Wife getting massages

[Tropical Wilds]

There's no hypocrisy in the assumption that she's heterosexual since she's married to a man. We don't need to consider every imaginable possibility when giving advice....just those which are reasonably true.

And, as I said, we all know that heterosexual women ~*NeVeR*~ experiment with other women, lol.

Is this suddenly a matter of welfare? She's been getting massages for these vague reasons for two years at a rate that's frequent enough to be of concern.

Apparently it is for some people because it has been brought up repeatedly that a man could take advantage of the situation and the woman would be responsible for allowing it.

I don’t think that, of course, because having gotten massages regularly, I know how massages work and as I’m in a functional marriage, it doesn’t send my husband into a tailspin. And my husband doesn’t hear that I got another massage and then say to himself “she got a massage last week too… I bet she’s breaking my trust with the masseuse… I need to deal with this because it’s inappropriate.” Instead, he jumps the more logical conclusion of “gee, she must be in a lot of pain, I wonder how I can help her” and then, get this, he actually helps me. He makes sure meds are topped off, buys Icy Hot and massage oil, last time he bought me a lavender-scented eye pillow.

You know, like normal people who trust their partners and are attentive to their needs would do.

If she's experiencing pain it's probably time to find a real doctor and better solution. If these are indulgences or luxuries then let's not call them welfare.

This may shock you, but she may be one of the millions of people who go to doctors and therapeutic care providers. In fact, doctors even sometimes suggest seeing a therapeutic care provider in conjunction with the medical care they are getting.

Again, this would seem like the more logical, rational conclusion. Certainly more realistic than the implication she goes to a massage therapist because she’s unaware of doctors and she’s at risk for an affair because she isn’t able to be unaccompanied with a man without trying to sleep with him, and she’s too dumb to research and employ a qualified massage therapist who will conduct himself professionally.

Are you going around touching other men's wives in the manner described or in any way that a man might reasonably consider inappropriate?

I find that unlikely.

Well, firstly, I’m a woman which apparently means I’m automatically incapable of any inappropriate behavior against women. Secondly, I’m not a massage therapist, so I’m not sure what your point is. Thirdly, this comment in no way relates to what I said.

And while I appreciate how you cherry-picked segments of what I said so that you could give totally irrelevant, out-of-context retorts while ignoring what I actually said, what it all still boils down to is this is more about who owns the wife and is allowed to touch her and not concern for her safety.

Her husband isn’t the final decision maker on who touches her, she is. She decides who can touch her, and she says a male masseuse she has seen for quite awhile and thus knows and trusts his conduct is totally ok. The husband can be as mad as he wants, but his anger is misplaced and inappropriate.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Yeah but you aren't accounting for the fact that men and women are different, experience the world differently, and have generally different perspectives.

But I am accounting for the fact that having a penis doesn’t make somebody an automatic king who is the final arbiter in all things, nor does having a vagina mean a woman can’t make leadership decisions or are incapable of making their own decisions… Even better decisions than a man can.

 

[Ana the Ist]

And, as I said, we all know that heterosexual women ~*NeVeR*~ experiment with other women, lol.

Here's what I'm asking you...

What is the point you're trying to raise when you say...

And as we all know, two women alone will NEVER do anything sexual.

What's the point you are trying to make?

Just explain that please. Nobody's interested in your fantasies. The OP came in asking for advice with a problem....and you're repeatedly describing a different situation that isn't happening to the OP or his wife.

Just spell out whatever point you are making....I don't see why imagining his wife as bi-curious or a lesbian engaging in some sort of affair with a female masseuse has anything at all to do with the topic.

So pretty please....with sugar on top....what is the point you're trying to make by imagining his wife in a situation that isn't happening?

Apparently it is for some people because it has been brought up repeatedly that a man could take advantage of the situation and the woman would be responsible for allowing it.

That's a nice way of not placing blame on the wife... as the OP seems inclined to avoid.

I don’t think that, of course, because having gotten massages regularly

Describe "regularly"?

How often?

You know, like normal people who trust their partners and are attentive to their needs would do.

Ok....but what in the world does imagining his wife in some sexual lesbian massage therapist situation have to do with the actual problem?

This may shock you, but she may be one of the millions of people who go to doctors and therapeutic care providers.

