After a successful hunt (or fishing trip), men like to show off with a picture of what they are bringing to the table. The appeal for men to demonstrate their ability to provide in such a primal way is obvious. But for women, hunting or fishing and then posing with their kill has lacked this appeal for equally obvious reasons; provision isn’t what women bring to the table.
Women are however skilled at finding ways to re-purpose activities to meet their own needs, and have finally found a way to make fishing as fun and meaningful for women as it is for men (LSFW).
Related:
Pingback: Broadcasting what they bring to the table. – Manosphere.org
Pingback: Broadcasting what they bring to the table. | Aus-Alt-Right
And all a means for the Women to show off their “bikini bodies”. It ain’t got nothing to do with the fish. (Given the tattoos on some of them, it’s also a sexual availability signal. The classic Slut Signals flying.)
It’s consistently clear what women really want.
What would make a modern feminist more proud? That she caught fish just like the boys or that she showed the boys more than just her fish? (Oh, that didn’t sound right)
At least their upper-front and lower-front bodies smell the same now.
Another perfect example of why you Never Take a Woman Fishing:
https://therationalmale.com/2015/10/20/never-take-a-woman-fishing/
Did Dalrock just jump the shark with this one?
boobs…they’re what’s for dinner
Eww. God must have given humans clothing because he couldn’t stand the sight of us.
It’s too late but does LSFW mean “Likely Safe For Work”? I don’t need another text from IT critiquing my inferior choice of porn. (It’s cool. Ordering male network admins to monitor erotic usage of company property is a really stupid HR move. “Thx d00d she wz hawt”. Band of brothers, oh yeah!)
“Did Dalrock just jump the shark with this one?”
Germans would call him a Trout.
I count ten women with tattoos.
The photos were interesting…I’ve never seen this many different types of fish on one page. And so colorful I don’t know if I would hold a shark so close to a sensitive body part, though.
Remember that while men can put sexual thoughts aside while another task is at hand, women are not like that. Sexual/SMP psychology comprises the *entirety* of female psychology. They can’t keep that angle out of anything they do.
Pingback: Broadcasting what they bring to the table. | Reaction Times
Smh lol… Them wimmenz be “hunting fo’ the men” at sea and they fallin’ “hook, lin ‘n sinker”. lol. Amen.
~ Bro. Jed
There go a few cold fish I’d like to thaw . . . . !
I count ten women with tattoos.
And at least that many with navel piercings.
Its just like the Olympics, honestly no one cares about female olympians unless theyre hot. The most popular female olympians are like Michelle Jenkins, Anna Voloshyna or the gymnasts. Beautiful fit women with good attitudes.
This article by Dalrock puts me in mind of video games for women.
The world of video games, everything from first-person shooters to civilization-building game simulations, is entirely geared for men. Aside from Tetris, there hasn’t been much attempt to appeal to women, probably because most men have absolutely no idea how women think or what tickles their fancy.
If, for video games, in my analysis, you wanted to appeal to chicks you’d have to make it a social event, something that involved feelings and memories. Harken back to the ancient hunter-gather tribes, when women were keenly interested in what others were thinking and how they themselves slotted into the big tribal picture. From that starting nexus, you could branch out into all kinds of “women’s games.”
Having worked for Electronic Arts, before, though, on the West Coast, I can safely predict that none of the male programmers or game testers would want to develop such a game, though. You’d have to literally order them by executive-fiat to get cracking on it. The closest most of them can come is Lara Croft’s big tits jouncing on the screen to “women’s entertainment.”
It’s loathsome in a way to understand women like this. Having a sharp angle into their psyches is like shining a powerful flashlight into a bubbling green cesspool. There’s “thought” there, kind of, but it’s not thought as the superior gender nkows it.
They all look like white trash. No surprise there.
I have a hard time believing most of those women are actually into fishing(or hunting for that matter…). They just don’t have the body language or carry themselves as most avid fishermen. I suspect most of them were convinced by their boyfriends into taking the topless photo’s with the fish blocking the view of their exposed breasts. Even if they did catch the fish, it was most likely with a lot of help from their boyfriends. Then after the fish was brought on board and at the prompting of the boyfriends urging them on by demanding, “Hey baby, hold this fish in front of your tits!!!” at which point the photo was taken. I, like most everyone here has seen similar imagery in other predominantly men’s sports and hobbies like off-roading, hunting, boating, et al.
So, the maxim, “You can lead a whore to culture, but you can’t make her think”* is quite true as always. Even about fishing.
*When I first read that comment I thought it was just about Madonna and her awful pop songs. I learned the hard way it was about Madonna’s fan base and the overwhelming, vast majority of women.
They just can’t let men have their space, can they? Pathetic.
They just can’t let men have their space, can they? Pathetic.
There is no such thing as an independent woman. It virtually does not exist.
As far as not letting men have their space, remember that women are biologically evolved to consume resources that men produce. Women rush to show up there, since if they don’t, that means that some other woman will get there first and consume the resources.
That is why women can’t stand it if men have even 3 hours to themselves, because the man is not producing resources that the woman can consume that very minute. This is where the idea of imputed income comes in, even after female-unilateral divorce. This is also why women hate men watching sports, playing video games, and worst of all, inventing something great in a laboratory (women cannot really connect that to subsequent money earned, since women don’t know how value is generated).
The take-away here is that women require the barest of excuses to reveal their exhibitionism.
women require the barest of excuses
Clever pun.
Note that everything is a prop. Whether captured fish, or one’s own child (breastfeeding exhibitionism is everywhere).
Just another example of the modern female mentality “if you’ve got it flaunt it”. It’s a display of power and who’s got more. Women have reduced themselves to sexual objects, its their power and its all they’ve got.
