Random thoughts and links.

15 Dec

Some bloggers are very prolific, but I find that my inspiration comes in fits and starts.  Sometimes I can crank out a blog post quickly, but other times I’ll spend hours tinkering with a post, trying to figure out how to say what I want to say.  Sometimes I start a post and then don’t finish it for weeks or even months.  It just depends.

Since I don’t have anything fully-formed at the moment, here’s a smattering of stuff that’s floating around in my mind lately.

  • Mrs. Cubbie Fink wrote a book.  It’s called What Is He Thinking? and contains the results of Mrs. Fink’s interviews with “men she respects who hope to get married some day.”  According to the description, “The men share their thoughts on topics like how women can respect themselves and the men in their lives, modesty, purity, taking it slow, friendship, letting guys lead, and more. This book gives them the floor to say what they would really like women to know.”  Or, you know, you could just read some men’s blogs FOR FREE and find more honest, more real, and more true information.  Somehow I find it hard to believe that men would be truly frank with someone who looked like Mrs. Fink, but that’s just cynical ol’ me.  P.S. If anyone wants to hook me up with a copy of the book to review, let me know.
  • There’s been noise in the media lately about how 80% of self-identified evangelical singles aren’t virgins.  Well, duh.  Most people can wait until age 22 for sex.  Asking the same people to wait until they’re 30 or 35 or older to have sex is just preposterous.  I generally think that after the age of 25, a lot of Christians say “F THIS” and do what their hormones tell them to do.  If Christians really are serious about preventing premarital sex and the social ills that result from fornication (single moms, bastard kids, poverty, demand for government entitlements, STDs, abortions), then they need to change their attitudes about (a) instructing their kids on marriage and its obligations, (b) when it is appropriate to get married, and (c) getting involved in finding good mates for their children.  I know it’s unpopular to try to shape your child’s romantic destiny (yet okay be a helicopter parent dragging your kid over the finish line to get the minimum SAT score necessary to get into a decent college), but wishful thinking is clearly not keeping the kids out of each other’s pants.
  • I came across a shop on Etsy that sells sexy bikinis for plus-size women.
  • Women admit they were more attractive at 19.  They are actually shocked at how good they looked when they were younger.
  • I started following the whole Tim Tebow thing after I saw someone on TV trashing him as a QB a few weeks ago.  Is the publicity good or bad for Christians?  Weigh in.
  • I guess a special on virgins wasn’t enough for TLC, so now they’re doing a special on Sunday, Dec. 18th called Geek Love.  In the Venn diagram of life, those two circles intersect quite a bit.  Here’s a promo clip:
  •  Lady Gaga is a good example of a woman who is extremely sexual but not at all sexy.
  • An older article at The Art of Manliness that I read recently:  5 Easy Ways for the College Student to Upgrade His Style.  Antonio strongly favors a classic, somewhat preppy look, but his general points are good ones for men of any age.
  • Buy clothes that fit.  Don’t buy anything that doesn’t “sing” when you put it on.  Buying something because “it’s a great deal” is the worst reason to buy something.  Better to buy something more expensive that is great on you, because you’ll wear it more and pay for itself that way.
  • Saw this review of an item at Old Navy, written by a mom who claims she is a size 18:  “I don’t always have the time to pull together a nice outfit outside of sweats and a t-shirt. This shirt makes it easy to pull a nice outfit together quickly whether it’s with cargos, jeans or a skirt.”  A nice outfit outside of sweats and a t-shirt?

Until next time,

a.h.

