Robert: Don't satisfy wife sexually to show her who's boss

[browncoatslytherin]

It just makes no sense. If he wants to have sex every other day (which he has said as nauseum) why wouldn't he want to give Amanda incentive to comply??

because womanly duties are not to be pleasurable!

[formergothardite]

Is there an exception clause in this verse? Anybody? Bueller?

1 Corinthians 7:3

The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband.

Usmcdad would feel like a failure if the 80 percent rule applied in our marriage bed. But then we strive for excellence in everything at our house. :wink-kitty:

Robert said in his Christmas Day post how much he dislikes people. I get it. He's not a social guy, but I do find that odd for a "minister." Mostly, though, I wonder where they are finding all these couples to "dialogue" with if he doesn't even associate with people. Seriously, where are all these phantom couples they hear from about sex issues?

Finally, I'd like to express my deepest sympathy to Amanda....for so many things.

You clearly don't have the Dominating, 200 lb, bull wrestling, gold panning Men's Bible. That one has this verse for 1 Corinthians 7:3:

"The wife should always fulfill her marital duty to her husband no matter how miserable her husband makes sex for her."

[Koala]

Since you guys have pretty much covered everything I am thinking, I will point out one of Amanda's comments.

Reader:

I’m not sure what to think about this… I like and respect you and appreciate 99% of what you write… but some of this set off warning bells in my mind.

Before becoming a Christian at age 19 I lived a very sinful, depraved life. So I have to say that from experience… 2 and 5 remind me of certain disgusting lifestyles and not like a Christian marriage at all. If this was a list of what works for you and Amanda I suppose it wouldn’t be a big deal to me, but to advise all men with numbers 2 and 5… makes me nervous. And nauseous.

I hope my opinion causes no hard feelings.

Amanda:

Shelley – can you explain why? Are you reacting because of your past, or can you justify your response with Scripture? For me, who didn’t enter into my marriage with a past of sinful immorality, there was nothing in that that struck me as unbiblical. Just for clarification, dominant DOES NOT mean kinky, weird stuff, nor does it mean abusive. And if read in context with the rest of the post, he has specifically, repeatedly, said that a husband should be loving and caring.

Is she serious??? Robert has absolutely ZERO Bible verses to back up what he said. He didn't even try to list any (other than the one at the very bottom of the post which totally contradicts his suggestions in #5). But this lady has to provide Bible verses for disagreeing with the great and mighty Robert? I don't think so. These people are crazy. And Robert is a loser. That is all.

[Koala]

In other news, I am starting to see the same theme with Robert that I see with Lori. A WHOLE lot of opinion mixed with a tiny bit of scripture that possibly backs them up. They will toss in a verse or two, but most of what they say is just their opinion. If you dare disagree with them, well you just disagree with God. :roll:

[moodygirl86]

Yeah but Robert's male, so whatever he says should apparently be taken as gospel and he doesn't need to back it up. Whereas Shelley's just a lowly female so can be assumed to be lying until she can prove otherwise.

[browncoatslytherin]

Since you guys have pretty much covered everything I am thinking, I will point out one of Amanda's comments.

Reader:

Amanda:

Is she serious??? Robert has absolutely ZERO Bible verses to back up what he said. He didn't even try to list any (other than the one at the very bottom of the post which totally contradicts his suggestions in #5). But this lady has to provide Bible verses for disagreeing with the great and mighty Robert? I don't think so. These people are crazy. And Robert is a loser. That is all.

that's always his schtick..."can you back up your response with scripture?" uh, sorry to break it to you, boobert, but burden of proof is on YOU in this case. but you're probably too dumb to even realize how to have an actual debate and discussion, so i don't know how or why the high and mighty manly man would know this. :roll: manly men like boobert ain't got shit for brains, apparently.

[Koala]

I am just going to read between the lines and guess that this 20% business is Robert's way of explaining to himself why his wife is only willing/able to fake it 80% of the time.

It's not that she refuses to fake it 100% of the time, it's that he only allows her to fake it 80% of the time! That's got to be it!

[Koala]

Oh gosh, look at that. Did I just go and imply that someone who demands every other day sex from his wife and thinks she has no rights to her own body is lousy in bed? Yep, looks like I did.

:disgust: Jackass.

