Not her marriage vow, but the vow she made to God when she asked Him to help her break her vow to God. Since He helped her break her vow to Him, she is keeping her vow to Him by helping other women break their vows to Him. Christian homeschooling mother of six Jill explains how this works in 7 Things to Expect During a Divorce:
I made a vow to God that if He would get me through this difficult time, I would use my tribulations to minister to others. He took me at my word. He is using my broken marriage, my heartache, and my mistakes to help carry other women going through a divorce.
So have faith married women, not in God, but in divorce:
I’m now thriving financially, emotionally, and spiritually. I completely give all the glory to God. I still have some sad days where I’m feeling blue, but I definitely have more good days than bad.
And so will you.
…
Before I share with you, I want you to know you are loved, and you will come out a stronger woman than you ever imagined. You might not see the light at the end of the tunnel now, but, sweet one, mark my word, you will survive this storm.
Trust me! You will amaze yourself.
Remember the message of Fireproof:
Divorce is the beginning of something wonderful…
Hat Tip: RobJ
See also:
- Put your faith in divorce.
- Intermediate guide to selling divorce; overcoming women’s better judgment.
Dominos image licensed as creative commons by aussiegall.
Thanks for giving this article it’s own platform. I feel sorry for the children spawned by this wretched woman, and hope she someday gets the comeuppance she richly deserves, for making their young lives so much more painful.
Pingback: She’s keeping her vow | Neoreactive
Pingback: She’s keeping her vow | Manosphere.com
You can’t make this up …
You can’t make this stuff up.
“Hi I’m Jill. I’m a Child of the King […]”
Honestly, I expected “Daughter of the King” or “Princess of the King.” But that’s close enough, I guess.
How is saying “God I will do X if you give me Y” any different from how the pagans used to worship?
The comment thread re: Fireproof going on over at Elizabeth’s blog might be a rich source of material for a future post as well…
http://the-end-time.blogspot.com/2015/06/why-i-do-not-recommend-kendrick.html
Seems to be positively begging for Dalrockian deconstruction.
Thriving financially. If you took any money from your husband, receive money now, or took money that he earned in the marriage then you are not thriving.
YOU are a parasite who stole money with the state as bully enforcer. You need to be accountable for that. As for God, its probably the one in the mirror you answer to.
The negative effects of divorce echo throughout the lives of everyone involved. No one disagrees with the fact that divorce has these negatives. The problem I see for Jill and all of these divorcing women is their media fueled rationalizations keep them from extrapolating these “bad days” over a lifetime. Which keeps pushing acceptance of the truth of the damage caused further and further into the future. It may not be until they are upon their death beds that true introspection happens, the veil of rationalizations drops and a flood of regret for the pain caused envelops them. Not how I would choose to spend my final moments but the truth will can only be ignored for so long.
I think however that Jill wrote this article for some narcissistic supply. For the you go girl’s! and the you’re such a strong brave woman! She seems low on support and needs some help keeping the truth at bay.
The way she treats god as a cosmic vending machine.
“I made a vow to [wait for it…Satan] that if He would get me through this difficult time, I would use my tribulations to [corrupt] others.” It’s kind of pathetic that modern women no longer have enough conviction to openly worship the Devil
She kvetches that it took the courts six months to process her divorce. She refers to herself in a previous post as a ‘single working mother’, so I gather the homeschooling is kaput. She cannot be ‘thriving financially’ unless she’s collecting masses of child-support. The line ” I’m not one to blast my ex’s dirty laundry on Facebook, so many people were surprised I was actually getting a divorce.” is an indicator that her husband’s shortcomings were rather esoteric, not things known in their circle of friends (as alcoholism would be and adultery usually is). Then there’s the incredible insistence that her children are completely unpurturbed by it all. And all wrapped in the most insipid evangelical gauze.
@Art Deco .Just because her friends said they were surprised to hear of the divorce doesn’t necessarily mean much . Even if the tension in a marriage is obvious people may pretend not to notice . It must be very rare for someone to see a marriage going downhill and try to intervene while there might be some hope of averting the divorce
Six months to process a divorce is nothing. She was a SAHM with six young children. Lots of things to fight over. The divorce could have lasted for years in some jurisdictions .And if she is thriving financially with six kids the ex must have a high income .and be paying hefty child support .She is a special snowflake .For every divorced woman who is doing well six months after the split there are dozens whose lives are getting worse with each passing month .
The typical divorcing couple is already financially overextended at the time of the initial separation . There is simply no ability to maintain two homes on the income that was previously inadequate to maintain one household.
The whore of Babylon. Or Jezebel.
Maybe we should switch from slut-shaming to divorcee shaming.
Lolzzlzozl
I would be absolutely SHOCKED if her children are happier now. Most likely they feel like there’s been a death in the family but mom won’t let them mourn.
Pingback: She’s keeping her vow | Reaction Times
“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?”
Every day it becomes easier to understand why God instructed the Israelites in the practice of stoning. And more staggering that he sent Christ.
It’s to her advantage to spread divorce as if it’s the good word of God. After all, her children need a replacement father figure that she just threw out of their lives.
Number six on her list is “[children] don’t seem to carry a grudge like adults”. After just witnessing their father being cut from their lives, they are probably too traumatized or scared to stand up to any sort of tyranny…especially the boys. The message is clear: do what you’re told, or you lose your family.
‘I made a vow to God that if He would get me through this difficult time, I would use my tribulations to minister to others.’
Three Hamsterlations, one sentence. Possibly a world record.
Instead of ministering she might consider reading that part of the Bible about her not ministering.
‘Not her marriage vow, but the vow she made to God when she asked Him to help her break her vow to God.’
Exactly. Full HuffPo. With a chummy Whoopie Goldberg starring as God.
Oh, suck it up Christian husbands! Your wives will tell you when you’ve had enough sex, so you’ll know when you’re sinning for the wrong reasons in your sex starved marriages:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/women/2015/september/new-parents-your-sex-lives-are-going-to-change.html
You’ll enjoy this commenter’s take on Fireproof. But be forwarned: This is a comment with substance! (We know this because she tells us so). Translation: “Don’t bother to challenge me. I’m right. I checked with my husband and he agrees with me. That’s why I find it necessary to do all the talking for him.”
http://the-end-time.blogspot.com/2015/06/why-i-do-not-recommend-kendrick.html?showComment=1441475700166#c6016302873047765012
“The comment thread re: Fireproof going on over at Elizabeth’s blog might be a rich source of material for a future post as well…”
Looks like that thread suddenly awakened. And someone named Carolyn floated this accusation, which went unchallenged, including by the site host. (Rev. 12: 10, 11) —
“I agree, in the church, women and children are often victims of tolerated male sin.”
Commenter Steve Sabin sent the truthmobile over for a spin, but nobody wanted a ride.
Can’t make the hosses drink.
They definitely could use instruction, and some rebuke, from an appropriate Christian here. I’d do it myself but Elizabeth banned me long ago. :O)
God truly works in mysterious ways so who are you to say that she does not have that hot-line – or perhaps cell-phone – direct to him. You are all just jealous that she is now thriving financially and even though she has some blue days (i.e. she cries herself to sleep every night) there is surely someone out there, say a secret billionaire handyman, ready to whisk her off her feet and resolve her inevitable debt problems. We all need things to believe when times are rough and thus it is cruel, so very cruel of you all to laugh at her delusions and hamsterbations at this very difficult time.
In general, I wonder if women who divorce ever reflect on what it’s cost themselves, let alone what it costs their children and ex-husbands. I suspect the occurrence is inversely proportional to the number of divorced friends they have… where there are many hamsters gathered in prayer after all.
Meanwhile aging thespian Emma Thompson (who when she was not thirty years ago playing Jane Austen heroines and getting her kit off for the camera – gee, that must have been so empowering, in a two way fight as to who had the better body with Kate – I sank the Titanic – Winslett) declares that she has since the age of nineteen been a Feminist and says that if you are not a Feminist you do not believe in equality. Does that mean that men who believe in equality must be Masculinists?
Roles are, I hear, so hard to come by for actresses in her mid-fifties: one must do something – anything – to keep from being forgotten or overlooked as ones ex-husband now Sir Kenneth Brannagh goes from strength to strength. If only she had not reached for that self-detonation Divorce button she would by now have been Lady Emma, but as it is ….
The Iron law of Opus asserts that the more a woman sees that the glittering prizes are no longer open to her the more Feminist she discovers she has always been.