Advertisements

46 Responses to “Random thoughts and links.”

  1. Will S. December 16, 2011 at 3:53 am #

    – Spot on, Haley, re: the reason why so many single evangelicals fail to remain virgins; simply put, they stay single too long, because the church doesn’t encourage them to do otherwise, i.e. to get married earlier on.
    – Agreed, re: Lady Gaga. Lady Gaga seems like a high-testosterone woman; a rumour went around that she was actually a guy in drag, though that’s absurd. Higher testosterone levels / lower estrogen levels will make a woman potentially more sexually aggressive (provided the man she is with is displaying enough alpha characteristics to, er, ‘turn her crank’), which is why post-menopausal and post-hysterectomy women, ironically, have higher sex drives than women who are younger or still have their uterus, even though they can’t reproduce. God has quite a sense of humour, doesn’t He?

  2. LibertyBelle December 16, 2011 at 5:08 am #

    ~I wonder if the bikini models had fun doing that shoot, getting to act out some sort of fantasy or if they were pained?
    ~I have been around the Christian online dating scene for a long time now and I don’t know if it is a new thing or I just didn’t see it before, but there is a portion of long-term singles who aren’t interested in other long-term singles. They want someone with either a divorce or a failed LTR. There is some mistrust of older virgins. Older as in over 30.

  3. Elspeth December 16, 2011 at 5:14 am #

    -Single evangelical sexual escapades: I agree with you. Get married already. Who says you can’t be a college student and a spouse at the same time? Sheesh. Parents contribute to the madness with their admonitions to “just wait” or with their own terrible marriage examples that do nothing to encourage young people that marriage is something to aspire to.

    -Plus-sized bikinis: LOL! I just wish someone in the fashion industry would simply refuse to make certain fashions in anything bigger than a size 12.

    – Tim Tebow: I like him. I don’t think he’s bad or good for Christianity. He’s just a young man with in the public eye. I don’t think he asked for the publicity that has come his way off the field. Surely it wasn’t easy for a star college quarterback to refuse all the sexual propositions I’m sure he received without someone asking what was up with that. I think he has handled the attention well though.

    -Only a woman suffering under massive delusion doesn’t know she was in better shape at 19 than at 35 (unless she was obese at 19 of course). This is news? Well, maybe it’s because many women remember how insecure they felt at that age compared to the way they feel at an older age with a bit more life experience under their belts.

    Good musings, Haley.

  4. Will S. December 16, 2011 at 6:00 am #

    @ LibertyBelle: “I have been around the Christian online dating scene for a long time now and I don’t know if it is a new thing or I just didn’t see it before, but there is a portion of long-term singles who aren’t interested in other long-term singles. They want someone with either a divorce or a failed LTR. There is some mistrust of older virgins. Older as in over 30.”

    A most curious development! One wonders, though, whether such people have been divorced or through a failed LTR themselves, but aren’t publicizing it.

  5. Elspeth December 16, 2011 at 6:31 am #

    I actually knew of a woman (divorced newer convert) who rebuffed the overtures of a handsome, successful Christian man who’d never been married simply because he was a virgin.

    I thought she was nuts for a whole hos of reasons, but it seemed contradictory me to decide a man was not worthy because of the fact that he actually walked his talk. Somehow that should have a been a good thing. Maybe I’m just weird. It was her loss and I heard he probably ended up with a younger woman with less baggage, who was probably more devout anyway.

    All that to say that there may be a ring of truth to what LibertyBelle is saying. Of course, this is purely anecdotal and as we know, you can’t put too much stock in anecdotes, LOL.

  6. Will S. December 16, 2011 at 6:48 am #

    @ Elspeth: It may be an example of preselection at work, of course, thinking that his maintained virginity was not due to personal integrity, but failure to have been successful at, er, ‘scoring’. Sad, but not altogether unsurprising. Hard for a divorced newer convert to shake her worldly ways of thinking, no doubt.

  7. LibertyBelle December 16, 2011 at 7:46 am #

    From what I can gather, it has to do, not so much with virginity/purity, but with the ability to have a relationship. Of course, if they are “back on the market”, that means the relationship failed. A man (or woman) over 40 (as I am) who has never been engaged or otherwise close to marriage is seen as… emotionally broken.

