Over at the throwaway post that keeps on giving, new commenter Deborah explains that since attractive men aren’t messaging her, women must have the SMP advantage as they age (emphasis mine):
My husband and my marriage has been over a little over a year after he walked out and feel that I want to start dating again. I keep my figure up, weigh 106 lbs, 5’3″ and put on my makeup and dress appropriately for my age of 57.
*But I have tried the “new type of dating” since I haven’t dated since 1979 and married in 1980, so I have signed up on 5 dating sites, some free, most not -JDate since I am Jewish, Match, OurTime for those over 50, OKCupid wihich is free and not Zoosk, which I am thinking I won’t sign up for a paid subscription.
Yes, I am lonely, and do love men, even though my husband hurt me deeply. But, when I look at the profile photos of the men on these dating sites, they turn my stomach, and feel these men have no idea just how bad they look, older than their years on their profile, fat, scruffy, and look like they have been road hard, put away wet, and don’t have a clue that most women who are my age, will not find them the least bit attractive, surely not to date. Most just look like they are narcissists, and self centered, and think us women want to go out with a fish, or boat or souped up car, because that is what these guys pose with and many don’t even smile on their profiles. Are their teeth rotten or do they just hate life? Not sure about any of this.
What I do know is I have more self esteem and want anyone I date to clean up their act too. These men, aver the age of 50, want us women to look good, even thin and sexy, but do they? Nope.
If you don’t believe me about these dating sites.sign up for one or two, create a profile, of yourself, and then sit back and watch and wait to see who sends you a wink or a message. These men are also rude, crude and disrespectful of women, and think that we are devoid of having a brain, or carrying on a conversation. To even try and screen out some of the men that are NOT a fit for me at all, I put in my profile that I love the theater, the ballet, the arts, as most men on these dating sites wouldn’t know what a tutu is, or who Picasso is. LOL Too bad it’s so pathetic:(
See Also: Grannies Gone Wild!
Pingback: The more meager a woman’s choices, the more attractive she must be. | Manosphere.com
The self deception is discouraging, isn’t it?
She really doesn’t get the “assortive” part of assortive mating, does she?
I think therefore I am … I’m awesome … just ask me!
She is only going to get older men to reply. Younger men will be in search of younger women. Her pool of possible matches is rather small to start with. Not that should drive her thought process. She can’t see that fence post staring at her.
But, hey what do we know? These converstaions could be very soon a jail-able crime.
http://news.yahoo.com/britain-threatens-internet-trolls-two-years-jail-110001348.html
Trust me….women at age 27 are saying the same things about men who contact them online.
A wife of an acquaintance of mine is thinking of leaving her husband
She’s 40, relatively attractive, three children, one of them a toddler, the oldest at 14 with a serious and growing drug problem
She’s confident she can get married again
I’m beyond words…
What I do know is I have more self esteem
This explains much.
Actually sounds quite true to me. In our group of friends, most of the women are still quite slim and attractive. Not “hawt” as in a 22 year old body, but Attractive.
I would say half of us hubbies are still in good shape, while the other half are slobs.
Over all, about 2/3 of the women are still attractive in the over fifty set, while only 1/2 of the men.
I get what she is saying. And remember, she hasn’t been on the market for 34 years, so these fatties were probably quite a shock to her.
To even try and screen out some of the men that are NOT a fit for me at all, I put in my profile that I love the theater, the ballet, the arts, as most men on these dating sites wouldn’t know what a tutu is, or who Picasso is.
Many a fine fella would not know of ballets or Picasso’s. She does narrow the pool, doesn’t she?
Not “hawt” as in a 22 year old body
When she was 22, almost all women were thin. These days, not so much. The market has changed.
after he walked out
I wonder what really happened there.
Not to put too fine a point on it:
Deborah, women tend to attract their rough SMV peers. The men you’re attracting ARE your rough SMV peers. [Rode] hard? Put away wet? Fat? Scruffy?
Let me explain something to you. You might be 5 foot 3 and 106 lbs (pics or it aint true), but you’re 57 years old. You were married for over 30 years to another man. You claim he left you, but any man worth his salt will understand that the marriage ended because that’s what YOU wanted. Men coming up on 60 don’t blow up decades-old marriages unless wife pushed him out for whatever reason. So the men you’ll attract will understand that. What man with two functioning brain cells is going to invest one minute of time or one dollar on you?
You have almost no sexual market value left. You’re 57, not 27. You just blew up a 30 year marriage. Your online dating results will reflect that.
“I would say half of us hubbies are still in good shape, while the other half are slobs.”
The hubbies in good shape will be sitting pretty if their marriages ever end for any reason. A 55 year old guy in “good shape” and a decent bankroll will be spending his dough and time on 35-40 year old women who still have some SMV. But remarry? Doubtful.
@MFG
You might pass on some or all of the information I shared on this page to him (I would probably repackage it though instead of sending a link). Specifically, the AARP study and quotes, and the real stories behind Stella and EPL. Both women (Stella and Elizabeth from EPL) found men who were far lower SMV than the ones portrayed in the movies, and both women explain that the men married them to get a visa to the US! The AARP study is about “late life divorce”, but it was largely about women divorcing in their 40s and early 50s. The results were brutal. I would write up a summary of the reality in your own words, and then link to the news stories I link to for Stella and EPL, and to the AARP study.
Dalrock, it appears you have created a magnetic monopole. Year after year it continues to pull, but only one polarity. Nothing in the normal world explains this. Only through The Glasses does it make sense.
It baffles science.
She really doesn’t get the “assortive” part of assortive mating, does she?
At 57, the “mating” part isn’t there either
@DeNihilist
It isn’t just that the only men who respond to her profile are fat, but they are in every way substandard. They can’t even smile or hold a basic conversation. The older fat guys who can smile or hold a conversation either don’t exist on the site or are busy with other women.
High maintenance she is.
MFG
A wife of an acquaintance of mine is thinking of leaving her husband
She’s 40, relatively attractive, three children, one of them a toddler,
Dalrock has addressed this very constructively, no advice to add.
Observation: I am certain the youngest child is the toddler, and that child is or soon will be 3 years old. This pattern is well known – youngest child is autonomous to some degree, wife becomes restless. IMO it’s an urge that comes from deep inside, the way men may get an urge to cheat at certain phases in marriage. These urges are not destiny or some irresistable force, but they do exist. It doesn’t have to take the form of frivorce or cheating, it could manifest as increasing hypercriticalness / nagging on her part; after all, it’s not really frivorce if she makes his life miserable enough that other women become a real tempation as opposed to a theoretical one.
It’s an urge than can be controlled. But only if she wants to, or needs to, control it.
“…and Adam was not deceived, but Eve was deceived, and became a transgressor.” So it goes.
but they are in every way substandard
She absorbed the knowledge of the modern market place well, that is “women are in charge”. For some reason she does not understand that it only applies to young women. Why is there such a disconnect?
I get what she is saying. And remember, she hasn’t been on the market for 34 years, so these fatties were probably quite a shock to her.
There’s a huge self-selection involved that she may not be really noticing; the men who know about ballet, who can discuss the work of Picasso might just have other things to do than post there.
There’s also the very obvious assumption that she’s worth the trouble. There may well be a man in her social circle who likes ballet and modern art, but does not find attractive or interesting the idea of her going to the ballet / art gallery / opera /etc. to be worth his consideration. I doubt this thought has crossed her mind, because it just wouldn’t. Solipsism, etc.
“Most just look like they are narcissists, and self centered”
Projection: it’s not just for movie theaters.
Where do I start? I am one of those 50 something guys she would run into. Overweight? Yep, a little, but I have no problems hiking up mountains, or skiing on them or hitting the treadmill. I am no 0% bodybuilder. What I have found is that the women my age who are recently single only take a look at guys like me when they are financially, emotionally, physically, and intellectually broken down. One of the commenters talked about guys my age pursuing ladies at least a decade younger, and it is true. Some late 30’s and 40’s women are a true pleasure to be around. Some of them can describe the plight of the 50 something better than anyone on this commentary board. Women are divorced because they want it, nay, demand it. They want to take the rust bucket out for a few more rides with new passengers, but there arent any.
“women at age 27 are saying the same things about men who contact them online”
No doubt about it.
http://drhelen.blogspot.com/2011/06/vox-at-alpha-game-dont-listen-to-female.html
“Women are divorced because they want it, nay, demand it. They want to take the rust bucket out for a few more rides with new passengers, but there arent any.”
Yep.
Anyone who thinks 57 year old, 5 foot 3, 106 pound Deborah is looking for a second husband is a moron. Deborah wants another spin on the carousel with the fun hawt horsies. She was expecting James Bond, Tom Selleck or Tom Jones. Instead she got Peter Griffin, Homer Simpson and “creepy” Rob Lowe” on those DirecTV commercials.
@Anon Reader
I can’t find the link, but this reminds me of a comment by an older divorced woman who complained that all men must be assuming she was interested in was “bycicle riding” (as a euphemism). Of course they weren’t assuming any such thing, they were just clearly communicating the limits of their own interest in spending time with her.
There is a fall in prestige for a woman of that age to become divorced. Perhaps she is feeling it, not understanding it, and consequently venting. The blame for this she places on men.
“A wife of an acquaintance of mine is thinking of leaving her husband
She’s 40, relatively attractive, three children, one of them a toddler, the oldest at 14 with a serious and growing drug problem
She’s confident she can get married again”
Sounds like she’s confident that she can leave her responsibilities behind, or at least find a simp who will help out financially. Sad thing is, with regard to the latter, she’s probably right.
“[I] put in my profile that I love the theater, the ballet, the arts, as most men on these dating sites wouldn’t know what a tutu is, or who Picasso is.”
Dare I say that a man who knows about those things would probably be….eh, nevermind.
Deti
You claim he left you, but any man worth his salt will understand that the marriage ended because that’s what YOU wanted. Men coming up on 60 don’t blow up decades-old marriages unless wife pushed him out for whatever reason.
Y’know, I’ve observed divorces of these sort from time to time over the years. When I was in college I knew of several friends who came back from the Christmas break very upset, because they were the youngest child & now that they were out of the house, the parents were divorcing. It seemed to make no sense. Then a few years later I thought I’d figured it out: making a family totally centered on children means that when the last child leaves, the marriage has no center anymore – the man and woman look at each other and say, “Who are YOU? Where did you come from?” with “what happened to the fun person I married” rather implied. And I still believe there is a lot of truth in this hypothesis, based on the divorces I saw. I recall one person I knew, her father was a doctor and her mother had been a nurse. It seemed pretty cold to me at the time that the divorce occured the same year as the mother developed breast cancer, but it could be that both the divorce and the disease were brewing up for some number of years. Stress is a known factor in tumors. I have another observation about stress in a moment.
Right now, I’m watching a possible grey divorce brewing and seeing some things I didn’t see as a younger man. When a woman pick-pick-picks at a man starting with the birth of a first or second child, when she picks fights passive-aggressively because he’s not “good enough” any more – (he was OK as a husband, but as a father? Not so much. ) the stress level apparently increases on him with out bound. A blue pill man knows something is wrong, but the only tool in the drawer is more pleasing, more supplication, more self-betaizing. This often leads to her frivorcing him. But, as noted, I’m seeing something else.
Athol once had a post about putting someone “on the clock”. This is different from a woman who has been cheated on deciding “one more time and that’s it”. This is more like “She’s going to kill me with this stress level. If she doesn’t quit this behavior in N months, I’m done”, or “He can’t control his temper. It’s affecting the kids. If he can’t dial it back in N months, I’m done”.
I think what I am seeing, from the outside, is this: many of the usual changes a woman goes through as a result of child birth / raising have gotten so bad, he can’t stand it and she won’t change it. The idea of SuperMom turning her undivided “always improving” attention on him and him alone after the youngest child is out of the house is appallling. He has few to no skills in managing her-no glasses, and apparently no authority & thus no respect. Also it’s possible that, pace’ Elspeth’s SAM, he’s afraid of her in some sense, as beta men often are.
When the future looks uniformly bad, a man may choose to make a dramatic change in the hope of some kind of improvement. Given a choice between being nagged to death (stress-induced high blood pressure is a major factor in stroke and heart attack…) or paying the lesser penalty of divorce without child support, some men apparently weigh the options and choose what looks to them like self defense.
From Deborah’s perspective her husband walked away from her. It could well be that from his perspective, she drove him out.
@theDeti
She wants both. She wants to have it all. She is just failing miserably at step 7, and moving on to step 8 isn’t happening either.
Been out for a while – nice little island you have there, Opus and Tam, but were the people who designed your road system all drunk? I’ll say one thing, though: every single person we interacted was unfailingly polite.
Anyway, back to our post-marital spinster:
Yes, I am lonely, and do love men, even though my husband hurt me deeply. But, when I look at the profile photos of the men on these dating sites, they turn my stomach, and feel these men have no idea just how bad they look, older than their years on their profile, fat, scruffy, and look like they have been road hard, put away wet, and don’t have a clue that most women who are my age, will not find them the least bit attractive, surely not to date. Most just look like they are narcissists, and self centered, and think us women want to go out with a fish, or boat or souped up car, because that is what these guys pose with and many don’t even smile on their profiles. Are their teeth rotten or do they just hate life? Not sure about any of this.
Pretty much everyone in the market wishes they had more and better choices… she’s not unique in that respect. But what we know – and what she doesn’t know – is that the men messaging her are her SMV/MMV peers. Guys can let themselves go physically a bit if they have money, and everybody knows it. It costs them some market value, but not as much as it does to women. Being poor for a guy is like being ugly for a woman, thus the pictures of boats and hot rods, which signal both provider status and edginess (a devil-may-care guy who has enough money to buy expensive non-essential things). The men she derides are better at advertising themselves than she is, including the lack of smiles, which has been shown to reduce the level of interest women express. Notice that she commented on her appearance but not her finances… that is part of the unacknowledged privilege she has as a woman, which she tacitly admits by what she says about herself (her body) and what she omits (her financial status).
What I do know is I have more self esteem and want anyone I date to clean up their act too. These men, aver the age of 50, want us women to look good, even thin and sexy, but do they? Nope.
Heaven preserve us from women with gobs of self esteem: It is at best unattractive and at worst toxic. And the reason men her age with enough wealth to buy boats and hot rods screen out women who are not sexy women is that they can, and they know that becoming a gym rat is a lot of work for little return if they have wealth.
If you don’t believe me about these dating sites.sign up for one or two, create a profile, of yourself, and then sit back and watch and wait to see who sends you a wink or a message. These men are also rude, crude and disrespectful of women, and think that we are devoid of having a brain, or carrying on a conversation. To even try and screen out some of the men that are NOT a fit for me at all, I put in my profile that I love the theater, the ballet, the arts, as most men on these dating sites wouldn’t know what a tutu is, or who Picasso is. LOL Too bad it’s so pathetic:(
I’m curious as to what she means by disrespectful. If she means uncivil, then she covered that with rude, so she may mean something else. But respect doesn’t work that way – respect has to be earned with men. She seems to be under the common delusion that women are due respect as a group, which they are not; as opposed to being entitled to civility, which everyone should always render unless otherwise indicated. She also hinders herself by putting a bunch of froo-froo in her profile. Ballet? What straight man goes to the ballet unless he’s hen-pecked or wants to watch lithe women in tight costumes who are 30 years younger than she is? Picasso? Yeah… I know who he is, but I consider the vast majority of “Modern Art” to be pretentious crap, including most of what he produced. Most guys won’t give a crap about her middlebrow sophistication anyway, but If a woman wants to convince me she’s sophisticated for some reason, she’d better bring something better than that.
theDeti
She was expecting James Bond, Tom Selleck or Tom Jones. Instead she got Peter Griffin, Homer Simpson and “creepy” Rob Lowe” on those DirecTV commercials.
Not to mention Henry Winkler selling her a reverse mortgage…
This woman, to me, seems to kind of follow a train of thought I sometimes see where women think they can deny, deny, deny those who approach them and magically vault themselves to the eye level of a higher class of man.
I think it is somewhat related to the idea of the nuclear rejection where a woman might think if people can see her blow up some guy, the woman actually must be more attractive than him and higher-value men might be interested.
Men of course tend to eye-roll when women tell them what to find attractive whether directly or indirectly.
@ thedeti
any man worth his salt will understand that the marriage ended because that’s what YOU wanted.
I assume that you mean that she dribbled the sex out very sparingly. Men actually file more divorces past 50.
since I am Jewish,
Paging Mark in Toronto … paging Mark in Toronto…
Come on, friend, hurry! You can’t avoid going to work on this one; that would be the let-down of the century!
@asdgamer
Do you have a source for this? The AARP study on late life divorce found that women initiated about 2/3 as I recall. However, the pool of data was focused mostly on women who were 40-55 when the divorce happened. Either way, it is worth noting that divorce rates drop dramatically as the wife ages.
Edit: Here is the actual breakdown from P 75 of the report. See my original post for more charts and context.
Right. It’s true that a lot of men have terrible dating profiles. A lot of guys do take pictures with their cars or something else they think will be impressive, and a lot of guys can’t (or don’t bother) string together two decent sentences. But you could say similar things about women’s profiles; and as you say, she’s talking about the guys who contact her — the only ones who see her as a potential anything.
I think if this happened in real life, a woman would be better able to see the causation. If the only guys who approached her in bars were fat slobs, she might realize she was missing out on the good ones, because she’d be able to see the good ones across the bar hitting on the younger girls. But online, the good ones either don’t have profiles or aren’t messaging her, so she thinks the losers are all there are.
And what a sense of entitlement! She’s fifty-freakin’-seven and she wants to quiz guys on Picasso to see if they’re worthy of buying her dinner! Astounding. Kudos on her keeping the weight down, seriously, but things still sag. No one else is ever going to appreciate that effort as much as her husband could have.
I wonder if she can make good sammiches.
If she can, that might be a better thing to advertise than love of ballet.
Did she ever take the initiative and contact fellas?
Somewhat OT: there are plenty of Game-deniers and some others who insist that the “alpha widow” doesn’t exist. Well, tell it to Monica, although as usual it’s someone else’s fault. In this case, the Internet is to blame.
http://www.businessinsider.com/monica-lewinsky-tearful-speech-about-falling-in-love-with-clinton-2014-10
@ dalrock
Me: Men actually file more divorces past 50.
D: Do you have a source for this?
Searching….
Projection: it’s not just for movie theaters.
Peter, I hope you copyrighted that, because otherwise I’m stealing it!
It would seem that she has two assets,
1. Her weight
2. Love of artsy stuff
What was she thinking?
FB said ..
“What was she thinking?”
Since someone mentioned movies (“As good as it gets”) … I thought of this when you asked that question Farm Boy.
Woman: “How do you write women so well?”
Melvin: “I think of a man, and I take away reason and accountability.”
So, it stands to reason that there is a reason you can’t think like them … lol
Slkinny does not equal attractive.
The projection on the narcissism is funny here. She isn’t into art, she wants to be the type of person who is into art. Saying you like Picasso is like saying you like the Beatles or Shakespeare. Yeah, most of humanity likes those things. This is code for saying she is cultured, but she just has the trappings of culture.
What she wants is the 50 year old urbanite CEO. To take her out and wine and dine her on his arm. But that only happens in movies to women her age. That man has a wife or a young mare on his arm. “Rode hard and put away wet”? Keeping with the horse analogy, she would be glue if she were a horse.
The sexual market place is a tough place, especially for older women. All of their cache has been spent, and they better work very hard at being feminine and pleasing to get a good man to spend time with them. His other options are either younger and sweeter, or just plain sweeter.
@ Anon Reader:
“Somewhat OT: there are plenty of Game-deniers and some others who insist that the “alpha widow” doesn’t exist. Well, tell it to Monica, although as usual it’s someone else’s fault. In this case, the Internet is to blame.”
Contrary to what some say, there IS such a thing as an alpha widow. Monica Lewinsky is THE archetypal alpha widow.
Monica Lewinsky’s life is a tragedy, it really is. I almost feel badly for her. Here’s a reasonably attractive woman who, had she never had sex with Clinton (the apex alpha to beat all apex alphas), would probably have been married off to some doctor or lawyer or business exec somewhere out in LA or NY. She’d be a housewife with a couple of kids, or working her own job if she wanted to. The most controversy she’d ever see is who would be president of the PTA or selecting the napkin color for the ladies’ auxiliary banquet.
Instead, her name is a punchline and will be until the day she dies and then for the next 100 years after. It’s awful to say it, but she’ll likely go to her grave a never-married woman. No man of any MMV whatsoever would ever seriously consider putting a ring on it with her, investing a couple of decades of backbreaking work and a couple of million dollars in hard earned money. Uh, would you be willing to buy “that woman, Ms. Lewinsky” a house with all the accoutrements therefor, and a couple of cars? Didn’t think so. Even now, any man who dates her will expect and demand that she put out immediately with porn-star level sex (and BJs, oh yes, BJs).
Tragic. And I say that in all seriousness. This is a woman who was on track to be a UMC suburban housewife and mother, not pimping handbags and earning advanced degrees just to make a buck and survive.
According to Lewinsky’s Wikipedia page , she was born in July 1973. So she is just past 41 years old. Kids are all but out of the question for her. If ever there was a woman with some SMV and a NEGATIVE MMV, Lewinsky fits the bill. Her MMV is literally less than zero.
Because of her durable notoriety, she can’t even get a full time job. According to her Wikipedia page, she hasn’t held full time remunerative employment since 1997 — that’s 17 years, folks. This is a woman with a college degree and a master’s in psychology from the London School of Economics. Because of a few highly placed BJs, a woman with no slouchy academic credentials can’t get a job. The reason’s obvious — because no respectable employer wants to be known as That Place Where the Presidential Blow Job Girl Works.
This poor tragic figure, this hero of modern feminism, this icon of SIW -ness, cannot even support herself financially. Even with two post-secondary advanced college degrees, this pathetic woman’s chief skill, the one thing she appears to be good at, is getting men to have sex with her.
@Chris
Images are more expressive than words.
@Cail Corishev
To be fair, she says her husband divorced her, not the other way around. I’m not in a position to argue with her. Likewise, I should have noted this as an exclaimer when referencing the having it all checklist. She is stuck at stage 6 but didn’t necessarily initiate steps 4 or 5.
@Lyn 87
Welcome back to the United States. I am pleased to know that you enjoyed everything about Great Britain, but sadly are unimpressed with our roads. As G.K.Chesterton put it, “The rolling English drunkard made the rolling English road”. The only straight roads in England are Roman.
Since commenter Deborah likes ‘the arts’, she may be interested to know that Richard Geremay be back on the market. . .
any man worth his salt will understand that the marriage ended because that’s what YOU wanted.
Asdgamer: “I assume that you mean that she dribbled the sex out very sparingly. Men actually file more divorces past 50.”
Dalrock already weighed in. Anon reader also put up a good comment that mirrors my thoughts. Could have been anything, really. What happens, I think, when an older man seeks a divorce from a marriage that’s more than 20 years old, is that the wife has worn down her husband with steady insults, deprivations, unfairnesses, and nagging to the point where he simply cannot take it anymore.
Could be keeping him on sexual life support, with juuuust enough sex, once every other month or so, such that she can say they “have a sex lfe”. Could be complete dead bedroom.
Could be her little pokes, jabs and insults, in public and private.
Could be her self-absorption.
Could be her constant complaining about everything under the sun.
So I think Anon Reader is on to something here with his observations of why a man all of a sudden ends a marriage. Usually it’s because he’s borne up under it for decades;and one day he finally breaks and says “that’s it, no more, can’t do it anymore”.
We don’t know who ended it.
If she ended it she does not have my sympathy.
If he ended it, she does.
@ Dalrock
I withdraw my claim. I misunderstood a comment that men were more likely to divorce as they age. The comparison was with younger men, not with women.
I hate that term “Who asked for the divorce?” They used to “ask” when you had to get your spouse’s buy-in to end the marriage. In reality, neither side asks. The one who wants out, can simply get out without asking their spouse for anything. That is unilateral divorce law.
All the other side can do, is refuse to sign anything. Refuse to sign all the paper. In court, refuse to sign any documents. Refuse to even speak with your spouse’s attorney since there is no point. Make it stretch out as long as humanly possible. When the judge grants the divorce (since he MUST since unilaterla divorce is the law) don’t sign that. It wont matter. At that point, it does not require your signature or even that you be NOTIFIED that your marriage is ended. Now she can offically apply for her cash and prizes.
@Chris
“[I] put in my profile that I love the theater, the ballet, the arts, as most men on these dating sites wouldn’t know what a tutu is, or who Picasso is.”
“Dare I say that a man who knows about those things would probably be….eh, nevermind.”
Celibate? 😛
Because I know about both of those things, and am celibate. I went to a yearly production of the nutcracker as a holiday tradition, and can judge different performances of that particular ballet. As for Picasso? Not my taste. I far prefer realists, or impressionists who focus on light and sound. Autobon prints are excellently rendered, but their positioning is often quite off (particularly for long necked birds).
even at such an advanced age, they all think they are the best & “deserve the best” they never grow up.
Going to dating sites instead of going out and actually meeting, y’know, people was her first mistake.* To borrow from Eddie Murphy, she’s wookin’ pa nub in all the wwong pwaces.
Exfernal – There goes my chances of having breakfast this morning. I curse you to an eternity of watching “The View” reruns.
* Assuming she wasn’t the one who initiated a frivorce.
No I think she is doing right with the on-line dating. That is better than bars where she is likely to find drunks and probably better than church where she is likely to fin crickets chipring. At least with on-line the men are interested and she can screen them.
Her problem is that she isn’t going to find even one man that measures up to what she had with her husband.
TFH
I highly doubt the man ended it. The financial ruination would be incredible.
If the alternative is slow death, financial ruination might not look so bad.
On the other thread I implied that Deborah was seeking a position as a fag-hag. If she really wants to corner the niche market of matrimonially-minded art lovers she will find that there are dating sites specifically catering to those who can distinguish their Picassos from their Tutus.
Are Introduction Agencies however a sure-fire way of getting rich? Three years ago a forty-something women in my locality started one. For (special introductory offer of) £700.00 she would guarantee no less than six introductions for the over-thirties to a person of the opposite sex who would, so she said in the Tweet to me: ‘blow my socks off’. Despite her mixed-up metaphor I was less than impressed and pointed out that menopausal women from the local council estate could hardly be hot. I was thus de-friended or whatever the Twitter equivalent and to tell the truth I now feel somewhat guilty about my dismissive put-down by way of Tweet for I see the web-site is down and the company going into liquidation with debts of £4,000.00. I am told that the lady who runs the rival and now sole surviving agency (still in business) likes to personally vet her members, and that if you are a man and she likes you will – as it were – firstly sample the goods before – if ever – placing you on the market for the other women to try. Perhaps introduction Agencies are a form of reverse prostitution.
@Anon Reader
What I’ve observed is that as women age at some point histrionics and manipulation stop working. As this happens, the woman becomes ever more and more unpleasant to be around, eventually complaining that everyone has abandoned her. This strikes me as a very common script.
“I …do love men.” No. She loves the idea of being in a relationship with a man way above her actual SMV. Men — the real kind who may be carrying a few extra pounds and lacking Carry Grant sophistication — are invisible to her at best and repulsive to her at worst.
“I have more self esteem.” Lucky for her, cats find this trait irresistable in women.
Thanks Opus. Driving on the left is no big deal, and even shifting comes easily to me as I am naturally left-handed, but the roundabouts still mystify me, as the U.S generally has intersections instead – roundabouts are rare here. I have to admit that they make sense to me for two-lane roads with light traffic, but when two highly-trafficked four-lane roads intersect, a roundabout seems like needlessly courting disaster, and the only time I came seriously close to crashing was at a roundabout where three roads met, and I had to get on the motorway around a fender-bender. The lead car in the accident pulled out with no warning as I was going around, so I was in the wrong lane to enter the on-ramp when a lorry came up in my left-side blind spot at high speed with the same intention. Yikes.
On the plus side of the ledger, I notice that Scottish women almost always wear tights or leggings, with or without a short skirt over of them. I have to say… that is quite becoming on slender women, which you seem to have a much higher percentage of than we do here.
In order to not be completely OT, I recall seeing a couple of women perhaps like the one in the article – older, slender, but wearing the same sort of clothing styles as the younger women. I am not particularly observant, but even I noticed them because they seemed so out of place. I suspect the woman in the article may be in an analogous situation – harkening back to her younger days when she could command the attention of men without effort, wearing the same form-fitting attire over her still-slim figure, and wondering why the only men expressing interest now are men she finds repulsive.
@Opus
This reminds me of a colleague I had about 20 years ago. Physically he was probably the very picture of the men Deborah is describing. Short, mostly bald, pudgy with a beer gut, and over 50. He didn’t have a degree and was a house painter by trade (he was working low end tech support via a temp agency at the time). But he had Game, and one of his several businesses on the side was a dating site/agency. He was always very clear that the Christian side of the dating agency he ran was his favorite. He wasn’t a Christian, but he preferred it because the women who came there were so easy. He would always come into work with a new story to tell. It usually went something like “we did X and Y and then I got out a quart of my favorite flavor of ice cream.”
Eventually he gave the dating agency up when he married a very attractive divorced mother 20 years younger than himself. She was probably three inches taller than him and to see the two of them together in a picture was comical. He referred to her as his sugar momma, and moved into her home. Last I knew they were still together, but who knows. Knowing him, no matter what happened he landed on his feet. He was just one of those people.
Well, I guess the science is settled…
http://www.theonion.com/articles/study-marriages-between-perfectly-matched-couples,37215/
@Lyn 87
The trick to roundabouts is: when you are sure you can get in, put your foot down and act like a true Alpha. Never reverse on a roundabout (I once found myself defending someone who did just that). Personally, I find the French system of Priorite a Droit given to any road on the right, no matter how minor, to be suicidal.
Although the dress-sense of the Scottish women may leave much to be desired I am shocked to learn that you found a pleasantly surprising shortage of war-pigs. It must now be even worse in America than I could imagine.
Britain welcomes careful drivers.
innocentbystanderboston says:
“We don’t know who ended it.
If she ended it she does not have my sympathy.
If he ended it, she does.”
It depends why he ended it. I know plenty of women that got caught cheating and where upset that their husband filed divorced and ended their marriage.
Philly:
“It’s fair to say that any marriage lasting more than 15 years is almost certainly a product of serious dysfunction.” Grossman added that 15 years was the uppermost limit, and that two people who were truly meant to be together may exhaust their relationship in half that time”
If there isn’t a nonunion study that supports this somewhere, there will be in five years or less.
Considering the “average” marriage lasts 8 years, that half time bit is even funnier
Once in a while the husband is indeed the one who wants out. That’s how it went with my parents.
For TFH
Off topic but extremely relevant:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/10/18/welcome-to-oculus-xxx-in-your-face-3d-is-the-future-of-porn.html?via=twitter_page
Deborah is in that 21% whose husband left her. Does that percentage look familiar?
He’s an alpha.
Her (bad) attitude is a shit test to filter out the non-alphas who would be wasting their time approaching her. If she’s kept herself in shape, she can get another alpha in his late-60s plus with experience taming hot shrews.
Bad attitudes are also an instinctive way to exhibit likelihood of fidelity. Woman who hold all men in contempt are unlikely to fool around. Why do women complain that men like bitches? Some do, mostly on that instinctive level.
Anonymous Reader
From Deborah’s perspective her husband walked away from her. It could well be that from his perspective, she drove him out.
I’m 57 next month, my wife is 55, married for 26 years. I decided about 13 years ago I wanted out but remained for the sake of my kids. My youngest graduates high school in 2015.
The fundamental problem for me has been a never-ending battle for dominance. My wife was raised a feminist and has just never come to terms with the fact there must be some role-specialization for a marriage to work. She sneers and tells me she’s not “domesticated” and that all I want is a “Stepford Wife.”
I have this amusing fantasy where I’m talking to a small group of friends at our 30th anniversary party and I tell them: “I’d like to tell you about my wife, about how much I appreciate her generous love and support that has made it possible for me to provide so well for my family. I’d like to, but I can’t because it wouldn’t be true. In fact my wife has been just one more burden to drag through life’s obstacle course and I’m happy to tell you all I’m serving her papers today.” lol.
I’m planning on divorcing her in two years. What I’m going to do after that I just don’t know but it’ll be awesome to breath the air as a free man once again after so many years a slave.
I’m going to play the devil’s advocate to the commenters, and say that more older men are cheating and that the dating market is bad for women who want to get married. I’m a 20-something woman. I *ahem* am the first to tell if a marriage is on the rocks, and I’ve made it into kind of a game to guess how I end up a mistress candidate in the fantasies of married fellows (cold? mean? miscarriage? former alpha? just a really guy young?). This happens to my friends often, as well. We have a running joke that the only men interested in us are already married.
I also have only a little bit of time left in the *secular* dating scene to meet a *Christian*, because the Christian dating scene is pure idealism. By secular, I mean not sleeping around, but going on hundreds of first dates that fail the “how often do you go to church?” test.
If you date at a church, you end up with the left-overs, most of the time. Someone my age has a shot with someone in his 30s. The kind of pew-warmer who’s unmarried, unsexed, and in his thirties is often alone for a reason. It’s usually a serious issue. It’s not the same as me going out and sleeping around and meeting a thirty-something that’s sleeping around.
So, why all the cheating? Why all the poor selection? Duh: everyone knows this – uncommitted (by this, I mean “unmarried,” not necessarily ONS) sex outside of the church, marriage (especially male) discouragement within the church, creates no reason for most men to marry. It also creates a surplus of women who are available for extramarital sex.
I’m just going to literally go with the title here; yes, “the more meager a woman’s choices, the more attractive she must be.” I can’t get my equal in attractiveness, virtue, whatever, because the choice selection is meager. BUT. I can get married men. Can’t WAIT for marriage.
@ trugingstar
By secular, I mean not sleeping around, but going on hundreds of first dates that fail the “how often do you go to church?” test.
Meh, bad test. The church is Blue Pill and boring for men. Get a better test to find a man of faith.
@ trugingstar …
I’m a 20-something woman.
Early or late 20-something (sic)?
By secular, I mean not sleeping around, but going on hundreds of first dates that fail the “how often do you go to church?” test.
Huh, why have you been left as an extra in this play? You are saying no men of your age (i.e. age appropriate) are church going and looking for marriage? BS.
If you date at a church, you end up with the left-overs, most of the time. Someone my age has a shot with someone in his 30s. The kind of pew-warmer who’s unmarried, unsexed, and in his thirties is often alone for a reason. It’s usually a serious issue. It’s not the same as me going out and sleeping around and meeting a thirty-something that’s sleeping around.
Huh, I guess he could have been building a successful career because he was ignored by a church going woman looking in a secular dating scene. Naw, that couldn’t be it could it? Seriously, I know plenty of men in their 30’s single and good church going men. Some small churches don’t have an abundance of woman that are … as you said … age appropriate. So, he does what I mentioned in the first sentence.
I waited (I’m a red pill guy) and guess what? I was one of those men. At 45 years old I can tell you .. you are full of BS on the 30 something year old guy .. having something wrong with him .. I had secular women hanging all over me (due to a lack of women at church) .. you really should be looking at your spinsisterhood gal pals.
” So, why all the cheating? Why all the poor selection? Duh: everyone knows this – uncommitted (by this, I mean “unmarried,” not necessarily ONS) sex outside of the church, marriage (especially male) discouragement within the church, creates no reason for most men to marry. It also creates a surplus of women who are available for extramarital sex.”
Wrong again. Women control access to sex. No man could cheat without your admittance. I haven’t seen a lot of churches forbid men from dating secular women.
Keep making excuses. You are on your way to a life without a man. AF/BB once again show’s its presence.
@ trug
We have a running joke that the only men interested in us are already married.
By the way, it goes both ways. A 20-something woman recently called me gay for not being aggressive enough. She leg-hugged me, by comparison. Good looking gal. This woman explicitly told me that she likes older men and knows that I’m married.
“All the good men are taken.” Because 80% of the men are invisible.
Romance in church is almost impossible because church social life is so awkward for singles. Try the local coffee shop after church. Or set up your own group social life with other unicorns from your church.
Mod Note: Trudgingstar has tripped my troll meter. She may not be a troll, but I’m not willing to wait further. For those who are interested in more, she has her own blog. Feel free to follow the link.
Opus,
Perhaps it was the location. I was in the central counties most of the time, and saw no shortage of attractive youngish women wearing the aforementioned garb with calf-elongating wedges to enhance the effect. They were not the majority by any means, but one cannot walk within sight of Edinburgh Castle for more than a few minutes without catching an eyeful of well-filled spandex. (I suppose you are going to tell me they were tourists – I can assure you I was not in my cups.) There may be more walking (as opposed to driving) relative to the U.S., which could explain the relative surfeit of women who would be more-slender-than-the-average-American-woman of similar age. Of course it may also be that my ever-advancing age widens the cohort of women who I consider “youngish” as well. The only place I see such a high concentration of attractive women in the U.S. is on college campuses, which I rarely have any reason to frequent anymore.
Anyway, don’t make too much of my ramblings – maybe I was just in a jovial mood because I was taking a long-anticipated vacation to a place I’ve wanted to see for a long time. It was all about the history, though, as I don’t have a drop of Scottish blood in my veins as far as I know.
@MFG:
She’s 40, relatively attractive, three children, one of them a toddler, the oldest at 14 with a serious and growing drug problem
She would have to be insane to leave her husband in these circumstances. Even without the discrepancy between her real and imagined SMV, the kid with the drug problem decides the matter.
When the kid is out getting stoned with his friends, who is going to go out and bring him home? Not Mom, who has a three-year-old to look after. Not Mom’s new boyfriend, who will likely be arrested if he tries to get hold of the kid and take him into his car. Not the police, because Mom won’t want to alienate her kid by getting him and his dealers into trouble with the police.
No one other than the kid’s father has any chance of keeping him on the rails. I would even guess that the marital problems driving the wife to leave are arguments about how to deal with the druggie kid.
