8 steps to confront your wife’s sexual refusal

Married Men: If your wife is denying you sex, forcing you to live within a sexless Christian marriage, you have the ability to confront her sin.

Biblical Gender Roles

How should you as a husband handle it when your wife directly refuses to have sex without a valid reason? Is there anything a Christian husband can do about this?

This will be my last post specifically about sexuality in this series on “How to be godly husband”.

Christian Husbands – let me be crystal clear here. The situation I am addressing in this post is not your wife occasionally turning you down for sex (even with a bad attitude, as opposed to for health or other legitimate reasons). What I am addressing here is the wife who consistently and routinely denies her husband sexually simply because she does not need sex as much or she thinks she should not have to do it except when she is in the mood or she thinks her husband should have to earn sex with her by “putting her in the mood” by…

View original post 3,951 more words

52 thoughts on “8 steps to confront your wife’s sexual refusal

  1. The guy who wrote this is very brave, LOL. It’s a hot button issue sure to trigger a great deal of emotion! Just the same, the thing to keep in mind is that wives need sex just as much as husbands do. It’s healthy for you and it’s healthy for the marriage. Unfortunately there are many cultural messages interfering with that relationship, making healthy sexuality more challenging.

    It’s the oddest thing, but sex is in your face 24/7 in our culture, but always outside the context of marriage. Girls are supposed to sexually empower themselves outside of marriage by saying “yes,” but once inside of marriage, we’re supposed to empower ourselves by saying “no.” That is just as irrational as it sounds and yet those memes really do get into our heads.

  2. Yep. God.

    Hard words incoming, and I promise I’m not as old as this sounds.

    Okay, so if you’re wife doesn’t do you–loudly–then your bad for settling for and marrying what was easy. But not fun “easy.”

    Sex really is a physiological need (speaking to post postmodern “feminists”)—for EVERYone. See Psychology 101, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

    I was apparently the “bad boy” who energetically went after just a couple of things that seemed really nice to add to my life, including adding Mrs. St. James. Even my own brothers didn’t think of things in such a manner. To say nothing of most of my male friends.

    Not that I don’t believe in God, but goddamm it, take the things you want and then let God (or whoever) figure out the particulars. I can’t remember how to say it in Arabic, but “All is as Allah wills.”

    (Not that I really believe that either, but dude.)

  3. I like the article and the suggestions.
    It’s kind of hard for me to understand how this type of thing happens. Maybe it’s just kind of habit pattern?
    Making a life with someone, to me, makes things hotter. I know the folks over at Rollo’s would laugh me down for saying it, but really when I see my husband doing normal everyday stuff with the family it makes me hot. Holding our babies, playing football in the yard or working with tools and all sorts of other manly shyte really gets me going. Even watching him nap. He’s like a sleeping bear and I want to pounce on him! 😛

  4. I think sometimes, also, that lack of lovin’ feelin’ has a bit to do with how the person thinks of herself. If she let herself go, she’s likely to be less amorous and want sex with the lights off. I’m thinking of the fat version of Betty in Mad Men. Also, I know when I was heavily pregnant I didn’t feel very amorous and it didn’t really have as much to do with physical desire as feeling undesireable (My husband did try to make me feel desirable, it wasn’t him it was me).

  5. Too many women get married for the wrong reasons, obviously. If spiritual and sexual intimacy are not #1 (while, for example, being taken care of materially, securing wedlock to ‘legitimize’ a desire to have a baby, being a princess for a day, because everyone she knows is getting married), look out below; it’s a long way down. They’re entering into marriage with the anti-sex attitude that boys will be boys, but a strong woman will sort him out post-betrothal.

    And of course, such a married woman, obligated now to her provisioning cart-donkey, completely falls apart when she re-encounters true desire, calamitous desire, endless desire. And both married partners enter the Hell that is mutual dislike: she because her desire destroys the one true haven two people may construct; he because her emotional and/or sexual betrayal strips what lingering self-respect he has privately retained.

    I confess, per Liz, that while I know this is a common situation, and while the culture actually celebrates the whole notion of the doofus pathetic man with a DadBod, I only understand it intellectually. I’m also sure this is the dominant condition in most of the churches I have attended; unfortunately, now, I read the unpleasant subtext whenever I hear a woman making fun of her husband in ways direct and indirect, and lose interest, really, in anything she might have to say. I also lose respect for their men for putting up with it.