For a massage?

Again, this would seem like the more logical, rational conclusion.

You think she's going to a doctor for a massage?

Well, firstly, I’m a woman which apparently means I’m automatically incapable of any inappropriate behavior against women.

That's not true. It doesn't have anything to do with the OP though....

And while I appreciate how you cherry-picked segments of what I said

I replied to a full post....un-cherry-picked lol.

Her husband isn’t the final decision maker on who touches her, she is.

Absolutely, she can totally get passed around by the whole town....he gets to leave. Right?

 

[Ana the Ist]

But I am accounting for the fact that having a penis doesn’t make somebody an automatic king who is the final arbiter in all things

Since you like to imagine scenarios....here's one for you....

You and your husband are walking down the street. Coming the other direction is a man much larger than you and very intimidating. Upon you and your husband getting close....he begins physically assaulting you.

Would you expect your husband to....

1. Protect you, physically.
2. Stand there and tell you that you get to decide who touches you or not, and he trusts your judgements.
3. Run away.
4. Call for help.

These are generally what choices a man has....but as you seem to imagine yourself totally in control of every situation and trustworthy enough to handle all possibilities....I threw in #2 just for you.

 

[Ana the Ist]

It's true that I'd disrespect someone who didn't have the integrity to stand up for his beliefs and commitments.

Mhm.

"Puts his foot down" starts, again, to sound controlling,

Ok.

though; and that'll lose my respect and my love faster than any weakness. And I'd think that'd be true of most women.

I'd disagree but I certainly can't speak for your situation.

I'm wary of the word "respect" in these discussions because it often seems to be code for the man being in control.

You'd argue that he respect her choices, I'd argue that she respect his boundaries. I asked a question in #455 above....how would you answer it? I understand it may have never happened to you, but since it happens....even in the quietest of towns....what would you expect your husband to do?

 

[Paidiske]

I asked a question in #455 above....how would you answer it? I understand it may have never happened to you, but since it happens....even in the quietest of towns....what would you expect your husband to do?

Noting that I have never encountered a situation anything like close to that, I would probably expect that my husband and I would have avoided getting close enough to actually be hit in the first place.

However, I think the whole scenario is both completely unrelated to real life (in real life I have never needed my husband to protect me physically; and in fact have never needed that from anybody since being an adult), and irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

I'm more amused by your question in the previous post, where you ask, "what is the point you're trying to make by imagining his wife in a situation that isn't happening?" I'm like, that's exactly what you've been doing with the whole speculating that she's having an affair with the massage therapist. Pot, kettle...

 

[Ana the Ist]

Noting that I have never encountered a situation anything like close to that, I would probably expect that my husband and I would have avoided getting close enough to actually be hit in the first place.

Perfect, I'll come back to this

However, I think the whole scenario is both completely unrelated to real life

It's not...women are assaulted all the time. There was a spate of random punching and beating of women in NYC not long ago. Obviously, if they had a man....that may have been avoided.

(in real life I have never needed my husband to protect me physically; and in fact have never needed that from anybody since being an adult), and irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

It's 100% relevant and I'm increasingly sure you understand why.

Regardless, whether you live in a magical land where women are never assaulted....or you're just trying to avoid the obvious here I'll spell it out as plainly as possible at the bottom.

I'm more amused by your question in the previous post, where you ask, "what is the point you're trying to make by imagining his wife in a situation that isn't happening?"

Nope...mine is actually relevant.

Take a peek.

3 Boyfriends Die Protecting Girlfriends In Aurora Theater Shooting

3 Boyfriends Die Protecting Girlfriends In Aurora Theater Shooting

www.google.com

Now...you aren't going to go into the comments of that article and say how sexist it is to expect men to protect women, especially ones they aren't married to. If you wouldn’t choose #1....and maybe you wouldn't if your husband is rather weak, you'd still choose #4 and hope that a man show up to protect you, typically a cop.

Sure, there's exceptions...but the vast majority of women wouldn’t stand a chance in that situation and definitely 99% would expect a man committed to them to defend them.

Now, if we ask men if they expect their wives to protect them from violence....it's almost certainly the exact opposite 99% probably don't. I certainly don't.