“In general, I wonder if women who divorce ever reflect on what it’s cost themselves, let alone what it costs their children and ex-husbands.” Short answer is no. Financially, for example, I told my wife when she filed that she was cutting her legs off financially; i told her what I expected the outcome of the financial aspects of the divorce would be, and I offered to agree to those terms without further litigation. She scoffed (apparently because her lawyer had assured her of significantly larger amounts or — entirely possible with her — because she interpreted whatever the lawyer said as such assurances). A mutual female friend of ours, also an attorney, told her essentially the same thing. Didn’t matter. After 16 months of litigation, $40K in attorney’s fees for me, and $30K in attorney’s fees for her (which she will never pay, claiming malpractice by both her first lawyer and her second lawyer), we settled for almost exactly what I had predicted. When her overall finances were tighter than she had expected after that, did she regret filing for divorce and cutting her own legs off financially? No, it was MY fault — I had obviously cheated and out-maneuvered her lawyers, was hiding money, etc. I would not want to be her (or Jill) on Judgment Day. If they really are Christians, they won’t be going to Hell, but at least their eyes are going to be opened and they’re going to feel every bit of the unnecessary grief and pain they caused and never repented of.
The more a woman sees that the glittering prizes are no longer open to her the more Feminist she discovers she has always been.
That is golden. The corollary is usually true as well. The more privileges a woman enjoys the less she worries about being a feminist. Whichever way one looks at it, it’s all about her; she is at the very center of it all.
It appears that she is worshipping a god of her own making.
cynthia:- “God I will do X if you give me Y”
Oh Lord, won’t You buy me a Mercedes-Benz?
@Rollo,
Don’t presume that Christianity Today gets much of anything right regarding authentic Christianity. Churchianity Today would be infinitely more accurate. In fact, you could probably adopt the George Costanza “Opposite Day” strategy quite successfully to arrive at something passably Biblical: take whatever content you find there and perform a Boolean NOT operation.
I left a lengthy comment to the article under the moniker “A Pilgrim”. Let’s watch the screeching and fireworks ensue from the assembled feminists and blue pills; i.e., their entire subscriber base.
“I made a vow to God that if He would get me through this difficult time, I would use my tribulations to minister to others. He took me at my word. He is using my broken marriage, my heartache, and my mistakes to help carry other women going through a divorce.”
– A right cannot arise from a wrong.
– Deceit is an artifice, since it pretends one thing and does another.
“Before I share with you, I want you to know you are loved, and you will come out a stronger woman than you ever imagined. You might not see the light at the end of the tunnel now, but, sweet one, *mark my word*, you will survive this storm.
*Trust me!* You will amaze yourself.”
– Outward acts evidence the inward purpose. So then… let him who wishes to be deceived, be deceived.
Which god, Jill? (Luke 4:6, 7). Proof: You’ve got tons of money.
I wonder if Jill comes from money, and i’s Daddy who’s helping finance her “more peaceful” lifestyle.
Still I couldn’t help but chuckle at her post “5 Tips to keep parents from becoming Narcissists”
I’ll be she is thriving financially – six children must rake in quite a substantial child support check. And I’m waiting for women like her and the church proper to rightly condemn GOD for leaving JESUS in Mary’s womb without paying her monthly child support via the Roman Empire. GOD is a dead beat dad according to modern definitions of same but I don’t remember JESUS preaching on the evils of a lack of a ruthlessly efficient child support system inside the Roman Empire. I guess the patriarchy cut that part out of the bible as well as the part where a woman CAN and SHOULD divorce her husband for any reason. Only men may do so for marital infidelity.
@The Real Peterman,
“I would be absolutely SHOCKED if her children are happier now. Most likely they feel like there’s been a death in the family but mom won’t let them mourn.”
Yes.
My wife’s parents divorced when she was a teenager and decades later she still feels the loss, anguish, and hurt from her family fracturing. She feels like her family died.
The divorce and remarriage of one parent makes interaction with both side difficult. Divorcing parents fail to realize the increased need for diplomacy in family interactions that they force onto their children.
Actually if we want to be true to the bible a woman cannot divorce her husband. When JESUS was asked it was with regards to the husband divorcing his wife NOT the wife divorcing her husband since such would be thought of as ludicrous in the extreme back then.
Lol, keep spreading the word! These whores keep reminding men why marriage is dead and life is best spent not worrying about it. Thank the Lord, these women are doing a better job outing the marriage sham than a thousand self-immolating men ever could.
From her picture, the woman looks like another Celtic/Germanic woman who is hard at work destroying her ethnic group by embracing family destruction/conservative feminism. She uses religion as a excuse to justify all of her destructive decisions.
She doesn’t mention the reason for the divorce. I wonder if she has a reasonable cause or if this was frivolous.
I’m now thriving financially, emotionally, and spiritually. I completely give all the glory to God.
Indeed. Even for the financial part.
She doesn’t mention the reason for the divorce. I wonder if she has a reasonable cause or if this was frivolous.
Perhaps the lack of discussion of it is telling.
where there are many hamsters gathered in prayer
I am trying to picture this.
I wonder what they pray for.
Oh great hamster in the sky, give us our daily alimony, child support and government cheque. Forgive our ex-husbands but give us their house and in his stead, give us eternal divorce bliss! In thy eternal hamsterisation, Amen!
“These whores keep reminding men why marriage is dead”
And yet, marriage or the hope of marriage for many is alive and kicking.
Two of the “manipulatedsphere””s most fascinating bloggers, Dalrock and Tomassi, both have been married for a long time. That’s what draws me here and The Rational Male, these blokes actually have “skin in the game”. A surfeit of bitter experience is easily found, its the analysis I crave. The dismantling of female motivation, from biology to status-seeking.
Feministhater,
How about an EPL prayer?
Oh great hamster in the sky. Give us wimmenz a better deal! Our pitiful husbands be boring, un-tingly and not of high enough status. Oh hamster, give us a speedy frivorce with cash and prizes galore (spacious house included). Grant us too a speedy millionaire handyman, with two or perhaps three holiday homes in various island destinations around the world, to restore our tingles most hastily. Give him a suave Spanish accent too.. Don’t judge us though hamster but instead spin on thy wheel of rationalisations and bring us closer to thy mercy.
In thy hamsterbatory name, Amen!
@mrteebs,
“I left a lengthy comment to the article under the moniker “A Pilgrim”. Let’s watch the screeching and fireworks ensue from the assembled feminists and blue pills; i.e., their entire subscriber base.”
I did not see your comment there. Did the open minded, tolerant feminists delete it?
David, He will need to wipe away every tear for a reason.
Give him a suave Spanish accent too
Also “correct amount of stubble” desired it would be
“@Art Deco .Just because her friends said they were surprised to hear of the divorce doesn’t necessarily mean much . ”
Original Laura:
When you’ve completed your studies in reading comprehension, you may understand that my point was that her complaints concerned matters not readily visible to outsiders. (The rest of your remarks are irrelevant to mine and anyone else’s).
Yes, that does mean something, for the reasons you cannot process. It means that it’s a reasonable wager he’s not an alcoholic or something similar. Those problems can be concealed domestically, but not reliably concealed; alcohol abuse catches up with you with your employers, with law enforcement, and with relatives outside your household. It also means he likely is not a tomcat. He could be exceptionally discreet or given only to episodic adulteries. The latter can be concealed from a spouse almost as readily as it can from outsiders. If he were hitting the bottle hard or hitting on other women and it was NOT known in their social circle, THAT would be exceptional.
Three alternatives: the man has a volcanic temper, the man is addled by sexual perversions, or this is all chickensh!t. The smart money bets option three.
Oh, there’s option four: she has a paramour.
It’s reasonable to be suspicious of someone who makes an exhibit of herself on the internet but conceals any distinct and specific reasons for why she does what she does. It is gullible to proceed as if that selective concealment is meant to protect him.
“I wonder if women who divorce ever reflect on what it’s cost themselves, let alone what it costs their children and ex-husbands. ”
I recall one in my sister’s circle of friends, a childless woman with a current husband and a former husband. She was at work and gets off the phone with her husband after some banal domestic friction and tells my sister that if she’d known then what she knew now, she’d never have divorced the first time. “Same issues…”.
There are shortcomings with a masculine signature and shortcomings with a feminine one. A shortcoming with a feminine signature is a truncated sense of personal agency, something from which a great many women suffer but which among men is peculiar enough that manifestations of it are the subject of droll commentary by people like Theodore Dalrymple. (Dalrymple was a prison doctor so encountered a great many odd characters, and these populate his writings).
