I thought this was pretty funny, here are some quotes/thoughts from Dr. Laura Schlessinger's book "The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands":

"If husbands are expected to "go to work and earn money" and visit relatives they don't like, she argues, why can't their wives put out on demand?

She also describes other ways a woman can make her marriage flourish: by making her husband her No. 1 priority; by not nagging, nitpicking or whining ("Be honest, girls, this is what we do") and by seeing her husband for what he is: "a gift from God," and respecting him accordingly.

"It's men who are starved for sex. "

But another psychologist had a differing opionion regarding sexual starvation:

"In most marriages, it's the wife who wants sex, and the husband who doesn't," says Frederick Woolverton, a clinical psychologist and director of the Village Institute for Psychotherapy.

"Dating and honeymoons are all about sex. Marriage is all about intimacy. Men have affairs because they're afraid of intimacy."

It's true that sex is an essential part of marriage, Woolverton says, adding, "It's the women who are complaining."

As this could be a sensitive topic, moving it to the debate forum.

Keep it clean please folks.

:cylon: :cylon: :cylon:

:hello:

Originally posted by 93LexoGS300
Men have affairs because they're afraid of intimacy.

I think that makes sense. ---->AHHGH!! *The quote not the title of the THREAD*

I don't really see where Dr. Laura is coming from with some of the quotes you posted. Men "go to work and earn money," and "visit relatives they don't like" ?????? Are those supposed to be the two top things men do that women appreciate? lol

My fiance isn't too crazy about my relatives, either. 2-way street. We both "whine" about having to do that stuff. Everybody nags, whines, and nitpicks occasionally. That's why stuff gets done. :)

Even as a man, I don't agree with what Dr. Laura said, but I did think it was pretty funny how a woman can say things like that.

It's true that a marriage is a two-way street and each spouse should complement the other.

"If husbands are expected to "go to work and earn money" and visit relatives they don't like, she argues, why can't their wives put out on demand?
"


yeah why :uh:

alot of married guys would like this question answered

I'm just going to say that if this is a problem in your marriage, I feel bad for you. I haven't had this problem yet and I don't see the fun slowin down. :woot:

A husband who truly loves his wife will not order her to " put out " on demand. :love: In fact, if it is that time of the month, he will be sorry if she DOES.

I thought this was pretty funny, here are some quotes/thoughts from Dr. Laura Schlessinger's book "The Proper Care and Feeding of Husbands":

"If husbands are expected to "go to work and earn money" and visit relatives they don't like, she argues, why can't their wives put out on demand?

She also describes other ways a woman can make her marriage flourish: by making her husband her No. 1 priority; by not nagging, nitpicking or whining ("Be honest, girls, this is what we do") and by seeing her husband for what he is: "a gift from God," and respecting him accordingly.

"It's men who are starved for sex. "

But another psychologist had a differing opionion regarding sexual starvation:

"In most marriages, it's the wife who wants sex, and the husband who doesn't," says Frederick Woolverton, a clinical psychologist and director of the Village Institute for Psychotherapy.

"Dating and honeymoons are all about sex. Marriage is all about intimacy. Men have affairs because they're afraid of intimacy."

It's true that sex is an essential part of marriage, Woolverton says, adding, "It's the women who are complaining."

Dont tell me she is neither not or ever been married or has had numerous divorces lol. I love it when women or men who have marriage problems themselves try to preach.

She's lifting text from the Bible and exaggerating it. Basically, the Bible tells wives to love their husbands and vice versa. It also stictly forbids either partner from willingly witholding sex from the other (except in the case where one is very ill or incapacitated).

But, God also expects husbands to be understanding. If the wife is tired or emotionally drained or whatever, the husband needs to back off out of respect and love.

Lastly, the Bible does set a very specific heirarchical order to a proper household. The husband is supposed to be in "tune" with God through prayer and worship. So, God is #1. Then comes the husband who is #2 and is head of the household. The wife (#3) respects and obeys the husband. The children respect and obey both parents.

But, too many men take this WAY out of context and use it as a license to control their wives. If you are "controlling" your wife, something is very wrong. She should be WILLINGLY submissive. It's her choice. You're not forcing her to be submissive, she just is.

It's just like the Military. Can you imagine the battlefield if captains were telling generals what to do and privates were unwilling to be submissive to their higher-ups? It would be pure chaos! And that is exactly what is happening in homes all across America.

So, wives be submissive to your husbands, as the Bible says. But, just like the Military, the husband (General) needs to EARN the respect of his family.

drink300

The children respect and obey both parents.



Close, Drink...but no cigar. If you are going to quote Scriptures you have to look at the WHOLE thing. Paul ALSO warns parents NOT to nag their children. Children are to obey their parents ONLY when the parents are correct, deserving of obedience, and within God's will THEMSELVES. Jesus Himself said "Think not that I have come to bring peace. No, I have come to bring a sword as well. A person's worst enemies will be the members of his own family ". Jesus was referring to the inevitable divisions that would take place in families where part of the family would be in God's will and the other part would not....and where some would accept Him and some would not.
Jesus, while generally respectful of His earthly parents, also replied to His own mother Mary on at least one occasion...."Woman, you must NOT tell me what to do".
AND, when the young man said "Please, let me go first and bury my father," Jesus said "Follow Me, and let the dead bury their own dead ".