Now...here's the point. What do men get to expect from women in return? Especially in a marriage? There's plenty of ways to protect women from violence....you can reduce the possibility with mere money and location. Children? Well the modern feminists say no. Sex? I think it's probably more expected from the man than woman...after all, we've all been turned down for sex more often than we turned it down. In those occasions, I've seen girlfriends of many years handle rejection far far far more poorly than the average man does.

So what does a man get to expect from a woman in return? Is it nothing?

More importantly, as women....I'm sure you're aware of the sort of behaviors that you could engage in to sexually attract a man. Where would you place getting completely nude except for your undies and having the man rub his hands all over you on a scale of 1 to 10?

1 being the mildest flirt you can imagine and 10 being an outright proposition of sex? I'd place that behavior at around a 9....certificate or not.

So let's be super generous and imagine that perhaps unlike the stellar genius women of this thread....maybe she's a little naive or ignorant of the behavior she's engaged in and the potential effects on men (she's probably not but let's pretend). Wouldn’t we expect him to explain to her how to behave herself in a manner that doesn't place her in *ahem* "danger"?

Of course, he is 100% valid in being uncomfortable with this and yes....if she holds any expectation from him at all (and she almost certainly does) she should immediately do as he says.

 

[Paidiske]

It's not...women are assaulted all the time. There was a spate of random punching and beating of women in NYC not long ago. Obviously, if they had a man....that may have been avoided.

Women are more likely to be assaulted by their partners or former partners, than a random on the street. So I think your whole argument rests on a whole bunch of misconceptions of how women experience safety and danger with regard to men.

Now...here's the point. What do men get to expect from women in return? Especially in a marriage? There's plenty of ways to protect women from violence....you can reduce the possibility with mere money and location. Children? Well the modern feminists say no. Sex? I think it's probably more expected from the man than woman...after all, we've all been turned down for sex more often than we turned it down. In those occasions, I've seen girlfriends of many years handle rejection far far far more poorly than the average man does.

So what does a man get to expect from a woman in return? Is it nothing?

Well, first up, I reject the idea that women "get" to "expect" physical protection from a partner. And secondly, I reject the idea that physical dominance should equal entitlement in some other area of life. Women, as a group, don't owe men, as a group, anything in particular in relationships. What each woman will commit to in any particular relationship is entirely up for negotiation. If you want children, or sex, or companionship in your favourite hobby, or a certain level of cooking, or whatever it is... that's to be negotiated.

More importantly, as women....I'm sure you're aware of the sort of behaviors that you could engage in to sexually attract a man. Where would you place getting completely nude except for your undies and having the man rub his hands all over you on a scale of 1 to 10?

I'd rate it completely differently depending on context. In a therapeutic context, it's much lower than in a dating context. I would have thought that was obvious.

Wouldn’t we expect him to explain to her how to behave herself in a manner that doesn't place her in *ahem* "danger"?

What danger? I note, again, that women are far more likely to be raped by their husbands, than by their massage therapists.

if she holds any expectation from him at all (and she almost certainly does) she should immediately do as he says.

Yeah, no. "She should immediately do as he says" absolutely does not fly. This is not a master-slave relationship. He does not get to be a domestic dictator. No matter how much hypothetical "protection" he provides.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Women are more likely to be assaulted by their partners or former partners

That's not the OPs problem. It's also extremely sexist to assume it is, particularly if you're not inclined to even suggest his wife's behaviour is wrong.

Well, first up, I reject the idea that women "get" to "expect" physical protection from a partner.

Then you'd be incorrect.

And secondly, I reject the idea that physical dominance should equal entitlement in some other area of life.

It's not a clear then what is in a marriage for men?

If there's any expectation of protection (and face it....that's exactly what success and income bring) then there should be an equal expectation of respecting a husband regarding it.

If you're financially supporting your husband and fight any potential fights for him....by all means, get the massages.

Otherwise why in the world are men even paying alimony anymore?

Women, as a group, don't owe men, as a group, anything in particular in relationships.

There's the problem. There's no feminists in foxholes. Till that day comes, we aren't equal, and that's why women used to be referred to as the "weaker sex".

What danger?

You're making my point for me.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Here's what I'm asking you...

What is the point you're trying to raise when you say...



What's the point you are trying to make?