(women cannot really connect that to subsequent money earned, since women don’t know how value is generated).
Ergo the fact that there has never been a prominent female economist. Indeed, you could probably count the number of working female economists on the fingers of one hand, with several left to spare.
I think a secondary motivation is the sort of penis envy we often talk about here on the net. In the first place, friendly competition is completely alien to nearly all women, and in the second, most women are just not very creative. The idea of a dude inventing or building something neat irks them, as they are locked in cuthroat zero-sum mode, where any progress made by anyone else is assumed to be inherently stolen progress from themselves (in the world of women this is more-or-less accurate). Women are not very creatively competitive, and they seek to stifle creativity in their men out of spite.
Sad, really.
@CEO Nikolic
One of the most popular-among-women video game franchises was: The Sims. Build a house, decorate and furnish it, plant a beautiful garden, get a glamourous career, get an attractive partner, get perfect children, socialise with acquaintances, buy all manner of clothes, accessories, appliances etc you name it, all for NO EFFORT WHATSOEVER.
Ultimately, it arguably failed among women because the stuff you could acquire was ultimately limited. And it never really took off with men because you couldn’t inflict violence, drive, or blow things up. And the “naughty” stuff was censored. (i.e., it was pointless, and a poor escape from day-to-day reality.)
Disturbingly, it even depicted virtual adultery.
Actually, I’m surprised the game didn’t make it as a compulsory part of the school curriculum – “How to Be a Good Cog in the Machine of the F.I. Economy”.
Did Dalrock just jump the shark with this one?
Your concerns are ignored, troll.
Ladies who like fishing generally don’t wear bikinis, at least where I live. It is too darn cold.
It isn’t just fish, Dalrock.
In Australia, we have a cult magazine called “Bacon Busters”. Every year it prints a calendar and it has pictures like this in it (warning):
http://www.sickchirpse.com/weirdest-magazines-still-in-print/7/
Perhaps it is a shallow notion, as The Other Jim suggested, where guys have caught fish and urged their girlfriends to stick them in front of their boobs.
I think however that there is not just exhibitionism, but sexualisation. For women, the trump card, their ultimate weapon, is sex. If they use it on a man, they own him. If they use it in a man’s space, they own that space.
Anon said it best, “They can’t let men have their space”. Women need to invade male space and claim it for their own. To do that, there is nothing better than sex. That will include posing with the carcass, and indeed, sexualising the fish.
Funny, the only attractive ones are still wearing their bikini tops. The rest either have tattoos, body piercings or are over compensating for lack of facial beauty.
There is something else to consider beyond the notions of “women consuming” and “penis envy” pointed out by Anon and Boxer.
And that is, women are desperate to join the Social Group. And men are it. Wherever a group of men goes, that is a Social Group. Even a single man is like a particle around which a storm cloud of a Social Group can form.
Women are volitionless and cannot form Social Groups. Groups of females are not real entities: they have no purpose, no push, no direction, no real command in charge.
So, when you consider that, and when you think of a woman being alone, being bored or uncertain, then the presence of a man is like an irresistible magnetic draw to them. You men are seeing the negative side of the picture — the rape of male assets and the abuse of male superiority — rather than the impelling, positive side. I have no doubt that women are generally abuse towards men, and on a daily basis use them, but they are also irresistibly draw to them, singularly and in groups. And that is my point.
Note that in groups, especially younger ones, the boys considered “themselves” part of the group but the girls were “NOT” part of the group. The girls were just hangers-on, as is demonstrative of their true status. (Women can only gain power by individually, emotionally manipulating and inserting themselves into the minds of close lovers or male relatives.)
The girls always considered themselves part of the group.
This reminds me of the duck face phenomenon.
Women look stupid as heck making a duck face, yet countless women tried to make the most fabulous duck faces on social media.
It’s not about the duck face or the fish; it’s about bring attention to yourself. Look at me!
So I guess it’s OK to view porn and share it with others as long as you’re being critical of it?
Women are not very creatively competitive, and they seek to stifle creativity in their men out of spite.
Yep, and this is why women in positions of leadership in the technological or competitive marketing workplace ALWAYS leads to dysfunction and disaster. When creative, outside-the-box solutions to a problems are needed, women are not only useless at providing them, but go to extraordinary lengths to hinder their male colleagues and subordinates who can.
Having been through this nightmare scenario too many times to count, I’ve sworn that I will never allow myself to work for a woman ever again.
The Other Jim says: August 19, 2016 at 9:16 pm
I suspect most of them were convinced by their boyfriends
oh yeah, i totally forgot that women misbehaving is ALWAYS THE MAN’S FAULT. i totally spaced out about that, thanks Dude. your rug really ties the room together.
alternatively, you’re still reflexively Cucking. a line in the sand, Dude, a line in the sand.
It makes me sad. Broadcasting what they bring to the table, indeed… and for way too many, that’s all that they bring (if it isn’t false advertising, in which case it’s even less).
“Women are volitionless and cannot form Social Groups. Groups of females are not real entities: they have no purpose, no push, no direction, no real command in charge.”
I’ve seen their sewing clubs. It’s possible, at least for women who curb their envy of men.
How women ruin everything.
It makes me sad. Broadcasting what they bring to the table, indeed… and for way too many, that’s all that they bring (if it isn’t false advertising, in which case it’s even less).
It usually always is false advertising, or, at best, a product with an incredibly short shelf life.
A woman who is a true helpmeet is not a pure consumer of resources. A true helpmeet assists her husband (i.e., an assistant, not a co-equal decision-maker) at home or even at work, helping her husband become more efficient. Taking some tasks off his hands so he can focus on other matters. Comforting and emotionally supporting him, so he is rested and fortified to face the working world.