[chaotic life]

Withholding an orgasm is a known genre of BDSM is a Dom/sub dynamic and it's an advanced dominance skill that can't really be taught. But to use it on a partner who has not agreed to enter a Dom/sub relationship is inexcusable and disgusting. To encourage BDSM as normal CHRISTIAN sex is comical at best, insulting at worse.

[browncoatslytherin]

Withholding an orgasm is a known genre of BDSM is a Dom/sub dynamic and it's an advanced dominance skill that can't really be taught. But to use it on a partner who has not agreed to enter a Dom/sub relationship is inexcusable and disgusting. To encourage BDSM as normal CHRISTIAN sex is comical at best, insulting at worse.

of course, he'll try to explain all of that away because he was never "living in sin" at any point so how would he know??? yeah, because bdsm is never ever portrayed in any porn of any kind. :roll: c'mon, boo, this is the 21st century, and we know you have the internets. that excuse ain't flyin for me, especially considering your association with ken "i totally watch porn and it's totes okay for christians" alexander.

[ILoveJellybeans]

Soooooooooo he isn't shit in bed because he is bad at sex, he is shit in bed on purpose....yeah, if pigs fly. He just wont admit that he is awful in bed.

I hope Amanda has a good dildo. With him, she is going to need it.

[chaotic life]

Frankly, I don't buy for a second that Boobert has the naturally dominant personality it takes to deliberately withhold an orgasm. I think Amanda, like most abuse victims, will perform sexually exactly as he demands so as to not make things worse on herself otherwise. I think withholding orgasm is a fantasy Boobert has and this Amanda performs to fulfill his fantasies but any other woman would laugh in his face.

[polecat]

I am just going to read between the lines and guess that this 20% business is Robert's way of explaining to himself why his wife is only willing/able to fake it 80% of the time.

It's not that she refuses to fake it 100% of the time, it's that he only allows her to fake it 80% of the time! That's got to be it!

Well, according to Boobert, women can't even get off most of the time.

Most women can’t orgasm every time anyway…heck many, many women struggle to orgasm at all and for the majority it is hit and miss.

Maybe just maybe women can't get off with HIM. Because it is NOT hit or miss when both people know what makes them tick and are willing to communicate that.

ETA: Boobert, five reasons to go give Amanda an orgasm **right now.** Pay special attention to numbers one and two. I think you might find they apply very much to your situation.

laweekly.com/afterdark/2012/07/19/6-reasons-why-orgasms-are-good-for-womens-health?showFullText=true

[formergothardite]

So according to his logic most women don't orgasm most of the time so 20% of the time their husbands should make sure they can't have an orgasm? Sounds like a great way to fuck up a marriage fast.

[doggie]

80% of the time she was faking it the other 20% she forgot to fake it.

[usmcmom]

First, Robert says this:

5. Study your wife. Get her off most of the time she desires. Some women will want to come every time. Comply 80% of the time. You might think that is selfish, and if you only take a short term view you might be correct. But long term for attraction and for you to remain dominate (remember the single most attractive thing to a woman) in her eyes you have to leave her longing and knowing who is in charge (in charge in a loving way) once in awhile.

Then Amanda replies to a commenter with this:

Secondly, he wasn’t saying to ONLY go for 80%. He was saying that the typical woman is only 80%. Not that that’s necessarily the objective.

Yes, Amanda; he IS saying to only aim to satisfy your wife 80% of the time. He makes it very clear that it IS the objective in order to maintain control and dominance.

They really do think their readers are stupid, don't they?

[chaotic life]

The lack of understanding women just hurts. Either you are into BDSM or you are just so damn shitty in the bed that you are trying to cover for lousy sex. It's just that simple dumbass.

[usmcmom]

In following the comments, I'm waiting for Robert to issue one of his stern warnings to Tom...something like "You're about to be on a short leash, my friend..." Because Tom is actually sounding like a rational and decent man - a man who knows his Bible. Robert is not going to tolerate this for long.

Seems like Tom has a wonderful marriage and actually cherishes his wife and truly loves and leads sacrificially.

[formergothardite]

In following the comments, I'm waiting for Robert to issue one of his stern warnings to Tom...something like "You're about to be on a short leash, my friend..." Because Tom is actually sounding like a rational and decent man - a man who knows his Bible. Robert is not going to tolerate this for long.

Seems like Tom has a wonderful marriage and actually cherishes his wife and truly loves and leads sacrificially.