“Number six on her list is “[children] don’t seem to carry a grudge like adults”. After just witnessing their father being cut from their lives, they are probably too traumatized or scared to stand up to any sort of tyranny…especially the boys. The message is clear: do what you’re told, or you lose your family.”
I do not know about that, but the ‘everything fine and dandy’ line just destroys her credibility.
Art Deco .If it is option 3 then people in their social circle may be genuinely surprised that a longstanding marriage that has produced six children is breaking up. If option 1, 2 or 4 then people may well be aware of the true reason for the divorce but pretend to be unaware so as to maintain a harmonious relationship with one or both parties. Maybe this happens more in the rural South than in some other places. People here tell white lies to avoid awkward situations.
My uncle’s wife had a series of affairs over the course of their twenty-plus year marriage. By the time she finally divorced him it was widely known that she had been an adulterous wife but everybody in the family and in his close circle of friends pretended that it was a “lifestyle divorce.” .My uncle lived in a town of 10000 people and had a job with a major corporation .He could not have started over in a new town and new job at that point. He got custody of the children and kept the family home and his career and the former wife moved away and nobody talked about it.
Yesterday, I left this dumb bitch a message, so I know she’s got the link to this blog — though this article featuring her dumb ass had yet to be written.
In most parts of North America, merely shouting at your wife is enough to land you an initiation into the jailhouse lifestyle. This is a lifestyle that most people, once acquainted with, rarely get out of. With that in mind, I don’t find it very likely that this marriage broke up because of any sort of “abuse”.
Don’t get me wrong. One of the few cases where divorce is justified is with a felony conviction, in my opinion. Who wants to be married to a prisoner? Patterns of minor misconduct (in and out of the clink for shoplifting, drunken driving, or other “minor” crimes) also can be too much to bear. If someone has kids, s/he should be setting a better example than that.
The whole article reeks of a woman who knows she dealt a very dirty hand to her own innocent children, but wants to keep chanting the mantra that “it’s OK”.
Well, it’s not OK, cunt. You’re a piece of shit. Face it and spend the rest of your life trying to undo the damage, rather than offering up impotent excuses for your own crap behavior.
Boxer
@Bee,
Yes, when I got up this morning, it was gone. Was there last night, about 8 hrs ago. I suspect it ruffled many feathers and got flagged as “offensive.”
Dear Original Laura:
I have an older male relative who likely banged hundreds of other women while he was married. Eventually, he decided to divorce auntie to marry his secretary (it’s so close to cliché, you can’t make it up). What you describe is precisely similar to what everyone seems to have done in my (Mormon) family. Let’s just not talk about it and pretend Uncle Joe is not a scumbag, even though we all know he is.
Just to tell the rest of the story … Justice was delayed, but eventually came down like the clap on a stinky ho. Auntie found a fairly nice and more faithful guy shortly after, and raised Joe’s kids with him. Joe was married to the secretary for several years before (Oh, no one on Dalrock will believe this) she took his ass to divorce court and screwed him over.
Today, Joe is quite lonely, despite still having enough money to live comfortably. On holidays he gets invited over to my Auntie’s house, where he passes roast turkey to her second, more faithful husband, and gets to see his grown kids and grandkids. My understanding is that his kids don’t like him much (gee, I wonder why?)
Let it be a lesson to you married people (both men and women) who think you’re gonna trade in for a younger/hotter/wealthier/more successful model. This sort of shit rarely works out in the long run.
Boxer
@Boxer.
Your story has a happy ending except for the faithful guy.
He had to raise other man’s kids. I guess he is the guy who was not considered “exciting” when he was young (beta). So he had to end up raising the kids belonging to the exciting guy (your uncle, because a man who bangs hundreds of women is very alpha).
He devoted a lot of work to raise the genetic heritage of another man. Very sad. In other times, he had slave himself to raise his own children and nobody else.
I don’t know the details but it seems a typical AFBB story to me.
Boxer. A cliche, like a stereotype, has to have a significant degree of truth in it.
Your Aunt should be up for sainthood . With possible sainthood for her second husband who allows the ex to come for Thanksgiving.1
My uncle remarried and for maybe fifteen years he had little contact with his first wife .After the birth ofgrandchildren they occasionally end up at the same church service or school event and are cordial to one another. My aunt’s life has been ok but not as good as it could have been. She was already regretting the loss of the marriage before the divorce was final. Whether she was truly repentant concerning the adulterous affairs is unknown .If she and my uncle had stayed married they would have celebrated their 60th anniversary by now.
People now get married so late and divorce so often that I wonder if 50 year plus marriages will die out or get a miraculous revival through life extending drugs.
I have to agree, if the divorce was justified, she wouldn’t be so happy. Crowing about her finances and offering to support others is a huge red flag.
“My family is happier. . . we have much more peace”.
She’s either lying of telling the truth. Non of which are good. If the kids are indeed happier that would mean the father was a horrible guy, which would force us to ask the obvious question: why procreate 6 times with a horrible person? Wouldn’t that point to the inevitable point that the woman in this story is almost certainly a bad persoon herself?
Oh great hamster in the sky, give us our daily alimony, child support and government cheque. Forgive our ex-husbands but give us their house and in his stead, give us eternal divorce bliss! In thy eternal hamsterisation, Amen!
It is good that there is a great hamster in the sky. Otherwise they would have to make one up to justify their rationizations
7 Things to Expect During a Divorce
There was a eighth that she did not mention. No longer was there an expectation that she would make sammiches.
Probably if she had just made sammiches like she was supposed to, all of these other problems could have been avoided.
On the topic of her source of income, she says in response to a comment on her about page that her blog is her “only source of income”*. She is another “The Writer”, and this is quite plain in the structure of her blog and the content. Her problem here is the Pinterest Mom blogging niche is a very crowded field. On top of that, she is straddling two very different categories now that she has detonated her marriage. There are very few unmarried homeschoolers (Christian or otherwise), and her signature is as a Christian homeschooling version of Martha Stewart. But her new identity is as a professional divorcée. These two groups don’t mix, not because Christian homeschooling moms are traditional regarding marriage (they aren’t), but because married women don’t look to divorced women for homemaking tips, etc. Divorced women don’t have the status of marriage, so even if the married woman is fine in theory with divorce, she won’t be likely to want to follow an unmarried woman. A Christian homeschooling homemaker blog for divorcées is a huge mismatch.
I think she understands this, because it looks like the post I linked to is only the second time she has blogged about her divorce. Also, her about page still looks like the page of a married homemaker. The photo of her large family includes her husband (the father of her children is still “in the picture”), and the text does not tout her as a single mother. Marriage is still a prominent category on the top menu bar. Like Jenny Erikson she will eventually have to decide what her “brand” is. So far she has fudged it, and it isn’t clear how this is working. This kind of community focused blog usually has a healthy comment section, but hers is a ghost town. Some of what used to be posted to comments on blogs now goes on Facebook, Pinterest, etc, but if you compare her to other women with monetized blogs like Susan Walsh or Sheila Gregoire you still see a healthy comment section. This problem predates her divorce, but the more she plays up the single mother angle the more she is going to drive away her core audience.
*She notes here that she is soaking the father she kicked out for child support.
@Boxer
She is blogging-for-dollars, and I have no doubt she noticed the spike in traffic coming from this post.
She should hook up with Life’s shit and become the divorced single mom duo we’ve all been waiting for!
After viewing the About section, it is possible that the husband cheated on her, and she’s just not talking about it.
@DrTorch
Why she chose to become an advocate for women blowing up their families is a red herring. Can no one see this?
Accordingly, two cities have been formed by two loves; the earthly by the love of self, even to the contempt of God; the heavenly by the love of God, even to the the contempt of self. — City of God, Augustine
God hates divorce, yet the Christo-feminsts see covenant breaking as the road to happiness and blessing. In the city of God “self” is sacrificed for God’s glory, in the city of feminism men are sacrifices for the glory and happiness of women.
What gets me is that these women sprout off about how amazing their lives are, they explain how blessed they are with a family, husband and children, and how their simple life is wonderful and fulfilling. And then they go and divorce like it is just another check point on their life race.
These are the women that were apparently different and praised their husbands until the point they wanted something else and then turned on their husbands like rabid dogs.
Red herring for what? Blowing up her family and destroying her husband? I don’t get it, she just seems like an ordinary American woman fulfilling the modern family life story.
“He had to raise other man’s kids”
But also perhaps, gain the benefit of other man’s ex-residence.
@ Boxer
September 6, 2015 at 12:14 pm
“I have an older male relative who likely banged hundreds of other women while he was married.”