Not many helpmeets around these days, as everyone knows. But a helpmeet is productive in her own way, which is, productive through her husband.
Not many helpmeets around these days, as everyone knows. But a helpmeet is productive in her own way, which is, productive through her husband.
Maybe The Onion can publish its own endangered species list, with “Helpmeet” being on of the Top Five.
Red Pill Latecomer: ” A true helpmeet assists her husband (i.e., an assistant, not a co-equal decision-maker) at home or even at work, helping her husband become more efficient. Taking some tasks off his hands so he can focus on other matters. Comforting and emotionally supporting him, so he is rested and fortified to face the working world.”
That so well describes the relationship my parents had.
Avraham rosenblum: That so well describes the relationship my parents had.
American society has lost so much these past few generations, yet few people understand what or why. At best, people have a vague sense that something’s wrong. The “solution” is more free stuff. More free education and jobs training. More free childcare for “heroic” single moms. More paid family leave for “heroic” single moms. More pressure on men to “man up.” More safe spaces and sensitivity training.
I was listening to Catholic radio — 930 AM in Los Angeles — this morning. They said that demonic possession is on the rise. One reason they gave is the failure of fathers to be spiritual leaders in their homes. They said, “If the children see the father going to Mass, they’ll go.” No mention of frivorcing mothers as the reason why so many children don’t have strong, spiritual fathers in their lives.
@Red Pill Latecomer,
Your description of that helpmeet is pure poetry. In fact, it’s practically biblical in truth and wisdom. Or even precisely biblical in truth and wisdom.
Any way, no need to fear a scarcity of helpmeets these days. We’ve subverted biblical truths to the point that we have plenty of helpmeets – except that they are MEN (using the term loosely) as helpmeet to WOMEN.
” My spouse/partner (not husband) supports me in MY endeavors, he is on MY team, we are EQUAL partners, he makes sacrifices for ME.”
“He guards my equality!” HaHaHaHaHa!
One thing’s for sure: men are to blame for this.
Ergo the fact that there has never been a prominent female economist. Indeed, you could probably count the number of working female economists on the fingers of one hand, with several left to spare.
Oh, I can think of no field that women have less aptitude in than economics. It beats even engineering by a considerable distance.
The only other serious competitor for title of ‘field important to human progress and hence almost 100% male while of zero interest to females’ is astronomy.
Don’t let some high-profile female economist pull a fast one. She is just a figurehead who still believes in the pay gap and making the minimum wage high. A female who is a good economist is about as rare as a 7 year old boy being a good professional economist.
The *only* female economist who ever said anything remotely worthwhile is Veronique de Rugy :
This reminds me of the duck face phenomenon.
Yeah.
Why is the duck face even considered attractive? I don’t get it. Although I would love to neg a woman by telling her, “You luck like Daffy Duck…”.
I can’t take credit for this but Vox Day said women already have an online gaming world, similar in scope but totally eclipses World of Warcraft in size it’s heyday, by a orders of magnitude.
Facebook.
i.e. farsebook.
If you want to have some fun, when you ask your woman what’s she’s doing (when you know she’s on FB) and she says ‘looking at facebook’, ask “are you ‘winning’?”. Once you get her to look up from her phone/tablet/computer start comparing it to all the big MMO’s that are out there, tease the dickens out of it, compare it to your kids xbox/video games etc. Eventually you might even shame/mock her it out of her life. It might take months but it will improve your life.
Firing nearly everyone working Economics wouldn’t be bad for the most major economies. Just saying.
A woman that want’s to go fishing? A woman that want’s to go fishing topless? I am for it.
Don’t ask me to sign a contract…..don’t invite the gov into our relationship…..and we’re good.
Firing nearly everyone working Economics wouldn’t be bad for the most major economies. Just saying.
That’s true, for the simple reason that most professional economists are Keynesians (or Chicago School, which is nearly as bad).
An activist/feminist by the name of Zarna Joshi decides to get some attention:
@bob k mando,
clearly reading comprehension is NOT your strong point. All of the women who had photo’s taken of themselves topless all had the opportunity to say, ‘No, I’m not going to flash my tits for you to put up on the internet.” Yet, they did NOT exercise that choice. All they did was give into some stupid ass request to feed into their narcissism and vanity, and their boyfriends’ pitiful attempt at attention by posting themselves on the internet topless. That’s a criticism of these women as weak-willed women who surrendered to ill thought out behavior by their boyfriends. Hence, my comment summarizing my previous commentary;
“You can lead a whore to culture, but you can’t make her think”* is quite true as always. Even about fishing.”
ps, “Robert”, you might want to change your google profile describing you as “changing HER profile photo”. Unless you’re a transgender transitioning to your new sex. In that case, you go girl!!!…er…guy…or whatever…
Anything about you that goes against “traditional” gender roles?
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=1022064
And along with their fish bras, they can wear these …
“Why is the duck face even considered attractive? I don’t get it.”
Perhaps because you can rub your dick on those pouty lips. At least that’s the only logical explanation I can come up with.
I Regret My Divorce:
http://blog.lifeway.com/womenallaccess/2016/07/20/i-regret-my-divorce/?adbsc=social_lwwomengen_20160720_64002646&adbid=755811515668701184&adbpl=tw&adbpr=15102388
Woman regrets her admitted unbiblical divorce. In the comments she keeps telling people who say she should simply get back together with her ex-husband that “she is very open to that idea…” She describes herself as an aunt of four that works for LifeWay doing women’s ministry.
The comments are a mixed bag of women agreeing on others screaming about how much they were abused in their marriages.
Dear Wood Chipper:
I thought this was a very good article by a self-aware person (rare find these days, male or female). She tells it straight.
Boxer
Wood Chipper, I didn’t think it was in any way a good article.
She spent a awful lot of words saying nothing much at all.