    (Last week an otherwise gentle woman, a self-asserting devout Christian, told a long story over how her husband’s planter failed him repeatedly during the spring rush to get corn in the ground, thinking she was just being witty and humorous about a guy who farms, but can’t afford a new 32-row Deere implement. I just lost interest thinking, “Great, another guy wandering in the once-per-quarter duty sex desert.)

    But I cannot imagine committing to all of the inconveniences and mundane details of cohabitation and not enjoying the fruits of desire.

    I disagree quite strongly with the blogger’s prescriptive 8 Steps. Desire cannot be negotiated, and cannot be leveraged through practical means. “If you won’t love me I won’t take you out for fancy dinners” seems to me to just reinforce the false basis of a relationship not constructed on a foundation of intimacy and desire; it reinforces the false idea that a man’s money and efforts are to be compensated in sexual favors. They reinforce the false notion that women neither need or seek sexual intimacy, that “other things” are somehow more meaningful or noble. I never found the notion of being a good puppy, in order to get some dog biscuit-sex, particularly erotic, and fortunately never experienced it.

    Per usual, I would say that “love” is a vastly misunderstood concept, and “I love you” is frequently thrown around carelessly in order to get something else. Meanwhile the concepts and behaviors of *kindness, respect and good sex* are both impossible to misunderstand, and impossible to separate from one another.

    Christians as well as secularists should be counseled by their pastors as well as friends to abjure the appeal of ‘sitting up housekeeping and starting a family’ in the absence of desire, kindness and deep mutual respect. These things just can’t be faked. Or purchased with an annual trip to Cabo.

    My (secular) strength coach got married Saturday. He’s already told me that he expects things to cool off post-children. So he’s already making his bed, one he may not enjoy so much in 10 years. And they will still be 30-somethings in 10 years, which suggests marital volatility, to me.

  6. I like the article because it reminds me of the things Rollo’s written about in his books. The dual sexual strategy of women. This is an example what happens to good, sweet, beta Christian men that marry a woman who wasn’t that attracted to him.

    You spoke of feeling less sexual or sexy when pregnant, I totally understand, but I’m sure you were still aware of your husband’s desire for you… and it probably made it on your radar of things you needed to take care of. That stems from a desire to please him because he’s valuable to you sexually – at a level that is very deep and primitive even. That desire was still there, you were able to still find it within yourself to care about his needs right? With the scenarios in this article however, the women are blatantly not caring about their husband’s desire for them, and I think (supposing here) it more than likely has to do with the women not having that raw desire for their husbands themselves.

    So, in a very good way, this is an example of what negotiated desire would look like – having to live with a wife who just isn’t that into you.

  7. Again, BV, your comments say more than I could if I tried to write a book I’m afraid. It’s hard to really respond well because I have to wait until I feel like I have enough time. But I definitely agree with everything you’ve written here. I think that’s why I liked this article… because it just reinforces the truth I’ve found in what Rollo writes and describes.

    I like this statement, “And both married partners enter the Hell that is mutual dislike: she because her desire destroys the one true haven two people may construct; he because her emotional and/or sexual betrayal strips what lingering self-respect he has privately retained.”

    You are right also how it all begins with getting married for the wrong reasons, and to someone that person isn’t spiritually and sexually drawn powerfully to. It’s very hard to watch friends get married for the wrong reasons… and to expect them to not be happy in life – who you pick is so important to future happiness, or your kids’ happiness.

  8. Sometimes I wonder how people, prior to marrying, would answer the question, “But are you intimate?” I expect a lot of women find the question strange, and would say strange things in response, such as “He’s my best friend” or “he’s a goof, but a lovable goof” or “we live for the Lord, not the idolatries of the flesh” or “that’s a clown question, bro.”

    It’s a magical thing to sit down to dinner each night with the same woman and go swimming in unspoken admiration. I never feel that way about my ‘best friends.” It’s not antithetical to friendship — a couple can enjoy gardening or cooking or traveling and feel fortunate — but friendship can be antithetical to intimacy.

  9. GWADT: Thanks for re-posting this. A pretty balanced article on a tough subject. I watched a good friend suffer this abuse by his Christian wife for many years before he finally left. My guess is it happens a lot. And yes, it happens both ways. The fact that St. Paul even had to cover the topic suggests that too.

    What the author doesn’t address is how many guys won’t go this route out of fear of losing their kids. Generally not the case were the roles reversed. A woman who dishonors him the bedroom likely dishonors him throughout the rest of the house too. And if/when he seeks another’s affections, she’ll hammer his infidelity in the divorce, in his kids’ lives, and at church. HD

  10. BV is the undisputed thread winner here once again, with the cardinal insights that explain why the matters in the OP are problems in the first place.