It is interesting that Paul says in Ephesians 5:22-24, “Wives, submit to your own husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church; and He is the Savior of the body. Therefore, just as the church is subject to Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything.”
NKJVIn today’s world, that can start a row just about anywhere you find a “liberated” woman. “WHAT?” she says, “I’m just supposed to SUBMIT to my husband??” This is often a contentious point among Bible students as well, but read on . . .
Look down the page to the very next verse, Eph. 5:25-29, “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word, that He might present her to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that she should be holy and without blemish. So husbands ought to love their own wives as their own bodies; he who loves his wife loves himself. For no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as the Lord does the church.”
- NKJVNow while the Lord is making reference to the relationship between Himself and the church (believers), He uses the relationship between husband and wife as an illustration. While He says that wives should submit themselves to their husbands, he does not command them to LOVE them. The instruction for husbands to LOVE their WIVES indicates much more - an even deeper commitment. Entire books have been written on the exegesis of just those few verses, putting the entire passage in biblical and historical context. Basically, it comes down to this:
While the husband is designated the leader of the family, he is not to conduct that role in an abusive or domineering way. The husband bears a tremendous responsibility. “Love”, “Sanctify”, and “Cherish” convey so much more than “Submit”. Would a man who loves and cherishes his wife, and regards her as part of his own body ever consider taking advantage of her? Never. And so it is with the Lord and his people. We are to submit ourselves to the One who loves and cherishes us above all else.
Next, in Eph. 6, the Lord continues: “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. ‘Honor your father and mother,’ which is the first commandment with promise: ‘that it may be well with you and you may live long on the earth.’
“And you, fathers, do not provoke your children to wrath, but bring them up in the training and admonition of the Lord.”
- NKJVAs a child, I liked that! FINALLY something in Scripture that didn't point to ME!
:D
BTW, my wife STILL thinks I'm God's gift . . . shhhhhh - don't anyone tell her . . . ;)

Basically, it comes down to this:
While the husband is designated the leader of the family, he is not to conduct that role in an abusive or domineering way. The husband bears a tremendous responsibility. “Love”, “Sanctify”, and “Cherish” convey so much more than “Submit”. Would a man who loves and cherishes his wife, and regards her as part of his own body ever consider taking advantage of her? Never. And so it is with the Lord and his people. We are to submit ourselves to the One who loves and cherishes us above all else.

My interest in the epistles has waned severely over the past year or so. Paul, Inc. sounds to me like nothing more than a disillusioned, crotchety old man attempting to enact, claiming divine authority, his own anathemas against various behavior that he, personally, found indigent.

That aside - I don't agree that gender defines individuals in marriages. Our individualistic, patriarchal society is the result of thousands of years of the same without a margin for change.

I'm not even entirely sure that marriage has a place in most romantic relationships. The divorce rate in America seems to indicate that.

M.

[QUOTE=Lil4X] While He says that wives should submit themselves to their husbands, he does not command them to LOVE them. QUOTE]





There is a reason for this. In Biblical times the men pretty much chose their wives and that was it...the bride often did not have a whole lot to say about it, so she sometimes could end up married to a man she did not (and could not) love. A man went to a bride's father...or other family representative if the father was dead, paid a dowry, and asked for her hand in marriage. He was either turned down or the girl was given to him....period. This is the tradition of "giving" brides away that is symbolically still observed at many weddings today, although today, of course, in most societies it is a 50/50 consent.

But...back then...sometimes even the MAN did not have much to say about it either when the parents had a pre-arrainged marriage, which was common.

Absolutely correct! Contract marriages have been the norm not only in the Middle East, but around the world, throughout history. Marriage was typically a political play - at least among the power elite. It often represented the joining of two houses, an alliance, if you will, of two powerful families.

In medieval times, the concept of chivalry and "courtly love" was based on the unrequited, or at least, chaste love of a man for another's wife - usually royalty. I suppose it was the Romantic Era that brought us the concept of love as we would recognize it.

Paul was unique in Scripture in that while like Luke, he never was physically in the presence of Jesus (aside from the Damascus Road experience). Most of the rest of the major writers of the NT followed Jesus as he conducted His ministry. Paul was probably one of the best educated men of his age, a wealthy young rabbinical student who was a Roman citizen. He was a Pharisee - an observant, legalistic Jew, who before his conversion, was a persecutor of Christ-followers. He is thought to have been involved in the stoning of St. Steven, the first Christian martyr. His academic credentials were extensive and his scholarship amazing. As you read his letters (Epistles) to the churches, you can see him using powerful logic to bring errant, apostate churches back into the fold.

As he said in 2 Corinthians 11:24-28,Five times I received from the Jews thirty-nine lashes.

Three times I was beaten with rods, once I was stoned, three times I was shipwrecked, a night and a day I have spent in the deep.

I have been on frequent journeys, in dangers from rivers, dangers from robbers, dangers from my countrymen, dangers from the Gentiles, dangers in the )city, dangers in the wilderness, dangers on the sea, dangers among false brethren;

I have been in labor and hardship, through many sleepless nights, in hunger and thirst, often )without food, in cold and exposure.

Apart from such external things, there is the daily pressure on me of concern for all the churches.

-NASBHe suffered just about every catastrophe known to man, yet he could still say as he approached the end of his life:For I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the time has come for my departure. I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day—and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing.

-2 Timothy 4:6-8 NIVAnd that's a pretty good epitaph for any man: "I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith."