Scott shares a tip on diffusing spousal friction in: When in doubt, grab her by her waist, put her on the kitchen counter and kiss her neck.
Added to the fun was the fact that my daughter, who loves this stuff grabbed my phone and snapped the shot.
This picture looks like something two high-schoolers would do. Remember?
And Mychael has many times referenced back to the fact that these moments make her feel like she is in high school again. It’s kind of the point.
It works, every time. And even if she knows I am doing it, it doesn’t change the fact that it worked. What “works” about it is still a bit of a mystery to me. But usually the look on her face changes rapidly from whatever scowl she has to slight resistance, to indignation to resignation and then relief. It takes about 4 seconds for her to go through every one of those emotions.
See his full post for the picture as well as the required disclaimer in our age of Duluth.
See Also:
Thank you, sir!
Pingback: Carrying on like teenagers. | Reaction Times
I read Scott’s statement as “grab her by the ladybits” by accident. Though, arousing woman’s primal instict of submission and love through actions that demonstrate power and dominance instead of verbal bout is, in essence, grabing by the ladybits – one that women love and enjoy most.
clearly this is spousal pre-rape.
Lol Bob! Feminists would be howling…. with delight… okay, maybe not but really, it’s more about squashing her trepidation or agitation than anything to do with assault of rape.
Very glad he put in the disclaimer. Really only to be tried if the two parties are married and comfortable with this sort of interaction.
Normal women in a normal society often respond positively to touch, especially a warm, affectionate touch, such as a hug, or a hand hold, from a loved one. It reassures them of the relationship, and indirectly, of their desirability to their partner.
But feminism has so messed things up it’s not even funny anymore. No wonder many women in the western world are always depressed. They have successfully destroyed two of the most important sources of their happiness: a great relationship, and a sense of being valued.
Women aren’t children, but neither can they consistently live in the harsh world that an adult male inhabits. So, yes, you need to remember to treat them, on occasion, where Women actually reside at.
One of those things a “modern” Man has to learn as they’re “unlearning” the stupidity they’ve been infected with.
@LG, sure they arnt kids ? Im seeing teen boys behave significantly more mature\stable (when their hormones arnt running away) than their mothers who seem to behave like a abandoned 5yo. Are women regressing into a warped childhood ?
It really is sad out culture has fallen apart so fast at the hands of women’s wishes that a man even has to put a disclaimer on an action like this. Im seeing so many single older women now its now even funny anymore. As I keep telling my son, women nowadays seem hell bent on their own destruction, they just can’t help themselves.
I guess when God said women need husbands, he wasn’t kidding.
@Minesweeper:
There are non-childish Women, but, sadly, it seems a majority lives in that childishness. In the case of Scott’s family, that isn’t the case, though that explains my point. Even the ones that have grown up can’t always live there and it behooves a Husband to know when to switch approaches.
Well, the Lord points out in Isaiah that Women will eventually just take on a name so they can claim a Husband. It’s that important, even for the harlots.
Schopenhauer: “you can have youth without beauty, but you cannot have beauty without youth.”
Are women regressing into a warped childhood ?
Yes. With all restraints on their behavior removed, there is no way of grounding them in the adult world that isn’t labeled “abuse” by the reigning elite’s armies of social engineering mutawaeen (this is, of course, by design).
As Scott’s family demonstrates, there are still some women of the Gen-X generation and older who are uncorrupted by the ideological rot of the culture in which they were raised. As for the millennial generation and younger, those women are a lost cause. Any mature young millennial western man (a rarity in itself) foolish enough to seek a wife is going to have to go on a global quest if he is to have any hope at all of not being utterly destroyed.
The link I’m posting below is a bit long (nearly 6000 words), but it pretty aptly encapsulates the topic under discussion (plus, it’s funny):
Woman: The Most Responsible Teenager in the House
The gist of it is that girls generally mature slightly faster than boys because of biological necessity (they have to be able to keep a baby alive once they reach puberty), but they stop maturing around the age of 18. Meanwhile, although men generally start out a little behind them, we continue to mature for decades, and ultimately reach a much higher level. It’s the difference between cooking a chicken in a microwave oven until it’s done enough to not give you food poisoning, versus stewing it in a slow-cooker until it’s fit to serve on the good china.