Just explain that please. Nobody's interested in your fantasies. The OP came in asking for advice with a problem....and you're repeatedly describing a different situation that isn't happening to the OP or his wife.

I made my point on post 525. Sorry you missed it. I guess I’ll repost it:

“No, I’m pointing out the hypocrisy that shows it’s less about being worried about the wife’s welfare and more of a machismo “she’s my wife and only I get to touch her” blustering from territorial men.”

Just spell out whatever point you are making....I don't see why imagining his wife as bi-curious or a lesbian engaging in some sort of affair with a female masseuse has anything at all to do with the topic.

See post 525 or the repost just above.

So pretty please....with sugar on top....what is the point you're trying to make by imagining his wife in a situation that isn't happening?

You mean like imagining she is acting improper with a massage therapist or a massage therapist is taking advantage of her or that her massage is sexual in nature? You mean that imagining of a situation that isn’t happening? The fixating and bringing it up and inventing a narrative that isn’t there as a reason why she shouldn’t be “allowed” by her husband to get a massage? What is the point of that entirely invented situation designed to malign a wife and attack her morality despite no evidence of anything ever happening that would be even slightly inappropriate?

Literally no idea. No idea why a woman going getting a therapeutic massage has people hypothesizing she’s sexually immoral or why they would make a husband think he should distrust his wife or question his marriage without any evidence that she’s been anything other than a faithful, loyal, loving wife who just so happens to need a massage.

Or are you talking about my pointing out the hypocrisy of it being cool to do if the masseuse is a woman as if women don’t have sex? Because if it’s that, post 525.

That's a nice way of not placing blame on the wife... as the OP seems inclined to avoid.

Actually it was quite clearly said that if something did happen, it would be her fault. So not quite. This woman has the criticism coming from all sides.

Describe "regularly"?

How often?

Every day and twice on Sundays, Christmas, and my birthday.

Ok....but what in the world does imagining his wife in some sexual lesbian massage therapist situation have to do with the actual problem?

Allow me to redirect you to post 525.

For a massage?

I guess I’ll have to really draw it out for you because what occurs at doctors and massage therapists seems to really stump you.

A lot, dare I even say most, people have medical conditions that are treated by doctors and are also treated by massage therapists. The doctor will treat you and then say something like “you know what? A therapeutic massage will really help support these treatments. Let me recommend some people.” Then those people go to the massage therapist and say “hey-yo, I’m here because I’m being treated for X by Dr. Y who recommended you as a coordinated treatment option.” And then they make a whole targeted treatment plan that, get this, is sometimes covered by medical insurance.

You think she's going to a doctor for a massage?

You are like craaaazy dialed in on the whole massage thing.

That's not true. It doesn't have anything to do with the OP though....

Well, just a moment ago saying that it wasn’t true led you into a full meltdown because it couldn’t POSSIBLY happen. Now you’re saying it could be happening? Or is the assumption that because I also get massages I must be sexually indiscriminate and prone to sleeping with anybody?

I replied to a full post....un-cherry-picked lol.

Very obviously false, but ok.

Absolutely, she can totally get passed around by the whole town....he gets to leave. Right?

Are we really sex-shaming a woman for getting a massage from a man? She gets massages so clearly that’s exactly like “being passed around the whole town,” lol? Good grief, talk about looking for something to become hysterical about.

To recap, all this woman has done is get a massage. No accusations of infidelity, no accusations of sexual contact, no accusations of anything but a woman contracting a trained professional for a licensed service… And the response from the peanut gallery is the same as if they found out she was a sex worker and questioning the integrity of the marriage for her appalling need to not have muscle tension, lol.

Some of y’all need massages yourself.

 

[Tropical Wilds]

Since you like to imagine scenarios....here's one for you....

You and your husband are walking down the street. Coming the other direction is a man much larger than you and very intimidating. Upon you and your husband getting close....he begins physically assaulting you.

Would you expect your husband to....

1. Protect you, physically.
2. Stand there and tell you that you get to decide who touches you or not, and he trusts your judgements.
3. Run away.
4. Call for help.

These are generally what choices a man has....but as you seem to imagine yourself totally in control of every situation and trustworthy enough to handle all possibilities....I threw in #2 just for you.

