Yes of course r0bert, but oh how often do we hear about all the things men should do for 'more sex'. I happen to prefer women who actually like sex, and therefore would be cutting off their nose to spite their face if they were to place conditions like Severin does.

Regardless, as Severin's link showed, the mental health industry that you're all so keen to get BTK to embrace sees it as a man's job to appease whatever their partner wishes.

As some of the commentators noted...

'Why is there the automatic assumption that the feminine mode and point of view with regard to dealing with emotion is the "correct" and desired position?

Why can't women be counseled to expect less emotional coddling instead? Or are women so totally incapable of controlling themselves that it is always going to be up to the man to make all the emotional sacrifices?

Why can't the woman say, "The way that I am acting and what I am demanding of the man in my life is distressing him. Perhaps I should learn to deal with him in a more constructive (to him) manner." But no, it is always - women need this, women have to be given that, women want ... etc.'

As the author admits, most men enter therapy because they've been "forced". Their partner has finally deployed the nuclear option. As amply illustrated by his train-platform anecdote, the female partner's goals for the therapy are presumed to be preferable, even sacrosanct. Even when they fail to exhibit the standard of behaviour they demand, the responsibility to conform/affirm still rests on the man.

This is not to say that men don't need to work towards healthy relationships. It's to say that men & women both need to compromise in that work. Despite the author's claims that he is advocating a new approach to doing therapy with (to? on?) men, he really seems to be insisting that they conform to what their partners expect, regardless of the merits. How about some balance?

billythekid: << I deny I have masculinity issues. >>

While you're in denial about the obvious problems you're having with respect to your masculinity, I don't think I'm going to waste any more time and effort on you. I suspect your ex felt something similar before she left.

Howler - the author's a godbothering relic who wants us to revert to 1950s-style relationships. I don't think too many people here take him seriously. I certainly don't.

On the other hand, losers like billythekid already associate the failure of their marriages with the cause of suicide. I take that seriously, which is why I suggested counselling or therapy. Hopefully he'll wake up to himself before it's too late.

Well, certainly calling anyone a 'loser', is not going to help their mental health problems. I don't think you're genuine at all.

I have a happy life and a wonderful relationship, but I know anyone could easily fall on hard times like billy. Loser is a dreadful word, full of arrogance and lacking in any empathy.

The last thing he needs is to spend $100 a week he doesn't have talking to some shrink who's just going to patronise him like that guy from Severins article. Or worse, imagine pontificator! Actually that article ironically explains every reason Hasbeen is right and men shouldn't see shrinks. Leave the shrinks and the Tarot and astrology for the chicks man.

PS: Does anyone really believe in that article that a guy really was so bothered about being seen carrying a hand bag. Man that's weird. It doesn't really ring true, I think the author made it up.

I don't presume to speak for Severin, but I believe her point was that sex will come more easily in a mutually satisfying relationship where both partners respect each other - respect includes sharing household, childcare and paid work responsibilities or other arrangements as may suit.

Women (or men for that matter) who are really tired from holding down a job, child care and housework without much help from the OH are less likely to feel like sex rather than using it as a manipulative tool.

That was my take on it anyway for what it's worth.

My point is pelican, that this works both ways. But all we ever hear in the media and from the rantings of yourself and Severin is that men must change to put women in the mood.

Now as I expressed earlier when you and Severin described the real men of the world are the ones who do manual labour for women they don't know, there is one rule for men and one for women.

For a man to describe how a real woman is one who makes him a nice meal, that more often than not will illicit shouts of sexism/chauvenism. Now we also have the call for men to do more housework if they are to have their partner in the mood for sex.

Yourself and r0bert have read into Severin's post a mutuality that wasn't expressed. Now that generosity would never be granted to Yabby or HasBeen if they expressed Severin's sentiments from a male perspective.

If yabby said he wanted his missus to show she cared by having a nice dinner on the table, or a nice BJ once in a while, CJ would be right out there with his Neanderthal gear. Certainly nobody would be defending him saying he was talking more generally about 'mutually satisfying relationship where both partners respect each other - respect includes sharing household, childcare and paid work responsibilities or other arrangements as may suit.'

It is commonplace to read about the simple needs of men in relationships relating to beer, sex, sport and food to be inextricably linked to their housework efforts, but the yard work and office work of men is in no way ever related to listening and cuddles and candle-light dinners. Nope, the attention and cuddles and stuff that women need are non-negotiable, never relating to their earning and yard work efforts.

Houlley
Please show me where I mentioned that men must perform manual labour to please women. In my household my OH does do more of the hard physical stuff as I really cannot do it (well not on my own), but even being a shortstuff manage to do my fair share of digging and garden slog. That is the way it is for practical reasons not from an ideological pressure that men must do manual labour. I do more cooking for example without any feeling of oppression.

There are many times I have agreed with and supported views from Yabby, Hasbeen and yourself on many occasions as usually I find you very fair minded if not somewhat defensive about gender, but we are all that - so that's cool.

I thought my posts clearly demonstrate an 'it works both ways' approach.