Talking with a friend about family histories. At some point I say to my friend, 'I think, at some point, my Dad started witholding sex from my mom. I didn't understand some of the things my mom was saying at the time, but looking back I realize that is exactly what was going on.

"He sounds like a wise man" my friend says.

My brain explodes.

Eyebrows Z, I say "how's that?"

"Women don't like it when you withold that. It gives you great power"

Comments, please.
FilteringMachine FilteringMachine
31-35, M
15 Responses Jul 6, 2012

Well... I guess if you want a nagging, bitter,unfullfilled partner that is the way to accomplish it. I would not call that power as much as just plain selfishness. He must have a huge ego to actually believe that his partner will not retaliate in some way sooner or later. At some point, she will be choosing to leave, have an affair or just make his life hell in return.

Totally agree.

My response to him was this: You are planting weed seeds in your garden.

That is an asshat comment and you know it.<br />
<br />
And you just asked that question to provoke; you know the answer.<br />
<br />
(Like any of us need more mind games)<br />
<br />
I hope your friend is getting refused.<br />
<br />

Sounds like he is the one doing the refusing.

Then I hope he is getting counter-refused.

One of my men tried that with me..I called his bluff, so let's consider him an Ex-man (no pun intended)

It only gives power while the refused accept that as the situation.

Ulae said: "women's physiology defines the ba<x>seline of great sex and men are brutes that need to be refined and trained until they meet that lofty standard"<br />
<br />
Huh? Would you clarify this statement for me?

It means that testicle crushing drives the modern aesthetic.

Okay, I understand now ... a statement of "victim mentality". No testicle crushing in my world though.

Then you live, unlike a large number of people (both men and women included), in the real world.

How about testicle kissing and/or licking? Are there allowances for that??

yes, many allowances.

2 More Responses

I don't think in some instances your friend is off the mark - I think some of what husbro says is true, but at the end of the day, their whole family agenda (their family) is pay back and he is most assuredly paying me back for something I did to him that he didn't bother to tell me about (and honestly it could even be something NO ONE else in the world would consider a slight) - at any rate, fine he can have 100% power over sex, I'll just have 100% power over leaving.

"fine he can have 100% power over sex, I'll just have 100% power over leaving"
Omg, that's good-REALLY good! I'm filing that one in my memory bank. Thank you

I often wonder too if there was something that I did that set my husband on his path of refusing. Or if he just likes having the control over something. I just wish he wouldn't take it out on our marriage.

You can, as they say, wish in one hand and **** in the other. A refuser in hand isn't worth a million in a bush.

I might get a little flak here for not labeling the friend a *****, but my SM has made me a little more, not less, sensitive to plights of other people (well, men). Anyone making a comment like that sounds like he has been through a relationship trauma. I don't know about power, but certainly women are used to a lot more (sometimes unwelcome but mostly enjoyable in civilized societies) attention than men. As another major example, this whole cultural statement that women's physiology defines the ba<x>seline of great sex and men are brutes that need to be refined and trained until they meet that lofty standard is pretty annoying. It destroys the very foundation of, um, coming to the table (bed?) as political equals.

both genders play these games... it boils down to the refusing spouse preferring control (power) to sex, love, equality (partnership)... and I now immediately recognize it for an exit sign...

I want a partner...

Ulae. I have to agree with you about many aspects of this. Culturally and socially there does seems to be an imbalance and hypocrisy when it comes to issues about sensitivities and tolerance of behaviour of men and women. The general message seems to be that women ultimately can't help themselves and men have to big and bold and just put up with it, while being the bottomless pit of understanding about it. Frankly, I think that may well be just an outright insult to women, even those who manifest the worst extremes of such behaviour. It smacks of the worst aspect of the Victorian thinking on "female hysteria" and in many ways doesn't seem to have ever gone away. Only yesterday I saw yet another headline to an article from a female journalist exclaiming that apparently women are made wacky by their hormones "at that time of month". I thought, "****, just great, I'm not reading any more of that." Of course, it says little that is helpful when it comes to try to strike your own bargain with your own immediate partner.

This is what's great about EP --- empathy one may not find at home! Make no mistake, I have no trouble respecting and relating to women in all other capacities and roles, except this one. It's not their fault, but neither is it men's. Nature has a really crooked sense of humor when it comes to human sexuality. Gosh if nature were really personified I'd be charged with battery and (wo)manslaughter.

What is the point of discussing the ***-for-tat that occurs in unloving marriages?? with people who do not put love as the primary focus of marriage, no less?

The funny thing is... I met my STBX on an online dating site. He stated very clearly he hated mind games, wasn't into games, wanted someone to be a partner... all the right words... he always has all the right words... all the wrong ACTIONS.

Your friend may be a nice guy as a friend to you but I would never want him near my bed or my heart. He knows nothing of mutuality and therefore would make a terrible partner.<br />
<br />
My ex tried to have that power over me. Instead of personal power he went for power to manipulate and control, me hurting meant I still must have cared about him. It was cruel.<br />
<br />
I wanted personal power with my ex and my ex wanted power over me. For a while he had that power over me. But now he's my ex and I got my personal power back. Baz is right. So is Lao. That's a control game and it does the opposite of promote intimacy. I don't do games & I avoid those that wish to play by those rules.

Simply, if its trust and intimacy you seek and not control over someone, then power games are not for you. To get to trust and intimacy you need to be vulnerable. A conundrum for anyone who won't give completely of themselves.

Sounds like it's time to make new friends... what other power mindf(cks is your friend capable of?

Very dangerous thinking... It is always possible to find somebody else, who willingly provides sex... Person who withholds sex just encourages the other do exactly that...

And hurts someone you say you love.

Then who started the circle?

It never matters who started it. Only who ends it. By ending the cycle of behaviors or by ending the relationship.

It is not always possible to end the relationship straight away... and it takes a while to realise that the partner is playing the controlling game... In ideal world all relationships would end as soon as they become abusive... Though in ideal world they would not become abusive... So everybody use their own way of coping... Many just accept anything and suffer...

FullMoon, I want to clarify: I meant that refusing sex rejects and hurts someone the refuser claims to love - the spouse they are refusing. It hurts deeply and sharply. Beyond that the refused is generally trying to react and manage/cope.

2 More Responses

Setting the gender bias aside, your friend is right, and also way wrong.<br />
<br />
Initially - if unchallenged - refusing does move the dynamic under the control of the refuser.<br />
<br />
Longer term, the power is actually with the refused, because they alone hold the control of the timing of the cessation of the dynamic. And that can have catastrophic results for the refuser.<br />
<br />
Ask anyone who is involved in tactical thinking. They will uniformly tell you that if there is a choice you can make between 'where the battle will be fought' and 'when the battle will be fought' they'll choose "when" every time.<br />
<br />
I don't wish to be critical of your friend Filt, but he sounds like a 'half smart' *****.<br />
<br />
Tread your own path.

"he sounds like a 'half smart' *****."

Pure Friday awesomeness :)

All it says is he has problems regarding women. It may have an explanation, it might not. Whether it can be justified is only a loaded gun.<br />
<br />
I would like to think that I could think and communicate my way to a better resolution but then I think, "Really, EVERY time?"