Don't you think "these women" aren't really suddenly desiring sex with the husband... more like they feel they SHOULD "give it up" in order to keep him, preserve the marriage, placate him...or whatever. I'd think in some cases it COULD shock the W into realizing the degree of sexual intimacy that is missing from the marriage and genuinely seeking that. But for the most part, "sexless" women aren't suddenly awoken and desiring.... IMO.
True but don't underestimate or discount the power of fear to ignite sexual arousal, albeit temporary, in a significant number of women. A good example of this you'll find in the 'Coping with infidelity' forum where quite a number former cheating wives start having what is called 'hysterical bonding' sex with their betrayed husbands who were ready to leave them and pull the plug on the marriage.
Quote:
And ya, a man should inspire his wife to love, care for and desire him.... but that works both ways.... A good woman will do the same to her H or she isn't much of a wife. THAT is when you have an awesome marriage, when it works both ways.... both spouses TRY and are conscious of wanting the other to think the best, be proud, and DESIRE them! Stage 3? I like what RDJ said about the stages.... but again, I think it applies to wives just as much as it does to husbands. We both have to give 100%, there is no 50/50
Or become like the person who discovers fiscal prudence under threat of being evicted: they learn to do it, because they have to, but hate every minute of it and would cheerfully go back to profligacy and carelessness at the drop of a hat if the chance arose
And surely will once security (whether it be in one's relationship or finances) returns. Posted via Mobile Device
__________________
Can you rokker Romani chib, pal? Aye, aye, brother!
What's Weshenjuggalslomomengreskeytemskeytudlogueri? I don't know what you say, brother.
Then you don't jin Romani chib...
True but don't underestimate or discount the power of fear to ignite sexual arousal, albeit temporary, in a significant number of women. A good example of this you'll find in the 'Coping with infidelity' forum where quite a number former cheating wives start having what is called 'hysterical bonding' sex with their betrayed husbands who were ready to leave them and pull the plug on the marriage.
And once the temporary, hysterical phase is over, and normality returns, what happens then? You haven't awakened a desire to do something, necessarily, merely expereinced an unreasoned reaction to a high stress event.
__________________
Can you rokker Romani chib, pal? Aye, aye, brother!
What's Weshenjuggalslomomengreskeytemskeytudlogueri? I don't know what you say, brother.
Then you don't jin Romani chib...
If you read Athol K, you'll see he espouses the idea of working to maintain a constant level of tension / instability in a relationship...
I have read a bunch, not all, of his stuff, and like much of what's out there, some is very worthwhile and some is ummmm ... let's just say not so good.
I'm not sure I've ever read anything of his that suggests putting your relationship in a constant state of tension/instability, but, like I said, I haven't read everything he's written. If he did write that, I'd put it in the "not so good" category. I think that would be exhausting for both parties and defeat the purpose of engaging in a long-term relationship. Why would one choose to settle down only to make an effort to keep thing constantly unsettled.
I can see some benefit in occasionally tipping the apple cart to maintain a level of excitement, but constantly? No thanks. Posted via Mobile Device
That was the point. If a man cannot inspire and lead his wife to a loving, sexual marriage. than he can let her go or live with it.
There is no silver bullet.
This I agree with. My point was that earlier posts from you (RDJ) seemed to give the impression that letting her go was a concession of sorts to men who aren't strong or able enough to elicit appropriate responses from his partner / wife.
I was simply trying to show that there are substantial numbers of women who simply will not come around through no fault or deficiency on the man's part. Additionally, there are women making demands for their compliance that no man should make even if he is able (like trading sex for gifts or excessive chores).
The bit below is a gross distortion. Athol's actual message is more like this:
If your LD partner is taking you and your love/commitment for granted, that is often because you have conveyed the idea that no matter how little love they show you, you will always meet all their needs. The only way to change that perception is to stop loving unconditionally. and doing so DOES destabilize the relationship. Your partner suddenly sees you putting yourself first more and more often. They realize you are starting to say "no", a word that previously the only heard when it came from their mouth.
The LD partner and their advocates tend to scream foul when this is done. In fact it is simply a rebalancing activity.
But they can't ever really explain why it is so unfair.
UOTE=FrankKissel;569363]I have read a bunch, not all, of his stuff, and like much of what's out there, some is very worthwhile and some is ummmm ... let's just say not so good.
I'm not sure I've ever read anything of his that suggests putting your relationship in a constant state of tension/instability, but, like I said, I haven't read everything he's written. If he did write that, I'd put it in the "not so good" category. I think that would be exhausting for both parties and defeat the purpose of engaging in a long-term relationship. Why would one choose to settle down only to make an effort to keep thing constantly unsettled.