Individual results may vary (I reached an adult level of cognition at the age of eight, according to the tests they used to give kids before such testing was determined to cause hurt fee-fees… conversely, there is certainly no shortage of mid-30′ women who still act like high school sophomores when given the chance), but in general it seems that we’re well-designed to possess the mental faculties needed to accomplish the tasks that fit our biologically-determined roles at our various life stages.
Grab her by the waist and put her on the counter?
I’d check those particleboard units underneath first, if she was an average Western Wife.
Does that make it her responsibility to keep herself pick-up-able?
So, wife is attracted to husband, but is having some doubts as whether her attraction is justified and deserved by him. Deploys minor shit-test, which he passes. She is calmed and reassured (for the moment).
“Californian Kathy Murray says she saved her marriage by giving up trying to control her husband. Despite considering herself a feminist, she follows – and now teaches others – the approach of a controversial book called The Surrendered Wife, which tells women to stop nagging their partners and start treating them with more respect.”
Amazing that even the most basic ability of a woman to relate to a man has been not only lost but utterly rejected as oppressive by most women.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-37861459
Tam win the thread.
Scott, in his post, made reference to “the evangelical version of feminism that created what Dalrock calls “cartoonish chivalry.”
I’ve told many that Christ was not a ‘Gentleman.’ That is a contrived and manipulated Christ that has also been laid on men, to suppress the truth. Christ was gentle at times, and so should men be gentle at times. But men are to “be not effeminate” in 1Cor6:9 which, according to Strong’s, mean ‘soft.’ Men are not soft on the firmness of the gospel because Christ was not soft on the gospel. While He was gentle at times, He was most certainly fierce at times.
I encourage men to stop being ‘Gentlemen’ and start –as David said to Solomon in 1Kings2:2-3 — “Be thou strong …and show thyself a MAN.”
Pingback: Linkage Is Good For You – 12-3 | Society of Amateur Gentlemen
That article on The Surrendered Wife has some good points, but there’s still some latent feminism. The rules advocated:
The six principles of being a ‘Surrendered Wife’
Relinquishes inappropriate control of her husband
Respects her husband’s thinking
Receives his gifts graciously and expresses gratitude for him
Expresses what she wants without trying to control him
Relies on him to handle household finances
Focuses on her own self-care and fulfilment
Pretty good. But it still advises the wife to relinquish “inappropriate control of her husband.” The qualification inappropriate leaves much interpretive wiggle room for rebellious wives.
Then there’s the advice to wives to focus on her own self-care and fulfillment. In context, this is saying to wives that the husband is not responsible for the wife’s happiness. That’s good. But it also supports female selfishness, as though the wife has an obligation to herself to make herself happy (as opposed to focusing on her husband’s and children’s happiness).
Then there’s this:
Women often ask me if my approach is about dumbing myself down or becoming a submissive wife. I tell them I am a feminist. Surrendering is acknowledging you can’t change or control anyone but yourself. That’s empowering!
This woman is still obsessed with being seen as a feminist, and still obsessed with her own empowerment.
Women often ask me if my approach is about dumbing myself down or becoming a submissive wife. I tell them I am a feminist. Surrendering is acknowledging you can’t change or control anyone but yourself. That’s empowering!
This woman is still obsessed with being seen as a feminist, and still obsessed with her own empowerment.
Another “fried ice” addict jonesing for an unattainable fix.
Great find, Minesweeper. I have a few thoughts of my own about it.
The first time I married I was divorced by 26. I married for the second time at 32 but soon found myself sleeping in the guest room. My husband and I fought all the time.
Her fault for being a bitch. His fault for marrying a feminist, contentious, Wall-crashing, divorcee. She had more red flags than a May Day parade.