@MFG
One thing which didn’t strike me at first but does now after reading James K’s response. Something which often motivates women to divorce is the desire to not only get child support, but also to offload the kids on dad every other week. The teen with a drug habit fits with this paradigm. One thing he might try in discussion is to suggest to her that if they divorce he will probably only be able to take the kids for a weekend every other week, starting at say 9:00 PM on Friday and returning them at 6:00 PM on Sunday. If he needs an excuse, he can plausibly offer the need to earn enough to pay for a separate apartment plus child support. Obviously a man would need to clear this kind of thing with a divorce attorney, because I don’t know the ramifications there. But if she is like many women him explaining that she will get the vast majority of custodial time (and only one weekend night where she can date every other week) will dampen her desire to blow up the family. It is counterintuitive, but works far more often than you would suspect.
Reading this is discouraging as Deborah is in my age cohort. It seems the entitlement and attitude fostered in youth will never abate in spite of huge demographic incongruities.
It’s her attitude which begs the question, is it my job to change it?
Chuck Kammer, that would be hilarious. Your guests would never forget that party. They might think you’re a dick, though, not knowing what she put you through.
I can’t imagine bothering even trying to get another relationship were I single. I am a bit below the age range, but I expect many of her target men feel the same way. I am also big enough she would consider me fat (I carry more weight than is apparent, unfortunately).
Of course I would take a good picture were I bothering with such sites. I am not the best marketer, but it is astounding that men think they have no need to market themselves in a place like that.
I would warn against assuming she must have driven the man away. I am sure she did some things that were irksome since she is human, but some men do have challenges as well, as several here have noted with specific examples. I will take claims of “its all the man’s fault” with a grain of salt though. not worth worrying about, just using this example for its direct value is worthwhile.
Fuzzie ..
It seems that these older women are being trained via the tv / movies / media / books to resemble their younger versions.
I know Desderian thinks it is a shit test .. could be .. but it will not work on men my age (45) and older .. like the much older crowd that will show interest.
Again some younger men might persue pump and dump .. it will be this older crowd that will be more serious about a LTR.
I think marriage is out of the question. And she may prefer this if she is getting alimony.
So, that reframes what she is after. The alpha pump and dump / LTR. Which will leave her more frustrated than she is now.
I can see divorced women .. with cats .. lol
as women age at some point histrionics and manipulation stop working. As this happens, the woman becomes ever more and more unpleasant to be around, eventually complaining that everyone has abandoned her.
Live by attention, die by attention.
This is why those women who say men are unnecessary are fooling themselves. Women want resources, with attention being a proxy for them.
What would happen if everybody was a consumer, and nobody was a producer. A “World Without Men” this would be.
Darock,
Her blog seems like a lot of work if she was a troll. I can completely understand her perspective on churches as I am going through a similar struggle myself, though you may be right that she was here to just stir up the pot. Just a comment after skimming several of her posts. I can’t imagine doing all that work to be a troll, but I am sure stranger things have happened.
It seems the entitlement and attitude fostered in youth will never abate
There is the entitlement part, and then there is the “what does she bring to the table” part.
@BradA
She strikes me as a different sort of troll than what I think you have in mind. The kind I have resembles the commenter Butterflyflower (from memory):
“Yes, I am lonely, and do love men, … Most just look like they are narcissists, and self centered, and think us women want to go out with a fish, or boat or souped up car, because that is what these guys pose with and many don’t even smile on their profiles.”
I wonder if she could elaborate on what she means by loving men because there’s a certain intolerance here for manly activities. What does she expect unmarried guys to do with their free time & money?
Meanwhile, a memo for the ladies: any man worth having will not prefer ballet to fishing. I’ll go one further. Any man worth having will not prefer *you* to fishing. That’s called pedestalizing around these parts.
…
BradA @ 3:23 pm:
“I am not the best marketer, but it is astounding that men think they have no need to market themselves in a place like that.”
Who says they aren’t? A guy wants to show he’s a normal, healthy man and brag a little at the same time, so he uses a pic of himself in waders with the string of trout he just caught. Were I to try online dating again, the caption would be “I shoot people for fun” then I’d post some airsoft photos. If the guns and fatigues don’t make me attractive then the mud should.
Speaking of poor marketing, I just looked up what a tutu is. There is no good reason to screen for men who know that. On the other hand, I would give considerable attention to a prospective date with one. It’s a very bad sign for Deborah to not be similarly attracted to men up to their elbows in grease and car parts.
From her first blog post. The last line:
“Oh, I’m a girl. Probably important.”
Of course it is, sweetheart. Of course it is.
If you are genuine, you need to worry less about him ticking boxes and look deeper. Does he not go to church but reads his bible and prays? Have you ever asked why they don’t go to church? Do you wonder if some of those guys see you going on hundreds of dates and may think YOU are the one lacking piety? If you are in your late 20’s, you time is running out. You need to start looking for a good man, and not Mr.Perfect…because he doesn’t exist.
As said earlier, most “modern” churches are all about the feelz. Crappy christian rock music and a pastor talking about how to make it through another week, with one bible verse thrown in to let the pastor expound on secular feel good nonsense. All the while, wives rub those little circles on hubby’s back. No Lion of Judah. No historical content and Greek/Hebrew root words and possible interpretation. Just surface level, luke-warm feelz.
The Real Peterman
Chuck Kammer, that would be hilarious. Your guests would never forget that party. They might think you’re a dick, though, not knowing what she put you through.
Well, I doubt I’ll actually be doing it. It makes me smile though when I’m dealing with another ration of bullsh!t.
So many women, like Deborah, the subject of Dalrock’s essay, have totally lost the plot. A 57 year old woman is just about worthless to anyone but her children and her husband who remembers her as she was. My own wife has spent our marriage maximizing her individual take at my expense and to a lesser extent at our children’s. At this point just about all I feel for her is an acid resentment of her selfishness, hence the malicious little fantasy.
Speaking of lukewarm modern chhurchianity:
Dalrock,
What do you think of the resignation of Mark Driscoll from Mars Hill? Looks like you saw the wolf in sheep’s clothing long before his flock did.
Deti, – about older guys staying in shape, yup, and it is also a form of soft dread. When I can walk up to younger woman, say hi and get a smile, she notices.
Women tend the get their self esteem and self worth by watching and interacting with other women. When women socialize with other single women, their self assessment can grow without feedback from men. As women age, there is less interaction with men. Women can spend hundreds of dollars on ugly long dresses, ug boots or a few grams of perfume but these things only boost attractiveness in the eyes of other women. This is how your average school teacher, educator, social worker …. who hasn’t been in a relationship in years can think she is the next Gisele Bundchen.
It depends why he ended [the marriage]. I know plenty of women that got caught cheating and where upset that their husband filed divorced and ended their marriage.
Yep. That, or the wife’s post-menopausal personality became so toxic and ultimately intolerable that he divorced her in order to save his mental and physical health.
I think I could safely wager a year’s salary on my assertion that of the remaining +/- 20 percent of the total divorces initiated by men, more than half of those are in reaction to some intolerable behavior on their wive’s part.
Denihilist:
Are you the same Denihilist who posts at Zippy’s from time to time?
Why would any guy that is up to her “HOT” standard want anything to do with some 57 year old woman. He can be running 20’s and 30’s. 57 is an old woman in the SMP.
@trugingstar
So, why all the cheating? Why all the poor selection? Duh: everyone knows this – uncommitted (by this, I mean “unmarried,” not necessarily ONS) sex outside of the church, marriage (especially male) discouragement within the church, creates no reason for most men to marry. It also creates a surplus of women who are available for extramarital sex.
I’m in my early 50’s and I can tell you for a fact that women in the church want sex, but they don’t want marriage. But it’s the married women who seem to be far more available. Over the past few years I’ve done a *lot* of traveling and been to probably 75-80 different churches. I frequently get IOI’s from married women with their husbands standing a few feet away. I’ve had married women stick notes with their phone numbers into my pocket as they brushed past me. The single (mostly divorced, with kids) women are arrogant entitlement queens and don’t seem interested in me, but the married women do.
I can walk into a church and immediately tell how serious the leadership team is, because in the churches that are alive, there are lots of families and the ratio of single women to men is down around 1:1. I’ve been in churches where the ratio of single/divorced/widowed women to men is more like 4:1 to 5:1. The preaching was feminist pablum and the women ruled the church. I have a friend that isn’t a Christian, but he goes to church a lot. He tells me that the most effective line, after receiving attention and interest, is “let’s fuck.”
The number of overweight landwhales is off the scale. 5’3″ and 106 pounds? I guarantee somebody is willing to nail it, they just aren’t willing to wife it up. At 57 years old? They’d need to get used to carrying around a tube of astroglide in their pocket.
Will just say women can and do push men into initiating divorce. I should know, I was one of those men so pushed. The x swore she didn’t have a clue that her actions were driving me up the wall and ultimately out of the house. On which I called bull: I reminded her that I had spoken forcefully numerous times about the need to change her behaviors for the better. She had simply ignored my warnings and gone on living in her fantasy world until the day I had her served.
“since I am Jewish”
On a scale of sweet to succubus…Jewish women are usually Lilith reincarnated.
“The 9 Most Overlooked Threats to a Marriage”
https://archive.today/FCtN0
sit back and watch and wait to see who sends you a wink or a message
Okay – I’m 50+ and the oldest woman I’ve EVER dated was 48 when I was 27, and I was seeing her and her two daughters, and they were willing to play together. Prior to that the only 40+ year olds I dated were when I was in my early teens mostly because they were plentiful, easy, and weren’t going stick me with a kid. These days the oldest that I date are 25 and that’s because they start to think about marriage after that age, and I’m not going down the route. I like women that don’t want to admit that they are f**king a fossil…
But 57? Jeez – just shoot me if I ever stoop to that level – unless it’s Jane Seymour, or Michelle Pfeiffer… They get a pass… I’ve thought they were hot since I was a kid…
Kinda OT, never posted before, but I’ve been reading here a lot.
What is the part about rubbing circles on husband’s back? I see people post about that a lot about how it’s degrading I guess. And I saw someone reference it in this post as well.
Good luck Chuck…they are all infected with the narcissistic ideology of 40 years of Fem World to some degree or another. Live alone…get some hobbies/friends and pay for it or get an FWB’s but they are all infected…56 and single with no drama in my life.
I’m probably oversharing, but my wife Jenny Ericksoned me a few years ago and after a lot of thought I’m just going to stay single
Late fifties, tired of the pure dead weight of a marital anchor (ie wife) and just don’t want to be fed through the old wood chipper again
Does that make me immature? Wise? Stupid? Cowardly?
I honestly don’t know
I do know that I’ve had enough though…
Dalrock,
I’ll raise you.
Have him tell the family court judge that his 14 year old has a drug problem. Have him tell the judge that is because he is out trying to earn money for the family while the wife is failing at raising the children. Now he can make an argument that she is a neglectful mother and if she wants the divorce, he should have full custody and she should be ordered to pay HIM child support so he can hire someone to watch his now juvenile delinquint 14 year old (to keep him from ODing and dying) because the mother has failed to do that.
MFG ..
It makes you a smart rational man who is not helpless.
My best. Friends and family are what got my brothers through the roughest post divorce patches. Lean on them if you need to. Though a tough experience for us all .. it wasn’t wasted time for any of us.
@ Artisanal Toad
At 57 years old? They’d need to get used to carrying around a tube of astroglide in their pocket.
YMMV, lol.
@ Just Saying
Some women are quite bangable even in their early 60s.
Gunner,
“Any man worth having will not prefer *you* to fishing. ”
That seems a bit harsh.
Wouldn’t it be a bit more accurate to say “Any man worth having will NOT give up fishing for YOU”? I say this as someone who heard so much moaning from my mid-30’s to mid-40’s peers about “no action”, but never went through that drought myself (everlasting thanks to you, dear!) so there were plenty of times when I might have been planning something else but spent time getting busy instead.
And I don’t say this to boast, because I wasn’t remotely Red Pill at the time and have no idea how it worked out that way for me… nor do I in the slightest suspect that my “thirsty” friends and associates were making up their complaints…
On a scale of sweet to succubus…Jewish women are usually Lilith reincarnated.
Thanks, earl. You saved me from being the goy who points out the un-PC obvious.
To be fair, though, I think the comparison might constitute an insult to Lilith.
You get on the internet and complain about the men in your community, and you can’t figure out why you’re utterly unwanted? Bitch, you must be joking.
Since you seem too stupid to figure it out on your own, here’s the news. The proper place for a religious woman around 60 years old is enjoying all her Jewish grandchildren, planning their weddings, encouraging the grandsons to marry worthy women, and encouraging her granddaughters to remain worthy to find a husband. You missed this boat, and it can’t be fixed now. You’re too old to play the harlot. Enjoy being that “crazy cat lady” that people steer clear of in shul.
Regards, Boxer
If she’s looking for “highbrow” men while using free dating sites, she’s going to be lookinga long, long time – those men won’t be slumming in places like POF, etc.
Boxer ..
Yep. You nailed it re: her stupidity.
Ladies how do you think the young women (next generation) gets so messed up?
The older ones aren’t doing their jobs and training the next and the next and the next generation.
She had a responsibility and she obviously didn’t fulfill it. So, it stands to reason she did the same to her husband. She had a responsibility and she chose to ignore it too!!
So .. lol .. you colored her correctly .. this doesn’t bode well for future generations.
57 year old women, for the most part, don’t get dates. They focus on grandkids and stuff. 57 year old men have 30-45 year old girlfriends, I know this because I’ve observed it for decades in all areas of the US. Her husband walked out, because he couldn’t tolerate her any longer and he DOESN’T have to; and, he will find a younger, more attractive woman and won’t have to bother “posting” on a dating site.
Btw, if you are a 57 year old hag posting on a dating site, you are definitely “creepy” to steal meme.
Setting aside actual “Semitic” (Hot) Israeli women, most Jewish women look AWFUL by age 40, and have horrible personalities (at least in the US). They are probably one of the LEAST attractive demographics to men (of any background), next to black women of any age…in least with black women, you get a young, pretty one that was raised right, you might be ok.
Jewish women are HORRIBLE lovers, monsters to everyone around them, including their adult children, and treat men like crap. This woman has to be JOKING to think ANY non-desperate, non-Jew will EVER find her worthy.
Disclosure: I’m Muslim. LOL
50% of marriages don’t end up in divorce. Based on what this woman wrote she sounds UMC- just a guess. The divorce rate here is much lower than 50%. When she asks where are all the good men – people she feels are like her/her class/whatever the answer is likely they are busy playing ball with their grandsons. I am sorry for her if her husband wronged her but the reality is that if she is UMC the men she dreams about are mostly still married.
No fault divorce is cruel to both sexes in different ways. It sucks. It really sucks if the marriage blows up when you are this old and in a group with a relatively low divorce rate. Few will have any chance of doing better than their spouse.
Don’s Johnson: Driscoll’s wife, you can bet, has already consulted with an attorney. Topics like “maximum imputable income” and “division of prior-resignation assets” have come up.
If he wants to play it right, he’ll ride out this downfall, grow a beard, live in a cabin, go on Umrah and convert to Islam, write a book and do the circuit.
I tell you what if Driscoll’s wife bails on him I’m damn sure going to twitter posting up some stuff.
“How dare you disappoint your lovely wife. She instructed you and gave you leadership and guidance for all those years and then you quit on her. How dare you. Your just a little boy forcing her at her age to have her body ravaged by players, bad boys, and PUA in a heroic effort to find a man worthy of her stink hole. How dare you”
Let that be a lesson to all. A house built on pleasing some pussy is on a failing foundation
“I think I could safely wager a year’s salary on my assertion that of the remaining +/- 20 percent of the total divorces initiated by men, more than half of those are in reaction to some intolerable behavior on their wive’s part.”
About 17 years ago I was reading about the relative proportions of divorces. About 70% were filed by women “because.” About 20% were filed by men in self defense. The other 5% were the traditional cheating or the guy running off with his sexetary, etc.
I almost became one of the 20% a little over a year ago. She was a hormonal wreck and she was diagnosed with type diabetes. In dealing with the she evened things out and became more like the girl I married nearly 40 years ago. It was a very close run for her because I had reached the end of living in a sham and being hounded like she deserved to do the hounding.
Hard to understand some of the criticism of this woman.
She’s not a late-life carouseler—her husband left her. Honestly, what’s she supposed to do after something like that? Live out another 20 or 30 years alone?
Yes, she’s waaay over-the-top critical of the guys she meets online…but I’m not surprised to hear that many of them are slobs. At that age, the gender ratio is so in their favor they don’t really have to be on the top of their game to get busy with the ladies.
I’m the farthest thing there is from a white knight…but this woman’s hamster isn’t really that bad. She’s sounds like someone who did the right things in life (try to stay married, stay fit and look good for her age, etc) and her husband left her in the lurch. Yes, she should be less critical of the men she meets online, be patient and keep an open mind…but I think she’s entitled to a little bitterness and hair-trigger negativity after what happened with her marriage.
I think the real issue here is that she probably just isn’t ready to date again yet. I hope she takes a timeout, calms down and resumes her search when she’s healed a bit more.
@OT
What rubbing circles is about is aiding and abetting the neutering of their husbands. Which usually accompanies the hubby sobbing in church from the feelz.
@enrique432
It will take more than a few pronouncements in islam about certain red pill themes. One must also consider the evidence for both and if their claims stand up to scrutiny like for instance the deity of Christ and the resurrection.
“Thanks, earl. You saved me from being the goy who points out the un-PC obvious.”
Well it’s not like goyim girls are much better…but compared to Jewish gals especially in the US well let’s just say Sarah Silverman’s ilk are not a paragon of femininity.
FuzzieWuzzie
It’s her attitude which begs the question, is it my job to change it?”
Yes, and if she doesn’t change, then…next. You haven’t found each other.
Anonymous Reader
If the alternative is slow death, financial ruination might not look so bad.
You do eventually reach a point where you no longer care much about money.
If I’d stayed on the career track I was on 15 years ago I’ve no doubt I’d be making seven figures now. To achieve this I would have needed a wife who made supporting my career her number one priority.
When it became clear divorce was in my future sooner or later and enduring cardiac-busting stress would mostly benefit her I took my foot off the gas. I started a couple of small businesses and make enough to pay the bills working about four or five hours a day. Both businesses have the potential to be more profitable but there’s no incentive for me to do any more than keep them ticking over. I have a couple more good ideas that I’ve just parked on the back burner. When we divorce she’ll receive some assets and a small alimony payment but these amounts will be peanuts compared to what she might potentially have received. I think she knows this and doesn’t really care as her priorities have always been doing what she wants in the moment and not submitting to me and my priorities.
@Quartermaster – 45% of divorces initiated by women are because of male infidelity. For men, 31% can say the same. So about half of the “because” is male cheating.
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3517175/
dragnet
She’s not a late-life carouseler—her husband left her. Honestly, what’s she supposed to do after something like that? Live out another 20 or 30 years alone?
That’s what she’s supposed to do. My wife’s family is very long-lived and I think about how it’ll be for her in her late eighties and nineties trying to remember when she had a husband who took care of her…..thirty five years ago.
Dragnet,
I can’t speak for anyone else, but it doesn’t matter how the divorce happened. I’m commenting on her obviously out of whack perception of her SMV/MMV. I’m not saying she shouldn’t have standards, but she reeks of entitlement and a fundamental flaw in understanding male attraction. She is attracted to cultured, UMC guys that are attractive. Those men probably aren’t in her wheelhouse. They’re either married, or not interested in a 57 year old divorcee. She believes it should be like her teens and 20’s and it isn’t. There can’t be anything wrong her, so it must be men’s fault. Narcissistic injury can cut deep, so I understand the defenses that must be erected.
Perhaps she should study the type of men she gets interest from. Most (grown) men have a good understanding of how attractive a woman they can get. If she is getting only interest from slobs….
The SMV is a cold witch. Many men have felt her pain. But they also adjusted their expectations, worked on their value and improved, or went their own way.
As stated earlier, she should be playing with her grandkids. Women her age aren’t meant to be out in this market.
Dragnet, we only have her word that her husband left her. Even if that’s true, she doesn’t say why, and a woman who was truly wronged (say by adultery) won’t usually keep it to herself.
If a man leaves his wife after 2 years, I might buy that he’s just a wanderer who couldn’t keep his commitment. But when a man leaves his wife after 20 years, he obviously doesn’t have that problem. The most likely reason is that she drove him away with mistreatment.
Sure, there’s that one in a hundred chance that a nearly 60-year-old guy suddenly walked out on his fit, 103-pound wife of 20 years even though she was pleasant and kept a nice house and didn’t withhold sex. Maybe his 25-year-old secretary just had to have him. But the 99/100 chance is that his wife — who clearly thinks she’s better than every man out there, so how well could she have treated her husband? — made his life miserable until he thought he had nothing to lose.
I’d say most late divorces come down to one thing: boredom. The kids are grown (and delaying their own marriages so there aren’t many grandchildren yet, if any), all the rooms have been redecorated, and life has settled into a rut. But men don’t crave excitement in their relationships the way women do, so boredom generally doesn’t drive them to leave. A man can be pretty bored with his marriage, but if he’s still getting his dick wet as often as he likes and his kids are taken care of, he probably won’t go through the drama of breaking it up. For a bored wife, on the other hand, the drama of the break-up is a bonus.
dragnet said
[Debrorah] sounds like someone who did the right things in life (try to stay married, stay fit and look good for her age, etc) and her husband left her in the lurch. Yes, she should be less critical of the men she meets online, be patient and keep an open mind…but I think she’s entitled to a little bitterness and hair-trigger negativity after what happened with her marriage
I’m going to have to assume that you’re a newcomer to the manosphere, taking a woman’s statements at face value as you are doing. Unfortunately, this will nearly ALWAYS mislead you.
As others here have pointed out, a man in the demographic group that Deborah is in doesn’t just “up and leave” his wife for no good reason. He has too many years and too much equity invested in the marriage and deserting it will be catastrophically costly. Much more likely is that either 1) SHE trashed the marriage and is projecting by blaming her husband, or 2) she has become such an intolerable speciman of the stereotypical Jewish bitch, making life with her so awful and insufferable thst his choices are divorce or suicide. Either way, no equity in his marriage is worth his self-respect, health, or sanity.
“Deborah” most certainly is aware that she and her behavior are the catalysts for her husband’s divorce, but the hamster can NEVER allow her to admit that. To do so would force her to admit that she deserves a lonely life of cats and dildos, or, if she gets lucky, being some horny young delta’s cougar P&D. It simply has to be SOMEMANSFAULT/i>[tm].
Women don’t realize that the “relationship/age goggles” really help them. It’s the same as how we look at our parents. We’ve been seeing them so often forever, their aging doesn’t register to us.
Just as that 57 year old woman probably thought her husband looked alright, that she had been with 30 years or whatever… and just as her husband probably thought she looked ok. Then take that away and try to meet new people…
Dalrock,
I haven’t been around enough to know all the examples and I did see some other of her posts after I replied. I have no idea, but I was just making a comment I thought of, not questioning your action.
Gunner Q,
You need to reach your target audience, whatever the format. You may love fishing, but at least have a smile on about it rather than a scowl. Note that used car salesmen have smiles, not scowls, since they want your money more than they want to let their own attitude show through. I have little doubt many would scowl away, but they adjust for their market. It seems like any man who wants to play the dating market should at least adjust a bit to the market.
It sounds like fishing in your favorite spot because you like it in the shade there. You may like it, but it will not help you catch anything if it is a bad spot to fish, no matter how comfortable you are with it.
Though I can’t imagine bothering with such a site, so perhaps that is part of my challenge.
IBB,
I wouldn’t want custody of the drug head kid, especially as a single parent. I didn’t hit exactly that, but my experience was close enough that I would almost run from it, especially if I was kicked out like that.
Well, one thing that self-described religious people (both women *and* men) are expected to do is to not advertise the fact that they are whoring around, particularly if they are, as this woman is, 60.
She talks about being a sHebrew. I imagine she has kids and grandkids. A sensible woman would work on limiting the damage that she and her ex-husband had caused, and try to set as good an example as possible. The primary focus of this old ho’ is acquiring a stable of rent boys or new f–k buddies, over internet dating and swingers sites. Laughable and pathetic.
Regards, Boxer
I’m quite partial to sHebrews. Many are quite spoiled, but they look pretty good when they’re my age. By “semitic” I’m assuming you might mean Sephardim — who are originally from Southern Europe and North Africa. They’re not Arabs, though they’re a little less “white” than the standard American Jewish chicks you find around here. There are actual Jewish Arabs, by the way. They’re a third type, and in Israel they’re discriminated against rather harshly. I don’t think any women really look very good by age 40, and don’t know that Jews look any worse than Christians do. Black chicks have better skin as they age, but they still get saggy.
The bad thing about dating sHebrews is their clannishness. You may as well be dating a Mormon chick. They never “leave the nest” and are always on the phone to mom and dad to bail them out of whatever shit they brought upon themselves. That’s a broad generalization, but its my experience. Getting with one is like getting with a grownup, with the mind of a 14-year old. Very, very irresponsible and never inclined to self-reflection.
Boxer
Pingback: Meager Options | Donal Graeme
Wow, OT, but Pat Buchanan just threw a bombshell of a blogpost for Catholics (and by extension, fundamentally traditionalist Christians).
http://buchanan.org/blog/price-papal-popularity-7042
Actually, change that blogpost OT label to on-topic, since it deals directly with the debasement of (the sacredness of) marriage vows and churchianization of the Catholic Church.
Brad,
I wouldn’t want to be a single parent either, but you may not have a choice. She is divorcing you either way. This way, YOU get cash and prizes FROM HER (well, no, she wont give you any money even if the judge orders it) but at least you don’t have to give HER any money when she frivorces you (and you keep the house since you get the kids)…. and you have a slim chance saving your son’s life. If she gets custody, you have no chance to help him, absolutely none.
Moving on after being cheated on?
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=916257
Pope and Obama obstruction
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=916310
Marriage question
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=916346
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/10/20/why-the-first-mission-to-mars-should-only-have-female-astronauts/
OT, but I stumbled on this and thought it might be worth it for some. She does talk about submission in the second video in the series, but I am not sure if they are accurate or not overall.
Christ Centered Relationships Pt 1
IBB, I was speaking of parenting a druggie teen. You may not have experienced enough close to that, but I would rather live with horrid child support than that.
I suppose going through the wringer 4 times makes me much more gun shy.
Most of Deborah’s comments about 50-something dating are accurate. However, they cut both ways: what she forgets to mention is the quality of the 50-something women who are on the dating market. It is painful to meet one’s peers in SMV at the age of 55.
I agree with desiderian that Deborah’s ex-husband was probably an alpha. This fact alone means that she will see most of the men she meets as useless, inferior slobs.
It isn’t that women are done with men after age 55 – but hypergamous women who find themselves single at this age are not interested in the men who are interested in them.
These women’s options are limited: being a booty call rather then a wife or girlfriend; travelling to Gambia or Tunisia to find a young man who wants sex without strings; or declaring that they are done with men. Possibly all three.
Pingback: The more meager a woman’s choices, the mo...
I was out as usual last Friday – exchanging banter with the barmaid, who it has to be said was as pleasant as she was good-looking – and that was fairly considerable – too bright frankly to be working behind a bar. ‘Can I have a Horny Devil too’ [Horny Devil being the unlikely name of the beer – the Harvey’s being off – again, but I caught her double entendre]. ‘You already have three’ I replied motioning to the three grinning losers sitting round the other side of the bar. To my left I observed a woman, her head turned away; very well turned-out in autumnal colours and with that blonde bobbed haircut I find especially attractive. Then she turned her head in my direction. She may well have been attractive once, but now… it is sometimes hard to be exact, but I would put her age at probably mid-to-late fifties.
It was an unusually quiet night and after an hour or so she left the bar alone and, as I could overhear, thanking the bar-maid for chatting to her. I was talking to my friend: I had twice, by chance, bumped into his wife that day and on both occasions she had feigned to pretend I was not there. My friend, seeing that his wife is usually all over me, was at a loss to understand his wife’s behaviour. Perhaps Dalrockians can enlighten him.
“Dalrock already weighed in. Anon reader also put up a good comment that mirrors my thoughts. Could have been anything, really. What happens, I think, when an older man seeks a divorce from a marriage that’s more than 20 years old, is that the wife has worn down her husband with steady insults, deprivations, unfairnesses, and nagging to the point where he simply cannot take it anymore.
Could be keeping him on sexual life support, with juuuust enough sex, once every other month or so, such that she can say they “have a sex lfe”. Could be complete dead bedroom.
Could be her little pokes, jabs and insults, in public and private.
Could be her self-absorption.
Could be her constant complaining about everything under the sun.
So I think Anon Reader is on to something here with his observations of why a man all of a sudden ends a marriage. Usually it’s because he’s borne up under it for decades;and one day he finally breaks and says that’s it, no more, can’t do it anymore.”
Wow, this pretty much describes me. My ex-wife thinks I just flaked out one day. She called it a mid-life crisis, a nervous breakdown, she called it anything she could to avoid listening to what I was saying: that she had been contemptuous for our entire relationship. A final disrespect which I won’t delve into here was the straw that broke the camel’s back. I asked for a divorce. She filed on me because, in her words, that if she really wanted to stay married to me all she had to do was nothing because I was too lazy to get a lawyer on my own. That was typical of what I faced for fifteen years. Please note that I was an excellent provider. I have a degree, a good career, and I’ve never been out of work and we never wanted for anything.
So, Anon and Deti are spot on. It isn’t all of a sudden. Every man has a breaking point. There comes a time in a man’s life when he has to decide what his self-respect is worth. Some men choose to suck it up for the rest of their lives. Some men choose to make the sacrifice for their children. Some men, though, have what I call the Popeye moment when “that’s all I can stands, and I can’t stands no more.”
From the woman’s point of view, though, it comes out of the fucking blue. As far as I can tell, she was perfectly happy with the state of our relationship, and my expressed desire for change came as a total shock. Either these women are clueless, and not the empaths they believe they are, or in their hearts they truly believe they are getting the relationship they deserve and they are entitled to a man’s sacrifice. And when he has the temerity to object to being treated as a whipping boy, there must be something wrong with him. He must crazy.
He has to be crazy. All lies. The desire to get out must be a symptom of a disordered mind. It must be lies. Because if it is not, she will have to take a long hard introspective look inside herself, and ask herself what it is inside herself that caused her to treat her man with continuous disrespect and contempt for so long.
I think it is a rare woman that is capable of this depth of introspection. It’s just too frightening for most to confront these demons in themselves. For most, they retreat from owning their half of the relationship and project and lay blame.
@gregariouswolf
”I think it is a rare woman that is capable of this depth of introspection. It’s just too frightening for most to confront these demons in themselves. For most, they retreat from owning their half of the relationship and project and lay blame.”
Unless they confront those demons they will never grow up or become responsible adults.
On the topic of middle-aged men leaving their hyper-critical wives because otherwise the wives are going to nag the husband into the grave, i am one. I am 47. We have two young children. But the stress upon me from years of my wife’s constant pick-pick-picking has caused me two cracked teeth from grinding at night, and three trips to hospital emergency rooms from panic attacks (note: my wife, who has no medical training, has from the first made drive myself to the hospital each time).
However, for you idiot modern American evangelical husbands out there, i found out there is an even more sinister trap waiting for you poor dummies. Our “Christian counselor” and another hireling shepherd (501c3 “pastor”) both failed to hold my wife accountable for anything, but by God do they ever resoundingly condemn me for leaving the marriage. Oh, same goes for our former “Christian friends.” It’s like whatever the wife does is invisible to them. It’s FIREPROOF on steroids. Oh, these idiots all LOVED Fireproof, of course.
And as to the wife’s near-constant denials of sex for over a dozen years, the same hireling shepherd pretty much said it must have been because i wasn’t “loving her like Christ loved the church.” So basically, the marriage is held hostage by the whims of a woman’s emotions. Because she wasn’t haaaaaaaaaapy, you see. Well, some women are unstable and never happy, did the idiot ever think of that!?
I can’t for the Russians and the Chinese to drop their nukes on this place so there can be a return to sane patriarchy.
Quick thoughts:
~From what I have witnessed, very few men middle aged or older leave their marriages without another woman (usually younger) waiting in the wings. This notion that husbands never wrong their wives unless the wives push them to it is the height of absurdity. Women are the primary drivers of the divorce during this, the post-modern era, but there are such things as husbands who misbehave.
~Whether or not she is attractive still is beside the point. These days it is not all that rare to run into a woman who looks good for her age. People tend to have either let themselves go and look a mess, or have taken very good care of themselves and as such stand out among their peers. This goes for men and women alike. Time catches up with us all though, no matter how hard we work at it. This is why it is in every woman’s best interest to as much as possible be the kind of wife whose husband looks at her and barely registers the years that have passed.
~The dignified thing for a grand-aged person to do when they find themselves suddenly single is to pour their time and energies into service to others and their children/grandchildren. When my GMIL’s husband died, she was pursued pretty vigorously by a number of men, and she was in her late 50’s. She made it clear that she had no desire to remarry. Of course, unlike many women today, she had raised 10 children and already had more than 20 grandchildren. We have lost count of the children/great grandchildren at this point there are so many. She had plenty to keep her busy, in other words.
My .02.
This notion that husbands never wrong their wives unless the wives push them to it is the height of absurdity.
Straw man this is.
@Elspeth
This is true.
what it is inside herself that caused her to treat her man with continuous disrespect and contempt for so long.
This sure does happen often, the contempt part. Women do contempt way better than men. Why is that?
Unless they confront those demons they will never grow up or become responsible adults.
Guys need to confront their problems from their teenage years onward. Do the gals?
Pingback: Don’t Be This Spinster Rob Lowe | Cail Corishev
Of course, rebuilding the mound it was.
They fill with contempt when they are married to a man who they feel is below them and they want to trade up.
They fill with contempt when they are married to a man who they feel is below them and they want to trade up.
Two points,
1. Who agreed to marry the guy?
2. Is the fella really beneath them, or is it all in their mind?
Pingback: Calling out Dalrock | See, there's this thing called biology...
@ Farmboy
“Guys need to confront their problems from their teenage years onward. Do the gals?”
No, they most certainly do not. Rather than confront the reality of being an adult, they keep bucking for ever more constant ‘change, acceptance, & accommodation’ within both society and the legal system.
Women have all but won at this point, and men are now second class citizens by any objective measure.
A person from space watching this slow-motion train wreck would think men to be of a subservient class of species.
I don’t expect to see a return to sanity in my lifetime. If anything, the feminst camp is dialing up the propaganda to a whole new generation of young girls; and it is being pushed into the grade school and high school system/curriculum.
‘Indoctination’ in place of ‘Education’.
The only chance for a course reversal is if there is a significant & unrelenting worldwide crisis. That crisis mus lay naked for all to see just exactly how vulnerable women are in the absence of a man to protect her.
I.E. a ‘Costa Concordia’ event of a much more prolonged and expansive nature. It could be a number of things.
What it can’t be is some short-term minor event, the cost of which can be foisted back onto the shoulders of men to bear.
Feminists are writing cheques they cannot possibly cash. Here’s hoping they begin bouncing sooner rather than later.
@theDeti said:
Anyone who thinks 57 year old, 5 foot 3, 106 pound Deborah is looking for a second husband is a moron. Deborah wants another spin on the carousel with the fun hawt horsies. She was expecting James Bond, Tom Selleck or Tom Jones. Instead she got Peter Griffin, Homer Simpson and “creepy” Rob Lowe” on those DirecTV commercials.
——
At 57, I doubt it.
I think she’s a ‘proper lady.’
A ‘proper lady’ knows that sex is for the young, so she ‘closed up shop.’ Which resulted in her husband cheating on her.
A ‘proper lady’ does not suffer the indignity of having a (publicly) cheating husband, so she divorced him to salvage her reputation and claim her Victim card. That she probably landed half of his pension/401K and lifetime alimony never, EVER entered into the equation.
As for her contempt for her potential matches… I’m guessing that on the inside, she still FEELS like a 23 year old hottie. Her ex was probably given the same leeway. On the outside, she saw him age, but she had the younger version of him locked in her mind.
Now when she looks in the mirror, she sees the beauty inside, but when she views her suitors’ photos, she only sees what is visually presented to her. Old men displaying status symbols that mean nothing to her.
Of course, rebuilding the mound it was.
I am doing no such thing. I have taken subtle and overt misogyny lumps on my own blog of late so to come here and be accused of rebuilding the mound is ironically amusing.
In reality, I read this thread and saw comment after comment dismissing the idea that a husband would leave his wife unless she deserved it*. That a man would never be a vow breaker the way women are. This needs to be confronted because it’s the exact same logic that drives the excusing of wives breaking their vows and leaving their husbands: “If she left, then he must have deserved it.”
If we believe wives must keep their vows even when they are terribly unhappy, then we must hold men to that same standard. The idea of joining them when it seems you can’t beat them holds no merit in the context of a Christian world view.
I know not everyone here is a Christian but the author and significant number of the readership is, so the Christian position needs to be represented without capitulating to personal feelings and shades of gray.
* Assuming none of the sins that are typically considered “Biblical grounds” for divorce.
This notion that husbands never wrong their wives unless the wives push them to it is the height of absurdity.
Straw man this is.
Apex fallacy this is.
Elspeth, of all people, ought to know better.
Elspeth is right…. AGAIN.
Gentlemen of the manosphere, the more and more society takes us seriously (and they are really starting to do that, I see it on sooooo many other forums and blogs that are not MRM focused) the more and more we have to acknowledge when non-feminist women are right. That helps strengthen our position of ultimate rightousness.
Elspeth is our ally, not our enemy. And there was nothing hamsterization about this comment of hers. She has properly defined the 20-30% of older alpha-esque married males who do NOT love their wives and have no reservations about trading them in for newer and younger models later in life.
Elspeth, your sample set may be too small.
I would only leave my wife if she persisted in behaviors that made the marriage intolerable. Not a chance of someone else, especially since I would just prefer to be alone at this point in my life if I were not married.
[Pro 19:13 NKJV] 13 A foolish son [is] the ruin of his father, And the contentions of a wife [are] a continual dripping.
Blaming it on a wife all the time is not smart, but ignoring her role over time is not either. I wonder how many of those situations were because the man got affirmation from the younger alternative than he did from his own wife. It still wouldn’t justify his actions, but it could certainly explain them and show that the wife had a role to play in what happened as well.
IBB’s wife, she brought the argument to rebuild the mound of female victim hood. Really, why do you think she came here to respond to an ideal no man here made?
