CASTIMONIA

Sexual Purity Support & Recovery Group

Jesus Christ

By

Withholding Sex Is a Form of Psychological Abuse

Originally posted at: https://gentlepathmeadows.wordpress.com/2016/08/20/withholding-sex-is-a-form-of-psychological-abuse

by Gentle Path at The Meadows

Alexandra Katehakis, MFT, CSAT, CST is a Senior Fellow at Gentle Path at The Meadows. The following is an excerpt from her book “Mirror of Intimacy: Daily Reflections on Emotional and Erotic Intelligence.” You can find it at www.TheMeadowsBookstore.com or on www.Amazon.com.

Withholding love or sex is psychological abuse and results from early trauma. Withholding is altogether different from not having sex or not reciprocating love. People don’t have sex for many reasons. They might be traumatized. They might suffer from sexual dysfunction. They might be practicing self-care and setting appropriate boundaries for them. They might even be engaging in the political act of a sex strike in an effort to enact social change. There are equally many reasons why people might not reciprocate love. But to withhold sex or love as a punishment is a different matter altogether, and is always the result of learned emotional or mental abuse. Manipulating loved ones might appear to be a thought-out strategy, but it’s always compulsive.

Withholding exemplifies how deeply we hurt ourselves when we try to hurt others, and how deeply hurt so many of us have been. The phrase, “This hurts me more than it hurts you” (commonly uttered before corporeal punishment), is actually true. A caregiver doling out physical pain literally experiences the punishment along with the person they are hurting. Unfortunately s/he is also reinforcing a psychological pattern that brings psychic agony and isolation. Likewise, those who purposefully withhold love or sex certainly feel the pain of isolation from their actions.

Like any addiction or compulsion, such habitual behavior doesn’t just disappear. Because withholding is often masked in denial, it can be difficult to confront. Withholding is a very human quality; most of us at one time have given and received “the silent treatment.” Since most solutions to human troubles involve caring, attention, and love, to withhold means to deny solutions. Such withholding is probably a leading factor in many personal, social, and global conflicts.

Help for Sex Addiction and Intimacy Issues

If you’re a man who’s struggling with sexual compulsions or intimacy issues, the Rio Retreat Center at The Meadows offers 5-day workshops which may help you break free from self destructive behaviors and strengthen your relationship with your partner or spouse. The Men’s Sexual Recovery Workshop helps participants to address sexual obsessions and compulsions, broaden their views about sexuality, maintain positive relationships and avoid the harmful patterns of the past.

In A Man’s Way™ Retreat you learn how The Man Rules™ affect all your relationships with others and yourself. You will also look at how past experiences affect your ability to be present in your relationships and stand as a healthy man in the space you have created for your life.

And, for those who need a more comprehensive treatment experience for complex sexual addiction and intimacy issues, The Meadows Outpatient Center offers a Sex Addiction Intensive Outpatient Program, and Gentle Path at the Meadows offers a 45-day inpatient treatment program based on the work of world-renowned expert Dr. Patrick Carnes, who is also a Senior Fellow at The Meadows.

For more information on these programs and many others call The Meadows at 800-244-4949.

 

By

Toddler Tears

by jrmybennett

Last night I went to another meeting last night. It was a much more of an intimate venue and more comfortable setting. During the meeting everyone was sharing stories of their past. I decided it was time I shared a bit about myself. As I began to relate my story of my addiction, how I have let everyone I love down, how I don’t remember who I am anymore, how I hate the person I see in the mirror I began to cry….

This wasn’t a manly single tear down the face cry but a full on snot bubbling sob. I was crying like a three year old who had just dropped their popsicle in the sand. It felt good to let all that emotion go in a room full of strangers, to feel unencumbered by people’s preconceived notions. While I was speaking a rough looking man got up and left the room, I assumed I had sickened him with my display. He had declined to speak earlier but when he returned he addressed me directly and began to cry himself. He said he remembered what it was like to be in my shoes. How I had taken the first steps and recovery is possible. I hope to god he’s right.

I start “real” counseling on the 29th. I can’t wait and I’m ready to do this once and for all. I pray that the ones I have hurt and betrayed the most someday forgive me. I know I have a long road ahead of me but every journey begins with a single step.

By

By Keith B.

NotUnknown.com

So the Lord sent Nathan, the prophet to tell David… – 2 Samuel 12:1a

Throughout my life, I lived a fragmented existence. I had a separate compartment for each of my identities. I put on my father and husband identity while home with my family. When I left for work, I put that persona away and donned my ambitious and cutthroat corporate climber appearance. At church and with family, I became a devout Christ follower and judgmental Pharisee. In isolation and shame, my addict ruled them all. That was my story. Isolated. Alone. Transparent to no one. Accountable to myself.

