Yes he does! Very enlightening to know how to avoid harming each other with only half- suitable decisions. Instead of sacrificing yourself to resentment dishonestly and unenthusiastically - you recognise that it is an unsustainable level of resentment. Very important to you as a 'leader' in this marriage. Don't agree passively to things you will resent. Don't allow your wife to dishonestly sacrifice either. Wait for her enthusiasm.

Leaving the decision unmade means not creating resentment. But now you can look at the million and one OTHER options in this wide, bright world. Among those options will be one you both like, and you can be together at your happiest. The garment will cover you both.

Don't like Mexican food, but she does? Don't agree to go - it is passive and dishonest. She doesn't like Thai? Then it would be most uncaring to plan a date around Thai food. Does this mean you both 'lose'? Not if you both like Italian.

Here is a thread on Types A & B Resentment:

Resentment Type A & B

People who are not used to using the POJA tend to see things in black and white and don't see other possibilities. That is what I see you doing here. When you start a negotiation with a set outcome in place, then you have sabotaged the negotiation before you have started. You must both be creative and negotiate until you find a solution that makes you both happy.

Please read the quotes about type A and type B resentment. Here is a post I wrote about choosing restaurants that might help you understand:

One of the most useful descriptions for me of PoJA was the image Dr Harley draws of a man and woman standing back to back. Apart, they can only see 180 degrees. Together, if they listen to each other, they can see 360 degrees. This is true. Women's brains and men's brains are designed to complement each other and fill in the blanks for what the other person does not know.

I like to imagine the couple as sentries. Each PoJA decision is boiled down to: "Is it safe to proceed with my plan?". If the woman sentry says: "No", she sees danger on the horizon that the man is unable to see. A wise man would listen to her. If the man says no, he is the one with the ability to see the danger and the woman must accept his report with respect for his vantage point.

Just because you don't see the problem, doesn't mean it isn't there. If your spouse can see it, and they are a reasonable person, devoid of addictions and unwholesome influences, then you must listen when they say it is a bad idea.

Never make a decision if one of you says no. It is a bad plan if one of you says no. The person who says no is the person with the clearest vision in that instance.

When your spouse says no they are saving you from making a very mistaken decision. Such as having to suffer the pointless experience of trying to cheer up a bored, frustrated and resentful spouse in the wrong restaurant, or with the wrong pet.

When they say no, there are million other similar plans you can pitch to them until you hear a yes.

You know it's funny but I once knew a couple who argued furiously becuase she 'really' wanted to visit Greece and he 'really' wanted to visit Italy.

Two things never dawned on either of them:

1) There were other destinations in the world to choose from
and
2) They would have a miserable time in either of these two options.

Wife speaking, thanks everyone for your insights. This has been very informative and eye opening for me. Now to finish reading all the links...

One thing that might help you in your brainstorming, Mr and Mrs Prookatz is to consider WHY the idea of a dog? Also, though Mrs P doesn't have to justify her no, it might be revealing to consider why not?

I noticed that Mr P made a reference to wanting to go on walks, with his little companion, which is the RC need, a commonly high need for most men. Of course dogs are affectionate and admiring too.

These are all needs that should be met in a good marriage. One place you might start is to ask yourself if your top ENs are being met on the appropriate scale and you are spending 15 hours a week UA time together. In fun dates, not discussing problems!

Dogs are fun and affectionate and don't want to talk. I once knew a lady who hated her husbands dog because he loved it better than he did her. He certainly spent more time with it.

I think it's important is assessing the roles in our marriages to consider God's intentions for marriage - that the two should become one. What does that mean? What is the nature of this individual that the Lord sees in place of the two that were there before?

What is clear to me is that God desires unified marriages. We need to do things that build the marriage up, and avoid things that tear it down. I am certain that POJA is very God-pleasing. I don't need to debate Scripture to understand that is true. Causing conflict in marriage by pursuing individual desires is not God-pleasing, indeed, it is sin. This is something we just know. Using Scripture to justify this kind of sin is very bad. Scripture does not support independent behavior in marriage, only unity of thought and action by both marriage partners. Whatever opposes the unity in marriage that was established by God is sin.

