The Daily Mail has a new article on the ten year anniversary of Eat Pray Love (EPL): Eat pray love (and walk out on your husband): It’s the bestseller that inspired a generation to transform their lives. But it left behind a trail of broken relationships
The focus of the article is on the “empowerment” the book and later movie lead to at the cost of broken families. But this is the text. If you look at the pictures the most striking aspect of the story is that all of these women are alone. None of them are pictured with their secret multimillionaire hunky handy man. One of the three women featured managed a short marriage to a retiree before he tragically caught a virus and died. The other two women weren’t actually married when they decided to EPL, and neither of them describes a current man in their life.
Then the article turns to the author of EPL, Elizabeth Gilbert. Unlike the three women who followed her EPL prescription Gilbert is remarried. But like the other women in the article, Gilbert is pictured alone. Why is that? The power of EPL is not that Gilbert managed to dump her loyal husband and travel to Europe and India. Being rewarded with cash and prizes for betraying your marriage vows is something the US and UK offers all wives. The power of EPL is that betraying her marriage vows not only made Gilbert more moral, it also allowed her to trade up to a better husband*. Gilbert appeared to have defied the odds and stuck the landing.
The obvious answer to Gilbert being pictured alone is that her remarriage was no more a trade up than her divorce made her more moral. In real life “Filipe” is 17 years older than Elizabeth, and appears to be shorter than her. Featuring 46 year old Elizabeth with the mid sixties “Filipe” doesn’t fit with the image of the story. The Daily Mail author doesn’t comment on the real Filipe, but she closes the article hinting at the disconnect between the EPL fantasy and reality:
Reading the book again I can’t help question whether Gilbert may have done as much harm as good for those following in her footsteps. There are of course inherent problems in trying to emulate someone’s else’s road to redemption, not least of all the inevitable disappointment when one discovers there aren’t enough Javier Bardems lurking at the end of the rainbow.
*The Kendrick brothers were shrewd enough to sell a similar story of divorce empowerment leading to a new round of courtship, a better husband, and spiritual rebirth in the Christian movie Fireproof.
Pingback: Not in the picture. – Manosphere.org
Dalrock,
You have made me laugh once again. Pure hilarity regarding modern women’s logic. They lack all and any fore thought.
Readers of the article should bear in mind that these apparently are the best examples they could come up with. Pretty slim pickings, really. Oh, she does more yoga and exercise now? Great. It is worth noting the subtle scorn in the article for the discarded men, this isn’t unusual of course, but pedestalizing types need to see it. All in all a somewhat dreary article, and Gilbert herself looks more than 10 years older than her book jacket pix, frankly.
However, there is a bright spot: merchandising!
During the Indonesian third of her book, Gilbert lived in Ubud in the Balinese uplands, a town which became a mecca for middle-aged women wearing white linen and thoughtful expressions as they drifted from green tea breakfasts to prayer sessions to guru appointments on a sort of perimenopausal gap year.
Laughing out loud, I wonder if the humor was intentional or accidental. Still can’t tell for sure.
Pingback: Not in the picture. | Neoreactive
@Anon Reader
I have concluded that when the Daily Mail does this it is intentional. They seem to deliberately troll their readers on this kind of subject.
“‘Felipe and I had made a rather unusual pact with each other, right from the beginning of our love story,’ Gilbert explains. ‘We had sworn with all our hearts to never, ever, under any circumstances, marry.”
She couldn’t keep her marriage vows. She can’t even keep her non-marriage vows. And she writes a book on marriage. Touche.
“My husband was no match for the fantasy hunk in my erotic novels… so I’ve ditched him” says bestselling writer of steamy fiction…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2845505/My-husband-no-match-fantasy-hunk-erotic-novels-ve-ditched-says-bestselling-writer-steamy-fiction.html
I saw a poster for EPL Gilbert speaking event in my town. I don’t know why I was surprised but I guess I thought the veil had been lifted a bit on the whole premise – that her story was nothing remarkable. I was half right.
Upon further reflection, the empowerment via relationship immolation theme is just so mainstream now that it doesn’t even register. It is unremarkable, but not for the reasons I first thought. I should know better. But the mission creep of weaponized feminist entitlement has a way of taking new ground with minimal resistance.
Why wait to realize you married the wrong man or are living the wrong life when you can just avoid such commitments altogether? Now, what didn’t surprise me at all was that it was posted in the lobby of a yoga studio.
I am of an age (and occasional work) that puts me in close contact with the mid-30’s women. Unlike Gilber’s era, in which mid 30’s women were likely married, ten years later the potential audience for such suggestive fantasy has already been living it for ten years and are more likely to be agitating for their Plan B than tickling the ripcord.
That said, I know a lot of women who are entering the final chapter of their fertility with a kind of resignation empowerment in which they begin the celebrated journey of falling in love with their singleness and liberating lifestyle. Of course, it doesn’t hurt to keep Tinder going and freeze some eggs just in case.
Instead of pushing the second chapter escapism, the culture now prefers to encourage and celebrate these selfish indulgences masked as self-exploratory empowerment trips as a first chapter hook. Back then, EPL was an ejection of responsibility fantasy, an escape from the unauthentic life, whereas now the narrative has elevated the selfish indulgence, this true-to-yourself authentic life, above any kind of responsibility that might impair, impede, or subordinate the aggregation of goodfeelz on the way to a kind of retirement-in-marriage with Mr. Beta Bux. You know, eventually, when she is ready.
And as this notion has replaced virtue, integrity, and character the younger cohorts have embraced it even sooner in their lives, a kind of preemptive EPL. They seem to prefer avoiding messy entanglements that ask anything of them in favor of building a portfolio of personal Experience.
What was EPL is now YOLO. I guess the advantage (for them) of embracing their empowerment early on in life is that they have the benefit of seeing that the closest they will get to Javier Bardem was when they were rolling in the hay with that hairless Spanish boy back in study-abroad. This eventual realization is, of course, unrelated to suddenly finding Kevin in IT “cute” in that shy-nerdy-cute 401k kind of way.
this reminds me of the story i saw on tv years ago of wives suddenly “realizing” that they were gay & destroying their marriages. afterwards, they were in the same place as these EPL idiots: alone, sad, regretful. as much as i enjoy the shadenfreude these girls provide me with. the husbands are the ones i feel for.
Hey Dalrock, it appears the solution to women’s dreams (making sure they are married ONLY to an alpha male and those same alpha males being interested in marriage) seems to be returning to the United States. Sadly, I find it ironic that women would be willing to share him just to make it happen. We’ll call this marriage 3.0.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-04-13/polygamy-is-the-next-marriage-rights-frontier
“My husband was no match for the fantasy hunk in my erotic novels… so I’ve ditched him”
There are no words to describe such stupidity.
No doubt he’s glad she did, and he is now banging cute 20-year olds. Bitch is no great shakes in the looks department, with her horse face and masculinized cougar’s body.
No doubt he’s glad she did, and he is now banging cute 20-year olds. Bitch is no great shakes in the looks department, with her horse face and masculinized cougar’s body.
