The above post is mostly correct, but:

If you are able, it might not even hurt to have a few woman friends – don't commit adultery or ever put yourself in dangerous situations, – but the ugly truth is that a woman finds men attractive whom other women find attractive. There is also the “dread” factor again, where she might get the message that “she can be replaced.”

This is worldly advice. Marriage is supposed to be an honest relationship, an institution with very clear duties. To have to go to such depths to trick your wife into giving you what she already owes you in the marriage contract is extremely demeaning, not to mention vicious and irreligious. It is repulsive that a husband should have to be the seducer of his own wife; that he should have to convince her in the same way a fornicator would seduce. What you said about taking the initiative and demanding sex rather than asking for it is correct. If your wife refuses sex then she is ipso facto refusing to be your wife; she is effectively divorcing you. But don't force sex with violence. If she refuses then do what this man says and consider her cut off from you and look into an annulment, or at least cut yourself off from her for awhile and don't let her return until she is penitent. She is committing an act of gross injustice against you. In an earlier age, such a wife would probably have had her hair cut off and shamed for disobedience. This is a case where it's a shame for a pagan wife to do this, but for a Christian wife to do this to her husband is really wicked. St. Paul didn't speak vainly when he said that wives should look up to their husbands like their husbands should look up to God. A woman that has no regard for her husband is a godless woman. A woman that does not care to please her husband is no better than a child that has no respect for its parents. What she is doing is tantamount to rebellion approaching adultery. She is not that much better than an adulteress.

To have to go to such depths to trick your wife into giving you what she already owes you in the marriage contract is extremely demeaning, not to mention vicious and irreligious. It is repulsive that a husband should have to be the seducer of his own wife; that he should have to convince her in the same way a fornicator would seduce.

These are the best two sentences I've ever heard on this subject.  Ever.   :applause:

Thumbs up to that post.

Quote

If you are able, it might not even hurt to have a few woman friends – don't commit adultery or ever put yourself in dangerous situations, – but the ugly truth is that a woman finds men attractive whom other women find attractive. There is also the “dread” factor again, where she might get the message that “she can be replaced.”

This is worldly advice. Marriage is supposed to be an honest relationship, an institution with very clear duties. To have to go to such depths to trick your wife into giving you what she already owes you in the marriage contract is extremely demeaning, not to mention vicious and irreligious. It is repulsive that a husband should have to be the seducer of his own wife; that he should have to convince her in the same way a fornicator would seduce. What you said about taking the initiative and demanding sex rather than asking for it is correct. If your wife refuses sex then she is ipso facto refusing to be your wife; she is effectively divorcing you. But don't force sex with violence. If she refuses then do what this man says and consider her cut off from you and look into an annulment, or at least cut yourself off from her for awhile and don't let her return until she is penitent. She is committing an act of gross injustice against you. In an earlier age, such a wife would probably have had her hair cut off and shamed for disobedience. This is a case where it's a shame for a pagan wife to do this, but for a Christian wife to do this to her husband is really wicked. St. Paul didn't speak vainly when he said that wives should look up to their husbands like their husbands should look up to God. A woman that has no regard for her husband is a godless woman. A woman that does not care to please her husband is no better than a child that has no respect for its parents. What she is doing is tantamount to rebellion approaching adultery. She is not that much better than an adulteress.

 :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

Actually, I am the one who stumbled upon this thread and applauded this advice.  It's spot on.  

Using PickUpArtistry (PUA)/Game Theory to seduce your wife is a sign of a bad state of affairs in the home.  

It so happens that I was reading the other blog that Vox Day keeps, AlphaGame.  (I'm on the cusp of calling out VD's anti-Catholicisim, probably within the next month.)  Coinidentally, he was discussing this very phenomenon--that is, withholding the marriage debt:

http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2016/12/when-solipsism-resembles-sociopathy.html

He recommends that the man leave the wife.  He recommends this, of course, because he is not a Catholic and doesn't understand Christianity that predates Luther.  Divorce, simply, is not an option for Catholics.  And if you have children in this situation, then God help you.  

But what really struck me on this Alphagame thread was the following comment.  There are some cuss words from this guy, so I changed them to the new bolded words for those people who cannot stand cuss words:

The flip side is, women require game & [sɛҳuąƖ market value] smv to be turned on, because they have no ability to pair bond.