I can see some benefit in occasionally tipping the apple cart to maintain a level of excitement, but constantly? No thanks. Posted via Mobile Device[/QUOTE] Posted via Mobile Device
Why would one choose to settle down only to make an effort to keep thing constantly unsettled.
I can see some benefit in occasionally tipping the apple cart to maintain a level of excitement, but constantly? No thanks.
It's not done constantly it's only done when absolutely necessary. It's human nature (sometimes) to take people for granted especially your spouse. When that happens some type of action must be taken and for many people just talking about it doesn't work therefore they need to up their game.
I do believe if you have to do this often you've got bigger problems than you know. So on that I agree with you.
Sometimes two people have NO CHANCE of marital success simply because they lie to themselves.
My ex knew exactly what she was getting since we dated for about eight months and she knew my occupation required at least 16 hours per day at work. She also know what she was getting in the sex department since we were active before marriage.
Why did she want to get married?
Greed. She correctly saw in me a meal ticket who could provide for her the things she wasn't accustomed to having.
Here it is, two years and a few months after the divorce and she now thinks she made "mistake" and wants me to take her back.
The second guy she was humping after the divorce has finally dumped her.
I'm sure that I shared in responsibility for the split, but I have nothing left to give her.
As a man you take responsibility for your marriage.
Your wife is only as b!tchy, angry, disrespectful, loveless, and sexless as YOU allow.
If a man does not have the balls to stand up and set the guidelines for what is and is not acceptable. Then he has no one to blame but himself.
It's all about mutual happiness. But if a woman will not take on her part of the marriage, then a man should take the lead.
Regardless of who takes the blame, he has the ability to inspire change in himself and in her.
As I said, if he can't get her to do so then "let her go". If he can't do either, he has no right to complain, he creates his own misery.
So is the man to blame ? More than likely, YES!
It's not that simple in some cases...and believe me I'm all for simplicity if possible.
What you describe there "if he can't get her to do so" is so incredibly subjective. I have a wife who is culturally AND personally prone to be headstrong. It is one of the things I love so very much about her. But...that means standing up to her will likely not lead to the positive results you elude to. Her strength is independence.
Staying with her is about so much. It's about my little girls, it's about that promise I made to her, to God and to myself on that rainy day in June 6 years ago.
At some point we all have to realize that people will ultimately do what is important to them. If one spouse is no longer willing to put forth effort that is fundamental to a stable healthy relationship...it is and always will be THAT persons fault. Shaft or Taco is of no consequence.
RDJ, just caught up on this thread (more like skipped over). Anyways, it definitely resonates with me, but also bothers me a whole lot because lately I feel like I am missing something in myself so badly, that has caused me to get far off track from your model of male adult development.
I think I just skipped stage 1. I am the nice guy that would never accept being selfish. I repressed all of that. And now looking back at my failed marriage I wonder if I was just faking it all along? My marriage ended in what would be your idea of stage 2, and pretty early on in it. We set up some routines that definitely were not healthy and she bolted really quickly.
So, in your model, if a man is way off track, skipped a stage but found himself right smack in the middle of stage 2 is it possible for him to get to stage 3? Personally I think my divorce has sparked a lot of work in myself to get to what looks like your stage 3, but now I have nobody to go through it with. Nor can I go redo stage 1, because I have a child that I am responsible for... your model doesn't seem to work for those who arrive at divorce, nor for those that haven't gone out and been a player.
I'm working on rewriting my NG road map, doing some of the breaking free exercises in Glover's book, but it is hard to feel much hope, its like you get one try in life, and when you get eliminated you are discarded, however I'm still here along with the majority of other men who ended up eliminated, so what do us rejects do, can't go back to the beginning, can't jump the queue. Where to? All I want to know right now is if there is something I am missing how can I find it...
Her husband was a drunk and and emoionally abusive. Her marriage was almost sexless. She grew up on a farm in Europe. She came to the states at 16. She's the oldest of 5. She was a virgin when she married him, and has had no other man besides her x and me.
I think, she was the oldest and raised the most European (strictest), and she found my wild side appealing because secretly she always wanted to be a "bad girl". She often says I went after her because she was a naive "Goody Two Shoes"...
Then after she turned 50 something, and menopause kicked in, my colorful past was no longer sexy or intriguing, but repulsive.
Sinnister,
We married the same woman. The differences are:
- I know what is important to me, everything else I make easy/fun for her
- The stuff that is important to me, either gets handled in a way I find acceptable OR the remaining 90% of our interactions (which are HIGHLY positive, supportive and fun for her) rapidly stop. I don't yell or scream. I don't pout or snap at the kids. I am not hostile towards my W. I simply filter her out of my consideration.