No one suggested that men are NEVER the cause of their divorces, merely that older men hardly ever divorce their wives; and most only do so because they have been pushed to the utter limit. And no, most don’t have some young broad waiting in the wings. That’s only Elspeth’s opinion.
Glad to see IBB’s wife is posting again.
Elspeth,
> This needs to be confronted because it’s the exact same logic that drives the excusing of wives breaking their vows and leaving their husbands: “If she left, then he must have deserved it.”
That would be very true. I had confronted my own mother about some of these facts a few months ago. I noted to her that women file for more divorce than men and her reaction was “they probably drove the action” (the men). Her knee-jerk response is just as bad as that from men.
I find that both sides in these arguments tend to excuse their side and push all the blame to the other side. The reality is that both sides are walking out their own foolishness and lust and thus we have the societal mess we have today.
We need to drill down to the root causes when something like this happens and not excuse either side. The problem is that women have been getting a free pass for so long that the backlash is likely to be equally as strong.
I find it quite ironic that I have heard the standard disclaimers any time I here Eph 5 mentioned, that it is used to beat women over the head with. Yet I have never heard such teaching that I can recall. I think that many women feel more attacked but the reality is likely to be far different.
Men are attacked all the time, but most of society tunes that out.
fh,
That is mostly true. But what exactly is the “utter limit” fh? What your wife yells at you all the time because you left the seat up? After 30 years of marriage, is that the “utter limit?” That sounds an awful lot like he’s not haaaappppppy anymore to me.
“utter limit” is entirely subjective. If you want to say he is sick and tired of her f-cking every other man in town and now he is at his “utter limit” I am with you on that. But don’t leave subjective phrases out there as an excuse for anything.
Its not her opinion, its fact. Its actually happening right now for people pretty close to us. My daughter’s best friend is having a really terrible time right now because her daddy is remarrying in two weeks. His new wife-to-be is 22 years younger than he is. She doesn’t want her father to do this and she has nothing but great resentment towards the man (he cheated on her mother with this girl.) Her mom was even willing to forgive this man and go on with their marriage but he didn’t love her anymore because she “…started to look old.” Those are the words he told me. It was all I could do to keep from punching him in the face (that, and if it weren’t for the fact that I would have been arrested for battery and maybe the more than middle aged man could have kicked my middle aged @ss since I was 6’1″ and he was an alpha-tall 6’5″.) But you get the point. When men do these things fh it destroys everything you and I would want to accomplish by ending feminism. Men like this give feminists justification for their irrationalization. He (and others like him who trade in wives) are our enemies, not Elspeth.
IBB, most men don’t divorce their wives, especially as their wives age. Therefore, Elspeth and your points are not ‘facts,’ they are anecdotes. You seem to forget that any man who divorces, especially for cheating on the so called ‘good wife’ will be hammered by the courts for alimony and child support, thus further eroding a man’s ability to divorce his wife to hitch himself to a younger beauty.
If a man divorces in this day and age, bar the super rich and famous, he is probably doing it to get away from his wife, not to be remarried. Unless you and Elspeth seriously want to argue that men far and away get away with divorce…
Please, be my guest..
fh,
Of course they don’t. I never said they did. Neither did Elspeth.
What Elspeth is saying (and what I am agreeing to) is that the few men that DO divorce their wives (because they are aging) do so specifically BECAUSE they have a younger beauty waiting in the wings. I have seen this first hand, multiple times.
You are wrong. And even if you are right, so what? That doesn’t make it better just because he isn’t remarrying. Marriage is until death us do part, not until he is at his “utter limit” (your words fh.)
I never said that. Neither did Elspeth. This is not about men getting away with anything. She is saying that the 20-30% of divorces initiated by middle aged to late-middle aged men happen because those men (typically) have another much younger girl waiting for them. She’s right. And these men don’t get away with anything. I still want to smack this guy, he will never be my friend.
Better to live on a corner of the roof than share a house with a quarrelsome wife.
I wasn’t addressing the prevalence of divorce at all. That women divorce more than men and for more frivolous reasons is not in dispute. That men take the biggest financial hit in divorce (particularly when there are minor children in the picture).
My only reason for commenting was to address the many comments that were about twisting the fact presented (namely that a husband “left”) for the purposes of asserting that husbands don’t leave. That they omly left or pushed out.
I disagree with that.
Ugh. Should read:
that husbands are only themselves left or are pushed out
Elspeth, if women were faced with financial ruin, less access to their children and a destroyed reputation.. how many divorces do you think would happen?
The amount of men who would actively sabotage a marriage to a supposed thin, helpful and generous wife to be with some younger beauty are few a far between as to be negligible.
The amount of men who might be at their wits end with their contentious wife after 30 years of marriage, children out the home and all, and thus willing to go through the financial hit of divorce with no re-marriage in sight, might be substantially higher..
I’ll concede that Elspeth is right that it sometimes happens that a man leaves a decades old marriage because he has someone else.
Sometimes.
Most men cannot do this. Most men are not attractive enough to do this. I’d speculate that this usually happens because H is high value, W has let herself go and W has also mistreated him.
I will suspect Elspeth notices this because of the apex fallacy – she’s seen and heard of more attractive men doing this, and so believes this phenomenon to be more common than it really is. I also believe there’s a racial/cultural difference here. Men being able to, and willing to, “trade up” appears (to this observer) to be more prevalent among longtime married blacks than among longtime married whites.
In my experience, at least among long time married whites, it’s far more often the case that a man leaves a decades-old marriage because she’s pushed him out and worn him down over the years with a varying multitude of wrongs and malfeasances; and he finally reaches a breaking point.
One must remember: Elspeth has lived her entire life around attractive men. Her father is one, she is married to one, and she has at least one nephew who is one.
Elspeth, I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: Most men cannot do what the men you know are able to do. Most men are COMPLETELY UNABLE to attract even their own wives, much less some other woman. You are overstating the case and frequency of men leaving their wives for younger honeys. It’s far, far less common than you believe it is.
Off topic tale from my annual month back in Hell.
I went north to the town where we lived until retirement in 1997. I visited my brother, a few years older than I am, and his wife, 4 years younger than I am. They look much older than my wife and I do. Especially his wife. Her fingers look like someone broke them and tied them in knots. Arthritis or something.
But, his wife, my SIL, told a typical asinine AW tale.
When her daughter got divorced, her husband weighed around 300 pounds, and she weighted 110 pounds. Or, so SIL said.
There was some discussion about his DV towards her. He said, “She hit me.”
And, the judge said, “Did she hurt you?” Based on SIL’s tone, this implied sarcasm. And, SIL laughed sarcastically. Then she added, “She got the divorce.” Missing the point that the divorce was automatic on request. Sigh!
This is all part of the B.S. that it doesn’t matter if a small wife attacks a big, strong husband. DV is always an act against the marriage itself, whether the man or woman is hurt or not.
My thought at that moment was I’d like to put my stupid SIL; her stupid daughter; and the stupid judge in a room and toss in about one ounce of killer bees, then say, with a smirk, “Does it hurt? You are so big and those bees are so small!”
This old crap that female DV doesn’t matter because men are bigger and stronger really angers me for several reasons.
First, of course, the female assumption, held by many men such as the judge, is that men have no feelings so hitting them doesn’t matter. And, most women really don’t care if female DV hurts men or not. What men feel is of no importance to women anyway.
The second is that it is false that small women can’t hurt big strong men. A former BIL came back from the Korean War, worked as a small town cop, then to the end of his life as a prison guard (i.e. – corrections officer). I once asked him if an average male prisoner went berserk how many average guards would it take to subdue him. He knew. Six. If no weapons are involved. Any weapon, knife, cast iron skillet; broken bottle is involved, it can’t be done without any injury at all.
The obvious next question was, if an average female prisoner went berserk, how many average male guards would it take to subdue her if no weapons were involved. He knew. Four. If any weapon at all is involved, someone will be hurt; no number of guards is enough to stop an average berserk woman with a weapon without a serious injury.
GENTLEMEN; READ THOSE LAST PARAGRAPHS AND DO NOT EVER FORGET THEM.
My 110 pound niece can kick the crap out of any three of you average commentors on this blog if she freaks out. Unless she gets her hands on a kitchen knife which means someone is going to die.
I know more than the average person about berserk, because twice in my life I went berserk. And by the grace of God I killed no one. It actually scared me more then the men who provoked it. But, the first time it took somewhat more than 6 men to subdue me… I think berserk may be a genetic thing, because a cousin also did it several times, no one else in the family that I ever heard of. There are some extreme Irish legends about men going berserk.
Anyone who says a tiny woman can’t hurt a big strong man is a total F’idiot.
The third reason this attitude makes me angry is that the attitude says men are simply supposed to stand with head bowed and hands in pockets while dearies hit and punch them. The status of antebellum plantation slaves. Not even the basic human right of self-defense. I say again what I have said before so many times: GTHO.
@ Elspeth
From what I have witnessed, very few men middle aged or older leave their marriages without another woman (usually younger) waiting in the wings.
I don’t dispute that husbands cheat a lot (60% admit it). I was inclined to totally agree with you at first thought, but then I considered it again. I think that husbands who leave may often have seriously mitigating circumstances–like sex deprivation or the wife ballooning out so as to become sexually unattractive.
I have seen men leave their wives and end up with a gf quickly. In one case, looks and deliberate sex deprivation weren’t at issue. The problem was that the husband’s job caused him to travel a lot and he was without his wife a lot. They should have arranged for her to visit him, but didn’t, and he found a new gf. He admitted that his first wife was as good as his second and that he made a mistake.
In other cases, I suspect that sex deprivation was at issue, since looks weren’t so much. You need to query the man about sex deprivation, not the woman. They typically have no idea how (in)frequent the sex is.
I think that you really need to look a lot more closely at what is going on. Are you perhaps projecting your marriage onto others that have broken up?
My experience observing older men who file for divorce is somewhat different. Men who took verbal and emotional abuse for years before bailing are very beta, which is why the wives treated them that way.
They do not often have a honey lined up before they file for divorce. They are betas. Betas just don’t act like that.
What I see happening is another woman who knows them, sometimes a fellow worker or an acquaintance of the wife, moves in as soon as she hears about the divorce.
And, she knows how men respond to a kind word and a smile. Throw in some hot sex for a man deprived for years. And, it’s like shooting ducks in a barrel.
Among Hispanic women married to Anglo men, it is likely to be the wife’s best friend! That is, a woman who well knows what the wife was really like, and who had sympathy for the beat-down man.
When people see them together after the divorce, they erroneously assume she broke up the marriage.
Something else that supports my theory on men leaving decades-old marriages mostly because of malfeasances, wrongs and mistreatments by the wife:
Most of the time, if a 50+ YO man is attractive enough to attract another woman who is not his wife, and he’s in a not-miserable marriage, that man will simply have an affair with the “other woman” and remain in the marriage. He won’t jettison a wife for the specific purpose of getting another one. Why should he? He has the best of both worlds — marriage to a woman who doesn’t make his life hell; and a sidepiece who enhances his sex life for far less investment than she would cost as a wife.
Moreover, a 50+ man leaving a decades old marriage for another woman will get absolutely murdered in the divorce and property settlement. He’ll be paying her alimony for at least 10 years, and it’ll be purely punitive — solely and only for the purpose of holding him out as an example. “This is what we in family court do to older men who cast off good, faithful wives for younger models. Govern yourselves accordingly, gentlemen.”
The only way a 50+ YO man leaves a marriage because he has another woman is because of the additional circumstance of a miserable marriage.
Men who do what Elspeth says are few and far between — they’re attractive, they’re wealthy so they can afford to get soaked in the divorce, and they have to have boatloads of motivation to do it.
Wow!!!!! Learning so much from your comments Chuck Krammer… wow! It just makes me love my husband and appreciate him even more. I swear, the truth found in the manosphere is just so addicting! So sorry for all you’ve been through and will go through, at least you know your comments here are good warnings for everyone reading them.
Right. I was careful to say that it’s possible that a man would trash a comfortable 20-year marriage to a good wife because some young hottie made a play for him. That could happen, and surely does happen on occasion. But it’s rare, so unless a woman gives some specifics in that direction, I’m going to assume that he left under the much more common situation, which we’ve already seen outlined by several guys here: year after year of involuntary celibacy and grinding him down with nitpicking and disrespect.
Note that we’re not saying such a guy would be justified scripturally; that’s a separate issue. I’m just saying that when a woman says, “My husband abandoned me after 20 years and I have no idea why,” I’m not buying it. Odds are she does know, and it does have a lot to do with her treatment of him. I can say he’s wrong to divorce her, while also saying she probably treated him miserably.
innocentbystanderboston says:
October 21, 2014 at 11:57 am
She is saying that the 20-30% of divorces initiated by middle aged to late-middle aged men happen because those men (typically) have another much younger girl waiting for them. She’s right. And these men don’t get away with anything.
I’m not sure I interpreted Elspeth’s post(s) to mean what you say above, but I assume you believe it. And while I have no chapter and verse to cite with respect to hard evidence, there is simply no way that male-initiated divorce is driven even minimally be the ‘younger girl waiting for them’ scenario, your anecdotes notwithstanding. No sane man would purposely subject himself to the fate that men uniquely endure in divorce. If he really could have a hot young thing, he’d likely just get it on the side, and these guys are in the narrow minority of all married men. It is only after years of quiet desperation that he might cause his own financial and parental undoing.
Are there exceptions? Absolutely, but they are just that.
Anonymous age 72 says:
October 21, 2014 at 12:49 pm
This.
@ Elspeth, I think you’re right… (even though I truly personally lean towards always assuming that women are the problem makers in their marriage – that they ultimately decide if it goes wonderfully or terribly, it just simply isn’t always right), there has to be a line drawn somewhere (for the morality of it).
This notion that husbands never wrong their wives unless the wives push them to it is the height of absurdity. Women are the primary drivers of the divorce during this, the post-modern era, but there are such things as husbands who misbehave.
…And what kind of cash and prizes do men get to take with them when they misbehave? Oh I’M sorry, THAT’S right, SHE still gets HALF.
If she hasn’t had sex with you for 20 years, no wifely duties fulfilled, SHE still gets HALF.
If you have a side girlfriend, 10 side girlfriends, or you’ve been as faithful as Job, no side girlfriends at all, SHE still gets HALF.
If you as the man have misbehaved YOU still have to pay HER alimony, which is equal to, “I have to pay you for the fact that you USED TO BE my wife.”
If SHE has misbehaved, YOU as the MAN still have to pay HER alimony, because somehow HER infidelity doesn’t translate into a LOSS of INCOME.
If she has NAGGED YOU within an INCH of your LIFE, too bad so sad, because HOW SHE TREATS YOU DURING THE MARRIAGE NEVER MATTERS.
It is the HEIGHT of absurdity to believe that the PENALTIES and LEVEL OF ACCOUNTABILITY is the same for a 57 year old woman who claims her husband left her FOR UNSTATED REASONS is the same as a 57 year old man whose wife leaves him FOR ANY REASON SHE DARN WELL PLEASES.
Last paragraph should read:
“It is the HEIGHT of absurdity to believe that the PENALTIES and LEVEL OF ACCOUNTABILITY for a 57 year old woman who claims her husband left her FOR UNSTATED REASONS is the same as a 57 year old man whose wife leaves him FOR ANY REASON SHE DARN WELL PLEASES.”
I was so pissed my proofreading was piss poor.
redpillsetmefree said ..
“…And what kind of cash and prizes do men get to take with them when they misbehave? Oh I’M sorry, THAT’S right, SHE still gets HALF.
If she hasn’t had sex with you for 20 years, no wifely duties fulfilled, SHE still gets HALF.
If you have a side girlfriend, 10 side girlfriends, or you’ve been as faithful as Job, no side girlfriends at all, SHE still gets HALF.
If you as the man have misbehaved YOU still have to pay HER alimony, which is equal to, “I have to pay you for the fact that you USED TO BE my wife.”
If SHE has misbehaved, YOU as the MAN still have to pay HER alimony, because somehow HER infidelity doesn’t translate into a LOSS of INCOME.
If she has NAGGED YOU within an INCH of your LIFE, too bad so sad, because HOW SHE TREATS YOU DURING THE MARRIAGE NEVER MATTERS.”
And, this (above), is the prison men live in.
In fact, those wimminz / minz feminists are fighting for us and our equality (too) .. oh wait .. [sarcasm]
Ha, you got called out Dallies! You naughty Christian, you! Oh.. you, why can’t you just forgive and be nice?! Really, why all the hatred and condemning of all these divorcees? /sarcasm
Apparently, we’re all so evil to criticise these women. I wonder why so many seem so upset at a single blog that dares to speak ill of women? If we are all evil, then just leave evil alone… isn’t that right? Insanitybytes?! Guess not!
“A cult we are” RealityBytes says.
@TFH
“If the man behaves like a mangina even in response to you, shame him.”
I think you’d find mixed results at best with this approach. I tend to think that shaming men who are predisposed to beta traits might very well produce more beta traits and supplication.
I really think logic is the best course. Of course, you can’t force men accept logic, or even more importantly, force them to work through your logic. For people to change for the better they need to want it.
Uh oh, some men crossed the line and implied that men are blameless in some area when we know that’s not true. Brrrap! Brrrap! White knight alert!!! Order must be restored to the universe!
What NOT to say if you’re single
http://chastityproject.com/2014/10/say-youre-single
@ASD:
No, not projecting my marriage onto anything. Unless my hubs is an Oscar worthy actor, I think we’re fine.
I have however had occasions to witness men leave their wives for other women. I was only pointing out that it happens not saying that it’s common.
So much that I didn’t say was read into my comments and much that I did say was ignored.
@ Elspeth
By “projecting” I meant that you have not turned into a whale nor have started parceling out sex as part of behavior management. You have assumed that the marriages where the man cheated were like yours.
Or are you saying that there may be mitigating circumstances when the man files and has a gf on the side?
@ girl with dragonfly tattoo:
even though I truly personally lean towards always assuming that women are the problem makers in their marriage
I lean VERY heavily that way myself. When I’m not writing light hearted stuff, it’s all I blog about; how far we women have to go to even begin to be worthy wives, how grateful we should be for our men, how wives need to shape up, etc. I invite you GWDFT, to go to my blog, click on the “marriage” tab and see how ridiculous it is that I am holding women harmless.
That was never the point of my comment. The facts as presented in the original post -which are all we can go by- were that the woman’s husband “left”. What followed were tens of comments along the lines of “If he left she deserved it”. I take exception to that because it assumes a lot that has nothing to do with anything, and it assumes that it isn’t possible that she couldn’t have been the more wronged party in the demise of her marriage That was the only thing I was taking exception with.
I don’t even think she should be trying to get back in the dating game, personally. It wasn’t my intent to do anything but point out the problem with that line of thought and where it leads.
Ya’ll don’t hurt yourselves with all the backpedaling, now, ya heah? 😀
I have however had occasions to witness men leave their wives for other women. I was only pointing out that it happens not saying that it’s common.
Then I’m sure their wives deserved to be left for other women, simple as that.
So much that I didn’t say was read into my comments and much that I did say was ignored.
This is just more proof as to why men need Men Only spaces, whether virtual or real. Because inevitably as we discuss any relationship based subject, some WOMAN is going to come along waving her “Men Do It Too” flag, moving the goal posts and changing the subject, and then interjecting snide phrases like ‘the height of absurdity’ into her response, as if she has to defend the imaginary and unicorn based concept of female honor.
In reality, I read this thread and saw comment after comment dismissing the idea that a husband would leave his wife unless she deserved it*. That a man would never be a vow breaker the way women are. This needs to be confronted because it’s the exact same logic that drives the excusing of wives breaking their vows and leaving their husbands: “If she left, then he must have deserved it.”
As soon as 50% of the divorces are caused equally by the genders, this statement will gain some weight. Until then, seems like 70% of divorces initiated by women tips the scales. In addition, and as usual, you are pretending that women don’t operate in the area of the subtle, the nuanced, and the immeasurable, which is pretty much where women live. So it’s the height of absurdity for you to think that men, who are the constant recipients of female, nagging, negging, criticism, and sex-as-a-weapon tactics would somehow ignore these truths. Or if you can’t understand that, I can put it more plainly: what is actually rare is for a man to leave a wife that is handling her business properly at home.
And again…..none of what you said was the point of the original post.
The point of the original post was that a 57 year old woman, without giving clear reasons as to why her husband left(unless I missed them), demonstrates her clear lack of understanding of SMV and the dynamics of the SMP, and fires up the response-de-jour of females, complaining.
Complaining that ‘ain’t no good men left out there’ and proceeding to have the nerve to be PICKY as if she’s some nineteen year old that still has her pick of men.
Thus demonstrating that at no point in their lives will females think that anything less than the top men are good enough for them, nor will they take their share of the responsibility for a failed marriage. They will continue to believe that even with fat, saggy, used-to-be-curves, an empty egg factory, more frequent flyer miles than Delta, and minimal(AT BEST) beauty to bargain with, they still are supposed to have what they want, and will never consider that perhaps THEY are not what MEN want.
Women were designed by God, and commanded by God, to be in submission to a man. Women are incapable of correctly perceiving themselves or the world around them, it’s why they need headship.
Thus demonstrating that at no point in their lives will females think that anything less than the top men are good enough for them
I wonder if there is a term that captures this…
redpillsetmefree said ..
“Women were designed by God, and commanded by God, to be in submission to a man. Women are incapable of correctly perceiving themselves or the world around them, it’s why they need headship.”
Re: YmY / etc.
Hey ladies .. are you really interested in stopping rape? Bad behavior by women? High divorce rates? Single parent households for children? etc.
Then read and apply the above quote.
What normally happens to an older man in divorce is his retirement and pensions etc. are taken from him and passed on to the wife. This is the root of grey divorce. Along with the social you go girl crap. In this day and age a man leaves a woman she is bad. A man gets custody of his kids from a woman she must be really messed up or just doesn’t want the kids. That is just the way it is by law and life now. 57 year old women divorced, she drove him off. He lost every thing he had too. That is why she was talking all of that shit. If she was just left she would be fucking anything with a job or two nickels to rub together. As mentioned earlier she should be baking cookies for grand kids. Not checking out dicks on some hook up site. There is no romance in todays world not for men.
As soon as this gay marriage thing gets off the ground with the full blessing from the catholic churchianship the gays can establish the surrogacy industry for the MGTOW/family men. Nothing like an industry getting money from men when they run out of the limited homosexual families. Especially when the old career hags decide they want a kid. The government may not stop it if it means taken care of future tax payers and not more welfare cases.
Most men are COMPLETELY UNABLE to attract even their own wives, much less some other woman
A wife can die of thirst in a desert with no tingles. How did this situation come to be?
I wonder if a 50-something guy has ever left a wife who regularly made him sammiches.
Eh, this has become thrashing over gnats at this point
By and large women are delusional when it comes to men and marriage and this has caused tremendous societal damage
On the other hand a lot of guys are horndogs and vermin and this has caused enormous problems as well
Too bad we can’t live traditionally anymore, but here we are…
I am inclined though to believe the theory that a man pushing 60 will be very unlikely to leave his wife, since this is my situation, I know I would never have left my wife but I was forced into divorce against my will
@Elspeth
True, all I have to do is look at my own father to be reminded of this.
I think though the problem that most people sense is how feminists handle the issue of the sin of men. When one example of a man’s sin comes to the forefront, you get the scowling see, men do it too! and then the issue of the woman’s sin is completely dropped. Because men are the ones with the sin nature, not women. Men are the problem, never the women. Even when you get an action pinned on a woman, it’s always because some man pushed her into it, never out of her own free will.
It’s unfortunate, but you almost have to be quiet on the sins of men in order to eliminate this doctrinal feature of feminism in the minds of both the traditional and secular feminists and bring them to responsibility.
There is a valid reason for this. It is also the reason we have a manosphere. The statement is true and it does have a full background story behind it starting with a discussion on what a modern feminized burden finds attractive
In the scheme of traditional feminism, all it takes is one man.
Chivalry: Falling In Love With Shame
@Elspeth
Yes. I’ve covered this before, most recently in Slow your roll.
@FarmBoy
I wonder if a 50-something guy has ever left a wife who regularly made him sammiches.
*SNARK* I swear you crack me up.
Since I seem to be the initiator of Elspeth’s disagreement and concern, I’ll try to answer.
First of all, in reviewing my comment, I am confident that I explained how my view of “grey” divorce has changed over the years as I have seen more of life and learned more about men and women. I specifically went out of my way in the paragraph explaining what “on the clock” means to include both an example of bad behavior by a woman and bad behavior by a man. I then went on to explore what a lot of years of bad behavior by a woman could do to a man. So I don’t think I’m on the hook for the “men good no matter what they do” charge.
Second, as Dalrock has documented amply, divorce in couples over 60 is rare (although the Boomers appear to be doing their usual thing in changing that) in general, so we do not have a large set to work from. I don’t know how many such divorces Elspeth has seen but I can only recall a relative handful, something fewer than 10, reaching all the way back to my college years. It’s difficult to draw a general conclusion from such a small number of cases.
Third, Elspeth and I have different life experiences not just because she’s a woman and I’m a man, but we live in different cultural environments. The college friend whose father the doctor and mother the former nurse divorced told me where the father wound up; he quit his job in the big city and moved out over 100 miles away to a rural area. He took a job working at a rural government-funded clinic that mainly served poor rural people. I seriously doubt he had another woman waiting for him. In the situation I’m watching now, the man is so betaized he can barely speak to men in a social setting, he has zero game and shows a lot of signs of stress, I am certain he doesn’t have a hotsy waiting for him, either. I’m not going to generalize from those cases to all cases, but I do point to them in evidence regarding “another woman”.
Fourth I laid out in my tl;dr comment how stress can kill a man, and if his wife is an unending source of stress that will not change, it is understandable that he might choose a way out that doesn’t involve dying. This doesn’t mean I approve of it, it means I understand it. I have never bought the notion “to understand all is to forgive all”. Suppose that a man beat his wife week in and week out, to the point that it was damaging her health. Would anyone tell her she couldn’t at least go live separate from him? I do not think so. The long term effects of continual stress, of constantly high cortisol levels, happens to be well known. It leads to bad effects in the circulatory system, often to high blood pressure (which damages the heart, kidneys and other things), affects sleep, and so forth. If a woman’s disposition is such that she is putting her husband under constant stress, and there’s no way he can get her to stop, it seems to me he has a right to protect himself if possible. Suppose a woman was poisoning her husband slowly, with small doses of poison every day in his food, would he have a right to at least eat somewhere else in order to not die? Could he leave? Or is it his duty to stay, and die?
Now again, to say that I understand a reason for divorce does not mean I endorse it. Some very serious chuchgoing people I know insist that abuse is not grounds for divorce, only adultry and abandonment. They would counsel a man or woman who is being abused by a spouse who won’t stop, to separate, to leave, take the children if need be, but leave open a chance for reconciliation. Even if harm was done with a knife or other tool, there still should be a door open for the wronged person and the wrongder to reconcile. Well, ok, I can see the logic in that. Not everyone will have the strength, I suspect, but I see it. So..I would urge that course of action on anyone who takes their religion seriously. But I would never insist that anyone who is being harmed, either in a fast way or a slow way, remain with the wrongdoer. And that’s the point of my observation: there may well be grey divorces that stem from a lot of years of low level harm that has added up. Note the word may, thats “some”, not “all”.
It was not my intent to say that men don’t do bad things, or that divorcing men are innocent of wrongdoing, or anything even vaguely like that. I merely chose to point out that grey divorce may not be quite the open and shut case I used to think it was, and that women might actuallly contribute to a husband leaving by their conduct. If memory serves there is a Proverb about women tearing down their house with their own hands, so this notion is not quite unheard of in the Bible and thus in churches.
I hope this clears things up a bit. Elspeth caught a lot of heat on her blog not too long ago over something similar and it’s not my intent to recreate any of that here.
@Anon 72
I’ve seen it both ways. One family I knew when I was young the wife was fairly feminist and the husband a quiet STEM type beta. After the kids were out of the house he divorced his wife and moved in with a much less attractive but much more traditional woman. No one saw this coming. Another case which comes to mind that fits your experience was a woman who divorced her husband, and within 6 months a woman at his work had moved in and they were married. It was sadly funny, because the wife had very clearly filed for divorce, and not due to any type of infidelity. Yet after the other woman moved in on her ex so quickly she said: He left me for a younger woman!
Self professed religious Jewish women are, in many ways, like religious Mormon women. It’s not just that both of these (self-appointed) “chosen” tribes delude themselves with the idea that they’re their god’s favorite children, though that’s part of it. Mostly, it’s that people in both those tribes see it as their duty to have as many kids as possible.
I’m absolutely confident that the wimminz in question is both a mother and a grandmother, many times over. She may have suffered at the hands of her husband. Who knows? It’s irrelevant, given that we can only critique her behavior here. He’s not here, volunteering his complaints and asking for our advice about his personal choices.
In short: It’s not that the husband is blameless, it’s that we don’t have evidence of him whoring around, when any normal person would be working hard to mitigate a terrible situation (divorce) for all the young kids in the family. The wife is doing that in an outspoken way, here on this blog, so we’re criticizing her, and rightly so.
If this bitch’s husband wants to come to Dalrock and complain about the choice of skank-ho wimminz he is meeting on swingers’ sites, then I’m sure we’ll spare a few minutes to point and snigger in his general direction. Until then, we’re just giving the abuse to the person who likes it.
Best, Boxer.
ballista74 says:
This is true and volitionally enforced, not just allowed to drop. A female relative of mine was cheating on her husband and the older women in the family circled the wagons to cover it up. I’m not supposed to know about it.
greyghost says:
Yes, even if the ex-wife remarries into money. My dad could tell you all about that. When he “retires” he will need to take a part-time job. Meanwhile, she’ll have a luxurious retirement. It is an infuriating situation.
redpillssetmefree,
Whenever I talk to a woman about the horors inflicted upon men by women due to frivorce, she will inevitibly resort to the “well me do it too” argument. I then shift and say “…okay, so lets change the laws to prevent both women AND men from doing this so no one can do it going forward. Are you with me?” Silence. Of course they can’t get behind that. And after about a minute of silence I say “…why don’t you want to change the law stopping this?” she will say something along the lines of men hit/abuse women so we have to have the law this way. And that she would never get behind changing the law to get rid of the frivorce ultimatum. So I then respond “…then don’t EVER complain to me that men do it too since you REFUSE to do anything about it legislatively/politically.”
That pretty much ends the conversation right there.
When one example of a man’s sin comes to the forefront, you get the scowling see, men do it too! and then the issue of the woman’s sin is completely dropped.
It’s a big world, and there are examples of lots of thing that happen. When one of these examples is used to try to derail a line of reasoning, make the issue one of “who does it more and by how much”.
what a modern feminized burden finds attractive.
I see what you did there.
A man-only space wouldn’t prevent discussions on things like whether men always have an excuse for leaving their wives. Comments like
> Then I’m sure their wives deserved to be left for other women, simple as that.
would deserve to a response even if only men were here. Dalrock noted the point that we don’t know the man’s role in this case way up above. I am and a few others have repeated that, before Elspeth even made a comment.
We may be reacting in a pendulum swinging way, but seeking the proper location rather than pushing too far to the other side will ultimately be more productive. A society cannot be successful and survive without proper family relationships, since God created those as the foundation. I have no idea how we will get to that in some form again, but it certainly doesn’t lie in making women mere breeding stock or something else. It may be impossible for most in the modern political climate, but I still agree with the idea that “what can’t continue, won’t” and I expect some reversion to the man nearby.
TL:DR – Men still need to consider all ramifications on an issue.
Farm Boy
This sure does happen often, the contempt part. Women do contempt way better than men. Why is that?
I’m not sure, but I think sammiches are in the equation somewhere.
Waitaminute, who said men never do anything wrong? Of course they do. Men break their vows. Men cheat. I smell an appeal to hypocrisy.
I think all Elspeth was saying is that we all need to be measured by the same stick. We don’t know why Deborah’s husband left, as she didn’t say. Are more women at fault? Yes, I believe that. The numbers show exactly that.I have no argument with those of you who say that she sounds like a complete, entitled idiot. And, Elspeth said, and I agree, that she is just stupid to be out looking at her age. She should focus on kids/grandkids and just live out her life as a single woman.
But, I observed what Elspeth did. A rush to judgement in the comments, because men just don’t do that. It’s her fault! I don’t know why her husband walked out on her, and none of us do. Yes, men do sin, men do leave their wives for unbiblical reasons.
When I read (many of) the comments, it sure sounds like six of one, half dozen of the other. It sounds just like what women say. Oh, sure, she left, but it’s still all his fault! I don’t buy that, and I also do not buy the reverse.
I’m not sure, but I think sammiches are in the equation somewhere.
A sammich a day keeps the contempt away?
margaret59
It is not the same for men and women. Men pay with their life for leaving a wife. She doesn’t. I think you know that. The meme to justify misandry is the man leaving this loving and submitted and committed wife for some young pussy is just straight up bullshit and a lie like many others discovered in the manosphere on a regular basis.
And you are right beta males just don’t do that and they damn sure don’t get paid and rewarded by government or society to do that. She does. So the leaving your spouse thing is not in anyway the same thing. You knew that going in or are playing dumb or are deliberately trying to get the men here back on the plantation as a monitor of the male space. I have full faith in the beta male just as feminist do. I have zero faith in female virtue. The lies and old school conventional wisdom aren’t don’t work any more.
When you come out ahead no matter who’s at fault, men don’t want to hear your complaints.
When results are in no way tied to behavior, men don’t want to hear your complaints.
When you are rewarded for immaturity and irresponsibility, the very things that are BEATEN OUT OF US by the system and our fellow males, men. don’t. want. to. hear. your. complaints.
Get used to these ideas.
@Elspeth I understand your initial comment – I truly do think you made a valid point, and it is needed 🙂
@ TFH – thank you for the encouragement, I do try to write mostly for women (especially my generation and younger) just because it makes sense for me to do so, but it is interesting that a lot of guys really seem to be “enlightened” by what I’ve written on marriage/sex – you’re right that it really sinks in for them. I just sent someone to Rational Male and Dalrock tonight… a friend of my brother’s who is in the army & just got cheated on.
BradA:
“We may be reacting in a pendulum swinging way, but seeking the proper location rather than pushing too far to the other side will ultimately be more productive . . .A society cannot be successful and survive without proper family relationships”
Exactly how far is “too far” and not “proper” when it swings the other way?
Old Rome, before its decadence, gave the patriarch of the family pretty much absolute power over his family, including life and death and selling them into slavery. He owned and controlled everything. And they did all right before going the way the west is now.
Is that too far?
Who gets to decide “too far” because quite frankly, most people would think turning the divorce laws back to fault, or awarding men primary custody, or eliminating maintenance and child support are “too far” and so is eliminating VAWA, and WIC and most of welfare, heck most of the welfare state needs to be dismantled.
And all of that is “too far”
Or holding women accountable for anything is “too far”
How about college degrees? Because the biggest correlation for a lower birth rare for a country is how educated the women are.
Is stopping that too far?
Women’s suffrage?
To far?
So . . .
How far is too far?
As for all the women bringing up “men do it too” I say a hearty “Who Cares”
Everyone knows the sins and weaknesses of men.
If we were living in a time when women were viewed as wicked depraved, disloyal, demonic little creatures and men are all paragons, then it would indeed be relevant.
But since it is the opposite, it doesn’t matter.
If that woman’s husband had cheated on her, she would have said it, if there was something to say even in passing to gain sympathy and elevate her martyrdom (for women love to be seen as martyrs) she would have, if her husband had been a wretch in some way, she would have said so.
She did not, and the silence says more than any words.
It is speculation, but she was left for a reason, and it wasn’t to the arms of another woman or she would have said “he left me for another woman” no “he walked out” and at best he was done with her.
Greyghost:
“In this day and age a man leaves a woman she is bad. A man gets custody of his kids from a woman she must be really messed up or just doesn’t want the kids. That is just the way it is by law and life now. ”
That’s probably the most salient point regarding who divorces whom.
The tipping point for when one party or another wants to break the marriage is different.
Its kind of like breaking a contract. If one party finds that it is to their economic advantage to break a contract, even if they have to pay damages, they will break the contract.
Now imagine if one party could break the contract and not have to pay any damages (or at least think they suffer no loss, maybe even get rewarded for breaking the contract) any amount of perceived advantage of breaking the contract to make a bigger profit elsewhere is tempting and if I get reward for breaking the contract, well the amount of perceived advantage doesn’t have to be great. Even the risk of the other party breaking the contract because I’m not fulfilling all the parts of the contract, or even violating it doesn’t seem that important.
Now imagine a party that faces liquidated damages, the advantage of breaking the contract would have to be huge, because the cost would be high.
There are only two scenarios that make the latter person break the contract: the profit made by jettisoning the contract is large enough to make it worth it, or the cost of fulfilling the contract is so onerous that it is worth paying the price, because the price is small in comparison to the cost of performance.
I know it isn’t Christian, but any man married to a borderline should get out, and there are a lot of them out there. There is no legal way for the man to hold her accountable or place boundaries on her to make it acceptable to be married to her (the lack of being able to do that is one more reason I say there is no marriage anymore)
Yes, some married men cheat. There are also more than a few married men who will go ‘so far’ (i.e., a lapdance at a strip club) but stop short of anything further. It would seem that beginning with oral sex, anything including and beyond that is incontrovertibly cheating, period. Kissing a stripper? Wrong, but perhaps not full-on cheating to the same extent. There are gradations.
I cannot understand why men who are left/divorced would seek another relationship or marriage. Make your money and use it to get the sex you need. That doesn’t work for a Christian worldview, I know.
The woman who commented at the top of this thread ‘trugingstar’ – I don’t think she was a troll at all. Her concerns and frustrations are what I hear from other Christian women who, in waiting for marriage, have the entire deck stacked against them. I’m not in a position to decry their ‘victimhood’, because (and only because) they have made a rigid, religious-based choice to put themselves at a severe disadvantage in the SMP with that self-restriction. It is downright extreme for an adult woman to be holding out for marriage in the modern dating world, and she pays the price for this. And I do, to some extent, respect and admire that commitment to principle in a woman. Even if it’s not a principle I’d ever promote.
Ra’s,
You have to admit that “too far” exists before you can decide what was too far.
Rome had a load of problems throughout its history. I would argue that those laid the groundwork for the decadence.