    BV aptly repeats what I’ve said many times. Too many women marrying for the wrong reasons. More to the point, most women are marrying men to whom they’re less sexually attracted than the men they used to have sex with. I suspect there are many, many more alpha widows out there than we realize.

    Most women can’t extract commitment from the men they really want; so they have to “settle” if they want to marry (and most do want marriage; and most marry). Most of the time that “settlement” happens after real world sex experiences with objectively more attractive men.

    And to add to the problem, most women do not understand why men get married. Most men don’t marry to “start a life together” or for “fun” or to “be with his best friend”. No. The prime reason a man marries is because he wants regular and exclusive access to sex with her. He’s decided to “buy the cow” — he likes having sex with this girl so much he wants to keep having sex with her. (He likely also wants children, or at least is not averse to having children with this woman.)

    Much, much too much misinformation and outright lies all around.

  11. I think if a woman is having really satisfying sex with a guy, she’ll usually be easy to get along with in other aspects of the relationship…I know that when I was with my LTR, sometimes after a really great night I’d go along with him on something where I really would have preferred a different decision, but arguing somehow didn’t seem worth the trouble, LOL! So I wonder if some women avoid sex because (maybe subconsciously) it takes away from their POWER, which seems to be the big thing for a lot of girls these days.

    Just a thought, not sure it’s right. In any case, it’s really rotten to marry a guy and then totally deny him sex, can’t imagine ever being that cruel.

  12. “It’s kind of hard for me to understand how this type of thing happens. Maybe it’s just kind of habit pattern?”

    No. It happens because women are free to have sex with hot sexy men, but cannot extract commitment from those men. Their prior sexual experiences jack up their taste for bad boy, jerkboy, dominant, confident alpha. In doing so they consistently learn to tune out and ignore their male MMV counterparts. These women then become disappointed and disillusioned with the men available to them for marriage. Yet, they have to pick one of them if they want to marry and have babies; and by the time they’ve burned up a few years and made it to age 29, their wanting babies outstrips their revulsion at the available men. So, they hold their noses, pick one of the men, say “well, I guess he’ll just haffta do”, and marry him up and (usually) use him to sire and pay for the kid(s).

    These problems are all a result of women’s prior sexual experiences with objectively more attractive men which ramp up their expectations; and the subsequent dashing of their expectations. It creates disappointment and disillusionment in the woman, which leads her to not want sex; which leads to increasing and seething resentment and anger in the man. Of course she doesn’t intend any of this (largely because she didn’t foresee it; and largely this is because no one told her this was a likely result of her prior sex experiences).

    Men can have sex with 15 or so women before getting married, and it doesn’t result in lesser attraction from him to her. Women can’t do this — they aren’t built to have sex with a lot of men and then have to look further and further down the sexual food chain to increasingly unattractive men to find one who will marry them.

  13. “Making a life with someone, to me, makes things hotter. I know the folks over at Rollo’s would laugh me down for saying it, but really when I see my husband doing normal everyday stuff with the family it makes me hot. Holding our babies, playing football in the yard or working with tools and all sorts of other manly shyte really gets me going. Even watching him nap. He’s like a sleeping bear and I want to pounce on him!”

    This is only because you were very sexually attracted to him in the first place. The attraction isn’t relational, it isn’t “I really like him”, it isn’t “I really like spending time with him”. The attraction is visceral and sexual. It was “I really want him to f*ck me”. Alpha fux.

    Most women marrying today DO NOT have that kind of attraction for their eventual husbands. The attraction they have for those men is “He’s a nice guy” and “He’s going to be a great father” and “He and I get along really well” and “I like him as a person”. Beta bux.

    Most women seeing a “really good friend” doing “normal everyday stuff” like holding babies and working with tools doesn’t create those kinds of feelings for their husbands. To those alpha widows, seeing the guy you kinda like (and whom you happen to be married to) doing stuff in your general proximity is just that — he’s just… doing stuff. Stuff he’s supposed to be doing anyway. Stuff he always does. Stuff you expect him to do and stuff he just does. Big. Fat. Meh.

    See the difference?

  14. “I disagree quite strongly with the blogger’s prescriptive 8 Steps. Desire cannot be negotiated, and cannot be leveraged through practical means.”

    Yeah, I disagree with this too. The best a man can do in this situation is to proceed directly to steps 7 and 8 – no more funding and “sex or divorce – make your choice”. Hubs might not be able to ramp up desire this way. But at least he can require her to make a decision about whether or not she wants to be married; and at least he can then end the marriage if need be.