She affirmed the notion that abuse can be emotional or mental, a treasured excuse for frivorce.
In cowardly fashion, she pointedly refused to reveal any personal details about her divorce (indicating that it was her fault on many levels).
She made herself out to be a suffering victim (of her own choice) and included many self-congratulatory praise (e.g. she remains close to her husband’s family; Jesus loves her and wants her to be happy, as if that’s to her own credit).
I guess this piece is considered praiseworthy coming from a woman. But a man would have been far harder on himself.
Inre “I Regret My Divorce:” one has to give Mizz Greene props for her honesty. Rare is the woman who would write such an admission (although MANY women undoubtedly feel it). I do agree, however, tbat her not giving details on the circumstances surrounding the divorce comes across as suspiciously self-serving.
One thing that jumped out at me above everything she talked about is what she did NOT talk about: children. Why didn’t she and her husband have any during their 12.5 years of marriage? Was she (or he) unable to conceive? Did one or both of them not want children? This is, I believe, a key factor in her decision to pull the divorce trigger. Not having children involved made it that much easier for her. Did she want children and he didn’t? Or vice versa? Did one or the other change their mind at some point during the marriage? Was self and career more important than a family? This inquiring mind would like to know, as answers to these questions would explain volumes. Then again, such answers might paint Mizz Greene in a less than sympathetic light.
@Freeriker
What was her sin?
Does she repent of that sin in the post?
Red Pill Latecomer:
Dalrock:
You guys are (shortsightedly) expecting this woman, writing to an audience of women, to preach like a man would preach to men.
From the best part of this (excellent) article:
This is pure effectiveness when given to women, who aren’t conditioned to function in the abstract (sin, etc.), but in the world of reward and punishment. It is what Grey Ghost and others call “dread,” and is exactly what women fear. The loss of status among other women, the loss of face in the community, and the loss of connectedness to the divine is illustrated as a direct result of going down to the divorce courts.
Bonus points to her ex, who is probably banging her, but will not commit to a “remarriage”. For those serious Christians who believe that divorce is not binding spiritually, the husband is surely making the right choice. He is still married to her, but is denying her a second wedding day, while keeping the dread game forefront in her mind. As it should be.
Boxer
I don’t know that their marriage didn’t produce children. She tells us she won’t reveal any personal details about their marriage. The unhappy fate of their children — drugs, poor grades, promiscuity, pawns during the custody proceedings? — might be among those “personal details.”
Maybe there were no children. But maybe there were. We don’t know.
@Boxer
In what other circumstance would “I missed a miracle” be a sufficient stand-in for “I committed an injustice”?
Woman: Your Honor, I missed a miracle.
Judge: You mean you stole.
Woman: I said I missed the miracle of buying! Same thing.
Judge: What about the kid you ran over in your escape?
Woman: Yes, exactly! I missed that miracle too!
@latecomer any woman that would dexcribe herself in her bio as an “aunt of four,” instead of a mother more than likely has no kids.
Dear Cane:
Your response made me lol.
Women, in my experience, aren’t at all concerned with “justice” (lol). They aren’t raised to understand the term and most (at least most North American chicks I’ve had anything to do with) haven’t a clue as to its meaning or application.
Now, “missing out” … that’s something women are terrified of instinctively. That little essay was rhetorically perfect, in my estimation.
Boxer
“@latecomer any woman that would describe herself in her bio as an ‘aunt of four,’ instead of a mother has no kids.”
FIFY. If she had kids, she would have definitely mentioned them. What mother who isn’t a conniving moster denies the existence of her children? A woman’s children are her most prized POSSESSIONS (yes, women see their childrren as exactly that: possessions, or property, and in a divorce case, their most powerful weapons).
Very likely one of her deepest regrets in addition to foolishly divorcing her husband is knowing that she’s going to spent her dotage ALONE AND UNCARED FOR should her four wonderful nephews/nieces decide that they have priorities in life higher than caring for their aunt (as in caring for their own [probably undivorced] parents).
Women, in my experience, aren’t at all concerned with “justice” (lol)
Except when THEY are denied it. As for when anyone else is denied it, well, yeah, then it’s not terribly high on their list of life’s priorities.
@Boxer
Are you saying the woman teaching Christianity at Lifeway Women doesn’t care about justice? If so, I think you can make a strong case for this. But it is an odd defense of a woman who sets herself up as a godly teacher.
I understand, and have written on the same. Her post teaching Christianity would be effective, if it wasn’t presented as teaching Christianity. Look at the blurb at the top of the article:
Dear Fellas:
Dalrock said:
I’ll cop to the fact that I haven’t been to that site before this weekend, when the link was posted here. If you have questions about her motives, I won’t pretend to argue. My point was that her article was rhetorically very good. It meant to reach out to women, and judging by all the comments, it worked.
feeriker said (speaking about the concept of justice):
Your argument seems to parallel Dalrock’s, and it seems to be predicated upon a rather amazing assumption, namely, that women know the definition of “justice” and (nearly unanimously) engage in a malicious daily conspiracy to trod it underfoot, pretending ignorance all the while.
I think it’s easier to believe that most women (at least in North America) live lives where contemplation of such abstractions is unnecessary. With very few exceptions, I think women don’t know what the word means. (To be fair, many men seem ignorant of the examined life, too). For these women, “injustice” just means “doesn’t give me what I want” or “disagrees with me” — which isn’t a coherent application of the actual definition.
In any event, I’m surprised at you guys who are pouring cold water all over someone who is telling the truth in such an unvarnished fashion. The author points out that her divorce did not lead to great riches or romance, but a miserable life of insecurity, regret and envy (of those people who didn’t go down to the divorce court, as she did). What, exactly, is the problem with such a message? I honestly don’t see it.