The shallow moronettes who write this drivel for consumption by other shallow moronettes make the same foolish mistake that musicians and actors today make after they score big with a hit song or a major film role: they think that fame (and accompanying fortune) will go on forever. They never take into account how flickle and fleeting their audiences tastes are, that there is always competition from newer and bettter, and that what is hot today is passé tomorrow. Mizz Malpas is clearly going to learn this lesson the hard and painful way in the not very distant future.
I see bankruptcy, cats, prozac, lots of alcohol, and lots of hours (and pounds) spent on a shrink in this creature’s future once it all implodes.
And yeah, I agree 100 percent – she’s fugly too.
Is this Kate Bolick cover recent?
If so, I believe the picture is at least 5 years old.
Kind of like J-Date……….perpetually 29 (or in Bolick’s case…….39)
I see now the cover is from 2011.
Kate Bolick is not a woman to be looked up to.
What she is looking for is the company of other women to join in her misery.
Note that Gilbert’s leaving the bulk of her fortune to Planned Parenthood, which seems so…appropriate. Ugh. Women who bought this crap not only promoted a profoundly harmful fantasy, but are now set to fund the premiere babykilling organization in the United States.
Seen any trailers of “Mothers Day” and get a look at “Pretty Woman” yet? She has reasons to “Pray”.
Her next lead should probably be titled “Runaway Groom”..
Rollo,
That “shame” tactic to get men to marry sluts really fails in an epic manner. I mean seriously, how do you “shame” a bachelor who works full-time during the week (and maybe goes to school at night or possibly manages a small business) to “man-up” and marry a ho? That is never going to happen. Its not going to happen because… well…. he isn’t even around to hear you shame him. He’s too busy doing stuff. So the “HOW DARE YOU!!!!!” drivel from a pastor Driscol, the busy bachelor is never going to hear that because…. he’s busy. And if he does hear it, obviously (to the bachelor), those words don’t apply to him because he has already “manned up” and taken on adult responsibilities. Whether or not Driscoll and the others think those words DO apply to the hardworking, never-to-marry bachelor, isn’t relevant.
Thought you might all enjoy this article, off topic. It was posted April 13 so pretty sure it’s notan April Fool’s joke.
http://babylonbee.com/news/joyce-meyer-pulls-fire-alarm-distract-audience-1-timothy-2/
“The power of EPL is not that Gilbert managed to dump her loyal husband and travel to Europe and India. Being rewarded with cash and prizes for betraying your marriage vows is something the US and UK offers all wives. ”
Gilbert had to pay alimony to her ex and her world travel was paid for by her publishing company. My issue with the film is its blatant cultural appropriation.
He’s too busy doing stuff. So the “HOW DARE YOU!!!!!” drivel from a pastor Driscol, the busy bachelor is never going to hear that because…. he’s busy. And if he does hear it, obviously (to the bachelor), those words don’t apply to him because he has already “manned up” and taken on adult responsibilities. Whether or not Driscoll and the others think those words DO apply to the hardworking, never-to-marry bachelor, isn’t relevant.
You have to love the clueless hypocrisy of idiots like Driscoll, whose “living” is “earned” by begging and hustling, when they (attempt to) shame single men who are earning an honest living in the productive private sector.
@The Question: The Babylon Bee is a satire site. I enjoyed the article, though.
@The Question
The whole site is satire. Well done satire, at that.
“Gilbert had to pay alimony to her ex and her world travel was paid for by her publishing company.”
Yes, her publishing company covered her expenses after they heard her pitch for the book she wanted to write.
Why would the publisher front the costs of such a book?
Because they knew it would S-E-L-L !!
‘Eat, Pray, Love’ falls apart if it is a work of fiction……….just one more romance novel.
BUT…….go travelling with a pre-written script and ACT it out, now you have the basis for a #1 Best Seller, AND a fraud to be perpetrated on gullible women.
What made this book S-E-L-L is that it’s ‘based on “real” events’
Women bought and swallowed this tripe whole.
No questions asked.
Not the slightest bit of critical reflection.
You will never go broke by telling people what they want to hear.
And what women want to hear en masse is that ‘”They can do better than the schlub they are currently sharing a domicile”
I hope that Gilbert’s book is something other than a pre-scripted story telling put-on; although I doubt it, considering the premeditated way in which her book appears to have been written.
I do suspect her novel destroyed countless good marriages with the false promises of ‘something better’.
“I do suspect her novel destroyed countless good marriages with the false promises of ‘something better’.”
Maybe. I know it boosted the yoga and India tourism industries a bit.
Well, you can always go see Kate’s 3 act play if that magazine isn’t current enough for you:
https://www.facebook.com/events/659281750876294/
@ Rollo
Better get your tickets NOW!
17 are going of 222 invited.
This event will really bring in the dollar.
(s) missing on purpose.
The 2011 article would now read (if written today in 2016).
“Why millions of women like me SHOULD never marry”
And in another 5 years……..
“Why millions of women like me CANNOT marry”
It just doesn’t make any sense is all. I mean seriously….
(Driscoll) “HOW DARE YOU!!!!”
(Busy bachelor) “How dare I what?”
(Driscoll) “HOW DARE YOU FORCE YOUR GIRLFRIEND INTO LIVING WITH YOU IN SIN WITHOUT MARRYING HER!!!!!”
(Busy bachelor) “I don’t live with a girlfriend.”
(Driscoll) “HOW DARE YOU KEEP A WOMAN HANGING ON WITH YOU FOR SO MANY YEARS WITHOUT ASKING HER TO MARRY YOU!”
(Busy bachelor) “I don’t have a girlfriend.”
(Driscoll) “HOW DARE YOU PLAY THE FIELD WITH SO MANY WOMEN UN-EXCLUSIVELY!!!!”
(Busy bachelor) “I’m not even dating anyone.”
(Driscoll) “Oh. Well.” (now smiling) “We have so many lovely ladies in our parish. Its true that maybe all of them have a ready made family for you and they like to eat, but just think how you would be acting so Christlike to step up and be a man here. Obviously, any one of these ladies would be a great catch for someone like you, finally make you a man, give you real honest to goodness responsibility.”
(Busy bachelor) “Well, work has really been tough and I have this side business that I am trying to get off the ground and I had a sister who needs me to help with her kids every once in a while, so I think I’m kind of too busy to start courting anyon…”
(Driscoll) “HOW DARE YOU!!!!!”
@ Heidi @Cane Caldo
I figured. Still hilarious.
One thing I will give Kate Bolick. As far as I know she is not divorced or a baby momma. That alone makes her respectable by todays standards.
My concern is always committed family men and their children. As long as the government isn’t punishing some man and taking his children from him for some cunts eat pray love story she can fuck until nobody wants her as and old spinster and It is actual fine and honorable for a woman to do that vice what we have now.
How sad that as I’m reading the Babylon Bee that I’m having a hard time recognizing as satire and not legitimate criticism of Churchianity delivered straight up?
gg
I am pretty much your ally on that.
The way I look at it, marriage is not for everyone. It simply isn’t. Know yourself. Know if you can accept all the responsibility that comes with having a marriage. And if you won’t accept it or can’t accept it (which is usually the case) then…. don’t get married… ever. I don’t think less of that person if they choose not to take a spouse. I DO think less of that person if they don’t yet have a spouse but go out and have children. That is not good for anyone. Its entirely selfish.
