Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2017 9:43:50 GMT -5
I think sharing a faith or at least believing in something greater than yourself could go a long way towards saving a marriage. If you are the center of your world, why work for someone else's happiness? It's my 2 cents that having a spiritual framework goes a long way towards wanting to connect with and please someone else before pleasing yourself. There's also the fact that religions will generally outline precepts for a healthy marriage, giving people who share that religion a framework to build on. If both believe in God or a similar higher power, surely they're not going to argue with the higher power, but instead come together to work on it, to please God or at least to comply with their shared (or similar) spiritual or religious precepts. I'm married to a self-proclaimed atheist. That fella don't answer to nobody - not God and certainly not me. Not much I can do with that attitude. I'll never marry another atheist. Next Mr. Elle will have an intimate relationship with God. I would love to agree with you 100% on that, however we are still talking about people, one of the biggest, strongest masks that people hide behind is there religion. Beware of those who claim to have an intimate relationship with God for purely selfish reasons. Smoke and mirrors to hide behind, and falsely claim that they are way better than you, while there actions prove that it is a surface understanding at best that fits there needs for the moment. There are many "religions" out there that play to this crowd. This is an excellent point, GC. I'll consider it for sure. I'm still refining what the next Mr. Elle looks like (not in the literal sense). I do know for sure he won't be an atheist. It's not so much a certain religion I need as an intimate relationship with something greater than himself. I call that God. But, you're right, I've known many people who hide behind religion as though it means they are golden because they call themselves by a given faith. Point taken. My favorite quote on the subject goes something like this: God is the moon and religions are the fingers pointing at the moon. You can easily have the finger, but not the moon. I'll be looking for a man who has the moon next time. And I'm pretty sure I'll be able to tell whether it's genuine.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2017 10:00:47 GMT -5
OK, I'm going to weigh into this debate and up front: I'm not religious and I'm not even Christian. But I'm aware of the Corintheans passage about conjugal rights, which I raised in another post today, in a purely historical context. The Christian bible is very specific: Christian spouses will "spread their legs", on demand, for their spouses. That is their duty as a Christian. So it does not surprise me if as many as 1% of Christian refusers actually take that biblical passage to heart. And to be honest, the fact that it is apparently only 1% or less could be arguably very surprising. On the other hand, in the rest of the modern world, that "spread em or else" strategy is called "Marital Rape". Of one form or another... and the resulting problems with that are discussed frequently here. You have two very diametrically opposing world views here. BeachGuy, I hear you on this. There's definitely an element of coercion to the "spread 'em or else" strategy. I know the Bible doesn't sanction rape, though. ( csl can chime in on that one.) To be honest, I hate the "spread 'em or else" strategy. It's crude and vulgar. Sex is sacred, beautiful, and needs to be entirely consensual. I don't think the element of coercion (or even the suggestion embedded in the strategy title) is good for anyone - neither the refuser, nor the refused. However, if the strategy could be renamed so it's not so offensive and if it were enacted in a compassionate and non-coercive manner, it's more than legitimate to expect sex from a marriage (assuming the refused is not a disgusting, abusive, neglectful boorish pig him or herself - and that happens all the time - no woman wants to have sex with a man who can't even be bothered to talk to her or who spends all his time drinking beer or playing video games, and no man wants to have sex with a woman who is a constant nag or is stone cold during sex). Here's how I envision it going down: "Refuser, you know how much I love you but the lack of sex is really hurtful to me. I understand if you don't want to have sex with me, but then I would like to divorce and find someone who can love me in that way." No coercion necessary. Refuser is entirely free to say - "you're right, I don't want to have sex, at least not with you. Divorce granted." Or, they can come to the marital bed willingly and not act like a starfish. Even still, sex alone does not a marriage make. If the connection isn't there outside the bedroom, the sex will never make up for it, IMHO. Also, sex alone can't build that connection. There has to be more to it.
|
|
|
Post by greatcoastal on Jan 6, 2017 10:50:56 GMT -5
I would love to agree with you 100% on that, however we are still talking about people, one of the biggest, strongest masks that people hide behind is there religion. Beware of those who claim to have an intimate relationship with God for purely selfish reasons. Smoke and mirrors to hide behind, and falsely claim that they are way better than you, while there actions prove that it is a surface understanding at best that fits there needs for the moment. There are many "religions" out there that play to this crowd. This is an excellent point, GC. I'll consider it for sure. I'm still refining what the next Mr. Elle looks like (not in the literal sense). I do know for sure he won't be an atheist. It's not so much a certain religion I need as an intimate relationship with something greater than himself. I call that God. But, you're right, I've known many people who hide behind religion as though it means they are golden because they call themselves by a given faith. Point taken. My favorite quote on the subject goes something like this: God is the moon and religions are the fingers pointing at the moon. You can easily have the finger, but not the moon. I'll be looking for a man who has the moon next time. And I'm pretty sure I'll be able to tell whether it's genuine. I know you said , what the next Mr.Elle will be like, that definitely has it's place down a few notches below who the real, happy, joyful, self sufficient Ms. Elle is and continues to look out for herself. Someone is going to receive a lot from you, this time it needs to be someone who gives a lot back in return. (speaking to myself as well)
|
|
|
Post by beachguy on Jan 6, 2017 11:24:07 GMT -5
OK, I'm going to weigh into this debate and up front: I'm not religious and I'm not even Christian. But I'm aware of the Corintheans passage about conjugal rights, which I raised in another post today, in a purely historical context. The Christian bible is very specific: Christian spouses will "spread their legs", on demand, for their spouses. That is their duty as a Christian. So it does not surprise me if as many as 1% of Christian refusers actually take that biblical passage to heart. And to be honest, the fact that it is apparently only 1% or less could be arguably very surprising. On the other hand, in the rest of the modern world, that "spread em or else" strategy is called "Marital Rape". Of one form or another... and the resulting problems with that are discussed frequently here. You have two very diametrically opposing world views here. "Spread 'em or else?" Yeah, no bias there. So any husband who tells his refusing, gate keeping wife that he can't/won't live in a SM, be he Christian or atheist, is now a rapist? By your lights, any husband who gives The Talk without divorce papers in hand is a potential rapist? If you think I'm biased against you, then you didn't read my post yesterday where I take on the fucking feminists that have destroyed the institution of marriage by pussy whipping all the men of the Western World, and giving their minions total license to enforce lifetime celibacy on a whim. And where I state that I would never ever enter into a marriage again because only a fool would do so under the present rules. And don't blame me for turning a millennium old concept of conjugal rights into "marital rape". Blame the feminists. Don't shoot the messenger here. iliasm.org/thread/2096/which-worse"you should definitely tell her that sex is the defining act of marriage, and if there is no sex then there is no marriage." "Spread 'em or else" There is no difference between the above two statements. Except one is a bit sugar coated, the other is not. The first statement is copied from a recent post of yours and it represents your world view, which coincides with the Christian Bible. I happen to think you are right, at least righter than the pussy whipping feminists. But it is what it is, and any application of the biblical concept of conjugal rights is a Spread Em Or Else Strategy. The point that I tried to make is that the world is divided into two extreme camps. Your world view encourages sexual relations within marriage. The other world view encourages enforced celibacy. So the fact that you have a slightly higher success rate is not surprising. In fact, it appears that 98.5% of supposedly Devout Christian refusers aren't taking their biblical (cultural) teachings to heart, at least in this matter. It just shows how difficult this problem is. And it should be clear from my post linked above that I have a huge problem with the fact that there are no expectations of sex in western culture (outside of the conservative Christian community). So you can safely assume I am much closer to your camp than the other. But again, it is what it is...