I'm might have to break down and go read the comments. So that is what Robert does when men make him look bad, he keeps them from being able to leave comments. He is a coward at heart.

ETA: looks like we are going to have a debate on biblical literalism and Robert is going to be out fundied. :lol: I always love when the holier than thou fundies get one upped by someone who is more holy than they are.

[usmcmom]

Just wondering who is watching the Children of the Cupboard while Amanda and Robert spend all their time monitoring his sex post...

[Pammy]

If I was a woman having duty-sex 3x per week with a man that I wasn't that into, at least not that often -- if I was spiritually abused to believe I had no options (other than complying or sinning)... And if 80% of the time 'enthusiastic' participation was also a manditory expectation. I'd seriously be just fine with 20% of the nights having him just go his business and ignore my 'pleasure'. Having him keep trying and trying in spite of me not being much aroused would just be tedious and annoying.

It's clear that Amanda would prefer less frequency, and obliges out of duty or kindness. She's probably not at all aroused by most of what goes on in her bedroom on nights when she'd rather not be doing it at all. It's probably best that he can at least not extend the timeframe and expect 'enthusiasm' every time.

[usmcmom]

You gals got to understand that 80% is huge, above the highest number out there in any study or survey. 80% in sports makes you a dynasty, an all time great, the very best that ever lived. 80% in politics makes you undefeatable, a rock star beyond belief. Keep things in perspective.

By this standard, Robert should be willing to reduce his demands for sex by 20% and still be quite satisfied. To use his math...

As a "48 hour kind of guy" he probably has sex approximately 182.5 times per year. Reducing that by 20% would mean requiring sex from his wife 36.5 fewer days per year. That would leave him still having sex 146 times per year, assuming he doesn't allow Amanda to "have a week off during her cycle as some women falsely believe is their right" (as he referenced in previous post about sex).

(I'm on the couch fighting the flu...so yes...I have lowered myself to his level. Why do you ask? :embarrassed: :embarrassed:)

[browncoatslytherin]

By this standard, Robert should be willing to reduce his demands for sex by 20% and still be quite satisfied. To use his math...

As a "48 hour kind of guy" he probably has sex approximately 182.5 times per year. Reducing that by 20% would mean requiring sex from his wife 36.5 fewer days per year. That would leave him still having sex 146 times per year, assuming he doesn't allow Amanda to "have a week off during her cycle as some women falsely believe is their right" (as he referenced in previous post about sex).

(I'm on the couch fighting the flu...so yes...I have lowered myself to his level. Why do you ask? :embarrassed: :embarrassed:)

80% is huge? now, i won't say that i'm speaking for every woman or that i'm typical, but i orgasm every time my partner and i go at it. in fact, he considers himself a failure if i were to only orgasm ONCE in our sessions, nevermind if i were not go without an orgasm at all.

[usmcmom]

Robert and Amanda keep hand slapping commenters who disagree with his advice to withhold pleasure to a wife. They insist that if you have a good sex life "THIS POST IS NOT FOR YOU!"

My question is why give advice to someone with a bad sex life that doesn't hold true for a couple with a good sex life??? If a husband with a fulfilling sex life NEVER deliberately withholds pleasure from his wife, why tell someone to do just that if the goal is to reach a mutually satisfying sex life?

I think that is what many of these commenters are trying to say, even if THE POST ISN'T FOR THEM!!! Most of them are doing it quite kindly, it seems. It's clear that Robert is not the writer he thinks he is if so many people, in his opinion, just can't comprehend the context of his post.

[browncoatslytherin]

Robert and Amanda keep hand slapping commenters who disagree with his advice to withhold pleasure to a wife. They insist that if you have a good sex life "THIS POST IS NOT FOR YOU!"

My question is why give advice to someone with a bad sex life that doesn't hold true for a couple with a good sex life??? If a husband with a fulfilling sex life NEVER deliberately withholds pleasure from his wife, why tell someone to do just that if the goal is to reach a mutually satisfying sex life?

I think that is what many of these commenters are trying to say, even if THE POST ISN'T FOR THEM!!! Most of them are doing it quite kindly, it seems. It's clear that Robert is not the writer he thinks he is if so many people, in his opinion, just can't comprehend the context of his post.

well, robert is sooper speshul, dontcha know? :roll: