I do not understand how a man can be a leader in a marriage if he is not allowed to address his wife's behavior in the marriage. Is a CEO not allowed to fire employees for bad behavior? Does a father never discipline his kids? Do friends not check each other's actions? Why is a wife any different? Why is a husband just supposed to learn to be at peace with whatever he gets? The masculine loves by loving a person's highest potential. On some level, a husband thus does not love his wife and is not showing "frame" when he allows her to fall into patterns of control, to close up her heart and intimacy. If he refuses to offer his truth to her, he is depriving her. It is not a noble sacrifice, it is a cowardly act. Women are not untouchable and are not devoid of problems - yet the subtext here is that a woman's problems are immaterial to the health of the marriage. The implication is because he's "the leader," the man's sins are the ones that matter, and so he should only focus on his own behavior to fix things. I understand of course you can only control your own actions, and yes this is where you need to start. But you can also control what you put up with. Yet though it's implied a man should persevere indefinitely, I have never heard a coherent argument made why - except perhaps some moralizing that he is a bad "Christian leader" if he doesn't. Are you a bad Christian if you lock your doors at night so people don't rob you? The argument is not materially different. Both involve enabling energy thieves. A wife can be (and often becomes, without good boundaries) a parasite, and you are painfully naive if you think otherwise. Everything you say in here about not operating in a transactional manner with your actions is correct. You cannot give to get; that's just nice guy behavior, even if its presented as taking the lead. But the reality is once a man gets to the point of actually being free of a woman's validation - i.e. he shows up for himself, not her approval - he also becomes free of the need to be with her altogether. Her power games and intimacy blocs become disinteresting; he has risen above the pattern. She needs to rise above it with him now, or he will lose interest in her and the marriage entirely. I have walked this path and have walked it with other clients, and it's why I'm suspicious of the claims that simply getting to this point of emotional zen in a marriage fixes everything, and that just like that a woman becomes a sex freak. Because the zen that releases attachment to the pattern also releases attachment to the woman still stuck in the pattern. She needs to change at this point if she wishes to keep you invested in her. But she will only understand what that change requires of her if you, the man, speak the truth of it into her heart. This is your core gift as a man: to call out, to create clarity, to raise the standards not simply of behavior but connection. I do not understand why it is considered a virtue to deprive your woman of it, or conversely to squander it on a woman who doesn't value it. God creates consequences to actions because consequences correct and force growth. When you spare a woman the potential of losing you, you enable the worst of her to bloom; like weeds in an unpruned garden, until all the flowers are overrun.