Don’t look now, but . . . . the church lady chapter of the “Eat, Pray, Love” fan club is apparently joining in for the anniversary party as well! The “Christ and Pop culture” website hosted a recent podcast featuring conservative Christian professional women and committed #NeverTrump supporters Hannah Anderson and Erin Straza discussing the importance of the lessons they learned from the book.
You can listen in here: http://christandpopculture.com/eat-pray-love-guidebook-for-life/
As near as I can tell, they seemed to appreciate what the book taught them, but had some reservations about endorsing its overarching message because . . . not every woman has the privilege of an Elizabeth Gilbert to be in a well-paid and prestigious job where your employer will finance you as you upend your life for a year to go “discover” yourself abroad.
But hey, I’m sure that if only more of them did have the privilege then it’d be no big deal at all to dump your husband and seek fulfillment through self-indulgence. So let’s keep on smashing that patriarchy for a brighter tomorrow, ladies! It makes both you and Jesus happy!
Why women like me will never marry…
(Um, saggy boobs, flabby arms, face and neck wrinkles, fertility declining, wall approaching, are those the answers? But hey she has her stupid useless education and career to console her, and no doubt also cats.)
But hey, I’m sure that if only more of them did have the privilege then it’d be no big deal at all to dump your husband and seek fulfillment through self-indulgence.
Coming soon: GoFundMe pages by women seeking to raise money for their EPL hajjes.
The Bridges of Madison County had a similar story in the early nineties and sold 50 million copies. A middle-aged housewife with a good and decent husband has a quick affair with a handsome hunky drifter when her husband is out of town. The handsome stranger wants her to run away with him, and she longs to, but she decides that the consequences of blowing up her family are not worth it.
By the time EPL came out years later, women were ready to hear the same story again only this time with the heroine brave enough to run off and experience her blissful romantic ending.
Never heard of this book, or movie until reading Dalrock’s post. Wasn’t surprised that “Julia Roberts” was the “heroine” of the ‘Eat, Pray, Love’ movie though. Not at all surprised.
I find it at least interesting that when women behave like this it’s called “empowerment” and “liberating” and if a man up and leaves his wife, he’s a bum and “becoming a man-child” or “going through a mid-life crisis”
Not that a man should leave his wife, or children…….
Even stranger, these women run to India to find spiritual enlightenment and then discovering this Buddhism thing as if they “alone and empowered” are on to some hot roll to niravana (which, if you read the tenants of Theravada Buddhism, a woman is a LOWER life form than a man and any serious Buddhist monk will tell you the same thing).
Every woman is a “foodie” today and is an expert on food (Just like the Julia Roberts character in that 1990’s rom-com). Every woman seems to be living in a “cinderella syndrome” and can choose love on her terms and when (Just like the Julia Roberts character in that huge movie back in 1990 “Pretty Woman”). As for praying, this whole “feminine mystique” and “balance” that yoga gives is a big trend. Some of the most angry and irate women do this, I saw it in San Francisco almost two decades ago………and since Julia Roberts “prays” in this movie; I am sure it makes “all” women someone deeply spiritual and connected…..
Then again, watch any sermon by the frat-boys of churchianity today (Platt, Driscoll, Noble, Chandler) and they tell us this already….women good / men bad (except for them)
I use to tell tell “trekkies” back in college “It’s just a TV show. Yeah, it was cool, but it’s not real”
maybe more need to tell women this about Julia Roberts movies.
Best comment from the DM article:
It will be a best seller again now in 2016 because of the publicity.. All those husbands buying copies for their wives along with numerous travel brochures to exotic places.
Meanwhile in China, there are the leftover women: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-35994366
“Marriage in China is extremely patriarchal and women need to see that being single is something to be celebrated, not to be ashamed of,” she says.
“But I believe that this trend of women who choose to be single and independent is going to increase and this is the beginning.”
Every woman is a “foodie” today and is an expert on food (Just like the Julia Roberts character in that 1990’s rom-com).
An expert in eating it*, maybe, but sure as hell not in preparing, cooking, or serving it.
(*Even this is questionable. Most of these shallow bitches are just pretentious enough to come across as “afficionadas” or “experts,” but get into a discussion with them at length in which origins, ingredients, preparation, and serving techniques come up, and you’ll find that most of them are just hot air. Indeed, most of the UMC and UC are pig-ignorant about the trendy “exotic” foods they consume – most of which are simple peasant foods in their various countries of origin. Hilarious.)
@chokingonredpills:
I personally prefer the Japanese term, “Christmas Cake”, that gets applied. The Asian countries understand a Woman needs to be married by 26. Past that, they get viewed as “old” or “stupid”, depending on the region. Though it should be remembered that the Wealth Effect has also rendered a lot of the Men & Women unsuited for Marriage. We have the “hopeless Beta” problem in the West, but, functionally, most Men in Asia are still peasants. Not exactly producing the gina tingles, that.
feeriker….
agreed. I even joke when I see all these women telling about the latest restaurant or food trend or whatnot……yet she never cooks…..,……notice all the best chefs in the world are men 😉
@ Dalrock
Has there ever been a film or book that has portrayed the opposite; depicting a man leaving his wife, “finding himself,” and then connecting with a younger, hotter, tighter gal?
Almost every “masculine” film I see has fidelity or love for one’s wife championed and promoted. Think of 300. An uber manly film and Leonidas’ love for his wife is conveyed very well. Or Braveheart. Heck, even in the Last Boy Scout, a deeply cynical film, Bruce Willis’ character still loves and sticks with his wife after she cheats on him.
In other words, there is no male equivalent of this.
The natural male inclination is to champion loyalty and devotion to their woman as a sign of honor.
Or maybe I’m missing something here.
“…..I can’t help question whether Gilbert may have done as much harm as good for those following in her footsteps. There are of course inherent problems in trying to emulate someone’s else’s road to redemption, not least of all the inevitable disappointment when one discovers there aren’t enough Javier Bardems lurking at the end of the rainbow….”
Redemption? From what exactly?
Notice the inversion Dalrock points out so often here. Staying in a marriage and ensuring that your children have a father is an act requiring redemption.
There is a good reason why the EPL road has to be dressed up as moral. The same reason why abortion has to be legalized and de-stigmatized: Women have killed something God has made. It makes them guilty, and it eats away at them. Deep within their souls, they know it. So they have to retro-fit a justification for doing a terrible thing.
@The Question.
The pick up scene and the red pill praises having a stable: that is giving women what they want and extracting as much pleasure as you can, as long as you can.
And killing your honour.
Which, RooshV points out, is a fundamental error. For you can not regain your honour but by a painful trek to the cross. Which he seems to be doing.
Pingback: Ten years of error. | Dark Brightness
On Foodie women. Yes. And yes.
Its one of those things that has carried on past its saturation point. Women have always wanted to be seen as edgy or trendy or discerning of taste. Interestingly foodie initially correlated with other things. It was a predictor of age, income, living arrangement, political preferences, being green(ish), so forth. Now so many women are foodies that it is a trend in its penultimate phase.
