From the Daily Mail: Mother reveals she REJECTED ‘thoughtless and lazy’ blackboard proposal
I said I didn’t like the ring and it was obvious that it was completely mid judged with the timing of the proposal.’
The mother explained that they agreed that he would try again with another ring, but that the surprise element had been ruined for her.
Adding that her partner was an amazing father but put no effort into occasions, she questioned whether she could move past the fact that he wasn’t romantic, admitting that she had stayed awake crying at night over it.
In her defense, while we still pretend otherwise, marriage is no longer a real family model. Legally speaking, marriage is now almost entirely symbolic, an optional facade we place over our real family model, the child support system. Since legal marriage is a matter of aesthetics, there is a certain logic to only constructing the facade if the aesthetics are right.
Moreover, even if she refuses to marry her baby daddy after he manages to jump through all of her proposal hoops, she knows that traditional conservatives will do her the favor of pretending that she was “abandoned” by her children’s father.
They have a kid. They need to get married. Not for them. For the kid. That used to be common sense.
Let’s guess at what’s left out.
Who paid for the smoked salmon bellinis for breakfast, travel to the Eiffel Tower, the helicopter ride over the barrier reef? Her note is inchoherent, so I’ll guess the answer is “him.”
She rejected his proposal. But he can’t walk out. That is, he could — but he would then be paying for two homes instead of one.
Is rejecting an alpha who just isn’t good enough (missing the “romantic” box on her checklist). Or is she channeling revulsion at this beta provider (despite him making salmon bellinis for breakfast)?
As usual with the grrl-tales, so many of the key details are missing.
Pingback: She’s too traditional to marry her baby daddy. | @the_arv
^ What Larry said. Exactly.
IMHO there are two driving factors that influence the average woman’s engagement criteria:
1 – warped perceptions of engagements/rings promulgated by Hollywood/celebs
2 – having an “engagement story” / ring that will make their friends envious
Also, somewhat off topic, but I think she meant smoked salmon blini, not Bellini. I like smoked salmon, and I like bellinis, but not as a mashup!
In the article she refers to her son as “DS” a snide dehumanizing term for “dear son.”
She refers to her mate as “OH” a side dehumanizing term for “Other half.”
But the daughter,well now that’s TOTALLY DIFFERENT.
Daughter is referred to as ” daughter” or “baby girl.”
The privileged sex,as is presumably “mother” aka :If momma ain’t happy nobody happy.
He should run,run far away and live a real human’s life.
Not this denigrating condescending life of subjugation she has planned for him.
Cristina says:
May 18, 2018 at 4:52 pm
Also, somewhat off topic, but I think she meant smoked salmon blini, not Bellini. I like smoked salmon, and I like bellinis, but not as a mashup!
She doesn’t need you to cover for her mistakes.
“she stayed up all night crying”
Translation; “She kept him all all night with screaming to punish him”
Ya know,nothing is ever gonna be good enough for this feminist pig,he should get out and leave the kids to the real owners; The State.
IMHO there are two driving factors that influence the average woman’s engagement criteria:
1 – warped perceptions of engagements/rings promulgated by Hollywood/celebs
2 – having an “engagement story” / ring that will make their friends envious
If that really is true of the “average” woman, then they should be avoided like toxic waste dumps.
In the article she refers to her son as “DS” a snide dehumanizing term for “dear son.”
She refers to her mate as “OH” a side dehumanizing term for “Other half.”
But the daughter,well now that’s TOTALLY DIFFERENT.
Daughter is referred to as ” daughter” or “baby girl.”
The privileged sex,as is presumably “mother” aka :If momma ain’t happy nobody happy.
He should run,run far away and live a real human’s life.
He should take his son and leave. Mom obviously doesn’t care about her male offspring, so why not remove the burden from her? If the bitch tries to get the cops involved, Dad should claim that Mom is neglecting the son (which she clearly is – at least emotionally). If she resists, he should harp on the fact that she’s trying to use her son as a pawn/CS bait, but cares nothing about his welfare.
In short, tear her mask off on the way out the door.
As usual with the grrl-tales, so many of the key details are missing.
That’s because said details will ALWAYS reveal them to be the conniving whores (or worse) that they are.
Pingback: She’s too traditional to marry her baby daddy. | Reaction Times
“He should take his son and leave.” uh the state considers that a felony; kidnapping – and will prosecute accordingly. Remember all those mug shots of missing kids on milk cartons not so long ago?… those were mostly due to fathers taking control of their children’s well being. Each father who got caught is now living with felony kidnapping charges. More recent: Amber Alerts – most of these alerts are for the same reason; fathers taking control of their child’s well being and mommy pressing 911.
I was at a “conservative” upper middle class church in the south, affiliated with a well known bible teacher and author in reformed circles.
The elders had actually recommended to an unwed pregnant member to break off contact with the father, and told the congregation this.
One of many nails in a coffin
feeriker –
Great catch! The details omitted are the ones we need to understand the story. They’re omitted to make her look good. It’s her selfie, after all!
“‘People seldom report facts wrong. What they distort is their relationship to the facts. It’s possible to describe the charge of the Light Brigade whether you were on the leading charger or at the other end of the valley brewing up tea.”
— From Len Deighton’s great cold war spy novel, “Funeral in Berlin.
This keeps my theory that most women don’t want to get married idea going.
Sure she’ll fornicate with you and be a single mother to your kids…but to get into that type of serious commitment she just can’t.
This keeps my theory that most women don’t want to get married idea going.
They want to get married, its just that they aren’t keen on staying marriage. Their entire focus is on the proposal-planning-wedding-honeymoon sequence. They need this to be as fantastic as possible. After that, they find the reality of marriage to be… anti-climatic.
If things are this bad today, what will likely happen when today’s messed up kids become our senators, our governors, our judges and presidents?
It’s probably too late for the West. The rest of the world won’t fare better either.
God help us all.
Imagine how her future husband feels …
[Game of Thrones star] Sophie Turner says her marriage to Joe Jonas won’t be the greatest thing that will ever happen to her — here’s why that sends an important message to young people: http://www.thisisinsider.com/sophie-turner-marriage-isnt-achievement-2018-4
“Game of Thrones” star Sophie Turner is sending a clear message about the priorities in her life and career, and it’s an important lesson for her young fans. In a new cover feature for Marie Claire’s “2018 Fresh Faces” issue, Turner spoke about her recent engagement to Joe Jonas.
“There’s this weird misconception that being married is the greatest thing that’ll ever happen to you,” Turner said. “But I’ve always found that my career is something I work for, and when I achieve something, there’s a sense that this is the greatest thing I’ll do in my life.” …
Again, imagine how her future husband feels, when your future wife announces to the world that being married to you is nice, but not all that important to her.
The article continues to gush over this Strong, Independent Actress’s bold statement of self-empowerment.
Given Turner’s prominence thanks to “Game of Thrones,” she’s speaking from very large platform to millions of fans of all ages. For her younger fan base, letting them know that marriage isn’t the be-all-end-all of life is important.
Thanks to centuries of patriarchal and heteronormative messaging, many young people grow up believing that finding a partner is an essential goal that must be achieved (and often women feel pressured to do it by a younger age, too).
Turner’s own iconic “Game of Thrones” character, Sansa Stark, is the embodiment of how raising young women to believe that their sole purpose is to be someone’s wife can be detrimental. Though Sansa eventually learns otherwise, her young life is marked with tragedy as she realizes the lies she swallowed about “true love” and chivalry.
But Turner is speaking against this notion. Her marriage to Jonas won’t mark the peak of her young life, nor will it mean a diminished emphasis on her career.
She has a lifetime ahead of her to explore new projects — especially as “Game of Thrones” comes to an end next year. It’s important for people of all ages, but particularly Turner’s young fanbase, to see her taking pride in an achievement outside of finding love.
Did anyone think to ask Sophie the obvious question, that if marriage means so little, and is probably just a relic of the heteronormative patriarchy anyway, then why the heck did she even get marrried at all?
Turner might reply about common goals and attractions as a reason for getting married. With herself as God, would her answer provide any insight anyhow? But, I am curious too, why get married? I wonder if she has a prenup and what her vows were. Turner is the end game of Betty Friedan, to whom Christians still have not developed a forceful response to.
Well since she’s an actress I assume she’s gone through the Weinstein initiation. She wouldn’t be good marriage material to begin with and it shows.
Just looked up her Wiki…22 and has been acting in GoT since 15. She’s certainly got to be screwed up in the head.
They want a wedding…that doesn’t mean they want a marriage.
One sometimes reads that an English accent makes people sound more intelligent. Can’t hear that myself of course but – and this may come as a surprise to y’all — an American accent , no matter how you may look, always make you sound like a film-star. Pat yourselves on the back!
The exception however are your women. I was verbally assaulted in the pub last night by one whose initial form of address was ‘you guys’. She narrowly avoided hearing me tell her to get lost – I just ignored the cow – and now I have just been listening to Ms Markle – the voice just grates. Thom. Jefferson is surely turning in his grave and wondering what the point of separating from Great Britain might have been. For myself I will not be attending St George’s Chapel as I seem to have misplaced my invitation which at least enables my avoiding the likes of Posh and Becks and the other z-grade slebs. Mentally, I will be spending the day with Jefferson at Monticello.
They want a wedding…that doesn’t mean they want a marriage.
So very true. To them, the wedding is the main thing; marriage is too boring. They seem to get a rush in the wedding preparations, when they get to be a princess for a day; the center of attention; a celebrity of sorts.
For most single women, there is nothing happening in their lives, so they tend to daydream quite often, and make endless comparisons of themselves to other women. Even those who claim to be “career-minded” are only marking time, until they are “swept off” their feet by “a tall, handsome and rich guy”, who will take them “away from all these” (meaning their so-called careers).
But their dreams almost never go beyond them being “swept off” of their feet though. It’s like a movie that ends just as the lovebirds ride into the sunset. The only thing they left out is the reality of life, where the new wife actually drags herself out of bed early, and makes food for her household.
Fortunately though, life is an uncompromising disciplinarian; it will ensure that they learn their lessons–whether the easy way, or the hard way.
@Opus…
Meghan is performing the role of her lifetime as an actress. She might even get an Oscar nod in ‘The Wife of Prince Henry’.
There’s this weird misconception that being married is the greatest thing that’ll ever happen to you…
Of course marriage cannot be the greatest thing that’ll ever happen to sluts. What is so great about it? Let’s see.
1. You get to profess your undying love to another, and they do the same to you? Yeah, she’s done it a hundred times, and she knows it ain’t mean crap.
2. You get naked with someone other than your doctor? Of course, she’s been doing that since age 12.
3. You physically, spiritually and emotionally become one with another? Sure, she’s done that too, countless times—at different locations.
4. The possibility of bringing new lives into the world through union with another person? Again, she’s a pro at doing that. She is also an expert at flushing those lives doing the toilet.
5. Announcing before friends and families that you’re “in luuuve”? How many such announcements will you count?
So, other than the formality and the legal shackles, marriage is just like another swiping right on a Tinder app. That sure should not be the greatest thing that happened to these “a-mazing and fabulously and ginormously awesome” women. You go grrrrl!
Since, Ms. Markle is not royalty and Harry is not Charle’s son, what’s the purpose of this charade?
Saw the headline on Drudge today. “Markle won’t vow to obey” or somesuch. If a Prince can’t lock down an actual wife I’d say the model is broken.
The whole term “baby Daddy” is disgusting, indicating a culture that’s sunk into the cesspool of feminism. Why not a baby Mommy? The very term is offensive and degrading.
The war against spiritual degradation is fought with language, first and foremost.
Anything from this point on is on Henry. He had more than enough red flags and people in Meghan’s own family to warn him not to marry her…and add on that. Saying you aren’t going to vow to obey that out loud….that isn’t an empty statement.
Shocking, that Prince Henry went dumpster diving in American trash bins in search of a bride.
And those classic crazy eyes. Can Markle be any less trashy? Or any less crazy?
I’m looking for Henry’s ulterior motive. Maybe he’s stuck in an adolescent rebellious stage. Perhaps he chose a truly trashy bride as an F U to his family.
Angry at his mother dying? Angry at the royal family for “killing” his mom? Angry at his father for marrying Camilla? Angry that his older brother gets the crown? Angry that though he did honorable service in the military, the press focused on his one night in a swastika costume? Angry and lashing out, gleefully dragging his family into the gutter and shocking his grandmother.
I’m looking for Henry’s ulterior motive. Maybe he’s stuck in an adolescent rebellious stage. Perhaps he chose a truly trashy bride as an F U to his family.
Angry at his mother dying? Angry at the royal family for “killing” his mom? Angry at his father for marrying Camilla? Angry that his older brother gets the crown? Angry that though he did honorable service in the military, the press focused on his one night in a swastika costume? Angry and lashing out, gleefully dragging his family into the gutter and shocking his grandmother.
Eh the crown isn’t in the cards for him, so I think he figures why not. Obviously he’s into older, divorced, biracial feminist American women — the family wasn’t going to stop him, because he will never get the throne anyway. His brother could have never married Markle, by contrast (and married someone obviously much better).
Harry likely isn’t Charles’s son anyway — everyone knows he looks like the bodyguard, and very, very different from his brother.
Obviously he’s into older, divorced, biracial feminist American women
Harry is into very good looking hot divorced feminist sluts. He was known for dating/having sex with dozens of these women as quite the bad boy/party boy himself.
Royals aside,back to this horrible woman.
The part about “crying all night” really got to me.
If you guys ever had a woman sleep deprive you before a days work you know this is a deal breaker.
I told the last woman that did that the next time she woke me up I would physically beat her ass for the first and last time.
She can always go to another room, or GTFO of the house all together.
No “doghouse” or sleeping on the couch.
Damn pedastalizing manginas set these wimmins up to fail
If his motive to marry her is a FU to his family…he’s going to be the one effed when she does what she does.
Her Majesty herself is the only person on that side of the Atlantic I actually like. Chrales, Di, Fergie, Andrew, the duke, the dutchess, the prince of this n’ that, the royal heiress to this or that estate, the jack, the ten of spades……..as a US Citizen it causes little bother and its something I cannot completely comprehend…..the ceremony, the pomp, the tradition……….
They are makin’ it out here as if this woman…….by some strange default is somehow gonna be the future queen in the name of “diversity” or “social justice”
Those royals are about as messed up as the elites who sit in our statehouses and Capitol building.
““Markle won’t vow to obey Harry”.
The more shocking thing was when Kate did the same to William, who is 2nd in line of succession to the British throne, and hence will become head of the Anglican Church.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1379453/Kate-Middleton-vows-Bride-obey-following-Princess-Dianas-lead.html#comments
“The bride-to-be will instead promise to ‘love, comfort, honour and keep’ her husband.
The Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams praised the young couple for their approach to the wedding.
‘Ive been very struck by the way in which William and Catherine have approached this great event,’ he told the Daily Mirror.
‘They’ve thought through what they want for themselves, but also what they want to say.
Rowan Williams, who will marry the couple, has described a wife pledging to ‘obey’ her husband and not vice-versa is archaic and could even be used to justify domestic violence.
Archaic: Dr Rowan Williams backs guidelines that warn that a wife promising to ‘obey’ could be used to justify domestic violence
Guidelines published by the Archbishop’s Council in 2006 in the responding to Domestic Abuse report said: ‘A promise to obey was in the past part of different standards and expectations of women and men within marriage, for example the fact that women had no standing in law until 1926.’
At their weddings, William’s grandmother, the Queen, and his aunt, Princess Anne, used the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, which requires women to promise to ‘love, cherish and obey’.”
‘love, cherish and obey’ versus ‘love, comfort, honour and keep’.
And the reaction of the Archbishop: a wife promising to ‘obey’ could be used to justify domestic violence
I’m baffled.
Man, I would never ever reject a marriage proposal from the father of my children. That was so stupid and shallow, I feel sorry for him. Entitlement princess detected!
Well, about the Royal Wedding…
I remember 7 years ago watching Wills and Kate’s wedding and feeling rather underwhelmed. Big deal, I thought. They are finally marrying after living together for many years…nothing special.
I was still single, then, of course, even though I was already in a relationship with my then boyfriend and trying very hard to ‘keep ’em crossed’ if you get my meaning.
I was unimpressed with Wiils and Kate for not ‘waiting’, like we were.
Fast forward to now, and I think, wow, how (moral) standards have dropped!
Now it’s not so much 2 people who are simply marrying after a long ‘courtship’ with cohabitation along the way, and are probably each other’s ‘firsts’ or ‘seconds’ or whatever. NOW, we are looking at a woman who said all these fancy vows to SOMEONE ELSE before, and broke those vows, and here she is before us saying those words again, to a Prince, no less. A whole new level of ‘low’.
I think I like Meghan Markle as a person. (I don’t care very much for her leftist and feminist views, which I think will get her at odds with the Royal Family sooner or later). I certainly like her very nice-looking and humble mother, and I was touched as to how lonely she looked today, sitting on that pew all by herself, and moved to tears at her only child’s wedding.
But all of the above sympathies declared, it seems so hollow to hear someone declare love/comitment ‘forever’ when they bailed before.
It sounds so insincere.
I really hope she means it this time, these vows. For dear Prince Henry’s sake. (Not that he is an angel in all this – as Deti alludes to above, he has been quite the bad boy at times, although we all understand why, and he is charming and all, so we give him some slack :)).
I hope Meghan Markle truly loves him and wants to BE married to him, not just GET married and have all eyes on her for one day. That special day is so fleeting. Over before you know it, then it’s back to the humdrum of daily life…albeit nice too if love abides.
(By the way speaking of LOVE, that Episcopal preacher was something else, lol).
Well vowing to honor and keep her husband is certainly an improvement over what most wifes do now. Did Ms. Hollywood Actress even say that? She certainly has a track record of not even doing that.
But if the Archbishop thinks obeying her husband could be used to justify domestic violence…what planet does he live on? Do he think the husband says…’alright honey I’m going to beat you to a bloody pulp, don’t move’ and she says ‘ok’.
My sainted mother…….so into Charles and Di’s wedding (despite her becoming a naturaized US Citizen in 1974) and waking up at the infernal hours of the morning to tune into the the CBC radio broadcast of Andrew’s wedding to that thing called Fergie…..
I consider myself an Anglophile and still *wish* I could have that posh accent, or write in such an eloquent way like many in the British press do………….that just slashes you to ribbons.
I like British style, and postwar culture in particular. Churchill is one of my heroes. I look at pictures of my mothers side going back to when Victoria was Queen…..and just wonder *if* my mother had stayed………and not come over with The Beatles in 1964??????? Would I have been born one of the lads? Had “mates” and or would I have been just very Welsh
I’m too American to understand much of this stuff…………
All my males…if that isn’t hypergamy laid bare for all to see…I don’t know what is.
Again, imagine how her future husband feels, when your future wife announces to the world that being married to you is nice, but not all that important to her.
Let’s hope, for his sake, that he feels the same about her. Otherwise, he’s a chump/doormat/moron to marry her. Any man with any self-respect would kick that bitch to the curb YESTERDAY after she made a statement like that.
Fuck you, Sophie Turner.
…an American accent , no matter how you may look, always make you sound like a film-star. Pat yourselves on the back!
If thst’s true, I’d rather blow my brains out with a 44 Magnum.
Shocking, that Prince Henry went dumpster diving in American trash bins in search of a bride.
THREAD WINNER so far.
He certainly has lowered his own SMV by wallowing in the AW septic tank, to say nothing of (further?) lowering the esteem of the Windsors in the eyes of the world.
Seriously, Harry, what the FUCK are you thinking? You can do better than THAT even in a comatose state!
What the hell, dudes? Has it suddenly become trendy for wealthy, powerful men to go slumming?
View at Medium.com
Never fails…some men can have it all like have royalty or be a genius with lots of money and that’s the best they can attract.
Then again perhaps my NAWALT-dar is off and they are truly the unicorns of their dreams.
Never fails…some men can have it all like have royalty or be a genius with lots of money and that’s the best they can attract.
Musk has been divorced at least once. Last year there was a breakup with another woman. This may be more along the lines of “what he wants” than “what he can attract”.
Musk is an example of a man who is a leader, an “alpha”, in the business / political world who apparently doesn’t understand women at all. It is possible he’s bipolar (manic / depressive) which would complicate matters.
Meh. The British Monarchy should only last as long as Queen Elizabeth II is alive. She is admirable, so it should be kept going for her.
Once she is gone, it should be abolished so that Britain can at least get to the level of enlightenment that the US and France got to over two centuries ago.
So the way a proposal is done is way more important then being in a committed relationship; this is nuts.
This, and the fact the birthrate is in free fall is closely linked. One wonders if the powers that be are really that clueless, or if this is some sort of scheme to reduce population, or at least the white population,
earl says: …a genius with lots of money and that’s the best they can attract.
Genius is not attractive to women. Almost every other kind of talent or asset is.
Chicks dig standout musicians, athletes, successful entrepreneurs, singers, bull riders, you name it.
But nobody is lusting after the brainiac neckbeard who knows everything. Nobody!
I consistently test in the genius range, but it is always my other good traits that attract the women. And if I try to show how smart I am, it is off-putting and boring to women. Men also hate it if you “prove” you’re smarter than them. Seriously nobody wants to feel inferior. If Beckham can kick a soccer ball better than me, I don’t care, If some guy sings better than me, I don’t care, If some guy is good at bull riding and has a big belt buckle he won, whoop de doo! If some guy wipes his butt with 1000$ bills, good for him! But if somebody is truly smarter, that can make people feel inferior, and some will hate them for it. And engendering the disdain of strangers is not the thing that attracts women. Now, if like musk, you can turn your brilliance into some money, the women will swoon for the money and your confidence. Otherwise if he is smart with no money, his confidence gets labeled as arrogance. I’ve sort of been both of those places. And it is palpable how differently people respond to you. Super smart is not sexy in either sex. If women want to be sexy, they will often play the part of the airhead/bimbo. And we all know that Chad who beds the wimminz is a “dumb jock”.
Sweden, or any number of western European countries comes to mind as examples of where will end up,
Agreed. Elon Musk inspires nerds and greedy Wall St. investment bankers, but the dude is as Beta as they come, even if he is a billionaire. A roguish bartender scores hotter women than they do,
I’ve never watched the show. Is she the starlet who enacted the steamy sex scenes I’ve heard about? Or do all the female leads in the show demonstrate how empowered they are by doing that?
Regarding the “Royal Wedding”, where the cucked “Prince” married the Hollyweird slut, I did my best to tune out that freak show.
I fear to ask what exactly did he say.
I recall reading an article about his saying that the Church’s mission was social justice. Silly me, I thought the Church’s mission was to bring men and women to Jesus Christ and save them from eternal damnation.
Curiosity got the best of me. He quoted Martin Luther King Jr., bit not our Lord (he did quote Corinthians).
He referred to Christianity as a “movement” as well.
Genius is not attractive to women.
Marilyn Monroe famously said that Einstein was incredibly sexy, because, she said, intelligence is sexy.
Some possibilities:
1. Monroe really did think that intelligence was sexy.
2. Monroe thought that intelligence was sexy, but only because she was insecure about her own intelligence. She was compensating.
3. Monroe merely wanted people to think that she was attracted to intelligence, because she thought it might fix her public image as a brainless bimbo. It was a PR statement.
4. Monroe was attracted to Einstein’s fame and status, and mistakenly thought she was attracted to his intelligence.
Frank K,
Sophie Turner plays Sansa on Game of Thrones. Sansa is old fashioned young princess with traditional values.
In the interview, Turner talks about how Sansa was poorly raised to believe that a romantic marriage to a handsome prince was the most important thing she could aspire to.
In the show, Sansa marries Joffrey, a handsome young prince who turns out to be a cold sadist. Sansa later escapes and is captured by Lord Ramsey, who rapes and brutalizes Sansa.
Meanwhile, Sansa’s sister, Arya, disdains men and marriage, and becomes a kick-ass warrior woman.
Message of the show: Traditional minded women are chumps who end up abused by men. Instead, become a Strong, Independent Woman who goes out and kicks some butt!
@Anonymous Reader – Musk’s dad has fathered six children, including one by his stepdaughter who’s 42 years younger. The family aren’t happy, Elon’s reported as not speaking to him – but dad seems to be an alpha of sorts, if not a very nice one.
Anon may get his own way as to the demise of the British Monarchy but if he does that will be the end of the most glitzy series of weddings. Either way there will be no more Royal Weddings for a quarter century. What we must now expect therefore (other than divorces) are Funerals.
I suspect, and even though it may not be conscious on his part, that Harry, aware as he must be as to what is said of his paternity and his Mother’s mud-sharking is, as the man who never will be King, as we say around here, pissing it up against the wall. Compare Harry with William. William marries in his twenties a woman not Royalty but English, Anglican and no older than himself who is single and probably virginal and who so far appears to be an admirable wife and mother: Harry marries a frivorcee who is not royalty either European or British, older than himself, Roman Catholic and whose parents are divorced and of different races and whose siblings do not seem to have a good word to say about her, the Father being estranged from the daughter. Had Harry set out to make an F.U. choice he could hardly have done better (save if the bride had children or had he decided to marry someone of his own sex). My Great Grandfather was a Deputy Lieutenant of the County of Sussex and I resent the fact that the new Duchess of Sussex is neither English nor of my race.
American Presidents come and go but we are stuck with this woman (and her progeny) in perpetuity. Where’s a jihadist when you need one.
@ Earl
@Opus…
Meghan is performing the role of her lifetime as an actress. She might even get an Oscar nod in ‘The Wife of Prince Henry’.
You can all figure out it will not be for the role of “Best supporting”
If the ring is not good enough then she is definitely not good enough.
Wow, that soft-core porn show from HBO has a whole slew of winners, it seems. Google “Souad Faress” to see what another one of its actresses does in her spare time.
His genius had led to fame & fortune status…that’s what attracts the wimminz.
Could be her…or that braided blonde I read some empowering story about. But it wasn’t the sex scenes she said were empowering…it was the nude scenes. Jennifer Lawrence also said some nonsense about that in her latest flop of a movie.
Ok so getting naked in front of the camera so pervert producers can film you and show it to the world is empowering…but a teen girl sends a nude text to her bf and he broadcasts it to the town is one of the worse things that can happen?
A frivorce could change that.
According to wikipedia her parents are Protestant, not Catholic. She did attend a Catholic parochial school as a child, but was never baptized nor confirmed into the RCC.
“All my females. If Meghan never left her first marriage she wouldn’t be a princess today or royalty. There is always better.”
All my males: After a lifetime of entitled go grrrl propaganda, your wife will always wonder if she can also become a princess and will leave you whenever someone more exciting or higher on the socioeconomic ladder comes along.
It’s fun telling people I’ve never seen the show. They stare at me incredulously, probably thinking I’m some sort of weirdo.
It’s even more fun to tell them that there are countries where woman are treated the way they are in “The Handmaiden’s Tale” (another show I’ve only read about). They get excited until they realize all the countries I enumerate are Muslim.
One wonders if the powers that be are really that clueless, or if this is some sort of scheme to reduce population, or at least the white population
Your second surmise is correct. TPTB want us white folk GONE, and are doing everything they can to make it happen. Destroying white marriages and families and making damned sure that the Patriarchy doesn’t make a comeback are near Number One on their list of agenda items. This is why the family court system is so blatantly anti-male.
Remember: the family, especially the strong, father-led patriarchal extended family is a mortal threat to the power and influence of the Almighty State. Ergo, it must be prevented/destroyed at all costs. Pushing feminism, and all of its toxic agenda, is a key offensive strategy in this.
Emailed my Uncle Thomas in Wales. Asked him about the wedding:
“There was a royal wedding? I thought it was a Hollywood fashion shoot.”
And as such the state wants to make sure they have your children and your wives.
I just tell them I started watching this show called ‘Friends’.
I’ve never watched it either. Anything on HBO pretty much guarentees the actresses have to do the empowerment scenes. The only info about the show I get is when they interview one of the empty headed people from the show.
Just saw this comment from elsewhere.
‘All my males, If Trump never left his first wife…we wouldn’t have Melania as our First Lady…remember guys, there’s always smarter and hotter out there!!!’
seventiesjason @ 10:59 am:
“There was a royal wedding? I thought it was a Hollywood fashion shoot.”
He isn’t wrong.
@thedeti
Ha! Is this true? I wouldn’t know, but if so we all know the answer to your criticism: Honi soit qui mal y pense.
Game of Thrones pushes more than female empowerment.
Two of the characters are eunuchs. One woman falls in love with a eunuch. He doesn’t even have a penis. She doesn’t care, because he’s such a strong, sensitive soul. Then they make love, and he uses his mouth.
There are several gay characters, and gay love scenes.
One of the most famous pair of lovers is a sister and brother duo, Queen Cersei and Lord Jamie. They had three children, with a fourth on the way.
The show started off fairly patriarchal, with intelligent, Machiavellian dialog examining the nature of political power. They introduced more magic, fantasy, and feminism as the show progressed.
Cane:
OK, shame on me. I’ll try to keep my mind out of the gutter.
Seventiesjason,
Lol, fashion shoot.
Opus,
You racialist, you!
Just kidding…we are both ‘bad guys’ here. You can’t get past her race, I can’t get past her divorce.