In the past only prostitutes required game & [pick up artist] pua tactics, as they were broken deranged women. Women didn't require game or pua, as they had fully functioning pair bonding biology.

Normal women with fully functional pair bonding form deep bonds with men, easily without the need to imitate a jacked up alpha or thug.

Today's petty women are deranged monstrosities, with more fornication/adultery with men & burnt out lifestyles then any coke whore.

Only broken crackwhores require insane amounts of game, the rare normal woman is easily satisfied with the biology of a man to keep her in check.

In short, women who arent deranged crack whores, require virtually no game or pua, only prostitutes require pimps to keep them in line.

 Red pill, game & pua are pimp techniques designed to control prostitutes & deranged crack whores.

Normal women no longer exist, this is the reality today, womens feral thirst for alphas & bad boys is really her wanting a pimp to control her, as she's too feral to bond with normal men.

 Women today are too feral & deranged, hence the need to behave like a pimp using game & pua.

Women have become feral, as that man said.  Typically, men like the Original Poster of this thread have been told to cook, clean, listen, have conversation, romance the woman, and make all of the moves required to put the woman in that special state of mind--in order to have her perform her obligation for her spouse.  Responsibilities of the woman?  None.  

After reading this thread tonight and seeing this similar blog post over at AlphaGame, it strikes me that when a woman withholds sex from her husband, she is essentially doing the very same thing that Eve did to Adam.  She is tempting him.  

It may not seem similar at first.  Eve tempted Adam to eat the Fruit of Knowledge.  But think about it a little deeper, and we can see that she was tempting him to capitulate to her new standard.  Adam was tempted to do things her way, for her benefit.  He was tempted away from the right path, and he was tempted into giving into a sinful act.  

This is what women do when they withhold sex from their husbands.  By deliberately withholding sex from their men for whatever whim, they tempt their husbands to cheat, masturbate, divorce, or what have you.  Women who do this are no different from Eve in this regard.  

I suppose the solution is for the man to do what Adam should have done.  Adam should have put Eve in her place, ignoring her temptation.  This is a difficult and heroic act of virtue in this over-sexed pagan world.  But if Adam had rejected Eve's temptation, he would have remained righteous in God's eyes.  

And with that in mind, I wonder what God would have done if Adam remained sinless but Eve had been the only one to fall.  Would Adam have felt a sense of justice in witnessing Eve's punishment?  I honestly cannot say.  

So the solution is what exactly?

Pretend your wife isn't committing a grave sin against you and just "deal with it?"

What does putting her in her place entail?

This is the problem. A man does not have any official power or authority to do this anymore. He cannot threaten her with the law, because the law has abandoned marriage. He cannot threaten her with violence, because that is against the law. A priest ought to rebuke her and cut her off from communion until she repents, but is your priest willing? All this failing, all that the husband can do is to inform the wife of his rights and the injustice of her actions, pray for her, and hope she repents. It may be an emasculating position for a man to be in, but unfortunately that's all this corrupt society has left him with. If she will not here her husband's rebuke, and if there is nobody else (priest, family, friend) to rebuke her, then prayer is the one and only option. But pray regardless.

If the wife isn't having sex with her husband, maybe she is having sex with someone else.  

If the wife isn't having sex with her husband, maybe she is having sex with someone else.  

Quite possible OR if her husband continues to cower and capitulate and crawl away whenever she says "NO" and doesn't push back, . . . . .  she will likely soon be having sex with someone else who is "pushy."  

Quote from: Guest

At least, it's an important teaching even if it's not a real dogma. Anyway, it's important to make lots of money because when you have sex your wife might get prego. And as we all know, children can be expensive.

Are you a troll?

Actually, children aren't nearly as expensive as Hollywood and the Media would have you believe. It depends on what kind of lifestyle you're after. Each kid having his own bedroom with personal computer/TV/TV show playback device, cell phone, 1 or 2 professional lessons for each child, a free ticket to college, birth control once they hit age 12, etc. then YES, you will spend a total of $245,000 raising EACH child to age 18.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/18/cost-of-raising-a-child_n_5688179.html


But Catholics can "pass" on most of those things.

Yes, it was a joke post if you read it