  15. I like how you call it abuse… it really is a kind of toxic emotional environment that she creates in the marriage. I like how the man who wrote this is trying to give Christian men who find themselves in this position some confidence and authority in feeling upset about the circumstances they find themselves in. That is crucial validation that a lot of nice men need to help cope in my opinion. I was really REALLY glad to find his blog… it gives me hope that maybe the Church will start holding women to the same standard that it holds men to.

  16. “This is only because you were very sexually attracted to him in the first place. The attraction isn’t relational, it isn’t “I really like him”, it isn’t “I really like spending time with him”. The attraction is visceral and sexual. It was “I really want him to f*ck me”. Alpha fux.

    Most women marrying today DO NOT have that kind of attraction for their eventual husbands. The attraction they have for those men is “He’s a nice guy” and “He’s going to be a great father” and “He and I get along really well” and “I like him as a person”. Beta bux.

    Most women seeing a “really good friend” doing “normal everyday stuff” like holding babies and working with tools doesn’t create those kinds of feelings for their husbands. To those alpha widows, seeing the guy you kinda like (and whom you happen to be married to) doing stuff in your general proximity is just that — he’s just… doing stuff. Stuff he’s supposed to be doing anyway. Stuff he always does. Stuff you expect him to do and stuff he just does. Big. Fat. Meh.
    See the difference?”

    I agree no one should marry a person they aren’t very attracted to. But I also the above is a false dichotomy. Sometimes (I don’t know how often, but I’ll bet it’s pretty darned) people marry other people to whom they are initially attracted and then they grow “out” of it, somehow. The sex dwindles until it is virtually nonexistent or completely nonexistent.

    It is unlikely, for example, the strength coach BV mentions has a terrible quality sex life at present. He accepts that sex will dwindle because that is his paradigm. A LOT of people have that paradigm. They expect sex to wane and not be as “into” each other over time. And, unsurprisingly, it happens. A lot of things in life work that way, actually (personal fitness, lifestyle choices, and so forth).

    I remember a couple of friends Mike and I spoke with when we were first married. They were 27, and seemed kind of “mature” to us. The husband told Mike, “Yeah, when you turn 26, you won’t want sex as much. You’ll still like it, but not want it as much…”
    We often kid about that. I say “Well, when you turn 26 you won’t want this so much…”

    We’ve heard that a lot since. Literally, that age, 26, seems to be the paradigm with a lot of folks. So I think setting some clear expectations is wise. It’s better if that all works organically, but libidos aren’t necessarily perfectly compatible regardless of how hot people are for each other. It’s an established fact (according to the poster Jeremy, not the doctor and not the one with the binoculars, the other one) that when women have sex more often they are happier and feel closer to their mates, and want sex more often. I actually think I’m addicted to Mike for this reason, and have been for quite a while.

    A lot of women today, I’m sure (likely almost all of them) do not realize that they are demonstrating that they don’t value their men and are disrespecting their men when they treat them unkindly or don’t have sex (or begrudging sex) with their men, much as they don’t realize they are being disloyal when they ridicule or criticize them in public. I think it can be useful to point this out and, if necessary, make it clear in a very direct way.

  17. Just to add, i’ve mentioned this before…perhaps not here though. Before my husband and I got married, I mentioned that I expected the sex to decline to less than every day. He explained that he was going to want it a lot. Everyday. And, if I had a problem with that it wasn’t going to work out. I adjusted my paradigm. It’s 50 percent fellatio for that reason. I’m very into him, but my libido isn’t wired for sex as often as he wants it (sometimes three times a day after a trip, or before a trip…it’s a lot).

  18. If IB22 is correct, then sex is just a transaction paid for with cash and prizes, and the leverage of a nuclear ultimatum leading to mutual assured destruction. In this scenario a wife engages in sex for money, or sex in the shadow of a virtual gun being held to the head of the marriage. In this scenario, women are incapable of intimacy, only practical rewards.

    This is why IB22 is not correct.

  19. “In this scenario a wife engages in sex for money, or sex in the shadow of a virtual gun being held to the head of the marriage. In this scenario, women are incapable of intimacy, only practical rewards. This is why IB22 is not correct.”

    Women tend to have sex like anyone, because it is enjoyable, but yes ultimately there is an exchange in marriage going on. Women are seeking favor, protection, provision. The reason desire can be negotiated is because the very nature of female attraction is often triggered by an awareness of those things. That is why men have often driven sports cars or purchased exotic trips to entice women. Confidence, leadership, leverage, produce desire.

