I would suggest not antediluvian as CJ put it but merely self indulgent and or immature.
BTW maturity isn’t necessarily a function of age or IQ.
Some males writing are obvious well indoctrinated into the “Me male… you Mother of children…sex slave mentality of yesteryears. There is nothing wrong with this if the woman has been like conditioned and is happy in this role. As an aside CJ I remember an ex OLOer who was the epitome of this “ I pay you do as I say” mentality perhaps it’s a function of being conservative unwilling to accept change.
H. and Max need to read what I say and not simply miss quoting me so they can rave.
How many ways can I say this I’m not advocating a sexless marriage or passing judgement either way. I’m simply saying that it ISN’T the central reason people get married. If it is I’m sure a crisis councillor sooner or later is going to get a call from both partners. I AM saying that it’s there are attitudinal differences that demonstrably learned from culture and I reject them. It has nothing to do with isms.

Mrs P
I still say you need to work out your issues clearly you have some. I’m sure they do come in all colours and sizes but obviously the quality you’re seeing isn’t that hot. As for your pot belly rejects comment I think you need to focus on the quality not the wrapper. 3 strikes should tell you something. or is this all a leg pull

CJ, miners are rather common in WA and mining is not the only industry
where blokes put up with all sorts of conditions, to provide for their
families. In fact I would be rather suprised if even Australia wide,
men arn't still the main breadwinners and alot of women simply work
part time.

Its not a case of "expecting" sex for bringing home the bacon.
Were you foolish for imagining that your first wife should have
an interest in sex? Clearly people get married with the notion
that sex is part of marriage and if that female libido suddenly
vanishes or hardly exists, some guys, due to their biological
difference, tend to get a little cranky after a while.

What Bettina Arndt has raised, is that this is a fairly common
problem and that if women just said yes a little more often,
alot of marriages might function alot better.

Foxy tends to blame it on the men for not being understanding
of women. So was it your fault that your first wife had no libido?

I think she makes the mistake of seeing this through her eyes,
rather then through the eyes of some women out there, who do in
fact simply lose interest in sex, once the kids have arrived.

I personally am simply a bit tired of all this "woman the victim"
business. So I'm putting the other point of view forward, of many
cases that I know, where in fact men work extremely hard to provide
for their families, yet they are married to selfish women who
treat them like dirt. Personally I think that they should appreciate
the men they have and saying yes to them occasionally, is not that
hard to do, even if she simply can't be bothered.

Dear Yabby,

I'm not blaming anyone - or at least not
intentionally. I'm simply attempting to
present both sides in this discussion.
Because it "takes two to tango," so to
speak.

I sometimes wonder how honest are some
posters being, when they post their opinions.
Because I'm sure that in many cases they're
not really as "hard-nosed," as they claim to
be. They couldn't be when it comes right
down to it, especially in relationships, or else
they'd end up frustrated and alone. With no one
to blame but themselves.

There's got to be flexibility in any relationship.
That's a given. And Robert nailed it, when in my
thread on "Double Standards," he pointed out that
BOTH parties in a relationship need to be pro-active
and willing to learn.

Yes, definitely!

Sorry Examinator, but since I cut and pasted your comments, then offered my own point of view on them, I fail to see how I'm mis-quoting you.Perhaps you'd care to explain that?
You seem to be a fairly intelligent person, and I don't disagree with a lot you offer, but you also seem to be persuaded that genetics mean little, that it's all in "Nurture" rather than "Nature", and that outlook is being disproved readily as our knowledge increases.
Of course our upbringing has an effect, but it has to work on what we are born with, and scientists are finding more and more that's hard-wired into us, just like the rest of the animal kingdom.
What I've said is we need a new form of marriage, and I offer no thoughts on it's shape, yet one that takes into account the differences between us all, both genders, and the mixtures and oddities too. The old model is dying, and the PC approach you seem to be offering is also dying, thank god, so where do we go from here?
I also think virtually all of us are in agreement about the mutual approach, no contest, but, as I've said, unless or until we stop denying genetic influences, we will fail in this.

You may be right about Mrs Pierno, Foxy. I've had similar thoughts, particularly when 'she' belatedly mentioned the significant age difference. However, even if we're being had, the discussion's been quite revealing.

Yabby: << Its not a case of "expecting" sex for bringing home the bacon. >>

If it's not the case, why frame your comment such that sex is something given by wives in exchange for the economic benefits provided by their husbands? The fact that you think that there is something fair and reasonable about this kind of arrangement where it occurs is probably a good pointer as to why it is that you're single.

<< Were you foolish for imagining that your first wife should have
an interest in sex? Clearly people get married with the notion
that sex is part of marriage and if that female libido suddenly
vanishes or hardly exists, some guys, due to their biological
difference, tend to get a little cranky after a while. >>

When my ex lost interest in sex, I think it was symptomatic of the pathological state of our marriage, which in retrospect had been going downhill for some time. It wasn't just sex - after the birth of our first child she became more career-oriented, cut her hair off and began dressing like a matron. More importantly, she increasingly became controlling while simultaneously uncommunicative when I tried to discuss what was happening with her. I didn't help much by working increasingly longer hours in a career that was more rewarding than home life had become and drinking excessively. Sound familiar?

[cont]

I'm with Foxy on this, particularly as it concerns this thread.

>>I sometimes wonder how honest are some
posters being, when they post their opinions.<<

The closer topics get to issues of emotions, sexuality and relationships, the more (I personally suspect) that the opportunity is used by individuals to testbed thoughts that they feel uncomfortable expressing in their daily lives.

The tendency is always to keep emotions and intellect as far apart as possible, primarily because it is practically impossible for the vast majority of us to express those emotions in clear and logical terms.

And that's exactly the way it should be, in my view.

How logical is falling in love with this person as opposed to that one? How logical can it be to construct other lives (mistresses, gigolos, prostitutes, Sven the pool cleaner) alongside the chosen conventional relationship?

I am sure that anthropologists can provide clues, but that doesn't cut mustard in a divorce court, or when you find the wife whetting the carving knife in the kitchen after discovering that lipstick-smudged phone number in your jacket...

Oh, did I also mention that fantasies don't carry a great deal of logic either?

So whether or not mrs pierno (alternate anagrams: iron sperm, porn miser) is genuine, it's a good and valuable topic to explore.