LDS women's attitudes toward conjugal relations

[Archaea]

which is that different.

There is scriptural language discussing "submission", and intrepretative gloss provided by President Kimball. In the end, you may be stating about the same thing.

I know Adam, and his wife is anything but submissive in the manner in which you are construing his interpretations.

Focus your discussions along this line to clarify what is probably not much of a disagreement.

Being lazy, as I remember this stuff, ultimately, a man bears certain responsibility for decisions related to his wife, she is supposed to eventually consent (I don't know how this really plays out). This assumes the husband must deal righteously consult, do everything in his power to achieve consensus or agreement, seek the Spirit, achieve unity in purpose with spouse and otherwise acts in a proper manner. I do believe that the scriptures state that both man and wife are commanded to give themselves to each other, this includes sexually.

Let me ask you this, because I give two real examples.

Are these women living righteously?

First woman, when married for 25 plus years, constantly berated husband for not giving her enough money to spend on leisure items. Whether true or not, I do not know. So she declared to the women of the ward, I will not sleep with my husband until I can divorce him in hopes he will commit adultery. She claims she did not sleep with him for the last three years of her marriage. He was a high counselor and perceived by many non-friends of the wife as a good guy.

Second woman, married for 17 years, became upset when her husband decided he hated being a chiropractor and pursued government work. From that time, she decided he was a bumb, even though bills always paid and she had enough, plus freedom to work if she desired, which she desired. She hated her husband, and decided even though he was faithful, but because he wasnt' making enough money, that she wouldn't sleep with him for two and one half years until she forced him to divorce her.

My question is: in your understanding of the Gospel, is this righteous behavior? Don't qualify, well, maybe they are justified because x, y or z.

I know this much about the two husbands, they both were faithful to Church and to wives. They weren't perfect guys, but were women righteous in simply refusing sex?

I submit they were not.

[tooblue]

I truly believe that point A as a problem would be solved if we could first solve problem B ... rendering problem A irrelevant.

I apologize for my aggressiveness and truly do not mean to be contentious, and recognize that my tone has been harsh. I understand that the problems you have pointed to are real, however I place the blame for such problems on a male dominated and patriarchal society.

I am certain that if every woman, even those souls who may have suffered trauma or abuse, were approached with long-suffering, persuasion, gentleness, meekness, kindness and love unfeigned they would readily embrace sexual intimacy with more zeal and energy than any man could ever dream.

Pornography and immodesty are lies that force us away from the truth -that woman are sexual creatures and that sex is a gift from God. Such perversity encourages the dominant male to see the woman as an object to be consumed as opposed to fellow child of God.

I am not ignoring your stated concerns, I suggest that they are a symptom of a larger problem that is oftern addressed in conference.

[tooblue]

First woman, when married for 25 plus years, constantly berated husband for not giving her enough money to spend on leisure items. Whether true or not, I do not know. So she declared to the women of the ward, I will not sleep with my husband until I can divorce him in hopes he will commit adultery. She claims she did not sleep with him for the last three years of her marriage. He was a high counselor and perceived by many non-friends of the wife as a good guy.

What do we know of the man in this situation? What were his actions, is he blameless for her behaviour (it is possible). How many times had she been ignored in favour of work, in favour of a hobby, in the name of earning money and procurring material things. Let's also consider that for all intents and purposes, based upon the anecdotal details provided, the woman is powerless and as a result desperate. She will grab hold of whatever pawn she can. I am sorry but the story does little more than convince me that there is much more history to the story than her desperate and unrighteous tactics.

Second woman, married for 17 years, became upset when her husband decided he hated being a chiropractor and pursued government work. From that time, she decided he was a bumb, even though bills always paid and she had enough, plus freedom to work if she desired, which she desired. She hated her husband, and decided even though he was faithful, but because he wasnt' making enough money, that she wouldn't sleep with him for two and one half years until she forced him to divorce her.