|
|
|
Post by LITW on Jan 6, 2017 11:35:43 GMT -5
I think sharing a faith or at least believing in something greater than yourself could go a long way towards saving a marriage. If you are the center of your world, why work for someone else's happiness? It's my 2 cents that having a spiritual framework goes a long way towards wanting to connect with and please someone else before pleasing yourself. There's also the fact that religions will generally outline precepts for a healthy marriage, giving people who share that religion a framework to build on. If both believe in God or a similar higher power, surely they're not going to argue with the higher power, but instead come together to work on it, to please God or at least to comply with their shared (or similar) spiritual or religious precepts. I'm married to a self-proclaimed atheist. That fella don't answer to nobody - not God and certainly not me. Not much I can do with that attitude. I'll never marry another atheist. Next Mr. Elle will have an intimate relationship with God. The fact that I feel I do have to answer to God is the reason I have not left my marriage. I realize that things could be a lot worse (she could be abusing me like my first wife did) and that a lot of people have it much worse than I do. After my foray onto EP was discovered by my wife, (she read all my posts and had her feelings hurt as a result) we went into counseling. She actually suggested one day in passing that I go back onto EP and tell everyone how we had turned our sexless marriage around. I declined. While I feel she respects me more, our marriage is not turned around sexually. We are having less sex than ever, which is mainly because I stopped pestering her into having sex. I have read a lot of those turned-around-marriage stories in Christian publications, and the one thing they all have in common is that both spouses truly wanted a sexual relationship, but did not know how to achieve it. I think for marriages where one partner is sexually numb, and has either no desire to become sexual or a sense of spiritual accountability, its not possible. My wife is sexually numb, so we are not only not on the same page sexually, we are not even in the same book. I don't see how that will ever turn around unless she decides that she wants to become a sexual person. That is about as likely as Richard Dawkins preaching at a Billy Graham Crusade. As a result I have given up hope that my marriage will ever be sexually satisfying. I wish she would at least give me a hall pass to get my needs met, but the very thought of such would cause her to melt down. This is truly a "I dont want you, and I dont want anyone else to have you either" situation. On 99 out of 100 days, I view my marriage as a mission field. Very few of my needs, and none of my sexual needs, are being met, and yet I don't want to turn her away or throw her out. She is my responsibility. If only she were my joy too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2017 11:54:02 GMT -5
LITW @litw, so you have to answer to God but she doesn't? How does that work? She gets to live in sin and you sanction it? You martyr yourself? Would your God want you to martyr yourself? Is that what He requires of you? Look, I don't want a divorce either. I don't like the divorce culture. But maybe the crisis of divorce explosion has to happen so that we start talking about some of this within our culture. Sexual refusal is not ok! If it brings divorce in someone, they need to own that. Not you. Part of me admires that you want to uphold your responsibility to her, but, I don't understand how it is serving God to enable someone else's sin. I just don't get it. Wife keeps you under lock and key but won't have you? Ouch. I'm feeling blunt today. Not meaning to offend. But this is a discussion that interests me. I've had to reconcile no longer enabling sin in my own marriage. There's a greater good here - and the only way I can foster it is by serving the universe/God. My leaving is the only possible hope for my H. So long as I stay, the dynamic stays.
|
|
|
Post by shamwow on Jan 6, 2017 14:40:25 GMT -5
I wish she would at least give me a hall pass to get my needs met, but the very thought of such would cause her to melt down. This is truly a "I dont want you, and I dont want anyone else to have you either" situation.I find that attitude comes from selfishness, cruelty, or fear. I tend to believe in the better nature of most people, so I think it is usually fear. If that is the case, are you sure it isn't that it isn't "I don't want you, and I don't want anyone else to have you either because you might find that you are happier with them and leave me"?
|
|
|
Post by LITW on Jan 6, 2017 14:53:59 GMT -5
@elle no offense. I have days when I feel blunt too.
There is a lot to this story, maybe I will share it later, but much of it is shame driven.
|
|
|
Post by LITW on Jan 6, 2017 14:56:52 GMT -5
If that is the case, are you sure it isn't that it isn't "I don't want you, and I don't want anyone else to have you either because you might find that you are happier with them and leave me"? I believe you are right, sir!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2017 15:35:23 GMT -5
@elle no offense. I have days when I feel blunt too. There is a lot to this story, maybe I will share it later, but much of it is shame driven. No pressure to share. I totally get the complex nature of these gigs. You're doing what's right for you and I respect that. It's an interesting topic, all the same. And no one-size-fits-all solution.
|
|
|
Post by novembercomingfire on Jan 6, 2017 15:45:01 GMT -5
@elle no offense. I have days when I feel blunt too. There is a lot to this story, maybe I will share it later, but much of it is shame driven. I understand the concept of "shame driven" here, at least in the abstract as I know not the details of your situation. For me, it may be the case that i have been encouraged to feel shame for all of those things that I have done wrong - all of the ways that she feels that I have wronged her, that i have failed her, that i have failed to be her ideal of worshipful, self denying servant. Needless to say, i do feel shame. Enough so that I no longer believe that i have a choice to leave. In my mind and in my sight, i am simply not worth it. Maybe there is a higher power that shapes our ends, and maybe that higher power intends that some of us were simply created to be used. If that is my path, sobeit. I lack the energy to care or fight anymore. My point however is not to say that we are the same. And it is certainly not to advocate my view as being right for anyone. It is to encourage you to free yourself before you end up as I am. Broken and resigned. There is a world of freedom and sunshine out there. Maybe not for some of us. But if you still care about yourself and about life, by god free yourself. Blow up the prison.
