Wise Advice to heed...

[ChiRho]

On marital disintegration

Being privy to a relationship or three which appear to be foundering - or have already sunk into the depths - there's a few common themes I've noted. Perhaps the most important is that while both sexes are more than a little confused about their roles, it's the wives who seem particularly out to sea with regards to their priorities.

It might help, I think, for some women to remember what their vows are centered on, and the special role they have taken in their husband's lives. Seriously, with the priorities I've seen some women display, I can only wonder what job they thought they were signing up for.

If you worry more about what you're going to serve a man for dinner than how you're going to rock his world later, you're not his wife, you're his cook.

If you spend more time obsessing about the last time you cleaned the house than the last time you had sex, you're not his wife, you're his cleaning lady.

If the children are always your top priority at all times, then you're not his wife, you're the nanny - or maybe just the day care center.

It's not that these things are unimportant, because they are, it's that they should be secondary concerns in a marriage. Your husband didn't vow to be faithful to your cooking and to never eat at another restaurant, after all. And sure, there will be times you're not in the mood or whatever, but you might want to consider this: would you consider that reasonable grounds for him refusing to pay the mortage or the health insurance? Sex, like love, is a choice. If you're always waiting for things to magically happen and sweep you away, you need to grow up and quit sleeping with the stuffed unicorn with the rainbows on it.

From what I've seen, there's no shortage of men and women who simply don't take marriage very seriously and refuse to accept any responsibilities within it. But failing to accept them doesn't mean they don't exist and that there won't be consequences for doing so.

(As for those pathetic women who can find four hours to watch sitcom sexcapades on TV every night but can't find an hour for the real thing, you'd be wise to buy your husband a subscription to the porn site of his preference and budget for a call girl once a month if you don't want to wind up collecting cats.)

There's a reason why call girls make considerably more money per hour than cooks, cleaners and day care workers, after all. This is because the service they provide is significantly more important to men.

I don't condone my acquaintances who leave their frigid wives and move on to friendlier climes with a free-at-last smile on their faces, but it's certainly no mystery why they would do so, leaving behind a woman who laments how she can't imagine what went wrong when she was such a perfect cook, housekeeper and mother.

God is good. He knew what he was doing when he gave us Chinese takeout, the Roomba and early bedtimes.​

- Vox Day (here)

 

[SPALATIN]

On marital disintegration

Being privy to a relationship or three which appear to be foundering - or have already sunk into the depths - there's a few common themes I've noted. Perhaps the most important is that while both sexes are more than a little confused about their roles, it's the wives who seem particularly out to sea with regards to their priorities.


It might help, I think, for some women to remember what their vows are centered on, and the special role they have taken in their husband's lives. Seriously, with the priorities I've seen some women display, I can only wonder what job they thought they were signing up for.

If you worry more about what you're going to serve a man for dinner than how you're going to rock his world later, you're not his wife, you're his cook.

If you spend more time obsessing about the last time you cleaned the house than the last time you had sex, you're not his wife, you're his cleaning lady.

If the children are always your top priority at all times, then you're not his wife, you're the nanny - or maybe just the day care center.

It's not that these things are unimportant, because they are, it's that they should be secondary concerns in a marriage. Your husband didn't vow to be faithful to your cooking and to never eat at another restaurant, after all. And sure, there will be times you're not in the mood or whatever, but you might want to consider this: would you consider that reasonable grounds for him refusing to pay the mortage or the health insurance? Sex, like love, is a choice. If you're always waiting for things to magically happen and sweep you away, you need to grow up and quit sleeping with the stuffed unicorn with the rainbows on it.

From what I've seen, there's no shortage of men and women who simply don't take marriage very seriously and refuse to accept any responsibilities within it. But failing to accept them doesn't mean they don't exist and that there won't be consequences for doing so.

(As for those pathetic women who can find four hours to watch sitcom sexcapades on TV every night but can't find an hour for the real thing, you'd be wise to buy your husband a subscription to the porn site of his preference and budget for a call girl once a month if you don't want to wind up collecting cats.)

There's a reason why call girls make considerably more money per hour than cooks, cleaners and day care workers, after all. This is because the service they provide is significantly more important to men.

