I’ve learned a lot from the manosphere, but that doesn’t mean it’s a perfect place. Like any corner of the internet, it has its echo chamber qualities; a few voices can be amplified until that’s all anyone can hear, and then those ideas become the predominant mode of thinking. Sometimes this is good, like men learning that women respond to confident, proactive men rather than passive, submissive men. But sometimes this is bad, like when men wrap themselves in the belief that all women seek to marry just to they can destroy their husbands’ lives by divorcing them out of boredom, and that subsequently women should be treated as trash that is only good for sex, or that women should be avoided at all costs.
Nothing good comes from dwelling on the negative. Yes, we should acknowledge that negative things exist – it would be just as bad to pretend as though everything is perfect all the time – but a lot of the tragedies that we read about in the news could have been avoided if the perpetrator hadn’t filled his (or her) mind with negativity.
Much has been written in the manosphere about the Elliot Rodger incident. Some people think he was crazy, some people think he was secretly gay, some people think that he wouldn’t have gone on a killing rampage if he had just learned how to get girls to have sex with him, some people think that society let him down… My guess is that it was probably a combination of the above, but what I feel very certain about is that Elliot Rodger completely gave himself over to negativity and let it turn dark inside him. Eventually that darkness had to come out. In this case, it came out in a horrifying and tragic manner.
Most people who dwell on the negative won’t go on a murder spree, or compile a manifesto chronicling every perceived or real wrong done to them, or make YouTube videos about it. But that doesn’t mean that they won’t be eaten up on the inside. Even on this blog, there are a lot of comments by men who are determined to see nothing good in women and are even more determined that no other man should, either. It’s always some selection from the “men good, women bad” pool of divorce rape/women don’t have feelings/don’t get married/church girls are sluts/there are no good women anymore/etc. Sure, these men can try to justify it as trying to “save” other men from pain, but when there is a consistent theme of anger, resentment, and betrayal from the same people, it starts to cross over from healthy realizations and genuine warnings to a relishing of negativity and misery.
I’m not trying to belittle real hurt, but bitterness destroys – and bitterness is something that is CHOSEN. Bitterness doesn’t happen to someone out of the blue. Bitterness is the result of choosing resentment, anger, unforgiveness, and hatred day after day. A bitter person will never be happy or content, even if he gets the very thing he claims to desire. Would finally having sex with a blonde have made Elliot Rodger happy? Would it have made him content with who he was? Would he have deleted his manifesto as irrelevant if a girl had told him she thought he was better than the rest of the guys specifically because he had a BMW? I highly doubt it. If anything, he would have started hating the girl who liked him for his car or who had sex with him because he still hated himself.
The mind is an extremely powerful thing. Its focus can direct an entire life. It’s why this world has people born with no arms or legs living productive and inspirational lives, and people who have looks, money, power, and sex destroying themselves and others. So focus on the things that will enable you to live a full life and be someone who can be someone to others.
Haley's Halo 
Test
Agreed. If you believe every single woman is scum of the earth, then it’s probably time for you to divorce yourself from the internet and go off and live in a cave somewhere as a celibate hermit.
Good point, Haley, It’s unfortunate that many lose perspective.
Even on this blog, there are a lot of comments by men who are determined to see nothing good in women and are even more determined that no other man should, either.
I’m not sure it’s true that men who comment here think there’s nothing good about women or are bent on persuading other men to think/feel the same. I wonder if what you’re seeing is hard hitting, no holds barred discussion with a bit of dark humor, and mistaking that for bitterness. I also wonder if you’re seeing skepticism and even cynicism, and mistaking that for bitterness as well. After all, the tone and volume with which men address each other is quite different from the way they address women; and different still from the manner in which women address each other. Men talk to each other differently from the way they talk to women; and different still from the way women talk to each other.
Bitterness destroys. But then again, so do lack of education, ignorance, naivete and gullibility.
You listening, Jack? LOL
Sometimes it seems like the line dividing realism from pessimism is so thin that many cross over it and into the negative realm, take residence there, and assume this is the world as it is. I’ve become more adverse to reading comments sections because it gets filled with so much negativity and hate and it just serves to reinforce the opinions of those who are already negative. Sadly enough, some people enjoy being in that negative state of bitterness. I think one way to get out of the negative zone is to realize the battle isn’t merely you verses feminism/sluts/evil women but rather the struggle is with yourself. Yes, there are external battles to be fought but very often our biggest problem is ourselves with our flawed human nature.
Good post. It’s all too easy for us to fall into the trap of looking at the dark side of things and focusing on the things we don’t have, and feeling cheated, instead of being grateful for all the good things that we do have in our lives, and realizing how good our lives really are.
I can attest to what Haley said. I recently asked God to deliver me from the enormous mental and spiritual bondage that sexual guilt and shame brought about, and a big part of that was to stop wallowing in it by revisiting blogs and websites that were dedicated to that issue. Websites can help with sharing problems and solutions, but we as humans sometimes have a propensity to look back at emotional Egypt rather than looking forward
to emotional Israel. I was a member of the MGTOW forums for the last few months of its existence before Nacho had his meltdown, but I shied away from it after a while because it often crossed the line from being anti-Feminist to anti-female.
I would go even further than that.
What is “positive” is not always what is “godly.”
Focus on what is godly.
IT’S HALEY HALO!!!!!!! XoxO
Every time Haley doesn’t post for a month or two, I hope it’s because she has met a guy, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. However, a post as upbeat as this one might suggest that something good is going on.
I dont see it as women bad/ men good, but more like; lies we were told about women bad/ the truth good.
It is pointless to get angry about normal human nature. The answer is to understand it and adapt to it. Hating PUA is a waste of energy, instead understand how they operate and adapt.
You should read Zuleika Dobson, a novel by Max Beerbohm. Set in pre-World War I Oxford, it tells the story of a girl who if she were alive today would be the ultimate Evangelical American Princess (instead of a ridiculous tiny dog, she has a French maid named Melisande.) The lack of game of the men—well, it could be set today. Satire all the way. Downton Abbey for those with literary pretensions and for those who can’t sit through the show itself without puking. You don’t seem the type to take Downton Abbey that seriously…..
Very pithy article. Being an older guy myself, it looks to me that many of the “women suck” comments are very juvenile, and suggest that the poster has little or no experience with actual women.
Whatever diagnosis people may have of Elliot Rodger, it is clear that he needed salvation. His frustration over his trouble with women was a symptom, not the cause of his strife. In all likelihood, his romantic problems probably became something of a proxy for all his other issues, not the least of which was the fact that his parents did not really seem to want him or regard him much. We can infer that rejection from one’s parents is probably one of the most debilitating types there is, judging anecdotally from watching the world around us.
Regrettably, we have a popular culture that shuns the idea of spiritual awareness, and certainly has made the concepts of sin and salvation to be unpalatable topics of discussion. This makes reaching individuals like this very difficult, and ensures that most people in his situation will continue to be exposed to the worst possible information (and inducements), rather than anything that would help.
I offer one intellectual challenge, though.
Let us consider all the various groups who may have crossed this young man’s path, and ask ourselves which group would have had the best chance of reaching a troubled kid like this. I would say that the Christian faction of the manosphere would have had the best chance.
Who else would have been able to meet this kid where he was? Certainly not the mainstream church, which would have probably issued well-meaning, but ineffective advice. Focus on the
FemaleFamily? Same deal. Pickup artists? Maybe, but that had been tried and failed, according to his manifesto. Mainstream liberal thinkers? Again, most likely, they would have shamed him for “expecting sex”, while entirely missing the point. A real-live “alpha male”? No, because of his blinding envy and resulting hatred of such men. In fact, his hate of so-called alphas appears to have possibly been the strongest of the hate he felt. Selah.What he probably needed most was a realistic look at the world, and most likely from a guy substantially older than himself, since his envy of romantically successful men his own age was going to make peer assistance a non-starter.
He needed to hear the truth, but from an older wiser source that he could listen to without feeling threatened or shamed. If I sound overly sympathetic to Mr. Rodger, well, I am not. The minute he decided that he was going to become violent, he lost me. But where along the way to that point might he have been reached? Perhaps a stronger father figure? Perhaps a less toxic social circle? (Hollywood is about is bad as it gets).
An unfair correlation
One more critical distinction must be made. Mr. Rodger did not appear to be seeking a loving, monogamous relationship, sanctified by a Christian marriage. From his writing, he appeared to resent being denied entry into the world of hedonistic, uncommitted sex.
Again, most of our sympathy should be gone at that point, because God did not create us to spend our time as sexual thrill-seekers. The person who laments the loss of opportunity for a loving spouse and family is not really in the same domain as a man who seethes at his inability to participate in ad hoc promiscuity with the partners of his choosing. I believe Haley realizes this, although I would have preferred she draw a bolder line between these two types of men.
As our culture continues to slowly disintegrate, I believe God will find men who He can use to reach troubled guys like this. Men who can take this warped view of the truth and replace it with one based on real truth. If I was in charge of the Christian Church, I would be looking at events like this as a sign that we needed to get busy understanding what was happening, and preparing to meet these evils with righteousness.
Here’s hoping the church does not miss this opportunity.
Anon
You listening, Jack? LOL
I think Haley has made many good points here, but I think that a clearer line needs to be drawn between Elliot Rodger, who is really more of a hater than he is someone who is bitter.
I’m not sure he is old enough to truly experience real bitterness. And let’s recall that not all bitterness is an artifact of a person’s spoiled, selfish wants. Sometimes it comes from mistreatment.
And in that case, the advice to abandon bitterness is good, but it can scarcely be given by those who are responsible for inducing it.
For instance, a girl who friend-zones a guy for years and then gets upset when the guy finally vanishes is not in any credible place to deliver sermons about bitterness.
Similarly, many Churchian websites and blogs have made a career out of making it a greater sin for men to desire a chaste wife than for a woman to be unchaste.
So, yes, I agree with everything Haley says, for the most part, but I consider it to be more of a curated narrative about how things should be, than to be a curative prescription.
Much of the advice elsewhere reminds me of this:
James 2:16
“And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?”
“You’re such a nice guy, some girl will snap you up someday. (Not me, of course)”
There is only good intent in those words, and no evil intended. But without realizing it, when women say this, they are pouring sand onto a parched man.
These forgotten and neglected men recognize the goodwill, but a lifetime of such empty calories leads to bitterness and spiritual malnutrition.
The greatest kindness and charity women can do at this point is this:
If you have been the kind to repeatedly reject good men, and have been the type to consistently give your time, companionship and affection to bad men, then show your repentance by FOREVER keeping your mouth closed when it comes to delivering rebukes about “bitter men”.
It would certainly be the smallest token of respect, but better than nothing.
@Robert What?
You sound like just another old guy who “doesn’t get it.”
Your comments are indistinguishable from those one might find on the most strident of feminist blogs. Age usually brings wisdom, but sometimes age comes alone. My generation has a lot of work to do, since we must dismantle much of what yours has created. We will spend the rest of our lives cleaning up the mess you – in your well meaning ignorance – made.
Evan Marc Katz was upset that the manosphere called him a “mangina.” Then he said, “Well, you’re all… misogynists!”
It’s true! Read his blog!
He needs to focus on the positive, *I* think!
:D
@Red
“Evan Marc Katz was upset that the manosphere called him a “mangina.” Then he said, “Well, you’re all… misogynists!””
You just made my day. EMK is – at best – an annoyance. At worst, he is a kind of Manchurian candidate of the SMP.
He fancies himself an alpha, but logic dictates that real alphas have no need to self classify as such – they’re too busy being alpha to have need of posturing.
He’s like a bad DJ in the mating nightclub: “Yo yo, Got the EMK in SMP to DHV your SMV…
He’s just another self employed apple-polisher of the female imperative.
Yo yo, glad I brought smiles.
“[B]ecause of his blinding envy and resulting hatred of such men. In fact, his hate of so-called alphas appears to have possibly been the strongest of the hate he felt.”
The knee-jerkers over at the Daily Kos(ovo) and others who tailored their reports on this tragedy conveniently neglected this, along with the fact that most of his victims were male. But hey, nobody’s perfect.
But you spoke a lot of truth here. I was in Rodger’s same place when I was in my teen years, and that’s when I found God. If I hadn’t, I might’ve followed in Elliott’s footsteps. I read some of the choice quotes from his manifesto and I know exactly what he was going through.
The more productive aspects of the Manosphere might’ve helped as well. MGTOW websites and YouTube clips provide men with the social and personal support they can use to improve the overall quality of life. None of the sites I frequent encourage violence. In fact, one of my posts was deleted by a Mod because it included a photo of a bodyguard pinning down a Feminist protester who got too close.
I see heartiste and justfourguys have addressed the Elliot Rodger story recently.
All I can say is that he seems to be a complete psycho, and though I still maintain that there is a remote chance he could have been reached, I am willing to admit that he was possibly beyond help.
That said, I still challenge our hostess to differentiate between the man who seethes at his inability to engage in casual sex with a man who is sorrowful at his inability to have a loving covenant marriage and children.
There’s nothing wrong with wanting sex, as long as you are willing to have it on God’s terms.
Just like for women, there is nothing wrong with wanting male provision and attention, as long as you are willing to have it on God’s terms.
I think it is a demonstrable disease of the modern female mind that Elliot Rodger could even be remotely compared to the typical manosphere commenter.
I will gladly point out that Haley wrote a technically correct treatise on bitterness, but in the end, how is it to be distinguished from the “shaming language” use of the word ‘bitter’? A distinction without a difference, I would say.
Haley, I have a question:
How many men does a churchian girl have to be, um, ‘intimate’ with before she is no longer qualified to lecture Christian men on holiness and the evils of bitterness?
I do not in any way imply YOU, of course. I am thinking of some of the women I know from my last, abortive attempts to not “forsake the brethren”.
Do you think is is inconsistent for these women to lecture men about bitterness while they themselves luxuriate in fornication with their non-believer boyfriends?
Haley, I really like what you have to say in this post. Having spent a bit too much time in the manosphere myself lately, it’s just been mindboggling to learn that a few, or maybe even many, of these men have encountered NOTHING BUT women who totally disdain the nice guys who are always there to help them, while offering free sexual favors to the bad boys who offer them absolutely nothing in return.
I realize that there are both women and men who do really stupid things and go after the completely wrong kind of person while ignoring those who genuinely care about them — but that’s not everyone. If I tried to say that the only men I ever met ignored the nice “girls next door” and only went after the most popular ones, I’d expect someone to call me on it.
There really is someone for pretty much everyone, if we really want to get married.
Jack, at what point would you consider that a man had been intimate with too many women to be qualified to advise men or women on the way things ought to be done?
That_Susan don’t use that NAWALT excuse. Christian women are no different in terms of their hypergamous nature. Women in general only select very narrow range of men, even the average/below average women. Guy must be tall (God forbid if he is short because we know women only care about personality right), rich, good looking and popular. On top of that he has to show confidence 24/7 and if he shows any sign of weakness/neediness the woman instantly loses respect for him and divorce is likely to occur. In churches the women tend to be cliquey they don’t even say hi. Women are more approachable in bars than churches. The woman I am currently seeing for over 1 month is 5+ years older than me and Christian like myself but she too plays games. After our dates which is once a week I usually text her once a day at max either to see how she is doing or show her something interesting. It takes her so long to respond as she is always busy as she claims. Then I usually confirm our next week’s plan couple of days later. She hasn’t given me exclusivity even though she is looking for long-term relationship. She was and perhaps still is seeing other men as she claimed after our second date. Dating is a real nightmare for men in the modern world as women simply are not worth the effort anymore.
Gosh, if I even suggest the idea that not all women are jerks, I’m using something called a “NAWALT excuse???” I’m trying not to overgeneralize here, but I’m starting to wonder if all men in the manosphere resent the slightest suggestion that there are still some good and sincere women out there.
It’s as if they ALL want to comfort themselves over their singleness by insisting that the men who ARE happily married aren’t really whole men anymore, because they had to give up some piece of their masculinity and accept being “settled for” by some woman who’s already lost her innocence by messing around with lots of “alphas” and is now just tired and used up and wants a chance to squeeze out a kid or two before it’s too late.
And will eventually dump her “beta” husband, and take the kids, because her taste of variety early in life has RUINED her for a committed relationship. If you have to find silly little acronyms to trivialize what I have to say, here’s a more accurate acronym for what I’m thinking: VFWALT; MWWSTGOW (very few women are like that; most women want someone to grow old with).
Yes, there are many women and many men today who’ve had multiple sexual partners before marriage — but I don’t think experienced women are any likelier than experienced men to be unable to commit to one person. Of course, there are a handful of people in each group who can’t, or at least don’t choose to, be faithful. But most PEOPLE, male and female, crave someone they can count on “for better or worse.”
That_Susan, good women where? Like 5% are perhaps good women. I was checking out Christianmingle dating profiles one woman that is 5’1 demands a guy at least 5’9 and 4’11 woman demands 5’8 minimum probably to satisfy their 5 inch heel requirement (female solipsism). As men have constantly pointed out online dating sucks for men. Women are the choosers in nature and they can pick who they want and they have hundreds of men hitting on them constantly that helps inflate their value. Hypergamy is a sad reality men have to face unless you’re one of the top 10-20% alpha males.
Short women are always going for the really tall guys. I’m tall and skinny, and I usually like shorter, stockier guys.
You’re right, women always exaggerate the number of men hitting on them, because it’s a huge turn-on for men. I do it, sure. I think it’s funny, because I avoid men who do the same thing.
I guess looks-wise I kind of have a few types. I don’t want to be with a guy who’s extremely popular, although kind of well-liked is okay. It’s weird for me to think that the guy has that many more friends than I do… it seems a little like he’s gay. I’m just as open to marrying a rich guy as I am to a geek. I’d actually prefer and I.T. guy or a cop to a doctor. I’m related to a doctor, and he has lots of doctor friends, and they’re just whatever.
Anyhow, don’t go with a dumb woman who plays games and follows around any guy in “America’s Next Alpha.” Or maybe you’re into dumb women, I dunno. Anyway, everyone has a type.
I’m very tall, and I never had a problem with smaller men, but I didn’t have many smaller men take an interest in me. My husband and I are almost exactly the same height, I think he’s just a tad taller, but it seriously doesn’t matter to me.
I don’t think I ever had a list of physical criteria for a man. I’m sorry about your negative experience. I honestly got tired of the whole Christian singles’ dating scene, I personally don’t think it’s any easier for women than men, and met my husband at church (a church that had very few singles in my age group and no singles’ group for us) when I was 34 and not really “doing” anything to meet men other than sharing my heart with God about it.
NameUnknown should go for tall girls.
Oh man, Susan. I know Christian singles whatever is not worth the investment. It’s basically Hunger Games. It’s ridiculous.
Red its easy for you to say “don’t go with a dumb woman.” The woman I have been seeing isn’t a dumb woman. She is educated and she is involved with Bible studies among her women’s group. Yesterday she told me that she feels that we are in the friend zone. I didn’t escalate physically because she told me she likes to take things slow on our second date. I guess you can never trust a woman’s advice and I slipped back into blue pill mentality. Surprised older women can still behave immaturely.
Most men like myself don’t have women flaunting over us like men chasing women. Mind you I am a 5’7, ethnic guy and slightly balding. I have pretty broad categories on the types of women I like whether shorter or taller than me. I am also open to all ethnic groups as long as she is a good Christian woman and somewhat attractive (not saying she has to be a super model). Most taller women want taller men though, you two are in the minorities that are/were open to dating shorter men. Last girlfriend was same height as I am and told me once that I was physically unattractive when we first met considering the fact that she wasn’t that good looking herself. Mind you this lady is Christian too and is also active in ministry.
I’ll keep trying for other Christian women but from my experiences there are better non-Christian women out there than Christian women.
I don’t understand your mentality…
So, you thought you should have physically escalated on the second date. For what, sex? Sexual favors? What would be your goal with that?
I’m a pretty boring date, because I don’t go past hand-holding/ hugging-type stuff. I think of it as getting to know the person. If I don’t know much about the guy I’m seeing, I’m not going to let him control me in that way.
Consider that the older woman you’re dating is older and single. Maybe remind her. :P
Nobody knows how to date in Church. Either that, or they know too well. Your last girlfriend probably thought she was being some kind of siren by saying that. Most women don’t know that the downer remarks they give to guys about their looks, etc. are actually offensive. We just don’t make that connect. For some reason, women think it’s sexy to bring up men’s flaws, no matter what. I think it’s better that there be a line drawn: neg gently. Who wants to be told that they’re dumb and ugly? Yet, that’s what women do.
Although, there’s some truth to that. Women aren’t physically attracted to 90% > of men right off the bat. Men are weird-looking. I think that’s why guys usually do the approaching.
Oh, and you’re right: it’s way more difficult for short men. Everything. Just be thankful you’re not shorter. 5’7″ is still capable of meeting someone. Also, being ethnic generally doesn’t help. I guess the best thing you can do is act like a really white guy. I hate saying that, and it sounds racist, but there’s such a white-guy bias in dating, it’s ridiculous.
Why do you want to be with any woman who tells you that you’re “friend-zone material”? That’s extremely insulting.
A white-guy bias? Really? I know so many mixed-race couples here where I live, in a big city in the Midwestern U.S. NameUnknown, if there’s a lot of racism where you live, you might want to look into some other locations. As far as your better experience with non-Christian women, or women you meet outside the church — maybe there’s something to that.
My husband and I were actually in a fundamentalist Christian church when we met and married, but a lot of our beliefs and perceptions have changed since our girls were born. We are now part of a Unitarian Universalist church, and it’s honestly been a wonderful place to get to know people.
One of my friends who grew up in this U.U. church said that when she was a teenager here, there were some guys who joined the youth group simply because they’d assumed that with no teaching about fornication being a sin, the girls would all be easy, and they were surprised to learn that the complete opposite was true. When given the freedom to determine when they were ready to become sexually active, along with really comprehensive sexual instruction through the church, their response was to take their time and not rush into anything they didn’t feel comfortable with.
It also just seems like there’s much more of an atmosphere of acceptance of people who don’t fit any mold — guys who aren’t alpha and aren’t trying to be, for example. The “friend-zone” relationships are actually highly-valued — not just a designation for someone you’re trying to let down lightly. Of course, we’re also welcoming towards those with differing gender and sexual orientations, so if you’re not tolerant in that area, it wouldn’t be the place for you.
But this is actually one thing I really love about being here — the acceptance of every personality. I think being open towards gays also makes us open to the wide range of different ways that each of us can be a man or be a woman. I think it’s harder for people in the fundamentalist church to be so accepting of a man who may be very gentle and soft-spoken, or of a woman who may be very assertive and direct, because fundamentalism tends to have somewhat limited ideas regarding what’s “manly” and what’s “womanly.”
There are very few of us who completely fit those ideals, and yet we were created by God, too. At any rate, I hope you can find a place where you feel loved and appreciated for who you are.