|
|
|
Post by csl on Jan 6, 2017 23:37:33 GMT -5
"Spread 'em or else?" Yeah, no bias there. So any husband who tells his refusing, gate keeping wife that he can't/won't live in a SM, be he Christian or atheist, is now a rapist? By your lights, any husband who gives The Talk without divorce papers in hand is a potential rapist? If you think I'm biased against you, then you didn't read my post yesterday where I take on the fucking feminists that have destroyed the institution of marriage by pussy whipping all the men of the Western World, and giving their minions total license to enforce lifetime celibacy on a whim. And where I state that I would never ever enter into a marriage again because only a fool would do so under the present rules. And don't blame me for turning a millennium old concept of conjugal rights into "marital rape". Blame the feminists. Don't shoot the messenger here. iliasm.org/thread/2096/which-worse"you should definitely tell her that sex is the defining act of marriage, and if there is no sex then there is no marriage." "Spread 'em or else" There is no difference between the above two statements. Except one is a bit sugar coated, the other is not. The first statement is copied from a recent post of yours and it represents your world view, which coincides with the Christian Bible. I happen to think you are right, at least righter than the pussy whipping feminists. But it is what it is, and any application of the biblical concept of conjugal rights is a Spread Em Or Else Strategy. The point that I tried to make is that the world is divided into two extreme camps. Your world view encourages sexual relations within marriage. The other world view encourages enforced celibacy. So the fact that you have a slightly higher success rate is not surprising. In fact, it appears that 98.5% of supposedly Devout Christian refusers aren't taking their biblical (cultural) teachings to heart, at least in this matter. It just shows how difficult this problem is. And it should be clear from my post linked above that I have a huge problem with the fact that there are no expectations of sex in western culture (outside of the conservative Christian community). So you can safely assume I am much closer to your camp than the other. But again, it is what it is... Mea culpa. I did read that post, but when I saw the "spread 'em or else",... Well, let's just say I was triggered. Just as I hit lyn's hotbutton the other day, that phrase, that ignorant slur against Christians sets me off something royal. Yes, I would agree with you that feminism and gender identity advocates have royally screwed up relationships and marriage. And I disagree that my statement that sex is the defining act of marriage is the same as "spread 'em or else." A subsequent poster (elle, I think) gave a more cogent description of the dynamic: Christians believe that sex should only occur within the confines of marriage, and so legitimately, sex IS the defining act of marriage. Outside, it's sin; inside, it's marriage. To us, sex is the only activity you can't do with a friend or roommate. I have written several posts on this topic, and basically, marriage is a mutual covenant/contract with promises, among other things, sex. For instance, that trigger phrase "conjugal right"? You are wrong when you say that conjugal rights are just an expectation of conservative Christians. They are written into the "Jewish marriage license", the ketubah (my podiatrist called it the Jewish marriage license), and have been for 3000 years. Look up ketubah via Bing or Google, and you'll find that it finds its basis in the Mt. Sinai law. In its original form it mimicked Ex. 21:10-11, with the guarantees of food, clothing and conjugal rights for the wife. As well, prior to the love, honor & cherish/obey, the English vow for the husband included "with my body, I thee worship." And the wife's vow was to be "bonny and buxome in bedde and board." Both of these old vows relate back to the promise of conjugal rights and promises. As I said, elle had it right in the idea that sex is part of the vow and if a spouse wants celibacy, then divorce is the option, as celibacy breaks the promise.
|
|
|
Post by baza on Jan 7, 2017 0:44:46 GMT -5
As a side bar Brother EarthHorse, ANY spouse, in ANY marriage (made in heaven or ILIASM shithole) needs to know the legal and financial implications of suddenly being not married. Simple fact is, ALL marriages end. Death or divorce see to that.
Obviously in an ILIASM deal, the divorce risk is vastly heightened above 'average' (which in my jurisdiction is about 1 in 3).
