffer.
When my marriage came to an end, I wasted a lot of time being angry and blaming him. I'm not completely talking out of my ass here. I try really hard to not cause my own suffering like that anymore, and it's bloody difficult but it's well worth the effort.
"Tell that to women who have suffered from both. I personally know three women who have. And each one said their husband's affair was more painful."
Forgive my armchair psychology but Marsh has gotten so out of whack on this thread that I don't mind getting raw myself. Anybody who is more pissed/devastated that her husband's dick tapped another well than the death of her own flesh and blood is not balanced in my eyes.
In their defense, however, normally the death of a child from accident or illness is totally unpreventable. However, with cheating, there's somebody to be mad at (besides God). Just knowing that somebody made a choice that hurt can often forment a deep emotional feedback loop. Whereas events nobody could control all but require a sort of stoicism because there's nobody to blame.
There's also the fact that a child dying is major predictor of relationship problems, which can cause infidelity, so the two emotional responses are not unrelated. Depending on which comes first, the second response could be compounded by dredging up the pain of the first. I.e. these women could be projecting the pain of their child's death onto the pain of their husband's affair and charging him double.
And herein ends anymore trying to get Marsh to see a point other than her own. Good Lord.... I can see why women drive men around the bend. Sometimes I wonder why they bother with us at all. I can't really blame them for just going with a "tag and release" (as my bf put it) policy with women.
Topher, I was thinking something along those lines with your last comment but you've said it for me. Indeed, my friend, indeed.
"And yet, you're OK w/ GM encouraging fathers to cheat on their children's mother?"
You keep saying children's mother as if that makes her pure and inviolable. Are you OK with
GM's wife was cheating the marital deal by refusing to do what was reasonably expected of her. She had already made the marital contract a farce, so I don't see GM getting some stuff on the side as anywhere near the moral breach that she had already committed.
Further, I don't think it's a bad lesson for the kids to see that if you treat your partner like total dogshit for years upon years upon years, they will find someone who doesn't treat them that way.
Should have read "Are you OK with Oprahism telling wives it's OK to deny their children's father basic courtesies of marriage?"
Now that we are on the subject, may we explore the hatred and anger someone feels when their romantic partner experiences infidelity.
We have a person, male or female, that feels that they are a moral upstanding person that is in a culturally acceptable relationship. They feel they are behaving in a way that is acceptable to society by being truthful, kind, caring and responsible. Because of their behavior they feel their partner should also be truthful, kind, caring and responsible. The person also feels that because of their behavior they should earn a certain level of respect from others.
When that person finds their partner has been unfaithful all those truths that a person holds near and dear to their heart are destroyed. However, their isn't necessarily a swift and automatic punishment that society places on a cheater. You can't fine or imprison them, they don't lose their job or even get a lecture from the human resources department. Their friends don't dump them. The cheating partner gets to go on with their life with impunity. The romantic partner who has been cheated on feels victimized and helpless.
Hence, the anger and plans for passive aggressive revenge as in keying one's car. If one confronts the cheater directly with anger and violence then that person would be seen as angry and violent. But if one sneaks around at 3AM and keys the car or secretly sets the house on fire then it could have been anyone and the victim stands a big chance of getting away with it. Would a victim of infidelity want his/her cheater to be able to continue to participate in the joys of coparenting their kids? Probably not, and I can see why one would everything they could to keep the cheater from seeing their kids, not that it is the right thing to do.
Telling people to simply move on and forget about having their heart ripped out is a massive waste of effort and highly insulting. If one is angry, highly traumatized and devastated then they probably need professional help. These feelings don't get processed and eliminated quickly and easily.
Cham,
No one said it was easy, but conjuring up revenge fantasies - and in a lot of cases, carrying them out - isn't healthy or helpful.
The romantic partner who has been cheated on feels victimized and helpless.
Again, this is somewhat a choice that is encouraged by everyone who rallies around the 'victim,' justifying all their unhealthy behaviour. They may need professional help, but they can get over it more quickly if they learn to stop hurting themselves as soon as possible in the process.
Because of their behavior they feel their partner should....
But it doesn't always work that way. It's reasonable enough on the surface, but this is just too reductionist in the context of a marriage. And just because they "feel they are behaving" in a desirable way, doesn't mean they are. I know this might be nit picky, but the language you use is all about what one partner "feels," not what they do.
all those truths that a person holds near and dear to their heart are destroyed
This seems an unreasoned statement too. They have been disappointed by a human being, they have had expectations disappointed, that doesn't have to destroy a person. Using language like that encourages a person to feel worse. As painful as it may be, I like to think of things this way: Will this all matter in 50 years? One day we'll all be dead and what does all this "devastation" over someone fucking someone else add up to? Diddly squat.