Best,
Boxer
In any event, I’m surprised at you guys who are pouring cold water all over someone who is telling the truth in such an unvarnished fashion. The author points out that her divorce did not lead to great riches or romance, but a miserable life of insecurity, regret and envy
I think the disagreement is about using the Christian label.
What is certain is that she is at least connecting her misfortune to her own poor decisions, and is even advising other women not to do the same. That is something we don’t see everyday, as women usually don’t have such self-awareness. On this point, she can be praised.
But I can see how her speaking under a Christian mantle may evoke the disapproval of some here…
On the topic of fish bras… I popped Waterworld into the player this afternoon, and chuckled at the scene where Jeane Tripplehorn drops her clothes in hopes of getting Kevin Costner to take her and a child along with him…to which he responds, ‘You’ve got nothing of any use to me.’
When women reduce themselves to only having one thing to offer, they better be certain that it actually has value. Not to discourage women from going topless, but rather, that putting it front and center as the only thing they have to offer might not be the best idea, if it’s not the best thing they have to offer.
(emphases mine) “But here is the gist of this post: I now regret divorcing my husband.
[…]
I also want to clear the question of abuse. We had our issues, but that was not one of them.
[…]
I was doing what I thought was my only choice at the time. After 12 years and 6 months, the woman I am now would not have chosen to divorce my husband.
Wherever you are, I hope you will read this and ask God what He would say to your reason or reasons for divorcing.
[…]
I am talking to someone who is feeling hopeless with no biblical reason for divorcing; someone who just wants OUT. My advice to you is to pause. Just stop. Wait. Breathe. Make room for God to move, even if it takes years (and it might), look to Him, wait for Him to move and not your husband. Ask God what to do and then really listen to Him—and not through the lens of only what you want Him to say. Give yourself distance, time, and space to evaluate your motives.
I think she made some very good statements. She regrets her divorce and would not choose it if she had her present level of knowledge. Overall, I would say she is saying not to divorce just because “I’m unhaaaapy”. Keep your commitment and look to God to work.
She gives no reason for her divorce, but states it was not abuse. It seems she may not have had a biblical reason for divorce. Assuming that is the case, it would have been so much better if she clearly said that was the case, and stated her repentance. I am disappointed that she does not do that.
As to the comments, I am surprised at how positive they are toward the article and her statements. I would have expected more backlash.
Boxer says:
August 21, 2016 at 10:03 pm
You bring up a very good point here concerning the strange and unfounded notion that women can define “justice.” I admit to this point not having crossed my mind before now. I also believe that your examples of what are the closest things to a definition of injustice in Womensworld are spot-on and are probably what I should have used as reference points.
All of that said, and as I stated in my original post on this topic, I do give kudos to Mizz Greene for doing something so very rare in the world of women. Where I think she fell short, as I later stated, was in avoiding an explanation of specifically why she divorced. This avoidance is somewhat akin to a doctor setting out to administer preventive medicine that requires a series of inocculations, but doing nothing other than giving a preliminary treatment and then going no further. Such abbreviated treatment effectively renders prevention ineffective.
Similarly, if Mizz Greene’s goal is to prevent other women from making her mistake, she needs to provide enough case background to enable the formulation of an effective preventive solution. I simply cannot buy her argument that the details surrounding her divorce were “personal.” Divorce scenarios follow a fairly limited and common set of templates and hers was certainly no exception. Again, while she is to be commended for her candor and honesty, two attributes oh-so-preciously-rare in women, I fail to see how not divulging details as a form of instructive example is helping her mission to help other women avoid her mistake. If anything, the more “gory details” she were to provide, the harder hitting and more effective would be her lesson of “ladies, you don’t EVER want to go here!”
Boxer: I’m surprised at you guys who are pouring cold water all over someone who is telling the truth in such an unvarnished fashion.
I didn’t read the article as unvarnished truth. I read it as offering some truth, but diluted with self-serving rhetoric and omissions.
Tom,
When women reduce themselves to only having one thing to offer, they better be certain that it actually has value.
This is why you see average or worse women as the most vocal complainers about ‘rape culture’ and ‘sexual harassment’ that they falsely claim to receive.
The biggest proof of this being is lie is that the prettiest women don’t seem to be worried one bit about rampant rape culture, even though they are the ones supposedly at most risk. That the complaining is exclusively from women that certainly don’t get any male attention tells you how they think they can fake it until they make it, and have no idea how to become attractive.
Actually, she needs to go to her ex-husband, fall at his knees, beg forgiveness and then stop complaining about her choices to divorce him for no reason at all. He is the one she committed this heinous act against and he is the one who should be told about her regret and the damage it caused him, not her. She needs to have some introspection and realize that she damaged others, not just herself.
Exactly, she doesn’t seem to interested in the pain caused to others but merely feels lonely and cheated out of her milestones for marriage. She does not seem overly concerned that she sinned against her husband and broke her vows. She still sees her acts as a positive step that had some unfortunate consequences and still makes disclaimers to try and justify her divorce.
Lots of “I’s” in her post..
Yeah, she really, really regrets her decision right?! No, she only regrets no other man came up and made the commitment. I see no true regret from her and that paragraph just shows the inner workings of her mind, justifying the act through the use of God’s love, pure filth.
She needs to have some introspection and realize that she damaged others, not just herself.
Introspection from a woman (especially an Americanwoman)? C’mon now.
I mean, yeah, she fessed up to both having made a stupid decision AND that it was all her fault, a pair of acts that surely have led to a rash of emergency orders from Hell for snow shovels and overcoats, but to think that a trifecta is possible with “introspection?” That’s just pushing things a bit far.
