What is the point of marriage?

[mkgal1]

Are women not tempted to want to be loved for the physical temptation they represent? It goes round and round.

It's not a "temptation" to want to be genuinely loved.

 

[russianorth]

The only problem I see with this is the idea that men are peculiarly affected by this. They aren't. A constantly rejected woman is going to face the same issues as a constantly rejected man. Your average woman's range of what "sex" entails might be broader than your average man's, but both need to be wanted, that's for sure.

Porn is an easy target to rail against, though. It's easy to point fingers and say "you shouldn't do that!" Much harder is to look down deep and examine your own heart and the heart of your spouse (wretchedly honest mirror that every spouse is!) and soothe what's there with kindness and patience and wisdom.

May the Lord have mercy on us all.

That's why I have learned that as a man with few options its best to find a woman with few options. Then both try a lot harder at the relationship.

The most messed up dynamic is when one partner is getting hit on constantly and the other one would be out in the cold if they were left.

 

[seeingeyes]

That's why I have learned that as a man with few options its best to find a woman with few options. Then both try a lot harder at the relationship.

The most messed up dynamic is when one partner is getting hit on constantly and the other one would be out in the cold if they were left.

And I find your view to be depressingly self-absorbed. Though I suppose it's a protective measure.

Don't let your troubles harden you, friend.

 

[russianorth]

And I find your view to be depressingly self-absorbed. Though I suppose it's a protective measure.

Don't let your troubles harden you, friend.

I would not say its hardened me but you have to do what works. Continually doing the same things that dont work is insanity.

 

[iambren]

"The only problem I see with this is the idea that men are peculiarly affected by this. They aren't. A constantly rejected woman is going to face the same issues as a constantly rejected man. Your average woman's range of what "sex" entails might be broader than your average man's, but both need to be wanted, that's for sure."

I see your point but respectfully disagree. I believe that the wiring of men vs women with regards to sexuality is different and in that difference man is more vulnerable. I too have seen the heart-cries of women whose husbands have sexually abandoned them. Their pain is real. I have had two women call me whose heart was broken over their husbands absence: one was due to porn and one was due to a husband (bipolar) on a manic high chasing every skirt in every strip-club he could find.

There's a difference to a man's sexuality. I can't adequately explain it but it seems woven into his whole identity-calling. It just seems that way to me and I see a lot of men suffering,often in silence. And I myself have been in their shoes,the knot in the stomach,the lost disillusion from being sexually rejected. There's a lot gained in the "point of marriage" but sexual rejection should never be part of it.

 

[seeingeyes]

There's a lot gained in the "point of marriage" but sexual rejection should never be part of it.

We certainly agree on that.

 

[Hetta]

There's a difference to a man's sexuality. I can't adequately explain it but it seems woven into his whole identity-calling. It just seems that way to me and I see a lot of men suffering,often in silence. And I myself have been in their shoes,the knot in the stomach,the lost disillusion from being sexually rejected. There's a lot gained in the "point of marriage" but sexual rejection should never be part of it

If any man's whole identity is tied up to sexuality, then he has a problem.

There is nothing biblical about men hurting men more from rejection. Rejection is rejection and it hurts the rejected, regardless of gender.

 

[iambren]

We certainly agree on that.

You're very graceful,SeeingEyes. I live in Newark OH, where in the heck is Backwoods???

 

[iambren]

"If any man's whole identity is tied up to sexuality, then he has a problem.

There is nothing biblical about men hurting men more from rejection. Rejection is rejection and it hurts the rejected, regardless of gender."


Oh but it IS tied up to his identity and that was exactly my point. I wouldn't say it was the TOP of his priorities for that would be idolatry.

And I agree,rejection hurts both genders--I think I made that clear in my post.

 

[seeingeyes]

You're very graceful,SeeingEyes. I live in Newark OH, where in the heck is Backwoods???

I'm in ashtabula county, way up in the NE of ohio. I just call it "backwoods" cause i'm surrounded by cows and amish folks.

 

[Hetta]

Oh but it IS tied up to his identity and that was exactly my point. I wouldn't say it was the TOP of his priorities for that would be idolatry.

Then "he" has worse problems than rejection. We are all sexual beings, but how often a person has sex should not be part of their "identity".

 

[seeingeyes]

Then "he" has worse problems than rejection. We are all sexual beings, but how often a person has sex should not be part of their "identity".

I don't know that I agree completely. Like, if your husband just stopped telling you that you were beautiful, that would certainly take a toll, no? Sex is just a physical manifestation of that.