And again, in probably the majority of cases, both partners could be considered victims in some capacity. Things are rarely so black and white where human beings are concerned.
I don't think anything I've said is insulting. It's just pragmatic and useful. If people are insulted, they are possibly too invested in feeling wronged and righteously indignant and in all the sympathy they get for that.
"I'm only going by how I think I might react, since I haven't had either situation to deal with. Nevertheless, there is a point where people create their own suffering. You can choose how you react after a point - you can replay everything over and over in your mind and cause yourself more suffering that way, for example. We've all done it; it doesn't mean that amount of suffering in inevitable."
Ok.
So, you are OK w/ infidelity? B/c we are all responsible for our own suffering? What other crimes/sins are you OK w/?
Cham,
You've walked right into my point with your patronizing soliloquy as if nobody reading this understands the emotional impact of infidelity. Of COURSE cheating hurts the other partner. Of COURSE they're pissed.
What's not OK, though, is using that anger as an excuse for vengeful behavior like trashing the person's things or absconding with their children. It's not legally or logically justified; it's simply revenge, which is not a founding principle of our legal system or our modern society. Your post gets very close to rationalizing these behaviors based on emotional pain.
"Telling people to simply move on and forget about having their heart ripped out is a massive waste of effort and highly insulting."
Let me clarify; I was talking to young women who were only dating, not married with years of tangible and intangible value built into the relationship. These women have much to gain from having a cry-out week and then putting it behind them.
"Anybody who is more pissed/devastated that her husband's dick tapped another well than the death of her own flesh and blood is not balanced in my eyes."
Now, you're beginning to get it. Suffer through both of these devastating events and maybe you can appreciate the full impact that can cause.
Women have had nervous breakdowns when their husbands have cheated on them.
"So, you are OK w/ infidelity? B/c we are all responsible for our own suffering? What other crimes/sins are you OK w/?"
Jesus Marsh, are you a cross-examining trial attorney? Can you acknowledge any balance in the discussion?
"Suffer through both of these devastating events and maybe you can appreciate the full impact that can cause."
More shaming language - "YOU can't understand so you can't render an opinion!"
In fact people who haven't gone through it are the only people who CAN render a reasonable, balanced analysis of the entire situation.
"You keep saying children's mother as if that makes her pure and inviolable. Are you OK with
GM's wife was cheating the marital deal by refusing to do what was reasonably expected of her."
I've already answered that question.
Here it is once more...NO. I think it is CRUEL when a spouse refuses to meet their spouses emotional needs.
Now how about answering mine?
And yet, you're OK w/ GM encouraging fathers to cheat on their children's mother?
Marsh, I didn't say I was OK with infidelity, but that doesn't mean I can't put myself in someone else's shoes and understand it. Understanding is necessary in order to be able to love.
You seem bent on trying to find that everyone here is "OK with infidelity" and using "crimes" in this context is ludicrous. You appear to have missed my point completely because of this single track you're on.
But what the hell, if we're talking "crimes," I'm OK with someone growing a marijuana plant for their own personal use. Is that off-topic enough for this thread? lol
"When that person finds their partner has been unfaithful all those truths that a person holds near and dear to their heart are destroyed. However, their isn't necessarily a swift and automatic punishment that society places on a cheater. You can't fine or imprison them, they don't lose their job or even get a lecture from the human resources department. Their friends don't dump them. The cheating partner gets to go on with their life with impunity. The romantic partner who has been cheated on feels victimized and helpless."
Yup. And don't forget when the wayward spouse gives the gift that keeps on giving...a permanent STD.
Ahhh, yes, people should just "get over" this....:rollseyes
And yet, you're OK w/ GM encouraging fathers to cheat on their children's mother?
Somehow I don't think GM's encouragement will have a lot of impact one way or the other on infidelity rates, so who cares if he does encourage it? If a man is happy with his woman, he probably won't cheat no matter how much his mates egg him on.
Ahhh, yes, people should just "get over" this....:rollseyes
Well, if people want to keep on suffering, that's their choice. I'm simply offering the idea that they don't have to suffer forever over it - and yes, some people do suffer needlessly for years on end over these things. Even if you do get an STD, what's the point in agonizing over it for years? It's not going to make it go away, any more than peering down the tracks will make a train arrive sooner.