  8. imnobody December 16, 2011 at 8:13 am #

    “there is a portion of long-term singles who aren’t interested in other long-term singles. They want someone with either a divorce or a failed LTR. There is some mistrust of older virgins. Older as in over 30.”

    I really don’t know but maybe they worry about people who have commitment problems or they are too perfectionist. Besides wanting to follow the Christian message, these are also causes of long-term singleness.

  9. imnobody December 16, 2011 at 8:22 am #

    Lady Gaga is a good example of a woman who is extremely sexual but not at all sexy.

    Classic. I wonder if she deludes herself thinking that her sexual overtures are sexy or if it is only his own way to be an attention wh** or to have the attention of media.

    Does any American consider Lady Gaga sexy or hot? Does she do this thing for men or for other women? Just curious.

  10. Will S. December 16, 2011 at 8:23 am #

    @ LibertyBelle: “From what I can gather, it has to do, not so much with virginity/purity, but with the ability to have a relationship.”

    Ah, I see. So, again, those who have remained faithful and stayed virgins, out of integrity, are considered to be ‘losers’ who can’t get a relationship, even by their fellow long-term singles. Great.

  11. jack December 16, 2011 at 9:10 am #

    Once again, my suspicion is that evangelical women (some of the most entitled of the female species) KNOW the abstinence message but make a calculated decision to have sex if it gets them a higher status man than they would otherwise get.

    I have lost count of the number of Christian women I know who have had sex with atheists.

    So it’s not like they are dating Bible-Camp Billy and fell into temptation because he was so spiritual. Nope. It is the same impulse that led Eve to reach out for the apple – seduction, daring, a sense of risk.

    That kind of catnip seems to get them every time. I would say that a bad-boy atheist has a better chance of being a Christian Girl’s first than a Christian man would.

  12. jack December 16, 2011 at 9:27 am #

    Elspeth-

    It probably made her feel dirty. That is the real reason. When someone’s explanations make no sense, and when they feel the need to give you a “whole host of reasons” it means they are piling on rationalizations while leaving the real reason unstated.

  13. Aunt Haley December 16, 2011 at 10:01 am #

    LibertyBelle–
    I’d say the models were loving their BBW photoshoots, if their facial expressions mean anything.

    Elspeth–
    I’d say Tim Tebow is probably MORE attractive to women for his virginity stance. Many ambitious women would love to be the one to deflower him. The status boost they would receive would be stratospheric.

    I think you’re correct about insecurities at age 19 clouding any objective assessment of looks. Plus, you’re always comparing yourself to your immediate peer group, not to women at large. A slender 19-year-old who believes she’s fat and ugly is comparing herself to her 19-year-old classmates, not to 35-year-olds who have given up.

  14. A December 16, 2011 at 10:57 am #

    Lady Gaga is a good example of a woman who is extremely sexual but not at all sexy.

    1. Her style is sexual without being sexy.
    2. She has an average face.
    3. She has a very nice body.

  15. A December 16, 2011 at 11:00 am #

    I’d say Tim Tebow is probably MORE attractive to women for his virginity stance.

    Once you reach a certain extremely high level of attractiveness through status or looks, virginity does make you more attractive. Call it the handicap principal, contrast game, whatever.

  16. Anna December 16, 2011 at 11:55 am #

    Christian women would be smart not to discount older virgins! http://seraphicsinglescummings.blogspot.com/2011/12/sex-and-cancer.html

    But it’s true that if a man is a virgin only because he has not had opportunities to have sex, that is going to be a turn-off for a lot of women. Those guys need to learn the basics of flirting and making a woman feel special.

  17. Artie December 16, 2011 at 12:52 pm #

    @imnobody
    “Does any American consider Lady Gaga sexy or hot?”

    Yes: gay men. The same ones who fawned over the similarly-sexual-unsexy Christina Aguilera a few years ago, and Cher for many years before that.

  18. Will S. December 16, 2011 at 1:03 pm #

    “Does any American consider Lady Gaga sexy or hot?”