I look to the Scriptures for my guidance and I would wrestle with those to find the proper balance. That may not satisfy you or others, but I would go with the one who made me before I will go with the “women are always bad” meme. I didn’t go with the “men are always bad” meme either, though it is certainly pushed.
We need to first of all admit that all are fallen and will sin. A woman may be at the cause of a divorce, but a man can as well. Ignoring that point in self-righteous anger will only create another unsustainable system. It will also do things that are not pleasing to our creator.
We don’t need a 50/50 split on blame, nor do we need to never acknowledge it.
I look to the Scriptures for my guidance and I would wrestle with those to find the proper balance. That may not satisfy you or others, but I would go with the one who made me before I will go with the “women are always bad” meme.
1 Corinthians 11:3 – But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
Colossians 3:18 – Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.
1 Peter 3:1-22 – Wives, in the same way submit yourselves to your own husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives.
Ephesians 5:22 – Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
1 Timothy 2:9-14 – In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works. Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
And there’s no scripture that gives the power of divorce to women. Ever.
The Bible doesn’t say(and neither did we) “women always bad.” The Bible says “women always submit.”
Let’s see how you do with those.
And I need to restate:
what is actually rare is for a man to leave a wife that is handling her business properly at home.
@ Anonymous Reader:
I wasn’t sure whose comment began the string of comments shrugging off the fact of how the woman came to be single. She may indeed have been a horrible wife. We just have no way of knowing that. I was offering my take on the way the thing unfolded. But I do appreciate your clarification.
@ Ballista:
I think you’ve read enough of me to recognize that I totally *get* what you’re saying about the whole ‘Men do it too!” excuse. I hate that too.
Even if that is true, and sometimes it is, that was never the intent nor the tenor of my original comment. That was how it was interpreted by those who came after me.
TFH says:
October 21, 2014 at 11:05 pm
Not to quibble, but I don’t think most people, men or women, realize how truly devastating divorce is from a financial standpoint. More importantly they do not realize that by and large this devastation is wrought with no consideration whatsoever as to comparative fault for the difficult marriage (if it were even truly difficult).
RPSMF,
The scriptures you quoted at BradA at October 22, 2014 at 5:52 am are well-known. I’m fairly certain BradA has used them himself. What he wrote in no way contradicts any of them. What BradA, and Elspeth, and IBB, and Dalrock, and others, and now me, is saying is that neither sex has a monopoly on either virtue or blame. I looked back through the thread and confirmed that nobody wrote that men are never to blame for divorce, or never initiate divorce for bad reasons. Also, nobody – and certainly not BradA – ever wrote that wives are not obligated to submit to their husbands, or that few do so in practice. You’re striking at an argument nobody made. I have every reason to assume good faith on your part, so I will further assume that this is a misunderstanding rather than a genuine disagreement.
Back to the topic at hand. I agree that, “Men do it to” isn’t particularly helpful here, since nobody here has denied that. What is salient is that men rarely destroy their marriages for trivial reasons, while women frequently do it. In fact, men rarely leave their wives for younger women even when they could easily do so. It is also salient that men are generally punished whoever is at fault or whoever hits the detonator, while women are generally rewarded either way. We all know that the big problem is not that large numbers of older men are dumping their aging wives for young hotties (that is as apocryphal as the “wage gap”) – it is that large numbers of wives are in rebellion against their roles within marriage, and both the law and the church excuse, encourage, and financially incentivize destructive behavior by women.
I have no idea why Deborah’s husband walked out, and neither do any of us. That doesn’t mean we cannot make educated guesses based on probabilities. Assuming that nothing she wrote is false, while acknowledging that she left a lot unsaid, we can assess the odds. Obviously it was worth it to him, because he did it. But we know that divorce generally punishes men at the expense of women, so we may suppose that either he was utterly miserable or that he perceived a much better offer. We know that men rarely dump their wives for younger women, and we also know that if she was such a victim it is unlikely that she would have left that out of her narrative…. so the odds are that she was a horrible wife. That does not mean that he was Biiblically justified in divorcing her – we just don’t know enough to say that – and since she’s Jewish it stands to reason that neither acknowledged anything in the New Testament, so arguments from Matthew or anything written in the Epistles would have been moot for them. From a Christian perspective their marriage was, for all intents and purposes, a secular one. Given that; they probably “grew apart” like a lot of couples do, and she probably strongly contributed to his discontent (which may even have included infidelity on her part – she doesn’t say what she did to contribute to her husband’s decision to leave despite the enormous penalties he faces for doing so).
Ra’s al ghul says:
October 22, 2014 at 12:00 am
To the extent that civil marriage is a contract, I know of no other parallel in other spheres of law. In what other circumstance is the default position that one party can unilaterally terminate an agreement with no proof of breach on the other party’s part and not only not be expected to compensate the non-terminating party for the no-fault termination but reasonably expect to demand at least partial continued performance on the part of the non-terminating party.
And if that scenario isn’t egregious enough imagine the all too common scenario whereby the terminating party actually has caused the difficulty (e.g., infidelity) and yet can still demand at least partial performance from the party theretofore holding us his (yes, his) end of the bargain.
This reminds me of one of my mother’s favorite tactics when my father called her on some BS of one kind or another…. “Well, I may have done X, but you do Y!” In other words, try to distract him from HER failing to one of HIS failings (and he had quite a few, no doubt) so she could control the exchange and put him on the defensive….and magically, HER failing was forgotten.
He finally caught on to this after many. many years.
Lyn87,
I will leave it at your statement. Good points.
Poke,
I have had to do the same. I don’t blame my wife for that, but I do note it regularly and I am doing better about not getting dragged past where I intended.
The claims of frivorce here I believe are wildly overblown. Even your poster child for “frivorce” Elizabeth Gilbert did not leave her husband just to find herself, she left him because he wanted children and she didn’t. This is a clash of values, hardly frivolous. The fact that divorced women report being emotionally better off in spite of being financially worse off is pretty telling, I think. The adverse health effects for a bad marriage are simply worse for women, so it makes sense that there would be more urgency in leaving one for a woman.
Even before the fall of the Temple, Jewish law made the capital offenses of the OT very difficult if at all possible to happen. Adultery, sodomy, etc. were not being punished by stoning or death as written in the law for most cases; the rabbis moved on to other important parts of the law to consider and let capital punishment to the governmental authorities.
Are we now at a place where the NT letters telling women to submit to their husbands, like the stoning offenses of the OT, just artifacts of an earlier time? Many here agree that marriage 2.0 isn’t even the type of marriage or divorce being argued about in the Gospels or NT letters. I don’t know what the solution is…but I’m sure at some point people will just be produced in artificial wombs and raised by the state making even children irrelevant.
Honestly, the only people fighting for the old values are the Islamists. You have to admit, they make a good argument for lonely or spurred men in the West.
Jen said ..
“The claims of frivorce here I believe are wildly overblown. Even your poster child for “frivorce” Elizabeth Gilbert did not leave her husband just to find herself, she left him because he wanted children and she didn’t. This is a clash of values, hardly frivolous. The fact that divorced women report being emotionally better off in spite of being financially worse off is pretty telling, I think. The adverse health effects for a bad marriage are simply worse for women, so it makes sense that there would be more urgency in leaving one for a woman.”
*cough .. cough .. Male Bovine Fecal Matter .. cough*
Yes Honeycomb it’s pretty obvious that a woman in a happy or functional marriage would be made worse-off by leaving it.. but a woman in a marriage where her blood pressure is off the charts day after day, it’s easy to see why she would report being happier to be divorced than to remain in such a marriage.
Cause: http://www.apa.org/monitor/dec01/badmarriage.aspx
Effect: http://www.thestar.com/life/2013/07/11/marital_split_women_happier_after_divorce_study.html
Ideally, all marriages would be good ones, no one would ever cheat or be neglectful or emotionally abusive. But unfortunately that isn’t how it works in the real world.
Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 (KJV)
To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance; A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing; A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away; A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak; A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.
The people that die first in a zombie apocalypse? They are the ones that won’t accept the situation that they’re in, but rather keep responding to the situation that they think they’re in, or that they used to be in.
Wisdom is justified of all her children, so he that hath an ear, let him hear.
Jen:
We’ve already addressed these arguments three years ago, here:
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/12/20/is-frivolous-divorce-overstated-in-the-manosphere/
The primary provocateur in that argument made her points. She lost that debate in quite crash-and-burn spectacular fashion.
There’s really nothing more to say on this score. Next.
The claims of frivorce here I believe are wildly overblown.
I wonder if Jen is secretly Susan Walsh,
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/12/20/is-frivolous-divorce-overstated-in-the-manosphere/
Actually nowadays, the more meager a woman’s choices, the more delusional and entitled she becomes.
Even your poster child for “frivorce” Elizabeth Gilbert did not leave her husband just to find herself, she left him because he wanted children and she didn’t.
Her publisher dangled money in front of her for a book. It effectively required her to divorce her husband.
Actually Jenny Erikson is the poster girl for frivorce.
thedeti, I will definitely review the link and thank you for providing it. At first cursory glance though it just kind of validates my point; the reasons given were not inconsistent with other data sets; cheating is a significant and leading cause of divorce initiation, to the point that when it DOESN’T top the list of reasons it makes news: http://www.themortonreport.com/home-away/life/the-new-leading-cause-of-divorce-is/.
Jen said ..
“Ideally, all marriages would be good ones, no one would ever cheat or be neglectful or emotionally abusive. But unfortunately that isn’t how it works in the real world.”
I see what you did there ..
See what I did here (below?) ..
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/05/28/the-cost-of-cuckoldry/
Yep .. Women don’t cheat and they have a much higher threshold for their men regarding what they call cheating. Women never neglect or emotionally abuse their husband’s. Nope.
So, I agree, “Ideally” (sic) women would make good on their vows (re: marriage).
Jen,
Just reporting they are better off emotionally doesn’t prove they are. Who is going to admit “I really messed my life over” anyway?
Note that many “bad” marriage become “good” marriages over time if the parties involved stick it out, working through things. I will firmly state that the willingness of a woman to work things out is the determining factor in that. It can work out if she wants it to work out. Most men are not the schlubs many proclaim.
The science says,
“A stressful relationship or marriage can leave you vulnerable and heartbroken literally. According to a 2000 study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, women who reported moderate to severe marital strain were 2.9 times more likely to need heart surgery, suffer heart attacks or die of heart disease than women without marital stress. This finding held even when researchers adjusted for other factors such as age, smoking habits, diabetes, blood pressure and “bad” cholesterol levels.
And unmarried women living with their sweeties who were in severely stressful relationships also had a higher risk of heart problems, the study showed.
These results were echoed by another study published in the American Journal of Cardiology in 2006, which showed that marital quality and social support are especially important in the development and management of chronic diseases such as congestive heart failure. The study found that patients with the most severe heart disease and poorest marriages had the highest risk of dying over a four-year period. The four-year survival rate of those with severe heart disease and poor marriages was 42 percent, compared with 78 percent among patients with milder heart disease and good marriages.”
So, what can we conclude from this? That marital quality is important. It may not be to the religious tradcon section of the manosphere, but in the real world, it definitely is. I struggle to see why the insistence that people should remain in situations that are adversely afffecting their physical and mental health with one caveat; the meatgrinder that is modern North American family law. OK, fair point. The solution to this is simple: don’t get married.
Actually Jen,
The leading cause for divorce is filing for divorce.
but a woman in a marriage where her blood pressure is off the charts day after day
So why might her blood pressure be off the charts?
Perhaps it might be that she is a demanding harpy where nothing is ever good enough.
Or perhaps she attached herself to a bad biy who makes no money and is always in trouble.
First world problems.
“Yep .. Women don’t cheat and they have a much higher threshold for their men regarding what they call cheating. Women never neglect or emotionally abuse their husband’s. Nope.”
Who said that exactly? Certainly wasn’t me. I think if a woman cheats on her husband, he should immediately divorce her, but not before hiding his assets.
KB said ..
“Actually Jen,
The leading cause for divorce is filing for divorce.”
Actually KB … I have got to call ya on this one … Marriage is the leading cause of divorce … lol
Jen, long time no see. How are your choices nowadays? You must be so awfully attractive. Just like you showed with your pics on J4G, lol.
Even your poster child for “frivorce” Elizabeth Gilbert did not leave her husband just to find herself, she left him because he wanted children and she didn’t. This is a clash of values, hardly frivolous.
I think it’s called “fraud” when you agree to have children when you marry and then reneg on the agreement.
Dalrock, did you see what I did there with Jen–that it was actually on topic?
The solution to this is simple: don’t get married.
OK. And as the rest if the bargain, taxes paid by men should not go disproportionately to women.
Sorry the adsgamer I don’t believe we’ve met. Or if we had, you must have been using a different name.
“I think it’s called “fraud” when you agree to have children when you marry and then reneg on the agreement.” But that’s assuming you know the ins-and-outs of the marriage. Lots of times people who are staunchly childfree are “fencesitters” initially – just very “meh” about the concept – and their partners and the people around them assume they will “change their minds” with time (people usually assume of women especially that they will start hearing their “biological clock ticking” and then decide to do it), and then when they don’t and become even more certain that they DON’T want them, it becomes a problem later on. Gilbert married at 25, which is pretty young. At least she left her husband when he was still young enough to attract a childbearing woman and have kids.
Jen said ..
“Who said that exactly? Certainly wasn’t me. I think if a woman cheats on her husband, he should immediately divorce her, but not before hiding his assets.”
You did. Are you arguing to that 70%+ of divorces are not by women? Because you’re seemingly editing the reality of divorce filings into you’re ideal (sic) divorce rate of 50/50.
And, you are living a lie if you think you can hide assests. You could be a great husband and get raped regardless of her morale compass. You’re stupid woman. Because it’s the Feminists refusing (and any other woman not opposing the Feminists on) DNA testing at birth for all children.
Jen:
Almost all the time, the source of a woman’s marital stress is herself, usually her lack of attraction to her husband.
Either:
1. She screwed up and settled for a man she is less attracted to than the men she had premarital sex with.
2. She screwed up and settled for a man she’s not attracted to.
3. She refuses to have sex with her husband.
The only time a man imposes marital stress on his wife is when he is full on out-in-the-open cheating on her, and rubbing her face in it. Those instances are so rare as to be negligible. The reason people believe this is more common than it is is because it is overwhelmingly and disproportionately depicted in media directed at women.
No no. You are both wrong. The leading cause of divorce is women not making sammiches for their husbands.
“OK. And as the rest if the bargain, taxes paid by men should not go disproportionately to women.”
Men can start going to the doctor more often and claim a bigger piece of the pie? Nothing to prevent them from doing that.
Also, this is an oddly worded statement; it seems to suggest that men are going to be the ones losing out if they don’t get married. I though the whole point of the manosphere and MGTOW movements are that men are the ones losing out if they DO?
“No no. You are both wrong. The leading cause of divorce is women not making sammiches for their husbands.”
Ohhhh okay. I get it now. You’re one of THOSE.
Hey Jen ..
http://www.livescience.com/47404-why-women-cheat.html
Hey Honeycomb.
I’m not sure what the point of posting that link is. Yes, some men cheat and some women cheat. There isn’t really an excuse for either gender since it’s a violation of the vows you made on the wedding day.
Is Jen the same person as FrenzyJen on CAF? That chick is a feminist whack-a-doodle.
Of course she thinks that claims of frivorce are vastly overblown: she’s a woman, and for women the risk of frivorce is miniscule. For men, it is significant. Half of all marriages end in divorce, and women initiate the vast majority of them. Not only do women initiate the vast majority of divorces, but only one of the top ten reasons they do so is legitimate. Additionally: for women, divorce is generally lucrative, while for men it is incredibly costly and potentially lethal, so it stands to reason (and is borne out by statistics) that women are far more prone to initiate divorce for frivolous reasons than men are.
And of course divorcing women tend to report increased happiness (in the short term) than the men they discard – women typically “win” in divorce… which is why so many of them initiate it for silly reasons. They get the kids (and get to keep them away from the father with legal impunity), and they get the benefits of marriage (the house and an income stream at his expense) while casting off any obligations she has to him. If I got to play a game in which I was practically guaranteed to win a huge prize, I’d probably be pretty happy too… if I had no morals, anyway.
They often lose out in the long run, though… as do the children. A woman with baggage does not have the same SMV/MMV as the younger, hotter, tighter, and unencumbered version of herself that snagged her husband. She may say she’s happy while the alimony and CS checks are rolling in – and she probably even believes it – but she’s likely to be a good deal less happy when she realizes that she’s no longer on the radar screen of men she finds attractive (like the woman this thread is about).
“You did. Are you arguing to that 70%+ of divorces are not by women? Because you’re seemingly editing the reality of divorce filings into you’re ideal (sic) divorce rate of 50/50.”
Women file about 67% (2/3rd’s) of divorces. For both men and women who file, I’m sure that the vast majority of the time they have their reasons, and the reasons are good ones. My point was simply that since a high-stress marriage has slightly worse health effects for women, it makes sense that they would subsequently report being slightly happier to be divorced than men. But men also reported being happier following divorce, you’ll notice.
Almost all the time, a woman’s complaint of marital problems comes down to lack of attraction.
Financial problems? Horseshit. Those are a cover for her lack of attraction. She had no problems working two jobs to support her layabout unemployed f*ckbuddy back when she first graduated college; and the reason she had no problem with it is because he was hawt.
They “can’t get along”? Nope, not buying that either. She could “get along” with Alpha McGorgeous when he was treating her like crap, ignoring her texts and giving her Skittles for her birthday. She took it because Mr. McGorgeous could sex her juuuust right.
Not enough time in the day to “connect”? Baloney. She has time for a hawt guy. A woman will crawl over broken glass to be with a man she’s attracted to. If she wants to be with a guy, she makes time for it.
Lyn87, I don’t know who FrenzyJen is. I only ever go by Jen.
“Not only do women initiate the vast majority of divorces, but only one of the top ten reasons they do so is legitimate.” I’d love to know which of those reasons you think that was. I see abuse, infidelity and alcohol/drug abuse on that list, I wonder which of those you thought was a “good enough.” (quietly laughing).
Again, what it comes down to is that many of you have a very different definition of “frivolous” than the majority of people. And that’s OK, but just know that experiencing a shortened lifespan and heart problems: http://www.livescience.com/35469-5-ways-relationships-are-bad-for-your-health.html, infidelity, etc. are considered NON-frivolous to most people.
I don’t agree with the North American divorce laws. In Scandinavia of course there are equitable laws concerning child support and so forth and no alimony, but that’s what happens when laws are feminist and not patriarchal/traditional in nature.
@Feministhater
I saw that. Notice how she apes the form (or what she thinks it is) of a man calling another man out, but the whole post is an expression of emotion. Dalrock makes her angry. Dalrock makes her feel bad, etc. There is nothing to disagree with. I have no question both are true.
She challenges me to rebut it, but doesn’t make any concrete arguments to rebut. All she does is point to this post saying I’m a bad man (presumably because this post causes feelbad). It reminds me of the old joke about the female astronaut:
“Houston, we have a problem.” What? “Never mind” What’s the problem? “Nothing” Please tell us? “You know what the problem is.”
And she wonders why I banned her as a troll.
Jen said ..
“I don’t agree with the North American divorce laws. In Scandinavia of course there are equitable laws concerning child support and so forth and no alimony, but that’s what happens when laws are feminist and not patriarchal/traditional in nature.”
Complete horse crap.
I was right .. you’re a stupid woman. I am done with you (re: arguing with troll’s).
While I was typing my last post, Jen was also writing and responding (poorly).
First, she wrote, “Gilbert married at 25, which is pretty young.” On average, women become fertile around age 15 and functionally infertile around age 40, with their greatest fecundity skewed toward the younger half of that range. Twenty-five is not pretty young for a woman to marry: she’s already 40% of the way through her fertile years by then. And at 25 I was a commissioned military officer with vastly more responsibility than Jen will ever be able to imagine. If a 25-year-old woman is “pretty young” to be married, then she’ll surely agree that 18-year-old women have no business doing things like voting, driving, signing contracts, or having the authority to initiate divorce.. right?
As for her “quietly laughing” nonsense, the article I linked listed the top ten reasons women initiate divorce as determined by a Pennsylvania University study. Nine were either completely trivial or fairly trivial, while only one – infidelity – is a legitimate reason for divorce.
Jen lives in a dream world where divorce is a relatively painless way for people to get on with their lives in non-optimal marriages, rather than a way than millions of women destroy their husbands and children’s lives over trivial reasons and for their own short-term benefit.
Again, Jen, who suffers more in bad marriages?
Jen:
If you believe that a woman ending a marriage because she feels unhappy is not frivolous, then there’s not much to discuss. You believe in the Marriage 2.0 model of hedonic marriage, i.e., that marriage exists to make its participants happy and the marriage isn’t successful if it crashes into rough waters. Marriage isn’t supposed to be difficult or taxing; it isn’t supposed to expect that its participants give of themselves to make it work.
The problems with this model are legion. It’s unstable. It’s vulnerable to hardship. It’s based on feelings and sexual attraction, not on commitment and resolve. It’s a place for fulfillment, not for mutual support and child-rearing.
If that’s what you believe marriage is, then I can see why you are here touting your viewpoints. I just don’t agree with you that your model of “marriage is supposed to make us all happy all the time” is a workable one. It isn’t, and the evidence is all around us.
Lyn87, what we have here concerning the top 10 reasons in your link is called a “difference of opinion.” You think infidelity is a legitimate reason for divorce while being married to an alcoholic, for instance, isn’t. That is your opinion and you’re entitled to it. But the majority of people in the world would in fact see ME as being the reasonable one here, not you, afraid to say.
Actually, I knew an alcoholic whose wife left him after over 20 years of marriage. He was a wonderful person with demons and I actually feel quite bad for him that he was never able to kick the habit. He died of liver failure at 51. I don’t think his wife was a bad person for divorcing him, nor do I think she did so frivolously. Again, you’re entitled to your opinion and if you’ve been involved in a ruinous divorce yourself, I can sympathize with why you have such a militant and unrealistic stance.
thedeti, I don’t think marriage is supposed to make us happy all the time and agree that that is not reasonable to expect from a 50-year union. However, nor is it it supposed to make us miserable all the time, and if that’s happening, then it’s reasonable to get out. Someone mentioned above that some men who file for divorce are facing a choice of losing their assets or killing themselves. I am sure that some women feel the same way (and in fact married women are slightly more likely to kill themselves than never-married women). I honestly don’t understand how you can endorse this is a reasonable way to live one’s life.
And actually, on a personal level, I think marriage makes more sense as a “capstone,” meaning I think it should come after the couple have already invested a good chunk of their lives together and know each other well, not before. I can’t see myself marrying someone I haven’t been with for 10 years or more.
Men can start going to the doctor more often and claim a bigger piece of the pie? Nothing to prevent them from doing that.
Can we prevent men’s taxes from going to baby mamas?
“However, nor is it it supposed to make us miserable all the time, and if that’s happening, then it’s reasonable to get out.”
“for better or for worse”
“for richer or for poorer”
“in sickness and in health”
No man should ever marry you, Jen, because vows don’t mean anything to you.
“Needed” why? What terrible thing would happen if a statement unfairy praising men were allowed to pass uncorrected? Why is it necessary to make sure that never happens?
Look, Elspeth and the white knights who rode in to cheer her on are right: sometimes a good wife is dumped through no fault of her own. That is true, and it’s possible that this writer was one of those. The claim that older men never divorce without being forced into it by an evil harridan was incorrect, of course, because NAMALT. So if someone wants to correct that, fine.
But why do we need to correct such hyperbole every time it’s uttered? Why is it seen as so dangerous, even by people who are generally hip to red pill ideas?
If you’ve been with a man for 10 years, why would he then marry you?
If you’ve been with a man for 10 years, why would any other man marry you?
Enjoy your cats.
joke about the female astronaut:
“Houston, we have a problem.” What? “Never mind” What’s the problem? “Nothing” Please tell us? “You know what the problem is.”
Good joke this is.
Much it reveals.
And there’s more. Jen wrote, “I’m sure that the vast majority of the time they have their reasons, and the reasons are good ones.”
Actually, they’re not. According to the UPenn study I linked, the top ten reasons women initiate divorce are as follows:
1 Infidelity – The only legitimate item on the list.
2 Incompatible – Not a good reason. Not only is it not Biblically justified, but so-called incompatibility can be worked through.
3 Drinking/Drug Use – Why did she marry a drinker/drug user? Oh, that’s right… women are attracted to bad boys. Something about. “You made your bed, now lie in it” comes to mind.
4 Grew Apart – Utter nonsense, and vague to boot
5 Personality problems – Again, utter nonsense and vague.
6 Lack of communication – And again…
7 Physical or mental abuse – Considering what feminists consider abuse, I have to say that 95% of abuse allegations are trivial, and are more likely to mean “He doesn’t instinctively give me everything I want without my having to ask for it.”
8 Loss of love – And again…
9 Not meeting family obligations – Is she meetings hers, including in the bedroom? Didn’t think so.
10 Employment problems – Lose a job, lose your family and everything you’ve worked for… seems legit. /sarc
“nor is it it supposed to make us miserable all the time, and if that’s happening, then it’s reasonable to get out.”
Who’s going to explain that to the kids? They don’t give a shit that “Well, I’m just not happy, so I’m not going to live with your daddy anymore. Because of my unhappiness, I’m taking you away from your dad. Living alone and stressing all the time about my job and money, having to go back out into the dating market and getting sexed up and pawed over by men who just want to use my body. Yeah, that will make me happy, kids. And you will get front row seats to all of this. But I’ll be happy, and that will make it OK.”
And actually, on a personal level, I think marriage makes more sense as a “capstone,”
Sure, why not? Right when he is starting to make bigger bucks and she is losing her looks.
They certainly couldn’t be fibbing about that, since admitting that they’re less happy would be admitting that they screwed up. Gosh no, I’m sure they’re being totally honest.
Jen said ..
C’mon now, guys – are you seriously going to feed that troll?
“nor is it it supposed to make us miserable all the time, and if that’s happening, then it’s reasonable to get out.”
Perhaps it would be more reasonable to figure out what the real issue is. Blogs like this one would be a good place to start.
C’mon now, guys – are you seriously going to feed that troll?
Well, to be honest, I would prefer that the troll would feed us sammiches.
thedeti, all I see around me are older people in good, healthy, strong, loving long-term relationships and marriages. I don’t see any truly unhealthy or toxic ones because the ones that were, have already been dissolved a long time ago.
Maybe she should get a f—ing grip and give up the drama.
Look, unless a woman’s husband is beating her regularly, or committing adultery and throwing it in her face, or gambling away his paycheck so it looks like they’re about to be homeless, or something equally threatening (and rare), there’s no excuse for acting like she’s being driven to an early grave. Her level of calm and happiness is up to her. The things most women let drive them crazy until they convince themselves divorce is the only answer are First World Problems: boredom, lack of social status, wanderlust. Those are mostly internal afflictions, and she can decide whether she wants to suffer from them.
Maybe we need to bring back the Valiums and the cocaine-based elixers from a century ago. Seems like those worked better than today’s SSRIs. Or we could ban indoor plumbing, microwaves, and TV.
*crunches on popcorn*
Holy cow, Jen dug herself in even deeper while I was typing my last post. Sorry, hon, those are not my opinions – they are God’s opinions as specified in the Bible. You and the vast majority of people may not like it, but that just means that you and the majority of people are objectively wrong.
And I don’t need your sympathy – my wife and I have been married for over a quarter century and we have never raised our voices to each other in anger even once. In fact, I didn’t comment all last week because we were on vacation in Scotland. I realize that it is typical for women to think that any strong statement must be caused by a traumatic personal experience, but that’s not how men think, and you’d do well to internalize that if you intend to stick around here, or even be a better debater in general. You are exhibiting a form of solipsism (see the second definition), which can be somewhat charming in small doses from very small children, but is not suitable for adults in adult conversations.
In fact, if you intend to have lasting success with men, you need to read more and comment less, except to ask us questions. If you think of marriage as a “capstone” to be entered into after ten years together, you are almost certain going to grow old both bitter and alone. A woman who enters an exclusive relationship in her mid-20’s would be in her mid-30’s by the time she marries if she foolishly takes your advice. The man who was her equal with regard to assortive mating at 25 could easily do much better than her ten years later. Even if she lands the guy, that gives her maaaaaaybe five years to bear legitimate children before it becomes unlikely, dangerous, and expensive… and even that assumes she starts trying to get pregnant on the honeymoon. Women who do what you suggest end up writing articles like this and this, bemoaning their situation and wondering where all the good men went.
Who’s going to explain that to the kids? They don’t give a shit that “Well, I’m just not happy, so I’m not going to live with your daddy anymore. Because of my unhappiness, I’m taking you away from your dad. Living alone and stressing all the time about my job and money, having to go back out into the dating market and getting sexed up and pawed over by men who just want to use my body. Yeah, that will make me happy, kids. And you will get front row seats to all of this. But I’ll be happy, and that will make it OK.”
For the benefit of those lurkers who might be new here, this rhetorical example was provided in hopes that that rare, rainbow dust-farting unicorn who sees her children as something other than meal tickets/means to an end and who values their spiritual and emotional wellbeing will reconsider the urge to frivorce. Although the lesson isn’t likely to sink in or have any effect in 99.999 percent of cases, it’s offered nonetheless as a public service.
Lyn87, we are just coming from very different (polar opposite, actually) places on this. I am not religious and as such I don’t recognize “god’s law” as objectively correct. Furthermore, yes I recognize that a woman who gets into a relationship in her mid-20’s would be in her mid-30’s when she marries if she went by what I already said is just my personal ideal, for me. I fail to see the problem with this. It actually sounds about right to me. I also don’t need your advice on how to have lasting success with men. I am in a very happy and successful relationship myself. And I know of several women who entered marriages in their mid-30’s and after. In fact, four of them I am related to by blood.
I agree with you, thedeti, in your assertion that very often divorce comes down to poor partner selection in the first place by the woman. The only place where we divert I think is in the belief that those individuals should then just suck it up and suffer their mistake for the rest of their natural (and shortened) lives.
Well, to be honest, I would prefer that the troll would feed us sammiches.
Like most femtrolls, I doubt Jen has the vaguest idea of what ingredients a sammich consists of, let alone how to put them together in edible form.
@Cail
Maybe she should get a f—ing grip and give up the drama
That’s akin to asking someone to give up breathing. One day very soon, mark my words, a scientific study is going to confirm that human females need drama as well as oxygen to breathe and survive.
Cail Corishev, first of all, I am not all that interested in getting married. So it wouldn’t bother me if my boyfriend and I became like his uncle and his uncle’s girlfriend of 34 years. I am not big on wearing jewellery and let my earholes close up so the absence of the ring really wouldn’t bother me any. My aunt got engaged after 14 years (married in their 16th), and my cousin after 12, so I am going to assume because the couples in question wanted to throw a big party in honour of themselves that they could afford. They were already living together for more than a decade each respectively. In the latter case, he proposed right after she survived a cancer scare. I guess it shocked him out of complacency. So when they got married she was I believe 37?
So you see the wedding not as an exchange of vows for the future, but as an affirmation and celebration of past good years. We actually do have a name for that; it’s called an anniversary party.
Again, why would any man marry you after you spent the last 10 years giving it up for free, either to him or to another man? You can call it your “ideal” all you want, but if you actually want it to happen, shouldn’t you be able to say what’s in it for the man?
“The man who was her equal with regard to assortive mating at 25 could easily do much better than her ten years later.”
It never fails to intrigue me how much agreement that misogynists and misandrists have on the nature of men. Sorry, but I give men (most men who’ve been with someone for ten years) a little more credit than that.
First of all Cail, I’ve already stated that I am indifferent at best to “it happening.” So if my partner and I go the way of Jon Hamm and Jennifer Westfeldt, that is A-OK with me. On the other hand, if we go the way of Travis Schuldt and and Natalie Zea and get married after 10 years, that’s OK too, just as long as we don’t bankrupt ourselves trying to pay for the wedding and the ring.
I know that as a hardened misogynists you view women as nothing more than goods and services (with the service being sandwich making) and sex holes, so it would be really difficult to explain to such a “person” why a human woman has more value than that. Therefore I am not going to attempt to. Suffice to say that you really fit the stereotype of how radfems portray the way that men think.
Jen, the binding nature of God’s law (God is capitalized, by the way) is in no way determined by your recognition of it. You can ignore it all you want… for a while, but like the Law of Gravity, you ignore it at your peril.
As for your female friends: their odds of them ending up divorced (by their own volition and for trivial reasons) are pretty high compared to women who do things the right way. Ask the ex-husbands and divorce orphans of women who are farther down that road than you are now about how happy and fulfilled they are. They are likely to tell you things like this:
Statistics on children whose parents divorce here.
What happens to divorced men here.
“Maybe she should get a f—ing grip and give up the drama”
That’s akin to asking someone to give up breathing.
No, not really. My Mom did not do “drama”. It was most definitely on purpose. She later on stated that it was for the benefit of the family. She was a very contented Mom.
I know that as a hardened misogynists you view women as nothing more than goods and services (with the service being sandwich making) and sex holes, so it would be really difficult to explain to such a “person” why a human woman has more value than that.
Assume much you do.
Open eyes you should.
What makes for a stable marriage? (a link to the original study included). Was it JustSaying that posted the link the first time here?
I doubt you can even make a good sandwich.
@Jen
This is the theory. In reality keeping your options open makes for an unhappy marriage. Despite all of the culling of “unhappy” marriages, both men and women report that they are less happy in their marriages now than men and women did at the beginning of the divorce revolution.
Lyn87, there are several states that don’t recognize nonmarital unions legally so it seems to me that a man can safeguard himself, at least fiscally, from divorce by simply not marrying. I’ve already acknowledged this above.
Ideally, marital dissolution would occur before children come along, but that is not always the case. I myself am a “child of divorce”, and the divorce took place when I was too young to remember my parents ever being married. So I was effectively raised by my stepdadwho is today my favourite human, with my boyfriend coming in a close second. I DO recognize numbers though and I’m willing to accept the possibility that I may be an outlier. My only point is that I can see how constant “churning” and acrimonious divorces are bad for kids but I don’t think all divorces are necessarily harmful to children and I’ve seen enough people in the comments sections of articles concerning the matter to know that there are many cases where the kids WISHED their parents had divorced due to the toxic nature of the marriage.
Again, I am not suggesting that people should leave a marriage involving kids lightly or hastily, but sometimes if there is actual violence between the couple, for example, or the father is coming home completely wasted and loudly banging things around (like the woman who left her husband of 20+ years), it’s not necessarily worse than the alternative. Anyway, concerning that example, at that point her children were grown.
But either way, if marriage means staying together until you want to break up, why marry? Under Jen’s version of marriage, there is no moral meaning to marriage. Marry or not, it doesn’t matter whether you get your serial monogamy endorsed by the state.
“Assume much you do.
Open eyes you should.”
It’s not really an assumption it’s a fairly obvious fact. Women as frivolous, hysterical, selfish, “hypergamous,” selfish, etc. is pretty much the entire tone of the blog and the comments. A few people here go so far as to state that men never leave a marriage for anything but excellent reasons. Yeah yeah yeah, we get it – men good, women bad. But you wouldn’t call that “misogyny” because you don’t like that word.
Well, Dalrock, Vox weighed in on this today.
http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2014/10/the-self-deluded-divorcee.html?m=1
I can’t wait to read the “war stories” of the guys who take Vox up on his “homework assignment.” Should be highly entertaining.
One last point. If women are really only interested in divorce if the man is really, really bad, why all of the frivorce fantasies in women’s entertainment? If women in our culture fantasized about happy marriages, we would have a different set of movies, books, TV shows, etc. What modern women fantasize about is divorce, followed by a return to the carousel and then suddenly a secret multimillionaire hunky handyman professing his undying love (swoon).
Dalrock, I myself don’t always get why people find it so important to marry. It may be the fact that I’m Canadian, and we generally don’t see it as this huge thing like Americans do: http://worthwhile.typepad.com/worthwhile_canadian_initi/2013/11/marriage-canadian-style.html, and are less likely to be married across all age groups. When we DO divorce (happens less often here) it’s at an average of 14 years of marriage to Americans’ 8.
The cynic in me suspects that many Americans marry purely for the tax breaks.
Mine didn’t either, nor did my grandmothers. We shouldn’t let women off the hook by suggesting that they’re fated to be psychos. Yes, there are biological and social factors that push them that direction, but plenty of women have chosen to rise above those, and they still can if they want to.
Jenny Erikson has a question: “Would you consider switching religions to support a family member?”
We know that she’d switch religions to frivorce a family member.
http://thestir.cafemom.com/celebrities/178626/ariana_frankie_grande_kabbalah_gay?utm_medium=feed&utm_source=feedburner&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+cafemom%2Fthestir%2Fblogger%2F32+%28The+Stir+By+CafeMom%3A+Blogger+Jenny+Erikson%29
“If women are really only interested in divorce if the man is really, really bad, why all of the frivorce fantasies in women’s entertainment?”
Thedeti commented earlier that the reason people believe male infidelity is more common than it is is because it is overwhelmingly and disproportionately depicted in media directed at women. The same could be said of media depictions of divorce. Happy, stable, well, relatively boring couples, I would imagine, just don’t sell well I imagine, just like action movies probably wouldn’t put as many male bums in seats if the female costars were not routinely 15-20 years younger than the men they’re starring opposite (when was the last time Tom Cruise had a 50-year-old love interest in a movie?)
In just under four hours and in a mere nineteen posts Jen has demolished the Manosphere and revealed why all the commenters here are basement-dwelling woman-hating Misogynists with small Penii. Were I a woman whose husband did not want children I too would go to Africa, sample the local delights both culinary and otherwise and do a lot of praying – and then write about it.
I suppose that sort of thing is what makes divorced women emotionally better off than those who are married. Like my North-African loving German Swinger’s club frequenting acquaintance who I can see from the internet now feels that she is in need of Counselling so as to reveal her ‘secrets’ – though why bother as it is all over the net if you know where to look – or women like fifty-seven year old Deborah, who join no less than five Introduction Agencies and then complain about the quality of the men on offer.
Jen,
Named your fear must be before banish it you can.
“As for your female friends: their odds of them ending up divorced (by their own volition and for trivial reasons) are pretty high compared to women who do things the right way.”