What I mean by escalation is holding hands or kissing, not sexual escalation as sex is for marriage.
5’7 is somewhat manageable.
I pretty much ignored what my last gf said and let the relationship continue. This new girl that friend zoned me I told her I would contact her today which I did and she never answered phone or called back. Its ridiculous after 7-8 dates she behaves this way. At least break it off on 3rd/4th date.
I’ve been living in the west since early childhood so I don’t act ethnic nor can I barely speak my ethnic languages.
Name Unknown, I’m sorry to hear that happened, but it might not mean you were too blue pill or not physical enough. Maybe she just didn’t feel you were the right person…and avoiding calls l think is tempting for anyone who wants to end things but doesn’t like conflict or confrontation.
Name Unknown–
It sounds like what you need is game. Christian game, of course. If she’s older, you should have gone to the supermarket, looked at some cartons of eggs, and said, hey, these eggs are near their sell by date. Maybe I shouldn’t buy them….
Pause. Meaningful glance.
But we’ll discuss my autobiography later…
Plus, there’s a foolproof method for determining your position in the friendzone after 7-8 dates. Give her a smooch. (PG-rated. We are good believers here!) If she resists, find another girl. If she likes it, you’re in. As Aunt Haley says, girls want guys to put the moves on them.
Hey, Susan! White guy bias does exist, whether or not we want it to. It was one of those things OkCupid discovered whilst moving through their statistics. There are a few more hurdles for an ethnic guy. But there’s usually someone who really likes the look.
Name Unknown, that usually happens to me when I date. And I’m a reasonably-attractive young woman. I think some people see it as a competition to be the ultimate dater/ score the ultimate partner. I see it as a means to an end, the end being a good marriage. I remember finding the thrill of leading people on/ chasing to be entertaining in high school. After that, it started to feel like a chore. But so many people are still really into that. I don’t get it.
What I never understood about that Rodger guy was if he wanted sex and love so badly, then why was he determined to die before he experienced them? I myself am a virgin who’s never had a relationship, and I’m several years than he was. However, I’m still not ready to die in this alone state, and I certainly wouldn’t want to do anything to hasten death.
That’s because he had depression. I tend to not judge.
Nobody take advice from “Uncle Badass”. Would you take advice from shriveled-up prunes?
Pause. Even more meaningful glancier glance.
Everybody gets depressed, but I DO judge the ones who take lives because of it.
True. I just noticed that. I only hate it when people judge suicide victims with the whole, “Well, ya don’t see me killing myself!” mentality.
We met today and had a discussion. She will let me know tomorrow if she wants to continue. Most likely not though. She is probably optimizing her hypergamous selection. http://therationalmale.com/2012/05/16/hypergamy-doesnt-care/
Its definitely tough on me but I realize I can overcome it once I let go of male mother need
Oneitis is a dangerous thing for men because most modern women have no sense of loyalty at all as they have plenty of options.
I am always reminded by StarDusk’s classic video “Coming to Terms with Reality”
This is so weird! I know I’m old, but it was actually common when I was a young twenty-something back in the 80’s for some girls to be in a big, big hurry to get that ring on their finger and have it settled. They tended to be in a much bigger hurry than their boyfriends were to tie the knot. I understand the hypergamous tendency, but there’s also still a strong desire for security, isn’t there?
Only certain women have so many options.
“Jack, at what point would you consider that a man had been intimate with too many women to be qualified to advise men or women on the way things ought to be done?”
In my view, no man should ever take advice from any woman about intersexual relationships. It’s not a matter of qualification, it’s a matter of perspective — any woman will give feminine-centric advice regardless of who she is giving it to. A woman will advise a man to “just be himself” and “be nice”, because those are the attributes she wants from attractive men. A woman will never, ever tell a man what he actually needs to hear, like “be more attractive” or “lose weight, you fatass” or “stop being such a whiny pu**y” and what not. Not even his own mother will do this for him, because she DOESN’T KNOW that he needs to hear this.
@ NameUnknown:
“The woman I have been seeing isn’t a dumb woman. She is educated and she is involved with Bible studies among her women’s group. Yesterday she told me that she feels that we are in the friend zone. I didn’t escalate physically because she told me she likes to take things slow on our second date.”
Most of the time you’re in the friendzone and she doesn’t say it. She has out and out told you she’s friendzoned you.
It’s going nowhere with this woman. Dump her now. Do not spend one more dime or minute on her.
NameUnknown:
“We met today and had a discussion. She will let me know tomorrow if she wants to continue. Most likely not though. She is probably optimizing her hypergamous selection”
If you hear from her tomorrow, she will dump you. Do yourself a favor: put this woman out of your mind now. As in this minute. Dump her, because this is going exactly NOWHERE. You’re now negotiating with her for her attraction and desire. Don’t. You can’t. It’s an impossibility.
If she calls, don’t answer. If she texts, delete them and don’t respond. Don’t call her, don’t text her, and for the love of Pete, do not see her.
ThatSusan:
“I know I’m old, but it was actually common when I was a young twenty-something back in the 80’s for some girls to be in a big, big hurry to get that ring on their finger and have it settled. They tended to be in a much bigger hurry than their boyfriends were to tie the knot. I understand the hypergamous tendency, but there’s also still a strong desire for security, isn’t there?”
Not so much for security. Most women have their own jobs and their own money. Women are constantly screaming from the rooftops that they don’t need men – they don’t need a man’s money, or strength, or time, or resources, or anything else. Women are providing their own security in the form of their own jobs, money, and resources. Women have also seen to it that they have elected politicians to pass laws to give them security in the form of Daddy Government which provides them with services, safety nets, physical safety in the form of police and other men with guns, and anything else they need.
Women do still want security. They just don’t want it from marriageable men. They want it from government and from their own jobs; so they date and have sex with the good looking men; and they can avoid the not so good looking men.
I’m sure there are some young women like the ones you describe, but I also know quite a few young women in my circle (I married late, so I’m one of the older moms in our local homeschooling group) who are very happy to be stay-at-home moms. And conservative Christians actually don’t have a corner on valuing one parent being at home with the kids, and homeschooling if they feel it’s the best form of education for their kids. I’m part of a secular homeschooling group in which born-again Christians are welcome but are not the majority. Most of the families there have either one full-time stay-at-home parent, or arrangements were the parents work opposite schedules so that one is always with the kids, or almost always, so that the need for outside caregivers is minimal.
Deti, that’s a lie. I would certainly tell a man to stop being a pussy. I make it a point to be as objective as possible.
However, anyone would most likely answer, “I’m not being a pussy, you’re bad!” Well, that’s been my experience. Men like women to lead them on, not be straight with them. They any homely piece of shit with a falsetto voice who dates Jesus. No matter what they say. But, yeah he should end it.
He has a 0% chance of “winning” if he continues.
REd:
You’re silly. First, you being an exception only proves the rule: most women will never give men good advice on intersexual relationships. And I don’t believe for one second that you’ve ever told a man to man up or that you’ve been objective. That’s trolling.
Men do not like being led on or lied to. Your saying that is pure trolling. I do agree, though, that most Christian men are so hard up, so beaten down, so demoralized in the dating scene, that they’ll date pretty much anything that is willing to give them any attention. Sad, really.
Thanks Deti, I remember reading your post “Good Christian Men Think Twice”.
Unfortunately I slipped into the blue pill but re-embracing the red pill.
I tried to lead this woman such as planning dates and we talked serious topics about relationships. We could hardly do any outdoor activities because she is such an independent woman that plays a lot of sports so at most we could have dinner once a week and perhaps the occasional walk. I was always attempting to initiate conversation. I paid for all the main course meals, sometimes she would pitch in for ice cream/gelato. I am not a sports guy as I like to read a lot but I do go out, travel and have fun. I try calling her but she usually responds by text. I hate texting.
I hate being led on. I am putting my time, effort, love and money into a relationship that I hope would lead into marriage. I also acted chivalrous by holding doors for her, walking her to her car. I am looking for that Proverbs 31 woman, but she simply does not exist in the modern world. I am young man at 28 and the woman is 35 and of a different ethnicity. I do know my career, family and other goals. I would agree that I have been pretty demoralized, this is the second woman I was dating in my life.
1. You shouldn’t make generalizations about people you don’t know. Plus, you suck at making character judgements. You’re supposed to go on pieces of observable, conclusive evidence collected over a period of time, not jump on your hunches, dear Watson. You seem like an 18-year-old manboy, but I can’t know that for sure, so I’ll bite my tongue.
2. I’m only going from my own exasperated experience.
3. Christian men tend to chase minxes and have double-standards about sex. They’re not as Holy as they’d like to believe themselves. I don’t know what Church of Perfection you attend.
I’ve been interested in guys within my league. My interest encourages them to do better than me. They do better, or at least, different, because statistically, they can: women outnumber men in the church 3 to 2, and virgins females generally outnumber virgin males 3 to 2. Where are all these wonderful young men standing around?
There probably born-again virgins if they exist at all. This means that they knowingly go around getting sexual favors to make their testimony sound cooler when they finally find Jesus and settle-down. This is why women don’t want to get married. However, I’ve come to consider myself agnostic since you’ve provided the one useful bit of feedback on my looks, after someone else already rated them.
I’m trying to think of the good, Christian men that have shown interest in me: 6. Two were bipolar, lead other women on, and interfered with my life when I rejected their douchey butts. One macked on me while he had a girlfriend, whom he was very physical with in front of me, and soon went on to worship the flying spaghetti monster. One was attractive, but drank and did drugs and was Catholic, and I was a Protestant. One was a 4 and a “friend”, and tried to make it look like I was chasing him on facebook, when I only wanted to talk politics. Four of those guys could adequately be described as “frail”. Two of them were shorter than me. The one guy who seemed decent-ish was both shorter and smaller and into the whole Rob Bell thing.
I’ve recently tried approaching guys online, and have been nuked by the few guys that I’ve approached on forums. I’m too shy in real life, and no one shares both my beliefs and my views on sex, so I might just throw-in the towel.
4. There’s nothing that I’m saying that could be counted as trolling, and that’s an inappropriate way to paint someone who merely happens to disagree with you. I’ve never called you a troll. I tend to think you’re a bit naive, based on some conversations that we’ve had on here.
I actually don’t know why I wrote that long post. Deti just said that women can’t give romantic advice, name-called, etc., because that made his advice look better by comparison. But all he did was dick-ride my comments.
“However, I’ve come to consider myself agnostic since you’ve provided the one useful bit of feedback on my looks, after someone else already rated them.”
Huh? I’m sure there’s some context here of which I’m not aware, but I still don’t understand how the first part of this sentence goes with the last part. Are you saying you don’t have any particular belief in God anymore. Moreover, is this due to your looks, or did these things just coincide?
I just gave the disclaimer that I was agnostic, so that there wasn’t any confusion. I don’t want to pretend that I’m something that I’m not. Deti really only addressed me personally to rate my looks, along with another guy, so that’s how it tied in.
They said I was a seven on here, which is supposed to be pretty good, so I don’t know. Everyone just seems really competitive. It felt like I drew people who I was not attracted to and repelled people who I was attracted to. It seems like something that you win more by catching the uncatchable, rather than by going, “So and so has blank, blank, and blank qualities, is about my league, and seems interested, so let’s give it a shot.”
I’m saying that I have no particular belief in God anymore, but not that it has anything to do with any of these scenarios. I guess the whole thing always just baffled me. It will probably be more difficult for me to meet someone who shares my beliefs, though. And it’s actually much, much more difficult being agnostic than belonging to a faith or atheism. Which surprised me, because I was always told that Christianity was difficult. There are no meet-ups or networking for agnostics. There’s one forum with a few people on it, and that’s it. And among agnostics, there are very many differing beliefs. So, I didn’t quit Christianity to find a man, but I’d feel bad returning to it just to network. I could very easily decide to become a shallow GCB and catch a prize, but I’d rather be at peace knowing that my beliefs and actions were reconciled.
I do not understand the question asked by Susan.
Also, Susan should look up and read “Sexual Utopia in Power” by F. Roger Devlin if she wants to understand what the manosphere is about.
I’ve made all my points a thousand times. I feel no need to explain or defend them. My mission is to get as many men as possible to avoid marriage, and to never give any woman any help, attention, assistance, or services unless she is a girlfriend, wife, relative, or very close personal friend.
You ladies can wear yourselves out trying to talk me out of it, but you won’t. So save your energy. If you really care about men, start some self-examination of your gender and start looking for opportunities to repent instead of trying to weasel out of the sinful way women have treated men in this generation.
Spare me any nonsense about patriarchy, etc. Spare me the nonsense about men “oppressing” women, which is nothing more than historical revisionism.
Instead, start repenting and apologizing for what you hare perpetrated against men. And don’t try to but-but-but about what “men have done”.
Your self-humbling and repentance need not trouble itself with the imagined wrongs men have committed. Humility is good for the soul – and humility is something that the average american woman has become a stranger to.
Women in the US are stubbornly insistent on smoke-screening their egregious sins with endless reference to the most minor of male transgressions.
Get humble – it will heal your souls, your relationships, and your marriages.
As for me, I will be studiously avoiding the womenfolk, since I do not trust them. I doubt you will miss me.
Are you doing okay, Jack? What do you mean by “I doubt you will miss me?”
Avoiding the womenfolk. Not providing attention, assistance or support.
If you read the last two sentences of my post, I am simply restating what I said earlier – my “guy door” has a sign on it that says “girlfriends only”.
I think that men have made a very bad strategic mistake in creating a society where it is so easy to get friend-zoned. A friend-zoned man basically gives all the valuable boyfriend services to a girl, while receiving none of the reciprocal affection or intimacy. This allows women to avoid commitment, because so many of their needs are being met.
If the only way a woman could get male assistance, emotional support, and attention was to be in a serious relationship (or marriage), then the men that are available to them would look like a better deal (beta or not, here they come).
As it is, women can get the sexual attraction itch scratched by the willing alpha males, and get the comfort and provision needs met by the willing beta orbiters.
Hey, I used to be guilty of this too, until Roissy finally set me straight, and set me free.
Let me give you a case in point. I happen to be very accomplished at a certain activity, to the point where people seek me out for coaching on that thing. A while back, I was chatting with a girl at work, and during the course of our conversation, she indicated a strong interest in learning the activity I am involved in, hinting strongly that she would like me to teach her. In the old days, I would see this as an opportunity to get to know someone, and would have invited her. As it is, I just played dumb (no jokes, plz) and let the moment pass. Turns out later, I hear she has a boyfriend.
Almost played the sucker again.
I am not going to spend my time, energy, and resources expanding the world of some other guy’s girlfriend. I’m tired of giving new experiences and skills to women who were basically just flirting with me to get something. If the guy you’re with can’t get you something, get it yourself, or do without it. But don’t go scam resources from another man, that you do not want.
Now, I am smart enough to understand that it may be almost subconscious – that girls turn on the charm to win men over, possibly without even realizing they are doing it. But that does not change the pain men like me feel when we find out that we were only getting chatted up so that we would provide a free resource.
Even as a Christian, I have a very hard time not agreeing with the modern man’s requirement that the girl place some sexual down payments early in the relationship to prove she likes them. Because displaying Christian virtue is the opposite of exuding a sexy bad-boy vibe.
I feel like I have been strip-mined repeatedly by possibly well-meaning but unintentionally selfish women, who just somehow naively think that all men are placed on this earth to be dispensers of goods and services, but she is required only to reciprocate to those men who are hunky, sexy, bad boys.
“Pastor” mark driscoll likes to thunder “HOW DARE YOU” to the men who are ‘test driving’ their girlfriends sexually without a commitment/marriage.
Where is the pastor for the men who will be willing to call the women to account for test driving the emotional support and provisioning from their beta orbiters?
I’ll even soften the message – How could you?
The women are on their own – I will not lift a finger to help them. Jerky boyfriend dumped you? Here’s a tissue, now get lost. Or go get drunk. Lonely? Too bad, so sad. Try netflix.
Want to learn a new sport or activity? Get out your checkbook and go do it. Learn it yourself, the way I did, with no one else’s assistance. Need a sofa moved? Call your selfie-taking girlfriends. None of them has a truck? Rent one. Need your car fixed? Call a tow truck. Need picking up at the airport? Call a cab.
You may not believe this, Red, but it hurts a bit to write those last few lines, because I am a giver by nature. And all my life I have over-given, and the cupboard is now bare. The women who took from me often disappeared even as friends later on, which proves that “Let’s just be friends” is really not the goal. The goal of LJBF is to keep a man on the hook until his services are no longer required. Then, she’ll fade away.
I have no choice but to preempt this misuse of my good nature by no longer offering it.
But there will always be another man to take my place, because the alpha-male chasing modern women have left many men so thirsty for female attention, that many will still accept the meager portion of LJBF status.
I suppose the women should be congratulated for engineering a system that gives them such asymmetrical benefits: Sex with only the men of your choosing, but receiving support and assistance, and even tax money (thug-loving single moms and their illegitimate kids).
Hey, the gals won -congrats. But don’t blame the guys who decide to quit the rigged game, and take their ball(s) and go home.
Without going back to double-check, I think you’re referring to a question I asked in response to your question. I think you were the one who asked Haley how many men a woman could have sex with before she was no longer qualified to give advice, and I countered by asking how many women a man could have sex before he was no longer qualified to give advice.
I agree that neither of our questions made any real sense. The fact that my question made no sense actually highlights the fact that yours didn’t either. Sexually experienced people are just as qualified as sexually inexperienced people to give advice on everything — with the possible exception of how to avoid becoming sexually experienced. And yet, some sexually experienced people HAVE had some good insights to share about what how to avoid ending up in situations you don’t want to be in. With this in mind, I think it’s okay for sexually experienced people to give advice. I know I’m not Haley, so this is just my two cents worth.
Susan- my questions always make sense. I found the question you are referring to, and will answer it below.
Susan asked about this question:
“How many men does a churchian girl have to be, um, ‘intimate’ with before she is no longer qualified to lecture Christian men on holiness and the evils of bitterness?”
First, it is not about giving advice, it is about lecturing on bitterness.
Let me clarify this for you, Susan, by an example:
Suppose a man spends several years cheating on his wife. Then suppose he repents and they reconcile.
This man IS able to talk about how bad cheating is, and how no one should do it, and how destructive it is.
However, should he also be lecturing his wife on getting over her bitter feelings about the affairs he had? I think that would be inappropriate. If he is the one who caused all the damage, he should be more concerned with managing his own repentance. His sin of cheating is the far more destructive sin, and had he not been a cheating cad, his wife may not have developed bitter feelings that she needs to overcome.
He CAN AND SHOULD try to help her over those feelings of bitterness, but he should do it from a place of humility, because he is the perpetrator.
Example two, just to drive the point home:
Suppose a man spends all the family income on things for himself. Selfishly buying a new truck, motorcycle, fishing gear, etc. Meanwhile, he tell the wife and kids that they can make do with their old things.
Then, suppose he repents of his selfishness.
Is he in a position to deliver lectures to them on how materialistic and jealous they are of his nice things?
“See honey, you were making an idol out of that new refrigerator you wanted, or that pair of shoes. Aren’t you glad that we are over that?
Of course you see the absolute nerve of someone causing damage, then lecturing the wounded party about “hard feelings”.
Now, to the question:
If you can find me a Christian virgin who has dutifully stayed away from bad boys and unsaved men, I will allow her FULL authority to say that we must not be bitter.
If you can find me a Christian girl who has made a COUPLE mistakes with the wrong kind of men, but has repented and decided that she will either marry a Christian or remain single, then I allow her NEARLY full authority to warn against bitterness.
Now, find me a Christian girl who has made repeated “mistakes” (I call them “decisions”), and who has always ignored the good men because ‘nice guys are boring’, and whose heart just goes all aflutter for fornicating with unsaved men, well:
She is free to talk about the damage that promiscuity causes. She is free to talk about how no one should act as she did.
But she has forever lost the moral high ground to lecture all the men she ignored about their “bitter attitudes”, since she is the spiritual offender who participated in creating the damage in the first place. The question was how many “mistakes” is a person allowed before they have to refrain for preaching to the wounded party? One? Two? Ten?
Note again, I specifically did not include Haley in this, so it was not an accusation – it was merely pointing out that there are lots of women who have lost the right to complain about the male bitterness that they themselves caused.
—————————————————————————————————-
Consider how wrong the following statements sound:
When you commit offenses, you lose the right to lecture the party wounded by your actions:
Said the burglar:
“you burglary victims need to get over your bitterness”
Said the drunk driver:
“holding onto bitterness over your dead loved ones is helping no one”
Said the embezzler:
“your materialism and love for money is the reason why you’re still upset that I stole from you”
Said the domestic abuser:
“your unforgiving and bitter heart is the reason we are not reconciling – your wounds have healed, why don’t you forgive me?”
Back in my college days, I was doing really well in a course — I think it was an anthropology course — and the good-looking guy who was sitting next to me asked if we could get together between classes so he could copy my notes. The teacher spoke so rapidly that he found it hard to keep up. And since my notes were legible only to me, he couldn’t copy them without me taking the time to read most of them to him.
I was a little disappointed that he never asked me out. Then one day after the semester ended, I went out to eat with a friend and saw him there with another girl from the same class who’d been struggling even worse than he was. I felt a little miffed — but honestly, he’d never flirted or pretended to have any romantic interest in me, and it frankly would have been a lot more hurtful if he’d started a dating relationship with me just to get through the semester.
And truth be told, I’d have been happy to help him, and his girlfriend, too, even if I’d known form the beginning that there was no romance in it for me, simply because I find it rewarding to help people, and to see someone who’s struggling in an area finally achieve success.
What this and some other experiences of occasionally feeling used have taught me is to ONLY help in situations where I’m happy to help just for the joy of helping. If the request is too draining — if it will take away from the time and energy I have for the things that are important to me in life, then it’s okay to say no, I’m sorry but I can’t do that, or if I help, to set clear limits on the extent to which I can be available to the other person.
And how would you have felt if he had flirted with you, maybe went on a couple fake dates, and led you to believe he was interested, only to vanish once he got what he wanted?
If they’d just been “fake dates” with no physical intimacy — a little worse but not really harmed. But if the dates had included physical intimacy, I would have been very angry.
And I actually have encountered some men who get a kick out of flirting with women they have no interest in just to feed their own egos, and walk away as soon as the woman makes it obvious that she’s interested in them. I’m sure there are women who do this as well. Experiences like this taught me to be more cautious and not just assume that every guy who “acted” like he was attracted to me really was, but they didn’t teach me to assume that most or all men were like this.
Okay, well then understand that physical intimacy is the other side of the coin for male provisioning and emotional support.
Think of it this way – suppose an attractive woman approached a guy and said “I just want to use you for sex, but no relationship.” Lots of guys would have no problem with that. It is almost impossible to “use” a guy for sex, because that is what we want most immediately out of relationships.
