In the Christian model one would have to be married in a church, and more importantly it would be immune from pagan laws, such as divorce. Of course legislation would have to be passed to make this possible. The only grounds for divorce would be adultery.

One could not get a divorce in a family court. Having Christians marry under the current system is not a separation of Church and State.

I forgot about that, this was my solution. But I don’t talk about it much anymore.”

The problem with this approach is that it is too complex. A better solution is the privatization of marriage – recognize the private agreements of the two parties to the marriage; exclude everything else. Make marriage a voluntary agreement of two consenting adults – the ONLY time government would be involved would be if the so-called adults failed to provide for the children of their union (even then, preference would be given to private charity over government interference). The rules, and method for enforcing them, would be provided for as in any other agreement between responsible adults. If the couple chooses a marriage based on the principles of their chosen religion, then you have the basis for your Christian marriage.

I truly believe anything less will further expand the rift between men and women. The government treats one sex as perpetrators and the other sex as helpless victims – a false dynamic based in the most bitter stereotypes. This model is enforced both by radical feminists and the strongly religous within our state legislators – the solution will be found in ignoring both their hateful views of people. The beauty of this approach is that people themselves can implement this without the permission of the legal system or the parasites that run it. Just ignore government; chose an enforcement mechanizm complete outside government – possibly a church council of elders- anything the couple mutually agrees to. I truly believe survivial of our society depends upon this approach.

Even if a girl claims to be a Christian and attends church, so what? Lot’s of girls have game and some in the Church are some of the worst ones. You have to use “discernment” my friend as not all girls have “game.”

And how did these women — the same young women who were complaining that “all men want is sex” — respond?

By rejecting these men.

Or on the rare occasions when these men would be “allowed” to date them, these women would then expect the men to pay for all the expenses, and then dump them for another man who was interested in sex.

A lot of these men figured out these women’s racket early on. Women pretend to not want sex in order to maintain a sense of moral superiority, or to exploit sex as a means to get what they want out of a guy. Too many decent men fall for this game. Underneath it, of course, women want to have sex just as much as men. But they also know how to exploit sex to get what they want.

If this were NOT the case, then these women would be taking the initiative to ask out decent guys. We rarely see that happening.

My two cents worth.

So imagine.

In the Christian model one would have to be married in a church, and more importantly it would be immune from pagan laws, such as divorce. Of course legislation would have to be passed to make this possible. The only grounds for divorce would be adultery.

One could not get a divorce in a family court. Having Christians marry under the current system is not a separation of Church and State.

I forgot about that, this was my solution. But I don’t talk about it much anymore.

In the Christian religion I feel like a a general in the 1936 Polish military inspecting the Polish air force and complaining on deaf ears that the current Polish air force won’t last one week against the Nazi Germany Luftwaffe. Imagine, my frustration.

Other than what I said, was an “ideal” situation and the best in regards to sexual intercourse.

As for solutions, well I don’t have any. You put forth excellent questions, but I just don’t know how to fix decades of damage done by women.

The relationships between men and women have become so adversarial, dunno?

I advocate wait for sex until marriage, but only if the current system of marriage is scarped, due to all the flaws you pointed out.

A lot would have to be done to undo 40 years of feminist activism, and attacks on men, women, and children.

* what do you recommend?

* what can be redeemed?

* what is the future of gender warfare/ possible reconciliation?”

Good questions all. The “wait till “marriage”" argument is definitely hopeless since we no longer even have a common definition of the word and the society as a whole no longer connects sex and “marriage”. I tried to wait till marriage, she was my fiancee, but she was experienced sexually even though I was not. This was 28 years ago – so I certainly hold out no hope for the “virgin till marriage” fantasies of today. Marriage is a financial transaction in today’s world and should never be entered into without an unequal partner.

Putting biology on hold? Stop it all together? Isn’t this what the feminists tried to do only to discover the vast majority of women were heterosexual and didn’t want to follow the lesbian model? This makes about as much sense as trying to reverse gravity, make the planet spin in the opposite direction, etc.

The facts is that social interaction is a competitive marketplace and it includes sex. I have a girlfriend I adore, but we rarely see each other since she chose to put her sex life on hold as she has teenage children. We will occassionally get together, even with her kids, but it is very frustrating. She will not even go out of town with me for fear her kids will think she is having sex and use that as an excuse for themselves! Marriage is not a possibilty; getting married to obtain sex is analogous to committing suicide to obtain freedom! She denies herself in an effort to prevent them from responding to their raging hormones – and I think she understands it will probably fail. I often wish “Dr Laura” would just go away!

“Why are males still getting married even though studies have shown that sex stops, when marriage begins…”

Boys grow up in a seamless Matriarchy from birth through high school. Every social space they occupy is administered and controlled by women — they are called moms, aunts, grandmas, sisters, day-care providers, K-12 & HS teachers.