On its face it was dumb. It says they like food. But…they like it better and want to explore it and try new things. There are two sure things about foodies or anything similar trend. First, I assert that they get more out of talking about the food experiences (or experiences in other trends) than they do the actual experience, and second, they try so hard to not be pedestrian in their tastes, to not be followers, to not be conformists, that they become the ultimate conformists. It isnt the conformist eating the pedestrian food that gets tied up in knots with efforts to fit in…its the foodie crowd that stays tied in knots worrying they may be seen as fitting in. hence they conform more stridently than the folks who just eat.
Nice that EPL pings on foodie, exotic spirituality, adventure, some bizarre nod to green sustainable living (go to India and see what that’s like for real….I wait on your report back) all stuff that seems to put women in the white chair in the white room holding the white ceramic mug billowing white steam and looking nothing but content.
I find it deliciously ironic that scores (thousands?) of unhaaaaaapy women dumped perfectly good husbands due to a book based on a lie. Gilbert didn’t leave her husband to find herself. Gilbert’s husband left her because she was a sex addict.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/magazine/confessions-of-a-seduction-addict.html?_r=1
Women are all about ‘image’, the superficial external presentation of (moral, physical, you name it) flawlessness they desire to project. They never confess any genuine regrets; regrets pertaining to the deleterious impacts on others of their actions.
Any ‘regrets’ expressed always relate to themselves: e.g. ‘ I knew my life was not good enough’; ‘I hadn’t been particularly happy’; ‘But I have no regrets’, that is no genuine regrets!; ‘My self-esteem was extremely low’; ‘I didn’t think I’d had a very remarkable or satisfying life’; ‘The saddest thing about most of my life has been how my lack of confidence has held me back’; ‘I was physically and emotionally drained’; ‘All I really wanted was a bit of peace and quiet’; breaking up with her long-term partner was essential for her peace of mind; ‘There was a sense I was missing out’; ‘He put his emotional needs before mine’; ‘It was that (breaking up) or my sanity’.
No regrets about any deleterious effects of their actions on others. No mention of abusive or kidult partners/husbands. All about me, me, me! The hamster spins hard.
If women do have agency, then they’re selfish beyond belief.
This seems to be the mid-life version of riding the cock carousel. They’re too old to ride anymore (i.e nobody wants them), but they have more money (no doubt as a result of alimony and property division in most cases) so they travel the world to “find themselves”. Then they come home alone and tell everyone how great it is (because they’re desperate to normalize the practice). Sad to say that it’s not going to work in the long term for them but the saddest part is that they will probably convince others to join in. Women are so stupid….
According to recent news articles, Gilbert and her EPL are selling her mansion and the business they just opened. They are “downsizing” and starting a “new chapter”. If the business doesn’t sell soon they are going to liquidate.
I think it is too soon to say she stuck the landing.
Women who left their husbands after reading EPL got the man they deserved. NONE!
The Question says:
April 14, 2016 at 12:15 am
“…The natural male inclination is to champion loyalty and devotion to their woman as a sign of honor.”
LOYALTY, DEVOTION, and (above all) HONOR. Male virtues if there ever were any, especially now in this culture. FEW women know anything of them…especially the EPL types.
Dalrock, you could write an entire article (or series) on Honor alone.
It was a struggle at times, but I never broke my military Oath of Allegiance my entire time while I was in. Why? Honor and Loyalty.
Dear Choking On Red Pill:
Try as they might, the feminists will never be able to erase these memes. They’re supported by our own biology as a species.
Women’s first and only job is to have and raise up kids. When they’re done with their own kids, their job is to raise the grandkids. This is the source of the angst of these selfish women’s parents, who are themselves seen as failures for their daughters’ refusal to bow to the biological imperative.
So it is. So it always will be. End of.
More on marriage 3.0
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2016-04-14/polygamy-is-constitutional-here-s-why
When I first moved to the USA I started reading this and related blogs. I also moved relatively close to a cousin of mine — a skank-ho single mom, who married and divorced an Americano simply for the green card and welfare check.
Her boys became a fun focus of my life. Eventually, I put it all together, and realized that I was taking on a typical matriarchal role. In the darkest depths of the matriarchy, one takes care of the kids of his female relatives, rather than his own kids. Of course, like my own bad self, the uncle/cousin male role-model isn’t really incentivized to do as much for these other kids. They don’t live with him, aren’t related to him as closely as his own kids would be, etc. I didn’t really contribute much money to them — and certainly I never gave her any money (she knows I don’t like her sorry ass). I took them out to throw the ball around. We sometimes went swimming, and lifting weights.
Given that white kids who are raised by single moms in the USA go in one of two directions, both of which are awful, I figured that I’d keep doing it, even after I realized that I was, at least in some small way, enabling her dysfunctional lifestyle. I figured that I might increase their chances of not joining the local nazi skinhead gang at age 14, start terrorizing law abiding citizens. And also I might show them an example of a man who didn’t ever take any shit from women, and had a great life. The white boys that grow up this way either end up thugs or total cucked-out manginas. Such is the life of the consumer, in a post-industrial matriarchy.
@ IBB
This type of polygamist thinking seems to be more and more along the line of a corporate cattle farm.
Several females popping out offspring & milk which is taken control of by the corporate farm interest. One male stud is kept for the purpose of servicing the females.
Does anyone else see the parallels to where our society appears to be headed?
We as a people/society are being treated no better than cattle.
Why keep several males around, as that’s expensive from a food perspective.
AND
Trying to keep a pen of bulls quiet & content can be dangerous.
@ Casey, whoever on earth thats running our societies for us, “those powers that be” can’t possibly be interested in farming us under the present circumstances of overpopulation. They’re far more interested in reducing our numbers. The harem system we’re seeing is the base nature of all stupid mammals. It’s female nature thats most in control here, making the sexual selection.
Everyone who’s honest knows there’s a hierarchy in the dating pool, the sexual marketplace. And everyones who’s honest knows that males generally will lower their rank in the hierarchy without the slightest hesitation for short term sexual access. Our new sexually open society opens up sexual opportunities for women of lower than average rank to sleep with men who are in reality completely above their league for exclusive commitment. An immoral alpha has little incentive in this system to marry at all but if he commits it will be to the female he perceives as the best option, not the sluts he’s using for sex. Meanwhile our societies support it because as a collective we’re immoral and can afford it, for now.. Shortsighted slutty women have voted in and support this system until it fails.
“Trying to keep a pen of bulls quiet & content can be dangerous.” Like the bulls from islam currently invading Europe? A religion of men who by force keep women chaste? Yes. Only now are the liberal, feminist idiots of Europe beginning to understand just how dangerous. Giving women power and sexual freedom is doom to any society eventually.
The next logical step in this sequence is one that has been championed in many feminist blogs; eliminate all men except for a few for breeding purposes, and keep those under close guard. This is what we do with cattle. Most male cattle are castrated and fattened up for slaughter. A select few prime specimens are kept for breeding and are mostly kept isolated and milked for artificial insemination. In milk cows it is even worse; the males are simply butchered shortly after birth.