So, rather than examining Scripture to find ways to support independent positions, ask yourself what God's real intentions are. Meet the intent of the Lord. Don't be Pharisees. Following MB principles is a excellent way to fulfill God's intentions for your marriage.

I think most people do 'just know' that and intend to be very good, indeed sacrificial, to their spouse. However I also think that the road to an over-active taker is paved with such good intentions.

Most people start off avoiding the conflict you describe. I'm sure Mr Prookatz did initially, because a man would struggle to get a woman to marry him if all she knew was conflict and his putting himself first. Most men sacrifice a lot in courtship.

That doesn't stop the person wanting what they want - it's just they aren't sure of how to get what they want while keeping their spouse happy. So they just ignore what they want in favour of their spouse. They sacrifice, merely because they don't know any other way of not being selfish.

But sacrifice doesn't make us happy, it makes us miserable. The temptation to insist on 'just this one thing for me' becomes very great. Indeed, we think we are showing our spouse how not to be selfish after all we have done for them!

That's what makes PoJA so great. Not allowing any resentment or selfishness on either side is a simple idea but, much like the wheel, doesn't seem to occur to anyone automatically.

For centuries people had high ideals and big plans like building pyramids and temples, but to do it they had to drag things over wooden runners or on mud sledges. While whipping slaves.

The end goal, or the intention isn't the debate - it is the method of getting there. In this way PoJA is as simple and as beautiful as the invention of the wheel.

With PoJA - people's intentions are the same as they always were when they 'just knew' that conflict for self gain was wrong. Their intentions are to still keep their spouse happy, but by keeping themselves happy too, they keep it rolling along and stop it from getting grounded in the mud of resentment.

I think Indiegirl has stated some powerfully convincincing arguments for POJA being aligned with Christianity AND with good sense. It has persuaded me, at least, to not accept anything else again. However, if this line of debate isn't persuasive to "Mr P", he could think of the words that mean even more than Peter's (or anyone else's) words: "Love your neighbor as yourself", "do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Either your spouse is your closest, most important neighbor or they're your chattel. Even if they are your enemy, you are to treat them with good will, according to the one who's words supercede's Peter's words.

If he commanded his disciples to not in any way lord authority over each other, he commanded his current day disciples the same, even if they are married to each other.

Well... I can't tell you whether or not to get a dog, but, here are some things I'm thinking that you might want to consider... Yes, Paul speaks about male authority/leadership, but I think it's important to take the entire passage in context.

That first verse (Ephesian 5:21) is, to me, the basis of POJA in a nutshell. Paul then went on to elaborate on the areas where I think he knew men and women have unique (to use Dr. H's terms) EN's in marriage to have their spouse's extraordinary care and avoidance of LB's, submitting to each other out of reverence for Christ.

• Is a husband loving toward his wife when he forces his will, knowing she is not enthusiastic about it? Is he giving himself up for her, loving her as he loves himself? Is he caring for her as he would himself?
  .
• Is a wife respectful of her husband when she forces her will, knowing he is not enthusiastic about it? Is she submitting to him?
  .
• What if either spouse does what he/she wants anyway (IB), and/or doesn't tell their spouse [Honesty/Openness (EN) vs Dishonesty (LB)]? Is a spouse who does this submitting to their spouse? Will the other spouse feel withdrawal or deposit of love units?
  .
• In what ways do each of these choices show reverence for Christ?

If we fully submit to one another out of reverence for Christ, then we are seeking *only* those solutions which consider our spouses feelings and our spouse is doing the same for us (regardless of whether one understands or agrees with the other spouses feelings - they still honor them). Using Dr. H's terms again, in order to build a compatible marriage in which both spouses are 'in love', both spouses must be choosing only solutions about which their spouse feels enthusiastic. If only one is doing so (i.e., if only one part of this passage is followed), it would lead to 'sacrifice', which leads to 'resentment', which leads to love units withdrawn.

Further, they would not be submitting to each other. To remove any part of the passage would be to take it out of context and it would also be against the POJA.

I'll leave it to you to brainstorm ways to resolve the issue about getting a dog or not... best wishes for a resolution that leads you to being 'in love' with each other.