If the boy-man somehow survives this institutional tyranny and screening system, he might go on to college.

Where he is introduced to the professional variety of institutionalized feminists in the form of professors, administrators, and the 58% majority of college students —oh, they happen to be female!

So really the answer to your question is that CHIVALRY is apparently in men’s DNA — it’s like a gender-suicide pact — and no amount of social contempt or pervasive misandry will persuade the average man that he is a commodity and an object of female exploitation.

To admit that would be … unmanly.

Really what a fine salon of writers and a worthwhile thread…)

So, since you all have so eloquently described from varoius perspectives the nature and dimensions of the dilemma — very poor and problematic gender relations and unsatisfactory sexual quests –

the logical next questions to put forward to this elite group may include —

* what do you recommend?

* what can be redeemed?

* what is the future of gender warfare/ possible reconciliation?

Women are totally stingy and selfish with their money.

Why are males still getting married even though studies have shown that sex stops, when marriage begins…

It’s probably why vibrator sales have reached new highs, another example of women being unable to be satisfies with anything and need mechanical assistance so she can do it to herself…now she’s got no-one to moan to..

I certainly hope you mean traditional marriage – the kind that virtually no longer exists. The kind my parents had, fifty years before my father’s death separated them. There is ZERO correlation between the traditional or “biblical” marriage and today’s “legal” marriage. I would participate in the first; was a victim of the second. It won’t happen again and I recommend to younger men they do NOT marry unless they find a woman with as much to lose financially and professionally as they do. No other marriage is possible under the cuirrent “justice” system – and even then there is no assurance that she won’t suddenly change after the marriage of when a child is born. Unilateral divorce is too great a risk, often compared to Russian roulette with even worse odds. Simple fact: if you don’t get married, you won’t experience divorce. The possible exception is a marriage entrapment state (called “common law”), where making the mistake of signing any legal document that might be interpreted as a “married” situation could entrap you. Don’t even live with a woman in one of these states; much like the “automatic arrest” states where a man is jailed just because someone makes a “911 hangup” call from his home. The result of these new feminists indocrtrinated laws is perfect equality – women live in their own houses just as men do. Period. End of story. I’m 48 and fully realize I will never have children under the new and offensive rules. Congratulations Feminists! You won! Our country will be ruled in the future by illegal aliens who are NOT subject to our family courts. The true death of a society.

I have read your comments to other articles and have never been particularly impressed with your lines of arguement but have to say I am completely amazed with your insight to this article. Well said throughout.

Denise, I repeat my earlier accusation… you are blaming the wrong sex. I have no sympathy for women complaining about there being no ‘nice’ men out there. You women have made your bed, now you can go masterbate in it by yourself.

Women who can’t find men whine that they can’t find men and women who find men complain that they don’t like being with them… and it always seems to be the man’s fault.

People, men or women, who take the responsibility for their own happiness seem to find it. People who expect other people to make them happy, not only are not happy but, remarkably, they blame everyone else for their misery.

I like amfortas’ comment that these women whing that they only ‘endure’ sex didn’t seem to have trouble enjoying sex with their boyfriends before they were married, so I guess your whole women as an orifice has nothing to do with it. I think the fact that marriage has made sex unenjoyable for them clearly indicate that they were using their sex to entrap the man into marriage. Once they had the marriage the sex was a useless tool for them. What’s to enjoy.

AND she will nag and be upset about any and everything you tell her – so you learn to tell her as little as possible.

The Answer: OTHER GIRLS!

The Solution: Stop teaching girls to do that.

Question: Why do girls feel like they have to sleep with boys to have relationships with them?

The Answer: Because the modern princess culture has made it so that it’s the only reason boys will endure female company.

The Solution: Maybe – teach girls to actually respect and like boys – instead of hold them in contempt – and they might have something to offer BESIDES sex.

Not rocket science.

Maybe, Denise, maybe. But all so often the man is made responsible and carries the ‘blame’. The Family Court carries on this same blame projection onto the man, even though they too pretend that its no-one’s ‘fault’.

In bed, men, having been raised with the expectation that they are responsible for what happens, seem almost too willing to carry the can for his partners’ lack of desire, lack of effort, lack of willingness. (He didn’t give her an orgasm, poor deprived thing! what an insensitive beast he is). She, raised to off-load the responsibility, is all to willing to find fault, even when, as you say, it isn’t anyone’s fault, or when it is clearly her’s.

You have mentioned before about your mastabatory exploits as a girl and that raises yet another issue about the couple situation. Her need for long involved foreplay to become aroused. I wonder how long you took. I bet it didn’t need a day and a half. One can be humourous about the ‘normal’ situation men find themselves in with their spouse/girlfriend.