Our interactions with others do affect our identity, and sex is a rather significant interaction. (Though, if our idea of ourselves comes entirely from outside sources, we're doomed.)

 

[Hetta]

I don't know that I agree completely. Like, if your husband just stopped telling you that you were beautiful, that would certainly take a toll, no? Sex is just a physical manifestation of that.

Our interactions with others do affect our identity, and sex is a rather significant interaction. (Though, if our idea of ourselves comes entirely from outside sources, we're doomed.)

I don't base my marriage on if or when my husband tells me I am beautiful, and I don't consider sex to be based upon that. I also don't base my identity on my sexuality. I'm a lot more than a body 'in heat'.

 

[seeingeyes]

I don't base my marriage on if or when my husband tells me I am beautiful, and I don't consider sex to be based upon that. I also don't base my identity on my sexuality. I'm a lot more than a body 'in heat'.

Right, but you do in fact have a body, and that body is part of who you are. And the love that your husband shows to your body (whether through sex or through bringing you a bowl of soup when your sick) is an important part of your marriage and hence, a part of who you are.

Perhaps I'm getting too philosophical for this conversation, but I think that the tendency to divorce the physical from the spiritual is a mistake. James said that telling someone who is cold and hungry to stay warm and well fed without offering cover and food is useless. And when the crowds got hungry, Jesus didn't tell them to pipe down and be satisfied with spiritual bread, but he fed them. And surely that affected the crowd's view of Jesus, and in turn, that affected their view of themselves (they "became" people that someone was willing to feed).

I think that all these things are connected. And sex falls under that umbrella of "how others treat me".

 

[Hetta]

Right, but you do in fact have a body, and that body is part of who you are. And the love that your husband shows to your body (whether through sex or through bringing you a bowl of soup when your sick) is an important part of your marriage and hence, a part of who you are.

Ah, but this wasn't about bowls of soup. It was just sex. Not kindness, consideration etc.

Perhaps I'm getting too philosophical for this conversation, but I think that the tendency to divorce the physical from the spiritual is a mistake. James said that telling someone who is cold and hungry to stay warm and well fed without offering cover and food is useless. And when the crowds got hungry, Jesus didn't tell them to pipe down and be satisfied with spiritual bread, but he fed them. And surely that affected the crowd's view of Jesus, and in turn, that affected their view of themselves (they "became" people that someone was willing to feed).

But those are literal bodily needs. You can die from being cold and hungry. You don't die from lack of sex. Kindness and love is another thing.

I think that all these things are connected. And sex falls under that umbrella of "how others treat me".

I disagree. "Others" are not involved in sex. Sex is not a life or death issue, and it's not a whole part of my identity. As I get older and sex becomes less - becomes it does as you age - it doesn't make me any less of a person. So, say, for instance my husband became impotent (he's not, just saying), I wouldn't bug him to take Viagra or any of the other drugs, because that would not be good for his heart and could risk him leaving this earth a lot sooner than otherwise. So if there came that point, where sex was no longer taking place, would our identities be changed? Would we no longer be husband and wife? Would I be a different woman and he a different man? I don't believe that to be true, because our identities as husband and wife are based in a lot more than sex. Hence, that is why I would bring him a bowl of soup if he was sick.

 

[seeingeyes]

Ah, but this wasn't about bowls of soup. It was just sex. Not kindness, consideration etc.

Why do you say "just sex"? Sex is certainly a way to demonstrate kindness consideration, etc.

But those are literal bodily needs. You can die from being cold and hungry. You don't die from lack of sex. Kindness and love is another thing.

I don't limit my giving to things that literally prevent death, neither do you, neither did Jesus. Those people weren't starving, just hungry.

I disagree. "Others" are not involved in sex. Sex is not a life or death issue, and it's not a whole part of my identity. As I get older and sex becomes less - becomes it does as you age - it doesn't make me any less of a person. So, say, for instance my husband became impotent (he's not, just saying), I wouldn't bug him to take Viagra or any of the other drugs, because that would not be good for his heart and could risk him leaving this earth a lot sooner than otherwise. So if there came that point, where sex was no longer taking place, would our identities be changed? Would we no longer be husband and wife? Would I be a different woman and he a different man? I don't believe that to be true, because our identities as husband and wife are based in a lot more than sex. Hence, that is why I would bring him a bowl of soup if he was sick.

I don't consider "sex" to be limited to "bumping uglies", though. (Just to clarify.) Even if his ability for intercourse goes out the window, you would still be physically intimate with him in a way that you wouldn't be with any other man, and that would affect his view of his wife, which would in turn affect his view of himself.