Human nature being what it is, pretty much all large families include such a dirtbag. I have a similar uncle. He has 10 children from several women. Today he’s in his 80s and none of his children want anything to do with him. He complains that he doesn’t want to die alone, but it’s too late. They’ve all hated him for decades.
It’s sad, but it’s also the natural consequence of his actions.
I remember having a heated discussion with my very ‘Christian’ but divorced cousin when she waxed lyrical on the comedy show ‘Modern Family’. I said the show is but a glimpse into the modern dysfunctional family landscape that we expect poor children to go up in. With divorced parents, same sex parents, single moms and destroyed dads and how it destroys any semblance of normalcy and creates despondent and empty children. Then she went on to denounce me for judging her divorce and that I simply don’t understand and should shut up. I haven’t spoken to her in just over a year.
At one point I heard she was dating a Catholic chap with a very serious Catholic family. I guess she didn’t tell him about that little divorce..
And what makes you think the normal chap would not die alone? For every one of your naughty uncles, who at least got to enjoy themselves, there is 10 chaps who were loyal, loving and kind who got handed divorce papers, accused of being abusive and haven’t seen their children in years and will die alone. What don’t you guys get? Are you that dim?
You describe this life, being unable to control oneself, as a good one; but, I suspect, you don’t know what it entails.
An individual who lacks the self-awareness to keep himself out of promises he can’t keep, and an individual who lacks the self-control to keep the promises he makes… these are not successful people by any measure. They’re failures in all the important ways. Most importantly, those who brought kids into the world under the cover of these false promises are failing their children.
This is as applicable to all the naughty uncles as it is to the skank-ho divorcées. Doesn’t matter the sex of the loser, they count the same.
Boxer
I’m not arguing that. I’m arguing that it makes no difference if you’re the naughty uncle or the good uncle, you can both end up divorced, alone and not seeing your children. If the price for being a cheating prick is dieing alone whilst many loyal men end up in exactly the same boat, it’s not really a real deterrent, is it?
Dear Dalrock:
I submitted a civil (but realtalk) comment yesterday, after her blog was linked by Rob. I don’t expect it to appear at this point, and wonder if the blog isn’t merely clickbait to serve up ads — there are tons of divorce attorney banners and buttons over there, on my browser.
Boxer
“Why she chose to become an advocate for women blowing up their families is a red herring.”
I agree. Divorce is a terrible thing.
TFH. Her children appear to be spread out in age with the eldest boys beiing high school age and the youngest perhaps being near kindergarten age. The workload would depend largely on the Mom’s Taxi issue. If she is driving six different kids to six different sets of extracurricular activities then her life would not be an enviable one. But if the older two take responsibility for their own education and if perhaps the oldest boy has a drivers license and helps out with some of the errands and appointments then her life isn’t that bad .
I’m not sure whether she still has the farm animals post divorce but those could be a pain now that she doesn’t have her husband in the house to insist that the boys help with the farm chores . But children over the age of seven are not as labor intensive as the tiny ones and they don’t require the same level of supervision.
Maybe you are asking more about the time commitment that homeschooling requires . My answer to that is that homeschooling can be as simple or as time-consuming as you want to make it . From what I read on her website she is fairly structured in her technique so that would require a lot of effort to keep that up.
You think this old boy is happy, when his only contact with his children entails being a guest in his ex-wife’s house, where he gets to see them defer to another dude they call “dad” in front of him?
Interesting.
Those are all valid points. I certainly wouldn’t play cleanup like this; but, I don’t pass judgment on other men. Some men find meaning in miserable work, and in the end it’s none of my business.
You’re accusing me of dishonesty, but why would I lie? I’m simply reporting the facts as I see them.
The old patriarchal rules were not just laid down arbitrarily. They tend to keep the most people the happiest for the longest time. People (both women and men) who think they are going to game the system rarely come out ahead in the long term.
Best,
Boxer
This woman has done her family a grievous harm.
Farm Boy says:
September 6, 2015 at 1:37 pm
7 Things to Expect During a Divorce
There was a eighth that she did not mention. No longer was there an expectation that she would make sammiches.
Probably if she had just made sammiches like she was supposed to, all of these other problems could have been avoided.
I like to say: A sammich a day helps keep the hamster at bay. I doubt that the sammich expectation was there to begin with. That seems to be a long forgotten remedy.
Pingback: Seven Benefits of Going Renegade | v5k2c2
The old patriarchal rules were not just laid down arbitrarily. They tend to keep the most people the happiest for the longest time. People (both women and men) who think they are going to game the system rarely come out ahead in the long term.
Seconded! To my knowledge, patriarchy is the best societal model known to man. For utilizing the strengths and weaknesses of men and women for the best possible outcome for both sexes, it has yet to be beat.
The author of that article has several other gems on her blog, including my favorite:
I’m a Swiffer Fanatic, and I Can Not Lie!
by jill 1 comment
A couple of months ago, I was approached by Proctor & Gamble to explore their first EVER Swiffer Ambassador program, known as #SwifferFanatics.
I admit, I get pitched daily from brands, but never once from a well-known, respected company such as Proctor & Gamble. They are truly amazing!
…
@Boxer
“‘I don’t know the details but it seems a typical AFBB story to me.’
You’re accusing me of dishonesty, but why would I lie? I’m simply reporting the facts as I see them.”
I do not believe ImNobody00 was doubting your story, but rather categorizing/filing it under “Alpha fux/Beta bux”.
Well, my story included a dude who filed for divorce in order to marry one of his side ho’s, and his scorned wife, who had a couple of kids by him, who did nothing wrong. I’m confused about how this could possibly be an AF/BB scenario?
More generally: I know it’s hard for a lot of you fellas to believe, but there are dudes who fuck around and file for divorce too. The system doesn’t afford them as many unearned privileges for behaving badly, so it’s not as prevalent a problem, but it does exist.
Boxer
I admit, I get pitched daily from brands, but never once from a well-known, respected company such as Proctor & Gamble.
Satan also well known he is.
@Boxer:
Of marriages that dissolve, it’s around 15% can be generally laid at guys being evil or stupid. The instinct is to reject the possibility because the greatest driver (Women not being “happy”) is utterly ignored by everyone. We’re all used to making a concession to the possibility of something happening and Women, being themselves, claiming it is the only cause.
“My family is happier. . . we have much more peace”.
Why?; because their father has been removed from their lives, so there’s no one for you to scream and bitch against all day anymore about how unhappy you are?
Oh yes there is. Her poor kids. Especially if they are male — they will become the targets for all the rage she can no longer vent on her husband. I speak from bitter experience as the male offspring in such a situation. The worst part about it, as a kid, is you don’t understand what you did (which was, of course, nothing) but you are still to blame for all the crimes of the male gender.
Fair point, Boxer. With that clarification, you have every right to be confused.
To my knowledge, patriarchy is the best societal model known to man. For utilizing the strengths and weaknesses of men and women for the best possible outcome for both sexes, it has yet to be beat.
Also very good for children it would be.
Any challengers to the throne there are?
Anyone?
Beuller?
More generally: I know it’s hard for a lot of you fellas to believe, but there are dudes who fuck around and file for divorce too.
I’ve seen this happen, but I can count the instances where it was the man who cheated and filed on one hand. I don’t have enough limbs to count the times the woman cheated and nuked the marriage (or more often, nuked the marriage so she could cheat).
Any challengers to the throne there are?
Many have tried! Many have died!
t I can count the instances where it was the man who cheated and filed on one hand.
In the small town where I grew up, a fella cheated and he was totally ostracized by the community. People could hardly believe it. People felt so sorry for his wife.
Many a woman did crazy things in that small town also, but crickets. Probably people were so acclimated to it, that nothing that women do raises an eyebrow any more.
By the way, is anyone reaching out to Curt Schilling?
Jill’s husband [I’ll call him Job] now has to pay alimony and child support for six children!!! If you go with the US Census average $430.00 per child which means Job is paying $2,580 a month. Throw in the alimony and extras and that goes up to 4k likely. Job better be making some big money.
People now get married so late and divorce so often that I wonder if 50 year plus marriages will die out or get a miraculous revival through life extending drugs.
The median age at first marriage is around about 26. Marital attrition rates are such that about 40% of all marriages can be expected to end in divorce, a figure that is slightly lower for 1st marriages and marriages with issue. There will be an ample supply of 50 year plus marriages, just fewer than there ought to be.
Her divorce from her husband is like Israel whoring after false gods. Exactly analogous.