"Somehow I don't think GM's encouragement will have a lot of impact one way or the other on infidelity rates, so who cares if he does encourage it? If a man is happy with his woman, he probably won't cheat no matter how much his mates egg him on."
IOW: You are OK w/ it.
Got it.
IOW: You are OK w/ it.
Got it.
Ha ha ha ha! Oy vey. At least you 'get' something I suppose. Enjoy being right all the time, eh.
Once more for good measure, being indifferent to someone encouraging infidelity is not the same as condoning the act of infidelity. Infidelity is not murder, nor is it criminal (at least, not anymore).
The pain suffered by infidelity has been compared to the pain of the death of a child.
I've lost a child and you have absolutely no clue how painful that is. Anyone who dares say any pain is comparable is lying. Don't you EVER make that statement again--until you have been there you have no idea.
if you aren't a christian man now, you weren't one then. You were just a poser. A pretender.
That is absolute, utter bullshit. People change. This does not make them phony nor does it necessarily make their previous self phony either. If someone genuinely converts to Christianity does that make them a fraud and a poser? I think not. Neither does converting away from Christianity.
For example; there was a time I liked working on cars. Don't any more. That doesn't invalidate the joy and fun I had then and that it was a sincere hobby. It doesn't make me a poser (anti-poser?) now--it's just something I no longer enjoy though that might change in the future (especially if I get my hands on a decent Datsun 240Z.)
"I've lost a child and you have absolutely no clue how painful that is. Anyone who dares say any pain is comparable is lying. Don't you EVER make that statement again--until you have been there you have no idea."
I have lost a child. So, yeah, I do know how it feels.
That is absolute, utter bullshit. People change. This does not make them phony nor does it necessarily make their previous self phony either. If someone genuinely converts to Christianity does that make them a fraud and a poser? I think not. Neither does converting away from Christianity.
"For example; there was a time I liked working on cars. Don't any more. That doesn't invalidate the joy and fun I had then and that it was a sincere hobby. It doesn't make me a poser (anti-poser?) now--it's just something I no longer enjoy though that might change in the future (especially if I get my hands on a decent Datsun 240Z.)"
Being a Christian is not the same thing as a hobby.
One might believe certain principles of Christianity w/o becoming a Christian.
I have lost a child. So, yeah, I do know how it feels.
Then how fucking dare you make light of it. That's disgusting and vile and about the most un-Christian thing I've seen on this site.
Being a Christian is not the same thing as a hobby.
Are you stuck on stupid? It was a metaphor. You know, like what the New Testament is full of? Do you believe that the kingdom of heaven is a mustard seed?
You completely avoid the undeniable fact that if a person converts to Christianity, by your standard they are a phony and poser.
People's convictions change. You are not the same person you were at eighteen. You won't be the same person at eighty. Your life experience will lead you to reject some things and accept others.
If you even claim to have never changed any of your convictions, you're a lying, self-delusional hypocrite.
"Being a Christian is not the same thing as a hobby.
Are you stuck on stupid? It was a metaphor. You know, like what the New Testament is full of?"
Sometimes what people write utterly amazes me. :D
"Then how fucking dare you make light of it. That's disgusting and vile and about the most un-Christian thing I've seen on this site."
How fucking dare you to drag this debate there.
I think you are vile and disgusting to accuse me of making light of it.
I think you are vile and disgusting to accuse me of making light of it.
You are a lying self-righteous hypocrite.
Wow...I've been busy working today with no internet connection. I think I like this blog. Thanks to HL for pointing me here. My comments from the array today are as follows;
Gents,
"He said he disowned them b/c they disrespected him"
No. I did not say that. I said one of the reasons I dis-owned my children was they dis-respected me and dis-honoured themselves, thereby waiving their privilege of having a father. A 'father' is NOT a right. It is a privilege. My eldest son(step) actuallly did nothing wrong. To not disown him would have been unfair to my younger son. Sometimes there are innocent casualties. He has since dis-honoured himself. The last time I saw him we had dinner and we had a great time. As he went to leave I hugged him and he must have known something was very, very wrong. I had decided it was the last time I would ever see him already. I just told him I loved him and it was time for him to go. It's very hard to tell your boy you love him and tell him it's time to go knowing you will never see him again. It was tough. But it had to be done.
"What I do find morally reprehensible is that he encourages fathers to cheat on their children's mother."
Another lie. Women like Marsh are full of lies and all you need to do is prod them a little to get the lies flowing. You men here have seen just how bad it is with Marsh as an example. I said that if a woman is not giving her husband what he needs I NOW tell him 'get what he needs' elsewhere. I do not consider it 'cheating' when a woman will not give her husband what he needs.