But the internet is riddled with stories about guys getting used for “guy services”, only to be friend zoned afterward. Also, by providing these services to women, we further encourage them to marry later, since even if they are not promiscuous, they are still getting social and support needs met.
If the only way a guy would do anything for you would be to marry him, the “average guy” would look a lot more attractive.
As it is, men have become “support sluts” by freely giving away help and attention in hopes of eventually winning a relationship. This is no different that a female slut who gives away sex in the hopes of winning a relationship.
As a Christian, I cannot truly support premarital sex. However, the situation in our society now is such that a Christian man can count on possibly being celibate until his 30s while he waits for his future wife to get done with college, career, and a period of trying to turn sexy bad boys into a Christian husband.
Even if she remains a virgin, he still has to limp along as one of her “lets just be friends” until she finally wakes up and decides to “settle” for him. It’s a raw deal for the Christian man, and a sweet deal for the secular men, at least those secular men who have the ability to feast on the supply of willing females.
A very well known case from the manosphere was the guy who spent many years having sex with lots of attractive women, and still managed to marry the church virgin, who is utterly devoted to him.
Now there is a win!
Now think of all the women who tried to lock him down and failed. They have to either try and win over another top-level guy, or else they have to “settle” for a lesser man whom they will always resent. And that lesser man has to spend the rest of his marriage knowing that there was another man who really revved her engine, and that he is a consolation prize.
Most men become more valuable as they age. They become more successful, more respected in their careers, and more established and dominant in their fields of work.
Women get old, although wiser. But if I didn’t get to play with the kitten, I really don’t want to buy the aging cat. No man wants to marry a 40 year old woman and imagine what she looked like at 20, when she was giving herself freely to other men, even as he deals with her rapidly aging looks. So the other men got the 20 year old cutie for free, and hubby buys the leftovers til-death-do-us-part. Hint – there is no such thing as a hot 60 year old woman.
That is a cruel truth of male preference. And women who squander their youth in the alpha male casino instead of investing in the beta male business have no one to blame but themselves for being alone. I will not bail a woman out from her choices.
I think Susan’s point was that not all women do this. So yes, it’s a problem, she’s just objecting to the idea that all Christian women over 25 or 30 have a past with more attractive men. Also, it’s important for men to have a physical relationship with their wives, so it is really cruel for women to reject someone they find unattractive?
Hana-
First, your use of the statement “not all women do this” is tiring. There is even an abbreviation: NAWALT, which stands for “not all women are like that”.
The problem is that are you really silly enough to assume that ANYONE said “all women”?
Unless you can prove that, I think you should retract your statement.
The “not all women” defense is nothing more than a tactic to say “well, since not all women do that, we don’t have a problem”.
Thanks, though, for proving that “all women” DO use the “not all women” tactic – all the time.
If you’re going to engage men in this debate, you need to avoid using shopworn cliches like the “not all women” defense.
Women who use it either
a) think men are dumb enough to fall for it
b) trying to pull a fast one
or
c) actually dumb themselves.
So please leave the NAWALT argument behind.
Suppose when women complained about domestic violence, I simply waved it away, saying “not allllll men are violent, so there is no problem.”
In fact, that is how I will handle any female complaint in the future – “not all men do that”. So, no problem.
With regard to rejection, sure go ahead and reject any guy that does not instantly give you butterflies in your tummy. However, realize that when Christian women reject good men, and then turn around and gleefully fornicate with unsaved men, the good men are going to start asking what is the point of being righteous, when the unsaved men are getting first crack (heh) at their women.
Actions have consequences, and the Christian women have accrued a massive amount of distrust to their account, and rightfully so.
Did you mean to say, “SOME Christian women have accrued a massive amount of distrust to their account, and rightfully so?” Because when you said, “THE Christian women,” it did indeed come off like you were lumping all Christian women together. Since you’re so sick of hearing the NAWALT argument, maybe you should stop speaking as if you think ACWALT.
Jack it just comes across like you’re talking about all women you personally have ever met, so that is hard for me to believe. Yes, I do think a lot of women chase attractive men and are friendly to the men they don’t want to date, but when it comes across as though this is all you’ve ever experienced in your life, it’s harder to take seriously. Aren’t there some women you haven’t been interested in, too? Aren’t there a few women who rejected you without being rude about it?
Also, something else…men do become more attractive with age…so who’s to say that the 30 year-old woman is ‘settling’ for the beta? Maybe he became more attractive between 20 and 30. It’s possible…
I agree, Hana — but I think most men in the manosphere feel like they’d be “settling” if they married a 30-year-old woman. Even if they’re 30 themselves, they feel like a woman that age is past her prime and that she’s deprived her husband of her best years. But thankfully, that’s just the manosphere — NAMALT. I got married at 35, and I feel like my best years are happing NOW, whenever now is.
Susan-
I think you are still new enough to the manosphere that you have not developed an accurate picture of the typical man’s viewpoint.
If my wife had spent her years up until age 30 being a celibate, or being a missionary, or whatever, then her “most attractive years” were given to the Lord, and I would not feel deprived.
However, if she had spent years 20-35 chasing bad men, giving those men free sex, and then picking me once she realizes that I am the best she can get, then I am not interested.
I just don’t want to marry a woman who has slept with half a dozen or more other men.
Sure, lots of women have not done that, but chaste Christian women are more rare than they once were, and they go quickly, and to the most attractive men (most attractive marriage minded men).
I have ALWAYS accepted that I would get a “plain jane”. So much so that I never even bothered to chase after the Church hotties that I had zero chance with. And so I learned to be attracted to those women which were of my league.
However, my experience is that most of them were also chasing the same high-level men that the hotties were dating. So, while they clamored around the top-level men, many guys like me were left by the wayside.
There were a handful of very overweight girls or extremely introverted women who were available, but they were not a good fit for me. These women would date anyone who even talked to them.
I watched a number of Christian girls go dateless for a long time, as they waited for their shot at the alpha males. They were not cute enough to get those guys, but they would rather have nothing than a guy who was at their own level.
And now, I will return the favor, since they are older, and nowhere near as cute as they once were. One girl I really used to like now has a horrible complexion, and looks much older than me, even though she is younger. Another is quite overweight, and looks like is permanently biting into a sour pickle.
I guess I got spared being hitched to one of these gals, they would certainly do nothing for my “male tingle” as it were.
Hana-
Yes, but often women have a series of “bad boy” sex partners when younger, who really give her the thrill. So there is still a sense of “settling” because good guys are not exciting or thrilling, but are stable.
The problem is that the women are giving their youngest and hottest years as a free gift to some men, then giving their husband the leftovers of their youth and innocence.
I don’t want my children getting kissed goodnight by a mouth that performed oral sex on a bunch of college boyfriends.
Also, the good Christian men once got to get married and have a meaningful marriage and yes – sex with their WIFE and did not have to wait until age thirty to get it.
You may not have any idea how harsh it is on a man to wait until age 30 to have sex. God did not design us to wait that long.
And it is all the more galling when the guy waits (which is much harsher), while his future wife is having a satisfying sex life with her “for the moment” college boyfriends.
You can criticize this male preference all you want, in fact I’ll even start the ball rolling for you in a second.
I have come to the conclusion that ALMOST all women have no sympathy for mens’ sexual needs, even when men try to fill that need in a Biblical marriage. To women, it is just a man ans his dirty, wicked dick doing the thinking, and it will probably do him some good to have 10 years of celibacy to “mature a bit”.
Meanwhile, future wifey, who has a soul as pure as the the driven snow can for forgiven for “accidentally” letting some guys seduce her into sex. Not her fault, the tummy butterflied made her do it!!
In the end, I have no real hope that more than a small percentage of you women will ever understand, mostly because you probably really don’t want to empathize with men because it would require you to give up some of your pet grievances.
So, I take my message to the men, and teach them to give nothing to women ever, unless they are a relative, girlfriend, wife, or VERY good friend.
Otherwise, the women are on their own. I regard women no differently than I do men. Except I trust men a little bit more.
Susan and Hana-
From a Christian site:
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2014/08/05/woman-who-had-sex-with-18-different-men-shocked-that-men-dont-want-to-marry-her/
This may explain some of the dynamics at work here, even though the girl is not Christian.
But Jack, not to be a broken record, but you mentioned before that you’ve slept around as well. You need to expect that other women “followed your example,” haha. You get what you put out, pun intended.
Like, where do you think all these extra women are going to come from? Good girls end up with good boys. So you get what’s left. Simple economics.
I’ve slept around? What gave you that idea? I never claimed that.
A woman tolerates her husband’s adultery for decades, perpetually defends him, and advances his ambitions at every turn. Sounds like an ideal manosphere wife, correct?
…..I’ve just described Hillary Clinton.
This was pure gold:
Why Christian Men Don’t Deserve Virgins:
http://www.returnofkings.com/9782/why-christian-men-dont-deserve-virgins
Jack, I thought you posted that your number was 20+ on here. If I’m wrong, I’ll admit it.
Shibboleth, you can buy me a non-alcoholic drink, this is my first time at a bar ever something, no homo, just in case.
Jack again, I doubt he actually hit it, and Old English should never be used to game. But he did make a good point. Absolutely nailed the Christian-betas that I’m acquainted with. They are so catty, they bring me to shame. In my area, the Christian guys have more facebook friends than the women. They all pedestalize the same woman. They talk behind other people’s backs about women. They’re like what happens when you pump a Real Houswife full of testosterone. Probably because they’ll be shunned if they date someone “unintentionally.”
“date” *rolls eyes*
Nope, not 20. I have made many sacrifices. My number could have been 60 if I took all the available opportunities I was given. (And only 5 of them were fat.)
With regard to the article, yes, they had sex. And actually, he married her. I heard this through another blogger I used to read, who knows the guy.
This, then, is the ultimate win – have all the fun you want, and still get the young, sweet girl. There has been skepticism about this article before, but it is 100% valid.
I will say this, however. It is her youth and accomplishments and personality that makes her such a catch. Not the virginity, exactly, although there is that statistic that says once a woman has been with two men, the chance of a successful marriage plummets.
The reason high-N women are unworthy of marriage is the “alpha widow” factor.
For example:
Imagine a 28 year old woman. Now, imagine the following, based on her N-count.
Slept with 1 guy: Long term beta boyfriend, and probably spent a lot of time being celibate.
Slept with 3 guys. A few long term boyfriends, mostly good guys, although an earlier one might have been an alpha “favorite mistake”.
Slept with 5 guys. That’s a new dick every two years since she was 18. Assuming she waited until 18. Probably at least one “bad boy” fling in there somewhere.
Slept with 8 guys. Getting close to one dick per year, counting from age 18. No way she waited until 18 either. Hubby will likely be her 10th or higher. Ask yourself if you really want this in a wife.
Slept with 12 guys. Started sexual activity very young. Probably does not count BJs in her total N. Definitely a few short-term flings in there somewhere. Alcohol involved in a few. 90% certain she is unmarriageable. Fixation on looks and status in men.
Slept with 20 guys. Incurable and unmarriageable. Fixated on a guy being “hot”. With each new notch on her bedpost, she requires a greater thrill to make it worth ratcheting up her N.
You know, Red, the one thing that many women who read the manosphere never understand is the nature of most mens’ feelings on this issue.
I would like to point out the difference between jealousy and envy.
The Lord refers to himself as a jealous God in Deuteronony. Is jealousy a sin? Obviously not, because God says he is jealous.
Think this way: Suppose you go to a party with your husband. Your husband, who has been distant and edgy from you all week is suddenly fun and engaging. Especially with some cute young women at the party. Is it okay to be jealous? Yes, because the attention and affection he owes you as his wife is being given as a gift to other women, not you.
What if you bought his receptionist a very nice birthday gift, but bought you something minimal?
Again, the attention he is paying to her belongs to you.
Now, lets look at the envy side. Suppose you, as stated above, go to a party with your husband, and some other couple is there, and that other woman’s husband is fun and engaging, while yours is quiet and reserved. Suppose her husband is rich, and yours is not.
THIS is envy, the coveting of things that are not rightfully yours.
The same would be true if your husband bought you a basic birthday gift and your best friend’s husband bought her something lavish. Now it is envy.
What has this to do with guys like me?
I do not envy the guys who are tall, good looking and charismatic, who have lots of female options. I do not envy that many men have essentially had a buffet of attractive women sleep with them.
However, I do not want to get my portion and find out that some other man has been there first.
Think Bathsheba. Uriah had his one little woman, and King David had an “all you can eat” King’s portion of women. Yet, Uriah was denied the joy of having his own little piece of female loyalty to himself.
[Side note: I think Uriah knew what was up, and the reason he didn’t go home was because he was not going to give David the cover he needed. People were smart in those days too.]
Anyway, it used to be that a man could have his one demure, devoted wife, who might be plain but was his and his alone.
Now, he has to share her heart with the bad boy heartbreakers she lusted for in college. It’s like going to a banquet and finding out that someone came before you and took a bite of every plate of food in the house.
I am resolute – I will not allow a woman to sell me the leftovers of her youth and virtue, and chastise me by calling me jealous or insecure. If she was offering up herself in her 20s, I’m not paying full price (marriage) for the higher mileage version of her in her 30s or 40s.
The day may come where I turn my back on Christian sexual morals, and that day may be coming soon. If it comes, I will then have no reason ever to get married. It will certainly solve the female intimacy problem for me, while not requiring me to bind myself permanently to and aging woman whose hottest and most enthusiastic years were given to other men.
I mean, what do I want with a 50 year old? Eww. It would be different if we built a life together, because I would know that she gave me her best (read: youngest and thinnest). And wife goggles are real, I hear tell.
So, ladies, go ahead and crank up the shaming language, I’ve heard it all before. Insecure, unforgiving, petty, etc.
But just realize that unless you have remained VERY chaste all your years, you are defrauding your future husband out of being first in your heart (and elsewhere).
Jack, I’m not a hypocrite, no worries. If you haven’t done *anything*, I can see why you don’t want to be with a woman who has. Don’t settle.
Ew, I can’t believe she married him. And after he posted that article. She sounds like an idiot, not a catch.
If you want to read something completely fragmented and stupid, read “thereinventionofman.” It probably makes sense if you’re high.
I’m sure glad that that not all men look at 50-year-old women and go “eww.” And feel like their wives’ best years are past and now they’re just sticking with them because of the memories. To live the greater portion of your life just rehashing old memories, no matter how hot or whatever, is simply no way to live, in my opinion. There’s a lot of life after 50.
Susan – yes there is.
But imagine how a man feels when he waits 20+ years to marry, and knowing that his wife has been sexually active during her most attractive years.
It is an unfortunate fact that men strongly prefer youthful appearance in women, but it is how we are wired.
Look at it this way, I’m 5’6″. I have a much more limited dating pool than a guy who is 6′. That is a sad fact of life. I have had to listen to women I was interested in making offhand comments about how short men are just not on their radar at all. Even from women 4″ shorter than ME.
Here is the good news: Every woman gets to be young, but not every man gets to be tall.
Susan, like I said before, you seem like a nice person and I don’t want to pick on you. But you don’t really understand men. This is how we are, how we’re wired, and it is plainly evident to anyone who is willing to look honestly at the world around them. The idea of marrying a women who is right on the verge of starting to look like a grandmother is very unappealing to 95% of men.
What this means is that I get her “golden years”, including the degradation of her looks and health, and the fun of menopause, whereas other men got to enjoy the younger, prettier, thinner (90% of the time, unless she was a chubster), and more sexually innocent version of her.
At this point in my life, and old(er) woman has nothing to offer me. Companionship? I can get that WITHOUT marrying. There are lots of lonely older women who I can put in the friend zone. (Turnabout is fair play).
Sex? I’m a Christian, so I do not believe in sex outside of marriage. However, I know how to manage long periods of celibacy, so in that regard, I will be okay. Anyway, marrying a granny-to-be just to get some sex? The price of sex is too high, since I will not marry. If I was an unbeliever, I would have my pick of lonely older women who receive very little attention. It would be a banquet of options.
My money is my own except for the horrendous taxes used to pay welfare and other giveaways to low-quality women, my time is my own, and I answer to no one.
I never have to come home to an angry woman, or deal with female emotional issues.
Now, the flip side is that for these 20+ years, I have never come home to a loving wife, gone on vacation as a couple, had anyone to provide emotional support during some dark times I went through.
But, now that I am a self-made man, why should I allow someone to take part in the harvest that they never helped plant or tend? Why should some women who spent 20+ years sleeping with the wrong kind of men get to invest her time and affection in them, and then come and eat out of my vineyard?
No, let her go back to her partners in promiscuity and seek support from them. Not available? Then go it alone, ladies. I will not help you.
Would I consider a divorced or widowed woman, or a single woman who “claims” to have a VERY low N-count? Yes.
But only if they were young enough to still be attractive to me. And with no kid-drama or ex-husband drama. I’m not bringing any troubles, so why would I sign up for someone else’s?
I think that many in this generation will wind up like the disobedient children of Israel, who would not obey God, and were consigned to die in the desert. Forty years God provided them with food and water, but they never entered the promised land.
I sometimes wonder where my wife is right now. I mean, the woman who – in a saner society – would have skipped the college sex party and relentless career building and married me and had children. Maybe she married someone else. Maybe she is a divorced single mom somewhere.
I get a grim sense that justice is served every time I read an article or blog post of some woman crying about there being “no good men” anymore. Always, of course, after she spent a long time as a professional fornicator, and chaser of bad boys.
Where are the good men? Right where we’ve always been, from the day you first started ignoring us for not being exciting enough. Except now we are ignoring YOU, and letting you lie in the bed you made for yourselves.
Red-
Word is, they are very happy together.
She got her alpha male, because the Church does not have them anymore, except for a few top-tier pastors and “worship team” (gayest term every) leaders.
Christian women are no different – they want their alpha, and if they have to bend a few Christian principles, so be it.
And as I’ve said many times before, Christian women are usually the most picky, the most looks-fixated, the most height-fixated, and the most status-fixated.
The bulk of Christian girls are essentially idolators, in that they are looking for social justification through a man, that a spiritual justification through Christ.
Am I generalizing? Yes, but because it is generally true. I quit going to church because I was treated worse there than by the world.
Okay, 5’6″ is where it starts to get really difficult. Don’t feel bad about that, it’s universal that short men have it tougher. It’s stupid that short women are in to ridiculously tall men. Not to be crude, but that’s not even going to work, if ya know what I mean. I think they just say that to appear more in demand or something, because it’s not like I can date somebody who’s 5’3″ at my height. So, they take away my options, plus have the option of dating shorter men, thereby hyper-inflating their own values. If it weren’t for the modeling stigma, no one would marry tall girls, although, thankfully, I’m only moderately tall.
To be fair, if you’re a more mature guy, than say, your thirties, you’re not going to be more attractive as an older guy. The exceptions are Hugh Laurie, Liam Neeson, John Stamos, Will Smith, and Robert Downey Jr. Most guys start to look like shells of their former selves at age 40. A few men avoid this, but it’s like how only a few women are born beautiful: only a few men get to age well.
It’s funny, I have a relative who was easily an HB8 or more in her day. In fact, her image was used as an icon of the 1950s (incidentally, she’s not famous). She was about twenty years older than my mother, but people thought they were the same age. She’d been married several times, the last time being when she was nearly sixty to a widower of the same age. She’d struggled with her weight off and on during those years.
I guess what I’m trying to get at is that men were obviously very attracted to her, and it was very easy for her to meet them. If anything, I think she could be a bit impulsive at times, and could probably have done even better. So, there are attractive older women out there, even if this wasn’t the best example. Even when she was old and a little overweight, older men would flirt with her all the time. I’d say the market was in her favor, which is something, considering.
If you meet the right older woman, you’ll find her attractive. I think women will last longer if they don’t tan their faces off. This woman has a pretty face as well, and beautiful eyes. There’s probably a version of her out there who lost a husband or was only married once. This particular woman used to see shorter men. But then, a cute women who’s a little older isn’t going to be pursued by younger men, so you can cash-out there.
Jack, every time I start feeling empathy for what you’ve been through, you say something that shows your total lack of empathy for anyone going through a different kind of suffering than you. Everyone who draws any kind of government assistance is “low quality?” You don’t have to respond, I know all about the stereotypes, and I realize most middle or upper class folks have no idea that the vast majority of welfare recipients are working people.
Anyhow, I wanted to respond to what you said about men preferring younger women. I got to thinking about the difference between being invited to a party where there’s a lovely buffet of food spread out when you haven’t had a good meal in weeks and don’t know when you’ll have a chance to eat such good food again, as opposed to attending that same party when you’ve been eating well and aren’t gnawingly hungry, and have a well-stocked fridge at home.
If I went to a party like that when I was gnawingly hungry, my sole interest would be in the food, and in figuring out how to gorge myself without making it too obvious that that was ALL I cared about. And when I’m hungry I tend to gravitate towards “junk” with lots of empty carbs and fats. Whereas if I went on a reasonably full stomach, I’d still enjoy nibbling on the food but I’d also be very interested in the people. I’d probably still enjoy a little junk but I’d be more inclined to balance it out with some fresh veggies, too.
So I imagine that for a man who goes for long periods without any loving, intimate female companionship, your everyday life is kind of like that of the starving man at the buffet table. How can you relax enough to enjoy subtle flavors like broccoli when you’re starving and you don’t know when you’ll see another pan of barbeque ribs (or whatever’s most tempting to you personally)?
And I can certainly understand that for a man who really wants children and doesn’t have any yet, it’s only natural to feel more attracted to younger women who show every sign of high fertility, than to older women for whom the risk of problems are greater, or to women who appear so old as to most certainly be past it. On the other side of the coin, I have some different friends who’ve been happily married for years in spite of never having gotten to have children. One couple adopted in their forties, other couples have found other ways to build meaningful lives together.
A few years back, I met one childless couple who’d determined that it was their calling to adopt a teenager out of the foster care system, and be there for her for the long haul, and just keep the unconditional love coming her way until she reached the place where she realized that this time, it was real and was going to last, and felt secure enough to actually receive their love.
What it all boils down to is finding someone you can love, enjoy, and be happy with NOW (not just someone whose “memory” you can love while the living, breathing person is still right there next to you! I’d honestly be appalled if the only way my husband could stand to make love to me was by imagining what I used to look like when he first met me!) . And the fact is, if you decide that all the women your own age are just too physically “eww!” for you to get any pleasure being intimate with them, and manage to get with somebody younger, it’s just a matter of ten, fifteen, or twenty years before you think she’s “eww!” too. And I honestly don’t know too many men who are all that much into mental scrapbooking and just getting high off of memories.
So if you’re that repulsed by the body of a woman the same age as you, I suppose you’d be repulsed by your wife today, even supposing you HAD been the one to take her virginity and enjoy her in her younger years. I think the only thing likely to save you from being repulsed by a woman your own age is to possibly find a way to have a loving relationship where your sexual needs are met, and see if this takes the edge off your constant craving for hot, young bodies, at least enough for you to be able to make a life with someone who really cares about you.