Actually, she needs to go to her ex-husband, fall at his knees, beg forgiveness and then stop complaining about her choices to divorce him for no reason at all. He is the one she committed this heinous act against and he is the one who should be told about her regret and the damage it caused him, not her.
She says at the beginning of the article that her ex-husband has seen it and given it his blessing. That they’re not back together again suggests strongly to me that he’s moved on, probably to a younger, better, hotter, more loving, less self-centered, and much more spiritually grounded woman. Paige is different from most women who pissed, shat, and puked in the hard beds they made for themselves in that she has no choice but to sleep in hers and has made peace with that fact. Most other women in her situation are in permanent denial/blame-him mode.
I’m sorry Feeriker, but there is zero acknowledgment from her of the pain she caused her husband, nor asking him for forgiveness. The only difference between her and the multitudes of other women who do the exact same thing for no reason at all is that she finally figures out that she caused herself damage too and won’t be able to enjoy the comforts of a marriage. It took her 12 years and six months to figure this out, mind you….
Not one “I’m sorry”. Stop defending a woman who only acted selfishly and then regretted that it didn’t work out in her favour. That is the only regret she has.
That is asking way to much from a woman.
Women are confused and scared and and believe it or not agree with her. The behavior of women is taught by society and that includes the church and they are miserable inside. While at the same time have all of the social cultural checklist boxes check off to represent happiness and success as a woman.
OT. Question, friend has been accused of fathering a 2 year old child. A bit impossible as he stopped sleeping with her 2 years ago when she wasn’t 9 months pregnant. He is out of the US on an extended business trip, but shall be back in 7 months or so. She has been contacting anyone remotely connected to him on the internet calling him a deadbeat etc., so he would like to file a restraining order and/or defamation suit. Any advice on how to proceed? He is not a permanent resident or citizen, although the female with the fake child isn’t either from what I understand. Thanks!
The author displays the sort of dishonesty so typical of many “Christian” women. She “searches her heart” to learn God’s true intentions for her — Does God want her to divorce or not?
Imagine a thief “searching his heart” to learn — Does God want me to steal that gold Rolex or not? Oh please God, reveal your desires for me and that Rolex…
Yeah, the author says to make sure its God’s true intentions, and not what the woman wants. But that merely hides her dishonesty with a veneer of false sincerity. It’s easy to know God’s true intentions for her marriage and for the Rolex. Don’t blow up the marriage. Don’t steal the Rolex. The Bible makes it plain.
Women, in my experience, aren’t at all concerned with “justice” (lol).
Oh, sure they are. They just have different evaluation criteria from men.
Male: evaluate facts and evidence objectively to arrive at “just” verdict
Female: evaluate muh feelz to arrive at “just” verdict
Tarl:
In other words, women don’t know the definition (or care about it).
That’s what I said, above, multiple times. lol
Boxer
Dear Feeriker:
Doesn’t matter whether or not you buy it. She’s talking to married women who are contemplating divorce. In that regard, what you (rightly) point out as faults, when speaking to men, are assets, when women are one’s audience.
The fact that she doesn’t give details about her divorce effectively denies her readers the opportunity to justify or obfuscate. If she did give details, readers would immediately decide that she was not in the reader’s position, and just as quickly discount her good advice. She keeps it general, so that the reader is forced to personally identify with the writer’s consequences.
Best,
Boxer
Have you ever apologized to a woman? lol
When women hear/read “I’m sorry” they tend to discount the message as quickly as they deprecate the person. They immediately feel pity and contempt, and quit identifying with the communication.
The author of this article doesn’t complain or explain. She just lays out the consequences, without ever giving her readers any opportunity to rationalize their own situation as “special” or “unique”, or to discount the author as a crappy woman. She remains in an equal position throughout the discourse, flatly laying out the end result of going down to the divorce court.
Read it again, pretending you’re a herd-animal chick (removing reason and accountability) and see what I mean. It’s a pretty convincing little essay.
Boxer
Even though she goes above and beyond disassociating herself from speaking to “abused” women, look at how many commenters feel the need to tell their stories about how abusive their ex husbands were.
Boxer
You have done a good job of reading women. That woman is as god as it gets. That is the best you will see from a woman. As much as we have discussed female nature here There is still difficulty in seeing what it looks like in real play. This whole story line is chick 101 and this is the best to be expected from women.
… look at how many commenters feel the need to tell their stories about how abusive their ex husbands were.
For the benefit of any newcomers/manospherian newbies here: Always remember that “abusive” is modern chickspeak for “refused to give me what I wanted or refused to do what I wanted him to do, whenever I wanted it.”
I’m sorry Feeriker, but there is zero acknowledgment from her of the pain she caused her husband, nor asking him for forgiveness.
Agreed, but like I said upthread, the fact that she even went as far as she did is nothing short of a miracle. To expect anything more out of her is tantamount to taking a miracle for granted. It has probably already caused irreparable damage to her womanhood just to have admitted that she made a foolish and destructive decision.
“Abusive” is modern chickspeak for “refused to give me what I wanted or refused to do what I wanted him to do, whenever I wanted it.”
Yep. Mental and emotional abuse always equals the above. Now I need very specific details to even believe someone claiming physical abuse.
Normal path for a woman to take. “No way in hell is that divorce her fault” What else would you expect from a woman? A woman can walk out of an abortion clinic and claim with full belief she is a victim of the loss of her child.
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/women-are-genetically-programmed-to-have-affairs-evolution-university-texas-scientists-suggest-a7203501.html
More commonly known here as Alpha fucks/Beta bucks. Marriage is plainly a silly endeavour when they are no societal controls in place. Get married at your own peril.