    Intimacy, love, loyalty these are beautiful things that often develop in marriage, but sex is still a physical act. Men’s desire is often triggered simply by the physical appearance of a woman and women’s desire is often simply triggered by his perceived status, confidence, protection, provision.

    It’s not pretty, but people are rather superficial and shallow creatures sometimes. If an unattractive man wins the lottery and buys a porche, the women who will flock towards him are evidence of negotiated desire in action. It’s not just money however, men who rescue drowning bears or stand up for themselves, instant negotiated desire.

    The very act of surrendering to a wife’s exclusive control/manipulation of sex, kills desire. The very act of standing up for yourself, increases it.

    So to say desire cannot be negotiated is false. The entire nature of sexuality between men and women is based on negotiating desire.

  20. “The reason desire can be negotiated is because the very nature of female attraction is often triggered by an awareness of those things. That is why men have often driven sports cars oer purchased exotic trips to entice women. Confidence, leadership, leverage, produce desire.”

    No. What IB22 is talking about here is beta bux “desire”; the want for a provider/father for eventual kids. This is not SEXUAL desire. This is not visceral, “I want him to f*ck me” desire. This is merely “beta comfort”, it’s “I really kinda like him…sorta”.

    The problem with beta bux desire is that it is more common and more reproducible based on male displaying provisioning ability. It isn’t “real” in the sense of true intimacy, sexual desire, and attachment that truly bonds a woman to a man. Only authentic sexual desire does this. This is why the world is full of alpha widows — women pining away for the one or two men who really could “do them right”.

    Beta bux “desire” is a mirage. It isnt’ desire at all — it’s cold, calculated transaction. A woman’s true sexual desire, the kind that will bond her to him, is nonnegotiable. It’s either there or it isn’t; and no amount of provisioning or sports cars will purchase it.

  21. Insanity:

    You do realize, don’t you, that you’re equating most marriages with prostitution here. You do understand that your comment essentially says women can and should whore themselves out, and that most husbands are johns paying for their “negotiated desire”.

    You do get that, right?

  22. Not only is beta bux “desire” not SEXUAL desire, it is interchangeable at her whim (and hers alone). It also reduces the husband to a commodity. The man’s function is to provide the beta bux to her liking. If he doesn’t, well, he’s just fungible goods. She can always go get another “beta bux” and “desire” him if she doesn’t “desire” this particular “beta bux” anymore.

  23. “Sometimes (I don’t know how often, but I’ll bet it’s pretty darned) people marry other people to whom they are initially attracted and then they grow “out” of it, somehow”

    I think this is usually what happens. I don’t think that most women are marrying men for whom they have no attraction whatsoever. I think that there is some attraction there. But that’s not really the problem.

    First, she isn’t nearly as attracted to her husband as she was to the men she had sex with before. This always leads to comparison, which leads to disappointment, which leads to disillusionment, which leads to her withholding and conditioning sex, and which leads to problems in the marriage. The primary problem in most marriages is simply that he doesn’t turn her on; she doesn’t want to have sex with him.

    Second, the attraction she had for her prior boyfriends is a very different kind of attraction from that she has for her husband. For the boyfriends, it was arousal — visceral, sexual, “I want him to f*ck me” arousal. For the husband it is “he’s a great guy and I like to be with him and he’ll make a great dad and he wants to take care of me” attraction.

    (Liz, that’s the difference here– you were aroused by Mike in a “I want him to f*ck me” kind of way, and were from the beginning before you married him. Most women are like this with boyfriends, but not with husbands. I really do not think most women are marrying men that they look at in a “I really want him to f*ck me” way. They are not examining husbands for those traits. They examine boyfriends for “does he really turn me on and rev me up”. They examine husbands for “can he provide for me and does he want to be a father and we like each other and get along pretty well”. That’s the key difference here, and that’s where you are getting tripped up. The “does he turn me on” bonds her to him. The “can he provide for me” commodifies the relationship and makes him little more than fungible goods to her.)

  24. Men need to understand women, and need to understand that “alpha fux desire” is NOT the same as “beta bux comfort”.

    The reason they need to understand these things is because a woman’s sexual conduct will start out looking more or less the same, whether she is looking for “alpha fux desire” or “beta bux comfort”.

    At the outset, her sexual conduct and response is the same. It’s after the wedding, after resources and time have been committed and exchanged, that the old bait and switch happens.

    A woman really wants sex with alpha fux. She will get visibly excited and will move heaven and earth to see him. She describes sex with alpha as “amazing”, “wonderful”, and “fantastic”. She is visibly sexually responsive to him as well.