I don't condone my acquaintances who leave their frigid wives and move on to friendlier climes with a free-at-last smile on their faces, but it's certainly no mystery why they would do so, leaving behind a woman who laments how she can't imagine what went wrong when she was such a perfect cook, housekeeper and mother.

God is good. He knew what he was doing when he gave us Chinese takeout, the Roomba and early bedtimes.
​

- Vox Day (here)

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to ChiRho again

 

[BigNorsk]

Everytime I read something like that I think the overal response is exactly the opposite of what the poster thinks he is promoting. Rather than the response being more sex and more love, such a thing is seen as a lack of love which produces lack of good feelings which produces lack of sex, the whole thing tends to spiral downward.

I don't find it very helpful for a man, commanded by God to love his wife as Christ loves his church, to point to the failing of womankind until he has successufully upheld his end of the bargain. I think such a rant just makes things more difficult for the rest of us. Frankly, it would make life easier for a lot of guys if fellows such as this would learn to shut up.

Do some women put too many conditions in place before they "grant" sex to their husband? Sure. But I don't think the way to deal with this is just to say put a smile on your face and put out. A couple is a little more complex than that.

Let each of us first correct himself, then correct the men around us, and only then, if necessary, with love and gentleness, correct women.

When was the last time you sent a man who was spending too much time out with the boys home?

When a man goes on a rant about his girlfriend or wife, do you feed it, or do you try to get him to examine himself?

Women are an amazing wonderful gift from God, not perfect, but after all, look at what God had to work with for material.

 

[ByzantineDixie]

The guy who wrote this is either 21 years old or is an AARPer on his second marriage to a woman half his age who just had his Viagra prescription refilled. The "real thing"...gimme a break.

 

[SPALATIN]

The guy who wrote this is either 21 years old or is an AARPer on his second marriage to a woman half his age who just had his Viagra prescription refilled. The "real thing"...gimme a break.

Whoever said that Marriage is a 50-50 proposition is incorrect. It is the husband giving 100% of himself to his wife and the wife giving 100% of herself to her husband.

It may very well be that the opinion is skewed in a certain way. there are some truths in it, but I think that upon a second reading I would have to say that real life trumps it all. My wife is not my slave, nor am I hers. We give of each other as close to 100% that we can on a daily basis. Somedays it is more some days less.

VOX is speaking his opinion of the situation, but I think to a large extent that you are correct BD.

 

[ChiRho]

The guy who wrote this is either 21 years old or is an AARPer on his second marriage to a woman half his age who just had his Viagra prescription refilled. The "real thing"...gimme a break.

Well, as it turns out, he is neither. I'm unsure where exactly you disagree, Rose?

My girlfriend found this refreshing.

 

[ChiRho]

Everytime I read something like that I think the overal response is exactly the opposite of what the poster thinks he is promoting. Rather than the response being more sex and more love, such a thing is seen as a lack of love which produces lack of good feelings which produces lack of sex, the whole thing tends to spiral downward.

Lack of love which leads to lack of sex? C'mon, since when is love a feeling? Unless there are specific agreements understood before entering into the marriage, such as mutual abstinence, sex is a necessary requirement of marriage. Again, it is a choice, not a feeling. I am sure there will be times that my future wife will not "feel" like having sex, but how is that different any other expression of love? Should I refuse to fulfill other responsibilities because I'm "not in the mood"?

I don't find it very helpful for a man, commanded by God to love his wife as Christ loves his church, to point to the failing of womankind until he has successufully upheld his end of the bargain. I think such a rant just makes things more difficult for the rest of us. Frankly, it would make life easier for a lot of guys if fellows such as this would learn to shut up.

Where is the the "point to the failing of womankind"? I think Vox is speaking about a specific group of women. His rant is against women who misunderstand the proper roles of wife and mother. The roles are not the same. In a family, I am husband first, father second (wife first, mother second).

As to this making things more difficult, I ask how?

Do some women put too many conditions in place before they "grant" sex to their husband? Sure. But I don't think the way to deal with this is just to say put a smile on your face and put out.

And why not? Unless of course you are still under the assumption that sex and love are nothing but pure emotions.