When did he make this career decision? Was it done without her blessing or at the very least consideration for her sacrifices? How many years did she work to put him through school? Again, as a woman in this society, she is, for all intents and purposes powerless and as a result becomes desperate.

I would not even pretend to suggest that the woman in your stories is acting wisely or righteously. However, when did the mistrust, the hurt, the frustration begin.

I do readily admit that there are times when a one person can simply hurt another without provocation. In marriage I believe it may be rare for a woman to hurt without provocation.

[Archaea]

You assume that women can withhold with provocation.

That from what I understand from therapists is a wrong point of view. Spouses get into a cycle of one hurting the other, when what they need to do is to try to break the cycle.

Women will say, well, he did this and he did that, so I'll respond in this manner.

I might agree that women will not attack without provocation, but I've seen countless times when women respond immaturely, fashioning provocation in their minds.

Do I believe either man to be blameless? No.

However, my question is, as long as no physical abuse, no verbal abuse and no unfaithfulness and no health issues are concerned., is a woman ever justified in permanently withholding conjugal relations?

You seem to imply there is. That is contrary to the recommendations of most therapists.

BTW, both women bragged about how they were so cruel.

You are quite the tenacious fighter, are you certain you're not a trial lawyer, as you seem to be unwilling to concede there is unrighteous exercise of dominion by women. Women can and do sin as well.

We know men's sins. They cheat. They look at pornography. They are domineering, they demand, they aren't considerate.

By the time I finish describing either of the genders, I wonder why God doesn't destroy all of us as we are so despicable we don't deserve to exist.

What are women's sexual sins?

[MikeWaters]

some women cheat too you know.

[Archaea]

show that they do in lower proportions.

And the studies show it's for different reasons, supposedly. Not having cheated, I don't really know.

Men are prone to cheating. It is my, perhaps naive, belief that women are much less prone, although there are likely exceptions.

Women to my knowledge don't become addicted to pornography.

[Archaea]

For example, if a woman still says No, or says Yes reluctantly, what does it all mean?

I just don't know.

I guess it's the Lord's way of breaking a tie, but I don't want to win ties, I want mutual partnership, and unanimous decisions.

Of course, we do what the Boss says any how. She has two votes, and I have none.

[tooblue]

Firstly I do not condone the actions of the women in the stories. I do not offer excuses to explain their behaviour. I do not believe they are justified in their actions. My response was to point our that there is more to the story.

About provocation -It is wrong for any PERSON to react unrighteously in response to provocation. That does not change the fact that provocation has consequences, one of which is another person acting unrighteously in reponse to the provocation!

it's a vicious circle.

I know for a fact woman can and are unfaithful and never suggested they could not or are not.

None of this alters what I have written about the root of this problem ... The very fact that we are having this conversation illustrates that misunderstanding of woman by the dominant male is rampant. We are looking at this from the male perspective, hence our findings from the get go are incomplete. You joke that I am a trial lawyer is funny :-D I am an artist who perhaps has sat in one too many feminitst driven art history courses :P I am merely trying to see it from the woman's perspective to encourage balance in the discussion.

I have a good friend who has suffered similarly to one of the men in your two stories. He is a faithful member of the church. His former wife is no longer faithful to any one but herself. When he speaks about the situation he is often candid. He refuse to be a victim and readily admits to his role in the dissintegration of the relationship.

Mostly I do not ever want to lose sight of the truths of our role as men in the priesthood. We are to lead out and direct with love, gentleness, persuassion etc.

[SoCalCoug]

Men are prone to cheating. It is my, perhaps naive, belief that women are much less prone, although there are likely exceptions.

I just reviewed my client list and did an informal survey, based on the information I am aware of. I identified 8 husbands who I know cheated, and 6 wives who I know cheated.

And there were several where the wives were convinced that the husbands had cheated, but I am convinced they hadn't.

Oh. I left out the threesome wtih the neighbor.

[Archaea]

Wow, now we're getting somewhere. SoCal is even more progressive than Las Vegas, where bishopric members have girlfriends on the side and RS presidents have boyfriends.