One more comment on the woman who regrets her divorce. The church sees two kinds of sorrow for sin: contrition, which means being sorry that you sinned and offended God and caused damage to other people, and attrition, which means sorrow for the consequences of your sin affecting yourself – being sorry you got caught, for the loss of reputation, or of other penalties you suffered. Clearly the woman who wrote feels the second kind of sorrow; I see no sign of the first.
Still, given the solipsistic miasma of most such posts, it was (relatively) a breath of fresh air. After all, she didn’t blame a man.
American society has lost so much these past few generations, yet few people understand what or why.
Actually, it is not rocket science. The rottenness started here. If we start the corrective processes today, we are not likely to see a nationwide positive result for another 20-30 years.
Another author made a similar claim here
This also highlights the lack of female mentorship in society. Older women do not mentor women into positive behaviors; it’s actually the reverse. They give them advice that’s designed to limit their happiness.
I can imagine an older woman telling the younger one, “Oh yeah, that picture of you looks great! You should totally post that all over the internet. Any man who does not like it is no good for you anyway,”
Then when the young woman proceeds with the photo, the older one sneers to herself: “What a sucker!”
My mistake; the two links pointed to the same person.
This also highlights the lack of female mentorship in society. Older women do not mentor women into positive behaviors; it’s actually the reverse. They give them advice that’s designed to limit their happiness.
As bears endless repeating, there are no more “Titus 2 wives” in today’s society, at least not in significant enough numbers to even consider. Today’s “older women” all came of age as Second-Wave Feminism was ascendant and nearly all of them drank deeply of its poisoned waters, which caused permanent malformation of their characters and souls. As you point out above, the only “guidance,” “mentoring,” or “advice” that older women today give younger women is just more of the spiritual, moral, sexual, and behavioral poison that has already irreparably contaminated at least three generations of western women.
This is the advice older celebrity moms (Lena Headey) offer their daughters: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/games-of-thrones-actor-lena-headey-makes-emotional-promise-to-her-unborn-daughter-10272768.html
“My daughter will have freedom of choice. She will be free to dance, to sing, to be educated in the fields that spark her passion, to marry if she wants, to marry WHO she wants, to remain single, or to fall in love with another woman.
“She’ll be able to wear what she wants, put on lipstick, and read books that spark debate and expand her mind.
“She will be loved, protected, respected, and celebrated.
“All these things that should be, and will be, basic human rights, are a promise to my daughter.”
So to be “celebrated” is a basic human right (at least for women).
Naturally, younger women look to older celebrity women — to Hollywood in general — for advice on how to live, marry, divorce, and raise children.
BTW, nobody knows who is the father of divorcee Headey’s daughter. Headey frivorced her first husband about the time Game of Thrones got going. She apparently got custody of the son (from her first marriage). The daughter is from a subsequent (unnamed) lover.
These sick policies are becoming so commonplace, it’s almost redundant to keep posting them: http://www.kob.com/albuquerque-news/teachers-at-school-directed-to-stop-addressing-students-as-lsquoboys-and-girlsrsquo/4240210/
Teachers at Carlos Rey Elementary School are in a tough situation after their assistant principal told them to stop calling their students “boys and girls.”
It seems the school administrators decided to take the new transgender bathroom policy for Albuquerque Public Schools a step further. This appears to the first example of something that started as a bathroom issue now expanding into daily life in the classroom.
A letter sent to teachers at Carlos Rey this month titled “Gender Identity Procedural Directive” states teachers can no longer refer to their students as boys and girls starting this month, telling them to eliminate gender in their classrooms.
Sure, being celebrated is a human right for women but being shamed is a human right for men.
No, she should be loved by her parents, she is not owed love by anyone else, she also should be protected by her parents, no one else. Respect is earned, not given. And to be celebrated used to mean being accomplished or accomplishing great works of one endeavour or another.
Willfully ignorant platitudes. Playing the ‘tough single mom’ in both The Terminator series and the GOTs rubbish has made her think that’s how to be a women.. yeah, these women are destructive.
It’s easy to believe that being a “tough single mom” is normal when the woman earns movie star level paydays. Then she party with lovers, have lunch with girlfriends, spend time doing yoga and therapy and physical training, go to premieres and gala social events — while nannies do the dirty work at home.
Movie star moms can always pop home for some quick “quality time” with the kids (all cleaned up by nanny), before they go out on another film shoot or awards event.
Of course, there have always been a few outliers — people who live the Bohemian lifestyle. Society could afford a few outliers, some of whom (almost all men) even produced some great art. Mozart lived a chaotic, Bohemian lifestyle.
But today almost every woman wants to live the movie star lifestyle, despite being unable to afford it. Instead they create a virtual “awesome lifestyle” on Facebook, while making a mess of their real-world lives in the attempt.
Red Pill Latecomer says:
August 22, 2016 at 3:42 pm
I now have ZE-RO sympathy for any parents who abuse their children by making them attend public “schools.”
“…eliminate gender in their classrooms.”
OK all you hominid lifeforms, let’s get out our social studies books. Today’s lesson is about the power of the oppressed female bipedal hominid to destroy worlds.
“She will be loved, protected, respected, and celebrated.
“All these things that should be, and will be, basic human rights, are a promise to my daughter.”
I showed my 22 year old daughter this and she laughed. She instantly knew these things were not basic human rights. It felt good.
Pope Francis brings the pain!
“In Europe, America, Latin America, Africa, and in some countries of Asia, there are genuine forms of ideological colonization taking place. And one of these - I will call it clearly by its name - is [the ideology of] ‘gender.’ Today children - children! - are taught in school that everyone can choose his or her sex.”
“Why are they teaching this? Because the books are provided by the persons and institutions that give you money. These forms of ideological colonization are also supported by influential countries. And this [is] terrible!” Francis said.