I suspect that I would want his reaction to be the same as if I was walking down the street with him and came face-to-face with a beat boxing t-rex on a skateboard, but maybe not quite as aggressive as I’d expect him to react when coming across 5 martians with ray guns ordering the last of my favorite ice cream.

 

[Paidiske]

That's not the OPs problem.

No, but since some people seem to want to make this about male "protection," I'm pointing out the problem with that whole construct.

It's not a clear then what is in a marriage for men?

I'm just going to pause to note that apparently, you don't see the point of marriage unless physical dominance entitles you to some other unspecified benefit. That's a fairly horrifying view of marriage.

The point of marriage isn't what it entitles you to. It's building a life together with a partner, (as my church's marriage service puts it), someone with whom "differing gifts and hopes [are drawn] into a unity of love and service." One in which "husband and wife enrich and respond to each other, growing in tenderness and understanding."

If there's any expectation of protection (and face it....that's exactly what success and income bring) then there should be an equal expectation of respecting a husband regarding it.

Well, again, I don't agree that there is, or should be, any expectation of "protection," or "success and income," for that matter. The sharing of life's practical responsibilities, including earning income, is not something one spouse owes the other.

And while I think that mutual respect is essential in relationships, I absolutely do not agree that "respect" amounts to one spouse being obliged to immediately do as the other says.

Otherwise why in the world are men even paying alimony anymore?

Because they've often contributed to their wives' financial disadvantage, would be my guess. That said, alimony (as distinct from child support) isn't really a thing where I live, so maybe it's an artefact of an arcane judicial system.

You're making my point for me.

I think you're illustrating the problems with your position very neatly the further you go. According to you, men are entitled to control women because they're physically stronger. It's just thinly veiled misogyny, really.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I made my point on post 525. Sorry you missed it. I guess I’ll repost it:

“No, I’m pointing out the hypocrisy that shows it’s less about being worried about the wife’s welfare and more of a machismo “she’s my wife and only I get to touch her” blustering from territorial men.”

Ok....so you made an assumption about his feelings in a completely different situation from the one he's having and pat yourself on the back for it?

You'd have to know his feelings about at least two very similar thing to declare him a hypocrite. We can just dismiss this as abject nonsense.

You mean like imagining she is acting improper with a massage therapist or a massage therapist is taking advantage of her or that her massage is sexual in nature?

Could be.

Literally no idea. No idea why a woman going getting a therapeutic massage has people hypothesizing she’s sexually immoral

Her husband has an intuition about it....obviously. I'd suggest he trust that.

Or are you talking about my pointing out the hypocrisy of it being cool to do if the masseuse is a woman as if women don’t have sex?

Did the OP say that? Or are you projecting?

Actually it was quite clearly said that if something did happen, it would be her fault.

Good.

Every day and twice on Sundays, Christmas, and my birthday.

Every day????

I guess I’ll have to really draw it out for you because what occurs at doctors and massage therapists seems to really stump you.

Oh I've been to doctors. I've read and seen what happens at massage therapists. Some people thought a little while ago that P. Diddy's parties were just fun celebrity hangouts. Others aren't stupid.

Yuma man arrested, accused of sexually abusing 2 women while he worked as a masseur

Ryan Quesenberry, 32, was arrested Friday on multiple charges of sexual assault, kidnapping and sexual abuse in Yuma.

www.azcentral.com

Massage therapist accused of sexually assaulting clients

Three women have come forward and police believe there may be more victims.

www.cbs8.com

If I had to guess what sort of "therapist" abuses his position the most in a sexual manner? People who give massages would be at the tippy top of the list. There were more articles under 2 years than I bothered to count.

A lot, dare I even say most, people have medical conditions that are treated by doctors and are also treated by massage therapists. The doctor will treat you and then say something like “you know what? A therapeutic massage *snip*

A lot of posters invented medical reasons that the OP didn't mention. He mentioned reasons....they look like a list of flimsy and invented lies.

Well, just a moment ago saying that it wasn’t true

I didn't understand whatever point you believed you were making. Apparently, the problem was your understanding or lack of understanding of hypocrisy.

What 2 beliefs that contradict each other does the OP hold?

Are we really sex-shaming a woman for getting a massage from a man?

No...she didn't post. Why would I care? I'm concerned about the guy with the problem and the awful advice immediately given to him.