But I guess if you see it as a case of you having only positives to offer, and the single women your age having nothing but baggage and drama to give you in return, then your ship is sunk before it even set sail.
Susan…I think the idea is not that men are living in their memories, just that they can remember what their wives looked like when they were young and more attractive (just like wives can do the same with their husbands…like picturing your husband when he had hair and twenty less pounds!)
But Jack, you talk as though you were entitled to a wife when you were young, like a wife is something you have a birthright to, but that isn’t true (it’s not true for me either, or anyone else). Of course it’s easy to get bitter if you think you were entitled to something and think someone else took it from you, but that isn’t really how the world works (God sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous alike, says the Bible). That is something that I’m trying to accept…it’s the hardest thing in the world to accept and not get bitter. But in your posts, it comes across as though your attitude is eating away at you.
Talking about lecturing about bitterness…a really good example of someone who could have or should have been bitter is Corrie Ten Boom. She had one suitor in her younger years…only one! And he ended up marrying someone else because his parents wanted him to marry a wealthy woman. She said she somehow knew after that, that there wasn’t going to be someone else. And there never was. So, she never married. And she ended up in a concentration camp and lost her father and sister, was treated brutally by the Nazis. Yet she forgave them. If anyone had a right to lecture about bitterness, she did.
Red-
On aging, you are correct, although women age far worse than men. I had a 30 something try to pick me up at the bar a few weeks back. I am very physically fit, tan, and had my best game on. However, I am not looking for a tattooed smoker.
But yeah, we start to look worse. But don’t kid yourself in thinking women age better, because they don’t, and women are more judged on appearance than men. I can make up for the aging by making a lot of money and having good game.
Also, the men you mentioned are the ones you see in Hollywood makeup. You actually do not know how they look without the glamor machine switched on.
It also is likely that you are reacting to their fame and power than their actual looks. If a guy who looks exactly like Hugh Laurie walked by you on the street, you would not even notice.
Susan-
I appreciate the almost-sympathy, I usually get outright contempt or hatred for the things I say. However, I say them because they are truths that other people are too afraid to speak.
Regarding aging and appearance, let’s remember the “wife goggles” effect. When a man marries a young and attractive woman who gives herself to him, most men will remember that in their mind’s eye, unless she ages poorly.
You know, I loved my fifteen year old hatchback just as much at the end of the 15 years as I did at the beginning. That little car was with me through many life experiences and good times. I only sold it when it started breaking down monthly. But despite the dings and dents, the rattles and parts of the car that no longer worked, I still loved it very much.
Now, people are not cars, I get that. But the dynamic is the same.
But to the person BUYING a 15 year old car, there are no memories associated with the dings, dents, and problems. Just an old car, that must be priced accordingly.
I know I would feel somewhat differently if I had my own marriage while young, and had subsequently found myself single again.
But I’m not going to START from this position. I would rather remain single than marry an old woman.
My preferences, in order:
1) Marry a woman who still has some youth, beauty, and innocence left.
2) Remain single.
I no longer even consider marrying a woman near my own age. They have nothing to offer me. Companionship, as I said before can be easily had without marriage, and without marrying a woman who is 5-10 years away from being a little grey-haired granny.
Oh, what about the Demi Moore types? Yeah, but they are so rare, they get their pick of men. I cannot compete in that market.
The only thing I can do is take care of myself as best as possible. I’d rather be lonely than dealing with some older woman’s issues, children from another man, debt, ex-drama, whatever. AND I can do whatever is in my power to convince other men that they should never settle for the tail-end of another person’s life, after they have burned themselves out on bad choices.
If a woman has not given me her best years, I can’t in good conscience give her mine.
No, Hugh Laurie is objectively good-looking. He’s tall, has a handsome face, nice eyes nice hair, and no weirdnesses. There’s a hospital by my house that’s full of attractive doctors from around the world. :P A family member went in for something, and I tagged-along and actually did see a guy who looked exactly like him. Very handsome. However, Laurie was better-looking in his youth.
So, Jack, you must see that you’ve ruled-out all possibility of marrying. You still seem upset, though. So, how would you like to fill your life? There’s more to it than getting married. What would you gravitate toward if you had no one to please?
I am a friend to a few good women, but who are not a marriage match for me. I don’t mind doing “guy stuff” for them, because I feel they truly deserve the help, and I know they aren’t scamming me.
Once I made my peace with not getting married, I stopped worrying about saving up a lot of money for kids and other things that a married couple would need, and decided to start spending it on some good times. I am planning a vacation sometime later this year, which will involve a particular sport I excel at.
I have not technically ruled out getting married, but I struggle to see where the typical woman that is available to me could enhance my life.
Obviously, I can enhance theirs, because of my financial security, my age and wisdom, and my career ambition and success. I work a full time job in a reasonably prestigious field, and have started a second business that I run from home.
Despite how awful I seem on the internet, I am often sought out by both men and women to counsel/advise them during difficult periods in their lives. This has led to me having a considerable number of women in my past who became very attached to me. However, most had serious issues that were not something I wanted to deal with, and therefore a relationship was not possible.
Too bad they weren’t wise enough to pick a good guy when it mattered to us. Now, they are learning what it feels like to be told “let’s just be friends”.
When I hear women cry about being alone and having no one to love them, I always think of all the good men they ignored when they were young and had what seemed to be limitless options.
Few things are more poetic justice than seeing a picky woman reap the rejection she has sown. Like two now-obese women I knew back in school. One is still 44 and unmarried.
Picky, picky, picky girl she was, very snotty and self righteous. Now she’s just a fat old spinster. Did it to herself.
Well, I was raised in a purity-movement environment, where the catty girls who assumed pedestals were the ones who didn’t end-up spinsters. I’ve faithfully exercised, dressed-welI, wadded-on makeup, checked my integrity, and struggled with homework for years. I’ve avoided things like missions trips, because I didn’t want to go for the wrong reasons. There’s no getting out of it. I reserve the right to occasionally cry an opera and eat ice cream and watch a period drama. Basically, purity movement didn’t care about me meeting anyone. I wasn’t taught the importance of marrying early. I didn’t learn how to interact with men. The guys I knew didn’t interact with me at all, like even on a first name basis. So, maybe you can see why I’m not a big born-again/ technical virgin guy fan. Sure, the whole PUA thing is attractive, but at the end of the day, I couldn’t actually be with that for any duration, because it’s so totally uncool. It’s like having a really rich friend: it *seems* great, but at the end of the day, you can’t help but get annoyed by their superior attitude born from daddy’s money. It’s the same thing as “Christian leaders”, who were mostly wild in their youth, only to discover Jesus in a barn or something later, telling me to not go on a date. Or if you read Boundless, telling women not to sit by men to show that they’re “too eager.” It’s like… who are you to tell me that? If anyone’s earned the right to give a lecture on abstinence, it’s me. Prodigal son can only get you so far; if you’re going to lecture, experience counts.
I always think it’s funny when Rogers comments on Boundless. He wasn’t into all of the pointy-elbowed 2/10s at church, so let himself pull a prodigal son. And then he writes an article about how he learned to accept his virgin wife, despite her many flaws. Yeah, get that guy out of there. Why does having a douchey past + apologizing with reservation qualify someone for a leadership position?
I’ve always chafed at the way the prodigal son story is interpreted by many.
Maybe it is because so many successful preachers were former hellions and otherwise very alpha.
I have lived the last 15 years with my commitment to sexual morality hanging by very few threads. In the end, I think I would have been better off having sexual immorality to repent of than I am having followed the course I took.
As can be seen from anecdotal evidence, a man with a promiscuous past is seldom a deal breaker for most Christian women. “Forgiveness” is the magic potion that renders him marriage worthy.
But would getting saved make a child molester marriageable?
Would repentance make a convicted rapist marriageable?
We all know it would not. But when tummy-butterflies are on the line, forgiveness means a man with a past is suddenly the best marriage prospect in the world.
Because ALPHA.
Anyway, Red, I hope you don’t go through what I went through. But you will probably have to choose between an attractive guy who is not all that Christian, or a Christian guy who does not push your attraction triggers very much.
The question is whether a Christian woman will trust the Lord that He will make her more attracted over time as she submits to God, rather than Tingle.
I trained myself to be attracted to average women, since that is what I knew was my best chance. Alas, they were competing for the top level men right along with their prettier, thinner sisters.
That is why I feel a sense of grim justice when I see such a woman stuck in middle age unhappy and alone. Because most of the time, she had it coming.
And I am not wishing anything on her that I have not already lived in my own life, many times over.
By the way, my commitment goes back further than 15 years, but only the last 15 have been a continuous struggle. Sometimes I feel like a fool for following this path.
I will also say that it has put some serious cracks in my faith.
“But would getting saved make a child molester marriageable?
Would repentance make a convicted rapist marriageable?
We all know it would not.”
No, they’d still get laid. Which is why jail, so that they get served the “backhand” of justice. Maybe former players could do bell choir, instead of lead college group.
Well, hey, look at it this way, Jack, at least you got to have sex. Welcome to my wonderful life of angelic celibacy.
“…unless she ages poorly.” And then what? I guess if you HAD gotten a young, virgin wife who’d had the misfortune to “age poorly, the “wife goggles” wouldn’t have worked so well for you, huh? Again, I’m much happier having a husband who lives in the now. We married when I was 35 and he was 41, and maybe we didn’t get to experience each other when very young, but oh well, life goes on. And life is indeed very good after 30, and 40, and now I’ve just turned 50 and it’s still good.
“I got married at 35, and I feel like my best years are happing NOW, whenever now is.”
Maybe we should ask Mr. That Susan whether HE thinks he got your best. Let’s ask HIM whether HE “feels like” your best years are happening now.
Been reading with interest the exchange among jack, red and thatSusan.
It’s always interesting to see how women never, ever understand what men talk about in this regard. Men say over and over they don’t want women who have had sex with a lot of men. Men say they want a woman’s best years, meaning from her early 20s to early 30s. A man is completely and totally willing to work himself into an early grave for such a woman.
And yet, all we hear from most of the women here is shaming. “Well I got married at 35 and MY husband doesn’t feel about ME this way! Therefore, you’re just messed up!”
It’s just more evidence that women do not and never will understand how men view women, nor how men view their lives with women. And I don’t believe women really care about how men feel or think. Most women, like ThatSusan, simply want to get men like jack to think the way women do.
Deti, I never, ever lied to my husband about my age, or about anything else, either. And I’ve always been a little-to-no makeup kind of gal, and a wash your hair and let it dry kind of gal, too, practically all of my life, except for a really short time during my teen years and early 20’s, when I was all about the mirror, and sometimes I did/do have fun playing with makeup as an older adult, too, but mostly I just like having a clean face and no gunk in my long hair. So what you see is what you get.
And apparently my husband liked what he saw enough to want to get to know me better and to pursue a relationship with me. And he asked me out for the first time when I was 34, and we were married less than a year later, so it’s not like he waited on me for years and years or anything.
In case you don’t understand why I’d share all those details, it’s to emphasize the fact that he knew exactly what he was getting, as far as appearance goes. There was no “morning after” shock when he saw my face first thing in the morning after our wedding night. Now as far as knowing ALL that he was getting into, I’d say that he and I, like most married couples, have learned a lot about each other and made lots of adjustments over the years.
And you know, we’ve never felt the need to ask each other silly questions like, “Do you feel like you got the best years of my life?” If he didn’t feel like he was getting the best version of me, then he certainly had the option of saying “I’ll pass on that” and never even asking me out on the first late, let alone proposing after he’d gotten to know me better. I assure you, no one was holding a gun to his head.
It’s seriously okay for you, Jack, and all the other manosphere guys to continue with your current mode of thinking if you find it helpful and productive. — and even if you don’t find it helpful but still choose to think that way, that’s totally your call. Go for it. Embrace it if you must.
Personally, I have never regretted my decision to shake up what I realized was a very unhealthy thinking pattern within myself. I actually made this change not too long before meeting my husband.
Having spent my growing up years at the bottom of the social pecking order at school, I’d absorbed the other kids’ negative views of me, and carried an inferiority complex into my adult years. Since I saw myself as somehow “less than,” I also perceived every man who was interested in me as “less than,” too, because if he was really top quality, why would he be interested in ME?
While friendships became much easier for me in my late teens and adult life, and I was happy to be friends with all kinds of people, I still carried this nagging feeling that I couldn’t really feel okay about myself without being linked to the kind of guy who was “so cool” he’d never notice the likes of me. Which basically meant that I thought the high quality guys were the ones who had no interest in me, and the ones who liked me must have something wrong with them or they’d want nothing to do with me. This was a totally self-defeating attitude, obviously.
I was in my early thirties before I came to terms with how my attitude — my unwillingness to love and accept myself just as I was — was defeating any chance I had at finding marital happiness, and before I actually came to the place of realizing that I SERIOUSLY was a cool person already. I didn’t need a man to lift me out of uncoolness — what I really needed was someone to love, be loved by, and make a life with. When I was really ready to love and be loved, God brought me my husband.
This is what worked for me, but I’m female and obviously don’t know what it’s like to be a guy. So I guess you should just keep doing what’s working out so wonderfully well for you. Take care.
Oops, I meant to address that last post to Deti — but I think it probably applies to Jack, too. :)
ThatSusan:
You’re completely missing the point. The point is that MOST women and MOST men are not going to want to wait until they’re 35 or 40 or 50 to get started on a married life.
Most men are not going to want to wait until age 41 to marry and start a regular sex life. Perhaps YOUR husband is like that. Most men don’t want to wait.
Your experience is not universal, not anywhere close to it. I don’t begrudge you your happy life. But I wouldn’t have wanted to wait until I was 41 to get started on a regular sex life.
MOST women are headed straight for The Wall by 35. A lot of women are already at The Wall by then. And if MOST men are not getting regular sex by age 41, they are going crazy.
I know why you’re sharing all those details. It’s to make sure that the world knows you are a special person. But, most of the rest of the world doesn’t share your view.
I didn’t accuse you of lying about anything.
You said: “And you know, we’ve never felt the need to ask each other silly questions like, “Do you feel like you got the best years of my life?””
I know you think it’s silly. You’re not a man. Every man posting on this board knows exactly what I’m talking about by positing the question.
I do think it’s silly to fret over stuff that you, or your significant other, can’t go back in time and redo. So if that’s a broken record that you just have to keep playing all your days, it probably is better to just play it alone rather than bringing a wife and kids into the situation.
And no, I never said my situation was universal. I ALSO don’t believe yours is. We’re all special. For me personally, I discovered that I didn’t like where my original “special story” was taking me, so I decided to write a new story — possibly just as “special” as the first one, but immensely happier and more fulfilling for me.
If you want to stay plugged into this program where the ENTIRETY of reality is composed of alphas, betas, and hypergamous females who are either “high value” (under thirty and virgin or nearly virgin) or low value (over thirty and “headed for the wall”), then it seems rather boring to me because there are so many different kinds of people and so many different ways to perceive other people if you can allow yourself to crawl out of the box and into a wider and more open space. But I realize that opening up to new possibilities and perspectives is also rather scary.
I know, I probably am never going to “get” what it’s like to be you. You and I probably never will fully “get” the other’s perspective. and that’s okay. I just wish you the best with your own unique story, so I hope you do your best in writing it.
Oh my God, deti’s, been spying on the grandfather clock and has flown down to teach us a very generic and valuable lesson. How does he do it? I hang on his every word.
“And yet, all we hear from most of the women here is shaming. ‘Well I got married at 35 and MY husband doesn’t feel about ME this way! Therefore, you’re just messed up!'”
Yeah, all one of the women who say that.
I don’t personally want Jack to be grumbly and lonely for the rest of his life, but it’s a pretty shit-deal when he’s already in a good spot and I, the one in a worse spot who’s done a hell of a lot more, kept my pants on, and my hands to myself, am supposed to feel so damn sorry for him, feel guilt on behalf of all women everywhere, and act like these men are cut-out to be leaders. It’s not my duty if you act like idiots to sit here and nod my head.
You people care too much about how you look. If you’re in such a friendzone, push your way out of it. Risk looking stupid for once, if you actually care about your principles. Or why should anyone care about your ass? You all just want to save-face and lead idiotic discussion in your Bible studies. That’s why you’re single.
You walk in on a Sunday morning, and someone pisses you off, so you decide to make discussion go in a direction that highlights a particular virtue that you have and they don’t. That’ll show ’em. Or if you don’t have a virtue, you can make one up, like “having an upbeat attitude” or “being motivated” or, if you happen to be married, “having a wife/kids.” You’re still a jackass.
And I don’t care if you’re a man who slept around because “no one would have him and he needed it.” You didn’t try hard-enough. A slut is a slut, even when it has a peen.
Red-
What is it that you think puts me “in a good spot”?
I’ve played by the Biblical rules. It is only recently that I am considering abandoning what I have believed about sexual morality. What “more” have you done than me? I think you’re making some inaccurate assumptions.
The following is not directed at Red, Susan or Haley, but is an open comment to Christian women as a general group
For a number of years, I have tried to explain why I am actually not “bitter”, but women love to use that accusation so much that I got tired of trying to take that toy away from them so now I just ignore it. You may also think me angry, but this is a by-product of needing to communicate some concepts with extreme verbal force, or have them get lost in the nice-guy fuzzy background.
However, even if I was the bitterest, angriest person in the world, if I tell you that stealing is a sin, I am no less correct than if you were told that by the most virtuous person alive.
I tried being “nicer” and engaging women with reason, and all I got was a shriek-fest of shaming language and rationalizations. Therefore, I concluded that the only way to deal with the female/feminist mindset is with most rhetorical force I can muster.
I don’t say cruel things for entertainment’s sake – I say them because the shock of hearing them is the only thing that seems to register in the thick head of the average American woman.
Women chafe in the face of male judgment, but they ignore anything else. I tried gentle words for a very long time, and the typical female just waved away everything I said as “nonsense”.
Well, it was time to bring out the more stringent measures, and I will tell you that they are far more effective than a kind word. Because women can’t help but engage a man that is calling a certain group of women a bunch of soulless sluts that are undeserving of marriage.
Ohhhh, that gets their dander up big time. Sure, they are plenty hostile to my views, but nonetheless they stick around and end up thoroughly defeated by me, because a woman feels defeat when she cannot bring a man to heel to her views. And I do not bend. Many a woman (and more than a few men) finally gave up and walked away from debating me – which is fine. Did I change their minds? Probably not, but I guarantee that I left more of an impression than if I tried to politely make the case for how men feel and what men want.
And you know what? I am a far more loving and caring person than most of the Christian women who read the manosphere. Know why?
Because I DO CARE if women are unable to find a man to marry. I DO CARE if a woman wants children but can’t find a man who is good husband material. I DO CARE if a woman is left alone with her child because her man walked out. I DO CARE that many women are lonely. I DO CARE that many women end up serving as sexual fast-food for selfish men.
But unlike the women:
I ALSO CARE that men are lonely, and I do not blame these men for not magically knowing how to “be attractive”. I ALSO CARE that many men spend years being deprived of a holy, sanctified sexual relationship with a woman (which is third only to oxygen and food to a man). I ALSO CARE that many men LEGITIMATELY feel they have no hope to find a devoted wife, and therefore have despaired of furthering their careers, sinking into video games and/or porn (men need purpose, not “maybes”). If some woman was taking bottles full of anti-depressants trying to numb her pain, you ladies would call out the marines, the grief counselors, and probably throw a party to tell her how wonderful, special and valuable she is.
When a man similarly dopes up on video games or porn to try and numb the pain of a meaningless existence, all he can count on from the women are smirky put-downs, or high-handed condescension.
American women need to humble themselves before the Lord, get on their knees and repent of the self-righteous ways in which they have been judging men, especially since feminism took over, and it’s “a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle”, and “all men are pigs”, smart-Alice commentary.
It staggers my mind that so few women feel any shame for the way they have treated men. We’ve spent 50 years listening to endless detailed lists of grievances of the alleged ‘patriarchy’, and its manifold sins going back to the beginning of time. The smallest of female grievances must be rectified immediately! If a man has been harmed, well, maybe that will teach him a LESSON! Women are unable to punish the long-dead patriarchs, and therefore must take out their anger on someone, so let’s call all men pigs, which makes it all the more convenient to use them as scratching posts for their unrequited rage.
Men are tired of women biting the hand the feeds them, and treating men like disposable units of production, wage mules, status symbols to flaunt in front of their Church sisters, etc. We’re tired of being blamed for what “some man did” 500 years ago. Get over it.
I know you will never take this truth from the words of a man like me, but one day I believe the Lord will convict these truths in the hearts of women, and they will grieve with remorse for the callous and materialistic way that they have regarded men, and the arrogance with which they have judged us.
If you think judgement day will be thundering accountability for men, and wink and “it’s okay, Daddy understands, Princess”, for the women, then a review of the Bible should dispel any such confusion.
Men do need to forgive the women for the things women have done.
Women, however, need to forgive the men for the things we have not done.
-jack
Okay, Jack, but men are sleeping-around and acting acting smarky at the same time. For every two women sleeping around, there are three men. That doesn’t sound like much, but it’s HUGE.
I spent my youth looking at guys and going, “I like him. Maybe he’ll talk to me!”
You spent your youth sleeping with women in their prime. I don’t care if it “wasn’t high enough for you.” Your generation did everything wrong / tells my generation to be good.
So. I like you, but if you’re going to make remarks about women sleeping around, don’t act like you’re any better than those women. Don’t. Talk. Down. They’re the girl version of you.
I’ve never even kissed anyone. My “purity-level” is unimpeachable.
I also think it’s funny when men complain that women are too dismissive. It’s like men complaining that women date assholes. It’s like… okay, but you have to be like that at least a little bit to get any attention from the opposite sex. Dismissive women get all the men 100% of the time. And then guys complain about women leading them on. And then I’m nice to them. And then they call me a weirdo. If you’re a female on Facebook, don’t like men’s comments. If you’re on OKCupid, get a red bar. Common fucking sense.
You’re like the guy version of a well-meaning feminist dating expert who tells me to not date douchebags, but that nice guys are annoying.
I’m not religious, but you can decide to quit your religion or you can decide to thank God for the small gourmet of psychologically-broken females that you got to indulge in. Or you can decide to have sex in church and give advice at the same time, and I’m sure no one would mind.
Basic goodness is just so rare in people now, it’s a shame.
Um, you keep accusing me of sleeping around. I keep telling you that I did not. What is getting missed here?
What part of “not yet compromised my moral principles” are you not understanding?
I think you are confusing me with someone else in the manosphere who may have done those things.I have walked the walk. You should be congratulated for being resolute also.
If you’re not religious, then why the strict adherence to purity, by the way?
“men are sleeping-around and acting acting smarky at the same time. For every two women sleeping around, there are three men [sleeping around].”