Much more at:
https://cruxnow.com/global-church/2016/08/22/popes-critique-gender-theory-emboldens-bishops-speak/
This is correct. Single mom culture is a top down phenomenon, whereby everywoman thinks she can live the life of the rich and famous, without consequence.
Social consequences reach beyond the children (even when the biological skank ho mommie outsources the job of dad and grandparents to the very best professionals, the child often still has problems). It’s horrifically inefficient to build up a huge infrastructure to do at cost what fathers do for free, and everyone in this weird supply chain has to take time out of their own emotional lives to raise skank ho children for a wage.
Boxer
Single mom culture is a top down phenomenon
This whole post is a top down phenomenon.
Boxer,
It’s horrifically inefficient to build up a huge infrastructure to do at cost what fathers do for free,
Hence :
a) a democracy fails over time (or at least is outcompeted).
b) excessive female freedom is precisely incompatible with civilization.
But today almost every woman wants to live the movie star lifestyle, despite being unable to afford it.
There are literally no more than 300 or so females in the entertainment industry who earn enough consistently for two decades+ to make this a reality. Sort of a small apex for the other 100 Million+ women to aspire to.
The lady who played Captain Janeway in Star Trek Voyager noted in some show how her adult children hated her because of the time she spent on the show rather than with them.
It reminds me of the Biblical idea that gaining the world is a poor substitute for losing your soul, or family in this case.
The lady who played Captain Janeway in Star Trek Voyager noted in some show how her adult children hated her because of the time she spent on the show rather than with them.
That reminds me of seeing actress Erin Gray on a TV talk show in the 1980s. She was then known for starring on TV’s Buck Rogers in the 25th Century. Gray discussed her great love for her acting career. The host asked Gray what she’d do if she ever had to choose between her career and her husband. Gray responded, Oh wow. That’s a tough one. I don’t know.
It’s been over 30 years, but I never forgot that moment. I was astonished (and impressed) with her honesty, to admit such a thing on TV. But also horrified. I thought, gee, what must her husband think? For your wife to tell the world that you might divorce him if your career required it.
I just checked. Sure enough, Gray divorced her husband (which whom she had one child) in 1990: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001292/bio?ref_=nm_ov_bio_sm
And coincidentally, Gray had auditioned for the Captain Janeway role, but lost out to Kate Mulgrew.
BillyS says:
August 22, 2016 at 11:40 pm
The lady who played Captain Janeway in Star Trek Voyager noted in some show how her adult children hated her because of the time she spent on the show rather than with them.
It reminds me of the Biblical idea that gaining the world is a poor substitute for losing your soul, or family in this case.
Good point, Billy. The actress, Kate Mulgrew, has said in the past that she is a Christian.
@Dave:
Beyond Dr. Spock, the other villain in the story of how we got here was Alfred Kinsey, who put forth the idea that sexual morality should be determined by what people actually do, and then presented flawed studies that helped institutionalize his own peculiar brand of sexuality.
Tangentially related to Dalrock’s original post: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3752169/Why-porn-death-knell-happy-marriage-Married-couples-view-adult-material-double-risk-divorce.html#ixzz4I4snK9tP
TLDR: Unhappy marriages are not made less happy if the woman looks at pornography, but “very happy” marriages go from a 3% rate of divorce to 12% if the woman looks at porn.
There are literally no more than 300 or so females in the entertainment industry who earn enough consistently for two decades+ to make this a reality. Sort of a small apex for the other 100 Million+ women to aspire to.
Notwithstanidng the fact that the FI is predicated on apex fallacy, and given that women are seldom ever forced to contend with socio-economic reality, that their every aspiration is catered to and indulged by society (usually through a government gun held against male temples), it’s no wonder that even Trailer Park Barbie thinks that she can live the Hollywood Queen lifestyle – or as close to it as she can get without self-destructing. The narrative and the illusion WILL be maintained at all costs.
Good point, Billy. The actress, Kate Mulgrew, has said in the past that she is a Christian.
And I’ve said in the past that I’m a fighter pilot with ten thousand flight hours in various airframes of multiple national origins, because that’s one of my fantasy alter-ego lives. However, that doesn’t make my claim even the least bit true.
Immutable Rule of Human Existence Number 2,432: People who proclaim themselves Christian, to the complete shock and surprise of their audience and lacking any visible or historical evidence whatsoever in support of their claim, should have it taken with a very large fistful of salt.
The Other Jim says: August 21, 2016 at 12:06 am
All they did was give into some stupid ass request to feed into their narcissism and vanity,
ah yes, the old “women only sin if the men in their lives encourage them too” defense. too bad Adam didn’t think of that, maybe God would have let him slide?
The Other Jim says: August 21, 2016 at 12:06 am
their boyfriends’ pitiful attempt at attention
because women aren’t naturally attention whores and the thriving market in thong bikinis and Brazilian wax jobs is … entirely because boyfriends, husbands and fathers are demanding that women present themselves in this way.
the above opinion ( women only do stupid shit because the men in their lives told them too, ie – Patriarchal Society ) is held and promulgated by Cultural Marxists, Manginas and Cucked Churchians.
and the Other Jim.
The Other Jim says: August 21, 2016 at 12:06 am
ps, “Robert”, you might want to change your google profile describing you as “changing HER profile photo”. Unless you’re a transgender transitioning to your new sex. In that case, you go girl!!!…er…guy…or whatever…
take it up with Google, retard.
my official choice in my profile for gender is “decline to state”. Google is virtue signalling by defaulting to feminine pronouns in gender indeterminate situations in opposition to a thousand years of established grammar.
I’d like Dalrock to touch on something he mentioned a few posts ago about feminism only really benefiting a few men. Those in positions of power. I think that we all see that, and I outline that in my post: https://speeeed23.wordpress.com
Pingback: Winning the arms race (made you look!) | Dalrock