    Yes: gay men. The same ones who fawned over the similarly-sexual-unsexy Christina Aguilera a few years ago, and Cher for many years before that.

    Exactly. But what the hell do homos know about what is truly sexy, i.e. to hetero men? The reason those women are ‘sexy’ to gays is because of their pro-gay-rights statements / songs, etc. Not because they make said gays want to marry and have normal relations with them; it’s really all political, and not truthful at all. Just more of the usual, silly, “Ugogirl!” props they give to all their straight female ‘hags’.

  19. y81 December 16, 2011 at 6:58 pm #

    “you could just read some men’s blogs FOR FREE and find more honest, more real, and more true information.”

    Yeah, probably not. People who write blogs are generally atypical, and turned to blogging because they were at odds with their surroundings. (As I said before, don’t infer the average law professor’s political views from Instapundit.) A broad selection of interviews might give a more representative picture. And if the cost of a book is setting you back, lack of a man isn’t your biggest problem.

  20. Matthew December 16, 2011 at 8:46 pm #

    Lady Gaga looks like one of the failed Ripley clones in Alien 4.

  21. Will S. December 16, 2011 at 9:07 pm #

    Which is why gay men find her sexy.

  22. Matthew December 16, 2011 at 9:10 pm #

    I never knew you were even more cruel than I.

  23. Will S. December 16, 2011 at 9:15 pm #

    I’m full of surprises.

  24. Will S. December 16, 2011 at 9:38 pm #

    What’s funny, is that straight women let Calvin Klein, Versace, John Galliano, Jean-Paul Gauthier, Yves Saint-Laurent, Pierre Cardin, Christian Dior, Dolce & Gabbana, Karl Lagerfeld, Mr. Blackwell, and the many other homo fashion designers tell them what’s sexy and what’s not. It’s no wonder so many fashion models are square-shouldered, anorexic boyish-looking things; that’s the only kind of women them queers find remotely attractive! And what looks supposedly good on a boyish girl, does not necessarily look good on a real woman. But fashion slaves are stupid, letting others think for them, telling them what’s ‘hot’ and what’s ‘not’.

  25. Aunt Haley December 16, 2011 at 11:30 pm #

    Will S.,
    If you say “homo” or “queer” one more time in this thread in reference to homosexual men, I’m sticking you in moderation.

  26. imnobody December 17, 2011 at 2:54 am #

    Yes: gay men.

    Well, it makes all sense now. I really didn’t understand Lady Gaga until now. But, when you see it from a gay perspective, it makes sense. Thank you for clarifying my doubts.

  27. Will S. December 17, 2011 at 5:07 am #

    AH: I see.

    Interesting.

  28. Kathy December 17, 2011 at 6:49 am #

    Curiouser and curiouser… shakes head.

  29. Kathy December 17, 2011 at 7:00 am #

    “But what the hell do homos know about what is truly sexy”

    How else should Will put this, then?

    This? But what the hell do homosexuals know about what is truly sexy?

    Shakes head once again.

  30. Will S. December 17, 2011 at 7:53 am #

    Apparently that would have been more acceptable. Don’t know why the abbreviation is problematic, or why we Christians should care… But, her casa, her rules…

  31. Anna December 17, 2011 at 8:23 am #

    How about “people with same-sex attraction”? It can be shortened to SSA.

  32. Matthew December 17, 2011 at 2:25 pm #

    Sodomites?

  33. Jennifer December 17, 2011 at 2:39 pm #

    “If you say “homo” or “queer” one more time in this thread in reference to homosexual men, I’m sticking you in moderation”

    Yipes.