I actually don’t know anyone who divorced for frivolous reasons, man or woman. But the divorces all pretty much took place either before I was born or when I was really, really young. So I haven’t personally seen a lot of divorce.
I spoke too soon – now its twenty-two – getting close to the moment the Hamster spins right off the wheel.
“I suppose that sort of thing is what makes divorced women emotionally better off than those who are married.”
That’s actually not factually correct. Divorced women are only better off than those women in BAD marriages. And the same can be said for single women vs. married women. But for women in GOOD marriages, they are happier than women who are divorced.
Jen,
Let me ask you this and you can be detailed or brief with your answers per your preference. What do you consider love is? What is your definition of love and by which standard do you uphold to determine what is and is not love? This is honestly all most people will need to know to understand the position you are taking on marriage.
Regards,
Crimson Viceroy
If all the money was taken out of the divorce industry, you’d see a completely different world, including women dropping their kids off, permanently, with daddy. Also, the feminist/sexist paradigm of “giving” men their own children every other weekend (or if their being nice, EVERY weekend) and two weeks in the summer (or 3 or 4) are ONLY given because a lot of women WANT THAT TIME, in chunks, only AFTER establishing child support. And those days/weeks are almost always in cases where the children are old enough to be a pain to the mother.
The mom wants the father to pay her 100 percent of the CS calculation (and you’d be amazed at the twisted logic and scheduling women offer to the court to keep that magical number), and then take the kids on weekends and the summer so she can “take a break”…a break from 1-3 kids (on average) being in public schools all day. Look at the dating sites, FULL of women who have their “breaks” to go dating on weekends, so fathers’ can have those “happy uncle” weekends with the kids, Disney and all that.
Take the money out of the equation and see how many women REALLY want their kids. The funniest part of it all, in a sick kind of way, is that EVERYONE in the court room and the “system” as a whole, KNOWS what’s going on, when they see that scheduling offered by the woman that is like “Monday through Friday at 330pm, throughout the year, except for X weeks (during my cruise) in the summer”, to equate to…what’s the state’s standard on altering the $$? X amount of weeks per month, for a full 100 percent of the CS to be transferred from father to mother.
IT’S A JOKE and EVERYONE KNOWS IT, which is why men are not marrying now. Men are supposed to accept “non custodial” status and do this whole weekend parent thing…how many women want to do that? How many would be willing? (think of all the NCP women you’ve known…if you’ve known any…do they RUSH to see their kids, or even PAY CS? NOPE!). How many women would DARE permit someone to categorize their time with their children as “visitation” like a prisoner.
MEN are fighting back and in other cases, opting out.
@Lyn89
It is funny to see Jen lecture us on marriage given that she isn’t married. I haven’t been married quite as long as you have and can’t make the never a raised voice claim, but after two decades and with two kids we still get asked if we are newlyweds. The last time was about a month ago by a fellow customer at one of the local DFW shooting ranges.
One thing I’ll say in Jen’s favor is she has so far practiced what she preaches. She doesn’t believe in lifetime marriage, but has thus far been honest by not pretending that her boyfriend is something else.
crimsonviceroy, that is kind of an interesting question. I guess for me love is about friendship, affection, fidelity, common values, and above all, consideration. I once read this quote somewhere that went something like try to make your marriage a competition of consideration and you will never lose. Something to that effect, and I agree with it. I think as long as both partners are constantly striving to be kind to one another and keep the other person in mind when they’re making decisions (realizing that as a unit, any decisions you make will affect both of you), you can’t go far wrong and you’re wealthy in life no matter how much money you have in the bank. But it has to be a mutual effort. No one is perfect so we have to have compassion for our partners when they’re having a bad day or are crabby and recognize that our day will come when we will be like that and we will want the same compassion extended to us.
It’s funny that so many of you think I’m unreasonable in my expectations. My boyfriend knows my conditions so to speak and thinks that they are perfectly reasonable and that my standards (of behaviour) are even kind of low. They are basically, don’t cheat, become a drunk or druggie, or start beating me up, and I will never leave you. But then again he makes it easy to have few basic standards just being an overall conscientious and fundamentally good-natured person.
Cail “The things most women let drive them crazy until they convince themselves divorce is the only answer are First World Problems: boredom, lack of social status, wanderlust. Those are mostly internal afflictions, and she can decide whether she wants to suffer from them.”
BINGO!!!!
I’m not going to hope that we all go back to living on the edge of survival, but will note that the ease of life in the first world seems to produce a preponderance of mentally weak and emotionally immature people.
“One thing I’ll say in Jen’s favor is she has so far practiced what she preaches. She doesn’t believe in lifetime marriage, but has thus far been honest by not pretending that her boyfriend is something else.”
Actually, my boyfriend and I have discussed being together for a lifetime. That is our intention, actually. We just may or may not get married.
@ Cail:
“Needed” why? What terrible thing would happen if a statement unfairy praising men were allowed to pass uncorrected? Why is it necessary to make sure that never happens?
Look, Elspeth and the white knights who rode in to cheer her on are right: sometimes a good wife is dumped through no fault of her own. That is true, and it’s possible that this writer was one of those. The claim that older men never divorce without being forced into it by an evil harridan was incorrect, of course, because NAMALT. So if someone wants to correct that, fine.
But why do we need to correct such hyperbole every time it’s uttered? Why is it seen as so dangerous, even by people who are generally hip to red pill ideas?
What unfair praising of men was uttered? None that I could see. Only presumptions based on an overwhelming need to make the situation look even worse than it is, and it was already pretty bad from where I sit.
The only reason I went there is because there was plenty to dissect and offer advice as well as constructive criticism about without getting derailed by whose fault it is Mrs. Deborah is divorced. The original thrust of the post was completely lost as people clamored to defend her husband for leaving. Whether he deserved such a defense it or not.
The real point, that 57-year-old women shouldn’t be actively pursuing a strange new man, was lost. That she doesn’t realize that at her age she just doesn’t have the power to attract the way she thinks she should? That too was lost in the sea of “she’s an evil divorcee”, when we don’t even know that she IS an evil divorcee. She could be a genuinely wronged wife, and it is still silly to be trolling dating sites at that age.
And no, I’m not saying that she should be forever doomed to live a lonely life alone. That’s what children and grandchildren are for. And of course, if a nice older gentleman who is lonely makes an offer of marriage, I have no problem with that. It does happen, as I have witnessed in recent years three of women over 50 getting hitched to decent men, but the men were always older and in two of the three cases the women weren’t actively looking.
That’s not the same as putting yourself back on the market and expecting to be pursued in the same way you might have been even 20 years prior.
In other words, the circumstances surrounding her divorce were almost irrelevant but because she said it was his choice, that he left, the knee-jerk response was to debunk that as if it were central to what she posted.
She’s 15 years older than me and if my husband left me (even if he died suddenly) I’m not getting back out there. You couldn’t pay me. I’d just have to busy myself with my children, church, and any grandchildren we might be blessed to have.
A few people made mention of that, but it was mostly lost in the din of “If he left she deserved it.”
You may all go back to arguing with Jen now.
Elspeth, I just don’t agree that a 57-year-old woman should just pack it in and never date again. Sure, she may not be as attractive as she once was and there aren’t as many singles to choose from, but really, I think her biggest problem is just that she is too picky, not that she should just be alone for the rest of her life. I mean, I respect that you feel that way yourself, but I don’t see why every other woman should.
Cail Corishev says:
Don’t you know?! Women are naturally more virtuous than men. Certainly you can take their word for it. lol
They must remain absolutely committed to the feministic post-divorce mythology. Admitting to anything less than Happily Ever After would kick the hamster out of its wheel. They’ve made a big investment in a fantasy.
@Elspeth
I entirely agree. Deborah may of course date if she wishes, but as she has seen, her SMV is not really very high – even though she remains slim and is well turned-out. Doubtless someone will sooner or later want her.
Jen,
I’m just curious but if you don’t believe in God and aren’t all that interested in a Christian paradigm, least of all the Christian worldview on marriage, than what are you doing here on a Christian blog attempting to convince others that your view is right by calling them misogynists or “bum’s”? I’m trying to understand why you’re expending so much energy converting folks who have been at this for much longer, whose experiences and collected data through university studies and government published statistics provide them with ample ammunition for robust dialogue and debate and for some of whom live out their faith very strongly? In short, what is your primary objective in debating here?
CV
enrique432, my dad’s youngest daughter is currently undergoing a divorce from her elementary school sweetheart (she is in her 30’s). The man does not want to work (didn’t for the last several years of the marriage) and he actually went after her for “equalization” payments (she is a high earner, but they together have accrued quite a bit of debt from student loans). Yesterday when I saw my dad he told me that he called him up and had harsh words for him, berated him as not being a man, etc. Well, there is a cultural difference. My dad (and his daughter) are white, and her (soon-to-be) ex-husband is Korean. Apparently in Korea the firstborn son is a BIG deal so she wants to give him whatever he wants monetarily so he doesn’t go after custody of their kid. Anyway, I think the way it’s shaking out, she will pay down their debt rather than pay him directly. My dad though he liked him was not crazy about his daughter getting married when she did. He wanted her to finish university first. It was a big mess when they got married, his parents threatened to disown him because he was marrying a non-Korean and my dad had to sit them down and talk some sense into them, tell them that they were just going to elope if they didn’t have their approval and they would be giving up the chance to know their grandchild just so they could save face and maintain their status in their community.
Opus,
“Doubtless someone will sooner or later want her.” I highly doubt that. That level of antogonism and haughty piety bleeds through the pores so that anyone of any sort of decency and value would stay away from. A guy in her age range is no fool (generally speaking) because he’s also been around the block enough times to sniff out “angry”. The last thing he wants to be is a second-place trophy or straddled with someone who is constantly going to be analyzing and evaluating him with other’s. Part of the intimacy enjoyed in exclusive heterosexual relationships, ESPECIALLY, in marriage is that neither partner should be constantly asking whether they got the best deal or not. If that’s the case, then there’s no point entering into such exclusivity. She clearly is not in the correct frame of mind, let alone has zero understanding that biblically she can’t remarry unless her ex-husband passes away. Those aren’t my rules, they’re His.
crimsonviceroy I found this blog a long time ago Googling data on marital age or something like that. So I passively read it from time-to-time. I just decided to comment yesterday with a different data set because I was annoyed at some of the commentary, which I should really be used to by now (I know what kind of blog it is and the attitudes of the people who post). I don’t actually think I am going to “convert” you nor do I expect to. I understand you want an echo chamber and not a debate so I’ll probably return to the monthly lurk in short order, don’t you worry.
Crimsonviceroy said …
“I’m trying to understand why you’re expending so much energy converting folks ..”
*Cough* .. Because she’s a (Feminist/Marxist/etc) troll .. *Cough*
Jen says:
October 22, 2014 at 12:11 pm
Oh Noez! Jen called me a misogynist!
I think it’s cute when a feminist calls a red-pill man a “misogynist” as if he’s supposed to take it as an insult. It looks like somebody doesn’t understand the issues or her audience.
But Jen tipped her hand when she wrote this, “I actually don’t know anyone who divorced for frivolous reasons, man or woman.”
Unless Jen lives in a cave, she is wrong about not knowing such people. The fact that she doesn’t realize that she is surrounded by such people means that she has very little knowledge of what she’s talking about. In the U.S., half of all marriages end in divorce, about seven-out-of-ten of them are initiated by wives, and the vast majority of those are for trivial reasons. She admits to being Canadian, where the stats may be a little different, but let’s face it: Canada has a population 1/9th that of the United States, and a somewhat different culture.
Sorry, Jen, but frivolous divorce happens all the time, it almost always happens to men, and it is usually devastating to men and their children. I’m curious about your claim that you don’t know anyone who has been frivolously divorced, when you surely know many. Based on the odds, if you know more than four men or twenty women who are in their 40’s or older, you know someone who was frivolously divorced. How is it that you doesn’t see what is right in front of your face?
Sigh.
Lyn87, my dad (so as not to confuse you I’ll refer to him as my stepdad) was actually a very religious man. He didn’t believe in divorce either but ultimately ended up divorcing his wife because she was a complete insufferable c*nt who made his life a living hell. I don’t fault him for it. He was engaged to my mother but they never formally married.
My aunt was married 3 times. The first husband she left because he was a serial cheater who used their savings to pay impress the women he was trying to ****. Believe it or not, though she divorced him, theirs was not an acrimonious divorce and they are friends all these years later. He attended her wedding to her 3rd husband 3 years ago. I know them both. I don’t know the second husband. He left her because he wasn’t attracted to her – he stopped having sex with her – and actually didn’t even have anything to do with their son by his own choice. She went after him for a little bit of child support but as she is a successful businesswoman in her own right she didn’t look for much nor ask for higher payments over the years. From the sounds of it that could have been a “frivorce” situation, but it’s all third-hand, I don’t know the guy, never met him and thus can’t ask him. And knowing my aunt, she is hard to handle, although this is primarily the way she is with other women including family. She tends to treat men pretty well as she loves them. The third man she married is 9 years younger and he is the one she was with for 14 years before they got engaged and 16 before they ultimately married. He is the stepfather to her youngest and a really good man. She is now over (she was 41 I think when she met husband #3).
My mother was married to a guy who despite being very educated chose to live as a bum off of women and was a serial cheater. It escalated to the point of violence when he all but moved in with one of “the other women” and she basically stabbed him in the arm. The other woman picked him up at the hospital. She had no intentions of having a kid with him but she got knocked up when she was planning to divorce him and proceeded with both the pregnancy and divorce. Do I think I would have been better off with those two together rather than divorced? No I do not. My mom can definitely be a complete wench and I am not suggesting she is blameless, my only point is that the divorce was not frivolous.
Now that I think of it, I have one friend who is divorced because their initial plan (to move to Canada together) got thwarted by immigration and he had to go spend a year back home in Romania; once there he decided to stay. He gave her the option to move back but she liked it here and wanted to stay as they had planned, so they mutually decided to split. I guess you could look at that as frivolous.
My uncle is divorced because he went to go live with his mistress. His wife initiated it. Happened when I was a kid, so it’s hearsay.
As I said, my dad’s daughter is divorcing her husband, the only man she’s been with her whole life, and from what I am told it is because he has refused to work for years and she is the unhappy breadwinner. But, though I’ve met her, I don’t personally know her, so it’s hearsay. Actually most of the examples are because most of them took place when i was 5 years old or younger so this is just what I am being told from other people. With the exception of my Romanian friend, I don’t know anyone who’s been divorced while I’ve been old enough to remember the process. And hers was painless; they were already living in separate countries and they had no kids, so there were no assets to divide.
Watch A Bunch Of Little Girls Curse Like Sailors To Promote Feminism
The people at FCKH8 have enlisted a few young ladies between the ages of 6 to 13 to get the word out about feminism and inequality between the sexes.
The comments are… interesting.
https://archive.today/Kg2fZ
My boyfriend’s uncle has been with his girlfriend for over 30 years since he was 34 and she was 30. He actually never believed in marriage and had somehow managed to get guilted into it by way of his first wife telling him it was for the good of the kid (who was not his biological child). So after they split, he never remarried but to call him “single” would hardly be accurate. I don’t know what happened with his first wife, it’s possible that it was a frivorce but I don’t know the specifics because it’s not polite to ask when he’s been with his girlfriend for so long.
And then there was the guy whose wife left him because he was drinking himself to death. They both liked to drink when they were young, he just had a genetic predisposition to it (his own father died of alcoholism at 49). He wasn’t a bad person, just an addict, and addicts are not easy to live with. I imagine it can’t be easy to watch someone kill themselves year after year.
So while “frivorcers” may exist, I just don’t personally know these people. Everyone I know who got divorced did so for a very good and understandable reason.
Cail C. …
She comes from a broken family … so maybe she should look this over …
http://freenortherner.com/2013/06/21/sexonomics-odds-of-divorce/
Honeycomb, indeed, I come from a “broken” family, but I am glad it was that way. Honestly, my biological dad was a bum (though educated, he chose to be) and my stepdad was a good man, honourable and successful and kind. Today he’s actually a Christian minister:p. He didn’t leave his first wife, though he despised her, until his youngest went to university, on principle.
Anyway, I didn’t have sex for the first time until I was 18 and a half. Atheists (I’m actually agnostic) supposedly have lower rates of divorce than the religious, but I think a lot of that has to do with age at which they marry. And though the odds of divorce are supposed to be quite low for the specific racial combo that my bf and I are, that’s based on American stats, so I don’t put a lot of stock into that necessarily either. In any case, I always questioned the whole “cohabitation = divorce” thing just because in every other nation which is more secular than America (the only reason people wait till marriage to live together IS typically religious), the divorce rate is lower than it is for Americans’.
I think in some cases, there are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics.
Apropos of nothing at all, for no reason whatsoever, this definition:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=attention%20whore&page=1
Atheists (I’m actually agnostic) supposedly have lower rates of divorce than the religious, but I think a lot of that has to do with age at which they marry. And though the odds of divorce are supposed to be quite low for the specific racial combo that my bf and I are, that’s based on American stats, so I don’t put a lot of stock into that necessarily either. In any case, I always questioned the whole “cohabitation = divorce” thing just because in every other nation which is more secular than America (the only reason people wait till marriage to live together IS typically religious), the divorce rate is lower than it is for Americans’.
If you don’t get married, you can’t get divorced.
You can call me that if you like, but you can’t call me a liar.
I say what I mean and mean what I say. I don’t know anyone who divorced frivolously. Examples provided.
“If you don’t get married, you can’t get divorced.”
Exactly. You may think it’s a bad thing that people in other countries are marrying late or not at all, but i sure don’t. We’ve gone over how bad family courts are and how much divorce hurts men financially, etc. so you can’t feasibly see it as a bad thing if people delay or avoid marriage. As far as I can tell, the reason the boomers divorced so often is because they married too young. If I had married the boyfriend I had when I was 22, I would be divorced by now.
Jen says:October 22, 2014 at 12:41 pm:
Oookay …
So Jen is essentially saying here that of course women’s media and entertainment propogate the “frivorce fantasy,” because, like, well, yeah, they’re women and women need mediatainment to tell them what and how to think and believe.
In other words, Jen believes woman are both brainless and without moral agency.
To paraphrase Yoda (apologies to him in advance): “hurt your cause with your mouth you do. Shut up and try thinking before speaking you should.”
Well, at least Jen in honest. I have to respect that.
If I had married the girlfriend I had when I was 22, I would either be divorced by now, in prison, or dead (as she was BPD.) I was 22 and horny. That is not enough to found a marriage on when someone is a person of the lie. I know that NOW. No WAY would I have known that then.
My gosh Jen, shut up. Nobody cares about your families’ intimate details. Marrying late is a terrible idea for a Christian. Men don’t feel like waiting forever for a washed up slut. Sorry, but that’s the truth. Please refrain from typing anecdotes that really prove nothing. Frivolous divorce is all divorce that didn’t come about through either adultery, abuse or abandonment. So, yes, all the above anecdotes of yours of frivolous.
Yes, its too much Jen. The guys here will ask you questions if they care enough to get the details. You are sharing too much at this point. For most of us your posts are TL;DR.
As far as I can tell, the reason the boomers divorced so often is because they married too young.
Previous generations married even younger, yet they did not have high divorce rates. Something else must have changed.
Jenn’s stepdad is a “Christian minister”, but apparently hasn’t heard of the Bible:
“and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. (Matthew 5:32c KJV)”
So far Jen has:
– Slandered her real father (who was, however, good enough for her mother to mix her DNA with and then stick some other guy with actually raising her)
– Informed us she is a bastard whose father didn’t marry her mother (somewhat unclear on thrn whole story)
– Said she knows nobody divorced without a good reason. Wow!
– Explained the guy she was dating at 22 would be a bad husband, thus plainly stating that as an adult she had zero good sense. (Most women I am around are sensible, and married good men by age 20 or so.)
– Advocated for late marriage, which is just another way to say she wants women to ride the carousel before having to settle down with a yucky husband.
Feminism in a nutshell.
http://therationalmale.com/2014/06/03/male-space/
“Even the most well meaning of women involved (however peripherally) in the manosphere are still motivated by their innate security needs – and those hypergamous security needs imply a want for certainty and control. As such the psychological influence of the Feminine Imperative will always be a predominant motivator in their participation in this all male space. This leads women to a want to sanitize Game to fit the purposes of the imperative, as well as oversee the thought processes of the men who come to participate in it.”
I feel like I’ve posted this article 10 times here, and I think of it every time a “Jen” shows up.
Guys, statistics are misogynistic. Don’t you know anecdotal evidence is where it’s at?
“1 You should know this, that in the last days there will be very difficult times. 2 For people will love only themselves and their money. They will be boastful and proud, scoffing at God, disobedient to their parents, and ungrateful. They will consider nothing sacred. 3 They will be unloving and unforgiving; they will slander others and have no self-control. They will be cruel and hate what is good. 4 They will betray their friends, be reckless, be puffed up with pride, and love pleasure rather than God. 5 They will act religious, but they will reject the power that could make them godly. Stay away from people like that!“
Jen says:
More accurately, you don’t know anyone who would own up to divorcing frivolously.
Frivolous means “lacking any serious purpose” or “characterized by lack of seriousness or sense.” So a frivolous divorce really means that the initiating party afforded no purpose or seriousness to the marriage to begin with. For example, I know a woman who initiated a frivorce because she wanted a new house and her husband refused to buy one. Full stop. If she valued a new house over her marriage then she had a frivolous attitude toward her marriage and divorced frivolously. Of course, if you asked her about it, you would receive a long rationalization that doesn’t even mention the house issue AKA the root cause.
Jen,
Marry or marry not.
All else is a lie.
Cail,
I don’t know if I am one of the “white knights” you mentioned, but I believe my first reply on the topic was before Elspeth’s first post. I see that as echoing the point Dalrock made earlier that we do not know details about the husband’s actions or lack of them.
It is popular to pile on and assume that a woman always causes the problem, but I have seen too many slacker men to hold the “women are always at fault” view. (Though women have almost always played a role in selecting the “loser male” in my experience.)
(Sorry if this was not your point.)
Jen, living together and playing house is effectively the same as being married, so you don’t get out of problems related to divorce just be avoiding the legal aspect.
Jen,
I missed this.
It is frivolous. She married him. She obeys him. He wants children, she has to try and have them with him. She is NOT permitted to disobey.
If she didn’t want children, do as Yoda says, “marry not.”
To be fair, Jen supplied a lot of details because I challenged her claim to not know anyone who had frivolously divorced. She then listed a bunch of people she knows who were frivolously divorced, thus proving my point. Not only are several of the stories she told indicative of frivolous divorce, but that’s just from a sample that only includes mostly her close relatives. The vast majority of people one knows are not relatives, so the total number of people she knows who are frivolously divorced is exponentially higher. The fact is that among Jen’s acquaintances are dozens, and perhaps a hundred or more, people who were involved in frivolous divorce, either as the aggressor or as the victim. We all do. She just doesn’t realize it, because 1) she doesn’t know the details of everyone’s lives (nor do any of us), and/or 2) her sample is not representative, and/or 3) her list of justifications for divorce is completely unrealistic, and/or 4) she doesn’t comprehend the statistics, or she would know that any random group of one hundred men over 40 is likely to include a couple dozen men who were frivolously divorced by their wives, and a similar random group of women is likely to include include five to ten frivorce victims.
Feministhater is right, of course, for Christians (which is the only thing to be), young marriage is usually the best. A marriage-minded Christian woman ought to start preparing herself to be a good wife starting around the time she reaches puberty, so when she’s old enough to marry at 18-20 she can do so, or at least put herself on short final if her intended needs a bit of time to prepare himself for his role. Nobody with any sense wants to spend years as the celibate boyfriend. My wife had just turned 20 when we met: if she had insisted on a ten year courtship while we “got to know each other” I would have “nexted” her in short order. Fortunately my wife is not insane and we got engaged two months after we met.
In about half of the examples I gave, adultery WAS involved, which is consistent with what the study I posted in my first post on this thread. In my mother’s case, both adultery AND abuse were involved in her divorce. As for including mostly relatives, the reason I have done that is because I only have one divorced friend. All the others are single, commonlaw, or still married. Like I said before, divorce isn’t something I have seen because they pretty uniformly all took place either before I was born or shortly after, and the people involved all ended up better off. If leaving someone who treats you like garbage like my dad (stepdad) did or leaving an alcoholic who is drinking themselves to death is “frivolous”, then so be it. Also, did someone really just advocate bringing unwanted children into the world to a mother who doesn’t want them? Well, it’s not like tradcons are worried about their PR and how they look to normal people so, sure, why not, I guess?
Jen,
Yes, damn straight, I did. She doesn’t get to make that decision. She OBEYS. Husband says I want children, she says “…okay, how many do you want? Lets go to bed as soon as you want and we’ll make one.” That is marriage. If she divorces her husband because he wants children and she doesn’t, then she is rebeling against her husband who she is commanded by God to OBEY. She is rebelling against God. That is a frivolous divorce. If you don’t get that, best you leave this place as you will get no sympathy for your thoughts here.
Frivolous means “lacking any serious purpose” or “characterized by lack of seriousness or sense.”
If you dwell on it enough, you can make almost any trivial non-issue become a huge problem. I have heard of people who divorced because one of them would squeeze the toothpaste tube from the middle, while the other preferred it to be squeezed from the bottom.
@Jen “My only point is that I can see how constant “churning” and acrimonious divorces are bad for kids but I don’t think all divorces are necessarily harmful to children and I’ve seen enough people in the comments sections of articles concerning the matter to know that there are many cases where the kids WISHED their parents had divorced due to the toxic nature of the marriage.”
I’m certain it has happened somewhere but I have never personally heard or read any man take the position that divorce is good for children. However, I do hear this rationalization all the time from women — single, married or divorced. The meme goes like this — “the children will be happy when the mother is happy” [period]. Thus, if divorce makes mom happy….. your kids will be much better off than living in an ‘unhappy’ marriage.
I know from hard, first-hand experience that this simple-minded idiocy is completely false, but a lie repeated enough can become accepted as well-settled wisdom…. I guess.
Bottom line: Talk to any woman — young, old, married, divorced.. it doesn’t matter — they will all go to the mat arguing that no-fault divorce is absolutely necessary. A woman being TRAPPED in an unhappy marriage without a way to get out is a situation too horrible to contemplate for a woman.
Even if they never intend to use it, women NEED the option to divorce without having to prove actual fault to exist. They will never give it up.
While some women may agree that the level of divorce is too high, the idea of a society without any divorce would be horrifying to them because it would mean that some women were unhappily TRAPPED without any way out. I think it’s equivalent to the phobia of being buried alive for them.
@Anonymous Reader
Yeah. This is getting ridiculous.
Jen: I’m pretty forgiving on off topic conversations, especially after the first two hundred or so comments, but you are monopolizing the discussion. I get that you don’t believe in marriage, but that you do believe in divorce. I’m pretty sure everyone here gets that too. Enough.
I read a comment by a priest or minster a number of years ago pointing out that the whole discussion of adultery is a bit of a red herring as adultery is almost always a part of the dissolution of a marriage via divorce.
Maybe he’s not getting any sex from his wife, and so he’s getting some strange on the side. Or, she’s already checked out and started spreading her legs for the new source of attention and validation while he has no clue. Even if neither of those things happen, it’s almost a guarantee that some screwing around is going to happen before the divorce is final.
So long as there are no real consequences for adultery, it’s going to happen. You can’t kill them. The division of assets isn’t effected. The child support amounts don’t change. Whether and how much maintenance is awarded doesn’t change. Parenting time doesn’t change. About the only cost for screwing around might be amongst your social circle, but that’s going to blow up anyway in the wake of the divorce, and most people’s shared social circle is so shallow, that it’s not actually going to matter all that much.
After all, when was the last time you asked whether the guys on your basketball league are screwing around on their wives?
“I know from hard, first-hand experience that this simple-minded idiocy is completely false, but a lie repeated enough can become accepted as well-settled wisdom…. I guess.”
Well my opinion also comes from first-hand experience.
” For example, I know a woman who initiated a frivorce because she wanted a new house and her husband refused to buy one. Full stop.” OK, yes, I agree, that is frivolous.
Jen:
If leaving…an alcoholic who is drinking themselves to death is “frivolous”, then so be it.
Actually, it is frivolous. I have heard the argument time and again, that divorcing an alcoholic or a drug addicted person is somewhat justified. It is not. For those who understand what it means to be married, you don’t leave your spouse when they need you the most. Marriage is supposed to be for better and for worse, for richer and for poorer. What many women are looking for these days are anything but true marriages.
An alcoholic spouse is definitely a challenge, but there is no biblical basis for divorcing them. Same goes for drug addicted individuals. An obedient Christian wouldn’t have found themselves married to one though. But for those who do, God expect them to stay true to their marital vows.
Substance abuse (alcohol, drugs, etc) are recognized to be illnesses. Would you divorce your spouse if or when they fall sick? Or you would expect to be divorced by your spouse if (God forbid) you develop some cancer? If so, then that would be a frivolous divorce.
I get that you don’t believe in marriage, but that you do believe in divorce.
Hey, Dalrock, if Jen doesn’t have her own blog on which to do it, could you invite her to write a guest piece explaining how she reconciles this paring of positions that defies all known forms of logic? I think the mood here is too dark sometimes and an offering like this from Jen would definitely add some much needed levity.
Okay Jen, I’ll cut to the chase. The average American knows between 300 people (older survey) and 600 people (newer survey), and I assume Canadians are similar. Let’s say you know about 500 people because it’s near the middle of the range and is a nice round number. Because of various factors like the baby boom and low infant mortality, about half of the population in first-world countries is 40 or older. Most people marry, and half of marriages end in divorce. That means you probably know well over 100 divorced people. According to pollsters, the walk-away winner for “most common reason for initiating divorce” is something called “lack of commitment.” Infidelity was a distant third and even “abuse” – although it is defined absurdly broadly – came in a very distant eighth. In other words, you probably know upwards of 50-75 people who frivolously divorced their spouse or were frivolously divorced by their spouse – the vast majority of the victims of those frivolous divorces are men, and most of those men got screwed by a legal system that aided and abetted the women who betrayed their husbands by breaking their vows. The women were “empowered” to get on with their lives at their ex-husband’s expense, while the betrayed men lost significant resources – making them less attractive to women and thus less able to get on with their own lives – because they have to subsidize the women who betrayed them.
You may claim to not know people who frivolously divorce because you do not know their individual stories, but you certainly know the people.
“Jen: I’m pretty forgiving on off topic conversations, especially after the first two hundred or so comments, but you are monopolizing the discussion”
She is only monopolizing cause you all let her by responding to her, feeding her. You don’t ever have to ban anyone, you just stop responding.
“If I had married the girlfriend I had when I was 22, I would either be divorced by now, in prison, or dead (as she was BPD.) I was 22 and horny. That is not enough to found a marriage on when someone is a person of the lie. I know that NOW. No WAY would I have known that then.”
Yeah, my mate selection criteria was woefully inadequate at that age. It was basically “cute and willing to get into a long-term relationship” because most of the guys my age only wanted to be casual and I wasn’t interested in dating men who were significantly older. Lucky for me, things around here change around 25 or 26 when it seems like all the guys begin really thinking about it.
Lyn87, who are these “pollsters”? Because almost every data set I have seen has put infidelity at reason #1 except for the UK where it only recently got bumped to #2. Even the link you posted yourself put it at #1. So now are you bold-faced lying to make your point?
I cannot keep up with all the Jen nonsense. But I do think its cute when people read epidemiology studies in medical journals and quote them as if they were “true”. I love the field but studies like that are simply exploratory and rarely explanatory. Posting them as evidence to overcome mountains of contrary data is just throwing pepples at advancing tanks.
“Hey, Dalrock, if Jen doesn’t have her own blog on which to do it, could you invite her to write a guest piece explaining how she reconciles this paring of positions that defies all known forms of logic? I think the mood here is too dark sometimes and an offering like this from Jen would definitely add some much needed levity.”
feeriker, who needs a full guest post to say that if you’re scared to death of getting divorced, don’t get married? Just stay single or live together. There. It’s been said. Done.
Lyn87, as I am under 30, most of the people I know are under 35. Most of the divorces that take place in Canada take place after the age of 40 (if you give me a second I will get you the citation). The people I know well over 40 are basically all related to me. So that explains a lot.
In the under-40 camp, I only know one divorcee.
feeriker, who needs a full guest post to say that if you’re scared to death of getting divorced, don’t get married? Just stay single or live together. There. It’s been said. Done.
((*SIGH* Is she really that dense?))
Listen up, as I’m only gonns say this once:
If you don’t believe in marriage, then you don’t believe in divorce either, because the latter cannot exist without the former (a less polite person than I am would throw in a “duhhhhh” here).
There now, simple enough for ya?
Good, because now I’m done.
Go home, little troll.
After she claimed she knew no-one who had frivolously divorced, then listed a bunch of people she knows who frivolously divorced, Jen has insinuated that I am a liar. That’s rich. She wrote this, “Lyn87, who are these “pollsters”? Because almost every data set I have seen has put infidelity at reason #1 except for the UK where it only recently got bumped to #2. Even the link you posted yourself put it at #1. So now are you bold-faced lying to make your point?”
Right here. Page 44, second full paragraph. The link I posted earlier was a different study from UPenn, and listed Incompatible, Grew Apart, and Loss of Love as three separate items even though they are basically the same thing: an unwillingness to work through problems in the marriage. The author of the file I just linked probably (and correctly) combined those types of excuses into a single response that he called “Lack of commitment” – which makes that the most common reason by a wide margin.
Before you accuse a man of lying, little girl, best to ask first.
Oh, by the way, right here Jen says that she is under 30, yet right here she claims that her father’s youngest daughter is over 30. Since Jen cannot help but be her father’s daughter, it seems she a having bit of trouble keeping her story straight.
Do you guys do open threads here?
Could we have an open thread if you do allow them?
Lyn87 ..
I believe Jen is or could be telling truth on her step dad. He came into her life with kids. Which is what she is saying with his youngest being 30 yrs old.
As for her .. she is self-delusional plus PD type woman.
She can’t and will not accept rational coaching / teaching. Hence her appearence as an attention whore.
Instead she is just a whore with bad manners and psyche or is that just her online purse’on’uh.
She’s dead to me. I even bet that if everyone stopped responding to her she would carry on a conversation on her own.
Jen is the face of modern women .. get a good look at the future of North America.
if Jen doesn’t have her own blog on which to do it, could you invite her to write a guest piece
Perhaps she could give sammich making tips.
honeycomb, true ‘dat.
I sometimes tend to carry on with attention-seekers after others have bowed out… not because I think I can get through to them (I know that rarely happens), but because most readers do not comment and it’s useful to lay out the counter-points for their benefit. That said, I’m done too.
Jen is the face of modern women
True this is.
Fallen we are.
Lyn87 ..
Agreed (re: setting the record straight for our lurkers / visitors).
You’re a smart cookie .. I know you know when to pull the plug on a troll to avoid looking foolish. Bang as you see fit.
As for me I have developed a much lower thresold of pain. Must be my age … hehehehehehehe
Oh dear, Lyn87. Not only are you contradicting your own sources, but it seems you are really, really bad at math. My dad’s youngest is in her late 30’s. He was married to his first wife, and did not leave her until his youngest had gone to university. Nice investigative work, dumbo.
Cail Corishev @ 11:30 am:
“Maybe we need to bring back the Valiums and the cocaine-based elixers from a century ago. Seems like those worked better than today’s SSRIs. Or we could ban indoor plumbing, microwaves, and TV.”
I read a historian make the case that those drug-laced “curatives” were the accepted way for women to get hammered because (at the time) they weren’t allowed to go into bars. That’s an interesting idea… would banning women from bars & nightclubs improve their behavior? They seem unwilling to get pumped by cads while sober and forcing them to get wasted in private instead of public means finding lovers during reduced inhibition would be problematic.
TV should be banned on general principles. I’d go a step further and ban all wireless Internet connections just so girls wouldn’t end up as smartphone zombies and guys would stop fact-checking my stories in real-time.
…
Lyn87 @ 6:41 pm:
…”but because most readers do not comment…”
I would’ve backed you up but didn’t want to feed this troll. She was a poor one. The good trolls are the ones who claim to be Christian yet are disobedient. Sometimes you can make their heads explode. The trolls who are openly Godless and don’t respect marriage, there’s not much to do but ignore them.
Lyn87, Farm Boy and innocentbystanderboston, I have to say, given your stances on women, marriage and bringing unwanted children into the world, you guys do more to promote secularism/reason than I ever could. So, I guess I should say: thank you!
Back to the matter at hand, then. I see that Deborah from the original article complains about the appearance of men in her age cohort, and it got me to wondering. If I’m reading this chart correctly, obesity peaks in the 56-59 age cohort, which is right where Deborah is. My wife used to work with the elderly and she said something I’ve never forgotten, “You see fat 60-year-olds, but you never see fat 80-year-olds,” which makes sense to me since obesity is linked to so many things that can take years off your life. So I suppose she probably really is seeing a lot of fat dudes in the portion of the dating market that she inhabits.
A few weeks ago I got a physical and my doctor suggested I lose a small amount of weight – the nurse weighed me with about six pounds of clothing and footwear on and plugged that number into the computer as my “naked weight” to calculate my BMI… duh. I’ll admit that I’m not quite as svelte as I was when I was 22, but I can almost fit into the pants I wore the day I met my wife, and I usually do some sort of exercise several days a week. But I wonder how a woman like Deborah would gauge somebody like me… we talk a lot about “wife goggles,” but I wonder if Deborah and women like her have “mirror goggles.” When she looks in the mirror and see’s her 106-pound self, does she also see the slim and smooth girl she was when she snagged her husband? Obviously she’s not going to see the pictures of the men as they were in their prime, but if she thinks of herself as being a lot hotter than she is due to “mirror goggles” that may partially explain why she thinks her SMV peers are so far “below” her. Oh, and pictures portray a three-dimensional object onto a two-dimensional surface, so the guys may not be as big as they look to her. As they say, “The camera puts on 10 pounds.“
Hmmm, Lyn87, you have a point about how women see themselves, I think. Most days, I think I look pretty good for my age, lol. But, when my daughters are home and we share a mirror when getting ready to go somewhere, then I wonder, who is that old hag? I suspect that the latter vision is the true one!