That statement is ridiculous on its face. Red, do you even listen to yourself? Do you even know how ill informed you are and how, well, stupid you sound? It is NOT POSSIBLE for there to be more men than women sleeping around. It is NOT POSSIBLE for an average man to obtain sexual access to women in the same manner as for an average woman to get sexual access to men.
I’m not saying it’s unlikely or doesn’t happen much. I’m very, very confident in saying it is impossible, physically impossible, existentially impossible. There is NO WAY that more men than women are sleeping around. That just cannot happen in any realm of reality I am aware of. W hat planet are you from?
It’s possible for more than one man to sleep with the same woman, just as it’s possible for more than one woman to sleep with the same man. Learn some math!
Jack and Red, y’all might benefit from checking out this website if you haven’t already: waitingtillmarriage.org
ThatSusan:
the issue has NOTHING to do with mathematics. It has to do with sexual market value. It has to do with how easy it is for average women to get sex and how difficult it is for average men to get sex.
It also has to do with which group, generally speaking, is more willing to just shag any willing partner.
ThatSusan:
No it doesn’t. It’s about the ease with which women can get sex. A man cannot just go out and find “any willing partner”. It is NOT POSSIBLE. But you can’t see that, because you, being a woman, in fact CAN go out and find “any willing partner” for sex.
I’m not saying you will do this. But if you want to find a man for sex, you can do that. You have the luxury of knowing that if you want sex, you WILL be able to get it from some man, unless you are a complete moron or weigh 600 pounds.
Among men, only the top 10% of men have the luxury of knowing they can get sex anytime they want.
I won’t argue with the idea that more average women can get sex than average men. However, I also know of two people I can think of, average men who got engaged to very average-looking women, who had non-Christian girlfriends when they were younger…and non-Christian girlfriends don’t usually restrict access to sex. So some of it also depends on moral values.
Actually, you’d be surprised about non-Christian women. We used to be fundamentalist Christian and now we’re Unitarian Universalist, and I’ve learned that not prohibiting premarital sex doesn’t necessarily = everyone running out to have sex. There are a lot more teen girls getting pregnant in fundamentalist Christian churches, and it’s not because all UU’s are quick to get abortions, either. I think UU’s actually put a lot more thought into what they do and don’t want in their sex lives than many fundamentalists do.
Yes, that could be true. I know that in the one case the non-Christian relationship did lead to sex though, because he told his then-girlfriend, who was upset about it and told me – not exactly, but enough so I could read between the lines.
Hank, I’ve been there. I had mixed opinions about it.
Okay, Jack: have you ever done it? I’m confused.
I think if it’s special to you, then it doesn’t matter. Although, finding the right person is maybe impossible. It’s disappointing that after you stop having overly-positive thoughts (because these are so culturally-promoted), you find that people only have consideration up to a certain point. I’ve reached a point where, for health reasons, I’ve noticed that at a certain point, no one wants what’s best for you. They want your problem, and whomever’s associated with it, out of their life. They’ll give you “constructive advice,” that can’t work. They’ll tell you to be happier. They’ll get mad when you “can’t resolve the problem.” Finally, they’ll make up reasons why you’re an inherently bad person. It’s finding someone who doesn’t let you turn into a Kafka critter. That means a lot to me.
@Deti: it’s mathematically very possible, and also true. They all sleep with the same women. Imagine if every woman slept with a smaller pool of men, and all the men had to keep their pants on and wait for the women to tire of them. You’d feel like garbage.
Edit: nm, I get different numbers when I look at different sources. Okay, I’ll give you that.
What do you mean about mixed opinions, Red?
It’s hard to describe. I’m talking about the forum. It’s just overrun with passive-agression, and people villainize you if you disagree with them. A lot of people post empty comments to win popularity on the forum. Umm… people actually *care* about popularity on a forum, which is strange, because there are only a very few bloggers.
At first, you can deal with it, but after a while, it gets to you. There are some okay people, but a lot lot of elder-types and “circle jerking”. It’s some of the worst behavior I’ve ever seen online anywhere. However, people don’t go there to have affairs, I don’t think, so that’s good.
I don’t know, give it a shot, if you haven’t already, and tell me what you think.
Any church group you’ve ever been to with young, marriage-minded members of the opposite sex times ten.
Well, I’ve only had one relatively “bad” experience with one individual on there so far, but the bigger problem I see, though, is that some threads just seem to die for no reason. Maybe I’m just late to the party, kind of like I am with the manosphere, too.
As far as popularity goes, are you talking about how you can “like” a post someone made?
OMg, I know who you are. Yeah, I know who you are.
Likes are a way for people to gain pedestal. :)
You mean you know what my alias is? (Hank Flanders is also an alias by the way).
I think so… does it start with “J”?
And then we’ll pretend like we’re not actually sure we know each other.
As you can tell, I am all about being popular and well-received…
Let’s just say this, Red – I would not criticize someone else for something I did. Male extramarital sex is just as immoral as female. Now, the disputable point is whom it harms more, and I feel that it harms women more emotionally, and also in terms of their marriage potential (to the extent they are truthful).
This is not “fair” of course, but it is also not “fair” that short girls don’t like short guys and tall girls like tall guys. It’s not fair that skinny guys want girls with big boobs and so do all other men. It’s not fair that blondes have an overall advantage (exceptions only prove the rule, read Heartiste today, it’s an article showing how blonde hookers get to charge more – ummmm, PROOF!! Lol.).
Anything I have done WITH a woman is something I feel morally bound to accept that she has done with someone else. Although quantity counts: I do not want a girl who is a strict virgin but has made out with 300 guys, just to illustrate the point.
My largest complaint is not about the inability to get a virgin (which is what I, ah, positioned myself to get). My biggest complaint is that I am offered the tail-end leftovers after LOTS of ignoring good men.
In my teens, I waited for girls to get over their bad boy fixation.
In my 20s, I knew it was just a matter of time until they matured and wanted a good man. I accepted not getting a virgin wife, even though I put all my effort into finding and deserving one.
In my early 30s, the women still were stubbornly trying to get the wrong men: “I no longer settle for hot jerks, now I demand a hot gentleman!!”. Okay…
In my late 30s, they were as stubborn as ever, still waiting for Mr. Big.
In my 40s, they have suddenly pulled the fire alarm and I am surrounded by batting eyelashes and come-hither smiles.
Yet, I know that when people pull the fire alarm, they usually head for the fire escape. I know that I am plan D, or E, or whatever. Again, why should I share my life with someone who did not offer to help me build it?
None of them where there when I needed a companion – none of them were there providing affection or support when I needed someone. So now, when I have my life put together and am very successful in two professional fields, why should I take the leftovers of their youth and beauty, and marry a woman who INVESTED the bulk of her life in other men?
Tell me why I would do this?
I went without for years while they dabbled in toy relationships and casual sex.
Such a woman has no possible way to make up to me what I have been deprived of. What SHE deprived me of while she dated (read :fked) men who she KNEW were not marriage material, but hey – fornication is FUN!!!
What, besides sex with an old woman, do I get out of such a relationship?
A partner? Well partner, a partnership begins in the early years, where people invest together. She invested elsewhere. I built my life alone. And now she wants to join with me as a partner? AFTER all the hard years?
Ohhhh, how conveeeeennnient…
That’s like wanting to buy shares of Microsoft back at the original offering price. Coulda, shoulda.
Red and Susan – you are nice people (I think Haley is too, but she never lets on too much). And you don’t deserve to see any of my harshness directed toward you. But there are women who need this strong and bitter medicine, so that they may repent of their sins toward men.
Please don’t just join “team woman” and defend women at all costs. Because most Christian women DO.
Yeah, you know me? I got the impression you didn’t use that site anymore.
Jack, you’re missing the point. You say you believe in Christianity, but Christianity says “don’t have sex, because that makes you an adulterer.” So, you *prefer* a woman with a “low n-count”, aka, who can’t follow her own rules. You said you hate fornication. You clearly don’t hate it all that bad.
Hank, you were fishing, weren’t you? ;)
It was that shitty statistic that gave me away.
Not fishing. I was just asking.
Aight. 0_o
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh…
Oh, you’re talking about farther back in the conversation. No, I wasn’t fishing. I still have no idea who you are.
Good, good. I get freaked-out about people at the blogstation knowing things. Not that they’d like need to, but, you never know.
Now, if you wanted to tell me…that would be OK…
You seem like the type who could guess who I am.
Thanks, that sounded like a compliment. :)
:)
Jack, I’ve heard of the blonde-bias. It’s not prevalent where I live: they like mostly short brunettes around here. But I know people from other parts of the country who complain about blondes all the time.
Anyone can become a blonde, just dye your hair. But I’m not into the look. :/
Point is, I can forgive. But I can’t replace the time that was taken from me.
It is not the fornication that I am judging, but the length of time it persisted, and the stubborn insistence on winning the “bad boy”.
In other words, I would accept a woman with a couple “mistakes”, but would reject a woman who made a long and deliberate habit of making mistakes (which at that point, get called deliberate decisions.)
Jack, first of all, I want you to know that you’re a cool guy, and I enjoy talking to you, even if I’m calling you a hypocrite or whatever. If feel like I lay-into you a lot, but I appreciate your transparency so much. :)
So, your typical church woman isn’t the prettiest girl in her friend-group, Church, or whatever, and all the boys ignore her. So, she meets this guy who seems interesting and he’s cute and he likes her a lot. So, she goes, “AJI*#UHIUJHAUUI! THIS GUY IS WONDERFUL!!!” and he adds another virgin tick to his sleeve. After she’s been with him a few times, he’s off chasing more skirts. But, as a female, she’s formed a chemical attachment from the sex. Because it’s her first guy, even more. So, she keeps trying with him, and it doesn’t work. Then, she tries with others that remind her of him. Maybe she tries to concentrate more on enjoying the sex than becoming attached, at some point. At any rate, she’s not able to “catch” those guys, so much as sleep with them a little. Then she lowers her standards to guys who aren’t as awesome. And then she wants to settle-down, so she’d have to lower her standards again, but it’s just as difficult as alpha-chasing. The only lower her standards can go is to marry a 70-year-old man, or an obese divorced dude.
And then, they go to church, but you don’t know what’s going on at home, because everyone cleans up for church. If the dad’s a drunk or the mom’s always gone, or any number of things under the sun no one’s going to know or act like they do. I’ve seen a lot of home school families fall apart for sex- and drinking-related things, now that the kids are grown. If someone’s being abused, the part of her brain that thinks about things logically and plans for the future isn’t going to work, but the more primal brain in her stomach is going to be on auto-pilot.
Then there are the people who start in school. I went to a bad school for sometime, and was surrounded by sexually-active teens. The girls had something a bit off about them. A few of them were dressed well, but a lot of them were poorly-dressed and kind of pee-smelling. It was shocking for me to find-out that they’d been active since they were ten or eleven, but they usually gravitated toward me, probably because I was kind of a shrinking violet. A lot of them actually really sweet girls. Some of them weren’t. I think they were abused.
I was home schooled in high school, so I didn’t see as much of that. I think by that point, you’d get your mainstream “yeah, sex!” girls. But then a lot of them are told that having a bf that you’re sexually-active with is a normal part of life, and you should get a few of those and learn about your body.
So, there are other factors to consider. A lot of these women were fed lies that sex was “no big deal,” and I think sexual abuse is everywhere. I even knew one poor woman who ended-up a single mom. She had been seeing this guy at a very young age, and he was super-controlling. They got engaged, he raped her, made her believe it was her fault (the last I heard, she still thought it was), and then either left her or she left him, I can’t remember. She ended-up sleeping around after that, and eventually got pregnant. She had a sweet, unassuming nature, and a horrible, psychotic sister (my own judgement; I knew her well).
It’s not always the act; it’s the meaning behind it. I’m sure for the amount of “casual sex is fun” women out there, there are about as many very nice women who’d never wanted to be hamsters in the first place. And then you have women from two-child households who go to college for free and get an education in English History and want to try some sex a couple of times. Then I’d say that my friend is a better person.
I think of no-fault as being a hamster who was made into a hamster by being raped/abused/taken advantage of. I think of “mistake” as someone who was in a bad spot and got seduced, thus falling into a cycle. I think of “douche bag” when I think of someone who strategically uses sex, no matter what the count. I’d say a lot of sexually-active guys are there because it’s just so difficult to keep their pants on, and everyone wants them to wait until forever to settle-down. But a lot of them are just like, “It’s time to go out and take what is rightfully mine,” and that’s why people get mad.
Although, of someone 100% thinks sex is 100% fine 100% of the time, they wouldn’t be violating their principles to seek it. If someone thinks premarital sex is 100% wrong 100% of the time, they aren’t violating their principles by abstaining. But the whole, “oh, this number feels right” thing, I just don’t get.
I don’t mind being called a hypocrite, but I fail to see how this is an accurate portrayal of my position.
Like I said, I accept a woman having done anything I have done. I strongly preferred a virgin, and did everything I thought was required to get and and actually be worthy of one. It was NOT easy. Didn’t happen, so okay.
Let me phrase it this way: I would be MORE willing to accept a woman who slept with three guys when I was in my 30s, then I would be with a total virgin now in my 40s.
Why? Again it goes to the “lost years”. Had a woman with a couple previous partners been willing to marry me at 30, I think I could have lived with being “Plan B”.
But I can’t be “Plan Z”, even with a total virgin. I wish I could explain the male perspective in a way that makes sense to you.
Let’s assume I met a 45 year old female virgin who spent the last 20 years waiting for “Mr Big”, and finally decided to “settle” for me.
I would rather have had a 30 something with a couple mistakes.
Chastity is an issue of the heart, not the body. A 40 year old female virgin with a 463 point list is far more offensive to me than a woman who slept with a couple beta boyfriends.
And as I have stated on other blogs, it is NOT a question of “gee jack, are you saying you could not love this woman?”.
No, it is my concern that she could never (truly and completely) love me, and I would suffer the dual pain and indignity of having to wait 20 years for a wife that is less beautiful than she used to be, and whose true heart still belongs the men who once really made her happy.
Sure, she can love my resources, my wisdom, and my ability to be a strong and reliable male influence in her life. She can love such a man, but her desire has long since been attached elsewhere, and she will always carry a torch for the men in her past.
I cannot allow myself to lose on all three fronts: 20+ years alone, with no one. A desert of celibacy which feels like eternity. Her most attractive years given as a free gift to other men. Knowing that she may love me with the comfortable love of old age, but the passionate love of her youth belongs to someone else.
It is not something you can ask someone to bear.
Note: This is usually where the female scolds triumphantly call me an insecure loser who is “jealous” of how much “fun” this woman had, and I should “man up” and marry her because FORGIVENESS.
Red: Basic goodness is just so rare in people now, it’s a shame.
It’s a small note in the larger stream, but I just wanted to say that I think this remark is both factually wrong and incredibly offensive, almost to the point of being abusive. I’ve known many people with basic goodness in their hearts and in their behavior, and this would describe (nearly) all my close friends over the years. I meet them every day, to say they’re rare is just ridiculous to me.
To so casually erase these many fine people, men and women both, is I think really nasty and destructive to the world. What could your motivation here possibly be? Is it uncomfortable or threatening to you to make the leap, that it’s not goodness itself that is rare but rather the instance of goodness being noticed and valued?
Red: people villainize you if you disagree with them.
This depends on exactly what the disagreement is, I think. When you erase my friends and family from the world, and for dubious and possibly selfish reasons, then yes I do think that is villainous. Does anyone here really hold otherwise?
Yes! A troll! Are you trying to hit on me, troll? Let’s just cut to the chase.
Uncalledfor is a classic beta orbiter who’s spent two weeks in the manosphere and thinks he knows what he’s talking about. He clearly has not gone on a single sarge at a Church potluck.
That Susan-
Because of your individual experience, women like you are basically exempt from the dynamic I was discussing.
It’s not like you were chasing the top level men and telling good quality men to get lost – you were just in an unfortunate place.
My criticism is directed toward the large number of women who ignore the good men and spend years pining away for men who are out of their league.
Thank you, Jack, and I think I understand you better now. I’m sorry I misunderstood you before — but there’s one point I’d like to make: a 45-year-old virgin, or any age of over-30 virgin, who spent years pining over men who had no interest in her, has not been “made happy” by those men. I’d seriously doubt that she even had a real love for those men. I know I didn’t. Infatuation isn’t love, and I have no idea whether my infatuations would have matured into love because I never had relationships with those men.
But you certainly shouldn’t marry anyone you don’t want to marry, such as a woman whom you don’t feel is pretty anymore. I’m just saying that you also shouldn’t assume that a virgin who carried a burning torch for some guy way longer than she should have has given her love to that other guy. I’ve personally found that a crush doesn’t even hold a candle to real love with a real person in a real marriage, so you may still be getting the best of that woman’s love..
Uncalledfor, Red’s comment about being villainized was not a blanket statement about society. It referred to a specific venue that she and I were discussing.
As much as we men believe that women hit the wall, they are still the selectors. I only get hit on by older women and that too if I’m lucky. Only once in my life did a younger woman show me interest but she was a foreign student. Women would rather go extinct than settle.
Jack, I believe I just read your comments over on Joyinthisjourney’s blog in the Feb 2013 entry, “On Virginity: What I did and did not mean,” and I have to say your comments were compelling and right on in my view. Of course, the other commenters refused to acknowledge it and fell back on the same old tired talking points, which you eloquently rebuffed. They still wouldn’t acknowledge what you were really saying, though. All you were saying was that you wanted someone who was truly repentant and not simply an opportunist. Therefore, that made you a “loser,” in their view, though, right? I guess people hear what they want to hear.
I forgot all about that thread, thanks for the props.
You are correct about the gratuitous use of terms like “loser” by those women. I don’t know why they are so stubborn about providing cover for womens’ sins.
Suppose men did that with pr0n. Suppose any time a woman expressed a concern that she would not want to marry a man with a known propensity for porn use, the men lined up and started scolding her about her insecurities and loser-y attitude.
“You’re just jealous that he likes looking at those women!
“You’re just intimidated at the sex skills those other women have”.
“Why be upset – he chose you, didn’t he?”
“You seem kind of obsessed about pr0n use, that’s sorta creepy”
As you can imagine, this would never fly with the typical church trolls like mark driscoll, the white knights like dobson, or the nancy-boys like glen stanton.
Blasphemy!, they explained.
Suppose too, that such man stubbornly refused to repent of said pr0n use, and instead told his wife, “don’t judge, I just had a little fun online”.
I assure you that the church would not fall all over themselves to scold the woman back into line, with instructions to be more forgiving. No, no, no, the man would be hounded for his lack of repentance and his lack of love and empathy for the woman’s feeeeeelings.
I aim to help men develop the boldness to confront this ridiculous hypocrisy.
Once a man becomes resistant to female shaming language, everything changes, because it is really the only tool the women have. It’s interesting to watch a woman’s reaction when she tries those tactics on you and you just laugh.
This, then, is part of the way in which men will regain their authority in the church and in the family, by learning to disregard, and where needed, rebut these control tactics.
Yeah, I thought of the porn example, too. The examples you gave concerning past porn use are perfect examples of some of those “said no one ever” things. Moreover, they’re also examples of things no one will ever say, because somehow, looking at naked people to whom one isn’t married is an “addiction,” which perpetrators will supposedly have their whole lives, but having sex with people to whom one isn’t married isn’t an addiction, even though it also includes looking at naked people to whom one isn’t married (and a whole lot more).
I think the hardest part for a lot of women to understand is that the men who are engaging in this discussion are not doing it out of some capricious desire to make women feel bad, or out of some sense of need to enforce a “patriarchal standard”.
We are involved in this discussion because of the deep wounds we have experienced. The entire manosphere is, in some ways, a catalog of the hurt that has been delivered our way. The existence of the sphere also proves that any ideas of “male privilege” are simply not true for the vast majority of men.
The fact that a small portion of top-tier men live with privilege is simply a fact of mankind’s existence. But most men live lives that are regarded as expendable by women, and society at large.
Hank-
You have correctly identified nudity as a root of all evil. Wait – I thought it was money? Well, money and nudity (these are a few of my favorite things?) are both right up there in the temptations category, for sure.
Perhaps we need a “Bonfire of the Nudities” to get us all back on track?
Here’s the link Hank and jack are talking about.
http://joyinthisjourney.com/2013/02/on-virginity-what-i-did-and-did-not-mean/
Props to you, jack.
What strikes me about this is the justification, excuse and rationalization for premarital sex on a Christian blog. Premarital sex is not shameful? Do these people know the Word? Do they not know what the Word says about extramarital sex?
“oh noes! You’re just Judgy McJudgerson, you are!”
“YOOOOOUUUU CAAAAAAAN’T JUUUUUUUUUUDGE MEEEEEEEEE.”
One commenter saying premarital sex isn’t fornication and it isn’t sinful? LOLWUT?
The other thing that strikes me about this is, as you said, women never ever seem to care what men think or how men feel about this subject. The lack of repentance, the defiance, the rebellion, the lack of empathy, is just astonishing.
This only proves that judgment is effective. If they really didn’t care, then they would ignore it.
So men, keep it up. Enough male judgment might eventually break the slut spell that has been cast on our women.
Haha, Bonfire of the Nudities…Anyway, technically, it’s the love of money that’s the root of all evil. I guess by that token, then, the love of nudity would be the problem there, too.
deti, it’s interesting the things I’ve found through Internet searches, and that joyinthisjourney blog was one I found today after seeing multiple profiles of girls on okcupid, even the ones who identify and “Christian and very serious about it” and rank God as “extremely important” in their lives, also state that they would expect sex to happen after “six or more dates,” not “only after the wedding.” Also, my introduction to the manosphere was through your justfourguys entry “Good Christian Men Think Twice,” a link I found after reading Matt Walsh’s blog about “manning up,” so thanks for that. I’ve found a lot of good info this summer, and it all started with that first blog entry.
These are the modern Christian “churchian” women that we uphold in society.
hank:
Thanks for that. Glad to hear that my blog entry reached you.
By the way, here is the ultimate in Beta-Male Emo-pr0n:
“Back To December”
I’m so glad you made time to see me.
How’s life? Tell me how’s your family?
I haven’t seen them in a while.
You’ve been good, busier than ever,
We small talk, work and the weather,
Your guard is up and I know why.
Because the last time you saw me
Is still burned in the back of your mind.
You gave me roses and I left them there to die.
So this is me swallowing my pride,
Standing in front of you saying, “I’m sorry for that night,”
And I go back to December all the time.
It turns out freedom ain’t nothing but missing you.
Wishing I’d realized what I had when you were mine.
I’d go back to December, turn around and make it all right.
I go back to December all the time.
In every alpha chaser, there is probably one or two tiny little molecules of doubt, or remorse over the fact that she can’t really love the loyal beta.
Alphachaser: “This is me swallowing my pride”
Formerbeta: “Why stop there?”