    I understand the queer thing, but not the abbreviation (not to criticize Haley) or why it infuriates people. It’s one thing to retain politeness on a public blog like this, but when I was discussing homosexual people with others on a movie blog, some of which were Christians, and I got tired of spelling out the word homosexual, I finally used the abbreviation once. And whoa: the place exploded. The debate lasted an hour. I went to my best friend, a liberal woman with gay friends, afterward and told her about it. She was nonplussed about the fuss, and her comments were hilarious. You’d have to email me, though, if you wanted to know what they were :P

  34. Celeste December 17, 2011 at 3:59 pm #

    Personal observation: The older the woman, the less modest she is changing in the lady’s dressing room. Seems body confidence increases to an extent with age, despite fading looks. Hmm.

  35. Will S. December 17, 2011 at 5:06 pm #

    @ Matthew: ‘Sodomite’ is a perfect term! It’s Biblical; no Christian would surely be ashamed to use a Biblical term like ‘sodomite’, seeing as it comes straight (no pun intended) from Scripture; surely no comments containing the word ‘sodomite’ would result in anyone’s comments thereafter ending up placed into moderation by our hostess, since surely, not offending the enemies of Christ (as unrepentant sodomites are; the Bible says they won’t inherit the Kingdom of heaven, you know) surely is less important than speaking Christian truth, on a Christian blog, amongst fellow Christians, notwithstanding lesbian trolls like Elisa Diane…

    @ Anna: Why should we abbreviate to ‘SSA’? We’re Christians; we don’t follow the ways of the world, and its blind acceptance of the zeitgeist. We reject that. Matthew’s term, ‘sodomite’, is Biblical, from the Old Testament; it’s a perfect word, which shouldn’t offend anyone except those whose consciences are bothering them because they know they’re either doing wrong or excusing it in others.

    @ Jennifer: I don’t understand why it is offensive to use terms used by members of the group themselves in relation to themselves, but suddenly it’s wrong when used by outsiders. (It’s kinda like that other word, with five letters, starting with n- and ending with -a, you know, only people of that group can use, and they can use it freely in the middle of two words like “Yo” and “whassup?”, but heaven forbid anyone else even use it jokingly, else they’re rraacciisstt.) I even less understand why it’s problematic to use those that short form or the synonym of ‘odd’ on a Christian blog, when we are hated by those people; why should we worry about offending the Elisa Dianes of the world, or the rest of her ilk? Isn’t that behaviour ‘odd’, indeed; what’s therefore wrong with the Q-word? And if we can abbreviate ‘post-modern’ as ‘po-mo’, why not that other word, likewise?

    It’s not like I used the word that is a British term for a cigarette, or the similar word which is a bunch of sticks tied together for firewood, or a pork offal meatball food in England.

    Anyway, I don’t know why certain words are verboten here, but regardless, I like this blog; there’s a reason why I highlighted this post and another one in a post at my blog, giving props to Haley for them, and why she’s on our blogroll, since we like her. Hopefully we’ll continue to have reason to like her and her blog, as we have, thus far. :)

  36. CL December 17, 2011 at 6:08 pm #

    LOL @ Will.

    Anna, that’s silly. Homosexual is the correct term, no need to come up with a silly mouthful of a term. People end up getting offended over whatever you say. Like how “retarded” became “special”, and kids immediately took the word “special” and used it exactly how they used “retard”. Humans are adaptable like that. “Queer” is really no different than “gay”, except it’s more apt. Both terms are used widely by homosexuals and really, why should the rest of us allow a small minority to co-opt the language like that?

    Surely AH can’t object to “sodomite” though, so perhaps everyone can use that henceforth!

