I think the essence of the problem is that neither of you allows for the validity of the other's viewpoint. As hairdog has said before, his W simply doesn't accept that his pov is reasonable, that his desire is reasonable. Does he accept that her pov is reasonable?
Let's look at that (just using hd as an example):
1. hairdog's pov: regular sexual contact is a reasonable thing to want/expect in a marriage
2. mrs hd's pov: it is reasonable to expect conflict over sex and or no regular sex in a marriage (her experience AS A DIVORCE LAWYER is that most couples [that she sees] disagree over sex, so she assumes this is reasonable)
In your example, Burg:
1. Burg's pov: it's reasonable to have a messy bedroom
2. W's pov: it's reasonable to have a neat bedroom
If each of you can accept that the other's pov makes a certain amount of sense, then you can work on solving the problem. To me this ability to respect a pov that is different from your own is a necessary but not sufficient condition for reaching a solution (and chances are, that solution will be a compromise).
In the hairdog example, harder to see either one having any genuine respect for the other's pov.