Lyn87 ..
Americans in general have gotten larger from the turn of the last two centuries (ie 1900-2000).
So Deb is recalling a dif timeline plus she is comparing her suitors to two dif standards she now has broadcast to her eye’s / mind daily. 1) The media’s exclusive repersentation of young fit men and 2) what she is (or has been) told she is entitled to.
Since neither of these men are available do to forces outside her control via selective mating and supply-v-demand she is left with compairing those men interested in her to these men. It’s an unfair comparison. Women feel entitled to the upper 1-5% of men already spoken for. This is the new economy. Hence this crap about “passive rejection”.
This will lead to her (Deb’s) long-term frustration due to the lie she was told by her family, friends and feminist cheerleaders of divorce that she must now maintain. This lie / self-denial is key to her health.
She is now dealing with this lie with maximum hamster rationalization. She complains about her choices (eg men) and rationalizes who caused the divorce to maintain a level of sanity only women can maintain with self-denial.
This is gonna be much worse in the future .. the lack of mental stability in women entering the race is drastically higher now than when she advanced thru the toll-gates of youth.
As a normal man you will be resented even more in the future with these women due to thier advanced PD problem and Feminists gaining more political / business power.
Exactly. You may think it’s a bad thing that people in other countries are marrying late or not at all, but i sure don’t. We’ve gone over how bad family courts are and how much divorce hurts men financially, etc. so you can’t feasibly see it as a bad thing if people delay or avoid marriage. As far as I can tell, the reason the boomers divorced so often is because they married too young. If I had married the boyfriend I had when I was 22, I would be divorced by now.
You managed, somehow, to miss my point.
If you don’t get married, as in “at all,” then you can’t get divorced. Delaying marriage is not /not/ getting married. Atheists have a lower divorce rate because they don’t get married nearly as often as Christians (for example) – the ones who do get married are much more firm in their belief in marriage, regardless of delay or not.
—
the reason the boomers divorced so often is because they married too young
Denying the antecedent? A fallacy of presumption?
>> they married too young
No, that’s not really the case. For example, divorce laws have changed significantly since the Boomers were born. That enables Boomers to get divorced much more easily. Besides that, the culture has changed significantly, and that has weakened marriage as well. (Grey divorce for Boomers is a thing, but not for older generations.)
Now, you’re probably wondering why that wouldn’t affect older generations (who still got married young). Well, divorces spike in the first 5-7 years – if a couple gets through those tough years, the chances of divorce go down dramatically (that goes for any age at which they married).
Besides all that, I’ll quote a previous comment of mine:
The difference in the rate of disruption between women ages 20–24 years and women at least 25 years of age at marriage is not statistically significant, but the difference between those over age 20 years and those under age 20 years at marriage is significant (Bramlett, Matthew D., and William D. Mosher. “First marriage dissolution, divorce, and remarriage.” National Center for Health Statistics. 2001, also: Bramlett, Matthew D., and William D. Mosher. “Cohabitation, marriage, divorce, and remarriage in the United States.” National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Health Stat 23.22 (2002): 1-32.). (One exception: according to the 1995 NCHS, Hispanic women who marry at 25 or older have a higher divorce rate than Hispanic women marrying under 18 or aged 20-24.) Breaking that down differently: persons aged 15-24 had a divorce rate of 32 per 1,000 in 2010, and 25-34 was 29 per 1000 (Brown, S. L., Lin, I.-F., & Payne, K. K. “Age Variation in the Divorce Rate, 1990-2010″ (FP-12-05). National Center for Family & Marriage Research. 2012). For adults over age 35, the divorce rate has increased (and each older age group has a larger increase).
You’re an idiot.
Poz freaks like you are the reason that secularism is collapsing. Prots, Cats, Jews and Mormons have a stable, viable, transmissible culture — yours is gone.
The secular society was built atop the pillars of the all-boys school (with military discipline) and a respect for classical archetypes (you know, those dead white men that are roundly mocked and ridiculed). With the collapse of the underlying structure, secularism is collapsing into the ghetto and the trailer park, and will disappear completely in the next couple of generations.
Now, while your dancing was sort of amusing here, you’re beginning to bore even the most tolerant participants. You may kindly fuck off until the angst of being ignored elsewhere is just too much, and you can’t resist creating another sockpuppet and starting the game anew.
Regards, Boxer
The trolls who are openly Godless and don’t respect marriage, there’s not much to do but ignore them.
Useful for instructive purposes they are.
Jen is your typical feminist, and/or female jock supporter. Everyone she knows, happens to be a statistical outlier that just HAPPENS to always fit, like a composite character into whatever narrative she needs.
If we were talking about abortion, she’d have the aunt that bled to death in the “back alley” during a “coat hanger” abortion. I typically refer to such people and their arguments as the “coat hanger” stuff. NAWALT is of course, part of this. Jen I am sure, knows tons of millionaire women who’ve been cheated on, beat, lied to, and divorced for alimony…but NOT before he took the kids, whom he was also molesting…while on drugs…and serving on the police department with a grandfather who was the local judge.
Men have wasted millions of hours arguing with the Jen’s of the world. She has to be miserable to come here and waste her precious time. She knows it.
“The difference in the rate of disruption between women ages 20–24 years and women at least 25 years of age at marriage is not statistically significant, but the difference between those over age 20 years and those under age 20 years at marriage is significant (Bramlett, Matthew D., and William D. Mosher.”
I don’t thin kthat’s the case. The divorce rate is effectively halved for the 25-29 cohort from the 20-24 cohort, and then halved again by marrying at 30 from the 25-29 cohort: http://www.mckinleyirvin.com/Family-Law-Blog/2012/October/32-Shocking-Divorce-Statistics.aspx?redirect_referrer=http%3a%2f%2fwww.hlntv.com%2farticle%2f2014%2f02%2f12%2fwhy-you-shouldnt-get-married-until-youre-30. At the end of the day everyone is different and I don’t judge people’s choices, but I kind of agree with this guy: http://www.hlntv.com/article/2014/02/12/why-you-shouldnt-get-married-until-youre-30. That’s not to say you shouldn’t get into a serious relationship with someone before then. I mean, considering that we know that the marriages least likely to end in divorce are those that took place after the couple had been dating 3+ years (http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/10/the-divorce-proof-marriage/381401/), my question is what’s the rush? Start looking early because it’ll take you awhile to find the right match, but then just enjoy getting to know one another and making sure you’re the right fit. If you’re talking about 50+ years of life, really, taking several years to just date is a drop in the bucket.
In the 90’s, a group of feminist social workers did a survey. They asked a number of women how happy they were in their marriages, on a scale of 1 to 5. Those who answered very unhappy or unhappy were noted and five years later, they were located and polled again to find out what happened.
Most of those who divorced because they were unhappy were still unhappy.
Most of those who were unhappy but chose to say married had moved into the happy or very happy range.
I understand this, even if Jen doesn’t. It takes time to fully adapt to being married, to accept your married life. Those who bailed never made the change. Those who stayed married worked past and then found happiness in the same marriage.
This feminist study agrees with what I have personally seen while supplying no-fee counseling services to 1600 men and a few women. Many so-called feminist studies are just plain fiction. Some lesbian professor writes up a totally fictional study and presents it as fact. Dearies like Jen love fictional studies.
By the way, not all women are bad. Nor are most women bad. Only most American women. They are mentally ill, which I define by the shrink policies, which means women who have no grasp of reality.
After a lil tour around the man’sphere I read an article at EW that might shed some light on our current discussion ..
http://elusivewapiti.blogspot.com/2014/10/womens-sins-partially-enumerated.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+TheElusiveWapiti+(The+Elusive+Wapiti)&m=1
OK enrique. Whatever you say. If pretending that I made everything up, name-calling, giving me “life advice” or whatever other solipsism you guys do is going to make you feel better about your argument or lack thereof, then, by all means.
@Boxer: “You’re an idiot.” What a compelling argument and data set you’ve provided. How truly convicing. I never said I was “sex positive” or whatever. I don’t think that having sex with someone you’re not sure you’re going to be in a relationship with is the end of the world, but I do generally think sex is better in the context of a monogamous and serious relationship. That is just my opinion, though, and I’m not pushing it on anyone. I have friends who prefer to be single and if they’re happy that way then all the power to ’em. However, I definitely think you’re pretty dead wrong if you think secularism is dying. It’s actually spreading, at least in Canada and the UK: http://life.nationalpost.com/2012/12/21/organized-religion-on-the-decline-growing-number-of-canadians-spiritual-but-not-religious/, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10458380/Christianity-at-risk-of-dying-out-in-a-generation-warns-Lord-Carey.html. Take for example the fact that I was raised Catholic and attended Catholic school (as did my boyfriend). Well, we see how that worked out. In all honesty, I’m not even white. Some of my friends are also not white, and we pretty much all think the same way. The wonderfully progressive values that mark anglo culture are just going to continue and be passed down to immigrants and their children in perpetuity.
Sorry I had to be the one to break it to you.
I believe Jen is or could be telling truth on her step dad. He came into her life with kids. Which is what she is saying with his youngest being 30 yrs old.
It seems rather strange to call a man “dad” (and not “stepdad”) without also accepting that she is his daughter. (alternative: not a woman?) But then, I think we’re far past the point where we might expect consistency here.
Jen, being raised Catholic, doesn’t apparently make you a Catholic, anymore than being raised in an oven makes you bread.
I cannot laugh enough at you using a “family law” site as some sort of evidence. But, as you choose to do so, here are a couple of quotes from your chosen site:
“Seventy-nine point six percent of custodial mothers receive a support award, while only 29.6 percent of custodial fathers receive a support award.
Forty-six point nine percent of non-custodial mothers totally default on support, while only 26.9 percent of non-custodial fathers totally default on support.”
Which pretty much supports what the MEN on this site are saying, you idiot.
“It seems rather strange to call a man “dad” (and not “stepdad”) without also accepting that she is his daughter. (alternative: not a woman?) But then, I think we’re far past the point where we might expect consistency here.”
I don’t understand what you are trying to say here. If you could clarify your question I’d be happy to shed some light for you. I did mention awhile prior that I call my dad “dad” but for the purposes of not being confusing here and distinguishing him from my biological father I would henceforward refer to him here as my stepdad. If I slipped up and called him dad at any point after that, my apologies.
“Which pretty much supports what the MEN on this site are saying, you idiot.”
Hi, you condescending little brat. Which part? Because the part I am disputing on this thread was that frivolous divorce is a huge problem. I asserted that a minority of divorces are filed for frivolous reasons and not after serious consideration. What YOU are referring to is something else entirely, which is the men on this site’s tendency to take facts like the one you just referenced and use them to justify their disdain for women (i.e. misogyny) and their victim/men as saints complex. Totally separate issues. You can put your dunce cap back on now.
@lgrobins
Don’t fool yourself, LGR. They love it as much as Jen does. Angry orbiters still orbit; just with more anger. If only Jen could see how right they are then everybody wins: They’d get her approval, and she would be all safe and warm in their hearts.
Dal ..
I know it isn’t my place .. but it appears this is de’Jen’er’ate’ing very quickly now.
Me thinks band camp discipline is in order .. but again it’s your house of (dal)rock
Oh, and by the way Margaret, the stats you referenced from the family law site I linked to actually just reinforce what I have been saying, which is that if divorce is particularly ruinous for men and something that there is a palpable fear of (not saying it’s unjustified), the best course of action then avoid it would be to either forego marriage or delay it as long as possible so as to reduce the odds of divorce.
😀
What I am saying is that the men, apparently, are right. CUSTODIAL fathers do not get child support, and when they do, more women than men default on their responsibilities. Thus, women appear to be ever so slightly more “frivolous”. If they do not support their own children, why would I think they are less “frivolous” about divorce?
I quoted your own “evidence” from some family law site. I am not responding to your hissy fit, because I just don’t care what you think. But, I will say that I get blasted frequently on this site by men who think I am “rebuilding the mound”. I get cranky at them, and vice versa. Can’t remember the last time they called me a little brat, condescending or otherwise.
OK, I am done with you, Jen, except to point out that “marriage” does not change child support. If a woman has a child, with or without the man’s acquiescence, child support really does happen! And women default on supporting their own child more than men do. Kinda puts that “deadbeat dad” stuff away as total bs, right?
Is it a matter of do not or cannot? It depends on the payments. Let’s face it: most child support payments are completely and totally overblown. Am I supposed to be shocked, or something, that those with lower average income are going to be less likely to meet these absurd calculations? I’m sure you’ve seen “Divorce Corp.” There is no evidence that a child suffers if they’re not kept at the same standard of living at both homes. So if a man can afford nice accomodations following a divorce and a woman cannot, (stats show women fare worse than men financially after a divorce but better emotionally) and equalization laws say that she (the non-custodial parent) HAS to provide enough money to keep him at the previous standard of living, um, yeah. Some women are gonna default. Like, no $hit, Sherlock.
“OK, I am done with you, Jen, except to point out that “marriage” does not change child support. If a woman has a child, with or without the man’s acquiescence, child support really does happen! And women default on supporting their own child more than men do. Kinda puts that “deadbeat dad” stuff away as total bs, right?”
See above.
Also, most men who have visitation rights and partial custody DO pay their child support…. I read something like over 90%, and the numbers decline only with lack of actual interaction with the child. Which makes sense to me. So I don’t necessarily think the “deadbeat dad” scenario is accurate in most cases. I think, like myths about “frivorce,” it’s just an exaggeration that sexists like to make.
I don’t understand what you are trying to say here. If you could clarify your question I’d be happy to shed some light for you.
I don’t have a question to clarify. It’s an observation. 2 hours earlier, you said, “My dad’s youngest is in her late 30’s.” Based on earlier posts, you claim to be an under-30 year old, and have hinted strongly at being a woman, and you do behave like one.
Female children of a “dad” are “daughters” by definition. A youngest daughter older than you is nonsensical. The simplest explanation is that you’re talking about a “stepdad” and differentiating between “biological” and “step” daughter- but again, strange to consider him close enough to just be “dad”, but not close enough to be his daughter.
Imprecise thinking is not the end of the world, but it does make the remark on “reason” all the more amusing.
Margaret59: The fact is that getting on board the “mommy track” does considerable damage to a woman’s career where it doesn’t for a man. I’m not going to debate the reasons why with you. Yes, it may very well be preferable or necessary or both for women to scale back the numbers of hours worked once they have kids, or to focus less on their careers, but that is the reality. Divorced women are the worst off financially. The irony is that the women most able to meet the oft-absurd child support payments are those who never bred.
SirHamster – OK, so you’re arguing semantics. We’re talking about the omission of a single word here – “biological” – which is to say that yes we are all his daughters, but his youngest biological daughter is older than I am – but one of us is not so by blood. I mean, talk about trivilalities. If you’re wishing to make some point about our closeness, you’re quite wrong. I am actually closer to him than his youngest; they had something of a falling-out around the time of her divorce.
Hamster tired it must be
I am guessing that Jen does not know the definition of “I am done with you”. This means, for the logically impaired, that I am not going to engage with you any longer. Waste. of. time. to engage with Jen, because she moves the goalposts every time anyone points out a fallacy. I may be a woman, but I do appreciate rational discourse.
Yes Margaret, I understand. Men = justified in being misogynists because women aren’t perfect.
Women = hate their children, want them to starve.
Abuse, drugs, infidelity, a husband whose every word towards you drips with contempt if he’s even speaking to you at all, differing views on having children – all are “frivolous” reasons for divorce.
John Gottman’s ability to detect with 90% accuracy from watching couples interact during conflict who will subsequently divorce = zero evidence that some couples were simply ill-matched from the get-go.
Divorce rates of couples marrying later on being much lower = zero evidence that dating for several years before marrying is a good idea.
Christians having highest divorce rates due to young marital age = zero evidence that dating for several years before marrying is a good idea.
The West is rapidly secularizing, but the religious are poised to take over the world.
It’s been fun playing in the Twilight Zone, really, it has. But… time to get back to the real world. It’s late.
Toodles!
Isn’t it fully possible to not know of many frivorces if few marry in the first place? The equivalent may be happening, especially as those “long term committed relationships” break up, but they won’t count as a divorce because they were never married! And we can pull out the odd example of the couple who made it their entire 50 year time together as proof that marriage is for dummies.
Yeah, right.
Divorce hurts kids even when the parents get along somewhat well. I still here it from my mom even though my dad has been dead for almost 15 years. It is the problem that doesn’t go away, no matter how much some want to claim.
Lyn87,
I have you beat by a year in marriage, but we have definitely not been that calm. We continue to work through things, so I expect us to continue in spite of some really nasty things to have hit our marriage.
As I said, goalposts, moving. And then when she is exposed as a person who can not, in anyway, carry on a logical conversation, she runs away. To quote the younger generation.. Whatever? lol
“Feminized Clergy and Young Men”
I am guessing that Jen thinks the Western “first world”= reality. I do find it funny that she decides “what margaret59 thinks” and then makes a sudden run to the sidelines! I will say this. Jen is a coward.. Not a shock.
I must admit that was a hamster performance on par with Susan Walsh’s here,
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/12/20/is-frivolous-divorce-overstated-in-the-manosphere/
ROFL @ stupidmargaret59 who stated: “Jen does not know the definition of “I am done with you”. This means, for the logically impaired, that I am not going to engage with you any longer.”
moments before typing, “she runs away.”
Srs question: are you bipolar?
@Margaret59 OK to be fair, you may be considerably less bright than the other posters, but you’re not anymore hypocritical or bipolar. You’re not unique in your inability to make up your mind if you want me here or not. I am sure you’ll continue urging me to not post anymore and declaring how “done with me” you are but then angrily fling an accusatory question my way, daring me to respond (rolls eyes).
Not that I know of, Jen. I just don’t think you have a clue about logic. You made a silly inference about what I do or do not think. you were the one that said that I think this, and I love misogynists, right? I apologize for calling you a moron. I should not have said that.
Anonymous age 72
My experience observing older men who file for divorce is somewhat different. Men who took verbal and emotional abuse for years before bailing are very beta, which is why the wives treated them that way.
That’s certainly conventional wisdom and maybe it’s true in the working class. In the UMC there are many women who Heartiste characterizes as “lawyerc***s” whose egos won’t allow them to follow. As just one example I happen to know that the wife of a former CEO of a major bank screamed at him and abused him for years before he finally ditched her and married his personal flight attendant.
My wife attended a nationally known girls’ private school and a nationally known girls’ private college. Her ego won’t let her be just a “wife.” She probably would have been better off with a wife than a husband. I paid for full time nannies for eight years – over $300,000 – and she was happiest then when she did have a de facto “wife” for those eight years.
I think of this as one of the hazards of assortative mating. Marry a high IQ, egotistical woman and your marriage may become a literal lifelong battle to the death, like mine. My brother married a significantly younger woman, a bit of a bimbo actually, and while his married life has been easier my kids are going Ivy League and his are not. Tradeoffs, tradeoffs.
I want to address Elspeth’s canard. Men are bastards who trade their aging wives in for a younger model. This is pure apex fallacy and something you only hear from UMC women. This type of divorce is a tiny percentage of the total number of divorces and only high value men can pull it off. But UMC women are deathly afraid of the trophy wife because it’s game over for them. Yes they get the big settlement but with a huge loss of status and little prospect of remarriage. I know of one guy that did this – a retired Goldman Sachs partner – and he was dead before his second batch of kids hit ten years old.
From the UK:
“It found that while in the 70s, 29% of marriages ended because of adultery, the latest figures show only 15% of divorces were down to infidelity. In the 70’s unreasonable behaviour was cited in 28% of cases but it now accounts for almost half of all divorces (47%).
Examples of unreasonable behaviour given to lawyers for divorce include an unsociable husband making his wife feel guilty when she wanted to go out with her friends; a cross-dressing husband who decided to have a sex change; and a spouse withdrawing all the family savings – £40,000 – and burning it in the bedroom.
She said the widely held belief was that divorces were granted because of unreasonable male behaviour, “but there has been a marked shift over the decades, with men now five times more likely than in the 70s to be granted a divorce because of the unreasonable actions of wives”.
That woman whose husband has the sex change – what a whore! She should have realized TILL DEATH DO US A PART!!! VOW-BREAKER!!!
I guess calling her a moron is insulting to morons.
Monty Python’s Flying Circus this has become.
I have daughters your age, Jen. This is NOT my site. Dalrock decides who is does or does not want here. I said I am sorry for calling you a moron, and I mean it. I think that we have really nothing to say to one another. Honestly, you have no logical argument, that I can see. Umm, I don’t ask if you have bpd, or whatever.
Yoda, Bishops Love SciFi!
Boxer writes,
The secular society was built atop the pillars of the all-boys school (with military discipline) and a respect for classical archetypes (you know, those dead white men that are roundly mocked and ridiculed). With the collapse of the underlying structure, secularism is collapsing into the ghetto and the trailer park, and will disappear completely in the next couple of generations.
I’ve never looked at it quite that way before (odd: since I spent four years in a nearly-all-male military academy), but I think you’re onto something. One quote that is (perhaps erroneously) attributed to the Duke of Wellington was, “The battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton.” Another that I can only vaguely remember was something about the British officer corps not being built at Sandhurst, but in the (highly patriarchal) homes of the British upper class (if anyone has the actual quote please feel free to post it). You are certainly correct that it is such institutions that provide the pillars upon which costly fallacies such as feminism and secularism can survive… for now. It’s like the discussion we were having a few weeks ago about how a particular non-violent sect was only able to survive because of the blood and courage of better men.
Daniel Amneus wrote about the concept from a slightly different viewpoint in some of his works. He knew that too many people are busily dynamiting the foundation, and if only “cranks” like us can see the inevitable in the distance… secular society is doomed, and all the pretentious “isms” that leech off of it. Silly feminist girls and women will find themselves begging for a return to the good old days before men foolishly took them seriously. Although written for another time and place, something like Isaiah 4:1 may make a comeback, “And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.”
I suspect women like Deborah in the original article will quickly learn to appreciate the value of the men who “turn her stomach” now. The question is, “how will men respond when the bottom falls out?”… remembering that the “Birkenhead Drill” was unknown before the reign of Queen Victoria.
Lyn87,
“the nurse weighed me with about six pounds of clothing and footwear on”
AND your carry piece, AND spare magazine, AND your folder, AND your pocket mini-multi-tool, AND your Zippo…
OK, I’m not really expecting you to answer, especially regarding items #1 and #2… but I’ll just point out my wife is always shocked and astounded when I show her my daily pocket-carry load. Many more items than you’d think and they weigh a lot!
Margaret59, my first (and was intended to be sole) comment on this thread was just this:
“@Quartermaster – 45% of divorces initiated by women are because of male infidelity. For men, 31% can say the same. So about half of the “because” is male cheating.
Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3517175/”
My next one was this: “The claims of frivorce here I believe are wildly overblown. Even your poster child for “frivorce” Elizabeth Gilbert did not leave her husband just to find herself, she left him because he wanted children and she didn’t. This is a clash of values, hardly frivolous.”
I do tend to circle back to that because that was the crux of my point.
Any tangents or diverting off-topic were in response to other arguments that were introduced, such as your statement about women and child support. I accept your apology for calling me a moron and sorry I insulted you as well. But yes, i definitely think you’re very likely a misogynist. I take it you’re “red pill” so yeah that means misogynist in most cases.
Enrique @ 8:57 pm – It’s not even about being an outlier. If we look at who is most likely to divorce, it is exactly who we would expect to. Divorce disproportionately affects young, poor, uneducated couples. What else disproportionately affects young, poor, uneducated couples? Abuse. Infidelity, Poverty. People with lots of overwhelming problems are likely to have one more problem called divorce. You may have a point about frivorce being common if the most common group to divorce were college-educated high-income low-conflict couples, but as it turns out, they are the LEAST likely to divorce.
So your complaints about “frivorce” are very likely the manosphere’s very own “apex fallacy”; the rich housewives they can afford to support cheat on them with the pool boy and leave them and thus, all women are bad.
TFH, I always post as Jen. Not Jennifer, FrenzyJen, Susan Walsh, or anyone else. Just Jen.
Your comment reminded me of something: http://jezebel.com/5868172/the-guys-who-think-you-want-them-may-be-the-last-ones-you-really-want
“Unsurprisingly, guys who thought they themselves were sexy were most likely to overestimate women’s interest in them.”
@ Margaret
“I am guessing that Jen does not know the definition of “I am done with you”.”
I am thinking you don’t either given how you keep responding to her.
KP,
The place where I was getting my physical was the local VA hospital – the only weapon I had on me was my knife… a very nice HK folder like this one.
I foolishly let my CCW permit expire a while ago and I’ve been meaning to renew it. I used to carry a .45 ACP all the time but got out of the habit when I worked on a military post… since Clinton banned weapons on military facilities (a ban continued by both Bush and Obama) carrying a pistol has been a good way to end up in the stockade.
BradA writes,
“I have you beat by a year in marriage, but we have definitely not been that calm. We continue to work through things, so I expect us to continue in spite of some really nasty things to have hit our marriage.”
On the other hand, I have never once in my life had make-up sex… we’ve never had an argument to make up after.
margaret59 writes
“Hmmm, Lyn87, you have a point about how women see themselves, I think.”
It’s not just women, I’m afraid. The real test is when you see a reflection of yourself and do not immediately recognize that it’s you, like when you walk past a window and see your reflection out of the corner of your eye. In that instant before you realize it’s your own reflection you see yourself largely as others do (with the 2D-versus-3D caveat). I am occasionally mortified by that… I suppose the solution is to stop wearing my glasses unless I’m driving.
Or maybe just hit the gym harder.
Lyn87,
Oy… when are we going to make the FedGov join (most of) the states in acknowledging our rights in their (non-sensitive, unless it’s a courtroom) facilities??? Grrrrr…..
OH, and… nice knife! Just don’t wear it into the MRI machine.
Farm Boy
No no. You are both wrong. The leading cause of divorce is women not making sammiches for their husbands.
Yep! If she had the humility to make him succulent sammiches, she just might be wife material. I think a lot of the problems in marriages these days is due to a lack of wife material. I hope Jen learns how to make sammiches.
Ohhhh okay. I get it now. You’re one of THOSE.
And you’re one of THESE:
Don’t fool yourself, LGR. They love it as much as Jen does.
Guilty as charged. I do enjoy the occasional pointing of a feminazi towards the kitchen.
Lyn87,
> we’ve never had an argument to make up after.
I can’t even envision that! I will take your word for it, but I never could see how some never had an argument.
Dalrock,
What part of DFW do you shoot at? I need to start doing that myself (and my wife wants to come), so recommendations are welcome. Feel free to email me if you prefer, though hopefully it won’t get lost in my massive incoming email.
@feeriker
“”Paging Mark in Toronto … paging Mark in Toronto…
Come on, friend, hurry! You can’t avoid going to work on this one; that would be the let-down of the century!””
Thank you for thinking of me…..L*.I just got back from a 4 country business tour and just getting caught up on Dalrock’s great posts and all the amazing comments.My take on this 57 year old single woman? That is easy! She drove him away.Soon as I read that she was a Jewish women it all made sense.She has been nagging and belittling him for years,then one day,he found his balls…”Here is the house,the bank accounts etc…..F*** You!..you miserable c***”.I have seen this happen among men that I know….and I also know several Jewish women of her ilk.She cannot figure out why he left because she has her head so far up her ass she cannot see daylight.Typical Jew broad….she is always RIGHT and blameless! As for her looking on the dating sites I wish her all the luck.She states that all the men are slobs etc.I read between the lines.What she is looking for is a “WEALTHY” man! Nothing else will do.A Jew broad like this does not care about looks.She cares about MONEY! If she were to meet a nice man,say 60ish,she would not be interested in him for his looks,character,charisma etc.She will only be interested in him for his WEALTH! That is the way these Jew broads operate.I think she is a great example of what I have been posting on several previous threads..”STAY AWAY FROM JEWISH WOMEN”!!!!!
@greyghost
“”As soon as this gay marriage thing gets off the ground with the full blessing from the catholic churchianship the gays can establish the surrogacy industry for the MGTOW/family men.””
As someone who considers himself MGTOW I am also quite anxious to see this happen.As you know,gay marriage is legal here in Canada.It is already starting here.Gays can have children(surrogacy) as well as adopt.I am the last person who is an advocate for gays rights,marriage etc.I believe in Adam & Eve…not Adam & Steve.Seeing this happen is a kick in the teeth to the women….and they are too stupid to realize it! Women are the biggest supporters of anything “GAY”.With all these men deciding that they would rather be gay than with a woman is absolutely hilarious!……Very immoral but,HILARIOUS!
@Dalrock
Thanks for the link….”Calling Out Dalrock”.The poster strikes me as a delusional twat! I would not worry about people like her.You get more people reading your blog posts in one hour than she would get in a year! There is a reason for that! Keep it up!
I don’t thin kthat’s the case.
Denial is not an adequate response.
—
I mean, considering that we know that the marriages least likely to end in divorce are those that took place after the couple had been dating 3+ years
So you go and repeat a fallacy of presumption.
People who wait indefinitely to get married (i.e. they don’t get married) have the lowest divorce rate of all.
Anyhow, you’re ignoring confounding variables. For example, what makes people more likely to date for 3+ years? Were they dating in college? Well, attending college is correlated with a lower divorce risk. Why? Probably because the kinds of people who (want to) attend college are also better suited to marriage. In fact, there’s a fairly clear divide between college grads and high school grads – the level of self-control they have. Self-control is a personality trait, and will be expressed in a range of ways.
Self-control will play a part in whether you go to college, whether you do well in college, what type of job you get and how well you do it, how much money you make in general (because you got a good job, because you did well in college, because you went to college, […], because you have self-control), and so on. (It also has an effect on criminal activity, promiscuity, alcohol abuse, and so on, which all destabilize a marriage.)
Spending too much on a wedding indicates a lack of self-control (e.g. indulgence — see for example: Rha, Jong-Youn, Catherine Phillips Montalto, and Sherman D. Hanna. “The effect of self-control mechanisms on household saving behavior.” Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning 17.2 (2006).)
To make my point again:
Higher scores on self-control correlated with a higher grade point average, better adjustment (fewer reports of psychopathology, higher self-esteem), less binge eating and alcohol abuse, better relationships and interpersonal skills, secure attachment, and more optimal emotional responses.
Tangney, June P., Roy F. Baumeister, and Angie Luzio Boone. “High self‐control predicts good adjustment, less pathology, better grades, and interpersonal success.” Journal of personality 72.2 (2004): 271-324.
Also:
Moffitt, Terrie E., et al. “A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108.7 (2011): 2693-2698.
In other words, delaying marriage does nothing (for lack of a better description, it’s a byproduct of self-control). People who have poor self-control can delay marriage and only marginally affect their divorce chances. People who have lots of self-control can get married at 18 and do just fine. People who exhibit a lot of self-control also tend to take advice of others (amongst other things, to delay marriage).
Pets are not the same as babies
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=916737
mothers working outside of home
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=916656
How to fix deep rooted damage cause by a broken family
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=916756
@Jen
“”It may be the fact that I’m Canadian””
I knew it!……I knew it! ……..Just from reading your posts I could I could tell you were a Canadian womyn! Probably from Toronto? Maybe you should go do some reading over at Roosh or Roissey.They will tell you what they think of Canadian women…….and they are 100% correct! I am Canadian also and I would NEVER EVER get involved with a Canadian womyn under Canadian law.Canadian womyn are the bottom of the barrel.
Pure gold from Mark +1
Lyn87 is becoming very Anglophile (since his recent visit – he has yet to say what he thinks of the warm beer). America must also however have had all male schools (Dead Poet’s Society). My mother’s cousin went to Eton – though not Waterloo – but he said that he did not really have enough money to keep up with the other boys. It is noticeable that the present three senior English Politicians (Prime Minister Cameron, Exchequer Chancellor Osborne and Mayor Johnson) all went to Eton and at the same time (and then on to Oxford) and are all independently of politics extremely rich.
I attended an all-boy boarding school of Spartan discipline – a prelude to a spell in Stalag Luft 17- but by then the rot had already set in.
Deti,
Or shall I say TheDeti!!! LOL.
Why *does* your new handle make me think of ‘The Fonz’??
I read with intereset your take on the plight of Monica Lewinsky. I appreciated your empathy for her whilst at the same time pointing out that she brought her troubles onto herself by engaging in that infamous act with The President.
Like you, I also feel bad for the man who *could* have benefitted from the wifely graces and love a chaste Monica Lewinsky would have brought to the (marriage) table.
What HAS happened to this man who lost out?
Did he marry another woman? In which case, is he still married? Or divorced?
Did he go MGHOW?
Is he a regular commenter here?
Did he join the priesthood?
I try to picture this man…perhaps he is in the age range 45-60, perhaps American, perhaps not…perhaps wealthy, perhaps not…
He lost out, because Monica did not do her part in the mating game. She flouted the rules, and a man somewhere lost *his wife*.
Sad all round…
If one considers that the point of men is to serve women, and the reverse is also true, i.e. the point of women is to serve men, then with this reasoning, this unknown man who ‘lost out’ is a very important man who has been severely short-changed by women like Monica, and must be ‘mourned’ in the same way the ‘unknown soldier’ during the First World War is mourned. He must never be forgotten. Afterall, this man is still alive, and perhaps living a suboptimal life?? I dunno if he is, but it would certainly have been better if Monica had been available to him.
Most men do the 4 P’s even if they are single:
*Provide* (means theyare gainfully employed)
*Protect* (they do physically protect their mothers, sisters, and even strange women – chivalry – although chivalry is now dwindling, due to ingratitude by many women)
*Problem-solving* (because men are more logical than women, they can’t help but be naturally better at problem-solving than women. This is a biological fact).
*Patriarchy* (meaning ‘leadership). Many MGTOWs are good natural mentors for other younger men.
Of course, if you consider a married man, he is doing even more of the above…
Most modern women are unable to retain their ability to do the 4Fs because of prior to marriage promiscuity, and for various other reasons. Sadly Monica is in this position:
*Food* (meaning she can prepare a decent meal for the family on a regular basis)
*Family* (means she can and will have children)
*Falthfulness* (means she is able to bond properly to her husband – in all ways including sexually – and therefore there is zero risk of cuckoldry)
*F…* (hey, I am a Catholic woman, I can’t say this ‘F’ out loud!!!
The social contract, indeed the marriage contract is often broken on at least 3 counts on the side of the woman (by virtue of her um, being ‘stingy’ with *her* Fs, whilst the man gives all of *his* 4Ps…).
So yes, this is a problem at this present time…
Monica’s example is a good illustration of this playing out right before our eyes…
Anonymous Reader (and Dalrock),
I was intrigued by this notion of the ‘children-centred’ marriage. I have been noticing this phenomenon for a long time. People marry ‘just so they can have children legitimately’, but the bond beween the couple is not sealed, so as soon as the children ‘leave the nest’, so to speak, the parents split.
I have also noticed, for instance, that when a child dies, eg. due to illness or murder (I have noticed this trend particularly amongst the parents of children who were victims of a murder by a stranger, and there have been a few in the UK in recent years), the parents almost always separate, AS A DIRECT RESULT of the child’s murder, or at least it just seems that way to me.
I have a question: perhaps you could answer this if you have the answer?
What is ’cause’ and ‘effect’ in this case?
Do you believe (through your own observation, or through studies, if there are any), that these people have the right intentions going into marriage (i.e. that the most important thing to them *is* the marriage, with the children being ‘happy additions’, and that through the stress of raising children, the ugly sides of the parents are laid bare to see, one parent to the other, or do you think that, as I have somewhat semi-concluded, the focus was always on the (future) children going in to the marriage, or indeed, in some cases there are already children, and the marriage is simply an afterthought after the event (eg. after years of cohabitation, or in the case of ‘shotgun’ marriages)?
What do you think?
Could this be a post all on its own?
Elspeth,
I generally agree with your point about ‘Mrs. Deborah’, but ONLY IF your point was indeed a general one, and not relating to *her* specifically.
Yes there are women (a small percentage) who are wronged by their husbands, and they tend not to get a lot of sympathy from men in The Manosphere, who are of course dealing with their own pain. I get that. This is how it is, painful but true, yes.
But in *this case*, even though we don’t know how ‘Mrs. Deborah’ came to be divorced, there are very strong clues as to what the deal is with her.
For a start, she simply says her husband ‘left’ her. She doesn’t say he *filed* for divorced. There is a high chance that though he ‘left’, it was *she* who FILED.
However, conjecture on my part….I know…
Further evidence that she does not deserve your moral support (and you already pointed this out) is that she is out there looking for Mr. Hot, at 57!
A woman wronged by her husband would be asking strangers ‘why did he leave me all alone?’ and ‘how can I get him back?’ and ‘how could he do this to me after all the years I spent with him?’ etc. She would NOT be checking out men on the internet and turning her nose at them in the process. The fact that she is doing this tells us EVERYTHING we need to know about this woman. We can now be almost 100% sure that her attitude towards her own husband must have been similar to that which she shows the online men.
Our brains ‘fill in the gaps’ and Bob’s your uncle! we got a verdict…
It is that simple.
So I am afraid I am with the men on this. If this woman, at 57, does not understand that her ONLY decent option in the online search is to look for a nice, elderly gentleman with whom to share ‘companionship’ if she absolutely *must* have another man, (and therefore his looks must never enter into the equation) imagine what she is teaching her 27 year old daughter…
I shudder to think…
If the SMP problems must be corrected, and it is women who must start ‘righting’ the ship, this woman is atrocious for several reasons:
She is an extremely bad example to younger women, and she is a disgrace to women her age. Her narcissism is off the scale and she deserves all the ridicule these men throw at her.
She failed to disguise her contempt for men. How on Earth did she remain married for so long? And how can THIS woman teach her daughter to be a good wife? And what do her sons think of her, crawling the internet as she is? Why wouldn’t they become MGTOW, with her filthy example stuffed up their noses?
If one or more of your children, and mine, cannot find a mate in the years to come, Elspeth, voilà, *this* woman is the reason. She is helping to kill the natural equilibrium between men and women. She is worse than the slut-walk feminists and Jen in this regard.
She does NOT need your defending her. You *must* come down hard on her, for your daughters’ sake.