Eppia, wife of a senator, ran off with the gladiators
To Pharos, to the Nile, and notorious Alexandria;
Even decadent Canopus condemned immoral Rome;
She forgot her home, her husband, deserted her sister,
Shamelessly, left her country, her wailing children,
And, amazingly, Paris her actor, and the Games.
Though, as a child of a wealthy family, she once slept
In a richly decorated cradle on soft, downy pillows,
That sea voyage concerned her little; nor her reputation,
Which is ever the least of losses to such ladies of luxury.
And, with a firm spirit, she endured Tyrrhenian waves,
The Ionian Sea’s vast roar, though she was often hurled
From one abyss to another. Though the reason be just
And virtuous, for taking risks, women are still afraid,
Their hearts frozen with terror, trembling in every limb:
Yet they’re courageous when daring shameful things.
If a husband demands it; then, boarding ship’s a pain,
The bilge is sickening, sky spinning round and round.
But with a lover, her stomach’s fine. A wife will vomit
Over her husband, a mistress eat with the sailors, stride
The deck, and delight in handling the stubborn rigging.
Was it good looks and youthfulness set Eppia on fire?
What did she see in him to endure being classed with
The gladiators? After all, her Sergius had already begun
To smooth his throat, an injured arm presaged retirement;
And his face was seriously disfigured, a furrow chafed
By his helmet, a huge lump on the bridge of his nose,
And a nasty condition provoking a forever-weeping eye.
He was a gladiator, though. That makes them Hyacinthus;
That’s why she preferred him to children and country,
Husband and sister. They love the steel. That same Sergius
Once discharged, would have dwindled to poor Veiiento.
Juvenal, The Satires: Satire VI, 82-113
That’s incredibly obvious at this point. The number of men who just won’t accept this is amazing.
Location matters. I was only kid of single mom and am neither thug nor cuck craving mangina. Oh, it screwed me up, but not those ways, and more importantly, not permanently.
What to say…..?
http://nypost.com/2016/04/14/why-more-women-are-letting-their-husbands-cheat/
DeNihilist, that would seem to be just formalizing a practice the UMC and UC have engaged in for years. Letting it out in the open is interesting. Abstractly it is a move in the direction of a soft harem, of a sort.
Perhaps Novaseeker can add his observations.
About the above NY Post article about “women letting their husbands cheat” I was discussing with some guy-pals in San Francisco almost two decades ago about how in the future women are going to “demand” harems or marriage to multiple men. We all laughed it off….but now?????? Doesn’t surprise me when / if this will happen….and it will be some Hollywood star that makes it popular.
Charlie Sheen had a harem.
And then there is this:
http://nypost.com/2016/04/14/why-more-women-are-letting-their-husbands-cheat/
Maybe these women are lying about them NOT cheating?
Well Dalrock This blog has given science focus on where to go. Male birth control pill, artificial womb, and sexbots. All of these together with a bible and all is good
How times have changed. 20-40 years ago we got revenge movies, femcentric, “9-to-5” and “Second Wives’ Club”, Jack Nicholson type movies, with mid-life crises intersecting with young hot chicks. The point of the movies was to “get back” at men, shame them, make fun of them, etc.
But for women we get Eat, Pray, Love. It’s noble when women do it.
Eat, pray, love. Cliche and passe. Destroy your offspring’s childhood for feelz and fantasy. Modern Christian religion no longer prevents ‘sinful behavior’…..it enables it. In women anyway.
Women have become feral because society has allowed them to. Debate, reason, philosophy, religion….useless. It will never suffice to convince women of their destructive nature. It must be prevented via laws and force. Finding a so called ‘NAWALT’ is not good enough….she must lack the ABILITY to destroy your life. If you get married, you give her all power over you. Women must lose power….and they will, one way or the other.
Listen to this man. He’s 100% correct on this.
Modern Christian religion no longer prevents ‘sinful behavior’
“Modern Christian religion” = churchianity, which is not New Testament Christianity at all. Since nearly all publicly visible “churches” fall into this category, this suggests that there are either almost no true Christian churches in existence in North America, or that their existence is entirely underground. Either way, it has horrifying implications for the true state of the faith. It has often been stated that Jesus and His Disciples would be mocked, berated and tossed out of today’s North American “churches,” but I must disagree; they would never set foot in them in the first place.
It will never suffice to convince women of their destructive nature. It must be prevented via laws and force.
You mean as did the ancients, who clearly understood the nature of women and the imperative of tightly controlling them? Granted, their civilzations all eventually collapsed too, but they lasted a lot longer than ours will for the simple reason that they kept a grip on common sense for a lot longer than we have. And no, common sense will NOT make a comeback in our lifetime without a great collapse occuring first. The One Percent is not going to drop the FI as their weapon of choice for controlling us without a civilization-rending battle.
It doesn’t matter what the 1% do. What can’t continue, won’t continue. The current situation is not sustainable and something will change. It may not be very pretty, but they are no omnipotent.
http://nypost.com/2016/04/14/why-more-women-are-letting-their-husbands-cheat/
I’d be interested in seeing the data behind that. Saying that it’s more common isn’t helpful – two couples instead of one is still “more common.”
Pingback: Poem of the day. | Dark Brightness
They’ve moved on from EPL:
Men on the Menu: 75 Delicious Affairs Around the World
Recently single and defiantly youthful, Bambi Smyth is determined to take control of her own destiny, and give love another chance.
So she sets off on a journey across the globe to combine her three greatest passions, food, travel and men, hoping to widen her horizons – and maybe her heart – along the way.
And what she finds during dates with seventy-five men as diverse as an Italian prince, a Spanish gigolo moonlighting in Monaco, a Russian multi-millionaire, and a priest at the Vatican, changes her perception of men – and herself – forever.
Longtorso
Modern women, She is going to pass herself around as a piece of ass and call that empowering self awareness.
Besides that I looked at ole bambi’s web site and she doesn’t look good enough to get a multi-millionaire especially a Russian one. She’s old too.
DeNihilist, that would seem to be just formalizing a practice the UMC and UC have engaged in for years. Letting it out in the open is interesting. Abstractly it is a move in the direction of a soft harem, of a sort.
Perhaps Novaseeker can add his observations.
It’s interesting and seems kind of new.
Affairs are not new, of course, but it would be new to have them explicitly permitted up-front in a kind of tit-for-tat way (“you get to have an affair once per year for an additional kid that I want”). That’s not something I’m very familiar with in the US at least. People have affairs (both sexes), but tend to keep them quiet, or at least try to. In Europe it’s different, because there are a lot more marriages in Europe that are open to some degree than in the US — I think that’s probably because Europeans tend to marry later on in a relationship, when pre-marital patterns, that often involved some degree of non-monogamy, have already been developed and agreed upon. In the US, by contrast, throughout the typical non-marital and marital relationship culture there is a huge emphasis placed on “external monogamy” — that is, on not “cheating”. So if this is happening to any significant degree here, it would be new, I think.
I also think that quite a few of the women who enter into such deals are taking care of business themselves on the side as well, and just not telling their H (get a better deal out of him that way, and many women are terrific liars when it comes to adultery).
