When writing the post on advice to a woman looking to marry in her 30s, I suggested she consider what good qualities in a man she would be willing to trade for more of some other good qualities. Part of what I was thinking about at the time is a tool used in project management called a Flexibility Matrix.
This is something a project manager fills out with direction from the sponsors when first starting the project. Sometimes the terms are slightly different, but the basic concept remains the same. If you have to choose, where are your priorities? Project sponsors are like everyone else; they want everything, and they want it cheaply (or for free) and they want it right away. No one can blame them, but sometimes reality doesn’t conform to their desires. This is where the flexibility matrix comes in. If the project represented in the chart above runs into problems, the project manager and the sponsor have already agreed that if needed they will add additional resources (funding, people, etc) to keep the schedule on time and avoid cutting features. If additional resources aren’t enough, their next decision would be to cut features to meet the project deadline. Deciding this upfront keeps everyone on the same page and makes the tough choices which can come up down the road easier to manage.
I know we are talking about a very subjective and emotion driven topic in a hyper rational way, but there is value in at least some careful planning. At the end of the process the outcome will be part plan, part emotion, and part gut instinct, and that is ok.
Anyway this is a fairly simple concept that I thought might add some to the existing discussion.
lol. You and your charts.
[D: The spice of life!]
You have thick legs. Or skinny ones. No chest. You have an annoying laugh. And a big nose. And 100k in debt.
Your “number” is well over 10. You were a party girl. You have an illegitimate kid.
Whatever.
Women who are less than perfect need to get over their unrealistic expectations.
If I was forced to start again at the ripe ol’ age of 29, the number one thing I would be flexible about is looks, second height. You can grow to be attracted to a man, especially when the other qualities, such as smarts, kindness, humour, etc are all there. We’re all pretty unattractive in the end, so better to invest in qualities that last.
Also, to the woman: You have to look as best as possible. This does not mean clothes and make-up. If you’ve always struggled with those last 5 pounds, LOSE THEM. Let’s be frank- your face is probably not as nice as it was when you were 21. However, a good way to balance this out, is by having a really hot body. Further, having a hot body is very very enticing to men. Just make sure you wear tasteful clothing. Always have your hair nicely done, smell nice, etc. Have long hair, blonde or with highlights if possible. Take care of your skin. Take a look at your natural expression in the mirror- do you look hostile? Make sure to have a natural “happy” look when you’re out and smile.
This doesn’t prime you for finding your ideal man, but a suitable partner. Be realistic.
Relevant theme to dissect, as women are inundated with hamsterization empowerment messages on a daily basis, from media and the ‘sisterhood’ reinforcing the idea that men must earn their love, not the other way around.
The opposite is in fact true. With no-fault divorce and pre-nups being flimsy and ‘circumnavigatable’, it is women who hold the cards in a relationship (i like to describe it as a hammer held over the man’s head, ready to strike should the mood hit her).
So, if a man wished some semblance of stability and fairness, this ‘hammer’ has to be neutralized, and to do that he must first fulfill his obligations re a relationship – have a good job, savings, healthy, intelligence via firm spirituality and understanding of the culture he lives in. Once this is established, the hammer drops slightly, as she now has to present her own offering (childrearing ability, mental stability, financial acumen, ability to support the husband emotionally).
To fully neutralize the hammer is trickier. This is where the man requires the woman to lose, completely, the feminist poison of bitchiness, nagging, moodiness, general childishness. I consider the male equivalent to this to be his use of force.
So, if the male is to renounce his use of force, she must renounce the female equivalent.
Out there as far as ideas go, I know, but just my way of advancing the discussion. No, I am not condoning DV in any way, shape or form and am proud to say I have NEVER done so, but there MUST be a way men can neutralize the woman’s general cattiness!
“….With no-fault divorce and pre-nups being flimsy and ‘circumnavigatable’, it is women who hold the cards in a relationship”
Only after marriage. Men hold the cards before then, as it is women who are after marriage, not men. Men could use their power to find a good wife, or (as in my case) to convert a slightly feral, but well meaning creature into a good wife.
It seems both sexes are giving away their power far too easily. Sluts give up the sex and betas give up the relationships. No wonder the contempt for these two…they’re ruining everything.
Off-topic, but thought you might appreciate (for your “Church Apathy About Divorce” files) this article about the awkward conversation that folks considering marriage need to have about sexual history:
http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=24-03-016-v
The author is a Southern Baptist pastor and seminary professor in Louisville, Kentucky, and the article is heavy on the theology. There is some good recognition that, if you find out your prospective mate has a past as a party girl and her hamster is telling her it’s no big deal, it would probably be a good idea to run away, pronto.
Then there is the following: “Yet I’m surprised at the number of Christians, particularly men, who are unwilling to move forward after hearing a repentant confession of past sexual sin. This is all the more puzzling when the one who “can’t get over” the sexual past of a future mate is also guilty of fornication.” I suppose one could say that there’s “repentant” and then there’s “repentant,” but overall I think the author goes off the rails there. The ensuing discussion presupposes that men and women are similarly positioned, and that a man has as much reason to worry about his fiancee who used to be a stripper as a woman does about her fiance who used to sow his wild oats.
Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: Close-Up Edition