LLozlzozl!!!! Commence with the bernankifying btthx asckcngn!
An evangelical group did a survey recently that confirmed my experiences. Barna’s survey results showed Agnostic/Athiests having lowest divorce rates along with Catholics, and a couple of mainline denominations. However, Baptists divorced at a 50 percent higher rate, and Evangelicals divorced at a 75 pecent higher rate than Agnostics and Athiests. My guess is that when Agnostics marry, they do so more methodically, it is more of a personal choice and they only do so when it makes sense to them, while the more conservative people do so more out of peer pressure or desperation. Or the good Lord works in very mysterious ways perhaps? P.S. I am not being flippant, I am just trying to understand this, just like the next person.
Um, Catholics having a low divorce-rate? I’ve heard of a lot of divorced Catholics. I’m just saying, I don’t know if that’s true or not.
I looked at the Barna website, and could only find their 2008 study, which showed Evangelicals to have the lowest divorce rate, skeptics to have a slightly higher one, and Catholics to have a slightly higher one than that.
https://www.barna.org/barna-update/family-kids/42-new-marriage-and-divorce-statistics-released#.U_Dz5477Ub0
I just don’t know what Barna report you’re talking about. If this report existed, the company would have no credibility, as the results are so different from the previous survey’s.
http//religioustolerance.org/new.htm And another way to convince you is to google a national map of divorce in US. The bible belt has much higher divorce rates than say the heavily Catholic northeast or the north central (Catholic and Lutheran, two low divorce risk denominations). It is counter-intuitive to me also, but really jibes with my observations of friends, acquantices, co-workers. I may need to tally my personal observations to see if it really does hold.
You can’t site a third party’s reference to a study as the study itself. You have to show me the Barna link, or I’m not believing the study was done. It could easily have been a fabrication.
I think we have different experiences. I’ve heard a lot of women with Catholic husbands say they got a divorce. It’s usually related to temperament issues, their words.
If you have a more traditional Catholic background, the amount of kids that you birth would discourage divorce. However, most Catholics are of the cafeteria-variety.
That being said, I’ve also seen divorce in homeschool communities. A lot of it is former homeschooling parents having affairs. Sometimes, there’s abuse. I guess it can happen anywhere. It’s always the families that seem so perfect that end-up exploding. Alcohol seems to be a big part of the problem.
Your results of the NE might be skewed, because Upscale. Places like Texas will have a lot of minorities, who have a higher divorce-rate. I think having money, but not too much, is a big indicator of marital success. It seems more socio-economic to me.
You know what, though, I did live in a Bible Belt area for a while, and at that time, there were a lot of divorces. It was the women having affairs.
There might have been the classic manosphere woes at play: high n-count born again + beta males. But another problem seems to be this sense of rigidity. For instance, everyone knew everyone’s business and judged them accordingly. Extended families were very tight-knit. In the traditional homeschool family breakups, these were leaders, along with hyper-conservative families. By hyper-conservative, I mean they didn’t listen to lyrics in their music. And when it came to them, having a big family made no difference.
I’ve also (well, I’ve lived a lot of places) lived in an area with a ton of Amish. They’d leave porno on their computers in their living rooms. There’s a certain point at which too much general (not exactly political) conservatism seems to be a big marriage-destroyer. People can only live by so many rules, so they’ll pick the ones they like.
“People can only live by so many rules…”
True. The Lord knew this, which was one of the reasons why the Old Testament Law seemed to allow some things that we could not imagine allowing today.
Hence, why the Lord allowed polygamy and divorce under the old covenant.
The church, however, forgets this, and lards up the people with ‘burdens grievous to be borne’.
Yes, God definitely seemed to empathize a lot with males in Bible times — but not so much with females. Any man who married a divorced woman was committing adultery.
“They’d leave porno on their computers in their living rooms.”
This is shocking to find out…that the Amish have electricity.
Red, excellent points. You make a really good analysis. The Barna sample size does seem very small. And the divorce rate is tied into the household socio-economic situation, and age of marriage. I am surprised that Pew has not studied it. They have studied every other aspect of religion, to the point of being almost Aspergers about it. Thanks for your comments
Glad you found them helpful. :)
And I stand corrected once again, or rather Barna stands corrected. Pew is a survey company specializing in social trends and had them from high to low — Black Prot, Unitarian, Athiest/Agnostics, JWs, Evan Prot, Mainline Prot, Catholics and Mormon, and finally Jews and Greek Orthodox the lowest. Also a much larger sample size. And thus I slink off with my tail between my legs :-)
Amish porn is probably an engraving of a woman hiking her shapeless dress a half inch or so above her stockinged ankle.
Amish porn is a goose with the feathers plucked out of it.
Amish porn sounds like buttons coming done.
Amish porn is a quilt made of bathrobe.
Amish sluttery:
Improper talk in the church vestibule.
Amish pimp:
“Who art thy daddy?!?!”
“Amish porn is a quilt made of bathrobe.”
I LOL’d.
Amish porn: a picture
Although, churning butter with someone could be really hot.
“Lookest that way again at me with lust in thine eyes, and thou mayest go home and churn thy own butter, if thou knowest my meaning!!”
But then, there wouldn’t be any Amish people.
kind of like the pottery scene in ghost
Right, along those lines.
So, I’m planning on retiring from internet commentary whenever this thread comes to a close. I’ve actually been less active on this blog than many others, and I have at least one manosphere phrase in occasional use that I can claim to be my own, I think y’all know it.
Despite my caustic delivery, the only blog I was ever banned from was boundless. But this should surprise no one, of course. Especially with the hyper-sensitive Martha Cranky at the wheel. Of course, I expect nothing less from a Focus-on-the-Female subsidiary like boundless.
Speaking of boundless, if I didn’t know better, I would almost guess that Red once went under another name over at boundless, at least her sense of humor is very similar to someone I once conversed with.
So why am I bowing out now? Because every group has a life cycle, and some have to arrive, and others have to leave. Otherwise the group will diminish into irrelevance. The manosphere is all about making the same few points as often as needed, but it is better if the voice and style periodically change.
Time to move on and focus on work and sports. I’m encouraged by all the younger guys (and a few women) who are waking up to the truths that are here to be learned.
I may make an additional comment or two on this thread. After that, it’s time to start traveling and living it up. And looking for a new place to call home – maybe South America.
Right, they never banned me, because I’m a woman. They probably thought that I was lost, and that their comments would eventually inspire me toward embracing cautious, suburban attitudes. I could get away with murder on that site. Well, their equivalent of murder, rollerblading without a helmet.
No, Jack, you can’t leave! You’d miss me so much!
I wonder when that was. I can’t remember when I got that account… anywhere from 2-5 years ago. O_O That would be a long time that we’ve known each other…
Comparing the sexual behavior of gay men to lesbian women provides a stark image of the tendencies of each gender when not adjusting to the opposite sex – i.e. gay male bath houses vs. lesbian bed death syndrome (look it up). Even the “down low” phenomenon doesn’t appear to exist among wives.
Nicoletta… I’m trying to make sense of what you’re saying…
Red-
Were you over there before I got banned?
And yes, I know you may miss me, but you’ll find another nice angry former beta to spar with. Besides, Haley has been patiently waiting for this day and I would hate to disappoint her.
I’m going to focus my energy on building my second business, and even more energy into “lifestyle sport” that will require some travel. Participating in this sport is one of the few times when I really can forget about the world, forget about being alone, and be at peace.
I once hoped I could find a girl who would follow me on this little adventure, and in fact I once thought I found the perfect one: Witty, funny, and as interested in the travel and activities as I am. Regrettably, this was the usual “thought we were just friends” deal. (That one hurt more than all the others combined, because I thought at my age they were done with those games.)
Am I a MGTOW? Can’t say for sure, but if I am it is more of a passive decision to become one. The hardest thing to do is to maintain any hope or expectancy of a satisfying relationship. Hope deferred, and all that.
The best encouragement I can give you, Red, is to try your best to cultivate an appetite for goodness in men. Yes, attraction is a tough thing, but our attraction impulses can be tamed, and trained. I was once very attracted to fried food and carbs. A long season of training myself to eat fruit and veggies has slowly brought my flesh under control, to the point where my body actually prefers healthy foods. But I dare not dabble in sweets or junk much, because the carnal nature is always waiting to be re-trained back into bad desires.
I did this with women as well. Like any other healthy male, I of course had the strongest physical desire for the most attractive women. However, I made a sacrifice of those desires and worked very hard to find a much larger group of women attractive. I also trained myself to love their personalities and their character.
So yes, a totally sexy blonde with a knockout body is still what my carnal nature wants most, but I have risen above it and am more than capable of loving a far less perfect woman, and probably actually loving her more, and in a more meaningful way that far exceeds the more base desire of my carnal mind.
Just like I know that any woman I would marry would still probably WANT a movie-star hunky guy much more than she would want me.
What is stunning to me is that these women are willing to throw all their youth and beauty away spending years pining for men that are really out of their league, and then looking for men like me in a panic, and I’m supposed to ignore years of bring neglected and man up and marry them.
I cannot imagine waking up every morning next to a wife who chose me only because her time was running out.
I realize that my chances of getting a woman in her early 30s are not very strong, but I would rather take the chance of being single forever than marry someone who has spent her whole youth elsewhere.
To most women in the US, men are not human beings, we are status symbols and income generators. Most American women are incapable of loving a husband Biblically because all they have ever been fed is narcissistic Disney fantasies.
Here’s an early holiday present for the manosphere:
So the manosphere doesn’t like Mark Driscoll either? I imagine this is one area where they agree with feminists, then.
I would imagine the dislike is for different reasons, however. I’m not overly familiar with Driscoll, but based on what I’ve read about him, lately, feminists probably dislike his view on gender roles and the manosphere dislikes his pandering to women and “white knighting.”
I thought they might hate him for being an alpha.
Then why single out Driscoll for that? While it’s true that my knowledge of the manosphere is still quite new, I’ve never seen any negativity towards say, Chris Hemsworth or Ryan Gosling.
Godspeed, jack. Happy trails.
I’ll be bowing out myself shortly as well.
deti too?
That’s even bigger news. While I was early to the party, deti made a far bigger contribution. I even remember his original, much longer screen name.
I think, deti, that you can retire and safely keep the title of Patron Saint of Manosphere Commentary.
Very curious to see what the sphere will look like in a couple years.
It’s certainly good to see that Driscoll’s bullying is evident to others as well.
Driscoll is a monster.
Susan:
Here is some justification for my viewpoint:
http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2014/08/n-and-odds-of-marital-satisfaction.html
As I said so long ago on Boundless: There will a generation that perishes in the desert without entering the promised land of marriage and family.
Too bad so many women listened to the siren song of sleeping around as “empowerment”.
Too bad a number men egged them on (hint: the alpha males win with this arrangement).
I notice that men sleeping around does not affect their marital satisfaction. I volunteer to test this.
No, I really think you’re right about the generation of Christians dying-off. Slight conspiracy theory, but I wonder if a large portion of Christian literature was actually made for the purpose of wiping-out Evangelicals. Think about how well it worked and how easy it was to do.
I’m probably the reason that deti’s leaving, but I don’t reciprocate the hate. No doubt my persistent female presence profoundly pesters him in a way that he can’t precisely pinpoint. Yet, I’ve grown accustomed to his avi. It will leave a little hole in my heart, but I’ll get over it. Oh, he waved! That wasn’t a wave…
Mark Driscoll: everyone knows he’s a creep, but your mom kind of likes him. By that, I mean deti’s mom.
There’s nothing alpha about Driscoll. Weenie, yes.
Jack, the writer seems to assume that beta males aren’t as good in bed as alphas, but I don’t see how he would know, unless he’s been sleeping with both.
But I honestly don’t know any women who divorced their husbands because of sexual dissatisfaction.
” No doubt my persistent female presence profoundly pesters him in a way that he can’t precisely pinpoint.”
Maybe it was your pernicious penchant for alliteration?
I do not presume to speak for deti, but I know that he is not one to quit for a reason like that. More likely, he has decided the time has come to move on. He’s been at this for a long time, and has certainly traded words with opponents far more hostile than you seem to be.
Susan:
Your comment is illogical, and proves that you are either not reading closely enough, or else you are twisting the writer’s point into something else entirely.
Also, pro-tip: Just because you personally don’t know someone who did something does not mean that it never happens. I don’t know anyone who steals cars. Guess it never happens!
Honestly, trying to explain the truth to women like you is a very trying exercise. I can never figure out if you’re being childishly defiant or if you simply lack the capacity to understand things. Sorry if that’s harsh, but better to hear the harsh truth and grow from it.
I offer explanations to the women in hopes of getting them to see the truth, but very few of them ever do. Women are generally only capable of seeing things that directly affect them.
Anything that does not affect them is just waved away like vapor.
But back to your statement that you don’t know any women who have done that.
Oh yes you do.
But you are probably just not paying close enough attention, because – you don’t care.
The article Jack posted is evidence that it’s best to obey everything in the Bible (the warnings against fornication in this case), even when it doesn’t make sense or when you don’t think disobeying will cause any lasting harm. Rather than arguing over “how many is too many”, we should remember that “one is too many…”
There are women out there who would rather never have been with an alpha male, once they’ve been hurt by them.
Jack, you’re kind of preaching to the choir here — I’ve only ever been with one man, so I don’t need any stats to persuade me not to sleep around.
That’s great, Susan, and you should be commended for your decisions and actions.
Let’s do a little test:
1. A man cheats on his wife. The affair is-
a) probably the man’s fault.
b) probably the woman’s fault.
c) probably both their fault.
d) impossible to know.
2. A woman cheats on her husband. The affair is-
a) probably the man’s fault.
b) probably the woman’s fault.
c) probably both their fault.
d) impossible to know.
The implied demonization of the male sexual need is one of the chief sins of the modern church.
Look at the clueless, evil James Dobson, who insists that men must “earn” sex from their wives.
However, there is no complimentary thing that wives must earn from their husbands. Women want affection? Hubby MUST provide. Women want cuddling and conversation? Hubby MUST provide. Women want hubby to get a better job or be more successful? Hubby must buckle down and achieve.
A man wants/needs sexual affection from his wife? Break out the mop and vacuum, cue up the footrubs and lots of talking. Show me that you’re a gooooood little boy, and maybe, juuust maybe the misses will get naked for you.
Dalrock has done an excellent job of cataloging many male and female “Christian” leaders who insist that women can use the denial of sex as a ‘tool’ to help guide their wayward husbands closer to Christ.
Would they also insist that a husband is allowed to deny a wayward wife affection to help “mold her into godliness”? Would they suggest that a man should hold off on giving her children until she straightens out?
I bet not.
Essentially, modern evangelicalism has become a tool for women to bring men to heel and make men subordinate to the
whimsdeep spiritual guidance of their wives.So, even a virgin wife could still turn out to be a monster, if she follows these pagans masquerading as followers of Christ.
Do you have any links concerning those leaders who have advocated for women denying their husbands sex, jack? That sounds interesting.
I’d say that in both the case of the man cheating and the woman cheating, each person is ultimately responsible for making the choice to be unfaithful. If one spouse isn’t meeting the other’s needs then they need to talk about it and if the other spouse continues to be unwilling to make any effort to meet the other’s needs, then the unsatisfied spouse needs to decide whether they can find other ways to meet those needs that don’t involve breaking the marriage vows, or whether they need to divorce.
When I talk about making an effort to meet the other’s needs, I say this knowing that when two people have very different need-levels in an area, there’s probably going to have to be some kind of a compromise.
For example, I talked to a friend once who was very upset because her husband had made an attempt to give her more affection, and spent about an hour or so cuddling with her on a Saturday morning, only to eventually decide to get up and do other stuff even though she, I guess, wanted it to go on like forever or something.
As another example, and here I’m going by what women have said, because I seriously don’t encourage men to talk with me about their marital problems, but I’ve heard at least one account of a new mom who was willing to have sex, but just didn’t have the same energy and enthusiasm that she had before having the baby, and her husband was upset over this.
So with sex, while some men say they’d be thrilled to have a wife who was at least “willing” when they asked for it, some men seem to set the bar rather high. My own husband has never been one to find fault with me over my “performance,” irregardless of how tired I’ve been at various times. And one of my friends has a husband who’s been very understanding about the fact that she’ll sometimes doze off in the middle if she’s really tired. :)
Seems to me that the wife of a more reserved husband who can find a way to be happy with an hour of cuddling, and the husband who can find a way to be happy with a wife who’s willing even if she’s not literally (I mean figuratively) bouncing off the walls with enthusiasm, are going to get a lot more affection, and a lot more sex, than the ones who set the bar so high that the other spouse just gives up ever trying to please them.
Hank-
Check out “the Threatpoint” post at dalrock.wordpress.com
There should be plenty of tagged posts on the subject there. I’m gonna miss commenting over there, but the time has come to move on.
Susan-
Fair enough on all counts.
However, it would be much easier for me to accept a woman who was less enthusiastic later in life if I got to have her when she was more enthusiastic.
But, if her young, enthusiastic years were given to haawwt college boyfriends, I’m less inclined to purchase the leftovers, if you see what I mean.
“Women Ruin Everything, Part 536”:
http://pjmedia.com/drhelen/2014/08/25/college-men-going-on-strike/
Oh sure, a few women will talk about how bad this is, but they will not so much as lift a finger to oppose it.
Women basically want to make men their social prisoners. So all that bull about the so-called patriarchy is just bull. We see who the real tyrants are, and they wear heels.
What a smart group of women would say when seeing an article like that:
“We have to stop this demonization of men, it will not end well. We can’t build a society where men are guilty of just being men.”
What a dumb group of women (90% of them) will say:
“Not all women are like that”.
“I’ve never seen anyone treated like that”.
“Punishing false accusers will only prevent real victims from coming forward”.
“Men need to be less threatening (apparently, until the insanity that passes for female “thinking” is finally sated).
I fully expect women to keep doubling down on the lies, and insisting that there is no problem, and that men are just whining losers. All the way up until the eventual backlash.
No wonder Islam is growing as a religion – it is the only ideology that stares coldly into the eye of feminist lies and does not blink.
Ginormous juxtaposition, jack! Jolly. (I don’t know if there was a juxtaposition, but I needed a “j”- sound).
Actually, in middle age, male and female sex drives tend to more similar than they are in youth. Women’s sex drives tend to peak at around 35, and some women in their forties are more interested in sex than their husbands are. The worst conflicts I hear about regarding sex are when the couple has babies and small children — which happens at younger ages for most couples, but, of course, happened to coincide with the middle age years for my husband and me.
Although there are exceptions to every rule, when women are pregnant or exclusively breastfeeding, their body and hormones are more focused on nurturing the current baby than on creating a new one. They can still enjoy sex, but there naturally isn’t the same drive as when their body is actively yearning to get pregnant. For the average couple who has maybe two or three kids, this is a very short period of a couple’s life — but as you probably know, there’s a segment of men in the manosphere who want to find young brides and have huge families.
I’m certainly not opposed to huge families, but I think the men who have this as their goal ought to be aware that such a choice will likely result in their bride spending a significant portion of her reproductive years being much more emotionally geared towards nurturing her children than towards having awesome, mindblowing sex. She’ll probably be very bonded with her husband emotionally and want to please him, but most of her energy will naturally need to be spent caring for their children.
Otherwise, they’ll lie there asleep, like an upside-down sting-ray. And not a mind will be blown. And not a body will bounce off walls. Not a bounce. Imagine the opposite of mind-blowing, a brain becomes a vacuum, and the head, a tiny raisin. You look upon these distorted, pompous features and are confronted with the horrifying truth: your partner is a shrunken monkey. Look in the mirror lately? SO ARE YOU. FOR-E-VER. No one is attracted to each other enough to ever want to do anything again. So you stare at each other with those beady, soulless eyes, and the clock can be heard ticking in the background, ad infinitum…
Oh wait, I forgot that their eyelids are apoxied-open. And there’s also a door and a bench. And a statue, for good measure. Everyone in the town is already dead, and a train never makes it. Actually, it’s a bus, and it’s in New York. Either Greece or New York.
This is my contemporary play, known as “The Androgine.” The protagonists must have gaunt, wrikled visages and vastly protruding eyes, easily described as “uncommonly homely.” Let’s play Mos Def in the background: BRILL-yant!
I’ve also started on “Oscar Wilde: A Musical Dandy!” I cut my ear off for that one, I went totally crazy, and guys, it’s gonna be ON A BOAT! Critics agree, rave reviews. Starring Robin Willia…
… TOO SOON.
My point is that men have a greater interest in sexual variety than women do. It isn’t just about the frequency of sex.
Is that a Van Gogh reference, Red?
Nicoletta: Ohhh, okay. :)
Jack: Yeah, Susan’s description of her friends was funny to me, so I worked them into my cheesy modern play that references other modern plays and general pretentiousness, which isn’t complete without the bold, crazy artistic meltdown. If you do anything creative and you aren’t bats-in-the-attic, people won’t take you seriously. It also helps to be gay (especially closet) and a Communist, of course. Bonus points for dabbling in the occult.
I wonder would Nickelback have been considered good, had it followed these rules? Eminem, no.
… Eminem is living proof that too much irony is a bad thing. Or that too much of anything is a bad thing.
Or that no one likes Eminem.
Focus on the positive. | HIV
Yeah, I need to get a life also, but jack, I want your email!
Am I to become a character in your play? A shadow in your charade?
A stanza in your sonnet? A bee in your bonnet?
I would be glad to strut and/or fret my hour upon the stage, if I can be of use.
I’ll bring the sound and fury, but don’t expect me to signify anything… (costs extra. lots extra).
You can have my email, but I would rather not publish it out in the open. Perhaps our hostess would pass it along to you.
Coming soon to a Western nation near you:
http://www.nybooks.com/blogs/nyrblog/2014/sep/02/dying-russians/?insrc=wbll
It may take us some time to get there, but the signs are unmistakeable. I already sense a sort of decaying sense of life in the US – I keep wondering if there is somewhere in Asia or South America where there are some signs of life, hope, and people constructively working to build a future.
The US is coasting at best. How long can we keep it up?
We need revival, but how will it come?
Jack, read the whole thing. Quite interesting… I would go to Chile if I was you, divorce was illegal until 2010 or so, thus couples didn’t detonate at quite the rate of everywhere else (they even separated at a lower rate). Honduras is pretty decent as well… India has quite low separation/divorce rates and a sizable population of virgins. Muslim women are also quite chaste and marry young, but you do need to be Muslim to marry them… Also, as divorce is considered very shameful *to the family,* Chinese and Japanese women can be a good bet. Also, they tend to look young for quite some time (which you quite value). Also, in Japan the pill was illegal for singles until quite recently, causing much lower rates of premarital activity than all other first world countries. Hm, that was all quite random but worth checking out…
BTW all soviet block countries (except Poland) had for some time an abortion rate higher than the birth rate. Their decay is a surprise to no one.