Chump No More’s link to the Gilbert article should be followed, and the article read. Here it is again:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/28/magazine/confessions-of-a-seduction-addict.html?_r=1
It reiterates the incredible me, me, me selfishness of these women; their total disregard for anyone but themselves. I seriously doubt she’s cured herself of her disease; only Christ can do that.
@ greyghost
It doesn’t matter………..this bunk will still S-E-L-L !
The same scripted, premeditated cursive as EPL.
It doesn’t matter if it’s total B.S. so long as women continue to buy into it.
Re: the marriage contract with benefits…….
Any man entering into this arrangement is terribly short sighted.
In the example cited, she agreed to allow her husband’s dalliances in exchange for a 5th child.
The sex is fleeting, the child is permanent.
None of this would matter in an eventual relationship breakdown.
She would get all 5 kids, and he’d get to pay for them all.
@Longtorso
Heh. She needs more men! This is what it looks like when the strip-mining machine is forever trapped in its own pit.
@Greyghost
Yes. When a woman is young and hot promiscuity feels like endless opportunity and empowerment. But later in life it feels like being passed around like a gift no one wants, or no one wants to keep very long at least. Note how poor the book’s rankings are:
Her target audience isn’t buying her “empowerment” claim. They can feel it in their guts.
EPL is basically “Menopause Lit” for well-past-their-sell-by date women who dream of trading their dim, purgatorial existences for some Latin Lothario – who they will, of course, tame from his wandering ways. So they trade comfort and family for solipsism and, ultimately, loneliness.
Another account I didn’t see mentioned in the comments, although Rollo has covered it before, was Robin Rinaldi’s “The Wild Oats Project”. She leaves hubby in their 40s and beds a bunch of men, and then is pissed when he gets a much younger girlfriend. Result: DIVORCE! I would suspect he got the better end of the deal….
We are BACK TO THE 70’s!!!! Here is Charlene with a blast from our slutty, 2nd wave feminist past….
Robin Rinaldi’s “The Wild Oats Project”. return of Kings had an article about this one.
http://www.returnofkings.com/59301/robin-rinaldis-wild-oats-project-shows-why-women-should-not-sleep-around
I wonder what the pastors and preachers Dalrock as been writing about would have to say about this EPL stuff. Would be neat to see a sermon about the guest member Robin Rinaldi’s the esteemed writer of “The Wild Oats Project”.
OT
Proposed conference for parents of marriage age children to network:
http://letthemmarry.org/get-them-married-conference/
@Bee
I noticed at the bottom of the page checkboxes for pink[girl], blue[boy] and other[ ]. That other box was troubling.
It is sad news for me: My friend has now confessed his adulterous relationship (with a fit, single, childless woman some twenty years younger than his wife) to his wife and she has predictably been less than pleased – lots of four letter words, and she a Christian too and with lots of other Hamster driven nonsense. She wants him out – and so has gone for a week to stay with her Mother. He says he will have to sleep in the spare room. Don’t do that I said, make her sleep on the couch. I told him to stop thinking with his little head and acknowledge that his infatuation is merely sexual. We get on so well in many other ways, he said. You mean during the cigarette break between shagging, I replied. His wife has of course has been denying him sex since forever so what did she expect.
This cannot end well for either of them or the new woman never mind their children, however, I predicted that when she returns from her Mother’s (new hairstyle, new clothes and somewhat slimmer) she will soon have men (though not of his calibre) sniffing around. Not me, half an hour with her sends me into spirals of depression. I would not rule out a round the world trip.
Opus
Tell the guy to sleep in his bed like it never happened. And make sue she understands it is her fault. he should tell her he is still willing to stay married and she doesn’t have to sleep in the master bedroom if she doesn’t want to. He should also ask his wife what a good gift for valentines day he should get for his girlfriend. Make sure he doesn’t forget to remind his wife of his girlfriends age and that she is ok that he is married in a sexless marriage.
EPL should be re-named “My Male Isn’t Alpha Enough”. It’s all hypergamy in the end.
Novaseeker
Affairs are not new, of course, but it would be new to have them explicitly permitted up-front in a kind of tit-for-tat way (“you get to have an affair once per year for an additional kid that I want”). That’s not something I’m very familiar with in the US at least. People have affairs (both sexes), but tend to keep them quiet, or at least try to.
That’s more or less what I was trying to write, that this newspaper article (with a sample of what, 2?) is referring to an explicit recognition of an implicit fact.
In Europe it’s different, because there are a lot more marriages in Europe that are open to some degree than in the US — I think that’s probably because Europeans tend to marry later on in a relationship, when pre-marital patterns, that often involved some degree of non-monogamy, have already been developed and agreed upon. In the US, by contrast, throughout the typical non-marital and marital relationship culture there is a huge emphasis placed on “external monogamy” — that is, on not “cheating”. So if this is happening to any significant degree here, it would be new, I think.
The millennials under 35 don’t seem to be following this. Perhaps the whole FWB / hooking up environment in college leads to a de facto open relationship even when “exclusive” (maybe even, golly gee, Facebook exclusive!), and I’ve seen enough marriage ceremonies to know that all that ritual doesn’t change the people who are going through it. So perhaps the millennials are going to be just as casual about fidelity in marriage as they have tended to be in previous relationships, and that attitude is spreading in the more cosmopolitian areas, as such things tend to do.
(There’s a thought that bubbled up about gay marriage but I’ll leave that rabbit trail alone. )
I also think that quite a few of the women who enter into such deals are taking care of business themselves on the side as well, and just not telling their H (get a better deal out of him that way, and many women are terrific liars when it comes to adultery).
Well, yeah, t’was ever thus in many subgroups. That’s why all these attempts to determine the percent of cuckolding come up with varying results.
A guy has an affair and it is his wife’s fault? She may have played a role, but what Opus posted doesn’t indicate how much of a role even at that. Nevertheless, he is responsible for his own choices and he violated his vows. Why is she the one that is wrong?
Going to the other extreme will not help anything, nor is it a good place to stand before God.
Opus,
I prey your friend finds the right path through this. I agree that it will almost certainly be a mess no matter what happens. No easy answers.
Bubblcluck,
I had not noticed “Other” until you pointed it out. From what I know of the site authors I think they mean, “anyone without marriage age children who wants to attend for one reason or another”. They ask them to explain in the Suggestions box. The site authors are going to filter this and extend details to those who fit.
His wife has of course has been denying him sex since forever so what did she expect.
EXACTLY.
“Ladies,” I know this is difficult for the Hamster to process and if I could communicate the concept in non-logic-driven terminology I would. But I’m at a loss to so, so here goes, once again:
Bad things –VERY bad things– happen when you deny your husband sex over a long period of time. Think of a blockage of natural gas in a pipeline, or tectonic pressure in a volcano building up without a fissure point to release it. Eventually the pressure builds up to a point where it WILL find release – usually in an overwhelmingly and powerfully destructive way. Or, perhaps a better analogy, think of a starving person. At some point they’re going to find SOMETHING to eat, usually something the thought of which will turn your stomach (think of the movie “Alive!”).
When your husband is denied sex, which for many –most?– of us men, especially us married men, is a need as essential as food, water, and oxygen, he is going to get his needs met somewhere else. As my late mother-in-law, in her inimitable ghetto fashion, warned my now ex-wife, who refused to listen: “you take care of your man, or some other bitch-ho will do it for you.”