@Bee
The comment I made over at CT has magically reappeared now. Go figure. Here’s the link:
http://fyre.it/EOSqg4.4
I expect fallout.
@feministhater says:
September 6, 2015 at 2:30 pm
“And what makes you think the normal chap would not die alone?”
And what makes you think that I think that? Can you provide a quote in which I claim to think that?
@Boxer
I never doubted your honesty nor I implied you didn’t tell the truth. I didn’t say the cheater wasn’t scum. All my words are clearly written for everybody to see.
For me, it’s AFBB, in the preemptive cuckolding sense. That is, the woman marries an exciting guy instead of a reliable guy. Then the exciting guy is not responsible so the responsibility is accepted by the reliable guy. Alpha fucks and pass his genes. Beta pays for the alpha’s kids. Of course, there were reliable guys to marry in the first place but the woman choose the serial cheater.
As Roger Devlin says, the woman has hit an evolutionary jackpot: she has gotten alpha genes with beta investment. This is completely unconscious on behalf of the woman, who never planned this outcome. Simply, she was attracted to the charming guy and then, when she had kids, she chose the reliable guy. By following their instincts, she got the optimal result.
I only feel for the reliable guy, who has settled for raising other man’s kids, which, from the biological point of view, makes him a sucker and a loser. In other time, he would have worked only for his own kids
Dear imnobody:
For observant Mormons, AFBB in the sense you describe is still not entirely possible (though with the ongoing pozzing of the culture, I’m sure it’ll be celebrated in a generation or two). Anyway, it’s a fair point, so I’ll give a bit of the backstory.
Joe and Jane grew up in a little town in Alberta (that’s like Canada’s Utah… lots of Mormons made a covered wagon migration there). Their parents knew each other from childhood, and their grandparents did also. After Joe served his mission (Mormon boys are required to do this) in the early or mid 1970s, he was told by his parents that he was marrying Jane. That was the end of that, and they got married. Joe was probably 20 or 21, and Jane was probably 17 or 18. Jane was a virgin and I doubt Joe had ever had full on sex with anyone either. They married in the Cardston Temple.
Joe and Jane moved away a few years after to Calgary (a big city) where Joe rapidly found himself with all sorts of opportunities for random, no strings sex. This was before the AIDS scare and after the hippie phenomenon. Apparently he felt like it’d be a good idea to bang lots of other women. I think Jane was way too hung up for anything so bold. It’s fair to assume she knew about it at some point and tried to get him to stop, but he’s the guy who ended up moving in with his side-ho’ — another Mormon by the way (fuck’n lol).
Jane is very quiet. She’s not technically my relative, except by marriage, but I like her a lot and have seen her off and on growing up as she’s the mother of a few of my cousins. The guy you call “Beta” gets a lot more respect from me and everyone else (including Joe’s biological kids) than Joe does. I’m sure he’s not perfect, but he seems like a nice guy. I don’t envy him either, but I won’t judge another man for anything that doesn’t concern me.
Best,
Boxer
@Bee,
I have an engineering degree, but can’t seem to figure out whether my comment at CT is publicly visible or not. I can see it when I log into their site, but not when I’m logged out.
Here it is in its entirety, FWIW…
I am going to offer a very contrarian perspective here by suggesting that as Christians, we actually do not place enough emphasis on sex in marriage. Think about it: it is the only aspect of relationship that God specifically forbids outside of marriage. That suggests it might be extremely important. I have been an evangelical Christian for 40 years. In all that time, I have heard precisely ONE discussion of 1 Cor 7:5.
One.
It was never discussed in pre-marital or post-marital counseling. Never in any devotionals. Never in any blogs, studies, small groups, men’s groups, couple’s groups, young married groups, prayer groups, home groups, retreats, camps – you name it.
The only place it was ever addressed outside my own reading of the Bible was a sermon from a young pastor and it was not even in my own church – it was a church that I visited twice. The pastor earned enormous respect in my eyes that day because he addressed a topic that took more courage than practically anything else I could imagine, given the amount of criticism from the female members of the flock he was likely to receive as a result of not making a thousand caveats and escape clauses to exonerate women and hold husbands responsible for “not being loving enough to merit sex.”
During that same 40 years, I have been subjected to at least a hundred books, blogs, screeds, treatises, studies, “accountability groups,” sermons, devotionals, retreat topics, men’s groups, and sermons dealing with sexual sin – and most specifically focused on the shamefulness of men consuming pornography – but never is the sin of withholding addressed. Never. Frankly, I think we could remove that verse entirely from the Bible and 99% of Christianity would not even notice, because the assumption that sex occurs automatically when the husband is behaving properly is so deeply ingrained that we consider the verse completely unnecessary.
What is interesting is that only the cessation of sex is to be by mutual consent, and then only for a very specific reason: prayer and fasting. Conventional wisdom is that wives will enthusiastically want sex if only their husbands will treat them like queens and the flow of romance will be endless. If he does everything right, the rest will be automatic.
Only it won’t.
In the vast majority of marriages, the woman is the sexual gatekeeper. The amount and frequency is governed by her, not him. Yes, there are exceptions, but they are rare and they do not invalidate the general rule that sexual cessation is rarely occurring by mutual consent. It is instead occurring primarily by unilateral female fiat. If it isn’t important to her at that particular moment, then it shouldn’t be to him, either. To suggest otherwise, we’re told, is to be unloving.
Unilateral cessation is not biblical, but that seems to be of little consequence when we can simply proclaim the more palatable sections like Eph 5:25 and assume that if a husband will just do this, the rest will be – automatic. By that reasoning, the unresponsiveness of the unsaved can be ascribed to God because He is not romancing them properly. They would automatically and enthusiastically respond if He would simply get it together and conduct Himself in a manner more to their liking.
I am not justifying pornography, and it pains me to even have to say that because merely suggesting that women might be exacerbating the situation is immediately interpreted as excusing or endorsing pornography. But the Bible is quite clear that if you do not want your husband to be under additional temptation, it might mean sex when you are not in the mood.
Ladies, it might come as a surprise to you, because you have been told your entire lives that men should love you for more than your body. But the truth is that your husband married you so that he – and he alone – could have exclusive access to you sexually. In exchange, he agreed to forsake all others, to provide for you and your children, and to pursue a life that would largely be defined by sacrifice and giving to his family. In exchange, yes, he did expect something and the Bible said not to withhold it. But this is so absent from the average Christian rubric today that it sounds utterly foreign, and I’m sure there are some reading this that are already screaming “misogynist.”
If women, as we are told, are aroused by touch and words, and men by sight, I would like to see women tread the world for a few months with the tables turned: where they were being caressed and touched and romanced by men that were not their husbands, at every stop sign, in the grocery store, in the workplace, at the gym, and even inside their own homes – only to be told to that they’re weak for giving in and need to “woman up” with an “accountability group.” Then, pile it on by having their husbands deprive them of the very thing they value most in the relationship – and accuse them of being selfish and inconsiderate when they ask for it, or dare suggest that it should not be unilaterally controlled.
We blame the man who has gone a month or more without a meal for being ravenous, and shame him for being “consumed” by a desire for food.
We need a balance here, and we aren’t getting much of it in our pulpits or anywhere else.
Commenter Pauline R. said earlier that “…seeing sex as a need and as a right is a great way to destroy any marriage or committed relationship.” The phrase “…or committed relationship” tells me instantly that the commenter already has a tenuous grasp on what is and is not Biblical, so I place little credence in the rest of what she has to say. I would suggest the exact opposite: treating sex as optional and as a “want” within marriage is an almost sure-fire way to destroy it.
mrteebs,
It isn’t there. They are far more interested in pushing their narrative than any Biblical truth.
I regularly hear preachers tell guys to do more, lay off pushing for sex, etc. I can’t recall ever hearing the shame she claims is so prevalent. She may be projecting her shame for not following the Scriptural command of not defrauding your spouse, except for a season of mutual consent to devote more deeply to prayer. Nothing in the Scriptures about a long term “post partum” time when the husband should just give up the glue (sex) that binds the marriage together.
She is quite the reprobate.
Boxer,
Some here cannot admit that a man can be fulfilled without following their script for life. Pain happens (ask me about it), but it does not have to rule your life, whatever your sex. God’s plan still works, even though it is often a pain in the rear to walk out and may often go a different way than we planned.
From the ‘Bay ;-
“Description
Brand new and tested before shipping.
Cute Hamster Pet Style Toy.
Repeat Whatever language and accent you say to it for 6 seconds.
Also Nod While Speak.
Great Gift For Kids.