Because she fully "grasps" the cause and effect of our interactions I very rarely have to go into "180 lite" mode. She HATES when I do that. But then, she gets to select the duration of that experience. A simple apology followed by a commitment to do better in the future produces an immediate thaw.
That said, my W has a few soft spots. I could work those in a self serving way and "weaken" her self esteem to make her "easier/less demanding/etc.". That would be emotionally toxic for her though.
You seem to have sold yourself the idea that you cannot firmly assert your boundaries. If I am right about that, your marriage will eventually end in tears. Even if you "stay together" on paper, you will end up without a real relationship.
The notion that you cannot insist on comparable treatment without "attacking" her independence, is simply false.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sinnister
It's not that simple in some cases...and believe me I'm all for simplicity if possible.
What you describe there "if he can't get her to do so" is so incredibly subjective. I have a wife who is culturally AND personally prone to be headstrong. It is one of the things I love so very much about her. But...that means standing up to her will likely not lead to the positive results you elude to. Her strength is independence.
Staying with her is about so much. It's about my little girls, it's about that promise I made to her, to God and to myself on that rainy day in June 6 years ago.
At some point we all have to realize that people will ultimately do what is important to them. If one spouse is no longer willing to put forth effort that is fundamental to a stable healthy relationship...it is and always will be THAT persons fault. Shaft or Taco is of no consequence.
Stage one marriages become sexless because someone (usually the man) becomes selfish about getting his own needs met and undermines the relationship with his needy and manipulative behavior. Stage two marriages become sexless because someone (usually the woman) decides that the marriage has lost all passion and excitement. It no longer inspires her to feel loved. They negotiated all of the passion out in favor of peaceful co-existence, and now she wants the passion back.
This might be the most hilarious statement in history:"someone (usually the man) becomes selfish about getting his own needs met and undermines the relationship with his needy and manipulative behaviour."
This is classic female behavior. You obviously aren't married, because any man who is married knows this is the story of their lives! LOL!
Every human being wants their "needs" met. The societal difference is that women are preconditioned to demand "needs" from men and men are preconditioned to try to meet those needs.
As men, we want to make our women happy! Women want to make their men happy too, but they aren't preprogrammed to the same degree that men are. This is why the world as we know it exists today. Women haven't really created anything of consequence, men have. Lights, electricity, cars, homogenized milk, clean water, buildings, bridges, boats, planes....our entire functional world was made by men. And likely by a man trying to impress a woman, at some core level.
I think what most men ask is that women recognize that we live for you. And we are programmed to. So please, don't abuse this knowledge. Don't make us feel guilty every time we don't live up to your expectations.
We love you women so much, and all we want is your approval. So make us feel like men, instead of constantly expressing disappointment, and I promise, you will always be happy.
If you want a man, you have the power to create one in your husband. Make him feel like one. I promise it will be the brightest flower you ever planted.
Let's be brutally honest here: getting married represents zero financial downside for a woman, and zero financial upside for a man (usually) - even when a woman earns more than a man; because women typically don't earn that money for long - due to motherhood. That's why women love weddings.
Can you imagine the man's equivalent of a wedding? A justice of the Peace walks up to you and says "from this point forward your will either be happy, or you will receive a financial compensation for not being happy."
Who in a million years would ever turn that down? And more to the point: with this kind of legal backdrop, who do you think is going to be the bigger ******* in the subsequent relationship? When you have no downside, you are bound to - at least, subconsciously, - be a bit of a *****.
Women demand happiness because (a) they think they deserve it and (b) if they don't get it, the man pays them money. Nice position to be in, if I do say so myself.
Men don't demand happiness. Men's lot is to provide it. 70% of divorces are filed by women. Why? Are women 70% less happy? Hardly. Men are at least equally miserable in their marriages. The difference isn't happiness. The difference is the sense of entitlement. Men don't feel entitled to happiness - to the contrary, many (most?) men see it as their lot in life to provide for lady and family. And many are miserable doing it. But why do they continue? Are women 70% less happy?
No. The reason only 30% of divorces are filed by men is, frankly, only 1/3 of men have the balls to look in the mirror and say "no matter how financially devastating divorce may be, she's a big enough ***** chart it's worth it".
95% of Women have no downside to divorce, so entering and exiting a marriage is rather easy. Men have trouble both entering a marriage AND exiting it, for the reverse reason: lots of downside, both to propose, and to file.
76Likes
Re: Is it always the man’s fault? 