A couple is a little more complex than that.

I love my girlfriend. God willing, I will call her wife early next year. Our relationship is very simple without complex drama.

Let each of us first correct himself, then correct the men around us, and only then, if necessary, with love and gentleness, correct women.

Who sets this order and why?

When was the last time you sent a man who was spending too much time out with the boys home?

Not exactly sure what you mean here, but I will try. It sounds as if you are confusing father with husband. Father is a natural result from husband, not the other way around. We are called to love our wives (this means true love, which is a conscious decision, not an emotion). Being a good father is a result of first loving our wives.

When a man goes on a rant about his girlfriend or wife, do you feed it, or do you try to get him to examine himself?

It depends, is his rant justified? Of course, self examination is always necessary, but there really are times that the lady is at fault. It does happen.

Women are an amazing wonderful gift from God, not perfect, but after all, look at what God had to work with for material.

Is this supposed to be funny?

 

[Flipper]

No comment to make. Just want to post to make it a "subscribed thread" so I can follow it.

 

[BigNorsk]

God's directions about marriage seem pretty clear to me. I'm not sure where the instructions to go out with the guys and complain your wife isn't perfect are, could you give me the verses? All I can find is instructions to love my wife as Christ loves the church. I have some difficulty seeing gossiping about wives as an expression of amazing love.

Ranting about the failings of one's partner is a juvenile, selfish act. (I bolded it for you so you could catch the fundamental statement in this post, didn't want you to miss it.)

One who's foundation is that the ranter isn't getting what he or she deserves. I don't believe it's correct to encourage selfishness in people. What they deserve is eternity in hell. Once we get past the selfishness a little, and see that the imperfect spouse is a blessing and a ministry then maybe something good can happen.

I believe the principal of first working on yourself and your own sins before pointing the sins of other out is biblical based on:
Matthew 7:3-5 NET
(3) Why do you see the speck in your brother's eye, but fail to see the beam of wood in your own?
(4) Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove the speck from your eye,' while there is a beam in your own?
(5) You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

If you can show where the men involved are diligently working at being good husbands I will shut up. But I'm going to have a hard time believing it of a bunch of guys who go out with other guys and spend their time complaining about women. Gossip doesn't seem to me to be a removing beam type of activity.

The rant also does not seem to me to be specific at all but to deal with wives as a stereotype, and it puts primary responsibility on the wives as to the "failing" of marriages. I thought men were the head of the household?

Let's look at the rant a little. He is privy (wonder why people are talking about their marriages to him and not to each other) to failing marriages. Shall we speculate a little? It sounds to me like this fellow ends up gossiping about their wives with other guys. Maybe lubricated with a little alcohol. Seems to me what we have is men out with the boys (not their wives) drinking and complaining that their wife isn't receptive to having more sex with them.

Now there is a saying in therapy "No man is a hero to his wife's therapist." Why is that? Because just one side from one perspective is presented. Let's look at some facts and not the gripes.

If you aren't getting enough sex with your wife, you won't get more by leaving home. Walking out into the desert isn't smart behavior if what you are looking for is a nice drink of cool water.

Instead of feeding their rant and their stupid behavior, it would be more loving towards these men to get up, kick their butt out the door and tell them to go home and work it out. They are men going into the desert because they are thirsty, and then they are so stupid they complain about the oasis back home.

I will explain once the entire rationalization of why I said.

1. first correct himself. Already shown the beam in the eye.

2. correct the men around us. Gossip is sinful, if your "friends" are engaging and engaging you in sinful behavior, that needs to stop, now.

3. then correct the women. Actually, in most cases, I don't think you, the confidant of the husband, should be heading off to his home to correct his wife. Not really your role so to speak. Better to support the ministry of the elder women in the congregation helping the younger wives love their husband.

I doubt in most cases that her husband's buddies showing up on her doorstep and saying that she isn't giving her husband enough sex will produce the desired responses, but maybe if she tells him if he goes out again she is just going to divorce him it would all work out for the best. They would spend time together and he wouldn't be lead astray by his buddies. Of course the remaining group of men could spend their time talking about how he needs to cut the apron strings or put his foot down and show the wife who's boss, but he wouldn't be there so the damage to his marriage wouldn't be great.