When you fall down on the job, “ladies,” don’t be surprised or angry if “some other bitch-ho” steps in and gets the job done for you. As Opus asks, in what can only be described as a common[sic]-sense question, WHAT ELSE DID YOU EXPECT TO HAPPEN UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES?
I think a much better question to ask you (and what Opus could have asked his friend’s wife) is why do you care? Neglecting your husband sexually is the ultimate show of not caring, orher than perhaps leaving him to rot in hospice when he’s terminally ill. Matter o’ fact, sexual neglect of a husband represents one of the most serious breeches of contract posible where the marriage contract is concerned. If we lived in a just society in which rule of law prevailed, it would be grounds for termination of the contract (without your drawing any cash and prizes, I’m sorry to add). Alternatively, if you refused to provide sexually for your husband, you would ideally be compelled to compensate him for the breech by, for example, allowing or even providing him with a second wife, a mistress, or a concubine. So which do you prefer: replacement with a younger/better model, or “womaning up” and doing what you agreed to do when you let him put a ring on it? YOU DON’T GET TO HAVE IT BOTHS WAYS FREE OF CONSEQUENCES.
That is all.
//putting soap box away//
BillyS @ 2:19 am:
“A guy has an affair and it is his wife’s fault?”
Yes. Sex is a legitimate, biological need for men. We cannot turn it off. His wife denied him and left him nowhere to go for relief. Are you surprised that a starving man stole food?
“Nevertheless, he is responsible for his own choices and he violated his vows. Why is she the one that is wrong?”
Because she violated the marriage vow first. God will judge the guy but I will not, because he had no practical alternative. “Go starve quietly on the couch” is only a denial of reality, like encouraging spandex-clad young women to exercise with men and then punishing men for staring. “It’s your fault you lusted after her! Not her fault for waving her tight ass in front of your face! Men are pigs!”
Or, perhaps a better analogy, think of a starving person. At some point they’re going to find SOMETHING to eat, usually something the thought of which will turn your stomach (think of the movie “Alive!”).
Analogy: suppose that custom and culture required that a woman could only eat food in the presence of her husband that he personally gave to her. Now suppose that when first married he provided her with a nice, balanced diet, but after the first child was born he cut her back to 1200 calories a day consisting entirely of bologna sandwiches on stale bread – take it or leave it.
Now suppose that everywhere she went, people seemed to be eating much better food. Maybe even offering her a bite of steak, a single shrimp, even just a slice of hot, buttered toast…
How long before something happened? Before…it just happened that she gorged on a cheap sausage, or a couple of cheap cakes?
Forget pre-marriage counseling by betaboy preachers / priests. Just inject every bride-to-be with Testosterone – not the full male does, just double what she’s used to – for 10 to 14 days. Let her live with that for a while, and be impressed at how her man maintains composure all day long.
Every. single. day.
A wise woman would keep her man’s appetites sated. Then again, Proverbs 14:1 instructs us that not all women are wise, and implies that all women are unwise from time to time.
Every wise woman buildeth her house: but the foolish plucketh it down with her hands.
Men are pigs and pigs are bacon
Narrative uber alles.
I read Opus’ post several times and did miss the comment on denying sex. She definitely violated her vows in that case, but it still does not justify his affair.
The Scriptures note that someone who steals because he is starving is still wrong, so one sin doesn’t make another sin right. I could see an argument for him to have left her since she had effectively left him, but adiltery remains a sin. He was not married to the one he sinned with either.
We still need to not stray into another ditch when avoiding the first one.
Banging hotties may seem compelling to some, but it is only pleasurable for a season.
The Scriptures only allow for sex within marriage or celebecy. Follow other options if you wish, but you will no longer be consistent with the core beliefs of this site.
I don’t get anyone claiming it’s the wives fault in the situation Opus described. I thought it was women that don’t have agency? Ridiculous. Sex is not a biological need like food. It’s a biological want. It’s strong, but you can easily avoid sex before marriage, and if your wife was sick or if just because she was a bad wife you can go without sex forever. Neither passions nor the devil has that much power over us.
And as an add to the above article regarding mates “allowing” their better half to have an affair.
This paper, using computer modeling is proposing that we as a race became monogamous through the help of STI’s. It appears, according to said paper, that as groups became social and large (over 30), the spread of dis-ease, helped form our thinking about poly/monogamy.
Now suppose there is some truth to this. As we advance in our fight against dis-ease, and we are able to slow/stop the spread of STI’s, then the pressure to pair up with just one partner to protect ourselves from physical dis-ease, lessens considerably.
We now start seeing the fruit of this “advance” in medicine, articles about happy cucks, men being “allowed” to barter for sexual relations with others, women no longer interested in marrying at their most fertile AND energetic phase of life, etc.
Unintended consequences anyone?
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/04/160412132035.htm
AARRGGHGHG 😦
Allow me to set a few facts straight about this woman. She did NOT leave her marriage for cash and prizes. In fact, she was the one to give cash and prizes to her ex, along with rights to her future cash and prizes. There aren’t very many cases where the woman is the higher earner (or has more assets) and the traditional divorce script is reversed. This is one.
She left her marriage because she didn’t want to have children, and he did. Well, “Felipe” had two adult children, and that suited her just fine because she didn’t have to do any of that icky mothering stuff, I guess. And her ex (who almost wrote a book about his side of the story but ended up not publishing it) went on to marry a younger woman and have two kids.
By Manosphere measures, this is a divorce success story (if there could ever be such a thing)! The husband ended up with the money, the young wife, and the kids he wanted. No wonder he didn’t feel the need respond to her book. He’s perfectly happy.
And, it should be noted, that she married “Felipe” to make it easier for him to live in the U.S., since he was Brazilian. Also of interest is that “Felipe”‘s ex is now writing her own book.
No wonder no one can keep up!!! 🙂
Dearie, some of us remember the narrative just fine, and the larger point of “Eat, Betray, Lust” stands on its own, no matter how frustrating that may be for you.
But thanks for dropping by to engage in your LIve Action Role Playing as “MOM to the Manosphere”, it’s sort of entertaining.
So how was your trip to Bali? Did ya get to Ubud, in the highlands, for tea? Or is that still in the future?
She left her marriage because she didn’t want to have children, and he did.
So I’m left to wonder: did she make her aversion to motherhood known to her first husband before she married him? Or, conversely, did he make his desire to be a father known to her beforehand? It would appear that in both cases the answer is no.
It sounds like each refusing to be honest with the other caused a lot of unnecessary suffering.
Expecting children in a marriage would seem to be just like expecting regular sex. A woman/wife may deny either, but that is not how it should work nor is it how it did work throughout history. (Only looking at the intent part though. Infertility happens, but is outside anyone’s control.)
Expecting children in a marriage would seem to be just like expecting regular sex. A woman/wife may deny either, but that is not how it should work nor is it how it did work throughout history.
Stretching it though this no doubt is, I still think a case could be made that any woman who, after marrying, both denies her husband sex AND makes it known that she wants nothing to do with motherhood has just handed her husband legitimate moral grounds for divorce or annulment.