I guess we are both prejudiced…
Serious question by the way: is divorcist a thing now? If I were head of a catholic school and I refused to hire a divorced teacher, would I get arrested or something? I genuinely don’t know if my anti-divorce views are *illegal* or not. Wouldn’t surprise me if they were, mind!
Not the first time of course that British aristocracy has ‘gone black’, so to speak, Opus. My mother used to bang on about some heir to some fortune back in the 60s who got hitched to some ‘black as coal’ African woman. Apparently she was very beautiful, ‘slim as a rake’ and model-like…
Anyone have any idea who that couple might have been?
I remember better Sir Seretse Kama and his British wife…but only because there was a film about their lives recently. She was only middle class though, but somehow their marriage caused a lot of noses to be put out of joint, not just on the British side, but also on his side, because he was a prince of some African nation and he was required to have an African wife…
And hey, a phenomenon I have noticed is that ‘ginger’ (red-haired) men like Harry tend to go for darker women. Boris Becker is another one who seems to have a ‘type’, and they are all dark…
It doesn’t surprise me one bit that Harry chose to marry a mixed race woman. In fact I am surprised he didn’t go for a fully black woman. Meghan Markle could easily pass for white.
Anyhow, I have been on a John Rutter cloud all day. H&M very kindly played a John Rutter piece at their wedding, reminding me of the superbness of this most English of composers known above all for his use of the high-pitched voice (women or boys) in his music. I LOVE, LOVE, LOVE John Rutter. Wills and Kate also had JR at their wedding, I recall…
May I share?
Here you go:
The Lord bless you and keep you:
By the way, at this the feast of Pentecost (the birthday of the Christian Church, as my italian priest said this morning at Mass: ‘E nata oggi la chiesa!’), may I say to you all: The Lord keep you and bless you! And wish you a blessed and peaceful Whitsun. Do you also have tomorrow (Monday) off as I do over here in a Catholic canton of Switzerland?
And another gem from the man himself: For the beauty of the Earth… (I am in seventh heaven with this one. How utterly beautiful!)
And another thing…
That young cellist at the wedding yesterday. Sheku Kanneh-Mason. Much has been discussed about his presence at the wedding. He was said to have been hand-picked by Prince Harry.
19 years old, won BBC Young Musician of the Year 2 years ago.
If I have learned ANYTHING at all from reading this blog, it is THIS:
When Mummy and Daddy stay together in Holy Matrimony, good things happen.
This young man comes from an intact home, and has 6 siblings, and they are all gifted classial musicians. They are basically the black answer to the von Trapp family, lol.
Beautiful family.
I am not sure we would be seeing this if the parents had split up, or had never married in the first place. I am convinced their strong bond is what underlies the beauty of their childrens’ success.
So thank you Dalrock for bringing to my attention the ills of single motherhood, and the beauty of an intact marriage. I pray fo all those who have been given their marching orders out of their own marriages by unscrupulous partners.
Musk has been divorced at least once.
Indeed, he’s thrice divorced, including the same woman twice, in fact. He is a man who can attract beautiful women with his money/power/status, but has no clue about how to retain them, obviously.
The show started off fairly patriarchal, with intelligent, Machiavellian dialog examining the nature of political power. They introduced more magic, fantasy, and feminism as the show progressed.
Yeah, Martin’s books were always very, very anti-traditional. He set out to write a fantasy series for people who hate LOTR and it’s moral black and whites, goods and evils — in Martin world, everything is grey and murky, no-one is really good, everyone is a lech and so on and he was trying to write a kind of anti-LOTR. The series pushed this further I guess (I have not watched it), but Martin is involved in the series, too, having long been a television writer anyway before he wrote the GOT books. The agenda pushing is quite deliberate, in other words.
Do you also have tomorrow (Monday) off as I do over here in a Catholic canton of Switzerland?
Not in the US, no. I am not sure that “low” Protestants celebrate or recognize the feast. In Orthodoxy, we observe it next Sunday in any case.
“The show started off fairly patriarchal, with intelligent, Machiavellian dialog examining the nature of political power. They introduced more magic, fantasy, and feminism as the show progressed.”
Vikings did the same thing. It’s unwatchable now.
The GOT books are very very different from the show. But the show has passed the book timeline for a couple of seasons so who knows what “Winds of Winter” will be like (assuming it ever makes it to print. Martin ain’t lookin too good these days).
Not to worry! Britland will also be banning those evil stereotypes in advertising. Stop showing boys as brave! Stop showing girls as caring! You might affect their life choices..;
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5738191/Gender-stereotyping-adverts-banned.html
In China and India, men outnumber women on a massive scale. The consequences are far-reaching,: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/world/too-many-men/?utm_term=.61257c9a3bde
Lots of interesting facts and anecdotes in this article. Especially liked the profile of single men, some in their 30s, who realize they’ll never find a wife.
But this is also a major problem for the West. Tens of millions of young, single, horny, angry men might immigrate to the West. And our borders are open.
Speaking of George R. R. R. Martin:
https://www.theonion.com/george-r-r-martin-promises-fans-the-winds-of-winter-1826115223
Man up and marry that slut…but make sure you put enough effort into it to prove you’re good enough for her.
“
For the time being parochial schools are still able to require that staff and faculty be Catholics in good standing. I personally know of a teacher who was dismissed when she became pregnant out of wedlock, even though the guy did eventually marry her.
Pretty much everything is unwatchable now, even though the masses appear to love the garbage. Case in point: Marvel’s Deadpool. I’ve only seen clips and from them alone I can tell that the movies are vile and ultraviolent. Yet almost everyone loves Deadpool And then we all act surprised when some kid goes on a shooting spree. I couldn’t even bring myself to watch the recent Justice League and Avengers movies. And even though I consider myself a Stars Wars aficionado, I won’t go see “Solo”.
@RPL: “Shocking, that Prince Henry went dumpster diving in American trash bins in search of a bride.”
You should put “bride” in scare quotes.
Markle is already married. And if you believe the words of Christ, she will continue to be married to him until one of them dies, regardless of what any court of man says. So Markle and Harry are merely aping the sacrament of marriage, will be living in a state of fornication, and will only have bastard children. All in God’s eyes, of course.
But no one really care about that anymore, do they? There’s no modern-day St. John the Baptist, yelling, “Herod (Harry), send this woman Herodias (Megan) away, for you may not marry your brother’s wife while he yet lives!”
Instead they had one fraud (the head of the American Episcopal Church) quote another fraud (MLK Jr) and he waxed like a teenager about “love”.
There are several gay characters, and gay love scenes.
A man should be proud that they don’t watch a TV show that contains gay love scenes.
The stupid sheeple who think it is great deserve all the disaster that comes their way.
They’re getting nuttier and nuttier as time goes by: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timothymeads/2018/05/20/oh-dear-god–feminists-warns-of-conservative-appropriation-n2482527
Vikings did the same thing. It’s unwatchable now.
Camelot started off feminist. Maybe that’s why it only lasted one season?
When Camelot was attacked, Guinevere essentially told King Arthur, “I hope you don’t expect us women to sit around doing nothing while we’re being attacked? We’re in this together!”
King Arthur sheepishly agreed. Swords were given to all the women, and Guinevere joined the men on the battlements to kick some butt.
Not enough plays are being written about young girls: https://www.americantheatre.org/2018/05/18/what-a-girl-wants/
We also both agree that culturally there have been very few empowering stories about teenage girls. …
“Young women, culturally they’re either objectified or they’re vilified,” said DeLappe. “And they’re hated and they’re annoying, [such as] the way they talk and the upspeak and the vocal fry.”
Contrast that with the amount of narrative space and breadth that young men typically occupy, from Huckleberry Finn to Holden Caulfield, or any of the countless tales about white boys and their dogs.
Teenage girls are usually lucky to either be the sole woman in a sea of masculinity (Harry Potter), trying to get a boy to notice her (Dirty Dancing), or battling some kind of “teenage girl problem” (like an eating disorder or an unwanted pregnancy). The stories of teenage girls are always inextricably linked to stories about their bodies and how the world responds to it.
Tragically, most book collectors are men. That too is a problem, because this means that books written by men are more likely to be canonized as great literature: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/may/18/the-second-shelf-an-devers-balance-the-books
in New York City, I noticed a discrepancy that I had never seen before when lingering in the stacks of secondhand bookshops. I pulled two first editions off of the shelf: one by a living female writer who is tremendously respected, and one by a similarly lauded male writer – and gaped at the difference in price.
The book by the famous woman was $25. The book by the man was hundreds.
There could be many reasons for this difference in price other than the authors’ genders. Yet looking around that room, I was quite certain it had everything to do with gender.
Historically, most book dealers and collectors have been male (although it is beginning to change). I looked closely at other modern first editions by women I consider to be exceptional. Their prices, for the most part, were far lower than their male contemporaries. Years later, new research has shown new books by men are priced higher – would the results differ much in the rare book trade?
Holding the two books in my hands, something crystallised in my mind that had never occurred to me before: that book collectors help determine which writers are remembered and canonised, and which are forgotten.
The collector trade is a part of a supply line, to readers’ bookshelves, universities, archives and libraries. Historically it has been male-dominated (bookmen), white, and oriented around a western canon. Women, particularly women of colour, are left under-recognised, their books deemed less collectable and given less space on shelves.
It can’t be that books written by men (and white men, at that) have simply been better, can it? No, of course not. It’s because the patriarchy refuses to value fiction produced by women.
Oh, will this patriarchal oppression never end?!
Oh, will this patriarchal oppression never end?!
Remember to always replace the word ‘Patriarchy’ with ‘Civilization’ to see the true meaning.
Most of the foundational concepts of any advanced civilization, such as due process, property rights, free markets, enforcement of contracts, meritocracy, small government, etc. are diametrically opposed to core elements of female psychology.
In other words, there is NO pillar of Civilization (what they call the ‘Patriarchy’) that they WON’T attack.
Hollywood must be full of identikit young women keen to use whatever limited talents they might possess to obtain fame and fortune. The new bride, at least according to a previous issue of the Daily Mail, once listed her accomplishments as including that of Masseuse and Stripper. One photograph shows her with her then husband and she was clearly pregnant.
She may these days hold out with envy against white success but that did not stop her straightening her hair, whitening her skin, or having a caucasian nose job.
Today’s Mail asserts that she is a proud feminist though I would have thought that in her case Feminist might be spelled g-o-l-d-d-i-g-g-e-r.
/pol/ naturally has various conspiracy theories to the effect that her husband was forced to marry her. I almost begin to believe as I weep for my country and its people that their wild theories might not be so far from the truth.
Anon says:
May 21, 2018 at 1:39 am
That real does ultimately explain everything.
Anon and Feeriker
Meritocracy should be within context though, because otherwise, churchians will use it to cover their cowardice at saying women should be getting good at mothering and being at home. That is, “let women in combat roles if they are good enough.” I for one, am not good with that, but meritocracy as a concept has no room for patriarchy and those two concepts have some conflicts.
“Not enough plays are being written about young girls
Because heaven forbid that only gays dominate the stage!!!!!!
OFF TOPIC:
https://ifstudies.org/blog/straight-talk-about-the-success-sequence-marriage-and-poverty
New, from W. Bradford Wilcox.
OFF TOPIC:
https://ifstudies.org/blog/straight-talk-about-the-success-sequence-marriage-and-poverty
New, from W. Bradford Wilcox.
Of course the article isn’t wrong in the context of a society where the lion’s share of good outcomes are reserved for people with a lot of education and established careers before marriage.
The trouble is that this sequence is only doable by people who have an above average level of drive, ambition and future time orientation — things which are not equally distributed and never will be. The success sequence itself can really only be followed by people who have these kinds of characteristics, which are never going to be close to widely distributed in the population. This is the folly of setting up the main success path in life around the personal characteristics that only a minority of the population has — it leads to many people not succeeding. It’s more of the “everyone else needs to be like the upper middle class” type of thinking, which is magic thinking in the end.
Another thing — the success sequence also depends on free access to abortion — there are lots of abortions among UMC white girls between 18 and 26 which are just as important to the success sequence as any other part of it, but Wilcox doesn’t want to talk about those, because doing that would lay bare the contradiction in his thinking — as a conservative who wants to support marriage, he touts the success sequence, but then doesn’t address the centrality of abortion to the sequence because that go against other conservative values.
“That really does ultimately explain everything.”
Not enough plays are being written about young girls
How many plays with any originality or creativity can be written about delusion, immaturity, pettiness, and shallowness before the subject grows stale?
Women actually do go to jail for domestic violence:
https://www.si.com/golf/2018/05/16/ap-glf-glovers-wife-1st-ld-writethru
I suspect that this would have gone down differently if it was just a husband and wife– her word against his. Instead, she attacked her mother-in-law as well and got arrested.
This is a fun one to imagine with the sexes reversed. If a man called his stay-at-home wife a “loser” and “lazy bitch”, then attacked her and her mother, people would practically be calling for the death penalty. But since it’s a woman, we have the husband saying his wife should be cleared in this “private matter.”
Nova: my thoughts too. It is more of the “working class people and poor people and uneducated people just need to be more like us, more like UMC people, more like people with money, and more like educated people. You just need to get more education, get jobs, and get married, and you will be fine!”
Brad Wilcucks is effectively writing the same thing that he wrote many times before.
How can someone have a cushy sinecure for writing one article per year, that too the same article again and again? Academia has become a colossal waste of society’s resources.
I don’t know…they keep trying it.
Perhaps that’s why they have to go back to the 80s and 90s for any ideas.
Interesting question – would the cries for grrl power plays been impacted if HRC won? We’ll soon find out since I fear Kamala Harris may be our President in 2020.
I think the calls for such plays would still be taking place. The true believers are extremely zealous. My engineering school devotes every of its magazines to diversity and the American Water Works Association makes sure it’s publication has at least one piece in it about empowering women.
Of course the article isn’t wrong in the context of a society where the lion’s share of good outcomes are reserved for people with a lot of education and established careers before marriage.
As Novaseeker pointed out, this track requires that discreet abortions be available for a reasonable price, something Wilcox cannot afford to notice. That may or may not cause him some cognitive dissonance. Also this “get married and stay married” track also worked much better when divorces were difficult to obtain; the 1950’s and 1960’s, to be specific. Compare and contrast the economic state of blue collar Americans during those 20 years with the same demographic over the last 20 years. Yes, there are a lot of other factors, but “men’s fault” divorce has done a great deal of social and economic damage – the divorce industry doesn’t produce anything useful but costs a lot of money. It is parasitic, but don’t hold your breath waiting for any cuckservative economist to notice that.
The trouble is that this sequence is only doable by people who have an above average level of drive, ambition and future time orientation
In the abstract sense Wilcox’s advice is an extremely wordy version of “Just Be Yourself!”….
At this point, only measure that might help would be a bullet through Britain’s head. Seeing as how it hates God almost as much as Amerika.
@ Novaseeker says:
May 20, 2018 at 3:32 pm
“Indeed, he’s thrice divorced, including the same woman twice, in fact. He is a man who can attract beautiful women with his money/power/status, but has no clue about how to retain them, obviously.”
Apparently, the same is true of Pres Trump.
Elon Musk’s current squeeze looks like a low-rent version of one of his ex-wives, Talulah Riley.
Mr. Musk appears to be confused. Billionaires are supposed to upgrade, not the other way ’round.
Apparently, the same is true of Pres Trump.
I suppose so, although Trump seems to have avoided marrying the same woman twice, as Musk did with the aforementioned Miss Riley.
Dave — “Fortunately though, life is an uncompromising disciplinarian; it will ensure that they learn their lessons–whether the easy way, or the hard way.”
Nupe. The governments of Britain, Canada, and America will ensure that ”life’s lessons” have no deleterious (i.e., just) impact on their princesses. Because the governments are feminist too.
The burden of lessons and pain instead will be shifted to men, boys, and infants in the Holy Wombs of the Goddesses.
Nova, AR:
I missed the part about low cost abortion. Yes, that’s an important part of the equation, and one that’s been kicked around before here. It’s been pointed out a few times that modern day conservative women are really just feminists who are (nominally) against abortion. That, and the fact that most of the conservative MC and UMC women touted as the “examples” are having lots of premarital sex.
The current tradcon stance on abortion is “we don’t like it; we hate it, abortion should be rare and people shouldn’t have abortions. But we need that safety valve there in case one of ours needs it.”
And tradcons just look the other way and stick their fingers in their ears and sing “LALALA I CAN”T HEAR YOU” on their Princesses having premarital sex.
There’s a lot of hypocrisy in the modern church on sex and abortion. “Sex and abortions (if I really really need it) for me (and in secret); but not for thee”.
Paul — “I’m baffled.”
Boss, these people are MASONS. They have no more to do with ‘the church’ than modern Anglicans.
Anglican Bishop Rowan Williams, who is again the choice to preside over these fake-royal weddings, is a confirmed DRUID. These people and their ”church” are the opposites and enemies of Christ.
Feminism, egalitarianism/equalism, humanism, and the rest of the philosophical/spiritual foundations of the modern West were sourced in masonry (the occult), not in Biblical structures and guidelines.
Nupe. The governments of Britain, Canada, and America will ensure that ”life’s lessons” have no deleterious (i.e., just) impact on their princesses. Because the governments are feminist too.
You really think so? I don’t. If the rate of mental illnesses among western women is anything to go by, methinks the government has failed to shield these women from the consequences of their poor choices. Telling women to feel good about themselves, and giving them hollow prices for destroying the most meaningful things in their lives, can only go so far.
Many women above age 30 are exhausted. The sheer amount of energy they expend to keep their faulty, make-believe narrative going, is unbearable. You only need to see these “strong and independent” women when they are alone in their cold, quiet little house in the dark of the nights or the wee hours of those lonely mornings. Those gaping yearnings for a family of their own. Those waves of dread that tend to wash over them when they begin to realize that they might end up alone like an old maid, unwanted by any man alive. Why else do you think they try to drown out their sad souls with alcoholic binges and endless one night stands?
Nature is unforgiving. It always gets it pound of flesh from those who cross him, and then some.
Government programs and biased family court judges are powerless against him.
The sheer number of them on anxiety or anti-depression medications or just flat out being anxious all the time should tell you something.
Tradcons don’t even oppose contraception…they are fully in on the fact they think their princess will have some sort of premarital sex.
Earl Dave,
You remember that this is women’s chosen path and that they don’t do cause and effect and that the Bible says a foolish tears her own house down? So what are you basing your confidence on a correction being made that is recoverable from? There could be no just impact, just a whimpering end to the US.
feeriker — “Remember: the family, especially the strong, father-led patriarchal extended family is a mortal threat to the power and influence of the Almighty State. Ergo, it must be prevented/destroyed at all costs. Pushing feminism, and all of its toxic agenda, is a key offensive strategy in this.”
Spot-on, as they used to say back when Britain was British.
Most of satan’s power is filtered through the various States and their institutions, and particularly through the leading States of the first-world West: Britain, Canada, the U.S. (think ‘powers in high places’)
All this talk about the current rise of the Deep State is ludicrous. Feminism, Humanism, Egalitarianism/Equalism have been the centerpieces of the modern Western State for half-a-century. Anti-father and anti-family policies have been in place for a long time, and each step of the process was planned and executed quite purposefully and cynically.
The results are everywhere around you in destroyed societies, and therefore when you hear the Right’s kneejerk solution to America’s descent into weekly mass violence is militarization of the schools, understand that this tactic will lead to the same result as the Left’s solution of gun-grabbing. School militarization would greatly increase State presence in the larger public sphere. Now, stop and consider feeriker’s comment”: Who exactly is Served and Protected by said State? It is not fathers or fatherhood, and it is not the sons of America, Canada, or Britain.
As usual, before any solution even is implemented, they’ve already gotcha ‘tween rock and hard-place.
Pretty much.
It’s not like great empires last forever…if anything they are quite similar how they end. Just look to see what the male-female relations become…are they led by the Patriarchy or are they led by the women?
OT, but had to post this here for vivisection. This was the form distributed by a pastor leading a men’s group at my church. I do not attend this group (I knew it would be pedestalizing 101), but get the emails. Something tells me “leading” isn’t what this form will get you asking these questions of your wifeincharge.
Challenges For Leading Your family
Probably one of the greatest challenges you’ll face in casting vision for your marriage and family is finding the time and energy to engage the issues. Here is a tools that should help make things a bit easier for you.
Ten Questions
Pastor Tom Elliff developed a list of ten questions you can use to begin the conversation with your wife.
1. What could I do to make you feel more loved?
2. What could I do to make you feel more respected?
3. What could I do to make you feel more understood?
4. What could I do to make you more secure?
5. What could I do to make you feel more confident in our future direction?
6. What attribute would you like me to develop?
7. What attribute would you like me to help you develop?
8. What achievement in my life would bring you the greatest joy?
9. What would indicate to you that I really desire to be more Christ like?
10. What mutual goal would you like to see us accomplish?
Dave — “Nature is unforgiving. It always gets it pound of flesh from those who cross him, and then some. Government programs and biased family court judges are powerless against him.”
Him? Who the heck are you talking about?
I’ve been watching the American Government prevent, uh, Brother Nature from exacting any consequences on malevolent female behaviour for fifty years and running. The National Security State of the western world is a direct outgrowth of female collective power (= safety safety and MORE safety for females, no safety for males).
Dunno what country you’ve been living in.
Chad —
So saith the fem-churches and their false pastors.
Anybody that presented my grand-daddy with that list would have departed from him bleeding.
Chad-
Most of the men in the church I attended in the 90s talked like that about their marriages. They scolded me when I was going through my divorce for not being like that. They are all divorced now.
Guess they weren’t asking hard enough.
Chad
Probably one of the greatest challenges you’ll face in casting vision for your marriage and family is finding the time and energy to engage the issues. Here is a tools that should help make things a bit easier for you.
Did this preacher learn English as a second language?
What does “casting vision for your marriage” even mean?
[Pedestalizing, woman-worshipping, Blue Pill / no-glasses self-abasing text elided]
Scott
Most of the men in the church I attended in the 90s talked like that about their marriages.
Which denomination was that? Not to pick at an old wound, just for “mah denomination ain’t not got no fem-in-ists noway nohow!” future reference.
@Chad
Rhetorical question of the day: did you ask the man distributing this for BIble quotes to justify the questions? In particular, ask him for a Bible quote to support question #1.
Then ask for the same support for question #2.
Probably something about “horses” and “water” and “drinking” comes up about now.
Mainline church of Christ
Why ask your wife that when you have the Gospel and the books by St. Paul already stating what it is?
Scott, I’ve been told by men from a couple of Church of Christ churches that they are not a denomination. Not! Not at all!
So there must be some confusion on your part…
Oh they are a denomination after all…they are the woman/wife worshiping churches.
Chad, that list reminds me of Dalrock’s insight that the church is constantly inverting the husband/wife Biblical relationship. That list is actually not bad if given to wives to ask of husbands. They are good questions but they are obviously phrased to make it clear that the one asking is the submissive one and the responder the leader.
The churches of Christ are part of the larger restoration movement (Stone/Campbellites) which also includes the disciples of Christ and the Christians.
They do not operate exactly like a denomination because they have no synod or other central governing body. There is no ordination process or endorsing body for clergy,
However, they have core doctrines, colleges, publications, etc.
The basis of the “not a denomination” claim is complicated.
They are all divorced now.
Guess they weren’t asking hard enough.
Or, they asked, got the answers, did everything the wives said; and lo and behold – those turned out to be exactly the wrong things to do!
50 years is a relatively short time. There’s plenty of Bible verses that talk about the wicked thriving for a time but eventually downfall comes upon them.
They probably washed the dishes and cleaned the toilet.
The wrong thing to do is give your wife the headship position.
I feel compelled to put Ray straight on one or two of the matters he mentioned above.
I cannot speak for everyone of course but I doubt that most inhabitants of the British Isles hate God; it is just that they do not think about him too much and certainly not as much as Americans seem to (that’s one of the things so endearing about Americans). As for the Prime Minister-ess, she like Prime Minister Brown (the one before Cameron) are – Like Frau Merkel – offspring of clergymen and so I assume see themselves as fully paid-up Christians.
I am not certain who officiated at Saturday’s show-wedding but I doubt that it was Rowan Williamson (though I could be wrong) as he is no longer Archbishop of Canterbury. Just because he looks like a Druid does not mean that he is one (although to be fair Druidism is the original religion of these Isles). Williamson is in fact a bit of a literary intellectual and strong on T.S. Eliot.
How come, by the way, last Saturday was a religious rather than a civil wedding for I was not aware the Anglican Church are now marrying divorcees?
@Opus
Apparently it changed in 2002.
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-42141868
Part of the larger feminist agenda in the churches was to let those who were divorced, remarry.
It’s a sad state that most churches are of the feminist agenda and not Christian.
Scott
The basis of the “not a denomination” claim is complicated.
That comment of mine was a little bit tongue in cheek….and it really isn’t as complicated as some folks wish. For example, as far as I know there aren’t any “elders” in a C of C church. That’s because “elders” are what denominations have, so…no elders. But there are “shepherds” who are male-only, and who appear to serve the same purpose as “elders” but they are not elders because that’s what denominations have. So there!
I guess the point is this: in any church of any denomination certain functions must be carried out.
How they are labeled isn’t really all that important to the function, but we humans sure do love to get wrapped up in labels and symbols vs. substance [1].
Last time I visited a C of C church it was interesting to notice the hymnals still had shape-notes, an interesting cultural and historical artifact that has echoes all the way back to Stone and Campbell. The shepherds were all over 60 and the one I conversed with was quite blue pill.
[1] Consider this question: “Red rose or white?” are you willing to bet your life on the answer?
Opus
I am not certain who officiated at Saturday’s show-wedding but I doubt that it was Rowan Williamson
Rowan Atkinson then?
How come, by the way, last Saturday was a religious rather than a civil wedding for I was not aware the Anglican Church are now marrying divorcees?
You’re just being an old fuddy-duddy, Opus. It’s the 21st century! Get with the times! Isn’t the C of E marrying women to other women now, and some of them bishops? Or am I confused the Anglicans with the US Episcopals again?
Earl
Part of the larger feminist agenda in the churches was to let those who were divorced, remarry.
Monkey-branching is an example of hypergamy at work. Hypergamy predates feminism.
@ Opus says:
May 21, 2018 at 4:09 pm
“… I was not aware the Anglican Church are now marrying divorcees?”
Like Henry VIII?
Another Strong, Independent Single Mom kills her son: https://www.yahoo.com/news/former-playboy-playmate-jumps-her-153822825.html
A former Playboy model killed herself and her 7-year-old son after jumping from a hotel in Midtown New York City on Friday morning.
The New York Post reports that 46-year-old Stephanie Adams jumped from the Gotham Hotel penthouse at 8:15 a.m. with her son, Vincent, amid an ongoing custody battle with her ex.
Only sixteen years out of date then – and I am supposed to know that stuff.
@Oscar
The devil is as always in the detail. Henry was never legally and properly married to Catherine of Aragon which left him free to marry Anne whom he executed for treason. The next one died after which he married a Flemish cow, so I am guessing that was annulment after which he executed number five and then at last found true love and stayed married. Henry was given the title Uberimae Fidae by The Pope (which every British Monarch still has – its on the coinage) and so I am sure he would not have made a theological error.
Anon-
Interesting. In almost 40 years in the church of Christ I never attended a church without both an elder and a deacon board.
Most COC theologians also use the terms elder, shepherd and pastor interchangeably.
They actually have a lot in common with orthodox as they see themselves the original unbroken line from the time of Christ.
Feminism seems to promote and encourage every bad (or perhaps natural) behaviors of women. The church is supposed to counter this.
@ Opus says:
May 21, 2018 at 5:36 pm
“The devil is as always in the detail.”
There’s plenty of devil in those details, alright.
Scott
Interesting. In almost 40 years in the church of Christ I never attended a church without both an elder and a deacon board.
Most COC theologians also use the terms elder, shepherd and pastor interchangeably.
Probably just sample error on my part. I have not known that many C of C members. So this likely is just an “artifact” of the individuals I’ve interacted with and the particular churches they belonged to. Given the independence of each C of C, there’s room for some drift in terminology, yes?
They actually have a lot in common with orthodox as they see themselves the original unbroken line from the time of Christ.
That’s beyond my competence, but it clarifies some conversations I’ve had over the years.
AR-
In the 90s (the last full decade I was a COC member) there were several movements running through the church simultaneously that were more or less growth oriented. The theme that ran through it all was a sense of trying to find common ground with the rest of Protestantism and the denominations.
It manifested in some not so subtle ways (like dropping the church of Christ brand name altogether in some places. They chose to put things on their buildings like “Christians meet here” and so forth. They added praise teams. The church I attended for example tried to compromise on the issue of strict acapella singing and placed lapel mics on the more talented SATB part singers in the congregation.
I was a bass/tenor. I also was the music director and primary song leader.
Max Lucado hit the big time as an author during that time and most people had no idea he was church of Christ.
More subtle indications were the loosening of such tight restrictions on the words themselves. When I was growing up the term “pastor” was for baptists.
The only acceptable term for the guy who delivers the sermon was “preacher” or “minister.”
All of this had the feeling of trying to be cool like all the larger, big churches without abandoning the principles that make the church of Christ seem so odd to everyone else. The main way they did this was to keep those idiosyncrasies while downplaying them or not talking about them much.
I was gone by 2005, so a lot had probably still changed.