The strange thing to me is, after destroying their marriages through neglect those same guys are willing to spend a lot of effort finding the next wife.

You are right that love isn't just a feeling it's actions, what I will wait for is an explanation of how going out with the guys and complaining about the lack of sex at home is an act of love.

Marv

 

[AngelusSax]

And why not? Unless of course you are still under the assumption that sex and love are nothing but pure emotions.

What... the... ever... loving... fieryplace...?

Why not? Well, let's see... next time you don't wanna have sex but someone tells you you have to do it, let's see if it doesn't feel degrading and even maybe like, um... rape..

Granted, love isn't about emotion. Emotion ebbs and flows, that's a given, but if you never have any emotion for your wife (or a wife for her husband), I'd be worried about that as much as constant emotion that's never in fluctuation, since that could be more infatuation than love.

Sex is an act. Easiest done when in the mood, and when one is not in the mood, sometimes all it takes is a little bit of effort by the other person in that relationhip to get the non-mood person into the mood.

If your spouse isn't in the mood, then try to get her in the mood, and if you can't, then pitch your own tent, type the letter yourself... you get the picture. Or just go to sleep, play a game, or write, or channel the energy into something if need be if you don't wanna do anything with a euphemism. If it becomes habit, though (say, 9 out of 10 times you can't even get her in the mood), then talk it out, and seek counseling if necessary, rather than just say "Lie down and put out for me," even if you dress the words up all purty-like.

 

[Flipper]

I wasn't going to comment, but Marv brought up some good points. For one thing, it is tacky, not to mention wrong, to gossip about your spouse's shortcomings, or even to write articles about it.

Also, if the complaint has to do with the amount of sex, I usually don't automatically assume that the other is doing something wrong. Everyone has different standards on how much is the right amount. Also, if one is denying the other, could it be because that person worked 9 hours at work, then came home, cooked supper, cleaned up after supper, helped junior with homework, then got junior in the bath and to bed, all without spouse's help and is just plain exhausted, as an example. Sometimes the spouse thinks sex 4 times a day is quite normal and expected and will complain if he/she doesn't get it enough. It's amazing when people complain about the lack of sex in their life in the Marriage thread, and later on, it comes out that the person expects it every day, or more than once a day. Hello. Reality.

Notice I try to keep everything as gender neutral as possible? That's because it goes both ways and both genders are guilty of stirring the pot.

Wives are to submit to husbands as the SPIRITUAL head of household. Men are to LOVE their wives as CHRIST LOVED THE CHURCH. Anything outside of that just isn't Biblical, including gossipping and/or whining if things just aren't the human standard of perfection.

 

[ChiRho]

God's directions about marriage seem pretty clear to me. I'm not sure where the instructions to go out with the guys and complain your wife isn't perfect are, could you give me the verses? All I can find is instructions to love my wife as Christ loves the church. I have some difficulty seeing gossiping about wives as an expression of amazing love.

Ranting about the failings of one's partner is a juvenile, selfish act. (I bolded it for you so you could catch the fundamental statement in this post, didn't want you to miss it.)

One who's foundation is that the ranter isn't getting what he or she deserves. I don't believe it's correct to encourage selfishness in people. What they deserve is eternity in hell. Once we get past the selfishness a little, and see that the imperfect spouse is a blessing and a ministry then maybe something good can happen.

I believe the principal of first working on yourself and your own sins before pointing the sins of other out is biblical based on:
Matthew 7:3-5 NET
(3) Why do you see the speck in your brother's eye, but fail to see the beam of wood in your own?
(4) Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove the speck from your eye,' while there is a beam in your own?
(5) You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you can see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye.

If you can show where the men involved are diligently working at being good husbands I will shut up. But I'm going to have a hard time believing it of a bunch of guys who go out with other guys and spend their time complaining about women. Gossip doesn't seem to me to be a removing beam type of activity.

The rant also does not seem to me to be specific at all but to deal with wives as a stereotype, and it puts primary responsibility on the wives as to the "failing" of marriages. I thought men were the head of the household?