Knowing how things would shake out in a divorce (or in a dec easement) is simple prudence. Anyone who is married needs to know this.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 7, 2017 1:21:12 GMT -5
I think SM can be turned around but it takes both people to do it. I used the ideas from His need and Her needs building an affair proof marriage, see the website www.marriagebuilders.com//graphic/mbi3000_intro.html He is a Christian. I'm not religious and found much useful information from the book. Some of the roles in the book could easily be reversed. It does not take away from the the ideas in the work, just realize that when he says a man it could be a woman to.. 1. I no longer told my wife about hurt feelings and blaming her. I made it known that I have basic needs that need to be met. When I married her, she agreed to meet those needs. In return I meet her needs. Marriage is about negotiation. Love is earned and not something that just happens. You earn that love by meeting the person's needs. We have basic needs and when they are fulfilled, then it's like deposits in the bank. Read more above on the website about the love bank. When those needs are not met then withdrawals began to happen. So you eventually reach a point where there is negative balance. If it's bad enough the marriage falls apart. This is not only applies to marriage but friendships. If you are always taking then a person will not stick around usually. Your spouse's needs may not be sexual. It could be financial security, or doing a hobby with them. This may be their top need. So as a spouse you may not like dancing but if it is what makes your spouse the most happy then you do it. 2. My number one need is sex. I told my wife that I need it at least twice a week. I would prefer it three but would settle for two. I knew if I said two then it may be one. My wife has been meeting this need for the last couple of months. Number 2 need was intimacy with hugging, snuggling, and kissing. Now my wife has not been as good about this. I should not complain because I'm getting laid and it's my number one need. If I was just getting hugged and kissed, I would go around blue balled. This may be a little peevish on my part. I should be honest and say that wife came home tonight and asked me if I wanted to snuggle on the couch. I just reminded her several days ago about my needs for warmth in a relationship. I told her that it had been several months since we last discussed everything. I had asked her if she wanted to be the wife that I want. She said yes. In return I had to straighten up some things that I was doing to her. So it really goes both ways if you want to fix the marriage. I have to be the husband she wants in return. There is no easy panacea to having a good relationship. It takes daily work and being present. 3. I've had to make sacrifices to my wife to meet her needs. Unfortunately her no 1. need was not sex. There are times that I have to do things I do not want to do. I just do it with a smile on my face and it's getting easier. I can't expect my wife to meet my needs if I do not reciprocate. My marriage has made an abrupt turn from the past. I had to give an ultimatum to my wife. This has caused some stress in the relationship. When your spouse tells you that they'll make up their mind if they want to stay depending on how things go, it does not make it easy. But it cuts out the bullshit quick. The reality of the situation sets in quickly for the refusing spouse. I don't beg for sex anymore. I hold my head head high around the house now because I no longer accept the marriage as it was. My wife respects me now and I have more respect for myself. We still get into disagreements but I pick my battles more careful now. It's only those things that are important. I no longer bring up the past, nor does she. 4. One of the consequences of turning my marriage around was working on myself. I realized that I had become pretty pathetic. I had brutal honesty for myself because I had enough. I have changed much faster than my wife but then I've been thinking about this much longer than her. Now I find myself questioning if I should stay. My needs are met but will it be enough? Will my wife become the woman that I want for a wife? I'm looking for excellence in my marriage. I want a special relationship. I've had enough of just good enough. I'm willing to do the work and hoping that my wife will step up more. If she does not, then I'll have to leave. Tonight was a good sign since she suggested being close. My wife has told me that she wants the same thing out of our marriage. I need to see action and change over the next couple of months. I do not expect a miracle but things should slowly improve and move in a positive direction. We also have a good friendship for a base. But as I've said before being close friends does not make for a great lover or intimacy. I know that I may sound a little negative but I'm a realist. I realize that my relationship could turn out great or go bad. I'm not going to delude myself either way. I'm only looking at the facts and what transpires not what is said.
|
|
|
Post by shamwow on Jan 7, 2017 7:37:52 GMT -5
A SM is kind of like a cancer with modern medicine.
If it is caught early, often it can be dealt with quickly and easily with a minimum amount of pain.
As time goes by, however, treatment becomes more time consuming, difficult, and painful.
If sexless changes into loveless that is like the cancer spreading. Can it be treated at this point? Yes, but the odds just went way down.
If loveless changes to hate and disrespect then even reset sex becomes little more effective than asprin.
Very few stage 4 cancer patients in hospice go into remission. Most people in this forum appear to be well into stage 3 (myself included) or into stage 4.
Perhaps if SM had the same lack of social stigma that cancer has it could be treated early and easily in many cases.
|
|