Alienation of affection, it's called, and it's grounds for divorce.
When a woman won't wean a child, the ever-larger kid literally kicks the father out of bed several times a night, and kicks him away from tittie svcking on the couch. The woman b1tches that they hurt, but who does she deny? Right. Been there. (Gotta love it when the people who write about and comment upon these issues leave out such key details as the kid taking up the man's half of the bed. It exposes these feminists as child haters who have no real-world experience in parenting. Even in this article, it was mentioned only metaphorically, and not as a physical fact.)
About the man whose needs are abandoned and neglected during a pvssy strike, the article says:
"It's a shame, because the whole thing reinforces a prevalent sex-negative narrative in our culture that holds that anyone who is unceremoniously cut off from sex in their relationship, yet still expected to be monogamous, is a shallow monster if they take issue with it."
Withholding sex is abuse. It ends the relationship.
It's a straw man argument to say that no one should be forced into sex. Entering into a relationship is voluntary. No one was forced into it. Either party can walk at any time. Withholding sex is a passive-aggressive way to walk, while pretending that the man is the "bad guy" for making an unreasonable sexual demand. Bull! Men need sex regularly. Every night, every week, whatever, but regularly. This is common knowledge. Seeking regular sex is not unreasonable.