Let's look at the rant a little. He is privy (wonder why people are talking about their marriages to him and not to each other) to failing marriages. Shall we speculate a little? It sounds to me like this fellow ends up gossiping about their wives with other guys. Maybe lubricated with a little alcohol. Seems to me what we have is men out with the boys (not their wives) drinking and complaining that their wife isn't receptive to having more sex with them.

Now there is a saying in therapy "No man is a hero to his wife's therapist." Why is that? Because just one side from one perspective is presented. Let's look at some facts and not the gripes.

If you aren't getting enough sex with your wife, you won't get more by leaving home. Walking out into the desert isn't smart behavior if what you are looking for is a nice drink of cool water.

Instead of feeding their rant and their stupid behavior, it would be more loving towards these men to get up, kick their butt out the door and tell them to go home and work it out. They are men going into the desert because they are thirsty, and then they are so stupid they complain about the oasis back home.

I will explain once the entire rationalization of why I said.

1. first correct himself. Already shown the beam in the eye.

2. correct the men around us. Gossip is sinful, if your "friends" are engaging and engaging you in sinful behavior, that needs to stop, now.

3. then correct the women. Actually, in most cases, I don't think you, the confidant of the husband, should be heading off to his home to correct his wife. Not really your role so to speak. Better to support the ministry of the elder women in the congregation helping the younger wives love their husband.

I doubt in most cases that her husband's buddies showing up on her doorstep and saying that she isn't giving her husband enough sex will produce the desired responses, but maybe if she tells him if he goes out again she is just going to divorce him it would all work out for the best. They would spend time together and he wouldn't be lead astray by his buddies. Of course the remaining group of men could spend their time talking about how he needs to cut the apron strings or put his foot down and show the wife who's boss, but he wouldn't be there so the damage to his marriage wouldn't be great.

The strange thing to me is, after destroying their marriages through neglect those same guys are willing to spend a lot of effort finding the next wife.

You are right that love isn't just a feeling it's actions, what I will wait for is an explanation of how going out with the guys and complaining about the lack of sex at home is an act of love.

Marv

Marv,

I wrote something really un-nice to begin with. So, I deleted it. I'll will try very hard to approach this differently.

Would you do me a favor and re-read your response with the original post. If you would, could you identify the baseless assumptions you have accidentally made (There are many. Many.) and eliminate them before we move on? This will save so much time and energy (I am currently working extra hard on avoiding Anger, and more specifically in this case, his wicked younger brother, Frustration.)

Thanks.

 

[ChiRho]

Truly, I thought that this piece would have been received much better. I just re-read what Mr. Day wrote and I am still in left field when it comes to understanding how all of the negative responses were actually taken from the original text.

Is everyone reading the same thing I am? Because it sounds as if there is a lot of "reading into" that is not only false, but could only be produced from staring through a pair of "Men are scum" reading glasses. Honestly folks, Vox is not railing against all women. He is highly critical of those women who do not distinguish the difference in the two terms- wife, and mother. On any other subject, awareness is always assumed to be a good thing, why is this subject any different?

Why is this funny (or supposed to be):

"Women are an amazing wonderful gift from God, not perfect, but after all, look at what God had to work with for material."​

So women are an "amazing wonderful gift from God" and of course, they aren't perfect but "look at what God had to work with for material [implied: scum or any other worthless, negative term].

One form of criticism is commonly laughed off, while another engenders argument and debate. One is allowed; another is not. What sort of double-standard does everyone endorse? This twisted form of chivalry is nothing but the result of a castrated society.

 

[ChiRho]

Why not? Well, let's see... next time you don't wanna have sex but someone tells you you have to do it, let's see if it doesn't feel degrading and even maybe like, um... rape..

Raping my wife. Unbelievable.