The other important point is this. If being faithful was at ALL important to women they would respect if and value it. They don't. What respect was I shown for being faithful to one woman for 23 years? None. If you women wanted faithful husbands you would not allow the faithful husbands to be abused. My point to young men is that no matter how good a husband you are that is no defense. In divorce you WILL be screwed over. So don't bother being a good husband in the first place. There is no point any more. Women brought this on themselves.
Eleanor
"I can see why women drive men around the bend. Sometimes I wonder why they bother with us at all."
My point to the young men is that women are now such a pain in the arse that they are actually NOT worth having 'relationships' with. I recommend young men have 'relaxionships'. Here is an interesting point. For more than a year now I have posed the following question on a multitude of boards. I am awaiting my first answer. Here is the question.
"Ladies. You keep telling me how 'valuable' you are and how 'lucky' I would be to have one of you in my life. Please name ONE THING you have to offer that is of value to a man like me."
When you remember that thousands of women have read that question and NOT ONE has been able to presenting ONE THING of value they offer to a man like me that tells the young men just how bad it is. And they have a right to know.
Gents, the raising of the 'loss of a child' comment would seem to leave open the opportunity to make this comment. My apologies if it is too far off topic but it is relavant and I have put it in other places. Dr. Helen is welcome to delete this if it is too off topic.
My step son contracted cancer and was given a 20/80 against chance to live. Through my family connections I was able to have him treated by the top cancer specialist in his area in Australia. It was proposed he was to be given a new and experimental treatment. I am told he was the first in Australia and the next two died. My wife at the time was, naturally, distraught. To cut the long story short we were broke from her wreckless spending and to pay all the bills I remained at work in Germany while my boy had chemo in Sydney. He was scheduled to have 8 chemo sessions and had the first one just before xmas 05. After the chemo he told his mother he no longer wanted to live. He could not go on and he just wanted to die now. The family was gathered together for the christmas minus me. I was distraught. I decided to go to Paris to try and lift my spirits enough to be able to return to work early in the new year. I walked the steets of Paris for three days, crying most of the time, and thankful for the winter rain to hide my tears.
One night I found myself at the tomb of the unknown soldier under the arc de triumph. I looked at the muriels and thought of all those men who died for me and mine. I could not imagine what I could do for my boy all the way across the world in Sydney. So standing there I begged God (at the time I was christiann) to tell me what to do. He told me to 'call you son'. So I called my wifes cell in Sydney and told her I needed to talk to our son. He refused to come to the phone so I told her to tell him that it was not a request, he was required to talk to me. We had a conversation where God gave me the wisdom in a minute or two to inspire my boy to save his own life. I got from him his word of honour that he would stand with me on this spot in one years time. He later related to those who would listen that it was my call that inspired him to save his own life. My boy fought like hell to save his own life after that point as he was not about to break his word to me.
For the next 5 months we did not know if he would live or die. At work I used to go and sit in the mens toilets and cry silently. When I went jogging I would wait until it was raining so I could jog in the rain and those around me could not see I was crying. I was distraught the whole time but it was required that I work to pay the bills. My eldest daughter steadfastly refused to assist her family at this time which left me working in germany and flying to dublin each weekend to care for my younger children.
My son survived. One year on we stood under the arc de triumph and hugged each other at his victory and the thanked me for inspiring him to save his life. Of such moments are lifetime memories made.
In divorce, when my ex was abusing me I asked her "Your son gives me credit for inspiring him to save his own life. What respect do you give me for this?" Her answer was "Well, I said thank you."
Infidelity? Who cares? Death of a child. Very important. I put this here to share. Even if you your wifes son gives you credit of inspiring him to save his life you will STILL be treated like shit in divorce. No question.
This comment has been removed by the author.
"Ladies. You keep telling me how 'valuable' you are and how 'lucky' I would be to have one of you in my life. Please name ONE THING you have to offer that is of value to a man like me."
A lot of people, men and women, are guilty of not thinking about what they have to offer while keeping a list of the things they want in a partner. I usually try to put people off if they express interest in me, lol.
Gents,
Mashs comment on my christianity is a little more rubbish. I became christian at 16. My parents were not christian but wanted me to make my own choice. I went to sunday school, attented bible study etc. It's too long a story but I became christian at 16. I was a well respected member of my church when married and even taught sunday school myself. My ex and I did bible study together as teens and we did bible study together all the way up to the the birth of our second child. My ex renounced her religion immediately after our second child was baptised. I stood my ground and prayed pretty much every week for the next 14 years that she would come back to our faith. I note that when she renounced her religion she did NOT renounce the benefits of being married, which were, after all, the direct result of being 'christian'.