ON/OFF switch. “ON” state in when you speak it will follow you with lovely voice speaking with swing, in not playing will be sure to switch “OFF” in state .”
Now I know what those half-orphaned kids ought to get for Crimbo. They can get the hamsters to tell Mommy Dearest what they really think.
@Cynthia: Re-read the Psalms. David wrote bargains of that style all the time. Psalm 51:12-13 comes to mind.
“If women, as we are told, are aroused by touch and words, and men by sight, I would like to see women tread the world for a few months with the tables turned: where they were being caressed and touched and romanced by men that were not their husbands, at every stop sign, in the grocery store, in the workplace, at the gym, and even inside their own homes – only to be told to that they’re weak for giving in and need to ‘woman up’ with an ‘accountability group.’”
I’d love for a handful of random women to be injected with testosterone levels equal to that of an 18-year-old male. I suspect the number of sex-negative Feminists and women ministers preaching (especially to men) about sexual sin would decline noticeably.
Even if her husband is a cheater, cheating doesn’t mean that she should file for divorce. Plenty of women don’t divorce their cheating husbands. You forgive and move on.
Nothing in the Scriptures about a long term “post partum” time when the husband should just give up the glue (sex) that binds the marriage together.
Common sense and medical advice says the woman needs some healing time after having a baby. It’s when sex dries up almost completely after the post partum period that there is a problem.
What gets me is that these women sprout off about how amazing their lives are, they explain how blessed they are with a family, husband and children, and how their simple life is wonderful and fulfilling. And then they go and divorce like it is just another check point on their life race.
The evangelical subculture is something I’ve always found at least disconcerting if not repellent. Richard John Neuhaus once recalled appearing at an anti-abortion rally which was warmed up by a man with a guitar saying “We love you Jeezus” over and over again for about 10 minutes. “I’d have left if I weren’t on the speakers’ roster.” You look at the self-help literature, the ‘inspirational’ literature, the Prayer of Jabez study guides, the photographs of people with glassine smiles and covered in lacquer, and the sheer goofy unseriousness of it all.
Francis Schaffer and Charles Colson were nothing like this.
Even if her husband is a cheater, cheating doesn’t mean that she should file for divorce. Plenty of women don’t divorce their cheating husbands. You forgive and move on.
In my mother’s social circle, the ones who were served papers were generally serial offenders. There’s a discrete minority of the male population (perhaps 12% of the total) who are just hopeless. See John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Bilge Clinton. See also Martin Luther King, who was astonishingly Gantryish in his mundane life, something replicated among his camarilla.
@ Chris Dagostino says:
September 7, 2015 at 8:46 am
“I suspect the number of sex-negative Feminists and women ministers preaching (especially to men) about sexual sin would decline noticeably.”
I wouldn’t bet on it.
@Mrteebs
It sounds like it is being held in moderation.
Off Topic, but the “Child of The King” seems to have papal support.
Pope Francis will be decreeing Tuesday new reformed procedures for those seeking annulments of marriages in the Catholic church, in his latest move to emphasize God’s merciful nature less than one month before the opening of a hotly anticipated global meeting of Catholic bishops on family life.
Much more at…
http://ncronline.org/news/vatican/francis-create-reformed-annulment-process-tuesday
@mrteebs,
Great comment. Thanks for reposting it here.
I don’t have an account at CT so I don’t log in. I see comments but not yours.
Here is another Scripture you never hear or read about:
” for indeed man was not created for the woman’s sake, but woman for the man’s sake. ”
I Corinthians 11:9 (NASB translation)
@FB 1:32: Let me do you two better: These are a masterful capture of the cadence if not precisely the content. I think I know how C.S. Lewis felt when he wrote the Screwtape Letters from the demonic perspective.
The Divorced Mom’s Creed (with sincere apologies to the Apostles)
I believe in child support and alimony, maker of all that is good on Heaven and Earth, and in no-fault divorce, our only daughter, our Goddess, who was born of the Holy Reagan, suffered under cuck-servative attacks, was lionized, gratified and supported. It rose again as the dominant ideology from which they shall destroy Western civilization which once was living and now is dead.
I believe in the Holy equality, the Holy Liberal ideology, the community of activists, the rejection of the patriarchy and abortion everlasting.
The Democrat Party Creed
(with sincerest apologies to the Apostles):
I believe….in government almighty, maker of heaven and Earth, and in President Obama, our Only Son, our Lord, who was conceived by the holy African, born in Hawaii, suffered under privileged white rule, was criticized by evil rich, Republicans, and lampooned by capitalists. He rose above all this and passed health care reform on Christmas Eve with no debate and he will adjudicate who is living and who is dead. I believe in the holy democrat party, the redistribution of wealth, abortion after birth, and Marx everlasting, Amen.
@Boxer: “my story included a dude who filed for divorce in order to marry one of his side ho’s, and his scorned wife, who had a couple of kids by him, who did nothing wrong. I’m confused about how this could possibly be an AF/BB scenario?”
Is this a drunk post, Boxer? Seriously?
The guy who married the hot secretary is the Alpha. Alpha fucks. He got lots of sex. He had the babies.
The guy who played cleanup is the classic Beta. Beta Bucks. He took care of kids who were not even his.
Alpha fucks genetic lineage continues. Beta bucks fizzles as he cares for the Alpha babies.
How is this ANYTHING EXCEPT a classic AF/BB scenario?
@Boxer: “The guy you call “Beta” gets a lot more respect from me and everyone else (including Joe’s biological kids) than Joe does. I’m sure he’s not perfect, but he seems like a nice guy.”
OMG LMFAO. You are arguing that he is not Beta because he’s a nice guy? Let me guess you have not read No More Mr. Nice Guy?
That said, “Beta” has a bad rep on the manosphere but on Married Red Pill we take a more balanced approach to “Beta.” It’s not ‘bad’ and in fact it is necessary in a marriage but it’s just not sexually attractive.
The new marriage: Celebrating divorce with a smile and a selfie
http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/the-new-marriage-celebrating-divorce-with-a-smile-and-a-selfie
Just from curiousity, would the first screwing around husband be alpha automatically just because he was screwing around or is it a possibility he was just a bad beta?
Dear Mariah:
Mariah writes in response to Blue Pill’s lame attempt to troll me…
Married men who fuck around on their wives are not people that other men look up to — unless one is a flaming homosexual (as Blue Pill “doing it for the numbers” Professor likely is).
Jack Donovan (who is himself a homosexual) wrote a great essay on the inherent homosexuality of people who obsess over sex, and chant nonsense like “Alpha” and “Beta”. Preening and seeking approval through sex is a feminine quality. Healthy men seek their place in a heirarchy of other men, based upon things like mastery and honor.
Blue Pill Professor lisps…
It’s called a patriarch, but of course, BPP wouldn’t know anything about this. He ought to crawl back into the closet, and keep circle-jerking himself with Darwinesque-Atheist nonsense about “passing on one’s genes” like the rest of the evangelical SJW loonies. Healthy men don’t care about such shit. They’re too busy building and maintaining civilization to obsess over lunacy like this.
Regards,
Boxer
“Even if her husband is a cheater, cheating doesn’t mean that she should file for divorce. Plenty of women don’t divorce their cheating husbands. You forgive and move on.”
Jesus told the adulteress that He wasn’t going to hold it against her, but He also expected her to change.
People don’t have to keep tolerating unfaithful spouses.
I was thinking more about the idea that “you are a looser if you don’t spread your genes far and wide.” I would never support that philosophy since God clearly speaks against it in many places, but I also pondered how it related to my experience adopting my family. I knowingly raised someone else’s children. I wasn’t hung up with whether it was my genes or not, I just figured it was a way to have a family.
It didn’t turn out as well as Boxer’s example, but I would have been quite happy if my children all called and considered me to be their father, since I put the years in raising them. It does happen for others and is not a bad thing, especially when you consider that God rules above it all.
The AFBB idea is just that, an idea, not an ironclad rule. Being a cad doesn’t make one better than others, no matter how many here claim that.
Dear Brad A.:
Interesting post. Pardon me while I take off my big faggy fuzzy hat and dark indoor shades.
The funniest part of this week’s tempest (in a homosexual’s dainty teacup) is the fact that the patriarch that these ninnies call “Beta” does have bio kids of his own — they’re my cousins. The fact that people here are running with a delusion that has nothing to do with anything I’ve written suggests that these dudes are spewing out their personal fears and weird sexual fantasies (cuckold fetish, anyone?)
In reality, this guy gets respect because he is respectable. It’s not because he has kids (it wouldn’t matter if he didn’t) and not because he conforms to some faggy PUA stereotype.