Sex is something above all other aspects of love. It is not to be thought of as the optional, negotiable part of marriage. Consider, once more (or maybe for the first time):

"It's not that these things are unimportant, because they are, it's that they should be secondary concerns in a marriage. Your husband didn't vow to be faithful to your cooking and to never eat at another restaurant, after all. And sure, there will be times you're not in the mood or whatever, but you might want to consider this: would you consider that reasonable grounds for him refusing to pay the mortage or the health insurance? Sex, like love, is a choice. If you're always waiting for things to magically happen and sweep you away, you need to grow up and quit sleeping with the stuffed unicorn with the rainbows on it."​

And this is eerily common:

"(As for those pathetic women who can find four hours to watch sitcom sexcapades on TV every night but can't find an hour for the real thing, you'd be wise to buy your husband a subscription to the porn site of his preference and budget for a call girl once a month if you don't want to wind up collecting cats.)"​

 

[ByzantineDixie]

On marital disintegration

Being privy to a relationship or three which appear to be foundering - or have already sunk into the depths - there's a few common themes I've noted. Perhaps the most important is that while both sexes are more than a little confused about their roles, it's the wives who seem particularly out to sea with regards to their priorities.

It might help, I think, for some women to remember what their vows are centered on, and the special role they have taken in their husband's lives. Seriously, with the priorities I've seen some women display, I can only wonder what job they thought they were signing up for.

If you worry more about what you're going to serve a man for dinner than how you're going to rock his world later, you're not his wife, you're his cook.

If you spend more time obsessing about the last time you cleaned the house than the last time you had sex, you're not his wife, you're his cleaning lady.

If the children are always your top priority at all times, then you're not his wife, you're the nanny - or maybe just the day care center.

It's not that these things are unimportant, because they are, it's that they should be secondary concerns in a marriage. Your husband didn't vow to be faithful to your cooking and to never eat at another restaurant, after all. And sure, there will be times you're not in the mood or whatever, but you might want to consider this: would you consider that reasonable grounds for him refusing to pay the mortage or the health insurance? Sex, like love, is a choice. If you're always waiting for things to magically happen and sweep you away, you need to grow up and quit sleeping with the stuffed unicorn with the rainbows on it.

From what I've seen, there's no shortage of men and women who simply don't take marriage very seriously and refuse to accept any responsibilities within it. But failing to accept them doesn't mean they don't exist and that there won't be consequences for doing so.

(As for those pathetic women who can find four hours to watch sitcom sexcapades on TV every night but can't find an hour for the real thing, you'd be wise to buy your husband a subscription to the porn site of his preference and budget for a call girl once a month if you don't want to wind up collecting cats.)

There's a reason why call girls make considerably more money per hour than cooks, cleaners and day care workers, after all. This is because the service they provide is significantly more important to men.

I don't condone my acquaintances who leave their frigid wives and move on to friendlier climes with a free-at-last smile on their faces, but it's certainly no mystery why they would do so, leaving behind a woman who laments how she can't imagine what went wrong when she was such a perfect cook, housekeeper and mother.

God is good. He knew what he was doing when he gave us Chinese takeout, the Roomba and early bedtimes.​

Since you asked...let me point out what this article tells me and we'll go from there. I highlighted the points above that make my case.

This article tells me four things:

1) Wives, in particular, are confused about their marriage priorities.
2) This confounding of priorities makes the author wonder what job wives think they are signing up for.
3) Servicing the man sexually is the number one priority of marriage, all other marital activities fall into second place.
4) We know that servicing the man is the number one priority of marriage because call girls make more money than day care workers.

None of this even remotely suggests marriage to me in the way I understand it. Scotty was right. Marriage is a 100%/100% proposition. It is a union and not a job.

You are correct in inferring the Love is not an emotion. Love is a Person and "to love" is to imitate the Person of Christ. In a marriage union (not a job) sex, like (not more than) housecleaning, cooking and raising a family, is offered in love.

And here is how that kind of love works. At the end of a long day of keeping house, spending time playing with and teaching a 2 year old and a 4 year old, preparing meals, putting up Christmas decorations, taking the youngest to a doctor's appointment (oh, the list can go on and on) the wife plops into bed only wanting to enjoy an undisturbed night's sleep. Out of love, however, she will respond to her husband's desires. On the other hand, the husband, knowing how tired his wife his, puts his desires on hold for a night while his wife gets some uninterrupted sleep. Think O'Henry's, Gift of the Magi.

And actually in some marriages, due to health reasons, men with all the typical male needs and desires, find themselves in situations where they must forego sex for the life of the marriage. And you know what...they are successful at this because of Love.