But your general point, as I said, is well taken, because you are always right on these matters 🙂
The hazards of delayed marriage:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/04/22/pregnancy.over.40/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-165664/Are-older-mothers-risk.html
Women consider yourself warned.
Jen’s answer to everything
“So I haven’t personally seen … “
Oi oi! Gotcha. You are not Canadian, but you do speak French.
You are Arsène Wenger, and I claim my £5.
Do you believe (through your own observation, or through studies, if there are any), that these people have the right intentions going into marriage (i.e. that the most important thing to them *is* the marriage, with the children being ‘happy additions’, and that through the stress of raising children, the ugly sides of the parents are laid bare to see, one parent to the other, or do you think that, as I have somewhat semi-concluded, the focus was always on the (future) children going in to the marriage, or indeed, in some cases there are already children, and the marriage is simply an afterthought after the event (eg. after years of cohabitation, or in the case of ‘shotgun’ marriages)?
What do you think?
Could this be a post all on its own?
It does vary.
There are very few couples who enter marriage only to have children, really. Many want children, but they also want the rest of marriage. What happens, though, in many cases is that when children come along, they monopolize the spouses. This isn’t because children *naturally* do this, but because of the socially-enforced parenting standards today, where parents are supposed to be directly interacting with their children 24/7 in order to raise/educate them properly. This often leaves very little room for the couple to develop, and so the couple’s relationship stagnates. In the best cases, the couple realizes this and compensates for it. In the middling cases, they realize something is wrong, but muddle through it (and are at risk if, as you say, the kids die or when the kids leave — because the couple’s relationship has slowly atrophied on the vine). In the worst cases, they divorce. But in pretty much all cases today from the MC on up, the tremendous parenting style pressure placed on parents in this parenting culture is the real culprit — the parenting practices of when we were ourselves children could easily land a parent in CPS’s grasp these days, to be honest.
That’s certainly conventional wisdom and maybe it’s true in the working class. In the UMC there are many women who Heartiste characterizes as “lawyerc***s” whose egos won’t allow them to follow. As just one example I happen to know that the wife of a former CEO of a major bank screamed at him and abused him for years before he finally ditched her and married his personal flight attendant.
My wife attended a nationally known girls’ private school and a nationally known girls’ private college. Her ego won’t let her be just a “wife.” She probably would have been better off with a wife than a husband. I paid for full time nannies for eight years – over $300,000 – and she was happiest then when she did have a de facto “wife” for those eight years.
I think of this as one of the hazards of assortative mating. Marry a high IQ, egotistical woman and your marriage may become a literal lifelong battle to the death, like mine. My brother married a significantly younger woman, a bit of a bimbo actually, and while his married life has been easier my kids are going Ivy League and his are not. Tradeoffs, tradeoffs.
Indeed. My ex was this woman as well. She even joked when we were still married that she needed a wife more than she needed a husband. You can’t fix that, really. Poor choice on my part, obviously.
This is all shuffling deck chairs stuff. Most of the arguments and counter-arguments regarding Divorce, Custody, CS, etc, are becoming moot, as more and more men choose not to divorce, and with the (finally!) advancements in a men’s “pill” (you know the gender that gets LESS medical funding?), there will be less babies for the Family Law industry to weaponize for what is essentially a wealth transfer from men to women.
On the other hand….
My Orwellian side tells me that things like the “Yes means Yes” law, which I claim will morph into written contractual agreements, are simply the advancement (read: workarounds) of the feminist imperative, given that Gen-Y and Gen-Zombie men are producing less and less, marrying less and less (meaning, less Family/Divorce law industry revenue and less CS for the state). Women will advance other legal “theories” to extract $$ from men, in this case, with YMY turning into mini-contracts (as I claim it will), you will finally see the ultimate irony: State-sanctioned, feminist-advanced Prostitution–where payment will be expected from men for any sexual interaction from women.
Women will get their pound of flesh from men. One can imagine the next step will be a Gloria Allredian claim that ANY man who DARES to utilize the male “pill” (allegedly to be out in 2017), must give informed consent to the woman prior, so that she is fully aware her sexual interaction with said male may NOT produce a baby and thus confer financial benefits to said women. Women WILL be paid for sex, short term or long term.
Marriage had been the preferred manner, but since women blew that up, and men are opting out, other arrangements must be made to satisfy women’s financial needs.
enrique432 ..
I don’t see it that way (re: consent for men to use contraception). Men already do this with a condom and we don’t have un-married women complaining about that.
A married woman would have a right to be aggrieved by a husband taking contraception measures without her consent / knowledge. I would have to agree with a married woman who had issue with male contraception inside of their marriage. Same with a man who expects his wife would do the same (re: use of contraception inside of their marriage).
And, as a side note: How would they know (re: women knowing if men are using this new contraception)?
As for your comment in general .. You could be right. It’s one theory for sure. But, regardless of what happens we know that any man who marries today will be prosecuted to tomorrow’s laws / standards. Without certainty how can a man make life altering logical and rational decisions without certainty in the laws / standards? The answer is .. He can’t.
Opus,
I’m not a fan of warm beer. I prefer mine American-style: ice-cold and in a mug… preferably a pewter mug right out of the freezer. I tried some high-end 18-year-old Scotch in Edinburgh and discovered that I don’t like it… and certainly not enough to pay £70 for a liter of it. I did, however, get some of this. Nectar. Of. The. Gods.
I’m not sure it’s fair to call me an Anglophile at this point, though. As we say about interesting places that are strange to us, “It’s a nice place to visit but I wouldn’t want to live there.” I’m certain I could adjust to U.K. living fairly easily, and the places of historical significance around every other corner is fascinating to me, but I definitely prefer living in the U.S…. and not just for the roads.
BradA,
Yeah… 27 years and we’ve never really fought. That’s just not how either of us deals with things. We don’t sweat the small stuff, and for the big stuff we discuss pros and cons like rational human beings, and 99.9% of the time we come to an agreement. In the very rare instances where we don’t come to agreement, I decide and she submits (“Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord” – Eph 5:22). At the same time, it is my duty to put her interests above mine should they conflict (“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it” – Eph 5:25).
It’s amazing how easy it is to get along without marital drama when wives live by Eph 5:22, husbands live by Eph 5:25, and both try to live by 1 Corinthians 10:24 (“No one should seek their own good, but the good of others.” – NIV) and Phil 4:11b (“… for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content.”). Funny… it’s like whoever created us designed marriage to work that way. I guess He knew what He was doing.
Other factors are that we don’t have kids, which eliminates a big source of potential conflict, and I generally make decent money – although, to be fair, I was unemployed for a short while and underemployed for a long while and our living situation was a lot less than optimal, and she was a trooper about it. I frequently tell her that she won life’s lottery when we met, but I know I did as well. I’m a lucky man.
You cannot “see” the “pill” for men-exactly. Contrary to what I have already seen posted by women in various sites, I believe men will be taking this pill MORE consistently than lying about taking it (which was women’s new claim, that men would deceive women to GET them pregnant). Women Wouldn’t know, which was my point…their will be claims from women that they were defrauded by NOT knowing that the guy they dated 3 months and were so in love with, and thought they were going to marry and by that home, and blah blah blah, were actually taking the male pill. You will even advise up front, as a man, or risk financial liability for lying about it (if you for example claim you are fertile, but actually were found to be taking the pill).
Kinda like YMY. Women will be ATTRACTED to men who blow it off, and rip their panties off…completely aware as women, that they then control the later narrative and can accuse these men of violating the law. The men who wimper up to follow each and every step, will NOT BE attractive to women.
Women want “unplanned” pregnancies to be available…and any person, particularly a woman, who denies this, isn’t looking at the reality around us.
I see this forming as an eventual “informed consent” model, where men have to divulge prior (as we essentially do with condoms) what their reproductive status is {“I am/am not taking GLAXCO male contraception pill”}, which of course will be a tip off to women, who can then decide whether or not they want to sleep with the guy…think groupies ever HOPE to get pregnant by NFL Alphas? Take that down a few notches…think any country-ass girls with no future ever HOPE the local big wig attorney knocks them up? Do not EVER underestimate women’s ability to utilize sex/reproductive opportunities, to advance their own personal benefit.
Pre-nups were created, and a minute later, women started the shaming process against men who sought to employ them, claiming pre-nups were “unromantic” and all that. Then they attacked their legal standing. Women will do the same with the male pill (to keep enforcing their imperative OVER men’s). In fact, expect a claim that there are “some potential health risks to women who are exposed to semen from men on XYZ pill”. WOMEN WILL BE PAID, and THEY WILL CONTROL all aspects of reproduction.
Do you NOT think for a second, after men begin using the pill, we WON’T start seeing women around the web, saying things like, “It just seemed so weird to have him say he was on this “pill” thing..I mean, we already told each other we love each other, and it just is kinda, hot to know that we could produce a baby…ladies, not saying I want to trap him or anything, I just hate the idea of knowing it may never happen”. Expect all sorts of essentially shaming language to accompany ANY loss of reproductive control for women.
Mark my words, YMY will eventually produce it’s “Big American Case of the Century” from some poor bastard in CA who while drunk slept with some Alpha chick who regrets it. It will play out, and eventually “forms” will be created to standardize the sexual approach…but the forms (contract) will only benefit women, and eventually will be used/weaponized, to extract money from men who were party to said contract.
Remember, 25 years ago, no one imagined that having a woman simply move in and even pay rent, could damn you to some kind of legal status whereby you owe her “relief” upon trying to kick her out. The converse became true too…men found that giving ANY impression that they lived with a woman, could confer legal obligations toward her rent, etc. As they say, “don’t even leave a toothbrush” at her place (or vice-versa).
WOMEN WILL BE PAID. ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. Marriage was the traditional model…women milked that and made it miserable, so men continue to opt out. Women are now moving onto other legal theories.
“As just one example I happen to know that the wife of a former CEO of a major bank screamed at him and abused him for years before he finally ditched her and married his personal flight attendant.”
… John Reed?
Jen,
I’ll play Devil’s Advocate here and assume your position in which you are saying that if you don’t want to deal with the desolation that divorce leaves in its wake, than it is best to avoid marriage all together. Here’s the problem though..in many states in the US, (not sure about Canada), there are common law marriage legislation which makes it so that even if a couple are living together but are not married, the local state regulations treat them as if they are married. Which means that asset division, alimony, and child support are arranged as if they are married. Thus, if you wanted to play it safe, then the only way to prevent divorce devastation is to completely avoid relationships, because any live-in relationship, even if it is not thru marriage, will still be considered so by the local government. Like I said it varies by states but it is quickly becoming law throughout the entire country. So your suggestion of just avoiding marriage to avoid divorce desolation doesn’t really pan out. What are your thoughts then?
-CV
Mr. Dal:
How long is this going to go on?
What can’t continue, won’t. Women cannot remain “on top” forever as they are now (and aiming to be higher).
It may take longer than any of us think to switch around, but switch it will.
Men doing the same selfish things will not help either, but those will be another thing that cannot continue.
Perhaps civilization will really fall, but I tend to think at least enclaves will get the right focus and rebuild from there.
Spacetraveller
Re: Child-centered family
Do you believe (through your own observation, or through studies, if there are any), that these people have the right intentions going into marriage (i.e. that the most important thing to them *is* the marriage, with the children being ‘happy additions’, and that through the stress of raising children, the ugly sides of the parents are laid bare to see, one parent to the other, or do you think that, as I have somewhat semi-concluded, the focus was always on the (future) children going in to the marriage, or indeed, in some cases there are already children, and the marriage is simply an afterthought after the event (eg. after years of cohabitation, or in the case of ‘shotgun’ marriages)?
Depends on the demographic, perhaps. I believe, based on observation of a pretty small data set, that it is not exceptional for a woman to focus most of her attention on her child / children. In past times I speculate that the social expectation was for marriage to precede children, and that the marriage would continue after the children were gone. Perhaps as a result of smaller families, sometime in the last 30-40 years we began to see the “helicopter” parenting style, always hovering over the child. This happens to correlate in time with the growth of men’s-fault divorce, which leads to families that are overtly mother-led (as opposed to “egalitarian” ones that may be covertly mother-led). These and other factors make the child the center of the family rather than the marriage, and the “child-centered” family has no center to hold once the child leaves.
It’s not my idea. An author named John Rosemond has been beating the drum on this for at least 15 years, he’s a syndicated columnist in various newspapers (remember those?) and probably has a book or three on raising children. I still see his column from time to time in some papers, usually on the same page as “Dear Abby”. Maybe there are books on child raising that urge centering the family the child(ren), and Rosemond writes in response to that? I don’ t know.
I doubt that even now any significant number of people are thinking this through. Most people just get married, or shack up, and at some point the woman decides children are in order, so there you go. As an aside, IMO all of us carry around templates in our head from our childhood, and so we tend to act like our parents did, whatever that may imply, when children arrive. It’s like a dormant app that wakes up when the “child in house” stimulus event happens.
Making the marriage the center of the family means that the man and woman have to stop being “daddy” and “mommy” once in a while and be some version of who they were before children. This has a lot of implications; as a man naturally the first one that occurs to me is sex. When a woman is “mommy” all day and into the night it may not always be easy for her to shift mode into “wife and lover”, she needs help with that (coughGAMEcough). A man who is deeply betaized can get stuck in “daddy” or “provider” mode as well. Centering the family on the child(ren) only makes such trends worse.
And all this applies to families where the woman works for money outside of the house. Maybe even more so – it is possible for a woman to “honor and obey” men at her work, and “love and honor” her children, thereby “marrying” her job and children to the exclusion of whats-his-name.
Another possible source of discord and alienation, to be sure.
This article was on my mind when I saw this Craigslist ad from a divorced 50-year-old woman, posting her wish list: http://losangeles.craigslist.org/wst/w4m/4726084699.html
She looks very familiar to me too, but I don’t remember her name last time. Initials CH, maybe? Anyway, she’s not the type who will go away if you ignore her. She’ll just fill the space with more mindless nattering until everyone else stops talking or she’s shut down.
I think it’s good that someone like her comes around once in a while, though, because she does represent the mainstream viewpoint — a viewpoint that’s held by far more people today than ours is. Dumb and obnoxious as she is, she’s normal now. When I respond to a Jen, it’s not because I think I’m going to convince her of anything, or that she’s even trying to discuss anything in good faith. It’s because her blather is the reigning zeitgeist, so if we’re going to combat it (even on a small personal scale) we ought to be able to recognize it and refute it. Others may find our responses to a Jen useful in that regard, up to the point that Dalrock decides it’s enough.
All you older men thinking about younger women … like Jen … read this first …
http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/26871809/florida-woman-sets-boyfriend-on-fire-using-nail-polish-remover-cops-say
and here (a little more detailed)
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/fla-woman-sets-roommate-fire-spaghetti-spat-article-1.1983806
and more details here
http://news.sky.com/story/1359013/woman-sets-boyfriend-afire-after-spaghetti-row
{These articles don’t agree in details so read with the knowledge of error’s.}
It is my understanding that this isn’t possible … or so I’m told anyway … huh, who knew? [sarcasm]
WOMEN WILL BE PAID. ONE WAY OR ANOTHER
Perhaps so. But they really want tingles. That affects the equation dramatically.
It sure seems that there are lots if “high maintenance” women around these days. I wonder how they stay maintained when they are not in a relationship.
Farm Boy …
No good deed goes unpunished ..
http://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/melissa-dawn-sellars-charged-with-aggravated-battery-by-clearwater-police-after-spaghetti-and-meatballs-row/story-fnh81jut-1227099745167
“Otiz had taken Sellars in after she was evicted from her rented property after losing her job at Walmart.
“He’s just a nice man,” Katherine Mudse, the victim’s friend and neighbour, “ told ABCAction News.
“He was trying to help this girl. He took care of her dogs.”
This man was doing this young monster a favor and giving her a place to stay after she lost her job .. and he got burnt .. pun intended. Glad he is okay.
Maybe he should not be such a white knight in the future. I doubt he will figure it out though.
Honeycomb,
It would seem that he did not do the maintenance well enough. He needed to do better.
I hear Paul McCartney in my head,
“All the high maintenance women,
Where do they all belong”
Farm Boy asks,
“It sure seems that there are lots of “high maintenance” women around these days. I wonder how they stay maintained when they are not in a relationship.”
They just get right back into another one… because most guys don’t know what this guy knows.
Beware the Danger Zone!
Agreed (re: do more .. faster .. higher .. better .. longer .. etc for the maintenance of women).
Women “feel” entitled to more than just a man (eg job, children, house, cars, jewelry, happiness, drugs, etc).
And, really, why shouldn’t they?
http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/institutions-of-higher-indoctrination/
We have ourselves to blame for telling them to get an education (ie higher ed degree) at our expense .. twice. Once for the cost of the education and the twice in the aftermath of their (th wimminz) behavior.
If college is so dangerous to women .. maybe we should ban college for women (eg using their example / method of gun control).
Again, it must be my white privilege talking … sigh
Lyn87 .. that is a great video. (And, that laughter you hear is of women in the audience.)
PokeSalad
How long is this going to go on?
S’matter, you outta popcorn already?
What can’t continue, won’t. Women cannot remain “on top” forever as they are now (and aiming to be higher).
It may take longer than any of us think to switch around, but switch it will.
Men doing the same selfish things will not help either, but those will be another thing that cannot continue.
Perhaps civilization will really fall, but I tend to think at least enclaves will get the right focus and rebuild from there.
It will actually not be morality that determines the next phase, even if there is a fall. It will definitely not be Biblical standards either. The next phase will be determined by the same thing it always is, money and economic incentives.
Makeup, like Caek, is a Lie. Not a bad lie, but still, misrepresentation of the most obvious kind, and if you are basing your attraction merely on looks, well you’re prone to being lied to.
There are obvious exceptions of natural beauty, but they are exceedingly rare.
Holy Crap, Thomas! It’s hard to believe that’s real. The woman who write that wish-list and Deborah could be sisters. For those who didn’t see the link:
____________________________________________
Pretty woman looking for Handsome,Succesful ,old fashion man for Relat – 50 (Brentwood)
age : 50 body : athletic height : 5’3″ (160cm) status : divorced
Looking for an unusual man,someone interesting and successful that is ready to create a deep loving connection with a woman .The person should have carisma,be funny and ARTISTIC ,in shape,tall and handsome but not self obsess.Someone that has done their spiritual work to become more in tune with himself ,someone UNIQUE.Ready and without fear to fall in love and give all they have to have a strong connection with another human being.NOT AFRAID OF STRONG WOMAN .Fear free,faith driven.Non smoker ,no drugs ,just plain enjoining life.The person is semi retire and love to travel and visit other countries ,he has the time and money.(If no photo is send you wont get a response,so please don’t expect me to write back if you dont send a photo,cynics stay out)YOUR PHOTO GETS MINE.I am petite,sensual ,spiritual,loving and loyal;Well educated and aware .Looks much younger than age,very artistic and have old fashion values..Wont be disssapointed.I will love you and be loyal to you.NO GAMES..prefer Latin men and europeans..
____________________________________________
That’s quite a wish list for a 50-year-old divorcee. Since it’s very apropos of the topic here, let’s unpack it a bit… This is going to be both educational and fun.
Pretty woman looking for Handsome,Succesful ,old fashion man for Relat – 50 (Brentwood)
age : 50 (That might be a problem.)
body : athletic (Self-reported… a plus if it’s true.)
height : 5’3″ (Not much of an issue for women.)
status : divorced (Red flag… almost certainly a no-go. Details are required to evaluate this one.)
Looking for an unusual man,someone interesting and successful that is ready to create a deep loving connection with a woman. (So… she wants a top-tier man – which implies future-orientation – who’s ready to throw himself into a relationship with a post-menopausal divorcee – which implies a lack of future orientation. Good luck with that.)
The person should have carisma,be funny and ARTISTIC ,in shape,tall and handsome but not self obsess. (Laying aside the fact that she cannot spell the attributes she requires… the odds of just those seven attributes occurring in one man shows again that she wants nothing short of the top tier of the top tier of men, if such a man even exists.)
Someone that has done their spiritual work to become more in tune with himself (In addition to everything else, he has to be “spiritual.” But clearly she’s not looking for anyone who is spiritual in the sense of adhering to a patriarchal religion like Christianity, because he must also be…)
NOT AFRAID OF STRONG WOMAN. (Oh my… that’s a red flag the size of Nebraska right there.)
someone UNIQUE.Ready and without fear to fall in love and give all they have to have a strong connection with another human being. (Everyone is unique, so that one is easy, but she is reiterating her requirement that the guy be looking to jump head-first into an LTR with a high-maintenance and high-baggage woman.)
Fear free,faith driven. (Translation: both reckless and “spiritual.”)
Non smoker ,no drugs ,just plain enjoining life. (Those are actually reasonable, IF she has the goods, because every other woman is angling for the same thing.)
The person is semi retire and love to travel and visit other countries ,he has the time and money. (In other words, she wants a sophisticated sugar-daddy to spoil her.)
(If no photo is send you wont get a response,so please don’t expect me to write back if you dont send a photo,cynics stay out)YOUR PHOTO GETS MINE. (So after laying out her extensive requirements, she is demanding photographic proof of physical attractiveness before being willing to offer the same.)
——— Now she describes what she brings to the table ———
I am petite,sensual ,spiritual,loving and loyal; (Again, self-reported, but how is it that a 50-year-old divorced gold-digger describes herself as both spiritual and loyal? Again, she needs to fess up about her role in her divorce.)
Well educated and aware . (Those require further explanation as well… in what subjects is she “educated?” Of what is she “aware?”)
Looks much younger than age,very artistic and have old fashion values.. (A plus if true, but since she’s unwilling to send a photo up front… call me a skeptic. And her main “old-fashioned” value seems to be her similarity to someone practicing the world’s oldest profession.)
Wont be disssapointed.I will love you and be loyal to you.NO GAMES..prefer Latin men and europeans.. (Like she loved and was loyal to her ex-husband?)
____________________________________________
This is pure delusion. Even if all the attributes she requires could be found in any one man (doubtful), that man would have been snagged long ago… and if he found himself single due to being widowed, he would have his pick of less-demanding women 20-30 years younger than her who would be throwing themselves at him rather than demanding that he prove himself to her before he even gets to see what she looks like.
What are the odds?
Charismatic – We generally agree that is about 20% of men.
Funny – a lot of guys are funny, so 30%.
ARTISTIC – All caps, and a rare trait among men, so 5%.
In shape – top third? 33%.
Tall – Top quartile? 25%.
Handsome – Most women only rate the top 20% of men to be above average.
“Spiritual” – 15% maybe?
NOT AFRAID OF A STRONG WOMAN – All caps again: she’s telling us that she is high-maintenance. 10% might put up with that… if she’s hot.
Ready to fall in love – Guessing… 25%?
Non smoker – Fairly common, let’s say 80%.
No drugs – Again, fairly common among older successful men, let’s say 80% again.
Has lots of time – Retired or semi-retired, so about 20%.
Has enough money for foreign travel – Assuming she means more than occasional first-class travel, maaaaybe 5%.
If all those attributes are evenly distributed among men, the approximate odds of one man possessing all of them is around 1-in-10 billion, which is quite a bit more than the entire male population of the entire Earth. She literally thinks that she is entitled to the man with the highest SMV in the entire world, and that such a man is going to answer a Craig’s List add from a 50-year-old divorced gold digger, and send her pictures of himself just so he can see what she looks like.
Lyn87 ..
Brentwood .. Tn? If so … then yeah this gal is a “Hi Mx” woman.
As for your math … most of these women are looking for (dare I say again ENTITLED to) the top 1-5% of men. In that case 99.999% will be taken already. Hi Means men in general are not that desperate for attention (eg I can get attention from women without the drama these bitches call for). If they are like me … I have only so much time to offer and that time comes at a premium.
Gotta love the modern day stupid women are embracing. They have no concept of their SMV.
“Well educated”. Fail.
Ten spelling and typo errors that jumped out at me so far, never mind the bizarre Inspector Clouseau grammar. No doubt she’ll love you longtime, and all. I’d begin to wonder in which other areas she’s being somewhat economical with the actualité.
I’m just an old blue meanie.
Lyn87, I remember reading the comments on a manosphere blog about a NYT(?) article decrying the trouble women in the city were having finding men to date. Their requirements were basically a six figure a year job and a degree. Someone broke down the numbers in the comments, and not allowing for reasons of attraction, shared political views, shared culture or religion, just with those two criteria, they had effectively cut down the dating pool to about 2% of the men in the greater New York area.
The problem with terms like “in shape” is that it is trying to equate an objective metric of health with a subjective desire. What many like to mean in PC terms is that they want someone “healthy”..well healthy isn’t necessarily mean “in shape”. Measures of what is considered healthy vary with a degree in terms of age and gender. As a result, what doctor’s consider healthy, which honestly should be a valid and objective metric to go by, is considerably different than what a horny used-up cougar like Deborah consider’s healthy. Fact of the matter is that most guys usually have no problem being flexible in their physical beauty standards (within reason of course) but women’s are completely stratospheric comparatively speaking.
@Spacetraveller
Yes there are women (a small percentage) who are wronged by their husbands, and they tend not to get a lot of sympathy from men in The Manosphere, who are of course dealing with their own pain. I get that.
Well, I can only really speak for one man here, but I think it’s generally safe to say that we’re not unsympathetic to women whom we know for an incontestible fact have beeb cheated on/abused by/frivorced by their husbands. True, there are men in these parts so embittered by their own negative and destructive experiences with ex-wives that believe no woman can ever suffer enough pain and misfortune, but I think these are a distinct minority. The vast majority believe in “equal justice,” for lack of a better term. Most of us don’t want to see women suffer the pain of abandonment, betrayal, or frivorce any more than men, but at the same time we refuse to consider women “special victims” of these actions or believe that they suffer more damage than men do simply by virtue of possessing two X chromosomes, a vagina, and a preponderance of estrogen.
If men tend to express or feel little or no sympathy for a woman who claims she has been “wronged” by a man, it is because so many women today make that claim frivolously that only a fool would take such a claimat face value. Is it fair that many of us demand a higher burden of proof from a wman before we extend our sympathy or assistance to her? No, certainly not. That is, alas, the state of the world we live in, a state largely the making of women themselves.
Honeycomb, re: the math. I got the 1-in-10 billion approximation by multiplying all the probabilities together, which is why I specified, “If all those attributes are evenly distributed among men.” But of course they are not… there is some correlation between them, so it’s less than that. Men who are tall and good-looking tend to make more money, for example… charismatic men are usually thought of as funny as well… etc..
If I were single I wouldn’t make the cut on five of her criteria, but by any objective measure I would be so far out of her league that I probably wouldn’t even notice a woman like her, much less be willing to throw myself head-long into a long-term relationship.
Women like her and Deborah have two choices:
1) Pare down their “must-have” lists to match their own SMV, which means the lists are winnowed down to this: “A decent guy who is not an invalid.”
2) Resign themselves to the fact that their SMV has deteriorated to the point that their male SMV peers are not worth the effort.
Lyn87 .. (re: math)
lol .. you’re math is fine. Its just no woman believes this is a problem though.
As for being “tall” .. I have been told, before, “you’re not tall enough to ride this ride!” I am only 5′ 8″ .. so being an average to socially short man I can sympathize.
anonymous_ng,
And that’s the rub. Most people, particularly most women, have no grasp of statistical probability. It’s the Lake Wobegon Effect, where every woman thinks she is above average… and not only above average, but FAR above average. Why else would a woman who is objectively in the bottom 20% of the SMV curve think that it is reasonable to demand that men who are among the top 1% of eligible bachelors would line up for her approval and possible selection, sight unseen?
The problem with lists is that unless there is strong correlation between the items, or the probability of meeting a criterion approaches 1, a list with more than a few items quickly becomes a search for a needle in a haystack. And to follow that analogy, unless a woman has very high SMV herself, she’s competing with a blindfold on against women who have metal detectors and magnets.
Statistics is a subject everyone should take in school – if people understood anything about calculating odds then Vegas would be a ghost town, lotteries would go broke, and women like Deborah and the Craig’s List gold-digger would work VERY hard to keep the husbands they have rather than looking for their hunky handyman millionaire in their 50’s.
Lyn87 ..
“Statistics is a subject everyone should take in school – if people understood anything about calculating odds then Vegas would be a ghost town, lotteries would go broke, and women like Deborah and the Craig’s List gold-digger would work VERY hard to keep the husbands they have rather than looking for their hunky handyman millionaire in their 50’s.”
One of the articles I linked for Jen about women cheaters basically said that women prefer to NOT divorce. But, cuckold their husbands with the badboy handyman .. but it’s the fact they “feel” entitled to do so that is the scary part.
Frankly, right now they’re emboldened to act overtly .. and soon it will be driven back to covertly doing the same things as they brag about now. It’s just a matter of time.
And, at 45 years old .. they’re not getting one minute more of my time than she deserves. I have a very strong list too.
To me, it’s not that I don’t have the sympathy. I actually have quite a bit of sympathy for a woman who’s been wronged, when I know that’s the case.
I just get annoyed at the idea that we have to give “equal time” or equal consideration to it, as if any discussion of bad female behavior is unfair if it doesn’t come with enough disclaimers. That’s not the case when it’s turned around, after all. I can’t watch a freakin’ football game on Sunday without being nagged because I haven’t turned any men in for domestic abuse lately, but I don’t see the TV networks offering equal time to discussions of bad mothering or serial monogamy.
So when we’re discussing these topics in the MANosphere, the one place in the universe where we’re allowed to discuss them (for now), I don’t think we should apologize for trying to stick to the topic, or allow ourselves to be distracted by demands that we give equal time to bashing men. If we give men the benefit of the doubt, so what?
I know that’s not what Elspeth was asking for, but that’s where we end up when things go in the direction of “men are bad too and it’s not fair if we don’t admit that.”
“I can’t watch a freakin’ football game on Sunday without being nagged because I haven’t turned any men in for domestic abuse lately”
When those ‘no more…’ commercials come on, I always say aloud: “No more blaming me for something somebody else did.”
The commercials still run but it cools the frustration a little bit.
KB …
That isn’t the only place (re: tv) KB .. I went to see the movie “Fury” and I almost left at the very beginning of the promo / commercial’s. What a shocker .. folly’world elite’s making bad polictical points.
These two, in a row, at the beginning of the promo’s was so blatantly pushing a false PC environmental cause and a truly awful Feminist violence against women rant. Both patently false.
I spoke with the manager afterwards. I told him if you do this again I’ll never watch a movie here again. I might just do that anyway.
For sure Honeycomb. It’s everywhere. And it isn’t particularly new.
The “No more…” is just somewhat recent and has been pretty frequent on networks I tend to watch.
In today’s society I often have to remind myself that I am only responsible for me, nobody else. Obviously if I were to become a parent that would change but the odds are…not great.
NOT AFRAID OF STRONG WOMAN
It is not that I am afraid of strong women. I just don’t like them.
I am not afraid of brocolli, I just don’t want to eat it.
FB ..
“I am not afraid of brocolli, I just don’t want to eat it.”
Hater !!!!
lol FB .. you mean discrimination is okay? [sarcasm]
The Brentwood woman has old fashioned values and is STRONG.
Somehow that does not seem to be right.
In today’s society I often have to remind myself that I am only responsible for me, nobody else.
Do you pay taxes?
redpillssettingyoufree,
It will be money and economic incentives but as long as there is government with authority to tax (whoever and whatever) then women will be “on top” forever and will go higher.
Life of Julia is government’s pre-emptive response to MGTOW. Think about it. Julia lives her whole life (birth, education, retirement, healthcare, death) in partnership with government. She never gets a marriage proposal, there is never a husband in her life and well, that is just fine. Just have government tax men more and make unmarried Julia as financially whole and as economically secure as any wife. That is basically where we are at with bachelor taxes like the Affordable Care Act. The ACA would not even be thought of if the majority of the adults in this country were married.
Fact is, women will just more and more turn toward government (never God) for economic solutions to make them whole at the expense of men. If men choose not to “man up” and marry them because they are sluts or whatever, they will just elect legislators to tax you into giving the Julia’s of the world what they feel they are entitled to, nothing will stop that. So long as women vote and so long as there are manginas and white knights that vote with them, they will continue to reach into your pocket.
Men in the manosphere WILL be supporting the sluts/Julias of the world whether they like it or not.
Good point on the taxes Farm Boy.
Good point.
Anonymous Reader says:
October 23, 2014 at 10:00 am
Excellent points. Rosemond’s advice is generally very good; honestly I can’t say I disagree with him on much. He descibed parenting thusly: from ages 0-2 the world involves the parent revolving around the child (out of necessity), from 2 on the child must learn to revolve around the parent so as to learn to respect authority, gain autonomy and grow into an adult.
Your hypothesis about child-centered (as opposed to marriage-centered) families is one I share, especially its relationship to smaller familes with fewer children. Children from such families do not learn to share as they would with more siblings, and these marriages heighten the divorce risk due to the fact that the most intense ‘mommying’ ends sooner (the youngest kid is in school faster) leaving her with lots of idle time (that should be spent on productive things) to get dissatisfied.
The most important relationship in a family is husband-wife by an order of magnitude over any other. Take care of that one and the rest will fall into place.
Miss Jen says that she hasn’t seen a frivorce. I have never seen a divorce that wasn’t.
Even with a strict definition of frivorce, I still have not seen a divorce that wasn’t.
Re: Strong women.
I raised the red flag on that one, but it’s not because I’m afraid of strong women. Quite the contrary; I have always found weak women to be boring. My wife is a strong woman, as she should be: she’s a Cristian, and Christians are called to engage in spiritual warfare and advance God’s Kingdom on Earth. Although the ministerial roles for woman are different than those for men, the basic concept remains: all Christians are to be strong regardless of sex… all of us are to “study to show thyself approved”… all of us are to “Put on the whole armor of God.”
My last girlfriend was not strong in any way I ever divined, I found her lacking because of it, and I dropped her like a hot potato when I met my wife. I have a strong personality and if I had ended up with a weak woman I would have crushed her. I prefer a woman who can hold up her end of things… who wants to live with a mouse?
But when a modern woman like the Craig’s List gold-digger advertizes herself as a STRONG WOMAN [TM], she doesn’t mean that she’s the kind of woman my wife or mother are – she’s telegraphing that she’s a high-maintenance ball-buster. It’s like they’re issuing a challenge to men: “Are you man enough to handle me?”
I’ll pass on that.
Farm Boy
I am not afraid of brocolli, I just don’t want to eat it.
Not even as part of a hand-crafted sammich?
Anonymous Reader and Hurting,
Thanks for your comments. I shall dig out Rosemond’s book. It does make sense to me that a marriage be centred on the couple, and everything else stems from that.
Perhaps the lack of this, therefore is the reason so many marriages are collapsing?
And yes, AR, this trend *does* seem to coincide with the ‘child belongs to Mother’ atitude, as opposed to ‘child belongs to Father’, which worked quite well in the past.
About small number of children, again I see your points…
Freeriker and Cail,
Sure, I agree with you. It does make sense that *in general* a MANosphere is not overly concerned with a woman’s problems, no matter how deserving she is. On the other hand, I also know that individual men can get very sympathetic if he believes her to be properly wronged, and even when she is NOT wronged, he is sympathetic anyway! See how empathic Deti got about Monica Lewinsky, and it is pretty clear she shouldn’t be anyone’s first choice for such empathy…
My point was that if Elspeth’s point was a general one, then well and good. But this Deborah woman fails to evoke tears in *me*, let alone the target of her venom (men), precisely because she very definitely has shown herself to be unworthy of such benevolence. Ironically, she evokes *less* sympathy than Monica Lewinsky…
Funny ol’ world, ain’t it?
OT: Poor nice guy wonders why chivalry is dead. Gets ripped up in comments by both red pillers and feminists.
http://elitedaily.com/dating/sex/why-chivalry-is-dead-from-a-mans-perspective/
Strong, shmong.
Takes more strength to be quiet and submissive than to bark off at the mouth and take government checks.
My Mom and Grandmothers were strong ladies. But, of course, they were not ball busters. It is important to differentiate between the two. However ball buster is rather inflammatory. Perhaps we need a more sanitary term for future usage.
I have published a post about relationships if anyone would care to give feedback. http://theasdgamer.wordpress.com/2014/10/23/managing-your-relationship-with-your-wifegirlfriend/
Honeycomb @ 12:46 pm:
“As for being “tall” .. I have been told, before, “you’re not tall enough to ride this ride!” I am only 5′ 8″ .. so being an average to socially short man I can sympathize.”
Don’t be too hard on yourself. I break the 6’3″ barrier but women never were attracted to my height.
The consistency of women’s online profiles leaves me thinking that getting a man is not what women really want. I think their notorious height requirement is either a proxy for dominance or a way to prove that no man is good enough for them.
That’s not a sammich!
This is a sammich:
Beefy, that article was painful to read. I was amazed at this little bit of blue-pill wisdom [Emphasis added]: Eventually, I feel that women will wise up and start asking for the things that they deserve, the things used to be automatic and expected of men, like holding a door, pulling out a chair, and paying for dinners.
Did he actually use the word deserve? Good grief. He just got done saying that getting a woman in bed was as easy as sending a text message in the hook-up culture… then he turned right around and said that the women deserve whining and dining? Why? I noted earlier that most women don’t understand statistical probability… I’ll add that most women and most blue-pill men also don’t understand supply-and-demand, either. When did schools stop teaching basic economics?
If there is an enormous supply of something relative to demand, the price of it goes down. It is meaningless to talk about what something is “worth” apart from this simple definition: the exact market value of something you want to sell is the maximum that someone will give you for it. The exact market value of something you want to buy is the minimum someone will take for it. It’s really not complicated, and to say that the market value of something is even one penny more than what someone will spend on it is a logical absurdity. I’ve argued with salespeople who told me that something was “worth” far more than they price they were quoting to me. They legitimately didn’t seem to understand that the sticker price is their asking price, but if nobody is willing to pay it, it’s not worth that much. It’s certainly not worth that much to me, and if they want me to buy it they’ll have to lower the price to whatever I’m willing to pay. BATNA and ZOPA… they’re real things, and they apply in the SMP just like they do in any market. (Probably worthy of a post by themselves.)