To recap, all this woman has done is get a massage.

You don't know that and clearly the OP doesn't either.

 

[o_mlly]

Which is not the same as residing in your actual home.

? The issue is not limited to physical presence 24/7. No married couple I know of is physically present to their spouse 24/7. Nor is the bishop to his priests.

Respect that yields obedience.

Whatever does that nonsense statement mean ... to you, of course. Respect, from the Latin means to see (spectāre) a thing (re) as it is.

Yeah, one is an outright demand. The other is a “I’m so amazing you can’t help but want to do what I ask of you.”

More nonsense. Who's spinning? It seems it is you.

0% of either scenario accounts for the need at times for the husband to submit to or obey his wife, or that it has the potential to be a seriously abused philosophy that doesn't yield the healthiest of relationship dynamics. Most women don’t decide to marry because they need a boss/subordinate dynamic.

An alpha woman marries a milk toast husband. Likely no problems.

The love that obtains in a teacher/student relationship as an analogy, although imperfect, is instructive. The teacher is superior to the student only temporarily. Once the student obtains the teacher's knowledge, they are equal.

The relationship between teacher and student and that between slave owner and slave are both based on the superiority of the one over the other. The interests of teacher and pupil lie in the same direction. The teacher is satisfied if he succeeds in furthering the pupil; if he has failed to do so, the failure is his and the pupil’s. The slave owner, on the other hand, wants to exploit the slave as much as possible; the more he gets out of him, the more he is satisfied. At the same time, the slave seeks to defend as best he can his claims for a minimum of happiness. These interests are definitely antagonistic, as what is of advantage to the one is detrimental to the other. The superiority has a different function in both cases: in the first, it is the condition for the helping of the person subjected to the authority; in the second, it is the condition for his exploitation. The dynamics of authority in these two types are different too: the more the student learns, the less wide is the gap between him and the teacher. He becomes more and more like the teacher himself. In other words, the authority relationship tends to dissolve itself. But when the superiority serves as a basis for exploitation, the distance becomes intensified through its long duration.​

(E. Fromm, Escape from Freedom)

 

[o_mlly]

Well...that's generally true I think but a bit presumptive. It's an ideal.

Realistically, a wife may not even realize that she disrespected her husband....at which point that may need to be explained/may become an argument. Ideals are fiction....reality is messy.

But sure, if in those cases she both understands how she was disrespectful...and he's worthy of respect...she should change her behaviour.

In the course of lovingly administering her "tune up", she will recognize her disrespectful behaviors as such, and she will willingly change her offending behaviors eg., going to that spa.

Admiration doesn't equal respect.

If the respect given is deserved then admiration is an outcome.

 

[storypeddler]

My wife has been going for massages for many years. I always assumed it was a spa setting with multiple people in the room. Turns out she is alone with a man for 50 minutes, door closed and shades drawn, covered by a sheet except for the body part being massaged, wearing only her bikini briefs, massage oil, everything except her bikini area and breasts are fair game for his hands directly on her skin. He is a licensed "massage therapist" and I have been assured it is completely non-sexual, just for relaxation and, as needed, working out a stiff back or sore neck, that sort of thing. This has me upset. I feel like I should have been told years ago exactly what the circumstances were. Does this make anyone else uncomfortable? Am I just too insecure? I don't believe it will lead to any actual impropriety or infidelity, but I don't like the idea of another man running his hands all over her feet, legs, thighs, shoulders etc. in private using massage oils. Thoughts?

I certainly understand your feelings. However, I believe this is a question that falls into one of those gray areas. Is there anything actually wrong taking place? No, probably not. It does push right up to the line, however. On the other hand, doctors examine patients of the opposite sex and are free to look at or touch any and every part of their body as part of their examination. To a lesser extent, physical therapists and personal trainers do as well. There is a line those professionals don't (and shouldn't) cross as they do their job. Some Christians would feel extremely uncomfortable getting a massage like you describe from the opposite sex. Some would not. I think the root question here concerns purpose and intent. There are clearly things that would be sinful for one person and yet not sinful for another. If this situation makes you that uncomfortable, you should discuss it calmly and thoroughly with your wife. I would argue that in a marriage relationship, nothing can be ultimately good for one if it is not ultimately good for both. That is not to defend unreasonable demands on the part of either person, just to say that the marriage covenant places your bond and your unity as one flesh above all else. Maybe you are overreacting. Maybe you aren't. I would say share your concerns openly and honestly with your wife and carefully explain what you feel and exactly why. Perhaps there are possible compromise situations that you could both live with. Maybe you could learn massage. Maybe she could find a female massage therapist. Maybe she could lay your concerns to rest.

