If you read OP's post, you see that she says she's been shutting him out in reaction to some deaths. The article isn't implying that women are the only one's destroying relationships in any relationship ever. But men and women do different things when they begin to sabotage a relationship, so it makes sense that an article would be geared towards women and the things they do. I guarantee you there are plenty of articles about how men destroy marriages too, but you won't hear a peep from anyone about them being sexist. I actually looked up the article, and the only point it makes that can be construed as sexist, is the first point because it implies women shopaholics, but really every point in the article can be applied to both sexes. If you just take that first point with a grain of salt, they all are good pieces of advice for both men and women.

So the fact that it tells women to have sex even when they don't want to doesn't strike you as even a little bit horrible? Every time there's a woman on this site complaining about the way her boyfriend/husband turned her down, 90% of the comments are "he's not obligated to have sex with you!" but this article implies that you are, in fact, obligated to have sex with him. Nothing says romance like making sex a chore. Not to mention the fact that yes, I would find an article blaming either gender for the faults in a marriage. It takes two to make a marriage work, not just one making all the mistakes while the other is perfect.

I noticed and was especially troubled after reading OP's follow up. They lost twins and he's blaming her for not grieving in a manner acceptable to him? That ain't right.

Her shutting him out is neglecting his needs too. It's a two way street. Go read her post. Also, withholding affection is a serious issue. Yeah you absolutely have the right to not want sex and say no, but that has ramifications. If you're telling him that you don't want sex, how do you think that effects his self esteem? If you don't want sex with your husband, something is wrong. If you don't feel you should fulfill your husbands needs, then why should he fulfill yours? If you put everything before your husband, shut him out both physically and emotionally, then yeah, that will damage the marriage. No one said the other is perfect, but a marriage is a partnership, and her shutting him out is the exact opposite of what partner should do.

I disagree that something's wrong if you don't always want to have sex with your husband. I'm engaged to a wonderful man who I'm very much attracted to. However, I don't always want to have sex. Sometimes I'm tired, or stressed, or distracted. Are you suggesting that I should just shut my mouth and open my legs and think about my grocery list while he gets his rocks off, because if I don't, I'm hurting his precious ego? What about the times he's playing a game and I want to have sex, should he just turn off the game and give in, even though he's not really into it and just wants to go back to his game? No. That's ridiculous. We're both human, and both have times and emotions that are not going to be good times for physical intimacy. If you can't understand why there could possibly be a reason for not wanting sex that may have absolutely nothing to do with your partner, then I think you're the one with the problem.

Don't deliberately misunderstand me. I'm not saying that not wanting all sex all the time isn't okay. It's perfectly normal to not want sex sometime, and it's perfectly acceptable to say no. In fact it's important to have that communication enough to say no, which some couples lack. The key word here is withholding, which is not the same as not wanting it some of the time. It means not wanting it at all, all of the time. I don't think the article is suggesting that you should be subject to every time your husband gets aroused either, but it is saying that sex and affection are important, and that if you notice a trend that you've just not wanted it for a while, that yes something is wrong. Also, if you're stressed a lot, you know what does wonders for stress? Sex. Like exercise, you may not want to do it when you're stressed, you may not feel like it, but it will actually do wonders for you.

Shenanigan, are you sure you read OP's follow up? The woman LOST HER BABIES. I don't even like kids enough to have any of my own, but I see how it am could be a really ******* traumatic experience. As in, traumatic enough that ANY sort of intimacy, physical or otherwise, might be the last thing on someone's mind. I've lost people close to me, and it didn't take a few weeks or even months for me to feel normal again, and again, those people were not children. OP has every right to feel weird and shitty and disconnected right now. If her husband is that eager to get it on, that's why grocery stores sell hand lotion and tissues.

I understand that her babies died. I'm merely commenting on the article. I'm not saying she should be intimate with her husband. The death of children can be really hard on a relationship, and her reactions are to be expected. She says shutting him out, doesn't mean just intimacy. It means emotionally. He wants to comfort her, because that's also probably what gives him comfort. When he can't do that, he feels powerless.

I'm aware that there is more than one form of intimacy. In fact, my comment alluded to the fact that there are forms of intimacy besides the physical. I'm also one of those people who just needs to be left alone when I'm at a low point. If OP's husband needs someone to grieve with, that's one thing, but it seems like he's blaming her for not needing or wanting his comfort. That's her wiring, she can't help that, and her husband trying to change her healing process to suit his own needs without even acknowledging that they have different healing processes is selfish on his part.

I don't think someone read the follow up...