Note, for example Larry Nunley’s church in Euless, Texas. Larry is the person who coined the term “Care Group” (found at the top of this page):
http://afcoc.org/caring-for-ourselves/
This concept is functionally no different from “small group” which most big box and denominational churches have today. But in order to get CoCers to buy it, it required its own name, because denominations are bad or something.
But also look at the upper right hand corner of the website. Every page has the same thing:
To Be Saved, You Must:
“Hear” Romans 10:17
“Believe” Romans 10:9-10
“Repent” Luke 13:3-5
“Confess” Matthew 10:32-33
“Be Baptized” Acts 2:36-41 + Col 2:9-12
Right out of the Stone/Campbell playbook.
The aforementioned Max Lucado’s church is called “Oak Hills Church” (minus “of Christ”) but it still a CoC. But buried deep in this tract about baptism is the core doctrine of the CoC on this topic.
https://oakhillschurch.com/Content/ExternalSite/OHC-BaptismBeliefs.pdf
It is no different from the little church of Christ on the corner in Podunk Arkansas with the 95 year old fire and brimstone preacher screaming at 6 old ladies or whatever.
I am not saying whether I agree with these things or not. Just a little lesson about how movements like the CoC evolve in order to fit their surroundings, and how the language matters.
thedeti: ‘There’s a lot of hypocrisy in the modern church on sex and abortion. “Sex and abortions (if I really really need it) for me (and in secret); but not for thee”.’
A couple of decades ago I heard the head of my previous denomination say, “I’m 100% against abortion except in two cases: Mary and Judy [his two daughters]. If one of them got pregnant, I’m not sure what I’d do.”
I couldn’t leave that denomination fast enough!
ray says:
May 21, 2018 at 1:47 pm
Paul — “I’m baffled.”
Boss, these people are MASONS. They have no more to do with ‘the church’ than modern Anglicans.
Anglican Bishop Rowan Williams, who is again the choice to preside over these fake-royal weddings, is a confirmed DRUID. These people and their ”church” are the opposites and enemies of Christ.
Feminism, egalitarianism/equalism, humanism, and the rest of the philosophical/spiritual foundations of the modern West were sourced in masonry (the occult), not in Biblical structures and guidelines.
-Ray: You won’t be surprised to see Henry sticking his hand inside his jacket in the classic Masonic pose. The wedding was performed on the Masonic black-and-white floor.
In the 1980s, journalist Stephen Knight wrote an expose of masonry called ”The Brotherhood”, where he outlined the corruption of Britain’s institutions by Masonry.
The churches responded by….doing nothing.
So yeah. What you see has nothing to do with Christianity….
I couldn’t leave that denomination fast enough!
Heh, it’s the de facto Christian position. Christian fathers know that when they push their daughters to get degrees and career as back up plan before marrying in the late 20s that they run the risk of fornication and abortion. Most of the time, they don’t want to know, it’s a don’t ask don’t tell type of thing going on, but they also don’t emphasize fornication for criticism (except of course criticizing men who “force sex” on their daughters), and are formally against abortion but, in cases of their daughters … erm, well, it’s complicated you know, and I never would have thought I would feel this way, and you know? … and so on.
This father-of-daughter(s) behavior is one of the main drivers of de facto Christian support for much of feminism.
Conservatism’s flirtation with feminism is suicidal.
This is a good article, even if the author, Mytheos Holt, is himself a mangina cuckservative (just to a slightly lesser degree than NRO).
When even Mytheos Holt says that Cuckservatism is too feminist, then it really is near the long-awaited end of that ideology.
Christian fathers know that when they push their daughters to get degrees and career as back up plan before marrying in the late 20s that they run the risk of fornication and abortion
It’s Plan A, not a backup. These cucks are actively against their daughters marrying young, marrying as virgins, and dedicating themselves to being wives and mothers first and foremost.
I’m now quite ready to believe that most of these poor schlubs have had such miserable marriages to their baby princess’s mamas that they reflexively (and mostly subconsciously) gag at the very thought of widdle pwincess narrying some other poor young schlub and becoming a carbon copy of her mama.
This father-of-daughter(s) behavior is one of the main drivers of de facto Christian support for much of feminism.
I also begin to wonder if the whole DODO phenomenon is God’s way of punishing a nation full of errant churchians by letting women rule them.
I am not certain who officiated at Saturday’s show-wedding but I doubt that it was Rowan Williamson
Rowan Atkinson then?
Heck, I would have got up early to watch that.
OT: Scouts and condoms – not your father’s Jamboree:
http://www.wnd.com/2018/05/condoms-required-at-scouts-24th-world-jamboree/
I was pondering the fact of America’s enthusiasm for God and England’s rather more relaxed attitude. It occurred to me, though this cannot be the entire answer, that it might not be unrelated to the fact that we have a Monarchy and you don’t. Britons or at least many of them (e.g. my late parents) regard the Monarchy and certainly the present Queen as almost God-like – and look at the deification of that slut Diana Spencer. Criticism of the Royals is thus limited and restrained and certainly nowhere near the level of the daily abuse that is heaped on poor President Trump.
Tl:Dr We don’t need God; we have the Queen.
Henry may have had six wives but the next four Monarchs (Edward, Mary, Jane and Elizabeth) only managed one spouse between the lot of them so that rather evens things up.
Agreed…we’ve seen it around here before, the DODOs are often the hugest feminists.
Deep Strength did a blog about the Biblical book Sirach (or also called Ben Sira or Ecclesiasticus)…which for whatever reason was taken out by Luther. It has a lot of good advice when it comes to women and for what fathers should do when raising daughters.
https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/2018/05/20/the-sirach-on-women/
‘Do you have sons? Correct them
and cure their stubbornness in their early youth.
Do you have daughters? Keep them chaste,
and do not be indulgent to them.
Give your daughter in marriage, and a worry comes to an end;
but give her to a sensible man.’
Ben Sira 7:23-25
Well if they put them on the pill…they are basically endorsing fornication.
If I ever have a wife and daughters…I’m not allowing them to have pill. Either the daughters stay chaste (and I’d tell them the consequences of fornication) or they get married and have sex/children in wedlock with their spouse.
Off topic, but interesting:
https://www.military.com/daily-news/2018/05/12/all-female-crew-proves-its-chops-board-carrier-roosevelt.html
“All-female Crew Proves its Chops on Carrier Roosevelt”
@Dan You’re exactly right. It would be hilarious to see the pastor’s reaction if I asked him why he doesn’t flip the script – “Husbands, take these questions home and have your wife ask them of you!” There would be howls and lamentations.
@AR English is not his strong suit. Like many nowadays, he speaks corpocliche. Blue sky thinking!
@Earl Yep. I’m not interested in my wife’s view on how I can be more like Christ. I think I know where that will lead. I’ll stick with the Bible.
It’s Plan A, not a backup.
Oh the life script is fixed, yes, but the job/career is seen by Dad as “just in case some loser divorces her” Plan B. Daughter always needs a fallback in case some douche divorces princess and leaves her high and dry, so to speak. In reality, it becomes Plan A, that’s right, but in Daddy’s mind it’s a backup plan. In his mind, Plan A is for her to get her feminist merit badge/Plan B backup lined up, then marry an Alpha Bux and quit to take care of the kids while she is supported by AB. That’s Plan A. In most cases, that doesn’t happen, but it’s about what Daddy has in his mind for princess.
Well if they put them on the pill…they are basically endorsing fornication.
In my observation having raised a son to adulthood and kept mt ears open around other parents, most follow a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy when it comes to their daughters and sex — even, and perhaps especially, Christian dads.
Sort of OT: Reading through Proverbs, I’d gotten to 31:2, which contains the words of a queen mother: “What, my son? and what, the son of my womb? and what, the son of my vows?” Note that, just as much as the fact of physical relationship, the queen is emphasizing the covenantal relationship when addressing her son. This isn’t “just” her own flesh and blood, but also the fruit of her marital relationship–a child of her vows. This gives us a profound sense of what’s missing when reproduction is sundered from marriage.
@ Opus says:
May 22, 2018 at 4:00 am
“Henry may have had six wives but the next four Monarchs (Edward, Mary, Jane and Elizabeth) only managed one spouse between the lot of them so that rather evens things up.”
Was talking to a 30ish coworker who married his baby’s mama. Not a believer, good with cars. When I found out he is rebuilding an engine , I mentioned it’s too bad his 2-year old isn’t a boy so he could build cars with him. He says, I’m having her do everything, I don’t want her dependent on a man.
He loves her, and that is what loves now means to the common American. In that context, I better understand where CBMW is coming from when they talk about a sin of servility- they were talking with the world’s heart. He is able to and does all the man stuff for his wife, yet wants his daughter to be a princess warrior.
On a football blog I read, from a top university, people will ask OT questions, such as choosing colleges for their kids. There are many dudes who come and talk about their daughters with similar choices, and these girls all have 4.0 gpas and 34 ACT scores. Guys love daughters that crush men.
This nation is an evil brood.
I would remind Novaseeker et al that the status of being working class does not necessarily mean a low level of drive, ambition, or a higher time preference.
It is a consequence of fulfilling some market function which pays less than some other function. If you insist on maintaining this is evidence of poor planning, I would remind you that a brick mason is considerably more useful than a lawyer when it’s raining.
Then again, I do have a soft spot for Thomas Gray.
Then what was the point of getting married?
As much as there are female feminists who hate men…there’s plenty of men who hate men. Making your daughter to be a competitor with men basically means she’s not getting married or she’ll be divorced and you’ll be raising her for the rest of her life.
More from Ben Sira about fathers and daughters…
An undisciplined child is a disgrace to its father;
if it be a daughter, she brings him to poverty.
A thoughtful daughter obtains a husband of her own;
a shameless one is her father’s grief.
A hussy shames her father and her husband;
she is despised by both.
Ben Sira 22:3-6
earl
Then what was the point of getting married?
In some cases it is cultural inertia, of the “we’ve always done it this way” kind. As the OP shows, this is running down, and it shows in various ways.
Besides, Earl, how can a girlie put off marriage until she’s 27 if she doesn’t have mad skillz?
As much as there are female feminists who hate men…there’s plenty of men who hate men.
In some cases that appears to be self-hate projected outwards onto other men.
FYI, so it’s clearer, my coworker wants his daughter, not his wife, to be independent of men. Knowing this guy, he expects and has a helpful wife.
Those guys with high-achieving STEM daughters don’t hate men, do you mean their actions are unintentionally hating men? I agree with that. They are just doing what’s normal to them, and that is to compete with other guys. They did so successfully with their own careers and compete in the arena that other Americans tell them is valuable, that is, grrl power.
The more I hear this…the more I think fathers are just as complicit in turning their daughters into feminists. DODOs are a prime example.
His daugher is never going to be independant of men. If there is one man she will certainly be dependant on (because we’ve heard stories of 40 year old women doing this)…it’s their father. And if she never marries…it’s a forgone conclusion it will be her father (assuming he’s in her life).
Well I guess the world needs women to fill the important careers of paper pushers and coffee pourers. Certainly more rewarding than being a wife and mother.
The more I hear this…the more I think fathers are just as complicit in turning their daughters into feminists.
Yes, Earl. Fathers of daughters are one of the main engines that drives feminism, and they always have been. Particularly towards the higher end of the totem pole, which is also where feminism began. It’s one of the things that makes it silly to blame women for being feminist when their Daddies all pushed them as hard as they could to be feminists when they were growing up — even the “conservative” Daddies.
There are many dudes who come and talk about their daughters with similar choices, and these girls all have 4.0 gpas and 34 ACT scores. Guys love daughters that crush men.
As much as there are female feminists who hate men…there’s plenty of men who hate men. Making your daughter to be a competitor with men basically means she’s not getting married or she’ll be divorced and you’ll be raising her for the rest of her life.
It’s not that they hate men, it’s as Swanny says they are competitive, and are competitive for their daughters as well. What has changed is that fathers are no longer mapping out and encouraging a feminine life path for their daughters, but a life path that is the same more or less as the masculine one, but they are pushing their daughters very hard towards this. They love it when their daughters beat the boys, so to speak, it tickles them pink. Again, this is one of the main engines of feminism — fathers of daughters pushing their daughters to be as competitive as boys so that they can outcompete the boys so that Daddy can feel proud of his accomplished daughter, and that, if that douchebag ever leaves her, she is strong and independent and all of that. Dads now see this as a duty towards their daughters. Again — even the “conservative” ones, even the “Christian” ones.
Just another reason why I’ve gone MGTOW. You guys can fix this mess. I wouldn’t even know where to begin. If the father is your enemy, the same man with his balls in his wife’s purse, you don’t stand a fucking chance of leading your family.
Sorry gents, have fun trying to fix this shit sandwich. I’m sick to death of even trying to talk some sense into the people I know, never mind taking on big daddy gimmedat and her father to boot.
Was at a baseball game last night…….Triple A team we have in Fresno. Family in front of me. Dad, the good looking mid 30-something jock with his “Posey” SF Giants jersey on. Mom….pretty (blonde of course) about 32. She was stoned on prescribed meds. Son…………maybe a todler….behaved. Daughter is about eight or nine. Daughter sitting with dad……dad is showing her the gameplay…….
The mom asks her husband several times towatch the todler for a minute. He ignores her. She turns to me, ask me to watch the kid for a minute while she uses “the little girls room”, hands me the boy and off she goes.
She comes back. Takes the kid. Thanks me. Husband and daughter had no clue I was holding the kid. I was a little worried if they did see me…………she tells me “My husband is fighting with the Fresno Youth Sports Comission, they won’t let our daughter play on the boys little league team………and she’s better than all of the boys now…they really love baseball.”
I chatted with her about the little boy, where they were from in town, that kind of thing………when I mentioned I was a former Scoutmaster………………….dad PERKED up immediatley, spun around (didn’t introduce himself) and wanted to know which was the “best Troop in town, ’cause he wasnts his daughter in Boy Scouts”
I told him that it was my former Troop, and one of the reasons why I stepped down was because they allowed “girls” to join.
The DAUGHTER said “I can do anything that a boy can do, and I would not want to be with your Troop with that kind of attitude by a leader.”
Smart-alec little girl I thought.
Dad hi-fives her and says to her “Gotta strand up to people who try to put you down”
Mom looked tired, as if “here-we-go-again” and gave me a look of “empathy” or perhaps “apology” for their behavior
Dad says loud and to no one (but directed at me) “Boys are pussfied today anyways, it takes a girl to show them how to do things, even a Scout leader”
The mom says “Jake…..stop……not now.” She looks at me with a “I am so sorry look” on her face.
I just said “by your actions you son here will be joining that groups of boys with your attitude……and your daughters I might add.”
He gets up “What did you say assh*le????”
“You heard me.” I said.
What does tough guy do?????????????????????????