I will add this thought---I have been getting deep-tissue massage regularly for a number of years now and it has been extremely beneficial to me as related to addressing physical tension, emotional stress, and mental fatigue. I typically go every two weeks and it is worth every penny I spend. But that is my personal situation and I am not married, so not exactly the same thing. I go to a male massage therapist. Had tried several female massage therapists but they couldn't or didn't deliver the degree of force and pressure I was seeking during massage. Anyway, I would simply tell you that massage can, at least for some people, be a highly beneficial and therapeutic practice. Your concerns are valid, however, and I would strongly suggest you share them with your wife and talk through them. As a married couple, they impact both of you---and your marriage.

 

[storypeddler]

I have two problems with this. One it is HER body, not property of her husband. Two is the implication that a therapeutic massage by a male masseuse is inherently sexual. If she has been comfortable alone with this masseuse then why is there a need for a female chaperone? Acquiescing to his insecurities does not bode well for the marriage.

No, it ISN'T exclusively her body anymore---not once she has joined herself to her husband in marriage, Scripture is crystal clear on this point. I am not at all not saying what she is doing is wrong. I am simply saying that the marriage covenant, according to God's word, is a bond between a man and a woman wherein the two become one flesh. Nothing can affect one without affecting the other. Nothing. They need to talk through this issue together and reach some solution both can be comfortable with and live with.

 

[storypeddler]

You don't own her. Her body isn't your property.

Maybe if you are so jealous, you could join some night classes or something and learn how to give good professional massages.
But still, your wife might rather go to the actual professional. If I were you, well I don't have that level of insecurity, but I certainly would tell her I'm doing the night class and that I'd like to try out massages on her. Maybe tell her you think it might save money, to have you give the massage, but don't feel too jealous if she'd prefer to go to the professional.
1. They know what they're doing.
2. She just might like to be pampered without the baggage of "you". She might just want some nice quiet time, some "her" time, and to not have to spend "her" time trying to accommodate you. There is nothing wrong with her having some time for herself. She doesn't need to be with you 24x7.

Actually, according to scripture, her body IS his property---and his body is her's.

1 Corinthians 7:4 For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does.

I am not saying she is doing anything wrong. Simply that this is a situation that involves both of them because they are married and are now one flesh.

 

[o_mlly]

Submitting to a bishop is very different than expecting a person to submit to somebody they share most of their time and lives with.

Let us imagine that an Anglican bishop had a complaint from a parishioner who said that he was scandalized when he saw his male priest coming out of private massage room attended by his masseuse. The bishop orders his priest to immediately stop or alter his behavior to avoid further scandalizing his parishioners. Would the priest have to obey his bishop ... he vowed to do so?

 

[Paidiske]

Let us imagine that an Anglican bishop had a complaint from a parishioner who said that he was scandalized when he saw his male priest coming out of private massage room attended by his masseuse. The bishop orders his priest to immediately stop or alter his behavior to avoid further scandalizing his parishioners. Would the priest have to obey his bishop ... he vowed to do so?

That's an interesting case, because - assuming we're talking about therapeutic massage conducted by a professional - that's essentially the bishop telling the priest to stop or alter his medical treatment, and it's questionable whether that's reasonably within the scope of the authority of the bishop. The priest would certainly be within his rights to seek legal advice on that one, and (knowing what I know about other situations) I wouldn't be surprised if the church's lawyers told the bishop that was overstepping.

(And I'd note that, in my experience, the bishop is more likely to tell the parishioner to stop being unreasonable and pull his head in).

The thing is, one's oath of obedience to one's bishop is to do with one's role; given that the priest's ministry is basically as a representative of the bishop, the bishop can direct the priest in the conduct of that ministry. That doesn't mean the bishop gets to micromanage personal decisions. The priest is bound by a code of conduct, and any violation of that is actionable, but a therapeutic massage does not violate it.