Much of our fighting stemmed from the fact I thought my husband was clueless when it came to raising the children (we had four children between us aged from four to nine years old). We also quarrelled about how to manage our finances, and how often we made love.
I wish I could say she got that crap from secular sources, and she probably did, but she could have heard the same things from any number of “Christian” sources, including Focus on the Family. As I recall, I remember one of those Churchian charlatans using the exact same word – clueless – to describe husbands who don’t obey their wives.
I was working full-time as chief finance officer for a private school and also volunteered at my kids’ school and in my community. My husband was a sales rep for a construction company but I was the breadwinner and acted like I was in charge.
Ah… the fruits of Yugo-Grrrl feminism: working at a job where the title far outstrips the responsibilities. Women become breadwinners and go-getters, and end up miserable compared to the “June Cleaver” generation they consider to have been “unfulfilled” and “oppressed.”
I didn’t tell anyone I was in constant conflict with my husband. I was embarrassed, angry and resentful.
As she should have been – she was making herself and everyone around her miserable by being a turbo-bitch without an “off” switch.
The six principles of being a ‘Surrendered Wife’
Relinquishes inappropriate control of her husband
Respects her husband’s thinking
Receives his gifts graciously and expresses gratitude for him
Expresses what she wants without trying to control him
Relies on him to handle household finances
Focuses on her own self-care and fulfilment
So… what the Bible has been saying for the past 2000 years?
My husband often resorted to watching TV and snuggling with our pets as I’d rage at him over ignoring my needs. I mean all men want sex right? Not my husband. He wanted nothing to do with me. It was awful.
Thanks to the feminism she still hasn’t rejected, backed up by the Duluth Model, her husband’s entire generation of men have no tools in their toolbags other than avoidance. How bad does a sex-posi wife have been to make her husband avoid her like a rabid badger?
The more I told my husband how he should be, the less he’d try. I couldn’t figure it out so I dragged him to marriage counselling. But that only made things worse, so we sent our children to counselling since they too bore the brunt of so much of our conflict. That didn’t work either.
Well, duh. Men don’t like to kowtow, you say? Really? Now she’s going to tell me that water is wet, I suppose. And counseling? Whatever made her think that was a good idea?
So I went to counselling by myself and complained about my husband for more than a year. Spending thousands of dollars, only to find myself nearer divorce than when I started.
And she finds that surprising… why?
I’d cry, fight, yell and pout, thinking he would eventually come around, but he didn’t. I lost weight, went to the gym and started getting attention from men which was tempting to act on, but I knew I couldn’t do that, so I’d play the victim card and sulk. That didn’t work either.
Men don’t react to pre-selection the same way women do, knucklehead. And if she was seriously tempted, then she’s a bitch for that reason, too.
I was about to end my marriage when I picked up a book called The Surrendered Wife by Laura Doyle. I mean, they don’t teach us how to be successful in marriage in school and the women in my life didn’t share the secrets either.
They used to teach that sort of thing in schools, and older women “used” to teach girls how to be wives, but thanks to the feminism she still hasn’t rejected, that would be considered “sexist,” or “outdated,” or “misogynistic,” or… something.
It was incredibly humbling to recognise that I had something to do with why my marriage was failing and perhaps even why my first marriage failed. But it was also empowering.
If she’s acknowledging some personal responsibility, she’s starting to reject the prime tenet of feminism: “In any conflict between a man and a woman, the man is 100% at fault 100% of the time.”
I didn’t know I’d been disrespectful to my husband or even that I’d been controlling and critical.
Complete lack of self-awareness by a feminist or the barest acknowledgement that men have needs and desires… sounds about right.
I thought I was being helpful and logical. I just didn’t know that respect for men is like oxygen, so no wonder my husband was no longer interested in me sexually.
I guess everybody is so intent on demanding that females be showered with respect that they forgot that men need it. There’s that big, bad “Patriarchy” at work, again.