He gets an usher / attendent and “tattles” on me. Tough guy like him. The Usher comes over and the dad and daughter throw accusations at me about how I am disturbing them…….and I have a hatred of women and girls.
I was *FORCED* to move to another seat.
You all here would rail that you would not move, but when it comes to situations like this, you will, and you would.
I moved. The mom met me at the one concession stand a few minutes later apologizing to me for her husband and daughter. I accepted and wished her “good luck”
Fresno Grizzlies won the game, and my seat was quieter…….I didn’t habve to hear inane banter between a father and bratty daughter for the rest of the game.
It was an eqvilent seat. I am a star-row ticket holder (good seats)
You know what is implied in the Dad’s glee? Their glee reveals they don’t expect as much from their daughters and they know that a daughter’s real role is in a family. Their glee says (at least to me), “my kid beat yours, and that is not even her main game, being a supporter is, hah!”
I wouldn’t, you handled it well enough and making such a situation even more combative would not have helped. Some times you need to choose your battles.
I presume that it is sublimated incestuous desire.
Degrees are supposed to be a fall back position for the daughter but that is not how the world works. Meanwhile boys are pushed out to work as soon as possible, and, unable to find a wife, in a few short years the Father is bemoaning lack of grand-children from both sons and daughters.
Feminism is a death-cult.
This is so true. Since they can’t do anything to stop their daughters, they would rather plug their ears and pretend it doesn’t happen. Daughters on the pill and, if worse comes to worse, will get an abortion without letting dad know and all is well. Dad would rather just pretend his daughter is a kick ass, independent go getter.
And this is what Christian men are meant to marry into, to love and cherish for all his days? Are you guys kidding me? Haha! Hilarious! Women are now competition, not support.
You can love and cherish them, but they still won’t stay faithful because you limit their “freedom” whatever the vow they make.
I am not sure why the criticism about Wilcox in this piece (lots of reasons to criticize in general). Wilcox always underestimates the challenges facing men and their incentives, but the success sequence is only:
1) get at least a high school degree, 2) get a full-time job, and, 3) get married before having any children
Thats a low bar and one many societies have achieved traditionally. It is one most Christians would encourage. If 90% of the population lacks the drive or ambition to do that low bar we are doomed. Wilcox piece is not aimed at future lawyers and doctors, but people who might have a future of poverty and can avoid it with these changes. There are challenges to full time work in our current economy (but less and less- thanks Trump). This is not an easy path but its not an insanely high bar either. The only places this falls apart tend to be very dysfunctional places with high numbers of single moms.
This does not even demand you get married, just that if you have children they be after marriage.
Full disclosure: I have only 2 degrees of separation from Wilcox in real life (a very good friend does work with him).
Yeah well if the dad is filling his daughter’s head full of nonsense that she doesn’t need a man…he can be the AMOG for his daughter then. Enjoy financially supporting her and any bastard spawn she has until you are dead.
I feel no pity for DODOs and their feminist nonsense anymore.
Kevin
1) get at least a high school degree, 2) get a full-time job, and, 3) get married before having any children 3.5) marry a woman with as low an N as possible, and no abortions, 4) Stay married.
Oh, oopsie! The parts Wilcox does not address for several reasons, because he can’t. He just can’t. But these parts matter a lot. As a woman’s N increases so does the probability of frivorce, although that probability does level off in theory above 10 to 15. Abortions can not only affect a women’s physical ability to bear a child to term, but also her mental state during pregnancy, childbirth and afterwards.
And of course, ‘stay married’ in a feminist swamp where social networks are full of divorce porn, where it is no secret any woman with one or more children can get ca$h and prize$ rather easily. Brad Wilcox addresses none of this. None! Nor does he even tiptoe up to the fact that the median age for a woman in the US at the time of her first wedding is now close to 27 – it isn’t the men’s fault, it’s the women’s choice. But good old pedestalizing Brad can’t see that.
Kevin, if there was a disease, a germ, that did to children what divorce does to them there would be a nationwide 24 / 7 push to Find A Cure. But…frivorce is all about unhaaaaapy women who have not gotten what they want, what they need, what they deserve! So Wilcox et al cannot bring themselves to suggest even the mildest, smallest changes to frivorce law.
Wilcox has played “marriage” on the Easy setting. He’s telling men who have to play on the Hard setting “Just be yourself! Just marry and stay married! Be like me!”, because he’s deeply blue pill and profoundly ignorant of what the world looks like outside of his Upper Middle Class Academic bubble.
Wilcox is clueless. He’s part of the problem, not the solution. Because “Just MANUP and marry that slut!”is not good advice.
Until they start saying that women should stop being sluts and frivorce artists…nothing will change.
The comments on fathers pushing their daughters is accurate. A friend was talking to me about how important it was for his daughters to do sports and be aggressive so they could compete. I asked if they thought her future husband would appreciate it if his wife was “aggressive” or kind. I was talking a different language and he just laughed. Marriage and happiness in marriage? That will all magically take care of itself after she fights herself to a career sometime in her 30s. This despite the fact his wife is a SAHM. Yup, Dads of daughters never say no and don’t even want their daughters to live the lives of their wives. This is the “conservative” dad.
Fresno Grizzlies won the game, and my seat was quieter…….I didn’t habve to hear inane banter between a father and bratty daughter for the rest of the game.
It was an eqvilent seat. I am a star-row ticket holder (good seats)
That was a particularly aggressive scenario, admittedly, but I have seen very similar attitudes expressed less aggressively many, many times over the past couple of decades hanging around other parents. It’s the Dads, folks. The Dads are actively molding the daughters into this for the most part.
@AR
I agree with you. But in this piece Wilson doesn’t say get married, he says if you are going to have children get married first (in most places he does the man up and marry the sluts tirade – I agree). Wilson continues to be clueless about the risks of marriage for men. You can avoid poverty by just graduating high school, getting a full time job, and being single without children per his recommendation.
Dads now see this as a duty towards their daughters. Again — even the “conservative” ones, even the “Christian” ones.
Exactly right, easily observed, and doesn’t end with her college graduation either. He will often continue to facilitate her go-girl efforts well into adulthood, which will manifest as an additional burden on any son-in-law that comes along without having picked up on this dynamic.
This is the new normal. Anything less than this formula is a personal, and social circle public fail for UC or UMC Dads.
Good to know…and I would have never thought about it if not for reading an OT book giving advice to fathers on how to raise their daughters. Especially the ‘don’t be indulgent to them’ part.
Thats a low bar and one many societies have achieved traditionally. It is one most Christians would encourage. If 90% of the population lacks the drive or ambition to do that low bar we are doomed.
The real difference in divorce rates, though, happens when you have college hs with a college degree, and of course it drops even lower when you have post-grad degrees on both sides, too. I realize that in the article he said what he did about HS degrees, and that’s fine as far as it goes in terms of poverty, but the divorce rate really doesn’t drop to lowish levels until you have dual college degree couples. If you have a HS degree and a job and you get married before you have kids, you end up less poor than if you didn’t do that, but your chance of ending up divorced is pretty high.
Especially the ‘don’t be indulgent to them’ part.
That’s true as far as it goes, of course, but this isn’t that. This is actively masculinizing them — not indulging their articulated wish to be masculinized, but the fathers actively masculinizing them regardless of what they wish. it’s rather more diabolical, unfortunately.
Kevin @ 4:01 pm:
“the success sequence is only: 1) get at least a high school degree, 2) get a full-time job, and, 3) get married before having any children”
That’s great advice for 1950. Here’s the 2018 version:
1) Get a GED. Homeschool or die, because public schools are Marxist nightmare factories.
2) Stay out of debt.
3) Don’t get married. Don’t have kids. Both will be weaponized against you.
That showcases the extent to which Tradcons like Wilcox are divorced from reality. But that’s not even our problem with them. Our problem is that when we point out their delusions, they wonder what’s wrong with us instead of listening. Perhaps shame & mockery will accomplish what reason & reality could not.
…
seventiesjason @ 2:49 pm:
“I was *FORCED* to move to another seat. You all here would rail that you would not move, but when it comes to situations like this, you will, and you would.”
You did awesome righteousness. No point in holding out for the complimentary security escort.
For once, I feel bad for the wife. Daddy is emotionally cheating on her… with their daughter. That ship ain’t right.
For once, I feel bad for the wife. Daddy is emotionally cheating on her… with their daughter. That ship ain’t right.
I suspect that the dynamic, which I have also seen in other guys expressed in a less aggressive/obnoxious way, is that he is more impressed with his daughter than he is with his wife, and thinks his wife is a laggard compared to his daughter. I’ve seen this attitude a few times, too — not all the time — often the wife is also pushing the daughter in the same way, really, and is a former go-getter herself with a AAA feminist merit badge to show for it, but not always.
Kevin
But in this piece Wilson doesn’t say get married, he says if you are going to have children get married first (in most places he does the man up and marry the sluts tirade – I agree).
Who is his intended audience? Who is W. Bradford Wilcox trying to advise?
[The mother] was stoned on prescribed meds.
Probably the only way she can tolerate living with her loudmouthed mangina asshole husband. If she isn’t doing it already, odds are that she’ll start cheating on him soon, and probably divorce his ass in a few years.
Needless to say, I feel nothing but sorrow and heartache for the toddler boy. What a shitty family he chose!
The advice that W. Bradford Wilcox is offering isn’t new. It was articulated years ago. In particular, if I remember correctly someone in Bill Clinton’s administration included that in a speech back in 1993. That would be about the time W. Bradford Wilcox completed his B.A. This is not a trivial fact.
Many thinktankers write from the position of the past. When they write about marriage, they write with the memory of their own in mind; so whatever the world looked like when Joe or Jane Thinktanker was in his/her 20’s fresh out of college, that’s the unconscious assumption underlying their writing that oozes out between the lines.
It’s not 1992 anymore. For sure it isn’t 1982, no way it’s even remotely close to 1972. Except in thinktanker bubbleworld, of course. Again this is not trivial. Duluth didn’t exist until around 1980, and VAWA wasn’t enacted until 1993, so someone who married and started raising a child before, say, 1990 is from a different culture than the current world. Most traditional conservatives fall into this category, although I have met some men in their 30’s who have grown up in a bubble and know nothing of the frivorce industry.
“Examine your premises” is one of those trite, pat cliches that certain Libertarians throw around (Randian in particular) but it is a valid suggestion, and it isn’t encouraged in the post-graduate thinktanker universe so far as i can tell.
GunnerQ typed a seriously magic word: debt. Not just the average rapacious stuff like payday / car title loans, either. Student debt is a negative dowry for far too many college girls, not just the MC but the UMC in some cases.
Inre fathers (and not just DODOs) masculinizing their daughters:
Does anyone have a theory as to when/how this trend got started and what is behind it? I think that Novaseeker at 5/22/18 @ 5:44pm may be onto something, but also wonder if maybe, just maybe Daddy has internalized feminist threatpoint from Mommy to the point where, even if just subconsciously, he is trying to “out-feminize” Mommy. In other words, “either I make her a YouGoGrrrrrrrrrl, or her mother will do it, and if she has to be the one to do it, i’ll have hell to pay.”
Do you mean ‘out-feminist’ Mommy?
I like Trump’s intuition; however, that won’t stop me from pointing out that Gina Haspel is a hard-bitten feminist marm who divorced her husband, minimized the children afterward, and became a workaholic.
At her acceptance speech, her real heart because obvious when she put the vagina above the nation. Watch a video of it. You made it Gina, not the millions of single female dope smoking promiscuous ratchets that move between the television and the refrigerator for 90 percent of their day mis-raising not just their boys but their girls too. You made it Gina because you jettisoned your family to concentrate on the work. You made it Gina because you are one of the small percentage of women with a high IQ (noting a far higher percentage of men have that level IQ than women).
There are reasons why YOU made it Gina but when you try to extrapolate that to all women you demonstrate that you don’t even know why you made it and they didn’t. Guess what, it’s not because of the so-called evil patriarchy Gina. Now manage my CIA for me until I, the people, replace you with a better man and restore the blessed patriarchy.
Does anyone have a theory as to when/how this trend got started and what is behind it?
I’m still thinking over the idea that Daddy is driving it all. I figured it stemmed from something like the over indulgence that earl brought up, or basically pandering to keep the peace, and what daughter wants daughter gets. But it’s a different, and more complex paradigm that the Dads are actually the ones behind it as Novaseeker says.
I guess I’d be clueless about this…do most daughters really want to be feminine and daddy is actively against that…or do a lot of daughters want to be the you go grrl type (possibly because their mother is) and daddy complies or indulges that?
wonder if maybe, just maybe Daddy has internalized feminist threatpoint from Mommy to the point where, even if just subconsciously, he is trying to “out-feminize” Mommy. In other words, “either I make her a YouGoGrrrrrrrrrl, or her mother will do it, and if she has to be the one to do it, i’ll have hell to pay.”
There are some cases like that, feeriker, where the Mom is a ball buster, but really in my experience it’s mostly that the Dads themselves want the daughter to be pretty feminine girl on the outside and aggressive masculine boy on the inside — they want this themselves. I think it helps them relate to their daughters better because they are kind of feminine bois when it comes down to it. They are often pushed harder by the Dads than the boys are — the Dads seem to expect the boys to do it themselves, and of course the whole culture praises Dads for pushing daughters, too.
I guess I’d be clueless about this…do most daughters really want to be feminine and daddy is actively against that…or do a lot of daughters want to be the you go grrl type (possibly because their mother is) and daddy complies or indulges that?
Girls like pleasing their Daddy, at least when they are younger, and if Daddy wants them to be an aggressive, masculine soccer captain and so on, they will do that to please him — in fact, by the time that becomes a possibility, the masculinization is already well underway. It’s the please the Daddy dynamic where Daddy wants them to be feminine/pretty on the outside and masculine/tough/hard/aggressive on the inside — so girly dress when it’s dress up time, but aggressive/masculine/tough underneath. It’s driven by what the Daddy wants, and then of course it’s reinforced by all the other girls getting the same thing from their own Daddies, in that social set, and then it does become demands from the girls as well, but the Daddies are not just responding to what the girls want, they are initiating the wants when the girls are young.
By the way, I suspect that this trend of raising girls by Dads has been at least in part responsible for the new phenomenon of “rapid onset gender dysphoria”, which seems to mostly take place among middle and high school aged girls who are tomboys and don’t like the sexualized/feminine external culture in middle and high school. The dads masculinizing these girls — and in the cases of these ones, letting the “external feminine” side also fall by the wayside — likely contributes at least in part to this growing trend among schoolgirls.
The girls are so heavily faced with you go grrrl messaging that I believe they want it. Such an effort may even turn out more successful than the Chinese, North Korean, and Russian efforts of yesteryear.
Jason- good for you! It’s happening all over, all the time, the Feminist push from Dad’s that is. Still, the park committed a great evil too.