  37. Will S. December 17, 2011 at 6:21 pm #

    @ CL: I’m certainly going to use ‘sodomite’ here and at Patriactionary, and any and all other Christian blogs, as the perfect term for homosexuals, and I encourage everyone else to feel free to use such a Biblical term. It will be most telling, if for saying the word ‘sodomite’, in relation to those who commit the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah (whom God despises particularly for their wicked actions, who have no inheritance in the Kingdom of heaven, as Scripture teaches), anyone ends up being cast in permanent moderation limbo, i.e. effectively banned. On a Christian blog, no less. That would be interesting, wouldn’t it? Most revealing, too, were it to happen. Of course, it’s surely not going to. And so, for instance, you’ll continue to see my comments here, using Christian language and terminology, e.g. like ‘sodomite’ as a synonym for homosexuals, on a Christian blog, discussing Christian themes, among fellow believers. If you don’t, maybe I’ve been ‘disappeared’; you’ll know if Haley’s blog ends up no longer on our blogroll. :)

  38. Aunt Haley December 17, 2011 at 6:36 pm #

    Will S.,
    Is this the hill you really want to die on? Grow up and stop being a passive-aggressive snot using my blog for grandstanding. If it makes you feel better to remove me from your blogroll so you can crow that you’ve won a moral victory, do it. Consider yourself banned until Friday or whenever I feel like dealing with your comments again.

  39. MikeJJ December 17, 2011 at 6:54 pm #

    Will S, we get it. You found a shiny new toy. Go on, wear it out. You manage to make Svar look mature.

  40. Matthew December 17, 2011 at 7:05 pm #

    Weaksauce, Hils.

  41. Jennifer December 17, 2011 at 7:35 pm #

    Of course she’d object to sodomite, CL, and it is a way to reduce a person to their sexual acts (which is fine if they’re just promiscuous people like those in the Bible, esp. the Biblical rapists, but not if they’re homosexuals wishing they could change). Besides, not all homosexuals use sodomy.

  42. Matthew December 17, 2011 at 8:49 pm #

    Homos, homos, homos! Much adored at Halo’s!
    casting down their golden crowns around the glory hole;
    Christian men be careful when you mention holy homos,
    lest you be banned from commenting. Oh noes!

  43. CL December 17, 2011 at 10:26 pm #

    @ Matthew

    Ah ha ha ha ha ha!!!

  44. Red Caroline December 21, 2011 at 6:24 am #

    I would take the whole evangelicals study with a grain of salt. It’s published by the NRO which is liberal-leaning, despite it’s contention and claims that they’re conservative. This study essentialy reminds me of the “liberal people divorce less” study when in reality most liberals marry less and therefore have less divorce rates (less marriages = less divorce), co-habitate more and other factors. We also have feminist sugar-coating where “college educated people divorce less” study when in reality this statistic includes anybody who has gone to college for a 1-year certificate or a 2-year associate to a person who has college education of 5-15 years and let’s be honest PhD and master’s college educated women are perhaps the worst enablers of feminism (egalitarianism, no-fault divorce, promiscuity, childlessness) since more time = more brainwashing. Then there’s the whole college educated but after getting married gave up a career and stayed home with the kids for whichever reason (e.g. planned it, sudden change of heart, etc). All of these women (e.g. 1-2 year college degree and college educated but gave up career after marriage) with their sheer numbers have pulled down the divorce rate made by the long-term college educated women with careers. So instead of getting 50-70%, which accurately reflects reality, we get the small 15-20% divorce rate cited among college-educated. My mistrust to the study is also due to the common “Christians are hypocrites!” mantra despite my reservations that evangelicals are heretical (health, wealth prosperity ‘gospel’ and other heresies) and quite liberal-leaning contrary to the MSM’s claims that they’re some evil, far-right plague. I’m an ex-evangelical turned Catholic and I have a lot of beef with the evangelical Church but I can’t stand liberals, especially political liberals whom trash Christianity in name of humanitarianism and theological liberals who preach in unbelief (ever heard of atheist pastors?).

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Aunt Haley on why single evangelicals fail to maintain chastity « Patriactionary - December 16, 2011

    […] Haley at Haley’s Halo weighed in with a great short observation, here, really a re-iteration of points she’d already made, actually, in expanded form, in an […]

  2. Spot the Evangelicals « Patriactionary - December 17, 2011

    […] Haley’s Halo: […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s