I’ll never forget the day I first apologised to my husband for being rude for correcting him in front of the children, or the day I said “whatever you think” when I’d previously been extremely opinionated about what he should do.
Wow… she allows him to make a few trivial decisions. Lucky guy.
I had trained my husband to ask my permission for everything. And then complained about it for a year in counselling that he couldn’t make simple decisions!
Cause and effect, you say?
I relinquished control of my husband’s life, choices and decisions and instead I focused on my own happiness. I was no longer acting like his mother and started acting like his lover.
So… no Oedipus complex? That’s good to know.
We were fighting less and less and my husband started reaching out to hold my hand or pull me in for a kiss.
So acting more like a loving wife and less like Elsa: She-wolf of the SS increases marital harmony? Who knew? Why don’t feminists just acknowledge that, since they claim to want women to be happy?
I had no idea that I was responsible for my own happiness. I thought my husband should make me happy.
Funny how an an avowed feminist would so instinctually expect a man to take responsibility for her happiness. It’s almost like feminism infantilizes women…
I’ve now found subtle ways of getting my husband in the mood for sex, which is far more effective than the days of begging, crying or yelling about wanting it. Even if I’m not in the mood and he is, I often find myself getting in the mood just by being open to receiving pleasure.
“It is better to dwell in a corner of the housetop, than with a brawling woman in a wide house.” – Proverbs 21:9. Apparently the corollary is that the house is more pleasant once the woman ceases to be as contentious.
My kids began to notice the change in our relationship too, and as a result, their behaviour improved and our home became peaceful and fun again.
Apparently, Proverbs 21:9 applies to everyone in the house… not just the husband.
Women often ask me if my approach is about dumbing myself down or becoming a submissive wife. I tell them I am a feminist. Surrendering is acknowledging you can’t change or control anyone but yourself. That’s empowering!
Say anything to avoid the obvious: It’s not “Happy Wife – Happy Life,” it’s “Submissive Wife – Happy Everyone.”
Vox linked to this post at alphagameplan: http://www.npr.org/2016/12/03/504158266/i-dont-want-to-be-the-breadwinner-in-my-marriage-anymore
Hilarious really. She still can’t really reconcile that the issue is her false ideology, and it’s driving her nuts.
On cartoonish chivalry: Dalrock – I wonder if you’ve read this article
https://gynocentrism.com/
The author points out the origins of chivalry, fusing the military with women’s welfare – worked because women had obligations. The 1960’s came along of course and dismantled women’s side of the equation, leading to the imbalance we currently see.
Even more interesting, it has been translated into Italian. This is important, as Italy is suffering greatly from the “sexual revolution”, in terms of an aging population, mass immigration and women who get really offended, as seen by their response to Italy’s first National Fertility Day:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/italys-baby-making-campaign-fertility-day-birth-rate-an-angry-response-fertility-a7221321.html
Hey Scott – If you, your daughter and your wife are happy, then hey, you won’t get any complaints from me. And Happy Gregorian Christmas when it comes in January!!
A rock, an oak……for her to hang on to during the tempest.
Absence drama she will manufacture or imagine it for herself.
Spike, thanks for remembering that. We started the Nativity fast a couple of weeks ago, awaiting the saviors birth.
But to be fair it is the western world that is on the Gregorian calendar (with Christmas on the 25th). We Orthodox are on the Julian.
Of course Scott – I got calendar dyslexia there!
“They used to teach that sort of thing in schools, and older women “used” to teach girls how to be wives, but thanks to the feminism she still hasn’t rejected, that would be considered “sexist,” or “outdated,” or “misogynistic,” or… something.”
Bottom line: they can’t accept that feminism is an abject and total failure, so they delude themselves into believing that if they were to just tweak it in the right places then it will work, and they can still ride the carousel, have the misandric divorce laws remain, etc. and that – shazzam! – they will now have great marriages to awesome men who give them the tingles, etc.