When "to love" is not the priority...then you get all these warp notions...like sex is more important than taking care of children because call girls make more money than day care workers.

Does this help you see where I was coming from?








​

 

[Flipper]

Since you asked...let me point out what this article tells me and we'll go from there. I highlighted the points above that make my case.

This article tells me four things:

1) Wives, in particular, are confused about their marriage priorities.
2) This confounding of priorities makes the author wonder what job wives think they are signing up for.
3) Servicing the man sexually is the number one priority of marriage, all other marital activities fall into second place.
4) We know that servicing the man is the number one priority of marriage because call girls make more money than day care workers.

None of this even remotely suggests marriage to me in the way I understand it. Scotty was right. Marriage is a 100%/100% proposition. It is a union and not a job.

You are correct in inferring the Love is not an emotion. Love is a Person and "to love" is to imitate the Person of Christ. In a marriage union (not a job) sex, like (not more than) housecleaning, cooking and raising a family, is offered in love.

And here is how that kind of love works. At the end of a long day of keeping house, spending time playing with and teaching a 2 year old and a 4 year old, preparing meals, putting up Christmas decorations, taking the youngest to a doctor's appointment (oh, the list can go on and on) the wife plops into bed only wanting to enjoy an undisturbed night's sleep. Out of love, however, she will respond to her husband's desires. On the other hand, the husband, knowing how tired his wife his, puts his desires on hold for a night while his wife gets some uninterrupted sleep. Think O'Henry's, Gift of the Magi.

And actually in some marriages, due to health reasons, men with all the typical male needs and desires, find themselves in situations where they must forego sex for the life of the marriage. And you know what...they are successful at this because of Love.

When "to love" is not the priority...then you get all these warp notions...like sex is more important than taking care of children because call girls make more money than day care workers.

Does this help you see where I was coming from?








[/indent][/size][/font]

I wish I could add to your reputation. I don't know why some people don't get that.

 

[SPALATIN]

AMEN DIXIE (ROSE) You will always be Luther's Rose to me even though you have gone east. I think that you would have stayed had you found a church that truly followed the model Luther put forth.

I can't possibly add anything to what you said on marriage that would strengthen an already strong position.

 

[ChiRho]

Since you asked...let me point out what this article tells me and we'll go from there. I highlighted the points above that make my case.

This article tells me four things:

1) Wives, in particular, are confused about their marriage priorities.
2) This confounding of priorities makes the author wonder what job wives think they are signing up for.
3) Servicing the man sexually is the number one priority of marriage, all other marital activities fall into second place.
4) We know that servicing the man is the number one priority of marriage because call girls make more money than day care workers.

Ok, I concur with your summation up to point four. Here is where we differ.

First let me explain three before we move onto four. What one single activity is undeniably only performed by wife and husband alone always? I may eat another woman's cooking on occasion; but I may not enjoy a sexual experience with another woman once or ever. Upon what infraction of marriage is there grounds for divorce? Abandonment (which seems pretty obvious, if she (he) leaves and does not return) and sexual unfaithfulness or adultery. Again, it is not as if other activities are unimportant, but less (and only less when compared to the physical union of man and wife) important.

Number four should read like this, I think:

4) The higher price of call girls compared to cooks, house cleaners, or baby-sitters reflects only that men in general believe sex to be more important than other services. This isn't really an argument about Christian marriage as it is illustrating the point that most men find sex more important.

None of this even remotely suggests marriage to me in the way I understand it. Scotty was right. Marriage is a 100%/100% proposition. It is a union and not a job.

Agree. I am not sure the article supposes differently.

You are correct in inferring the Love is not an emotion. Love is a Person and "to love" is to imitate the Person of Christ. In a marriage union (not a job) sex, like (not more than) housecleaning, cooking and raising a family, is offered in love.

Again, I disagree. First, some of the responsibilities fall under mother, not wife (raising a family, etc.), and none of the other activities, while I agree are offered in love, are as important as sex. If you actually believed this, there is no way you would allow your husband to eat your mother's cooking.