    She is willing to have sex with beta bux. She doesn’t really want sex with him or even “kind of want” it. She is just “willing” to have it, similar to doing the dishes or taking out the garbage. She WILL do it because it needs to be done, but doesn’t really look forward to it.

    She doesn’t get excited about seeing beta, but she’ll do it. She isn’t really responsive to him, but she is just responsive enough to feign it and put on enough of a facade of “desire” such that it mimics and resembles “excitement” and “responsiveness”.

    The one true tell is that a woman doesn’t get wet with a beta. She always requires lube, and always makes a pained grimace on the beta’s initial entry because, well, she doesn’t really want him there.

    She insists on controlling the sex, down to the position and to what she is willing to do. Alphas get BJs and foreplay; betas get vanilla missionary. Alphas take control; when she is in bed with a beta SHE takes control. She refuses to do anything a beta wants to do sexually, instead insisting that she will do only what she is comfortable with and absolutely nothing more. She will repose in an alpha’s arms after sex. After sex with a beta, she immediately leaps up to expel the semen. Her view of sex with an alpha is fun and desire. Her view of sex with beta husband is that sex is for procreation and for “his release”.

    The beta bux loves it, because he’s getting sex. And she will start out sexing him pretty well. It all looks the same to him. It looks like he is getting what the alpha thug dickbags got — really “good” sex.

    The reason this is important is the different kinds of desires mean different things for men, and on how women experiencing those different kinds of desires relate to men. Men need to see them, understand them, and learn to differentiate them so as to avoid being married to a woman who wants only “beta bux comfort”.

  25. Not all alphas are dickbags, Deti… just saying. You described the sex aspect of it very well, I know it may seem tmi to some, but I appreciate it being spelled out for women. They know… most are just in denial of women’s true sinful nature in this sexual aspect. I wish I could comment more on that topic, but I’m afraid it would be tmi.

  26. I completely disagree with you, Deti.

    Above you mentioned that you believed I was saying, “You do understand that your comment essentially says women can and should whore themselves out, and that most husbands are johns paying for their “negotiated desire.” I don’t wish to see it worded so crudely, but all in good humor here, we do like to say that prostitution really is the worlds SECOND oldest profession.

    There is a biological exchange going on and for both men and women that exchange is closely entwined with desire.

    To “leverage” her desire like Biblical said in his article, is actually alpha behavior and therefore creates attraction.

    “A woman’s true sexual desire, the kind that will bond her to him, is nonnegotiable.”

    Sadly Deti, this is not true. Women will not find you irresistibly attractive and therefore sexually bond with you. That is more likely the behavior of men. Even an alpha, no matter how attractive will get dumped should someone else come along and leverage her attraction.

    One problem with the red pills is that you tend to place entirely too much emphasis on a woman’s so called beta/alpha pursuits. It’s actually not about her at all, but rather the leadership, worth, and value that a man shows her.

  27. And that’s the thing… with an alpha… even prostitutes often don’t make him pay money or resources of any kind. Sexing him alone is reward enough… HE is the payment.

  28. “It also reduces the husband to a commodity.”

    Deti, when we are talking pure physicality and biology, there are some rather harsh truths that must be looked at. In a biological exchange a woman becomes a commodity just as sure as a man does. The man provides provision, protection, the women provides sex in return. It simply is what it is.

    In a Christian context we go on honor a covenant with God, to sacrifice, to build connection and intimacy with another, to discover and delight in many additional kinds of love. However, sexuality and desire itself usually involve a different part of our brains.

  29. “There is a biological exchange going on and for both men and women that exchange is closely entwined with desire.”

    No. For MEN that exchange is entwined with SEXUAL desire. For women that exchange is entwined with a desire to have babies and accumulate resources to care for said babies. For women the sexual desire has only to do with getting pregnant. Her desire for accumulation of resources has NOTHING to do with SEXUAL desire. A woman need not have her children fathered by the same man who will toil to support them.

    “Even an alpha, no matter how attractive will get dumped should someone else come along and leverage her attraction.”

    Not when we talk about “attraction” and “desire”. Two different things — a distinction you’re still not getting. Again: “attraction” is beta comfort. “Desire” is visceral, sexual, and urgent. The former pays the bills. The latter is bonding superglue.

    “To “leverage” her desire like Biblical said in his article, is actually alpha behavior and therefore creates attraction.”

    No. Again, you keep using that word, “attraction”. I do not think it means what YOU think it means. You say “Attraction” when you mean “Desire”. They are not the same thing.