Of course what that book preaches is at odds with the Feminist Orthodoxy, and she will soon find out that she’s been branded a heretic and will be cast out from the sisterhood.
New frontiers in Femtwat stupidity :
Lucasfilm President says she does not need to cater to male Star Wars fans.
This should be a fireable offense right away for reasons both moral and business-related, since at least 75% of the franchise’s fans are male, AND there are tons of qualified executives who would love to have her job. She doesn’t even understand what her job is.
This is not some blue-haired shoggoth, but rather an executive in a highly-desired job. She should be kicked out by Monday morning…
Glad that works for some percentage of men. Hopefully no one has stated the usual thing about how those men that this doesn’t work for are not doing it right….lack the right frame….are somehow conveying blue pill supplication while doing it…..etc.
It was incredibly humbling to recognise that I had something to do with why my marriage was failing and perhaps even why my first marriage failed. But it was also empowering.
Lest anyone think that this is Mizz Murray admitting fault for at least some of her marital travails, read the highlighted text carefully: she states that she “had something to do with” why her marriage was failing, NOT that she was a primary cause of it.
Come on now, we all know better than to think that she (or any other woman) would actually own her shit….
Anon says:
December 4, 2016 at 9:12 pm
The Market will dole out all the punishment needed to show that bitch the error of her ways. Meanwhile, anyone with stock in any of the major Hollywood studios would do well to short it.
Lyn87 says:
December 4, 2016 at 3:23 pm
Thanks, Lyn, for slogging through that so that the rest of us didn’t have to. My takeaway: the “clueless” label she so freely slapped on her husband belongs more appropriately on the woman in her mirror. But then again, any woman who would undergo the epiphany she (supposedly) did and yet still call herself a feminist is not just clueless, but stupid to the point of being a danger to herself and others.
“Lucasfilm President says she does not need to cater to male Star Wars fans.”
Well that explains why The Force Awakens was such an awful film. I expect that Rogue One will just as big a Mary Sue fest.
I fully expect Rey to end up, with no effort on her part, as being more knowledgeable about the Force than Luke in Episode 8.
[Kethleen] Kennedy addressed her decision to cast a female lead in her second movie in charge, Rogue One: A Star Wars Story. “I have a responsibility to the company that I work with. I don’t feel that I have a responsibility to cater in some way [to those particular fans],” she said. “I would never just seize on saying, ‘Well, this is a franchise that’s appealed primarily to men for many, many years, and therefore I owe men something.’”
She feels she has a responsibility to the company, but not to the company’s primary customer base.
I guess these explains why there are so few successful female entrepreneurs.
>She feels she has a responsibility to the company, but not to the company’s primary customer base.
>I guess these explains why there are so few successful female entrepreneurs.
Translation of “I have a responsibility for the company that I work with” = “I have a responsibility to the Jews running the company to push their agenda”. The purpose of Lucasfilm isn’t to make money anymore, it’s just another left-wing propaganda arm now.
If you can still make her giggle, you’re doing it right.
http://manningthewall.com
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCUDY17Xg_Ix5kaenkryh63g
https://twitter.com/manningthewall
Well on the Star Wars issue, she’s probably right. She doesn’t have to cater to the male fans, because they will come and see the movie anyway. It’s not like SW geeks are going to stay away because there’s a female lead. In fact, sci fi geeks generally like Hollywood’s “kick ass heroines”, because almost all of these guys are die-hard blue pillers. So it won’t hurt Disney one bit to have a female lead — they can shove their empowerment feminism right down their male viewers faces, and these guys will wolf it down with a smile on their faces, being the pathetic blue pillers that they are.
Empath, good to see you.
In 1995 Fox aired a series called VR5, starring Lori Singer as a Sexy Girl Geek computer hacker. It ran on Friday nights. A TV Guide review snidely remarked that Fox was wise to run it on Friday nights, because the only people watching TV on Friday nights were Boy Geeks fantasizing about Sexy Girl Geeks.
In 1995 Angelina Jolie likewise portrayed a Sexy Girl Geek computer hacker in the film, Hackers.
