After referencing the Apostle Paul in my last two posts, it is very important to see the role of sex in a marriage (I won't get into sex outside of marriage...I'm not trying to make a moral statement). Sex in the marriage is very important. Sex is part of the glue that holds the marriage together. Healthy sex is needed to keep out sexual temptation. One commenter spoke of Paul as being a misogynist. I'm not sure why. Perhaps it is the line about wives submitting to their husbands. With the exception of that bit, I don't see Paul as a misogynist. Paul describes himself as asexual. He would rather no one got married but sees a need for marriage to keep people from falling into sexual temptation.
In today's world, we are not taught to share ourselves with others. Today's world is all about the individual. Yet, marriage is the ultimate team sport. If marriage means the complete bonding of two people, then it follows that means physically as well. The question of control should never come up. One person should not be able to hold all of the cards. This is not bonding; this is a dictatorship. When one spouse (I, generally, use women because that's my personal experience) withholds ANYTHING from the other, that is a means of trying to control. It could be money, sex, the TV. It does not matter.
Sadly, we humans are fallen creatures. None are perfect. Therefore, whatever we create falls short of perfection. This can be seen in marriage. In a perfect world, both spouses would be on the same page. However, that is rarely the case. That goes back not relinquishing individualism. Putting oneself in first place before the marriage is a recipe for disaster. In different areas of a marriage, one spouse gives authority to the other; while that spouse will have authority in other areas. Many times one is independent and the other is dependent.
In terms of sex, this leads to frustration and resentment. The spouse with looser boundaries will start having to change to mold to the spouse with rigid boundaries. Therefore, having control over one's body invariably means having control of one's spouse's body too. If both spouses are ok with this arrangement, then more power to them. It seems that is not really how things in the real world operate. The rigid spouse feels pressure to loosen boundaries. The more lax spouse feels confined. Both end up resenting the other for the pressures placed on them.
That is the problem. What's the solution? I do not know. In the end successful marriages are full of compromise. A marriage based on one spouse having all of the control usually fails. It believe that one should sacrifice for one's love. That comes in many different forms. Although I have been concentrating on sex, sacrifice can be other ways. One spouse may work harder, so the other can stay home with kids; one spouse may give way on certain TV programs because he/she knows their spouse enjoys that program; or one spouse may have to go on search and destroy missions to rid the house of spiders.
Sex is different because it involves physical intimacy. That is what makes it so beautiful. When one has sex, it is surrendering to another. That's why it is the glue to that holds together marriages. That's why it has room for so much anger and resentment. Withholding sex means that one has not totally surrendered the self to the other person. That is what makes it a sin to withhold sex. By withholding sex, that person elevates their needs over their spouse's. How can love coexist with selfishness?
Does that mean one has to be a doormat for the one they love? No. What it means is that sometimes it's ok to watch football (or Desperate Housewives). Sometimes it's ok to give that backrub, although one had a long day and is need of sleep. Sometimes it's ok to engage in oral sex. When we love another, we should strive to put that person's needs before our own. If love is reciprocated, then being a doormat never comes up.
Or...I could be living in a fantasy world.
The demand of the loveless and the self-imprisoned that they should be allowed to blackmail the universe: that till they consent to be happy (on their own terms) no one else shall taste joy: that theirs should be the final power; that Hell should be able to veto Heaven. The Great Divorce. C.S. Lewis
3 comments:
Very well said Aphron. I have no good answers to the questions you raise here and indeed have struggled with them myself a lot.
I will address a couple of points you made:
Sex in the marriage is very important. Sex is part of the glue that holds the marriage together. Healthy sex is needed to keep out sexual temptation.
This is such a true statement. I'm afraid that the lack of sex (and affection) contributed greatly to the demise of my marriage.
Today's world is all about the individual. Yet, marriage is the ultimate team sport.
I love the way you've stated this. It is indeed a dichotomy of our age.
When we love another, we should strive to put that person's needs before our own. If love is reciprocated, then being a doormat never comes up.
I completely agree. Yet I seem to see more examples of people putting their own needs before their partners an overwhelming percentage of the time, and when they do put their partner first the partner is made to know just what a sacrifice it is and how it should not be come to be expected.
When we love another, we should strive to put that person's needs before our own.
The problem, of course, is that each partner almost ALWAYS thinks he or she is loving or giving "more." There aren't too many people that will admit to being the one who does less.
Whoever has the least desire always controls the frequency. Whoever has the most hangups always controls the the actual sexual content. So, yeah, this is about control. The low desire partner has all of the control (and most of the guilt) while the high desire partner has the higher status and none of the control.
In your case, you would rather not have the mechanical, autistic-like sex your wife craves. You don't want lousy sex. Your wife wants lousy sex or doesn't know it is lousy. Either way, it isn't too intimate. Funnily enough, you and Sybil have a more balanced synergy going in that she is a higher desire partner but also has more hangups and limitations. Most of the time, the same person occupies both roles. The solution looks easy; she loosens up on her neuroticism and your desire increases. But I suspect there is a deeper undercurrent involved in that sort of discussion.
Post a Comment