    And desire, real, visceral, sexual desire from a woman to a man, cannot be “created” from nothing. It’s either there or it’s not. A man cannot come along and “create” desire in a woman. She either feels it or she doesn’t; it is either there or it is not.

  30. “Her desire for accumulation of resources has NOTHING to do with SEXUAL desire…”

    Deti, her desire to accumulate resources, is the precise provision and protection she needs in order to make babies.

    “A man cannot come along and “create” desire in a woman. She either feels it or she doesn’t…”

    Sure he can. He can rescue her from a fire, save her from marauding barbarians, or display his worth and value in some other way. Instant attraction. Conversely, an extremely attractive man can completely squash all natural desire by failing to communicate his perceived worth and value to her. Perceived being the key word there.

  31. “when we are talking pure physicality and biology, there are some rather harsh truths that must be looked at. In a biological exchange a woman becomes a commodity just as sure as a man does. The man provides provision, protection, the women provides sex in return. It simply is what it is.”

    Well, it USED TO BE what it is. Now, the female side of this has been enshrined and pedestalized to the point of worship; while the male side of this has been denigrated and made fun of. The female side is legally protected; the male side is exposed to ruin. And no, the woman is not a commodity. She is a legally protected endangered species. The man is commodified, though. Eggs expensive, sperm cheap. That little saying has caused men to be used and abused; and women to be sanctified and exalted, in today’s society. It’s a great time to be a woman; a terrible time to be a man.

  32. “He can rescue her from a fire, save her from marauding barbarians, or display his worth and value in some other way. Instant attraction.”

    You really live up to your name. Most men never save anyone from fires or vandals. And the way most men display “worth and value” is through provisioning, through the ability to make resources. And as we’ve seen all over the ‘sphere, most men are denigrated, laughed at, and made fun of for being “providers”. Women don’t need providers; as we’re always told, women can do that for themselves.

    You have no idea what you’re talking about. Have a nice insane day, IB22.

  33. Thanks, DF. I know I am absolutely 100% correct about this, because I’ve seen it from both sides. I’ve been the alpha dickbag who moistens them; I’ve been the beta provider who dessicates them.

  34. That is true, Deti. I am sorry, but it is what it is. That is the truth of the world we find ourselves living in.

    On the bright side, there are many who have managed to carve out a little bit of paradise for themselves, in spite of the world, in spite of the culture. Personally, I’ve found biblical values and scripture to be the best path for getting there. It’s not entirely unlike your red pill truths, just slightly different. God’s game I call it 😉

  35. “In a Christian context we go on honor a covenant with God, to sacrifice, to build connection and intimacy with another, to discover and delight in many additional kinds of love. ”

    Oh, and insanity, if you think that any of those things really mean anything to most women whose hypergamy has been completely unleashed (including most Christian women), then you’re more insane than I thought. I have seen more allegedly Christian women than I can count who have detonated and absolutely RUINED their marriages to good Christian men because of “unhaaaaappiness”.

  36. True again, Deti. Christian women can be just as flawed as anyone else. That is why I really support the efforts of Christian men like Biblical who actually understand scripture and how that is provided as guidance for marriage and relationships between men and women.

  37. “And the way most men display “worth and value” is through provisioning…”

    Actually money is only a small part of provisioning, one our rather materialistic society makes a big deal out of. However, provision is also showing leadership, protection, guidance. Men bring order to our chaos, they fulfill several emotional and spiritual needs women have that really aren’t so related to money.

    I’m sorry men are denigrated, laughed at, made fun of. I too hate to see that and find it appalling, especially since the need for respect is so innate to who men are.

  38. “provision is also showing leadership, protection, guidance. Men bring order to our chaos, they fulfill several emotional and spiritual needs women have that really aren’t so related to money.”

    No, provision is none of those things. Women have made clear they don’t want those things from any man. And the law has made clear that any man attempting to provide or impose those things on a wife will be divorce raped, accused of crimes, and possibly imprisoned, if she deems that desirable or advantageous.

  39. IB22, “provision” is money. It is not leadership, it is not protection, it is not wisdom or guidance.

    To women, provision is resources. It is money. It is labor. Full stop. Women want that money so they can use it to care for themselves and their children. Period.

  40. “Most men never save anyone from fires or vandals.”

    Yea… and the ones that do (firefighters and Police men) really are sexually objectified… all the time. LOL my husband and his friends have “Badge Bunnies,” girls that are wet because of the badge and how he looks in general (so sexy). There was a photo that our department put up on FB and my husband and some of the younger guys were in the front row… and the women went nuts over them online. I watched their comments about how sexy he was (!!!!>*&*^^&).