I guess that’s the rationale for filling Star Wars with Grrrl Power heroines. Passive Beta Boys fantasizing that, somewhere out there, is a Sexy Girl Geek who hates jocks, and is instead seeking a guy who’s great at computers — but a Sexy Girl Geek who is also assertive and liberated enough to take the initiative and ask the Boy Geek out on a date.
RPL-
I love your description there. You have described something in those two paragraphs I couldn’t quite articulate,for example to my son.
(And it applies to the generalized “kick ass” women characters, not just the geeky ones.)
That is, I am indifferent to these characters. I don’t dislike them, nor love them. They just strike me as silly.
Most of the men Novaseeker described above are almost offended when I look at this stuff and go “meh. Not interested.”
I guess that’s the rationale for filling Star Wars with Grrrl Power heroines. Passive Beta Boys fantasizing that, somewhere out there, is a Sexy Girl Geek who hates jocks, and is instead seeking a guy who’s great at computers — but a Sexy Girl Geek who is also assertive and liberated enough to take the initiative and ask the Boy Geek out on a date.
THIS.
Novaseeker @ 8:42 am:
“It’s not like SW geeks are going to stay away because there’s a female lead. In fact, sci fi geeks generally like Hollywood’s “kick ass heroines”, because almost all of these guys are die-hard blue pillers.”
While true, reality still asserts itself. The Farce Awakens was not remotely the nerdscape-shattering event that Episode One was and repudiating the existing canon of supplemental books was a fatal mistake. Not having representation in the franchise kills nerds’ imagination and treating men as technically incompetent is a terrible insult in this community. Most of the Star Wars interest I’ve seen in my circles for the last few years has been the RPG (by Fantasy Flight Games, not Disney) and tabletop wargame (by Wizards of the Coast, not Disney).
Disney is sucking the life out of Star Wars like a vampire on a lemon.
feeriker says: December 4, 2016 at 10:13 pm
“Come on now, we all know better than to think that she (or any other woman) would actually own her shit….” So true.
David Schnarch, a 40 year marriage counselor [and non-Christian at that] and author of “Passionate Marriage” knows better than to think that a wife just ‘contributes’ to marriage problems, saying:
“Marriages aren’t often bad because people are out of touch or had a bad past. It is usually because one person DELIBERATELY AND KNOWINGLY and selfishly is destroying the relationship.” [my emphasis]
And how many people really think that ‘one person’ is usually instigated by the man…
When in doubt, grab her by her waist, put her on the kitchen counter and kiss her neck.
I much prefer the scene from Gone With the Wind in which (a slightly inebriated) Rhett Butler simply picks up a kicking and screaming Scarlett O’Hara and carries her up the stairs to the bedroom after one of their routine donnybrooks. The viewer of course knows what ensues. Next scene, several months later: Scarlett in labor delivering the couple’s baby daughter.
feeriker says: December 5, 2016 at 1:08 pm
Or how about John Wayne in the “Quiet Man” (1952) dragging his wife Maureen O’Hara for 3 miles while the Scottish town cheers him on; or again Wayne and O’Hara in “McClintock” (1970?) chasing her all over town to spank her, again with the, this time, old Western town cheering him on ….EVERYONE KNEW WHAT WAS RIGHT. Both very real movies.
sip,
Dey wur Irish don’tcha know?
and McClintock! came out in ’63.
Ah, glad you guys know yur stuff. Thanks.
Indeed, knowing this stuff is essential for
Annymous……its good to have a minute to marinate amongst the crowd here
Thought about this for a few days, mulling over my reaction. And it hasn’t changed.
Anyone that hesitates to do this to their wife is simply pathetic.
Pingback: The Kitchen Counter Photo, my perspective. | ljubomir farms
Hi Dalrock. Just in case the pingback doesn’t work.
https://ljubomirfarms.wordpress.com/2016/12/09/the-kitchen-counter-photo-my-perspective/