For him, foreplay is fraught with problems. Men prefer 30 to 45 Seconds of foreplay, less if at all possible. For the man, driving back to her place is considered a part of foreplay.

No woman understands why this is.

Women prefer 30 to 45 Minutes of foreplay, in addition to a bubbly spa with Champagne and dinner out in a restaurant; and (if she is in a ‘relationship’) him doing the washing up, vacuuming, putting out the rubbish and mowing the lawn.
As well as grocery shopping, washing & ironing, putting up shelves, re-arranging the furniture…..

And begging.

This adds another 12 hours on average; sometimes a whole week.

It is a mystery to him why these things didn’t turn her on when she was single and did them all herself. ( Apart from the begging).

She “needs” to be turned on to, and by, him, each time, generally with some effort on his part.

She expects him to be turned on to her all the time she’s there. Only her. Not the hem of any old dress. Not by any other female. Not by his own hormones. Her. He is to be totally disinterested any time she is out of his sight.

He has to initiate. He has to reach out to her, be sexually adventurous, interesting, open, inventive and daring.

She wants to be ‘taken’.

She sees sex as a form of ‘communication’. She wants to know his most secret sexual thoughts. His history and experience with other women. His fantasies. She wants him to ‘Talk to her’.

He is reluctant. He wants to avoid this. He thinks she will not like it. So, he asks for her secret thoughts, fantasies, history etc., too, to head it off.

Mistake.

She lists between 100 and 500 men who all ‘pursued her relentlessly ‘ and she ‘gave in to’, was ‘swept away’ by, or was ‘forced to do it for /to him’ and were all either fantastic in bed or total jerks.

Her fantasies are few and involve a 19th Century Crinoline, or a hooped dress, and a fan. She doesn’t have any sexual thoughts at all unless she’s with him; and they are about her. She does not use a single rude word. She swears it’s the truth.

He believes her. He tells her. All. The truth, too. To be fair. His reality is the four women in his past and the several thousand who he lusted after but wouldn’t give him the time of day. His fantasies involve a cast of a modest theatre company and would keep a porn script-writer in business for a year.

She hates him. He talks ‘dirty’.

The more initiating, adventurous, daring, interesting, inventive, open and reaching out to her he is, the more ‘demanding’, ‘needy’ or ‘perverted’ he is likely to be considered.

For him, foreplay is very complicated. And she still isn’t turned on.

But later, alone with her vibrator……..

Denise observes: “From both what I’ve heard and read, I know married women say they could not “repond” to their husbands. A married woman wrote, “Sex can be boring, sweaty, awkward, and just plain painful.” Again, this isn’t anything against marriage. It just means marriage is no sexual panacea. The truth that women can endure rather than enjoy sexual intercourse is not the result of a male supremacist conspiracy.”

How about it being a female conspiracy, Denise.

(Denise) As I pointed out in the next sentence, it is no one’s fault. It’s the result of the way the genitals are constructed. The vagina is an orifice and can be entered without the woman being sexually aroused. Of course, this is true of the rectum and mouth as well, organs common to both sexes.

>

(Denise) There are any number of reasons. She could have been enculturated into the “nice girls don’t” ideology which would usually be by her mother and/or other females. You see this in movies like “Splendor in the Grass,” “Carrie,” and elsewhere. People, especially other females, might have poisoned her mind with “men are beasts” sayings which left her unable to respond. She may have been a victim of sexual abuse which would usually, although not always, be by a male.
As far as “too many rejections formed a habit,” I’ve read that “teasers,” women who make a habit of heavy petting without orgasmic release can end up unable to reach climax at all, at least with a partner.

>

(Denise) In one program about a non-responsive wife, the wife said she agreed to allow her husband to have a girlfriend so they could keep the marriage together and raise their children.

By projecting ‘endurance’ rather than pleasure she puts the responsibility onto him, and the blame, for her being ‘bored’. Sweaty? Of course its sweaty. Its supposed to be sweaty. Its great, sweaty.

(Denise) I was quoting someone else. Masturbation is sweaty too. As a teenager, I used to soak through my bedspread with sweat when masturbating.

Awkward? Maybe she should try wielding a penis and see how awkward that is with a whinging partner! Lesbians must often have a really crappy time with the strap-on if the one on the recieving end is half as whiney as the average wife!

Lesbians; who blames whom?>>

(Denise) Each can blame the other. Lesbians can easily have incompatible sexualities. A lesbian friend of mine had a lot of problems with her last female partner for several reasons but one of them was that the partner wanted to have sex something like three times a day, every day. My friend is not nearly that horny but that wasn’t what broke up the relationship. I was her partner’s physical abusiveness.
Lesbian Bed Death is notorious as a problem faced by many longtime female-female couples (although it didn’t quite apply to the couple mentioned above!).