    He calls me his badge bunny, and it’s too true, but the desire was there before the badge obviously. After 9/11, a bunch of the firefighters that saved women heroically actually LEFT their wives… there was some kind of documentary done on it, the wives admitted to treating their firefighter husbands a little badly (but hey, feminism right? THey’re tired after working their long hours at their OWN jobs. Nevermind their husbands are sexy as hell, and can always get sex if they want it elsewhere. The wives should be excused!), and they admitted to taking their husband’s for granted. Then comes 9/11, and heroic and sexy firefighter actually DOES save some poor woman from certain death, and boom! Very hawt hero action and visceral desire! The only thing shocking to society (or the wives) were how many this actually happened to.

  41. This is what folks like IB22 don’t understand — the difference between visceral sexual desire, and beta bux “attraction”.

    It used to be that beta bux attraction was enough to get and keep the interest of a woman long enough for marriage. Now, BB isn’t anywhere near enough even to get a f*cking date, much less a wife.

    It’s all about hotness now, all about visceral sexual desire. Make no mistake about it — visceral sexual desire, where a woman wants that man to f*ck the holy hell out of her until she can’t walk or see straight — that’s what women really, truly want. And women can get that — for sex, but not for commitment. There aren’t nearly enough of those men to go around to all the women who want them. So they have to “settle” for BB “attraction”. And most women do not like that one bit.

    Most women will never, ever admit this — you ask a woman if she wanted sex with her husband before she married him, she’ll say “oh yes, yes I did. we had sex before we married and it was great! And it is STILL great!”

    But ask her husband this. Ask her husband how their sex life is. “Vanilla missionary once a month, and only with prodding. BJs? HAH! I don’t remember the last time I got one. During sex she’s obviously somewhere else. She looks away, she has her eyes closed. When I enter her, she has this pained look on her face. We always have to use lube – she always talks about how much sex “hurts”. And the minute I ejaculate, up she pops to run to the bathroom to take a piss and push out the semen I just put in there.”

  42. Deti, money is important, at least when it comes to having food, shelter, and running water. However, honest to goodness men provide a wealth of value to women’s lives that extend far beyond those things.

  43. “honest to goodness men provide a wealth of value to women’s lives that extend far beyond those things.”

    If you have a shred of honesty, you’ll admit that none of those things matter one whit to the modern woman. Nothing matters to the modern woman more than extracting resources and money from a beta bux.

  44. “But ask her husband this. Ask her husband how their sex life is. “Vanilla missionary once a month, and only with prodding. BJs? HAH! I don’t remember the last time I got one. During sex she’s obviously somewhere else. She looks away, she has her eyes closed. When I enter her, she has this pained look on her face. We always have to use lube – she always talks about how much sex “hurts”. And the minute I ejaculate, up she pops to run to the bathroom to take a piss and push out the semen I just put in there.”

    😦

  45. “Men can have sex with 15 or so women before getting married, and it doesn’t result in lesser attraction from him to her.”

    I don’t know the science on male bonding, but I will say that as an unwilling single man (we can probably smirk and add “unwitting single man”), the attractions of monogamy are greater than ever with me. Perhaps it’s just age, but I don’t think so. In my long marriage I misunderstood badly the role of sex, misunderstand male and female sexual differences, practiced a beta equalism with a Good Girl who enjoyed sex but was incurious beyond a handful of practices, and I consequently got incredibly restless. (And our activities slowed to a practiced crawl.)

    Because of my life as a single man, and because I have been educated to ignore what women say and watch what they do, I think it would be very easy to inhabit a sexually fulfilling, monogamous LTR. It’s certainly what I would prefer. But of course the marriage horse has left the barn, so it’s a bit late for closing the door on this matter and proving my point. And no matter what a strong empowered woman says, no matter how many tales of heroic feminist independent women she tells, after three months she’s going to want the ring.

    Again, I’ll defer to Deti if the science shows that men relinquish a capacity for monogamy and true bonding above a certain N. The closest I’ll come to exploring it will likely be catch-and-release-and-catch-again.

  46. Or, any man who wishes to have a fulfilling, married sexual existence would be well to marry a girl who otherwise would be his alpha widow — a girl who might admit one day, “I thought you were out of my league.”

    I can remember two things extremely well: specific plays on the college ball fields; mind-blowing events with apex females. It must be the same, in the latter case, for females, or else there would be no alpha widows.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.