King David, yes that King David, had it all. His story was the basis for all rags to riches stories. He was a shepherd. The youngest son. The least of these. And who Samuel described as “a man after God’s own heart” when revealing to Saul that he would lose his kingdom. David ascended to the throne, united the Israelites, and dominated his enemies. He lived in community with God, transparent. Until he didn’t.

The Israelites had engaged in battle with their enemy, the Ammonites and had routed their forces. David sent his army to lay siege to their capital city. It was spring time, the time when kings went out to battle with their armies. But David stayed behind. He stayed home. Alone. Away from where he was supposed to be. Unaccountable. He went for a walk in the evening time. He saw Bathsheba. He wasn’t where he was supposed to be and had no one around to hold him accountable.

You know the story. He had Bathsheba brought to him. He slept with her and sent her away, thinking he was safe. His secret would remain that way. Only, she sent word to him that she was pregnant. So he tried to hide it. He had her husband brought in from the battlefield to spend time with his wife and sleep with her, thus hiding that David was actually the father. When that didn’t work, he orchestrated her husband Uriah’s death on the battle field. And promptly compartmentalized that and went on being king.

So the Lord sent Nathan, the prophet.

I have read that passage many times. I assumed that Nathan was sent to confront David because he was a prophet. Only, Nathan was much more than that to David. Nathan advised David earlier in his life to not focus on building a temple, that God had a different plan for his life. Nathan would later name David’s second son. Nathan would support David when one of David’s son would try to overthrow his kingdom. Nathan wasn’t just a prophet. He was a friend, a confidant, a brother. Someone who loved David enough to risk telling him the truth and hold him accountable.

The Lord sent Nathan to tell David a story of a rich man taking a poor man’s lamb, to illustrate power and influence unchecked, and to confront David for his hidden sin. Nathan obeyed God and called out his king and friend. When I read this story so many times before, I thought that was it. It wasn’t. Nathan remained loyal to David. God showed David mercy in judgment but also consequences in his sin. Nathan didn’t point a finger at David. He walked along side him through those consequences. He loved David and supported him as a friend the rest of his life.

Dan and Jay are my Nathans. So are Corey, Sean, Josh, Hayden, Jeff, Jeff, John, Doug, and so many others. Guys who love me, know me, and will absolutely hold me accountable in Christ. Surround yourself with people who know all of you and who love you enough to walk with you through your own celebrations and trials.

https://castimonia.org/2018/07/16/7131/

By

Different effects of stress on the brains of men and women related to empathy

originally posted at: http://www.psypost.org/2016/07/different-effects-stress-brains-men-women-related-empathy-43688

BY  ON JULY 6, 2016

The different effects of social stress on the brains of men and women are related to their response to empathy for pain, according to a study published this July in the International Journal of Psychophysiology. The study provides evidence that each sex may engage in distinct mechanisms to cope with stress.

Empathy is an essential aspect of social functioning. It allows people to build an understanding and mental representation of other peoples’ emotions and feelings. Research suggests that the brain mechanisms involved in how people empathize with others in painful circumstances involve two distinct responses. Firstly, there is an early emotional response seen in front-central regions of the brain; and secondly, there is a later cognitive evaluation, over the parietal area, where attention is either directed towards or away from stimuli.

As humans are a highly social species and face social stress on a regular basis, it can be expected that stress affects how people react to their environment. Therefore, the extent to which someone empathizes with another in pain is thought to be influenced by social stress.

Within this area, it has been proposed that men and women are distinctively affected by social stress. Men supposedly become more self-oriented, engaging in “fight or flight” behavior, whilst women react by creating and caring for social networks.

The study, led by Cristina Gonzalez-Liencres of Ruhr-University Bochum, involved 60 healthy participants (30 women and 30 men), half of which were exposed to short-term social stress. To measure empathy, researchers recorded the electroencephalography (EEG: which detects electrical brain activity) of the participants, while they observed photographs of hands in painful and neutral situations. Participants also had to fill in an assessment of their empathy in response to the photos and had their cortisol response to stress measured (via saliva samples).

Results revealed that different effects of social stress on the brains of men and women were related to their response to the pain empathy task. The late brain activity, associated with cognitive evaluation, was uniquely associated with a change in cortisol in stressed males. This was despite similar empathy ratings reported by all participants. This suggests that men used more cognitive processes in response to social stress and provides evidence that each sex may engage in distinct mechanisms to cope with stress.

The findings are useful to help understand the unique effects of social stress in men and women, as well as for the separate mechanisms that each sex undertakes to cope with socially stressful situations. This may be useful for understanding psychopathological conditions which are influenced by high levels of social stress.