We have a popular sports radio host here who loves talking about how aggressive his 10 year-old daughter’s soccer league is and her too. He gets all kinds of Dads calling in agreeing and amplifying, and the church plays on.
So basically they are raising sons with breasts.
Well as a guy who has to date their princess…I’d tell them I’m not a fan of their little girl’s personality. If it’s a competition to see who’s the most masculine in the relationship…that’s not going to be fun for either of us.
RE: the Success Sequence
When I was in my early 20s, I was enlisted, and got engaged to a girl. My dad disapproved. He took me aside one day and told me, “son, you need to do things in order. First, get an education, then a career, then get married.” At the time, I thought (but didn’t say), “sure dad, you’re old fashioned. That’s not necessary anymore.”
Well, guess what? I didn’t marry the girl, and I did things in the order my dad advised. And, guess what else? Dad was right. And he’s still right.
@ earl says:
May 22, 2018 at 7:39 pm
“So basically they are raising sons with breasts.”
In more ways than one. I see plenty of young men with moobs these days. It used to be rare.
@Oscar…
That advice works for sons. Problem is a lot of dads tell their daughters the same thing…but daughters aren’t sons. If anything they should give them the reverse advice.
Stress education, career, mission to your son.
Stress getting married and having a family (to the guy who is doing the above) for your daughter.
This jerk of a father and husband at the baseball game after I had been moved (a few rows forward) said a few comments loud enough for me to hear……the usual “i’ve-gotta-have-the-last-word-thing”
The wife said something to him like “stop……just please stop, we’re at a baseball game”
He replied loudly and it was to ME “Yeah, well.. F*CK that GUY!”
Which was a nice thing to tell his wife to do……alas, she did not……….
Really cool to be acting and teaching his daughter this. Sure, we can blame feminism…….we can see the wreckage this has caused, and will continue to cause…..but turds like this guy……..loud, pompus, acting all tough and “confident” and molding this beahavior for his “star” (his daughter) teachers her to be a feminist. It teachers her to cuss. Be disrespectful (she let into me, and I was a total stranger……and an adult….dad high-fived her for this). Don’t get what you want? Tattle. Lie. Change the rules…..use context of words over real meaning…….bully……..
Guys like this “dad” are the type of men that know most won’t hit back hard and below the belt. If this was in on some street corner on lower Fulton in bad downtown Fresno…..he would have had his teeth knocked out and then given a curb job and whipped with a bicycle chain. This guy knows the “game”
This “dad” was actually behaving more like a feminist than mom was.
It will catch up. No future boyfriend is EVER going to meet his expectations, so she’ll be slumming with the guy in the rock band, she’ll be sneaking out in high school. She’ll be riding that carousel hard and early because she is being rasied to. No one is gonna tell her “no”
Dad then will blame men like me for not teaching her, guiding her or being a role model in church, or some related church youth actvity……
This guy could get away with it because he did have physical attractiveness to back-up his terrible attitude.
People like this *always* get paid back in the end. They do. I had to learn that.
I moved because I was not going to play *his* game at a public event like a baseball game. He would have loved to have me throw the first punch or some “backhanded *neg* at him” (so I could secretly impress his wife…..lol). He would have loved to see me argue with the usher…..and then security.
Guys like this know when to run their mouths. In real urbane culture, with no rules, security or cloaking behind the weak excuse of him being a dad…….jerks like this get housed.
It will happen…..more than likely in a decade or so when the daughter accuses him of rape, molestation, or “violence” when she doesn’t get her way.
@ earl says:
May 22, 2018 at 7:46 pm
“That advice works for sons. Problem is a lot of dads tell their daughters the same thing…but daughters aren’t sons. If anything they should give them the reverse advice.”
I didn’t say it was good advice for daughters. I’m pointing out that it’s still good advice for sons, despite all the criticism of Wilcox. The fact that Wilcox is wrong on other subjects doesn’t make him wrong on this one.
I was bringing up the larger problem…not accusing you of thinking it was good advice for daughters.
Got it, dude.
Yeah that guy does sound like a feminist loudmouth. Makes me wonder if it was his mother who taught him how to be a man.
I doubt he even gets that fact that boys need girls to show them how to do things is the reason why boys are pussified today.
Do you mean ‘out-feminist’ Mommy?
Yes.
I’d have to agree with Gunner in this rare circumstance I’d have more sympathy for the wife.
Basically whomever is the least feminist in the marriage is probably the sanest one.
She was medded up hardcore…..you could see it. The dazed glossed over look. The old Rolling Stones song “mothers little helper” came to mind……..just going through the motions…..holding up the best she can….miserable…..the looks on this guy probably wore out just after the wedding when she realized the tingles don’t stay when you’re now married to a real orize horses ass…..the divorce that will happen and will come will not affect her. All women on these pills are immune to emotion of others……..
Earl, Gunner,
We have no evidence the Mom is less feminist, just that she is embarassed of her husband’s combativeness in public venues.
Hypergamy predates feminism.
How is that possible? The first feminist was Eve, and she accepted the first and only marriage proposal she got from a man, and stayed with him until death.
However, Eve believed so much in “equality” (with God) she was willing to risk her very life to have it; and she believed in being so “strong and independent” she didn’t bother to ask her husband’s opinion before she disobeyed God’s clearest order.
Her devotion to feminist beliefs was so strong she readily and effortlessly usurped her husband’s authority, and took the lead in plunging the human race into the abyss of sin.
Hypergamy may be one of the children of this seven-headed evil called Feminism. It certainly doesn’t predate it.
Well as a guy who has to date their princess…I’d tell them I’m not a fan of their little girl’s personality. If it’s a competition to see who’s the most masculine in the relationship…that’s not going to be fun for either of us.
Again, it’s worse than that. The girl will retain her sexual allure/power through feminine appearance, and yet insists on at least going to toe to toe with you in masculine aggression and “winning”, if not outright beating you. It’s female domination, full stop — most men are just run over, and that’s why we have so many dead bedroom marriages. Thanks, Dad.
How is that possible?
Baked into the cake. Eve was created from Adam’s rib. Adam was always “higher” than Eve. She was created as his helpmeet. All she knew was a male who was higher/prior/her origin. Her initial relationship with the male was looking up — it was hypergamous, because that’s all there was. Hypergamy was her natural state, well prior to the fall when the first feminism came into the equation.
Hypergamy was her natural state, well prior to the fall when the first feminism came into the equation.
If you’re right then hypergamy is good. It is even beautiful, because God created Eve to be hypergamous, and Scripture said everything that God made was very good:
Genesis 1:31
And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.
And that will mean hypergamy indeed predates feminism….
If you’re right then hypergamy is good. It is even beautiful, because God created Eve to be hypergamous, and Scripture said everything that God made was very good:
Yes. Hypergamy isn’t the issue. The issue is the abuse of hypergamy. Hypergamy works, it places men and women in proper male higher/women lower (relatively) relations. God’s intention. The issue arises from feminism, which wants to get rid of monogamy, which then makes hypergamy “fryable” in the sense that it just goes all over the place and overruns all morals. Hypergamy is the way women are intended to be, as is monogamy. When hypergamy and monogamy go together, women and men mate up in relations that can easily match Paul’s strictures. When hypergamy is given free reign, free of “enforced monogamy” (as Jordan Peterson describes it, a socially-enforced monogamy), then it runs amok and leads to 80/20, carousel and all the rest of it. Hypergamy isn’t the problem, it is a feature and not a bug, the problem is feminism and the sex rev.
Both of which bring out the worst traits in women.
Matt Chandlers answer to this question
What Would you like me to do to be more Christlike?
Wash the dishes, clean the house, cook dinner, care for the kids and support my career dreams above yours….
basically role reversal
and men are driving this, they want their daughters to be the leaders in their marriage.
My Dad on the other hand has told my sister if she works more than part time job after marriage she will be disowned….
She is 18… she got punished 6 months ago for failing to be proactive in making his coffee….
most other Christian fathers
tell their sons to cook dinner and sleep on the floor of the house , while the wife is on the bed…
https://jdgreear.com/blog/happy-husband-advice-15-year-old-son/
@Dalrock
Thought you might enjoy this.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-comment/harry-and-meghan-look-to-the-future-but-some-royals-never-change
“Well, that was fun. A good time was had by all. In the words of one well-placed source, “the ceremony was over very quickly, in about fifteen minutes. Then everyone hit the dance floor. It seemed they all just wanted to party.”
No, wait. Hang on, that was Meghan Markle’s first wedding, held in 2011, in Jamaica. Then came her second wedding, at the end of last month, when, in the guise of Rachel Zane, she married Mike Ross, formerly a fake lawyer, as the seventh season of “Suits” drew to a close.
…..And so, at last, to the festivities of today, when Markle was hitched to her true love—her true true love, forever and ever—at St. George’s Chapel, Windsor.”
Opus says: I presume that it is sublimated incestuous desire.
I read that Trump allegedly told one potn actress/prostitute (maybe Stormy Daniels) “You remind me of my daughter.
I read that on a leftist website, so who knows if it’s true. But Trump does show a creepy over attachment to Ivanka.
feeriker: Inre fathers (and not just DODOs) masculinizing their daughters … Does anyone have a theory as to when/how this trend got started and what is behind it?
Don’t know exactly. But Strong, Independent Daughters were showing up in film and TV culture by the 1950s. Perhaps earlier.
Movie scientists often had beautiful, brilliant daughter/assistants. As did movie archeologists, movie cattle barons, and other fathers.
A Strong, Independent Female Gunslinger sings about female superiority in Annie Get Your Gun (1950):
How could hypergamy be an issue for Eve in the garden? I thought the idea was that there is always an ill defined notion in the back of a woman’s mind that she could probably do better than whoever the current man is.
Lost Patrol,
Guesiing at something I haven’t thought about until this thread brought it up, but Eve could have had a God-shaped hole in her heart, as the saying goes. Such a hole would have a large overlap with trying to get more than she has, hypergamy.
I thought the idea was that there is always an ill defined notion in the back of a woman’s mind that she could probably do better than whoever the current man is.
The idea isn’t necessarily always upgrading. The idea is that women are attracted to “higher”. Women are made that way, because they were made, from the beginning, with men being “higher”. It’s in their created nature to be attracted to men who are “higher” because that is how they were made from the beginning. It only becomes about upgrading when you combine it with non-monogamy, where it becomes free-flowing and unrestricted. In a system where there is one girl for every guy for life, more or less, hypergamy is fine and is the way God intended things to be. In a system were no relationship is permanent unless the woman wants it, hypergamy-as-upgrade takes over and it gets dysfunctional as we see today. It’s understandable that because this is what we see today that guys conflate the two things (hypergamy as being attracted up, which is innate and God intended, with hypergamy as branch swinging, which is what happens when innate hypergamy is combined with social approval of non-monogamy).
Gotta say: really impressed by Jason at the ball game. Now, i am not suggesting that he should have followed up, especially given that the woman was married with children and on medication but the fact that having moved away the wife still managed to find him suggests to me that she would not have been averse to a little kino from Jason. Jason: she pursued you. The first rule of Game: accelerate.
@ Novaseeker
That is a good explanation. Also a problem for women that is being created and perpetuated by the Dads-of-go-girls discussed upthread. Her created nature is to be attracted to “higher”, while Dad is positioning her to always strive to BE the higher. Her pool of “higher” available men thus becomes an ever shrinking one. The potential for longer term unhappiness is built right in to Dad’s model, despite the near term triumphalism both Dad and daughter enjoy.
OT: Microaggressions are the greatest sins:
http://www.philly.com/philly/news/african-american-woman-bishop-evangelical-lutheran-church-in-america-philadelphia-history-20180523.html
I am curious. Perhaps a father reading here can enlighten me as to whether girls aged eight or nine are as strong, skillful and supple as boys of that age. When I was eight or nine I spent every minute of school play-time kicking a ball with and against the boys in my class. We would not have welcomed the arrival of a girl (it never happened) but had a girl joined in then to have been outclassed by a girl would have been humiliating yet had the girl been outclassed it would have looked cruel.
In 1980 a Scottish movie (you will need subtitles – I can’t understand the porridge wogs either) entitled Gregory’s Girl used just that scenario of the gifted soccer girl shaming the boys and more recently Bend it Like Beckham has ploughed the same furrow but with added vibrancy. The movies concern adolescent females rather than children yet in the real world adult female Soccer is so bad it becomes cruel to laugh – but what else can one do – no wonder Americans think of Soccer as a girl’s game (much as we think that Rounders – which you call Baseball – is for Girls).
Are there any movies about adult male soccer? I can think of two: Escape to Victory and Mike Bassett. The latter comes pretty close to how things are whereas the former is dreadful for (in terms of soccer play) it has Ipswich F.C. (dressed as Germans in black) being beaten by a group of has-beens and non-footballers. Absurd, and it shows. Almost as bad as if the stand-in Germans had been beaten by girls.
@ Opus says:
May 23, 2018 at 9:00 am
“I am curious. Perhaps a father reading here can enlighten me as to whether girls aged eight or nine are as strong, skillful and supple as boys of that age.”
They can be. The disparity in speed and strength between boys and girls that age is small, and there’s a lot of overlap. Plenty of girls that age are faster and stronger than their same age peer boys.
The gap widens quickly in adolescence. By 15, girls who are faster and stronger than any boys are exceptionally rare, and those girls are elite athletes, while the boys who are weaker than the elite athlete girls aren’t athletes at all.
By contrast, 15-year-old, elite athlete boys are faster and stronger than seasoned, elite athlete women.
Behold CJ Cummings clean and jerk 186 Kg (407 lb) at a body weight of 69 Kg (152 lb).
By contrast, the women’s gold medal winner in the 69 Kg class at the 2016 Olympics clean and jerked 145 Kg (319 lb).
First, get an education, then a career, then get married.”
So if a wife is a helpmate, why can’t she help w/ the first two things?
My understanding is a man needs to find his Master, his mission, then his mate. But the mate is to help w/ his mission. That may, for some, include the education/training portion. In fact, it’s no coincidence that the powers that want to tear down the family, W. Civ, and ultimately the Christian church, have stretched out the education period for young men, by 5-10 years consistently. The purpose is to delay marriage and family.
I used to watch House Hunters a lot, and there was a couple who were on the show two separate times. I saw their first episode 2x, so recognized them a few years later on new one. What left me impressed was their background story. He was a very successful businessman/entrepreneur. She was a retired nurse, an inch taller than he, and too cute for him. They married in their teens, and she worked as a nurse to support family while he started his business. Oh, and their parents didn’t want them to marry (got the feeling these were dysfunctional families, probably abuse) so they ran off together.
I love her commitment to him, and that she was ultimately rewarded. Finances won’t be same for everyone, I know, but it was a great story. And I think almost all wives are rewarded when they’re that committed.