And here is how that kind of love works. At the end of a long day of keeping house, spending time playing with and teaching a 2 year old and a 4 year old, preparing meals, putting up Christmas decorations, taking the youngest to a doctor's appointment (oh, the list can go on and on) the wife plops into bed only wanting to enjoy an undisturbed night's sleep. Out of love, however, she will respond to her husband's desires. On the other hand, the husband, knowing how tired his wife his, puts his desires on hold for a night while his wife gets some uninterrupted sleep. Think O'Henry's, Gift of the Magi.

Um, in this situation the husband's busy day is conveniently omitted. I wonder why? Again, wife does not equate to servant. I am not suggesting anything of the sort. Of course there will be days when one or both parties will be so utterly exhausted that lifting onself into bed is the chore of all chores, but I am not speaking of those rare occurances.

And actually in some marriages, due to health reasons, men with all the typical male needs and desires, find themselves in situations where they must forego sex for the life of the marriage. And you know what...they are successful at this because of Love.

This does seem to be appealing to the extreme (as even most physical sexual dysfuntions have a medical solution) to set the standard.

When "to love" is not the priority...then you get all these warp notions...like sex is more important than taking care of children because call girls make more money than day care workers.

Sex is more important. I guess I am warped; sort of strange coming from a healthy man that chooses to avoid de-flowering his future wife.

Does this help you see where I was coming from?

It does. I hope you understand my point a little better.

 

[SPALATIN]

Ok, I concur with your summation up to point four. Here is where we differ.

First let me explain three before we move onto four. What one single activity is undeniably only performed by wife and husband alone always? I may eat another woman's cooking on occasion; but I may not enjoy a sexual experience with another woman once or ever. Upon what infraction of marriage is there grounds for divorce? Abandonment (which seems pretty obvious, if she (he) leaves and does not return) and sexual unfaithfulness or adultery. Again, it is not as if other activities are unimportant, but less (and only less when compared to the physical union of man and wife) important.

Number four should read like this, I think:

4) The higher price of call girls compared to cooks, house cleaners, or baby-sitters reflects only that men in general believe sex to be more important than other services. This isn't really an argument about Christian marriage as it is illustrating the point that most men find sex more important.



Agree. I am not sure the article supposes differently.



Again, I disagree. First, some of the responsibilities fall under mother, not wife (raising a family, etc.), and none of the other activities, while I agree are offered in love, are as important as sex. If you actually believed this, there is no way you would allow your husband to eat your mother's cooking.



Um, in this situation the husband's busy day is conveniently omitted. I wonder why? Again, wife does not equate to servant. I am not suggesting anything of the sort. Of course there will be days when one or both parties will be so utterly exhausted that lifting onself into bed is the chore of all chores, but I am not speaking of those rare occurances.



This does seem to be appealing to the extreme (as even most physical sexual dysfuntions have a medical solution) to set the standard.



Sex is more important. I guess I am warped; sort of strange coming from a healthy man that chooses to avoid de-flowering his future wife.





It does. I hope you understand my point a little better.

The problem I have with number 3 is this. the wording Vox uses shows his priorities are skewed. If he would have said that Sex is one of the most important priorities in a marriage there would have been no problem. But to say that the number one priority in a marriage is to service the man sexually I can't agree. It is not just about the man's needs, but about BOTH their needs respectively.

If we say that sex is a vital part of a marriage relationship I think it is a priority that each person is mutually satisfied. Sex is not a reward that one or the other gets at the end of a hard day but a union of two people longing to be together as God created them. He made the sex drive one of the most powerful..

By the way I respect that you are honoring your future bride in this way. It will make your married life so much the better for it.

It will be interesting to see how much marriage changes you after the first 5 years or so. Because you do change and then you look back at some of your previous postulations and smack your head with your hand saying "what was I thinking back then?"

God Bless You ChiRho.

 

[ChiRho]

Thanks, Scotty.

It will be interesting to see how much marriage changes you after the first 5 years or so. Because you do change and then you look back at some of your previous postulations and smack your head with your hand saying "what was I thinking back then?"

Ummm...you wouldn't want to give me some heads up on some of these to avoid the whole hand-to-head collision, would ya? (Since, of course, I would have to be devoid of reading comprehension to miss the not-so-camoflouged implications)