A respectable married man doesn’t fuck around; and, if an otherwise respectable married man chips, he doesn’t make it a public issue and embarrass his wife and kids with it, by moving in with the ho. I would think that on a board full of Christians and Jews, this wouldn’t have to be argued, but who knew?
Everyone hates his father when he’s a young adult (I certainly did). I’m guessing that these kids will likely settle down and eventually you’ll get the credit you’ve earned. Even if they don’t, it wasn’t time wasted. You did an unselfish thing — the sort of thing heroes of old did. Even though I’d never attempt it, I respect you for it.
Boxer
BradA, I’ve seen a little about your experiences before. What would you say to others looking to adopt, based on what you’v learned?
I never considered myself an alpha. But I did sire my children. I’ll also continue to father them, as they will still be staying with me three nights a week.
I don’t think I could have knowingly married a woman who couldn’t have children. I wasn’t particularly young either. Just something I couldn’t have done. We actually had fertility issues on my end (ha!), but those were overcome by technology.
Now my sister in law, she couldn’t have children. Didn’t have any, and couldn’t have any. Someone married her anyway. They are still together, while the ex left me. They eventually adopted.
The man the ex left me for was someone she knew before we met. I met him a couple of times before we married. He LTR at the time broke off because his girlfriend wanted a family and he was a commitmentphobe. Which I believe the ex likes. Of course, if they stay together, he’ll be dealing with my three kids on a part time basis. The same man apparently hit on my sister in law the night she and her husband met. Small world, I guess. Whereas I almost never flirt.
So a lot of this alpha-beta business depends on circumstances and the issue. A lot of people who can be very easy going and compliant may have particular issues where they’re insistent and will not bend.
Bluepillprofessor
What you are doing with your story of the guy divorcing his wife and mother of his children to hook up with his side pussy is comparing normal female behavior with a defective man. The woman in this case married a player and why not he can make the stink hole tingle.
As a MGTOW for life, I’ll never have to deal with such insanity. The best solution is never to have the problem to begin with. EOM.
mrteebs says:
September 7, 2015 at 2:21 am
+1. Excellent.
As a married guy who’s had some troubles (mostly related to my own foibles) women encouraging other women to divorce is fucking enraging. If the circumstances were reversed, women would wail like keeners about the injustice of it all. Our society is fallen.
Reluctant Neo,
BradA, I’ve seen a little about your experiences before. What would you say to others looking to adopt, based on what you’v learned?
The skeptical part of me (which is huge at this point) would say run and use your time and money on something else.
An infant adoption might work differently, but children that were removed from their birth home come with huge scars that are not always clear in the first few years.
Some random thoughts:
– Educate yourself ahead of time, including such books as Adopting the Hurt Child and Parenting the Hurt Child.
– Actively make sure you take off the blinders and think nurture can overcome what nature messed up.
– Know with a certainty that society will turn against you. Even trusted church members will question your character when your children start complaining about how unfair you are.
– Be prepared for a messy time as the children hit the teen years.
– Know the laws on teens in your state. Texas allows them to leave home at 17, but keeps you responsible. That is a horrid combination. Not much can be done if they run away earlier though.
– Realize it is highly likely no one will “have your back” if the stuff hits the fan. You will go from being a model saint to the worst devil overnight in the eyes of many. Nothing you can do about that.
Biggest point is to make sure you see the whole picture, not just the “forever family” part pushed by adoption agencies. I made a forever commitment, but my children did not.
We had the ironic situation of a birth father who still wanted his children. That was good for them, but lousy for me as someone else has a much more valid claim on the “dad” role, especially since he fought to keep his children in the first place.
Boxer,
I know my children are better off and my oldest son is even doing what he can to have a bit of a relationship now (his family was over with us this weekend), but it definitely seems like I got the very short end of this stick. The other son has acknowledged we played a good role, but he is up in the birth family area and much more tied there (as much as he is tied anywhere). One daughter is almost wall aged, but married into some money and thinks she did it all herself. The other is actively ruining her life. Both are incredibly bitter and little likelihood for change. My oldest daughter has 2 children. That didn’t open her eyes to anything, so I don’t expect much will.
I will care about them until the day I leave this earth, but they are out of my hands now. I probably just need to meditate on your advice since I get it from so many. The problem lies in looking to the future. Nothing is there to take care of me when I am old, nor my wife when she likely outlasts me. I should trust my own faith a bit more as a firm Christian, but walking that out is the tougher part.
@Boxer
I guess he’s trying to test the “you get more of what you subsidize” idea.
Either way, he really needs to be more specific when he speaks in public. Off-the-cuff remarks are not appropriate when one is Pope, particularly on faith matters.
don’t get married
@Reluctant Neo: Just thought I would mention that infertility treatment can be MUCH cheaper in Eastern Europe than it is in North America, and “embryo adoption” is much cheaper than creating your own embryos. The advantages are that you control the prenatal environment, and the child has not been through a lot of emotionally upsetting experiences in infancy and toddlerhood, such as multiple foster care placements, or placement in a foreign orphanage.
A lot of people who have worked with Child Protective Services to adopt a child do NOT end up having positive experiences, and adopting (foreign or domestic) through a reputable agency is extremely expensive. If you DO decide to try CPS & “foster adopt” do some research first and get up-to-date local information from people who have adopted through CPS as recently as possible. Some counties have far more available children, the demographics of the children available can vary a lot by county, and some CPS agencies are headed up by complete jerks, or have such high staff turnover rates that nothing ever gets completed. Also, in some cases, you can “hire” a big name adoption agency to represent you, and their sky-high fees are paid by the government.
Best wishes!
Well, the comment over at CT is now visible to all, along with the anticipated screeching. The tone deafness is astonishing, but entirely predictable. Empath also managed to swing by and add fuel to the fire.
Here is the link once more, for convenience:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/women/2015/september/new-parents-your-sex-lives-are-going-to-change.html
It is Exhibit A in why sites like Dalrock are such a godsend.
You would think, from the comments, that the majority of women were being sexually browbeat daily and have PTSD as a result. If I say “one” and you hear “two,” who is really to blame? The speaker, or the wonky settings on the hearing aid?
Oh, and the tone policing is in full display as well.
From BradA: I should trust my own faith a bit more as a firm Christian, but walking that out is the tougher part.
Vast wisdom in the last half of that one. To quote Red Green: We are in this together; I’m pulling for you.
Attraction in Dating, Important or Not?
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=977378
Mrteebs
I read those CT responses for years at CF. It was that topic that brought the male group down over there. I wrote a comment with statements about sex, including a disclaimer that I was not endorsing sex on demand that included when they wife is in traction, or a coma, or has a fever, etc absurdium. The response was to berate for for my insistence that women have sex when they are ill.
I used to get animated by that crap. I don’t care much anymore. Some poor men are married to women in that gaggle of gigglers. Let them sort them out.
Dear Brad A.:
If you were a godless heathen (as I am) I’d suggest Camus; but, as you’re a Christian, I’ll send you a book that is almost as good. Here’s a very brief outline.
http://lib.tcu.edu/staff/bellinger/60023/summary_of_SicknessUD.htm
They lie to everyone, they even lie to the fish, as some old 1990s movie reminds us. Even though nothing means anything, we just have to keep living — and make meaning for ourselves when we can. In the end, one must imagine Sisyphus happy!
Keep going broseph.
Boxer
Empath
I used to get animated by that crap. I don’t care much anymore.
Pretty much the same for me. I drop little fact-bombs into conversations from time to time, both online and IRL, mainly for the lurking onlookers. Not gonna convince those women who are heavily invested in “sex-as-Pavlovian-control-method” but maybe let some men know “It’s not just you”, and possibly – possibly – even wake up one or two women who aren’t actually controlling, just going along with what their BFF’s and besties do.
Always be aware of the lurkers / bystanders. Few conversations online or offline are totally private anymore.
AR,
Point taken.
In spite of the fact that the women commenting were universally dismissive of what Empath and I had to say, it was still personally enlightening:
– It reinforced, once again, how women will do almost anything to subordinate scripture to their feelings. If they cannot excise it, they will marginalize it or ignore it. They will not address it directly and instead will reframe the debate into a “you are so mean – I’m glad I’m not married to you” tirade.
– It reinforced, once again, how valuable sites Dalrock are — and men’s-only coversation spaces in general — in being able to speak candidly and freely, without walking on eggshells lest you offend a special snowflake. I received no fewer than 5 verses from one commenter, reminding me of how special she is to God. Meanwhile, crickets chirped regarding 1 Cor 7:5, which seemed to be construed as a husband demaning “sex on tap” even with his wife in the back of an ambulance while connected to life support.