At 45, only about 18 months ago, I came across some information that had me renounce that faith. This was about a year after separating from my wife. If Dr. Helen wishes me to share what that information was she can ask. It's way off topic. Few people can handle that information.
Eleanor,
I make the point to women that my ex fought for 2 years to take as much money off me as possible and to have a future relationship with my wallet. Thereby showing exactly what she saw in me as 'of value'. She tried to get hold of my software but she failed in that. In all likely hood I will be a millionaire in a few years from my software. It is clear for any man who looks that women do not love the man. They 'love' what the man provides. BIG difference.
My fav#1 knows exactly how to be of value to me and it is the topic of this blog. She gives me all the stroking, singing, lovemaking and sex I could wish for. She is also really interesting company. I just love spending time with her.
She is perfectly ok with me dating other woman as she accepts I can no longer be satisfied with one woman. She even said that should be marry it would be fine for me to have young girlfriends as long as I was discreet and did not bring shame on her. Perfectly ok. She made every offer under the sun to get me to have babies with her.
Women want babies. Its normal. And they want the men to pay for them. It has always been this way.
@globalman100: You might-as-well, man. This thread has already spun way out of "on-topic" discussion in several different directions... so let's hear it, eh?
This comment has been removed by the author.
q12345q6789
"so let's hear it, eh?" Not quite sure what you meant?
I see you removed your other post. So I will not put my response. My email is globman100@yahoo.co.uk. I wrote a response before noticing you removed your post.
Joe, "You are a lying self-righteous hypocrite."
That's rich coming from you! Especially in view of what I am about to point out about you...
You said:"the most un-Christian thing I've seen on this site."
Did your "Christian" sensitivities miss the posts on this thread where the God's name was taken in vain?
Did your "Christian" sensitivities miss where a poster proudly proclaims his encouraging married men to committ adultery?
Did your "Christian" sensitivities miss when the same poster took a swipe at all mothers? Even yours?.. when he said this:"Therefore women are not 'loving parents' like men are."?
Was not your "Christian" heart wounded a tiny bit by that? Enough to say, "Now wait a min. GM, you've gone too far here. My mother gave me life, tenderly cared for me at her breast, and tried to teach me right from wrong. I would not trade her love for me for anything. Nor would I tarnish her by sitting quietly while you said such a thing."
"No. I did not say that. I said one of the reasons I dis-owned my children was they dis-respected me and dis-honoured themselves, thereby waiving their privilege of having a father. A 'father' is NOT a right. It is a privilege. My eldest son(step) actuallly did nothing wrong. To not disown him would have been unfair to my younger son. Sometimes there are innocent casualties. He has since dis-honoured himself. The last time I saw him we had dinner and we had a great time. As he went to leave I hugged him and he must have known something was very, very wrong. I had decided it was the last time I would ever see him already. I just told him I loved him and it was time for him to go. It's very hard to tell your boy you love him and tell him it's time to go knowing you will never see him again. It was tough. But it had to be done."
I don't even know what to say to this. You are far worse of a father...a man than I could ever have imagined.
And yet you dare hold yourself up as a judge over how women parent???
This is an astonishing admission by you. And you actually believe you did the right thing by cutting your boys out of your life?
Wow.
"I said that if a woman is not giving her husband what he needs I NOW tell him 'get what he needs' elsewhere."
Your pathetic justification will bring little comfort to the man's children, who will find their families destroyed.
But, I guess to quote you," Sometimes there are innocent casualties." Right?
"Of such moments are lifetime memories made."
You delude yourself if you think your stepson will think more about the moment when you said "some inspiring words" to him, than the moment you hugged him and stabbed him in the back as you cut him out of your life.
"Mashs comment on my christianity is a little more rubbish. I became christian at 16. My parents were not christian but wanted me to make my own choice. I went to sunday school, attented bible study etc. It's too long a story but I became christian at 16. I was a well respected member of my church when married and even taught sunday school myself."
That's nice.
I can see how it was very important to you to add that you were a "well respected" member of your church.
Otherwise, you're just a guy who cut his children out of his life, threw away every good and decent belief you had and are just a guy who thinks that saying "COW shit", as opposed to, BULL shit is a terribly important way to impower men.
Marsh, sometimes letting commenters write endlessly and whatever they want tells us all much more than they want us know about them and also reduces every point they are attempting to make into vapor.
Post a Comment
<< Home