These things are all connected. Sex is not something that should be put on a shelf over there somewhere as though it is an irrelevant add-on to our self-perception. It isn't. Should someone's identity be completely tied up with sex? Certainly not, that's big trouble. But it's not a non-issue, either. It's brightly colored thread in the fabric of who we are.

 

[Hetta]

Why do you say "just sex"? Sex is certainly a way to demonstrate kindness consideration, etc.

Typically not so much to a sick person. Maybe it's just me but when I'm sick, sex isn't the top of my agenda.

I don't limit my giving to things that literally prevent death, neither do you, neither did Jesus. Those people weren't starving, just hungry.

Nonetheless, they were physical needs.

I don't consider "sex" to be limited to "bumping uglies", though. (Just to clarify.) Even if his ability for intercourse goes out the window, you would still be physically intimate with him in a way that you wouldn't be with any other man, and that would affect his view of his wife, which would in turn affect his view of himself.

These things are all connected. Sex is not something that should be put on a shelf over there somewhere as though it is an irrelevant add-on to our self-perception. It isn't. Should someone's identity be completely tied up with sex? Certainly not, that's big trouble. But it's not a non-issue, either. It's brightly colored thread in the fabric of who we are.

I never said it was a non-issue ever, and bear in mind that the person who initiated this dialogue said that it was more a male thing than a female thing - your argument seems to be that both genders feel as strongly about sex, and therefore would be equally damaged by rejection. Which was my point in the first place. Sex is certainly a part of my fabric, but it doesn't inform my identity to where rejection would kill me, but nor would I take well to having sex removed from my identity entirely for no good reason.

 

[seeingeyes]

I never said it was a non-issue ever, and bear in mind that the person who initiated this dialogue said that it was more a male thing than a female thing - your argument seems to be that both genders feel as strongly about sex, and therefore would be equally damaged by rejection. Which was my point in the first place. Sex is certainly a part of my fabric, but it doesn't inform my identity to where rejection would kill me, but nor would I take well to having sex removed from my identity entirely for no good reason.

It seems like sex is 20% of a marriage when your having it and 80% when you're not (assuming everyone is physically capable and healthy enough). I can't speak to whether complete rejection by my husband would "kill" me, as I've never been through that. I like to think I'm tougher than that, but I doubt I would stick around for daily rejection.

Though I can certainly see how having half a lifetime of sexual acceptance from one's spouse would make it less of a factor in one's self-perception overall. In the same way that I no longer have to love the same bands that my friends do like when I was a tween, the discrete act of intercourse becomes less of a factor in marriage when there has been been a pattern of acceptance and understanding and generosity with regards to sex over the years.

I'm sure we're way off topic by now, but thanks for your input.

 

[mkgal1]

There's a difference to a man's sexuality. I can't adequately explain it but it seems woven into his whole identity-calling. It just seems that way to me and I see a lot of men suffering,often in silence. And I myself have been in their shoes,the knot in the stomach,the lost disillusion from being sexually rejected.

I agree with Hetta---that's not a healthy thing. That sounds more like some sort of bondage (not fetish bondage.....but something our enemy has a hold on due to believing some sort of lie). Any time we are dependent on something besides God and His provision.....there's that possibility of becoming bound. It's God's desire (IMO...based on Scripture) that He wants us to live FREE. I hate to sound like the guy on the corner of an urban city that carries a sign saying "REPENT".....but that really sounds more like oppression than "just how guys are". That would be an evil thing for God to create that in men (without a way for them to be "redeemed" or "freed".....so I can't buy into that.

However....(and I know this may sound ridiculous).....but that longing....that desire (hungry heart---remember that song?)....may be woven into all of us---but it's not sexual---it's a longing to connect with God.

Bono from U2 writes about that desire:

I have kissed honey lips
Felt the healing in her fingertips
It burned like fire
This burning desire

I have spoke with the tongue of angels
I have held the hand of a devil
It was warm in the night
I was cold as a stone

But I still haven't found what I'm looking for
But I still haven't found what I'm looking for

I believe in the kingdom come
Then all the colors will bleed into one
Bleed into one
Well yes I'm still running

You broke the bonds and you
Loosed the chains
Carried the cross
Of my shame
Of my shame
You know I believed it.

 

[Inkachu]

FWIW there's a big, big, BIG difference between going without sex with mutual consent (if someone is sick, tired, away from home) and experiencing sexual rejection.