– It reinforced, once again, how Team Woman will band together to defend the indefensible. Commenter Crab Grass, a 40-year old virgin (this is not hyperbole), suggested caustically that men can masturbate if they dont’t like it, and then observed that men are whiny crybabies for emphasizing sex and should be more like her – a pillar of abstinence. When responded in knd – first by Thanking her for the helpful suggestions and then by asking her to tell us about her cats, this was apparently beyond the pale. The bench emptied onto the field.
Unfortunately Christianity Today jumped the shark years ago. Retired editor David Neff now supports the homosexual lifestyle:
http://www.christianpost.com/news/tony-campolo-and-david-neff-from-evangelical-left-to-post-evangelical-140288/
mrteebs
I received no fewer than 5 verses from one commenter, reminding me of how special she is to God.
I was hoping somebody would ask how those scriptures proved their arguments in the subject being discussed. The only scripture that even had the slightest hint of being on-topic was about creation being made for God’s pleasure, but that one doesn’t prove their arguments either, as one is going to be hard-pressed to prove that ignoring scriptural commands, including the command to not deprive one’s spouse, is going to be pleasing to God.
By the way, it looks like your comment that you posted here was heavily truncated on CT, or did I miss something?
@Hank
I suspect the full comment is in moderation, but cannot fathom why. It is word for word what I posted her, but there is nothing caustic in it – unlike some of the other subsequent comments I made.
@Bee
The article turned out to be primarily about Tony Campolo, which just gave me that sick feeling in the pit of my stomach. Such a gifted man, but now apparently willing to sacrifice scripture to reconcile his heart (which we’re told, by the way, is deceitfully wicked). I had no idea of his “controversy” on that issue, and was especially disheartening that the flip was apparently in response to long-standing disagreement with him publicly by his wife. What’s up with publicly debating your wife?
I tried to add to that conversation, but their site would not accept my post, even with a Google account log in. Grrrr.
Almost as bad as the various sites that only permit users to post if they have a facebook account. Which rather skews the commenting membership to women I think.
“My family is happier…”
Three observations:
(1) From a woman’s perspective, her “family” is her and her kids. Funny that.
(2) Unless her ex husband was some kind of degenerate addict or abusive monster, her children are almost certainly NOT happier after the divorce.
(3) If her ex husband was, in fact, a degenerate addict and/or abusive monster, the fact that she chose to have not one or two or three or four or even five but SIX children with him, at the very least, throws her judgement and mental/emotional stability into serious question.
This woman is very likely a supremely selfish, phony POS. I wouldn’t trust her for directions to the bathroom let alone advice on any serious life issue.
I welcome anyone here pointing out errors in my observations.
“Unfortunately Christianity Today jumped the shark years ago. Retired editor David Neff now supports the homosexual lifestyle:”
Francis Schaffer is dead, Charles Colson is dead, Bill Bright is dead, Jerry Falwell is dead, James Dobson has been all but repudiated by the organization he founded, and Pat Robertson has always been…erratic.
I doubt you’re going to find many people in the evangelical intelligentsia or with a history of evangelical institution building who will not betray your trust, push comes to shove. Campolo has long been a pillar of the shiftier segment of that subculture, but now we’re seeing what’s up with the quondam ‘mainstream’. It’s rather like a bank having to re-value a portfolio shot through with sour loans.
“This woman is very likely a supremely selfish, phony POS. I wouldn’t trust her for directions to the bathroom let alone advice on any serious life issue. I welcome anyone here pointing out errors in my observations.”
It’s difficult to say what’s up, or what she wants to appear to be up. Since she’s not given to dignified silence globally, I tend to assume that selective silence guides you to what she would find an embarrassment in certain settings. Again, if her husband a satisfactory earner and her social circle would be surprised at her filing, one can make a probabalistic assessment that alcohol is not an issue. If he’s a chronic adulterer, it would be unusual for that datum not to be abroad in their circle, either, though that’s more uncertain. If the issue is his temper in its various manifestations…
I knew three women growing up who were saddled with insufferable husbands, one of whom seemed to have been medicated by her doctor in whatever way was common for physicians coping with female patients with problems ca. 1975. They marked time until the last child finished high school and then packed their bags. Only one re-married, about 15 years after she’d left and the better part of a decade after he had committed suicide in one of his rages (the 2d husband, to whom she is still married, was a widower). “Jill” does not remind me of these women at all in what she says about the life she leads.
This woman makes statements which are not particularly credible, nor do they illuminate much what makes here tick, because none of the pieces of the puzzle fit together. You’d think a stay-at-home-mother with six children would be loath to disrupt matters with divorce proceedings even if she were severely dissatisfied, which is why I suspect the 10th planet here is a paramour. Just guessing.
You don’t debate women, you just tell them what is and leave. They do not listen. They are in full rebellion, leave them as Adam should have left Eve. Learn.
Maybe you’re just bad at explaining things.
Brad,
You did God’s work.
If you reflect on the value of His appreciation, your need for appreciation from your children will lessen and you’ll then be more likely to receive it unbidden.
@ Reluctant Neo says:
September 7, 2015 at 9:01 pm
“BradA, I’ve seen a little about your experiences before. What would you say to others looking to adopt, based on what you’v learned?”
I’m also an adoptive father. My wife and I adopted a sibling set of five from Ethiopia. They were twin 7-year-old girls, twin 4-year-olds (a boy and a girl) and an 18-moth-old girl.
My adopted kids are now 15, 12 and 9, and we now also have three biological children – two boys (5 and 3) and a girl (17 months).
Before we adopted, my wife and I read a bunch of parenting books, but the one I found most useful was by John MacArthur, and the most useful quote from that book was (I’m paraphrasing here), always remember that your children are retched little sinners, like you are. Children have a sinful nature. They’re selfish, ungrateful, they lie, cheat, mistreat each other, etc. Children who grew up in circumstances that nourished their sinful nature, and did not nourish Godliness, generally behave worse.
It’s also true that older kids generally have a more difficult time bonding than younger kids. Individual personalities make a big difference as well. Within my own adopted kids, one of my 15-year-old daughters still has trouble feeling bonded with my wife and me (more so my wife), but she’s mostly very well behaved. By contrast, my 12-year-old daughter is very affectionate with us (more so with me). My other adopted kids are also well bonded to us, especially my 9-year-old daughter.
My 12-year-old boy has given us the most trouble (as some predicted), but It’s been ordinary stuff. I’ve also noticed he has a powerful desire for masculine honor, and I’ve been trying to use that to help him.
All my kids love their grandparents, and they love their siblings (both adopted and biological). My oldest three daughters in particular are powerfully bonded with their youngest siblings because I assigned them to each other as their “buddy”.
There are a few factors that makes raising adopted kids easier on the parents.
1. Adopting younger kids.
2. Adopting one kid.
3. Adopting kids that are younger than your biological kids.
4. Pursuing adoption of kids whose relatives have no legal claim on them.
My wife and I reasoned that God didn’t call us to do only that which is easy, but we didn’t think we could handle the toughest situations, so we ended up somewhere in the middle. You and your wife need to prayerfully consider how much difficulty you’re willing to take on to demonstrate God’s love to “the least of these”.
I’m far from done raising my kids, but so far it’s been more of a blessing to us than to them (it’s more blessed to give than to receive).
By the way, up until this year we home schooled. We found a school whose values are close to ours and their tuition was very inexpensive, so we decided to go for it.
If you have more questions about adoption, let me know. You can follow the link on my user name to my blog, and from there you can email me, if that would help.
@ Brad
desiderian is right. You did God’s work. You were faithful and obedient to His word (within human limits, of course). You’ll be judged on your faithfulness and obedience, not on how your kids turned out.
Matthew 25:34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
That’s you, brother.
I doubt you’re going to find many people in the evangelical intelligentsia…
You just created the new granddaddy of all oxymorons with that phrase.
You just created the new granddaddy of all oxymorons with that phrase.
I did nothing of the sort. There’s an antheap of small evangelical colleges, academic journals devoted to various and sundry disciplines, as well as figures such as Francis Schaffer. Cannot help it if you’ve never heard of them.
Oscar are you black? If not I want to ask how interracial adoption worked for you. I’m asking for personal reasons. Its been talked about a lot since Haiti. And I’m assuming you are not Ethiopian so there’s an added cultural and linguistic element, maybe even interfaith?