Isa-
As a committed Christian, I am of course limited in choice of wife. I do like the South America idea, because they have beaches and sun. Not even sure I’m looking for a wife in particular, I’m more looking for someplace where there is some vestige of hope for the future, along with a people who are more grateful for the little things in life.
I don’t want to re-enter the rat-race of chasing materialistic goals. My career is very portable, and would allow me the flexibility to move away from the US.
Maybe I just need to live around happier people, even if the experience is a vicarious one, it is better than being around so many ungrateful, selfish people in the US.
I think I would find it easier to be a blessing to people who have a more humble heart, also. The irony, though, is that the US probably has greater need for outreach than most other places.
Thanks for the info, though. That Poland thing is something to think about.
Beautifully sums up everything the manosphere has been saying for ages:
Female promiscuity ruins marriageability:
http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2014/09/why-low-n-matters.html
There, in a nutshell is the reason that so many men are opting out of marriage. Why would I marry a woman who would always be living in the past and remembering her “better lover”? A woman who sees intimacy with me a marital duty – possibly pleasant but certainly not anything like the powerful experiences she had previously?
I just had an epiphany – I bet a lot (no, not “all) of male porn use is directly tied to have a wife that was previously promiscuous. You tend to reap what you sow.
Any woman that is not 100000% repentant of her premarital sex deserves to reap this in kind, to receive a husband whose heart is also elsewhere. That way she can feel the similar sense of burning loss, knowing that someone’s heart isn’t really with you.
If I ever married a woman with several past lovers, I would have to know that she went through a period of deep reflection and repentance. It would be like marrying someone with a criminal record – you HAVE to know they’ve changed.
What is also amazing is the brazen selfishness these women exhibit – they have no problem denying the best of their youth and beauty to their future husband, and instead treat God’s gift to them as a plaything for their own selfish carnal nature.
Christian women who sleep around might as well take their offering-plate money and drop it in a slot machine or spend it on birth control so they can bang their non-Christian boyfriend.
Won’t they be surprised someday when it turns out that God does not listen to their rationalized excuses for being sluts.
Bring me another glass of schadenfreude, bartender…
Might as well have a movie parody:
Modern Women: Rise of The Hypergamy Machines
Every time I try to find it in my heart to think positive thoughts about the modern woman, I see this kind of thing:
http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2014/08/27/study-explains-why-college-women-embrace-binge-drinking-and-hooking-up/
Just think of all the marriages that are being destroyed. Just think of all the innocence that is being poured away like cheap wine. Just think how these women are complicit in the destruction of their own virtue.
In some ways, I have a bit of pity for them. Yet, when confronted, they would most certainly respond with the most stubborn and hateful feminist boilerplate.
What recourse does a good man have any more, except to sit and wait while they destroy themselves, and try to find some sense of justice in the wreckage they have made of their lives?
After 3 or 4 premarital partners, a woman might as well join a convent, because she is worthless to anyone except God.
You have to bare in mind that women, like men, don’t go out there and sin after having a long, philosophical thought about it. And they definitely don’t sit there with a theological perspective, and go, “The right decision seems to be to hook-up and get drink.” You also have to bare in mind that, at the end of the day, anyone could justify him or herself as a “feminist” for one reason or another, and these people are probably unaware of a lot of things. They’ll just say, “I’m a feminist” or “I’m tolerant” or “I believe in equality” or “I’m not a racist,” because it feels good and that’s what all the cool kids are doing. Most people, for instance, say that they’re “color-blind,” but then they’ll say things like, “Such and such African-American is so eloquent,” like it’s some big surprise.
Outside of your typical Evangelical Conservative-leaning church, it’s a very big world, and I often forget this. This is the land of Cafeteria Catholics/ Lutherans and on and on. These people weren’t raised in a church, so unfortunately, they never learned to trick away their sex drive (sic: approach men and women in a Godly manner). So, they find their place in society by assimilation.
A typical young baby woman going off to college for the first time is going to have the “college experience” that her mother and father had, because “you’re only young once.” She’ll meet some other girls, and together, they’ll share “the college experience.” This is a secular institution. A woman will watch how other women get men to “fall in love” with them: “Okay, you sleep with them, and then act kind of mean, and then they fall for you. Seems to work!”
A good 80%-90% of women out there are only following a structure that’s already in place. They are putting 0% thought into how feminist they are, unless attending a feminist rally is part of the “college experience.” They’re just doing what they’re to do. Now, when you have a frigid Purity environment that has not prepared adults for adult-to-adult interaction, and all people know is that they’re to keep sexual immorality rules, they have to go to the next best thing, or what they see working: the secular model. So, maybe they aren’t sleeping around, but if you want to show a guy how much you care, a good IOI is acting catty. “It works for them, right? I don’t see where in the Bible is says to not flirt…” Because being catty is actually, I believe, viewed as an IOI by nearly every woman out there (just watch any Rom Com). Men are channeling their favorite media role-models, and women, theirs.
My point with this post, is that there’s a lot of ignorance about any cultural institution, and courtship is a big one. People do things in a ritual manner, because “this is what you do.” They don’t give it any thought. Men of the manosphere seem to think that women are scheming their demise in a creative and perverse, evil way. Women, by and large, want to find their “soul mate,” get married, settle-down, and live happily ever after in a mildly spicy way. Even if they’re living with their boyfriend, they want him to suddenly change his mind and beg her to marry him. Even if they’re out sleeping around and claim to like “sexual freedom,” they want one man to be smitten through their actions and whisk them away. Dudes in the manosphere think way too hard about this: it’s the basic, easy to market, romantic media formula that 95% of all women are instinctively drawn to that’s their goal.
I also think that hypergamy is not “the thing” nowadays. Hypergamy was “the thing” in Edwardian England. Nowadays, women are taught to go to college and get their own jobs and support themselves, which is what some men on here don’t like. You can’t have an independent woman be a hypergamous woman. These are oxymorons. I’d say “feminist female independence” is more prevalent than hypergamy, and that hypergamy is not nearly what it’s been throughout the centuries right now. These are two different ethos:
1. You shouldn’t rely on a man to do work that you can do.
2. Your job is to rely on a man, and his job is to provide you with things.
Hi Jack, I realize you’re going by that article that you or some other guy posted here, which asserts that women who’ve had multiple sex partners before marriage are more likely to get divorced than women who were virgins on their wedding night. Presumably, your theory is that a woman who’s been used to getting a variety of different dicks stuck into her has a hard time settling down to the “boredom” of one dick.
While this may be the reason why a few marriages fail, I’d like to introduce another theory, which may explain at least part of the reason for the higher divorce rate. A woman who’s already been intimate with a number of men has probably already survived a few breakups. She’s made it through hell and out the other end a few times. So if she finds herself in an unhappy or even abusive marriage, she may be more likely than the virgin bride to see a divorce as survivable, and also to make the decision a lot faster (while she’s still young) than the virgin bride.
In contrast, a woman who’s saved her virginity for her wedding night tends to see this as the best gift she can offer a man. Once she’s given it to her husband she can’t get it back to give to another man. She’s “secondhand furniture” now so she might as well stick with the guy who broke her in. Plus, she’s more likely to be a deeply religious woman who feels like prayer can fix anything, even an unhappy or abusive marriage with a husband who doesn’t want to change. So she may spend her youth and beauty trying to pray her way through a truly unacceptable situation, and feel too old and spent to start over again when she finally wakes up and realizes that you can’t change someone who doesn’t want to change.
This is not to say that most marriages break up over abuse, whether male to female or female to male. But I do think abuse is at the root of “some” breakups, and as men become more comfortable sharing about their own experiences of being beaten or verbally abused by their wives, we may find that both kinds of abuse are equally prevalent. At the same time, I agree that a few women, a very few women, may divorce because they’re bored with having just one dick, but I just don’t think it’s a majority.
Susan-
It’s because the most exciting dick they ever got is not the one that married them.
Therefore, their most satisfying sexual experiences are memories. It’s not “boredom with one guy”, it’s that women can get short-term sexual attention from men that are out of their league, leaving them with champagne tastes, but a beer budget.
Your analysis may be right about 5% of the time, but for every abusive relationship, there are many where the wife is simply bored.
Know what? Thrill seekers have a hard time slowing down and liking stability. Promiscuity is a form of thrill seeking. So a woman who INVESTS her time into seeking sexual thrills and variety is likely to continue as such.
Suppose you knew a young man who spent 15 years being irresponsible with a financial inheritance. Would you assume that just because he suddenly wanted to “get serious about a family” that he would make a good husband? You can’t spend years training yourself to be one thing, and then turn on a dime into another thing.
Red-
You don’t understand the definition of hypergamy as it is used in this context. Feminism and independent women are the quintessential examples of hypergamy.
Hypergamy is the woman’s desire for a man who is her socio-sexual superior: Taller, richer, more prestigious, etc.
Men don’t care if a woman is famous, they prefer that she be hot. They don’t care how many other men desire her, in fact, a man’s secret fantasy is a hot girl that no one else notices, so that he can keep her.
Women, on the other hand, get off on having the status of being with a famous man – which is why a man can be ugly and have poor character, but as long as he is a movie star or rock star, he will never lack female attention.
How many male groupies are after fat or ugly female celebrities?
Really, you’re misinterpreting the word hypergamy. Other than that, your comment is generally correct regarding the fact that most of these decisions are not premeditated, but occur as a result of group-think and peer pressure.
But absolving these women of direct blame still leaves good men like me on the sidelines, always being alone, always being forced to watch one more stupid girl piss away her value.
It’s like making starving people sit and watch as the vast majority of fresh food is deliberately tainted and polluted. So as the women serve themselves up as a sexual party favor for the 20% of “truly desirable men”, the rest of them men are abandoned, at least until they are allowed to pay full price (marriage) for the used-up version of what the college boyfriend got for free when she was younger, cuter, and more innocent.
And the women ARE PLEASED with themselves that they are able to attain a marriage with a good man, WITHOUT HAVING HAD TO INVEST in that man’s years of work.
It’s the same mechanism where waste-of-space welfare mothers and their illegitimate spawn get to be fed and housed by the tax money paid by the hard-working men that they ignored.
I always think of the parable of the ten talents, and I imagine that God will very severely judge these women for using their intimacy and affection to enrich the lives of evil men rather than good men.
Who’s up for some wailing and gnashing of teeth? Surf’s up!
So what is the magic pill that enables the male thrill seeker, who’s spent years training himself to be good at “game,” to settle down and be a faithful husband? Also, is there really any evidence that “champagne” guys have better dicks than “beer” guys?
Actually, about the financially irresponsible guy, I guess it could go either way. Some financially irresponsible young people do indeed stay that way all their lives — but some also change a lot when they have a goal in mind, such as making a life and raising a family with the one they love. I’d say that if the previously irresponsible person is working hard and behaving responsibly NOW, and If I loved him, I honestly wouldn’t waste my time wailing over what had been lost and couldn’t be retrieved. If I loved him and he loved me, we could still build a life together.
Susan-
Most women can be thrill seekers, because guys are more sex-oriented and short tern oriented.
Most men can’t have the same level of sexual variety – only the top tier men get to experience the near-universal mating-market value that most women get to experience.
So, the problem with your question is that you assume that men and women are equal participants in this dynamic. But they are not.
And no, most players have a hard time settling down and being faithful – just listen to some Taylor Swift if you need convincing. But women still want those hard-to-pin-down men, because the thrill is there.
And this is where you also miss it – it’s not that the alpha is a better lay, in fact in many cases they are very sexually selfish. But THAT DOES NOT STOP WOMEN WANTING THEM.
For women, it is about the thrill and conquest of landing a top-tier man.
Just look at romance novels – it is about female conquest, not really about sex.
So, once a women is addicKted to sexual conquest and seduction, she is as damaged as the small fraction of men who are equally able to play the field.
The problem is that with women delaying marriage and playing the field, they will generally seek max thrills, and that means that men who are cultivating “husband” attributes will be ignored and “saved for later” while she spreads her legs for men who are “dangerous and exciting”.
Well, now she’s a hormone junkie, and the stability and love of a good man will be boring to her.
Really, I just don’t think you’re ever going to understand – most women are not capable of truly understanding this – because deep down, they don’t want to see the truth.
Question for you Susan:
How many times does a good, family-oriented man have to be turned down because women are not done s—ing college c— yet, before you are finally going to realize that women are being selfish whores?
Susan-
Perhaps, then, if I am to marry a woman who has slept with a lot of guys, then I should be allowed to bang a number of hot hookers until our numbers are equal.
After all, it is not fair that she got to play the field and abandon me, while I remained virtuous and suffered in loneliness.
Either that, or I get to look at increasing amounts of porn if she gains weight. Or maybe I don’t marry her, but instead we shack up, and if she gets fat or starts to annoy me, I LEAVE.
I will not reward a sexually promiscuous woman with a sacred “until death do us part” promise. I might live with her, but a sacred vow of that sort goes only to a woman who has proven the ability to guard herself, both for her benefit and mine.
Red-
This thread is getting close to finished, and I will keep my word and retire from commenting after this thread.
Here’s the email:
jack_peterson30
at
aol(dot)com
So you view some precious people as a waste of space? And some precious children as illegitimate and “spawn?”
Seems to me that love, to you, is supposed to be nothing more than a prize given to those who’ve earned it — and your pain at missing out on your young virgin bride may be nothing more than rage at God for sending rain, or lovingkindness, down on those whom you see as less deserving than you.
I remember feeling a similar rage at having been such a supposed “servant of God” myself and still being single in my late twenties, while a young mother of two children, fresh out of the drug culture, came to God and immediately won the heart of a good Christian man. it’s like the rage of the prodigal son’s brother, and the silly rage of Jonah when God decided to spare the Ninevites.
I can see now why that humble young woman was most likely more loveable than preachy, Scripture-quoting me.
I think that if you come to the place where you can stop labeling certain groups of people as “wastes of space” or “illegitimate,” you might just find yourself capable of seeing more beauty in everyone around you.
So you’re saying that if you banged a bunch of hot hookers prior to marring a sexually-experienced woman, this could then free you from your sense of resentment against her for choices she made in the past that she can’t undo now? Seriously, if this could free you from your resentment, maybe it’s not such a bad idea. Mind you, I’m not normally one to think being promiscuous can really fix anything. And I have my doubts that it could really fix anything for you.
But it’s definitely better than telling your beloved, “Since you’ve been shagged by a few guys and I’m still a virgin, this entitles me to look at increasing amounts of porn if you get fat.”
Oops, I meant “marrying” — not “marring.” Although a woman in the kinds of arrangements you’re describing may very well end up marred.
Except I was the opposite side of the coin to you – I only became this way after two decades of being told “wait your turn”.
By the way, the “good Christian man” you refer to was probably an idiot, and maybe just horny for that particular girl.
What I found out was that it seems like there is always some royal fuck-up whose needs have to be service RIGHT NOW, and the good people? “Wait your turn, all things in patience”.
Okayfine, how about making thug-banging slut or reformed bike-thug exercise some patience for once?
NOPE! We gotta attend to their problems NOW!
Really, maybe I should go become one of those people so I can suddenly be seen as a fallen object of pity, and therefore worthy of rescue?
I used to be a good man. In some ways I still am, but in other ways I have become a version of the selfish jerk that women always seem to crave. But I’m not trying to do it to attract them. I’m just doing it because it feels good to finally be returning the insult.
In many ways, I deeply regret toeing the line with regard to sexual morality.
I would be a better person today if I had just gone ahead and followed the world, and then repented later. This seems to be the winning method. It would be no problem to marry a woman with a past if I also had one. Not only that, I would not have experienced the grinding, soul-destroying loneliness.
You see, I had more than enough secular girlfriends, and they were all willing to sleep with me. I’m not the basement dwelling loser that is often seen as a manosphere cliche. I’ve had women ask me for one-night stands on a few occasions even.
Had I taken what I needed when I needed it, I would probably be in a better place today.
But I was trying to follow moral principles, and I was also trying preserve those women from harm – I was not married to them, so I would have been wrong to take something that was not mine. But this was before I knew how casually most of them gave it away in the first place.
Had I known then what I know now, my N-number would easily be 50-75.
Not to mention that my good-guy-wanting-marriage vibe probably scared off lots of women who were still just looking for a good time.
Ultimately, as wrong as it is, I am gladdened by knowing that there are men out there breaking these women’s hearts. Because they are hearts full or pride and selfishness and deserve to be broken. Much as the Lord used the Philistines to lay waste to Israel during periods of sin, so too do those “heartbreaker” alpha boyfriends perform a similar role.
Spent the morning listening to some good preaching about forgiveness and kindness.
It won’t be easy, but I’ll give it my best effort.
Cheers.
Red, as Jack and I have mentioned hypergamy is also about a man’s height and his looks. Look at online dating, men have to send hundreds/thousands of msgs to women just to get a few responses whether it is on POF, OkCupid, Match.com, Christian Mingle. Now if you put a picture of an extremely attractive male, that guy will get tons of responses. Unlike females, men tend to be more broad minded in terms of the women we find desirable. We do like someone that is somewhat attractive, but it is not like all of us men are aiming for trophy wives http://therationalmale.com/2014/06/30/trophies/
OkCupid had done a survey which found that women find 80% of the men online unattractive. Are you implying that this isn’t hypergamy? The biggest lie that men were told is that women care about personality and that women are loving creatures. Women can easily find dates but they put their standards way too high just because they have reproductive organs. How many msgs have you sent to men on online dating websites? How many approaches have you done in real life? Women can’t understand what men have to go through because for them it is like having a life long birthday. Everything in modern western culture and cultures that are now heavily western influenced is gynocentric and appeals to the feminine imperative.
The most frustrating thing about women’s behavior on online dating sites isn’t they don’t respond. It’s that they’ll say things like you have to actually “read their profile” as well as not just type a one line message, but when you show that you have read their profile, can type a decent message, and have a brain, they still don’t respond. I actually prefer when women will specify that you need to be six feet tall, hot, make a lot of money, be of a certain age, or whatever. I may not be able to date them, but I can at least respect them for being forthcoming. When supposedly good Christian women won’t even respond to say “thank you” to friendly compliments about their profile and not even necessarily their looks, I quickly get jaded with online dating sites.
No, hypergamy, by definition, has nothing to do with looks. That’s something else.
That_Susan:
I think that this
http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2014/09/ghosts-of-alpha-widow.html
will really help explain the Alpha Widow problem. Now, you mightsay that men could pine for past lovers, but this never seems to be a problem. Partly because men don’t mistake sex for love or commitment in the same way as women do.
Also, if we marry a woman, it is because we are attracted to her enough to limit ourselves to her sexually “until death do us part”. Women like the one in this article, however, usually cannot marry a sexually satisfying man, but they still want a husband and babies, so they “settle” on a good man, while always pining for the past.
So, what say you, Susan? Are you going to be like most women and just say that this husband needs to be quiet and grateful that he got her at all? Or do you have even the most minute shred of empathy for a man whose wife’s heart is always somewhere else?
And this article is the final proof of why good men should reject women with a sexual past.
It’s not about being “unforgiving”.
It’s not about being “too good for her”.
It’s not about saying she is a “fallen woman”.
It is about the fact that her heart always will belong to other men, and men that she regards as better, more desirable in her sight, and even though those men were not perfect, she will polish and nurture those memories, while her real-life husband has to measure up to her fantasies and memories.
I believe that this is one of the main causes of the divorce epidemic – women who could not get the thrilling college boyfriend to marry them, who eventually settle on the chumpy nice guy, thinking they can make it work, and then finally one day the call of the wild is too strong, and they break up their families, looking for one more chance at “love” (but what they really want is more carnal than that).
Can you finally see it, Susan? Women don’t like having to compete with a man’s porn-viewing habits, because they know they can’t compete with the porn star’s looks or sexual adventurism.
So why should a man be expected to compete with the emotional porn that a woman like this nurtures in her mind? Imagine all the times he was with her, but she was not truly with him.
“The most frustrating thing about women’s behavior on online dating sites isn’t they don’t respond. It’s that they’ll say things like you have to actually “read their profile” as well as not just type a one line message, but when you show that you have read their profile, can type a decent message, and have a brain, they still don’t respond. I actually prefer when women will specify that you need to be six feet tall, hot, make a lot of money, be of a certain age, or whatever. I may not be able to date them, but I can at least respect them for being forthcoming. When supposedly good Christian women won’t even respond to say “thank you” to friendly compliments about their profile and not even necessarily their looks, I quickly get jaded with online dating sites.”
Hank – women are not actually on dating sites to find a good man, they are on there for validation from men, and to prove to themselves how desirable they are. It also helps them feed the narrative that “there are no good men left”.
The key is to understand why they are really there.
Susan:
Read the comments also, very enlightening.
The real problem is that the majority of our women are getting Disney-fied into having this mindset, so even a virgin can still have that “prince charming”-seeking circuit in her brain.
We have an evil media culture that is feeding this poison to our women, and the women continue to crave it, so very little can be done. In fact, the only thing that can be done is to deny women our attention and affection. Essentially, go on strike.
Does this make you proud of women?
nymag(dot)com/movies/features/62027/
or:
demotivational(dot)in/twilight-moms/
??
I see the soul of a pornographer in these women.
(reposted because the links put me in moderation)
Jack, I think you’re preaching to the choir. No woman on this thread has been sleeping with anyone before marriage.
Jack, I couldn’t find the comments, but I gather they have something to do with middle-aged women idolizing Edward. I enjoyed watching the movie series with my teen daughter, but couldn’t really identify with the adult fans who were crowding around Robert Pattinson begging him to bite them. It doesn’t make me proud or un-proud of my fellow women; I just realize that like men, we are all human and can be really stupid sometimes.
“Hank – women are not actually on dating sites to find a good man, they are on there for validation from men, and to prove to themselves how desirable they are. It also helps them feed the narrative that ‘there are no good men left’.”
I guess that could be true, but I would think that that would be more likely for the profiles which don’t include much detail and expect to get by on pictures alone. I don’t mess with those, anyway, as I figure they’re probably fake. On the other hand, thought, I would think a woman who takes the time to put up a detailed profile is actually interested in finding someone, but that doesn’t mean she can’t be full of it and yes, extremely hypergamous, not only who she’ll date or marry but even who she’ll apparently talk to.
Hank Flanders…it’s because women get a LOT of messages on online dating sites…even women who aren’t that pretty. So they only reply to the ones they are really interested in. This isn’t fair; however, you can try to work around it by making your message and profile as exciting and interesting as possible.
Like I said, it’s really not fair to men that online dating works this way; but it does, so instead of expecting that you will get replies to most messages, try sending out as many messages as possible in the hopes that you will get a few replies from some good prospects.