So… the young blue-pill author thinks that women who put out for a text message and half a bag of skittles deserve better. In economic terms he thinks that vag is under-priced. But if girls are willing to “sell” access to the “V” for a text and half a bag of skittles, then that’s what it’s “worth.” If a guy wants to pay more than that, in terms of his time and money, he’s bidding up. He’s going to end up paying a premium, then because he’s a blue-pill guy, rather than admit that he’s a sucker, he’s going to complain that he’s getting the same service as the guys who didn’t overpay, as if the other guys took advantage of the “sellers” in some fashion.
But the kinds of girls who spread their legs promiscuously are not “worth” a lot of effort. If that’s all a guy wants, he can get it pretty cheaply is he has a bit of game. If he wants more than that he needs to move up-market and stop looking for a Bentley at the local Kia dealerships. The women who are worth a man’s time aren’t the ones putting out for skittles. They’re demanding – and can get – the kinds of prices he’s willing to pay.
The other thing he doesn’t understand is that everyone in the market is both a buyer and a seller. The girls are getting something they want as well. He thinks that forgoing the transaction costs them nothing, but that’s not how they see it – they want to get with the guys, too. And since all the girls are competing for the top guys, the “price” has to be low or the guys will “buy from a different seller.”
Deserve… /snort.
“The Brentwood woman has old fashioned values and is STRONG.
Somehow that does not seem to be right.
“
Ah, but Madame has sophisticated Continental tastes, so when she says “strong” she means “like French cheese”.
Camembert, an Epoisses, perhaps a cheeky little Reblochon.
LOL… whining and dining should have been wining and dining.
Tam ye Bam
Ah, but Madame has sophisticated Continental tastes, so when she says “strong” she means “like French cheese”.
Camembert, an Epoisses, perhaps a cheeky little Reblochon.
Or maybe more like Limburger..
Lyn: You were right the first time too, lol
Gunner Q says:
Height is the biggest factor in a man’s physical attractiveness to women. Most women would agree “the taller the better” but, at a minimum, the man must be taller than her. This puts short men and tall women at a mating disadvantage, a bit moreso for short men.
The height requirement is a quick-and-dirty filter for dominant men. It isn’t a very precise method but cave-women needed a way to guess how well a man could ward off a sabertooth cat. Without Facebook and Cosmo what’s a girl to do?
Look, I agree that many women today are narcissistic, spoiled, whiny, entitled brats, but this is because society lets them get away with being such without consequences, or at least tells them that they ought to be able to get away with being such without consequences, and blames men for such consequences. I don’t necessarily agree that this is because women are intrinsically that way, at least not to any significantly greater degree than men. If society told a similar message to men we’d have many more narcissistic, spoiled, whiny, entitled men. I think we’re all agreed the problem is women thinking themselves entitled to equal (or greater) rights without equal responsibilities, but I’d really like to see a debate sometime on the three major strains of the men’s rights movement, which correspond of course to the three possible courses of action.
1) Deny women equal rights, as a cost of men’s greater responsibilities. (True traditionalism, not SoCon/TradCon fakery.)
2) Demand that women accept equal responsibilities.
3) Refuse to shoulder the traditional responsibilities. (MGTOW).
I would assume that most Christian posters here are in favor of 1), but I simply don’t see how that has any chance of success in our society currently. Option 3) ends up destroying society in the process. I just don’t see how there is any option other than 2), with 3) being the nuclear threatpoint.
Most women would agree “the taller the better”
Judge me by my size they do?
I used to do a lot of online dating. I have probably received 500 or so inquiries from women who resemble Deborah. I will provide my gloss on her self-description, which is typical of women of a certain age and circumstances. Also, I’m 57, and thus ‘age-appropriate’ as the feminine imperative would prescribe. I apologize for the long post.
(In the past 15 years I’ve dated one woman my age and she a) is a former ballet dancer who still trains; b) we have an unlikely coincidence in our past, as the one time I was carted off the field on a spine board, she was a cheerleader for the other team); and c) she is a senior partner now for a major DC law firm, and thus has an inkling of what it is like to work oneself into the ground for a few decades.
Deborah proclaims:
“My husband and my marriage has been over a little over a year after he walked out and feel that I want to start dating again. I keep my figure up, weigh 106 lbs, 5’3″ and put on my makeup and dress appropriately for my age of 57.”
She introduces herself by way of grievance. Any man dating her will be reminded repeatedly of her betrayal. Secondly, she’s probably 115, but in any event, she thinks 106 at age 25 or 35 is the same as 105 at 57. It’s not. The differences are staggering. “Dressing appropriately”: she will dress poorly, because a well-dressed woman doesn’t defensively promote her wardrobe.
“*But I have tried the “new type of dating” since I haven’t dated since 1979 and married in 1980, so I have signed up on 5 dating sites, some free, most not -JDate since I am Jewish, Match, OurTime for those over 50, OKCupid wihich is free and not Zoosk, which I am thinking I won’t sign up for a paid subscription.”
She’s either poor, or cheap. Spending a few bucks a month to meet men is unreasonable to her. She’s entitled to meet men for free. Good luck dating her; bring lots of money, all your dinner checks are yours. She won’t even spend $20/month to make herself available to men.
“Yes, I am lonely, and do love men, even though my husband hurt me deeply.”
She’s a victim, in case you didn’t notice the first time, and her grievance is your problem too.
“But, when I look at the profile photos of the men on these dating sites, they turn my stomach, and feel these men have no idea just how bad they look, older than their years on their profile, fat, scruffy, and look like they have been road hard, put away wet, and don’t have a clue that most women who are my age, will not find them the least bit attractive, surely not to date. Most just look like they are narcissists, and self centered, and think us women want to go out with a fish, or boat or souped up car, because that is what these guys pose with and many don’t even smile on their profiles. Are their teeth rotten or do they just hate life? Not sure about any of this.”
There’s no such thing as the SMP. She is entitled to the same men, age adjusted, as she was at 20. As a feminist, she subscribes to the cultural marxist idea that attractive men should desire women precisely in the manner women wish. The fishermen and hot-rodders, who are the natural market for an angry, grievance-ridden woman of zero accomplishment at age 57? They are beneath her. Because her ideology says so. There’s no such thing as preference, biology, or markets, in respect of intersexual dynamics.
“What I do know is I have more self esteem and want anyone I date to clean up their act too. These men, aver the age of 50, want us women to look good, even thin and sexy, but do they? Nope.”
Something is wrong with men. The right ones are not approaching her. The wrong ones are. It’s as though there is a sexual marketplace out there, expressing preference and biology. Obviously, as a feminist, she knows that’s not possible. Good Men just want to date slim women like her who have accomplished nothing in life and have nothing to offer except her enlightened grievances. Where are the Good Men? She has a vagina, and she’s ready to go out with them, provided they do all the work and pay for everything.
“These men are also rude, crude and disrespectful of women, and think that we are devoid of having a brain, or carrying on a conversation. To even try and screen out some of the men that are NOT a fit for me at all, I put in my profile that I love the theater, the ballet, the arts, as most men on these dating sites wouldn’t know what a tutu is, or who Picasso is. LOL Too bad it’s so pathetic:(”
The men who do approach her do so cynically. How dare they? It’s as though they’ve never met a woman of zero accomplishment and average looks, with an elderly body, and severe grievances about her past relationship(s). Haha, she throws out Picasso and the word ‘tutu’: this is code for she’s an intellectual and an arts enthusiast, though of course she’s not. She just affects that, so that a man her age of significant accomplishment and resources, who is thin and muscular and smart and has the world at his feet, takes her out and buys her dinner. Or better, flies her to his second home. Hahaha, it’s not like men know anything about art or the Mariinsky, and of course, she doesn’t know ‘art’ from People Magazine. Who’s George Balanchine, anyway?
***
I’ve gotten, seriously, 500 inquiries from people like Deborah.
Here’s what she doesn’t understand:
a. there are always two people in the room during divorce, and if she wants to play Victimology, I’ve got references for her to family court, CPS, and VAWA — all of which I’m familiar with, as is every man who’s been to the divorce fire. And if I introduces those items to a respectable woman, she’s heading for the exits.
b. men her age who are of the stripe she believes are worthy of her, i) have been working their butts off for 35 years; ii) have very, very serious developed interests (e.g., art, sport, aviation, design, renovation, gardening, writing, Porsches, shall I continue?). This is because to be successful in work, they acquire habits of study and application; anything they’re interested in, by age 57, they have *thousands of hours* invested in understanding. So some angry dowager drops the word “Picasso” and they’re supposed to be wowed? A man of 57 might have a subscription to the National Symphony, belong to the Philips, have 4000 hours of flying time, own two or three houses, cultivate heirloom roses, have his furniture designs manufactured under license — and own a software company. Meanwhile, Deborah wants him to take her out to dinner because she knows what a ‘tutu’ is, and by that we don’t mean an Anglican Bishop.
c. men her age, of the socio-sexual status she believes she deserves, have options. Those options include women as young as 25. A chubby 25 year-old with a great smile and a mattress on the floor is more fun than an angry 57 year-old with a butt that has the consistency of cottage cheese, a brain that has never accomplished anything, and a bank account that is never opened to buy a guy so much as a cup of coffee. A 40 year-old woman who’s been training and sporting and working for 15 years? She’s probably better built than the average 25 year-old, plus she has the smarts not to rail on a good guy if she meets one. A 50 year-old woman who stumbles into an accomplished man? She will pledge commitment on the first or second date, tearfully.
Deborah needs to find her level, as water finds its level, in the SMP. It’s likely a 70 year-old guy living on SS, or a modest pension, with no interests other than TV and his annual camping trip. If she wants younger, she needs to subscribe to Hot Rod, Field and Stream, and learn to ride back seat on a Harley.
What women like Deborah don’t understand, that the men she desires do understand:
While she was sitting around doing jackshit for 35 years, the men were getting up at 5 and sweating performance reviews and trying to be charming to their bosses and investors, and trying to get to the gym, and trying to get to the children’s recitals, and trying to keep their personal interests functional and real. While doing “their fair share” of the housework, so the SAHM didn’t feel like a SAHM.
So now Deborah is ready to start living. My response to these women is always, “You give me back the last 30 years of my life, and every hour I did not have with my children, with people I love or like, you give me a vacation I never took in my 30’s. Then, no problem. I will be thrilled to take care of you too, and for the next 30.”
Jen’s a lot easier. She’s a pink shirt. If you disagree with her, she will call you a misogynist. Once in a while, this is fun, if she’s sexy and skilled and smart. They usually shut up when they are being appropriately serviced. Jesus allowed such women to wash his feet with their tears and their hair, after insulting them by way of test, and occasionally they saw the value in that.
But, basically, Jen’s a Pharisee and if you don’t play by her rules, and you don’t want to indulge her sex pozzie outlook, she will quote a magazine and call you a misogynist. In a few years, by her rulebook, she’ll also call the government (Romans) down on your head.
@BuenaVista
Jen is badly in need of salvation. Much like the original Pharisees, she thinks her righteousness as defined by society’s standards will make her a “good person”.
Little does she know she is busy hanging millstones around children’s necks. And that’s what this war really is about: a spiritual war to destroy as many of God’s children as possible—whether by murdering them before they are born, placing them in fatherless broken homes, or teaching them paganism and not to believe in what Jesus of Nazareth said.
“Did God really say that?” – the devil, circa 4000 B.C.
Holy crap. To attempt conversation with a troll like Jen is so obviously pointless that I can’t believe so many people spent so much time doing so. What’s the deal? Got tired of watching paint dry? Why do you place so little value on your most valuable and finite asset?
(The latter question is rhetorical. I know the answer.)
Yoda is awesome.
She should target a 70 year old or so. Men in their 50s of the socio-economic status she wants can get women in their 30s and 40s.
Whenever a woman puts an ad up beginning any one of her bullet points on her list with…”A man who isn’t afraid of…” She is implicitly front-loading a shaming strategy. Usually her demand is finished with…”Afraid of a strong, independent Latina” (or black woman, or “educated” used to code “uppity white girl”).
“Isn’t afraid of…being with a strong, single mom”
“Isn’t afraid of cherishing and smothering the woman he loves with ….(cooking, trips, CASH, attention, mowing the lawn, etc).
Really, women have been employing these “man up”, shaming and other techniques since Eve gave Adam the apple. It’s just funny to see how language gets twisted, perverted to code their demands as being reasonable.
Btw, hope no men on here are “Afraid of a strong, voluptuous BBW, with three kids” Because there’s plenty of them left to date.
enrique432 says:
October 24, 2014 at 8:32 am
“Btw, hope no men on here are “Afraid of a strong, voluptuous BBW, with three kids” Because there’s plenty of them left to date.”
I was very afraid; to the point where I avoided it completely. That is why I eventually met and married a fine young Filipina. I was not looking for someone that young and dismissed her for quite a while as age inappropriate. Her mother eventually convinced me that she was not too young. BTW her mother met her father when she was a freshman in the college course he was teaching. Large age differences are very typical in couples in that area of the Philippines. There is a down side to marrying the traditional woman; one which, on the whole, is still preferable. Long ago, as I was about to graduate from one of the military academies I discussed with a classmate whether to get married (we were all male at that point). He said he could not marry until he decided for sure if he was going to stay in the military for a career. I asked how that had any bearing. He said if he was to stay in he military he would be away from home a great deal of the time and his wife would have to be a very strong and independent woman. If he was going to get out after the minimum service period, then the last thing he would want is a strong independent woman constantly battling him for dominance. This young man was wise beyond his years.
I have been with strong independent women and have suffered because of it. Home becomes one more battlefield instead of a refuge. I have also been married to the smartest woman I have ever known. She got two masters degrees in the time I got one; and she had two pregnancies while she was doing it; and we were both working full time and had two other children in the home. Yet, she was not what the feminist call a strong independent woman. She knew her strengths and she knew mine. We had discussed and mapped out our areas of responsibility and she respected mine, as I respected hers. She unfortunately died very young. Now to the definitely not independent Filipina; she is no push over, but she was raised in a very traditional small village, in a strongly patriarchal society. She had never gone anywhere without being escorted by a male relative. This included any dates we went on (two years). The only place she willingly goes on her own now is to work. I have fought long and hard not to go to baby showers and bridal showers as she insists that we should be attached at the wrists and ankles. Her mother pushes this as well, so I am fighting at long odds. She has no concept of money as this should be handled by men, and not women. She eagerly accepts the man’s role as the head of the house hold. This means I make all decisions, and she is apparently capable of making none on her own. This does not mean she is bashful about making her opinions known. There are many things that I care little to zero about, to include which sheets to buy, but decide I must. All in all she is sweet and wonderful as a wife, but it does get to be a little tiring.
How will she provide for herself if you die before she does Mike? That is a huge danger I see there. Though I do share your disdain for a “strong independent woman.”
enrique,
To add to your comment about women using the whole “men who aren’t afraid” meme, I have only one thing to say: Proverbs 1:7: “Fear of the LORD is the foundation of true knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and discipline.”
Fear is truly the beginning of knowledge. Men understand this and use it gain wisdom and correction in their lives. Women think that fear is a weakness and thus foolishly consider vain pride as a strength. Oh wait, I guess the PC word for that is “game”. Yeah, not buying that bull either. When a woman like Deborah claims that she despises men who have certain misgivings and or rational fears about certain undesirable and rather dangerous traits, she is displaying her disgust for wisdom and thus presents herself a fool.
Eve gave Adam the apple
How would things have turned out if she had given him a sammich?
This guy isn’t afraid of big women.
http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/10/23/wed-man-walking-2/
He is just afraid of standing on his own two feet. He will be red pill in a few years whether he want to or not
I come to this site from time to time, mostly because I think it’s good practice to challenge the views I hold. I’m an atheist female who married at 29 — the age at which, if I’ve read your posts right, my face caves in and I become a banshee or something. Thank God I found some beta schmuck just as I was hitting the wall, right?
Anyways, I enjoy this site because I usually find something interesting to think about that I hadn’t considered before. I’ve enjoyed considering whether men don’t work as hard now because sex can be obtained without marriage. Or whether we are undervaluing some of the benefits of early marriages. I like the fact that there are people out there who don’t think that couples need to be completely settled before entering into marriage (something my friends all believe, but which I have never for the life of me understood).
But lately, my friends, the level of your hate for women has disappointed me. Like the time Dalrock had to actually point out that you shouldn’t attack a particular woman. Or now that you’re hating on a woman who has stated that she was left by her husband. Somehow, it was still her fault. She must have been a nagging shrew or something. She’s looking for love, lonely and re-entering the dating game — and you slam her for being 57 and not 20. So much for Christian sympathy. 😦
Then I read this:
She doesn’t get to make that decision. She OBEYS. Husband says I want children, she says “…okay, how many do you want? Lets go to bed as soon as you want and we’ll make one.” That is marriage.
I wasn’t sure whether to laugh or cry at this, because the poster clearly doesn’t understand that you should actually give a shit about your wife’s feelings when you get married and not be a sociopath.
So my friends, I think I have to leave this site. The hate and callousness now outweighs the thoughtful posts. I know some of you will hate me no matter what, but for the moderate guys out there:
I’m sorry that your experiences with women have been so negative that you’ve now decided to hate us en masse, or think that you can figure out why we’ve been getting more progressively evil by looking at some charts. I’m sorry if you’ve been left by your wife and you’re hurting. I agree with your assessment that some women are bat-shit crazy, inconsiderate, and basically leeches. I’m sorry that we live in a time where it’s okay to be openly sexist towards men but not women. But I hope you’ll consider seeing us (or if that’s too hard, me) as people again. There are loads of women out there who are also invisible to men — but we don’t really mention it because it’s a bit of a taboo. It’s socially embarrassing to have to admit that no man has ever wanted you — and since men supposedly want to have sex with anything that moves, surely there’s really something REALLY wrong with you if no guy has ever shown interest, right? We’re not all dicks, waiting to eff up your life and steal your things.
Take care,
Diana
Diana,
That was me. I am no sociopath. What I gave is straight Biblical commandment. Genesis 3-16. She obeys. That is morality. God’s law. You are an atheist so right off the bat, I can’t imagine why you would want to get married other than to get access to cash and prizes at the expense of your husband. Why on secular Earth would any woman want to marry a man she does not want to obey in all things?
You can’t have equality in a marriage. Can’t be done Diana. Think about it, he wants to buy one house and you want to buy another one. Who wins Diana? You both get a vote because you are married and partners and we live in this fine Republic called the United States where you can vote, so who breaks the tie? If you are both equal (neither having to obey the other) then the tie could never be broken and no matter what, you are both going to be unhappy. He wants to go to one church, you want to go to another, who breaks the tie? He wants 2 kids and she wants no kids, who breaks the tie? You get it?
You see marriage is not a Democracy. That is your feminist imperative talking. Marriage is a property relationship. The wife is the “property” of the man. The father gives away his “property” to the man at the time of the wedding. She is now the husband’s “property.” And women want to be given away, feminism can’t crush that most basic fundamental aspect. Wife obeys the husband. He is the master.
Don’t let the door hit you on the @ss on the way out.
How could any of us hate you? We don’t even know you. Worrying about your feelings is none of our concern. We are not going to waste any of our energy feeling anything towards you. You are husband’s problem, not ours. And any person who feels that their thoughts are so important that they need to write a super farewell after only lurking and never posting, that is a very strange personality disorder Diana. You really think you are that important?
There might not be anything “wrong” with you. You are probably just ugly.
And so….
You too.
I’ve enjoyed considering whether men don’t work as hard now because sex can be obtained without marriage.
I’ve enjoyed considering whether men don’t work as hard now because sex can’t be obtained with marriage or without (for boatloads of men).
I’m late to this one, but I guarantee you Deb has bought into the whole nine yards of new age Feminism.
Anyone over the age of 45 who buys into or mentions their “self-esteem” has issues.
Taking my thought a bit further, Deborah mentions her self-esteem, Pablo Picasso and Ballet.
Okay, she knows what those things are, but, other than that, what are Deborah’s actual accomplishments? I see something about her husband leaving, and the rest is filler.
Personally, Ballet bores me and I understand Picasso and, therefore, don’t care for him. So, what does this gal actually have to offer other than “self-esteem?”
Oh, so many gems with this one.
I’m an atheist female who married at 29 — the age at which, if I’ve read your posts right, my face caves in and I become a banshee or something. Thank God I found some beta schmuck just as I was hitting the wall, right?
So are you saying you didn’t have your sexual fun with your Alphas or thugs before you settled down? Were you a virgin when you got married? No carousel for you?
Or now that you’re hating on a woman who has stated that she was left by her husband. Somehow, it was still her fault. She must have been a nagging shrew or something.
Because, you’ve not been paying attention for the last 40 years on how Oprah and everything else on TV have been saying, ad naseum, that everything that happens in a relationship is a man’s fault? And so one site in one corner of the Manosphere is just not being fair. Awwwwwww.
She’s looking for love, lonely and re-entering the dating game — and you slam her for being 57 and not 20. So much for Christian sympathy. 😦
Nice manipulation there, tying one’s Christianity into whether or not we feel sorry for a woman who’s “looking for love.” I wonder if there’s a commandment in the Bible about that. Wait you don’t know anything about the Bible, do you.
Especially when she does not make clear the reason(s) for her husband walking out, which pretty much guarantees it is her fault, because there’s no way she wouldn’t have mentioned all that he had done, had he been at fault.
And this same woman has the nerve, at her age, to be picky and critical of the men that respond. Where’s her sympathy for the men that are looking for love?
I wasn’t sure whether to laugh or cry at this, because the poster clearly doesn’t understand that you should actually give a shit about your wife’s feelings when you get married and not be a sociopath.
Oh, you mean the same way frivorcing women actually give a crap about financially raping their husbands, and what divorce might do to the children? Or the way that wives withhold sex from their husbands, because they care so much about their husband’s needs? Like that?
So my friends, I think I have to leave this site. The hate and callousness now outweighs the thoughtful posts. I know some of you will hate me no matter what
As always, Captain Narcissism guides your ship. None of us were thinking about you before you posted this, and none of us will think of you again.
I’m sorry that your experiences with women have been so negative that you’ve now decided to hate us en masse, or think that you can figure out why we’ve been getting more progressively evil by looking at some charts. I’m sorry if you’ve been left by your wife and you’re hurting. I agree with your assessment that some women are bat-shit crazy, inconsiderate, and basically leeches. I’m sorry that we live in a time where it’s okay to be openly sexist towards men but not women. But I hope you’ll consider seeing us (or if that’s too hard, me) as people again. There are loads of women out there who are also invisible to men — but we don’t really mention it because it’s a bit of a taboo. It’s socially embarrassing to have to admit that no man has ever wanted you — and since men supposedly want to have sex with anything that moves, surely there’s really something REALLY wrong with you if no guy has ever shown interest, right?
And of course, then, you are putting your great sympathy towards men into action by fighting for men’s rights? Trying to get the legal system changed so that divorce and family laws are more equitable all the way around, yes? So that men are seen as people and all; not ATMs and indentured servants. Maybe there’s a reason that the Manosphere exists, but that kind of thinking might be above your pay grade.
Loads of invisible women? Oh I see that Captain Projection is also your first mate. Because of course there aren’t loads of perfectly good men that would love nothing more than to love a wife and be loved in return. Oh wait, Miss 57-not-20 talks about FILTERING OUT UNACCEPTABLE MEN IN HER POST. It must be nice to have a power even Superman doesn’t have, Selective Reading Vision. I think you have to be from Planet Estrogen to have that under a yellow sun.
We’re not all dicks, waiting to eff up your life and steal your things.
The only women that say things like that are old, fat, and ugly.
The young pretty ones that men are actually attracted to are busy using phrases like “starter husband” and “ewwww” and “let’s just be friends.” All of which is Femtonian for “dude you seriously don’t make me wet enough.”
The only other women that are asking for “sympathy” from the Evil Manosphere Empire are women who are ex- or current carousel riders who are about to hit the wall and have had a Come to Jesus moment, or tools like Emma Watson who still have their pick of men but are complaining about being called “bossy” at the age of eight and “you men need to do something about that.”
It sure would be fun if guys could make up a reality in their heads, and then talk to everyone around them like that movie playing in their brains was actually what life was like.
@redpillsetmefree…it may be that not all women are dicks waiting to eff up our lives and steal our stuff, but recent history tells us that we’d be foolish not to approach dating with that attitude.
It sure would be fun if guys could make up a reality in their heads, and then talk to everyone around them like that movie playing in their brains was actually what life was like.
Indeed. That would be fun. And when reality doesn’t agree with the script, demand that reality be changed. And get extra “feel-good” points by aggressively making those demands. What a life…
@Blake
It may be that not all women are dicks waiting to eff up our lives and steal our stuff, but recent history tells us that we’d be foolish not to approach dating with that attitude.
Recent history and actual legalities as well.
-She can ruin your life with just an accusation of sexual impropriety. Said impropriety is whatever she says it is. No proof required.
-She can retroactively decide that any sex at any point in time in her life was rape. Just because her feelings about it change.
-Her benefits in a marriage and a divorce are guaranteed by law; there are no such guarantees for men.
-She has every possible reproductive option and right; as a man, you have none.
-Women can get on TV and joke about men being mutilated and brutally killed by women. Because the men must’ve deserved it. Men can’t joke within a woman’s earshot without risking losing their jobs over it.
-Said divorce benefits include, in some US states, alimony for life. You have to pay her for the fact that you used to be married to her. And child support is not based on the needs of the child, but rather, how much money can the state force you to give her?
-Our 57 year old friend proves that at no point do women ever think they have to settle for less than the perfect man; they are supposed to always get what they want, regardless of what they bring to the table.
-They now, in the US, are more educated, more employed, more paid, and have every social right that there can possibly be, but Emma Watson says that is STILL not enough.
-Hillary Clinton may indeed become the first female President; all during the campaign, every question asked of her will be deemed misogynistic and unfair, and her supporters will shriek, “It shouldn’t matter that she’s a woman! It doesn’t matter that she’s a woman!” …..And then when she wins it will be, “Behold, our first WOMAN President.”
Poor women. They have it so rough.
And look at us selfish, insensitive men, making blog posts. Is there no end to our cruelty??
@redpillsetmefree.
Most men will claim that “She’d never do that to me” right up until she actually does. I know, I was one of them. (they tend to give you warning signs, but, at least in my case, I didn’t want to blow up my family. However, she didn’t care and blew up our family anyway) Unfortunately, our kids paid the price, in the end.
Most men will claim that “She’d never do that to me” right up until she actually does. I know, I was one of them. (they tend to give you warning signs, but, at least in my case, I didn’t want to blow up my family. However, she didn’t care and blew up our family anyway) Unfortunately, our kids paid the price, in the end.
Wow. Dude, so sorry to hear that.
All the more reason we’ve got to maintain the integrity of whatever Manosphere spaces we have. We need to educate each other and other men entering the dating scene.
Do you get to see your kids on the regular?
@redpillsetmefree, oh, it was a couple of decades ago. My story in the annals of divorce is unique is some respects, but, overall, it’s the “rinse and repeat” of what’s been going on the last two or three decades. I got both sides in my divorce. The churchians and the government both screwed me. I may have been ahead of the curve.
Thank you for the condolences, though. It happened and I learned from it, however.
Blake,
Wow Blake, I’m sorry. How old are the kids? I’ve found that when the kids get older, they realize what a frivorce is and they tend to gravitate towards dad. She can’t really brainwash that out of them if they ask enough questions of their father and he is willing to honest about what kind of person their mother is.
The friends of mine whose wives did that to them, their kids are now starting to get old enough to figure out the bad guy in the divorce was their mom and they are increasingly spending more time with their dads. A couple even asked the judge to grant their dad full custody even with mom crying tears of losing child support in the courtroom.
The friends of mine whose wives did that to them, their kids are now starting to get old enough to figure out the bad guy in the divorce was their mom and they are increasingly spending more time with their dads. A couple even asked the judge to grant their dad full custody even with mom crying tears of losing child support in the courtroom.
Yes I’ve seen that as well….it happened a friend of mine as well. His wife asked for a divorce, and he later found out that she’d been sending naked pictures to another guy in Florida. A guy that she’s married to now. The kids saw the truth.
But now it looks like everyone’s all smiles, and he even visits his grandkids down there with his ex and her new Mr. So……
innocentbystanderboston, our kids are all in their thirties and you’re right, the kids have definitely gravitated toward me. However, I, for the most part, kept my mouth shut and let the kids eventually figured out just what their mother is.
A couple of things that make me sigh, though. My ex-wife and I never talk. The only thing we have in common are the children, but, anything I might say about our kids she will repeat to our kids and repeat it in such a fashion so as to make me look bad. Also, the ex still says stuff about me to our kids. It’s rather mind-boggling, to be honest. Seriously, it’s been over 2 decades since our divorce and she’s remarried, yet, for some reason, she still hasn’t moved on.
As for custody, if you’re patient, you can usually take them away from mom. Speaking from experience.
However, beyond a certain age, the parents don’t have much say about custody. If a child decides they want to live with the non-custodial parent, there’s not much the custodial parent can do about it.
Exactly. You “won.” Kids grow up and figure this out. At 8, they don’t know, they just want to be with mom. At 18, they put it together and can properly assign blame.
And you now 30-something kids are on to her, so it doesn’t matter. She can’t set the narrative anymore no matter how much BS she slings.
That is not surprising at all. Sounds to me like she doesn’t have any self-esteem (or if she does, its very low.) She probably regrets what she did 20+ years ago but pride gets in the way of her acknowledging her own failings. So that would most definately prevent her from moving on….
It’s rather mind-boggling, to be honest. Seriously, it’s been over 2 decades since our divorce and she’s remarried, yet, for some reason, she still hasn’t moved on.
Women never get over things. And I mean anything. Anything.
It’s why God commands them to be virgins when they get married, and to be married to the right men; that way the imprint will be one of righteousness. And it will be singular. Because it most certainly will be lifelong.
If not, they will imprint with their first the longest and every other man will be blamed from that point forward for not being him.
And, even if they manage to trade up after their first, they will want to parade him in front of their ex to show them how much better they’re doing now.
Because even if they deem you a loser and unworthy of them, if they slept with you, the imprint is there, and the need to prove their validation from a higher status man in front of the ex is never ending.
If they can’t do that, and sometimes even if they can, they’ll just poison the children. Because SOMEBODY has to pay. Somebody not named “the woman.”
How is it possible to have at the same time too much pride and too little self-esteem? Does not compute. It would require massive delusion to hold both at once.
innocentbystander, actually, it’s just the opposite, the ex has a ton of self-esteem. However, she has zero accomplishments to go with all of the self-esteem.
redpill, my ex-wife is the poster child when it comes to imprinting.
I hope no one here thinks I’m complaining or bear any ill will toward my ex. I won’t claim I didn’t hold a grudge at one time, but, I got over it, moved on and eventually remarried.
God gave me everything I needed in my second wife. I just wish it wouldn’t have taken so long. Either that, or, I wasn’t smart enough to realize that God had a plan and I just needed to be patient. (Yeah, I’m going with option 2)
Agreed.
First fiance lost her virginity to her uncle through incestuous molestation. Then he died so I could never confront him, nor could she heal the wounds he inflicted upon her in childhood. Yes, I was blamed (by her) for all the sins of men. I was blamed because I had a penis and I was there. Her uncle penitrating her hymen did so much destruction to her… I personally believe that her losing her virginity through incest was the reason she was BPD. I thought that it didn’t matter how awful she treated me, I had to UNDO the damage her uncle hath wrought by hanging in there and standing by her through all her BS and emotional chaos. I was wrong. I could not save her and had to leave her before we were to be married.
Disagree.
I think this parading tends to happen only if she HAS to be around her ex for whatever reason (because they had kids together.) I have known quite a few men who violated Luke 16:18 and in doing so, their wives simply refused to ever introduce their current husband to their previous one. They didn’t have to flaunt him because they didn’t have children with husband number one. There is absolutely no reason for her to be around number one, a person she will always deem a loser.
Now if she did have children with number one and she feels she has traded up, then of course, ex husband is going to feel like husband number two is being paraded in front of him. How could he not? Yes, that is going to make him feel like shit to think that the mother of his children actually succeeded in trading up…
Exfernal,
Well sure you can hold both at once. I’ll explain.
Pride is one of the seven deadlies, a terrible thing to have. You are too PROUD to admit when you are wrong. You just dig your heels in and never give an inch, never say you are sorry, never admit any wrong doing.
That said a person that prideful might have ZERO accomplishments in their life to actually BE proud of. As a result, they will have no self-esteem, absolutely none. This will cause them nothing but bitterness and resentment towards others (others whom they can’t compare themselves to because they know there is no comparison.) They will look back on their life and see nothing of value in it….. but because because they are so prideful, they will never acknowledge that this was in anyway, their fault.
These are common traits of the BPD.
Low self esteem doesn’t exist.
Here’s an easy way to prove it. An undesirable woman says, “I’m fat, ugly and stupid! I hate myself!”
To which I would reply, “No you don’t. If you hated yourself you would be glad that you’re fat, ugly, and stupid.”
The reason a person feels bad about her (fill in the blank) is because of her pride: she thinks that she is too good to possess such flaws. It’s not that she esteems herself too little, but that her thinks of herself too highly.
The Bible says much about human pride. All of it is bad, and both too-high and too-low “self esteem” are nothing more than two ways pride manifests itself.
Lyn87,
Of course it does.
You assume too much because you assume that they are in complete control of their circumstances.
There is another option. They hate that they are fat, ugly, and stupid anknowledging that there is nothing that they can do about that. They hate that they are the way they are, but if you are stupid (and ugly) you don’t have any control over that. Fat, yes you can diet.
“Of course it does.”
Well, that settles it then. /sarc.
Please put your husband back on – or switch back to your male persona if there’s only one of you.
LOL!
There might not be anything “wrong” with you. You are probably just ugly.
I dunno. Having a bitchy personality on top of that seems like a problem to me.
Concern troll is concerned.
You’re a lucky man, TFH. I’m 5’7″ in my thick socks. That puts me about one StDev below the median height for adult males. I guess that leaves me in the “normal” range, although at the very bottom edge of it. The good news for me is that the bottom of the normal male range is still noticeably taller than the median for adult females, so I’m still taller than most women. I feel sorry for guys who are truly short… At this point on my life I only get an occasional taste of that crap sandwich – they have to eat every bite.
But you are correct that it’s more than just height relative to a particular women, but an overall sense of “physical toughness.” By that score a smallish guy like me comes up lacking a lot of the time, simply because most men are bigger than I am and some are a lot bigger than I am. Just as physical beauty in women gives the impression of fertility and health (often wrongly so), so too the appearance of “jungle survivability” is often a poor proxy for the things that make a man a good candidate to provide either good genes or good provision (AF or BB). A lot of good that did me, though.
Of the women I dated before I met my wife, two were taller than me: one was a little taller (less than an inch), and one towered over me. I didn’t care about the height difference and neither did they, but they were both exceptional in that regard. I asked the taller one to wear flats when we were together, though… she really is freakishly tall for a woman.
Short stature for men can have many deleterious effects. As you may guess, my cold approach ratio was not nearly as favorable as yours, and while success breeds success, the opposite is also true. I’ve gotten used to the idea that until people know me, they will assume that I am less (fill in the blank) than a guy who’s taller than I am. The thing is that, if IQ was manifested as height I’d be an NBA center. But while a man’s height is easy for all to see, it’s considered bad form to let on how smart you are, even though that’s arguably my “best” trait from a fitness standpoint. So I don’t try to hide my intellect – we don’t expect tall men to slouch all the time, after all. (But take just this little exchange as an example of how I have to approach this subject – you gave your height in a matter-of-fact way, but I’m not going to give my precise IQ even here, even though both are attributes over which neither of us has the slightest control.) Of course when a small guy exposes his best traits he opens himself up to charges of having a “Napoleon Complex” or “Little Big Man Syndrome,” so there’s no winning either way.
@IBB
You are conflating different things here. One could argue that according to 1 Cor 7:4 the wife’s body belongs to the husband, and the husband’s body belongs to the wife. But this has nothing to do with headship, it is about being one flesh. It also is different than the protection that husbands and fathers provide to women. For example in Numbers 30 we learn that fathers and husbands (under the old covenant) could at their discretion and within specific parameters negate a vow a woman made. But this protection required the woman to submit to the authority of either her father or a husband.
Diana, so committed are they to male faultlessness that they are now openly defending serial adulterer males (John Nesteutes at 3:19PM). I don’t know how it took you so long to notice.
Dalrock,
As a traditional conservtive I find this part the most interesting, the Biblical aspect of the protection of women. Given this (and given your recent comment about the yes means yes laws of California only applying to men) I could argue that rape laws (created by man) should only be one sided. So we protect all women from being raped by men, no matter how old he is or she is. By the same token, it would explain why the twenty-something and thrity-something year old gorgeous school teachers who have sex with their 14 year old male students, are not considered rapists by society. After all, (Biblically) we only “protect” girls/women from men, NOT young boys from women. There may be something to this about the concept that ONLY a woman could be “ruined” from premarital sex whereas a young boy (being seduced by an attractive older woman) would not be.
But that is a whole different discussion about how you and I might look at our sons and daughters (in childhood and adulthood) very differently.
Anon Reader and Hurting,
This is a classic example of the phenomenon of the ‘if a child is murdered/disappears, the parents divorce’ that I was talking about upthread. This family has been utterly destroyed by the rape/murder of their 8 year old. And now, the father has died – of alcoholism, it seems.
In this case it appears (to me) that it was the father who could not get out of the pain of the loss of the child (‘I wasn’t there to protect her’). The wife always seemed much ‘stronger’ emotionally than him, I have to say, having followed this case through the years. She was the one, for example, who forced through ‘Sarah’s law’ which now is in place in the UK, which entitles parents to know if a paedophile has moved into their area…
In other cases, it could be the mother who blames herself, eg. the mother of the 3 year old Jamie Bulger abducted and killed by two 10 year old boys…as she went shopping with him…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2815502/Michael-Payne-s-life-slipped-despair-blamed-death-daughter-finally-drank-death-father-reveals.html
It must be a very painful thing to experience…and I am not surprised it breaks marriages and families apart. There are plenty more examples I know of…
👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾I thought it was just me, because I don’t date a lot, and, I thought I missed something?! I’m 47, and I’m having the same issue(s).
By the way, you forgot about the (new?) string of pics from men, where it seems as though they are looking down/over us…wth…I haven’t a clue why that is an option to convey toward women, whoo!
I hope it isn’t vastly mutual?!