@Kate Minter
Gilbert absolutely was rewarded with cash and prizes for divorcing. These “earnings” you describe are the funds she received selling the story of her divorce and subsequent empowerment. Divorce pays for women, but Gilbert hit the divorce jackpot.
The point here though was her story wouldn’t have been gruesomely feasted on by millions of women (some no doubt named Kate) had it not involved finding the love of her life as part of her cosmic reward. That she divorced and used her ill gotten gains to eat, travel, and pretend to be moral wouldn’t have been a story aspiring home breakers would have eaten up. Those stories are a dime a dozen; while the average woman’s post divorce isn’t funded by a book contract, the average woman can expect to be lavished with cash and prizes by the courts for not honoring her marriage vows, especially if the family she is breaking up has children in it.
I’m sorry, Dalrock, but the whole meme of EPL has very little basis in fact for Gilbert, herself. Perhaps women tried to follow, but she was a fool if she ever tried to make herself such an exemplar and she would lead them down the path of destruction.
Here is an excerpt from the book:
“The spring of 2003 brought things to a boiling point. A year and a half after I’d left, my hus-
band was finally ready to discuss terms of a settlement. Yes, he wanted cash and the house
and the lease on the Manhattan apartment — everything I’d been offering the whole while. But
he was also asking for things I’d never even considered (a stake in the royalties of books I’d
written during the marriage, a cut of possible future movie rights to my work, a share of my re-
tirement accounts, etc.) and here I had to voice my protest at last. Months of negotiations en-
sued between our lawyers, a compromise of sorts inched its way toward the table and it was
starting to look like my husband might actually accept a modified deal. It would cost me
dearly, but a fight in the courts would be infinitely more expensive and time-consuming, not to
mention soul-corroding. If he signed the agreement, all I had to do was pay and walk away.
Which would be fine with me at this point. Our relationship now thoroughly ruined, with even
civility destroyed between us, all I wanted anymore was the door.
The question was — would he sign? More weeks passed as he contested more details. If
he didn’t agree to this settlement, we’d have to go to trial. ”
I’ve tried to correct this misconception that she got a monetary reward from the divorce before, but it always falls on deaf ears. I think it’s important. Actually, I was given the book after I divorced and I found it incredibly depressing and a rather sadistic gift. No one likes divorce, but the truth is: a woman who is motivated enough to buy her way out of a marriage is more likely to find happiness in a subsequent relationship. The reason she’s in no way to be a role model is that this is in no way a typical scenario. A few of us wealthier broads do exist, but it’s not common.
None of this information undermines your ultimate message of the damage her book may have caused to the culture. Actually, it makes her look even worse.
And what I mean by that, is either she was too ignorant to understand the damage she would cause to fathers/mothers/children in even considering her situation equivalent to actual families, or she actually thought that being a mother was so horrible as to merit divorce and that other women don’t face tremendous difficulties (even dangers) in relationships.
Here’s another excerpt of importance:
“Great news!” my lawyer announced from distant New York City. “He just signed it!”
A few weeks later, I am living in Italy.
I have quit my job, paid off my divorce settlement and legal bills, given up my house, given
up my apartment, put what belongings I had left into storage in my sister’s place and packed
up two suitcases. My year of traveling has commenced. And I can actually afford to do this
because of a staggering personal miracle: in advance, my publisher has purchased the book I
shall write about my travels. It all turned out, in other words, just as the Indonesian medicine
man had predicted. I would lose all my money and it would be replaced immediately — or at
least enough of it to buy me a year of life.
If there is anything I can commend her on, it is releasing her husband to find his own happiness (the normal expectations of a relationship- sex/children), paying up like a big girl, and being willing to start again with nothing. Most divorces, as we know, don’t go down like that. It is actually *this* that made it possible for her to find happiness later. And, yet, women looking at her story seem to miss all the crucial parts and think they will find happiness by stealing from another.
*going back to my cave now 🙂 *
So I’m left to wonder: did she make her aversion to motherhood known to her first husband before she married him?
Who knows? Who cares? She’s a vow-breaking, trust-destroying, narcissist. So even if she did tell him something, it wouldn’t have mattered, because her words were just mouth-sounds to get what she wanted at that moment. If she wanted something else later, why, it’s time for different mouth-sounds.
Lizzy Gilbert clearly was living in pure emotion, and arguably still is. Any appeal to logic would be “mansplaining” and “patriarchal oppression” and so forth. Waste of time and energy.
BillyS
Expecting children in a marriage would seem to be just like expecting regular sex. A woman/wife may deny either, but that is not how it should work nor is it how it did work throughout history.
“Ought” is not the same word as “is”.
GeishaKate:
No one likes divorce,
Ah. I guess that explains why there are so few of them, then?
Thanks for clearing that up for us.
I think Kate is probably getting ready to spill the EPL lifestyle on Mark. Who knows?
Look at all of this victim shit in this. “too ignorant to understand”
other women.. face tremendous difficulties ( I like the even dangers shit tack on there to “trigger white knighting)
Is this the chick that Mark Minter the MGTOW guy married?
Is this the chick that Mark Minter the MGTOW guy married?
Er, what’s her last name, again?
Here I thought I was the only one who remembered Minter’s tl;dr wall-of-text postings at Rational Male.
Pingback: Not enough cash and prizes. | Dalrock
Pingback: Jumble Spoiler – 05/18/16 | Unclerave's Wordy Weblog
Pingback: Remarriage and widows. | Dark Brightness
BillyS says:
April 16, 2016 at 2:19 am
“A guy has an affair and it is his wife’s fault? She may have played a role, but what Opus posted doesn’t indicate how much of a role even at that. Nevertheless, he is responsible for his own choices and he violated his vows. Why is she the one that is wrong?”
SHE BROKE UP WITH HIM AS A ROMANTIC PARTNER. THAT IS WHAT LONG-TERM DEADBEDDING OF A HUSBAND MEANS. If you would not castigate someone who dated someone else after their GF/BF dumped them, oh, a couple of YEARS ago, why would you logically do so when a spouse does so?
Please don’t waste both our time referring to how they still are legally married, or they took a sacred vow in church. Just because a man doesn’t want to lose his children, all his property, and all his future income, doesn’t mean he has nothing he can morally do in response to a continuing fundamental act of voluntary betrayal of the marriage contract by his wife. The contract died by her hand; he is just acting on that reality.
Further, marriage no longer exists in the West, at least not for men, except as a way to get extra liabilities, in exchange for nothing. Marriage very much still exists for women, to the extent they want it to, as long as they want it to, in terms of what they get out of it, but with negligible obligations on their part, making it just a kind of welfare, or unearned “gimme” they can swipe. The Apostles may indeed have said that marriage is preferable to “burning” for the great majority who are unfit for lifelong celibacy. But, when marriage ceases to be possible for nearly all men (we can’t all be expected to become Amish or expatriate), the command to marry or be celibate dies with that loss of possibility. You might as reasonably deride a Jew who was born and died a century before Jesus’ life for not having accepted Jesus as his savior and the Messiah.
Pingback: The Lone Wanderers’ solutions to dating and marriage
Pingback: A review of “Tully”: it’s an antidote to marriage