I notice in this thread that men repeatedly blame women for dating problems, and that is okay *to a point*, but you can’t change women’s behaviour en masse; you can try to work with it. Pray about finding a good wife, try to be the kind of person who’d be attractive to her, but remember that women and men are living in a fallen world. Focus on the things *you* can change and not the people you can’t (girls). Just pray for them, for their sincerity as Christians. And where they fail, remember that they’ll be accountable to God someday. Trust God to be just, and live in fear of his justice. Ultimately we’re all accountable for our own actions.
Thanks, Hana, but I don’t even really mess with online dating sites anymore. I still get on and look around for the heck of it every now and then, but I rarely message anyone anymore, and I disable my profile when I’m not using it.
I know it’s true that women get a lot of messages, but to hear some of them tell it, many of those messages are sexual or nonsensical in nature. The ones I send aren’t, though, and again, women not responding would still be understandable under certain circumstances. Smart ones will even specify not to feel bad if they don’t respond. OK, that’s reasonable. It’s when they specify certain other things and then don’t follow through that I start to think they’re full of…well, you get the idea. I even remember coming across one who said she’d be happy to talk to ANYONE who wanted to discuss Jesus (whether or not she was interested in them as a guy). You can probably guess how that one turned, too. I disabled my okcupid profile after just three weeks of that kind of garbage.
Susan-
I meant the comments of the alpha widow article.
Hank – yeah, some girls are hypocritical, I’m sure. They don’t mean exactly what they say. I hope you find someone you click with ‘in real life.’ :)
Thanks, Hana. You sympathized with my problem and didn’t just try to fix it like most women. ;)
Seriously, though, thanks for understanding and not rationalizing their behavior.
I keep hearing this term “hypergamy” – women seeking higher-status men. Yet, interracial marriage statistics would suggest that black women aren’t especially interested in wealthier white men, while white women do like black men. And neither group tends to marry Asian men, who have high incomes and education levels. There’s something else going on here besides economics.
Nicoletta, as per RationalMale (Rollo Tomassi’s) blog hypergamy includes the preference for tall and good looking men. People generally still prefer to stick to their own ethnicity, there is nothing wrong with it but for Christians I think it should be overlooked as Christ came to save all peoples. Peter himself was half Jewish and Greek. The early church father Origen of Alexandria too was half Egyptian and Greek. I myself could care less about a woman’s ethnicity or if she was taller than me as long as she is loving and is somewhat attractive and loves God.
Nicoletta, sure. That’s part hypergamy part racism.
NameUnknown, THE Rollo, or whomever, is actually wrong. :( Even if he is an alpha. Or something. I don’t know, I haven’t met him.
hy·per·ga·my
hīˈpərgəmē
noun
the action of marrying a person of a superior caste or class.
People keep using that word, etc…
*It’s everyone who’s misusing that word.
Here’s another one:
pa·tri·arch·y
ˈpātrēˌärkē
noun
noun: patriarchy
a system of society or government in which the *father or eldest male* is head of the family and descent is traced through the male line.
a system of society or government in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it.
a society or community organized on patriarchal lines.
plural noun: patriarchies
Specifically, this system:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pater_familias
So, I’d argue that inheriting the male surname is patriar*chal*, not a partiar*chy*, etc.
Well Red, women deem taller men superior class don’t they? We could argue over the semantics of the term but female nature is what it is. Anyhow I’d rather focus on improving my life.
Usually, there’s a height-range for each woman, depending on her own height and body mass. I think it sort of works out that way economically for men. There might be an element of classism, but I think that hypergamy is referring more to middle-class marrying upper middle-class or upperclass. I think what you’re talking about is similar to the chest fetish in our culture. In some cultures, men are more into legs or wrists or what have you.
Our culture values men who are unusually tall. I personally don’t care about height, unless he’s half a foot shorter. That might be shallow of me, though.
The thing is, though, Red, men in America don’t much care what “class” a woman is from, what she does for a living, or how much money she makes. We care about what she looks like and what her attitude is. Actually, I would prefer it if my woman were from more modest means so she would have more of an appreciation for me and what I could provide.
Likewise, I believe most women prefer tall men to even rich or fairly well to do men. I remember seeing a special on this several years ago in which the women interviewed preferred the tall men out of the lineup of male subjects in spite of the fact that they had lower class jobs than their shorter counter-parts. The women admitted that the only way they’d have chosen the short men to the tall men was if the tall men were murderers or something along those lines. Despite the official dictionary definition, I believe hypergamy in America is more about genetics than money.
Red, yes there is a height range for each woman, but when a woman is between 5’0-5’3 refuses to date men say 5’4-5’8 range and only 6’0+, that is a big problem.
Hank that documentary you are referring to is this one
Women of all ethnic groups have a preference for taller men, the question is how much taller. I see many Korean and Chinese women date men minimum 5’10 and above. Western influence is everywhere so there is no escaping it. It is sad that men are starting to go for limb lengthening surgery which is very painful and expensive just so they have a chance of finding a woman or to progress in their careers and life.
But it’s STILL not hyperg… uhn… >:(
Hypergamy is by definition *only* referring to social class and/or money, whether you’re using the caste system or going Bourgeoisie/Proletariat Marxism-style or whatever. Now, if you were to argue that daters are a subculture, and that within the subculture existed a class-system, and that height a part of that class-system, then you could have Hypergamy, as you define it. But it’s only a temporary social institution, wherein most people enter and then leave, like a revolving glass door. A subculture would be more permanent.
You know what, I don’t like short girls either. Hyper-inflated. Thanks, Obama. (no offense, short girls)
If it makes you feel better, I was obsessed for years with a guy who was my height exactly. Some women don’t care. The only way to find them is to:
“Likewise, I believe most women prefer tall men to even rich or fairly well to do men.”
Were that the case, you could demonstrate that hypergamy is less of an issue now than it used to be. Because so many women are job-holders, they now date more like men (in this scenario). They are now concerned more with physically desirable qualities, and less concerned with comfort/provision. They’re using their own careers to climb the social ladder, and rely less on “marrying-up.”
However, hypergamy is still going to be an issue nowadays, because women generally can’t handle their power. Also, as a group, women tend to self-sabotage. Incidents of woman-on-woman workplace bullying are some three times higher than man-on-woman (which is still higher than man-on-man).
When you’re talking about height, you could include it with hypergamy in the category of “maximizing.” Physical traits/ personality/ presentation + hypergamy = maximizing.
Something that I’d like to write a paper on in the hypothetical future: “Does the Dowry System Still Exist?” I’ve wondered if the dowry system of yore ever died-out in the West, or if women are still expected to provide it without the help of the patriarch? Maybe I’ll get a blog someday and write junk like this.
Were the case, you could study how hypergamy’s changed (but remember, still sticking to the original definition of hypergamy).
I personally think height is one of the ‘hypergamous’ characteristics girls find attractive. For that matter, both men and women are impressed by height, and taller people are almost expected to belong to a higher ‘social caste’, if that’s the term you want to use. Think of Saul in the Bible; he was a head taller than the other men around him, so people found it easy to respect him as king.
I’m not quite attracted to men who are REALLY tall, so that I feel like I have to look way up at them when I’m beside them (I’m pretty average height). Men who are, say 6’6″ or something (I’m Dutch, so I’ve met a few of those! :P ) feel too tall beside me. Yet even then, I see them as more attractive and impressive than shorter men. Confession: I have someone ‘pursuing me’ right now who I thought was out of my league…because of his size, mostly! There are other reasons I’m interested in him, but I can tell that my response to him is different, right off the bat, because when I met him, my subconscious brain labeled him as one of the most attractive men in the group. So my conscious mind is aware of the superficial reasons why women are attracted to some men above others, but that doesn’t stop my subconscious brain from being shallow…
But I also agree with Red, girls can also find not-so-tall men very attractive. I have. Attractiveness comes from a combination of traits…social dominance, height, job, etc… Girls who screen for men over 6 feet (especially when they are short themselves) are being very superficial and screening out a lot of good men.
“Were that the case, you could demonstrate that hypergamy is less of an issue now than it used to be. Because so many women are job-holders, they now date more like men (in this scenario). They are now concerned more with physically desirable qualities, and less concerned with comfort/provision. They’re using their own careers to climb the social ladder, and rely less on ‘marrying-up.'”
It sounds to me like we’re basically agreement, although you’re still emphasizing the dictionary definition of hypergamy. No big deal.
Hana made a good point when she mentioned thinking someone was out of her league. To me, that’s really what hypergamy is all about, trying to get or holding out for someone out of one’s own league. I’m frequently guilty of this myself.
Thanks for finding the clip, NameUnknown. It’s been a while since I saw that and couldn’t remember where I’d seen it exactly.
Hana, I’m part Dutch. My brothers are 6’4″ and 6’5″, respectively. I used to live in a Dutch area. Freaky giantism genes…
Also, beaucoup de perfection.
Then again, Tom Cruise’s short height hasn’t hurt his career.
Hank I don’t really aim for women way out of my league cause I assume their super hypergamous and probably have 300+ male friends constantly giving them attention on Facebook/phone in this gynocentric society. Overall men are first attracted to pretty faces, then the rest of their physical features. It really is a numbers game at the end of the day. Approach thousands in person and msg online and some woman might choose you. The other thing is turning off male mother need which is hard to do because we are conditioned to believe that women are these nurturing, loving beings, when in fact most aren’t in the modern world. Stardusk has a good video on the subject I’ve linked to below. I disagree with his atheistic views in other videos.
“Then again, Tom Cruise’s short height hasn’t hurt his career.”
It also hasn’t hurt his value in the eyes of women, but the rules are different for famous guys. On the other hand, guys who are only rich and not famous (like Elliot Rodger?) still have to provide some social proof or at least some normalcy.
I’ve always been surprised by Jack’s comments about his height causing problems with women because I’m 5’4″ and have always dated much taller women without an issue.
Hana–I lived in the Netherlands for 18 months (getting a masters at Leiden) and was engaged to (though the wedding didn’t come off) to a girl from Zealand who was 6’2”. Before her I dated a girl who was 6’5” and liked to wear high heeled boots. That got people’s attention, partly because she worked at ESA in Nordwijk which was, not surprisingly, 90% male.
The reality is men are just as attracted to bad girls as women are to bad boys. The reason Fatal Attraction is such a popular (and imitated) film almost 30 years later is because it rings true – like the relationship between Jodi Arias and Travis Alexander. People have the wildest sex with the kind of person they would never consider for marriage and family.
I’ve dated 5’9″, 5’10”, and 5’11”.
Although none of them were natives to my own region, but came from elsewhere in the US where I suppose, women may have less of a hard-on for male height.
Ncoletta-
You mistake the fatal attraction thing.
Men are not attracted to bad women, we are attracted to highly sexual women. The issue is that highly sexual women often become that way due to other problems in their life, such as being a psycho, or drama queen.
“Badness” is often a sign of dominance, and it is a masculine characteristic. Men are actually unattracted by these attributes, but are more attracted by the highly sexual behavior.
I’d rather “be with” a 6 who has issues but is highly sexual, than a princess-angel 9 who is a l=pillar of beauty and virtue, but regards sex as some sort of chore, or has a “nice girls don’t do that” attitude, even after marriage (yes, it happens).
It’s not that we WANT bad women, but we tend to tolerate it in order to get women who are attractive enough, but are at least into us.
This is similar to women – they don’t really “like” the bad boy’s bad behavior, but they are willing to tolerate it in order to be with a guy who is masculine and dominant.
“Men are not attracted to bad women, we are attracted to highly sexual women. The issue is that highly sexual women often become that way due to other problems in their life, such as being a psycho, or drama queen.”
Jack is correct. Men are attracted to highly sexual women. It’s commonly misinterpreted that highly sexual women are “bad” because many of them happen to be sluts. But this is wrong, because a slut is not necessarily highly sexual, or even averagely sexual. And a highly sexual woman is not necessarily a slut.
It’s often misinterpreted this way for a couple of reasons. Sluts are considered “bad” by most because their loose sexual morals are destructive for everyone involved. Badboys attract all sorts of women, sluts and nonsluts alike. It’s just that the badboy often brings out a woman’s sexuality – making her look “bad” or “slutty” by association, even if she is a nonslut.
Women routinely will express surprise or shock at how sexual they become in the presence of a man they’re attracted to – they’re so unaccustomed to it they get literally overwhelmed with desire. They’re shocked at their OWN conduct. It’s why I’ve often said – given the right time, right circumstances, right man, and low risk of detection, many women will cheat, and many more will seriously consider it.
Most women have it in them to be highly sexual – it’s just that most men don’t inspire those kinds of visceral sexual feelings in them. But the ones who do inspire them can “bring out the beast” in most any woman.
“The issue is that highly sexual women often become that way due to other problems in their life, such as being a psycho, or drama queen.”
A technical but important quibble here. Certifiably crazy women or women with mental issues on the personality disorder spectrum (borderline, narcissistic, histrionic, etc.) and who get promiscuous aren’t necessarily “highly sexual”. They’re just women who know how to use their sexual power to achieve their desired results through manipulation and coercion. Most women understand very, very well the sexual power they have. They understand they have it, how to use it, and what men will do to get it. I’ve never known a woman to hesitate using her sexual wiles to manipulate a man if she believes it will work and it will achieve her goal.
But if you’re too obvious, FWM sets in.
That’s true. If a woman shows too obvious an interest in a man, he sees her as “low-hanging fruit,” not even worth the energy to reach up and grab — except maybe for easy sex.
Susan-
Not really.
This is only tangentially true because usually when a women is very forward, it is because the guy is of much higher value. Think of a bunch of preening groupies around a rock star.
You’re getting cause and effect reverse. I assure you that very few men would see a great girl as low hanging fruit if she displayed interest.
Generally women only show very obvious interest when the guy is such a “good deal” that the girl thinks it is worth the risk. Unless the guy is top-tier, women expect men to do the pursuing. Top tier men get pursued, all other men must do the work themselves.
I don’t mean to be mean, but you’ve been married a long time, and it does not sound like you’ve been in the combat dating world with the rest of us, so your perceptions here are not based on first-hand experience.
The few times really cool girls approached me, I was in NO WAY turned off by that, nor did I see them as hookup material.
When I have had tattoed and obviously trampy women hit on me, then yes, I see low hanging fruit.
So it has nothing to do with how forward the girl is. You’re mistaking a PARALLEL attribute with the real cause.
Me and a friend of mine were at this band thing at a church, and there was like a whole group of women around the guitar player guy. My friend said she would have approached him, if it weren’t for all them. I agree. I refuse to be the groupie woman. Refuse. It’s reverse hotness for me.
#NAWALT
#butyoualreadyknewthat
#hashtagstotheinternet
I think we can now officially declare that Aunt Haley has either found herself a husband or has moved overseas to work in an orphanage. Or something like that.
In other news, Joshua Rodgers tells us how great marriage is (again), before running out of selling points and telling us to man-up for God’s blessing.
https://community.focusonthefamily.com/b/boundless/archive/2014/09/22/single-men-life-could-be-a-whole-lot-better.aspx
Not that it matters, I just wanted to be the last one to comment. I’ll turn off the lights and lock-up before I leave.
I noticed that this thread was wrapping-up, but I hope to catch a small crowd of you. So, this is going to sound crazy, but maybe some of you noticed that jack and I had kind of a thing going on? We’ve actually been dating the whole time. I met jack on a different forum, “Red Pill for Gamers,” where he taught me the fine art of “game” firsthand. As it turned out, I had no idea what I was doing, but Robertson had some experience in the manosphere, as well as other online locations, and was able to show me the ropes.
I didn’t realize how much attraction could take place when you let a man be a man. It was mostly a mixture between jack’s masculine attitude and my ability to let myself be controlled by a man. When I was playing the game wrong, jack would forcefully correct me into moving in the right direction. Then I learned how to play, a very beneficial skill.
To make a long story short, I will now be the proud wife of an accountant, a very beneficial job. This will teach me how to cook square meals.
Haley, I sent you an email a while back. We’d really like to have you at my bridal shower, and I’d also really like it if you came to my bachelorette party. I’m registered at Kohl’s. You don’t have to bring a gift for the bridal party, just be yourself. Maybe just bring money or a dish to pass. I’ll give you the directions to our place (yeah, I compromised and moved in with him, because alpha).
Here’s the Kohl’s website, just in case:
kohls dawt com/
Here are coupons for Kohl’s (Kohls?)
bestcouponsforyou dawt com/stores/kohls
Happy Kohl’s-ing! Hope to see you there. I’ll cry, if you don’t come! :)
Congratulations to both of you!
Sept. 5, 2014, 1:12 AM, Jack said:
“As a committed Christian, I am of course limited in choice of wife.”
Aug. 5, 2014, 5:37 PM, Red had said:
“However, I’ve come to consider myself agnostic…”
Jack’s post came just 24 days ago and yours a month before that. You’ve been dating, engaged, or living together while these inconsistent statements were made (all other inconsistencies notwithstanding for the moment)?
Red and I are now quite the item. Turns out the corollary for “No Rings for Sluts” was “Huge Rocks for Virgins”. (who knew?) You should see the size of the Cubic Zirconia I have festooned her delicate little hand with. (Yes, CZ, because she don’t care about that kinda thing too much).
I’ll make it up to her by getting her a sports car. You can’t drive a ring, after all.
Of course, I have a traditional job, and there is no doubt in my mind that someday one of her screenplays will hit it big, which could put me in a bad spot if her hypergamy flares back up. As a preventative measure, I am keeping myself well ahead with strategically places negs, to make sure her otherwise demure nature doesn’t suddenly go all Paris Hilton on me. Gotta keep the female ego in check. Like the Huns, they’re either at your feet or at your throat. Season with just enough loving beta to keep her guessing, and…
TINGLE, oh, the TINGLE!!!
This could all end poorly, of course, if my former beta self ever works its way back out of the cage I put it in.
As we know, alpha is all about the frame: I like to stand below her balcony at night, with a flower in my hand, and one by one pull off the petals as I say “I love you, I love you not, I love you, I love you not”.
Romantic angst is the best makeup.
Just kiddin’ babe – it’s really a diamond…
Interesting that the forum you guys met on is…no longer in existence… Maybe it’s time for you two to forge a relationship with other people. In real life.
congrats, Jack and red.
I think.
Jack….
Were you referring to the Return of The Kings article, the one where Thatch practically bragged about bedding an innocent Christian virgin woman?
“…Word is, they are very happy together.
She got her alpha male, because the Church does not have them anymore, except for a few top-tier pastors and “worship team” (gayest term every) leaders.
Christian women are no different – they want their alpha, and if they have to bend a few Christian principles, so be it….”
I read that blog too and was flabbergasted.
That “Christian” woman was clearly deceived, to be so easily seduced by that pagan fornicator Thatch.
Most of his detractors in that blog were right, he was wrong.
You make some good points here. The manosphere suffers from an echo chamber more than anyone would like to admit. The internet as a whole is so flooded with simpletons it’s easy for a crowd to fall into the habit of parroting the same ideas. People should focus more on their own ideas.
I’d love it if you’d check out my blog at practicallyalpha.wordpress.com. I write a good bit on keeping a positive mentality, so I believe you’d find something worthwhile in my words.
Oh my! I love your blog. And your tag line is just great!
Any thoughts on this Father’s Day quote I saw in my church bulletin? “A lot of men are leaving their wives for younger women because they yearn for attention from younger women. And God gave them a daughter who can give them that. And instead they go find a substitute daughter….you’ve seen it, we’ve all seen it. These old guys going and finding these substitute daughters.”
That is an interesting perspective. It’s not so weird for a single man to eventually settle down with a much younger woman because he wants a family and such — but for a man to abandon his family just to start a whole new one is rather sad.
That is just a BS male-shaming tactic. If anything, more wives than ever are leaving their husbands to have one last go being chased by other men.
A huge number of the women in the Church are in massive rebellion against God and their husbands, and silly statements by churches are just white-knighting pastors trying to kiss up to the women.
I’d be just as wary of marrying the average Christian woman as I would the average secular woman. The church is totally infected with a certain kind of Christiany-feminism.
I’ll be avoiding most churches like the feminist ghettos they are.
Men know men. When the Josh Duggar scandal broke, my Twitter feed was full of male posters (largely of the Calvinist persuasion) insisting that all males have pedophilic temptations, “but for the grace of God, there go I.” I was shocked, but men know men.
Agonistes, I believe that’s a quote from Voddie Baucham and a strange one at that. I’ve always wondered about what Voddie would think of men who didn’t have daughters. Would they then be allowed to go pursue other women, because they weren’t blessed with daughters to give them attention? If not, then why even bring up the daughter part? This is to say nothing of the accuracy of his statement itself for men who do have daughters, which alone would be another conversation.
I also think it’s strange that your church put this in the church bulletin on Father’s Day. On Mother’s Day, did they also put a quote about women leaving their families to pursue other men? I have my doubts.
TeresaR, men also lie about men.
First time on this excellent blog. What happened to Haley?
This is pretty clean negging. Not really negging, but the fact that he totally ignores his gf and continues to film her is pretty cool.
http://thebestoftumbling.com/post/127474385273/guy-annoying-his-girlfriend-with-bad-ikea-puns
jack, I’d be your substitute daughter. :P
“On Mother’s Day, did they also put a quote about women leaving their families to pursue other men? I have my doubts.”
Of course not; when was the last time you saw some middle-aged broad snag a younger trophy husband?
Interesting you speak of the negative effects of bitterness….your entire blog reeks of it. Get the beam out of your own eye, Haley.
Jack,
Lemmee comment on this statement you made:
“…..I had more than enough secular girlfriends, and they were all willing to sleep with me. I’m not the basement dwelling loser that is often seen as a manosphere cliche. I’ve had women ask me for one-night stands on a few occasions even…”
***Same here. I turned-down some.
“…..Had I taken what I needed when I needed it, I would probably be in a better place today…”
***I feel the same way.
“…..But I was trying to follow moral principles, and I was also trying preserve those women from harm – I was not married to them, so I would have been wrong to take something that was not mine….”
***Me too. Seems a foolish view now, doesn’t it?
“…..But this was before I knew how casually most of them gave it away in the first place….”
***DITTOS.
I won’t claim to be a virgin in my single days (I lost mine in high school, before I became a believer next year in college), but I wasn’t a pagan fornicator & DID NOT pressure the women I dated for sex.
My “number” was rather low: 4 from 17 to 30.
I can count the number of times on one hand.
What’s that? Sex every 2 years?
I too tried to be a “nice guy” & “really respect” Christian women’s feelings.
Little did i know they cared little for this & would so easily drop their panties for the bad boys, who after they took their Christian innocences, would soon bolt.
I wasn’t any jerk.
I wasn’t only after women for sex.
Good that I changed my view @ 30 when I met a Christian woman (who I would later marry) who wasn’t so hung-up on sex. Yes, we had LOTS of sex when we dated.
After living like an almost-virgin for so many years, I felt I “deserved” some happiness.
Your points are spot-on.
First comment in awhile. Is Haley still with us? There were rumors of a car accident.