By 15, girls who are faster and stronger than any boys are exceptionally rare, and those girls are elite athletes,
Exaggeration to the point of nonsense.
Plenty of heavy girls will be able to lift more than lighter 15 y.o. boys.
And you haven’t even defined “faster.” I guarantee most girl cross country runners, even those not elite, will outrun all of the lineman, and most of the rest of the football team.
Maturation isn’t complete at an adolescent growth spurt, and many boys/men continue to put on significant muscle through age 20.
And “athlete” can mean many different things. Women are much better at long-distance swimming events.
Your fictional account just adds fuel to the fire, as many 15 y.o. girls will see success against boys, then they, and their fathers, believe they are “elite.”
But that success usually doesn’t continue through HS senior year, so the thrill is gone, biology sets in, and it’s not as interesting to them any longer. But Daddy can still relive Princess’ glory days, and Princess believes she knows how to coach her husband by yelling at him.
Lost Patrol to Novaseeker
The potential for longer term unhappiness is built right in to Dad’s model, despite the near term triumphalism both Dad and daughter enjoy.
Excellent summary, and it is easy to see this if you know what to look for. Cause and effect? Who needs that, mah little princess deserves the best of ever-thang! The women’s college softball world series was on last weekend, and it was a clear example of this process. There’s always some girls with very long pony tails – “feminine long hair” – going all out to win – “daddy’s princess wins again!”. They tend to be pretty big girls, too; tall and muscular. Great hypergamy fail in the making…
Title IX has been embedded into the culture since the 1980’s, that’s over 30 years. Any girl who can do well at softball, field hockey, ice hockey, track, basketball, volleyball, etc. has a good chance of a college scholarship. The “mah little princess” mindset has always been around, but before the 80’s it wasn’t institutionalized at the college and career level. Now it is all but mandatory.
Anonymous Reader,
Not only at the career and college level, but in personal adult conversations at a podunk minor league baseball game, per Jason’s story.
As aware as most here are, we still grapple with daily realizations of how bad and deep the rot is currently. At least that is what happens for me. It’s not so much being stunned at the world, but at the silence and destructive help of the church.
Her created nature is to be attracted to “higher”, while Dad is positioning her to always strive to BE the higher. Her pool of “higher” available men thus becomes an ever shrinking one. The potential for longer term unhappiness is built right in to Dad’s model, despite the near term triumphalism both Dad and daughter enjoy.
Precisely — Dads are screwing things up.
It’s not so much being stunned at the world, but at the silence and destructive help of the church.
Exactly.
I have come to the conclusion that churches, seminaries and Bible schools got infiltrated several decades ago, just like other Western institutions. What is taught now is of the world, and that propagates to what is preached.
I don’t go to church right now, b/c I can’t find one that I trust worships God and follows Christ. Yet I was recently accused of turning my back on God. Hmm. I don’t go to Buddhist temples or JW churches either. So if I’m right about these contemporary churches, then it’s no different avoiding the former just like the latter.
@ DrTorch says:
May 23, 2018 at 12:38 pm
“So if a wife is a helpmate, why can’t she help w/ the first two things?”
Did anyone say they “can’t”? General rules are just that; general. There are exceptions.
@ DrTorch says:
May 23, 2018 at 12:49 pm
“Plenty of heavy girls will be able to lift more than lighter 15 y.o. boys.”
Not in my experience as a strength and conditioning coach.
“And you haven’t even defined ‘faster’.”
You actually need me to define “faster”?
“I guarantee most girl cross country runners, even those not elite, will outrun all of the lineman, and most of the rest of the football team.”
Long distance events don’t measure speed. They measure endurance. Note that I didn’t mention endurance.
“Maturation isn’t complete at an adolescent growth spurt, and many boys/men continue to put on significant muscle through age 20.”
No kidding. Despite that fact, by 15 the gap between boys’ and girls’ averages is huge with very little overlap, and it only gets bigger as the athletes progress into their 20s.
“And ‘athlete’ can mean many different things. Women are much better at long-distance swimming events.”
Again, I didn’t mention endurance. And you’re still wrong.
“Your fictional account just adds fuel to the fire, as many 15 y.o. girls will see success against boys, then they, and their fathers, believe they are ‘elite’.”
Only if they’re delusional, and I’m not a psychiatrist, so I can’t help with delusions.
“But that success usually doesn’t continue through HS senior year, so the thrill is gone, biology sets in, and it’s not as interesting to them any longer.”
It rarely continues through 8th grade. But, again, I’m not a psychiatrist, so I can’t help people with their delusions. I’m an engineer with teen-aged kids who volunteers to train kids from his kids’ private school, and by 15, the difference between boys and girls is undeniable to all but the delusional.
Again, delusions are way outside my realm of expertise. Not my circus, not my monkeys.
Plenty of heavy girls will be able to lift more than lighter 15 y.o. boys.
Well, yeah, of course. Carrying around a couple of hundred pounds of inert lard requires extra body strength out of necessity. HOWEVER, that doesn’t necessarily equate to having extra UPPER body strength.
I don’t go to church right now, b/c I can’t find one that I trust worships God and follows Christ. Yet I was recently accused of turning my back on God.
As far as the churchians are concerned, you HAVE abandoned their God, which is the World wrapped in a faux veneer of Jesus. You of course know that this deity in no way resembles the God of Abraham, whom the churchians consider hateful, anachronistic, and “not nice.”
As far as finding a real New Testament church is concerned, you’ll have to hunt for that and it will probably be a long hunt. Plan on meeting in someone’s living room or garage.
@ feeriker says:
May 23, 2018 at 1:59 pm
“Well, yeah, of course. Carrying around a couple of hundred pounds of inert lard requires extra body strength out of necessity. HOWEVER, that doesn’t necessarily equate to having extra UPPER body strength.”
He’s still wrong. Take an average heavy girl and an average skinny boy, train them both, and the skinny boy will out-squat the heavy girl easily. Take an athletic heavy girl (they do exist), and an average skinny boy, train them both, and the skinny boy will still out-squat the heavy girl.
Take an elite heavy girl (again, they do exist), and an average skinny boy, and… all bets are off. Elite genetics do some crazy things, but so does testosterone.
Novaseeker
Dads are screwing things up.
By the way, this seems to be a middle-class and “upward” thing. The diesel mechanic that used to be a neighbor was pretty blue pill in his actions with his fat wife, but he was teaching his little 5 year old son how to rope.
“So if a wife is a helpmate, why can’t she help w/ the first two things?”
In theory she can. It used to be pretty common among people aspiring to the middle class. However, that would entail marrying before the age of 29.999, which is not compatible with girl power, nor does it fit in with Helicopter Daddy’s life plan for his princess. So it’s not so common anymore.
Well, I had to go and search on “rapid onset gender dysphoria” – it’s a thing. A thing I could have put off knowing about for a day or three. Thanks, Nova…
Pfft.
Not in my experience as a strength and conditioning coach.
Then you’re not paying attention. Or more likely, you’re looking at a very limited set of the data, and ignoring the majority of it. That’s not a proper way to draw a scientific conclusion. That’s why you’re wrong.
Long distance events don’t measure speed. They measure endurance. Note that I didn’t mention endurance.
Really? Then why do they TIME them, and conduct the race based on speed (distance/time). You’re talking about “quickness” which is slightly different than speed. But for a “strength and conditioning coach” you should know the difference.
“It rarely continues through 8th grade. ” For various reasons, yes, it grows more rare. But NOT as you claim, and I quote, “By 15, girls who are faster and stronger than any boys are exceptionally rare,”
Again, I didn’t mention endurance. And you’re still wrong.
Really? Then tell competitive swimmers, Olympic committees, etc that they aren’t athletes.
Like I said, you exaggerated. And you’re wrong. Be a man, and own it. Otherwise, I’ll take continue taking delight in showing how ridiculous your back-pedaling is.
Despite that fact, by 15 the gap between boys’ and girls’ averages is huge with very little overlap
Plenty of overlap at 15. I can provide numerous examples. That’s why you waste all our time pretending to prove a negative, made worse b/c you use a tiny data set.
But your delusions fuel their delusions. So you’re very much a part of the circus.
Did anyone say they “can’t”? General rules are just that; general. There are exceptions.
Sloppy language is a sign of sloppy thinking. You demonstrate that repeatedly and proficiently.
Prov 18:2, 6; 9:8; 17:10
Take note.
Opus — “I feel compelled to put Ray straight on one or two of the matters he mentioned above. . . I am not certain who officiated at Saturday’s show-wedding but I doubt that it was Rowan Williamson (though I could be wrong) as he is no longer Archbishop of Canterbury. Just because he looks like a Druid does not mean that he is one (although to be fair Druidism is the original religion of these Isles). Williamson is in fact a bit of a literary intellectual and strong on T.S. Eliot. . .”
Hey O-pus, next time you put somebody straight, you might try having the actual facts at your disposal prior to corrections. Smoldering resentment only takes you so far, you know? :O)
Uno: His name is Rowan Williams, not Williamson. I wrote about him (disparagingly) in 2011, when he officiated for Billy ‘n Kate. He’s YOUR ”Archbishop,” remember?
Dos-o: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/2172918.stm [dateline 5 August 2002, “Archbishop Becomes Druid”‘]
O-pus, get your bitterness in check and don’t be in so much of a hurry to “set straight” folks you resent. Thataway you won’t end up looking like a petty dork.
She certainly could. In fact my advice for women is to find a guy who is on that path and marry him.
The longer they wait, the more the man sees that he doesn’t need a helpmate to get where he is. She wasn’t there supporting him (emotionally) when he was struggling to forge his life.
LOL.
When I was a skinny 140 lb wuss with little muscle mass in high school…I could still bench and squat more than any of the girls who have done strength and conditioning much longer. Don’t make statements you know can’t possibly be true.
Don’t make statements you know can’t possibly be true.
Ever consider taking your own advice? Oh wait, you used a single anecdote to prove your point, so it must be true.
IOW, you don’t know what you’re talking about, but feel compelled to say something anyway.
Proverbs 1*;2 A fool has no delight in understanding,
But in expressing his own heart.
‘Her created nature is to be attracted to “higher”, while Dad is positioning her to always strive to BE the higher. ‘
Woman worship…starting real young.
If anything the trait most absence from modern women is humility.
Well Torch…I’m in the gym everyday and your general skinny guy still outlifts the women in there everyday.
But yeah I’m a fool because I realize things like testosterone are much higher in even weak men than any woman.
Spike — “You won’t be surprised to see Henry sticking his hand inside his jacket in the classic Masonic pose. The wedding was performed on the Masonic black-and-white floor.”
I covered the William/Kate farce, which was loaded with occult baggage, but purposely stayed away from info about the recent one. Enough is enough. I would have been surprised if the 2018 wedding was not saturated with masonic symbolism. Hidden in plain sight, as is their wont. This Williams dood that officiated in 2011, he’s quite a piece of work. If he’s not Entered then I’ll eat my toe jam. :O)
Well Torch…I’m in the gym everyday and your general skinny guy still outlifts the women in there everyday.
Your folly just doesn’t stop.
We’re not talking about adults. So you clearly don’t understand even the slightest bit of having an intelligent conversation.
And I looked up weight/growth charts out of curiousity,
https://halls.md/chart-boys-weight-w/
And a 15 y.o. at 140 lbs isn’t even in the lower half of the distribution. I explicitly referred to the lighter boys at that age.
Again, we see that it is you who knows nothing about what you wrote, yet you keep coming back adding even more.
Ask yourself why you feel the need to express yourself in contrast to all reality? It’s the sign of a fool.
I need to express myself because what you said is often not reality. I’ve seen it, I’ve experienced it, biologically boys have more testosterone than girls…boys gain muscle quicker than girls. Other guys here have pointed this out through their experience.
Ask yourself why you feel the need to point out that heavy girls can outlift skinny boys?
Farm Boy: “I am not certain who officiated at Saturday’s show-wedding but I doubt that it was Rowan Williamson
Rowan Atkinson then?
Heck, I would have got up early to watch that.”
The former archbishop’s name is Rowan Williams. Apparently he’s not Archbishop of Canterbury anymore, as the Harry and Meghan ceremony was officiated by a new A of C, one Justin Welby.
For the Harry and Me-Me-Meghan affair, I’d only have watched if Rowan and MARTIN had officiated. Woulda been far more appropriate.
@ DrTorch says:
May 23, 2018 at 2:10 pm
“That’s not a proper way to draw a scientific conclusion.”
I never stated that I was drawing a scientific conclusion?
“Really? Then why do they TIME them, and conduct the race based on speed (distance/time).”
Because the person with the greatest endurance (a function of VO2 max) can sustain a specific speed for the longest distance. Therefore, by measuring distance and time, they’re measuring endurance.
“Really? Then tell competitive swimmers, Olympic committees, etc that they aren’t athletes.”
I never stated that “they aren’t athletes”.
@ DrTorch says:
May 23, 2018 at 2:14 pm
“Sloppy language is a sign of sloppy thinking.”
As is is your sloppy reading. See above. By the way, your sloppy reading is also not my circus, and not my monkeys.
I’ve seen it, I’ve experienced it
Actually, by your own admission, you haven’t.
Ask yourself why you feel the need to point out that heavy girls can outlift skinny boys?
Because it’s true. I’ve observed it. And this site is about dispelling lies and myths. That you have a problem with that is telling.
Because the person with the greatest endurance (a function of VO2 max) can sustain a specific speed for the longest distance. Therefore, by measuring distance and time, they’re measuring endurance.
Haha. Except it’s a speed race, not a competition requiring anyone to maintain a “specific speed.” I told you, your back-pedaling was only going to reveal more of your foolishness and ignorance. And pretending that you know something by referring to VO2 max, only embarrasses you further.
I never stated that “they aren’t athletes”.
Actually, that’s exactly the deductive conclusion required from your 10:30 am post. Again, your post is filled w/ sloppy writing, which demonstrates your foolish thinking. And you bristle at every reproach, wh/ remains consistent w/ your foolishness.
You make exaggerated, cartoonish claims to show you’re the AMOG, then double-down when confronted. You don’t want to be held accountable for what you actually wrote. Hmm, who does that remind me of? https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2016/05/06/dont-tell-women-no/
@ DrTorch says:
May 23, 2018 at 3:43 pm
“Except it’s a speed race”
Except it’s a distance race. Distance is the constant. Time is the variable. Endurance is the determining factor. That’s why they’re called endurance sports, not speed sports.
“Actually, that’s exactly the deductive conclusion required from your 10:30 am post.”
Actually, that’s your sloppy reading and faulty deduction, both of which are not my circus, and not my monkeys.
Swanny — “He says, I’m having her do everything, I don’t want her dependent on a man.
He loves her, and that is what loves now means to the common American. In that context, I better understand where CBMW is coming from when they talk about a sin of servility- they were talking with the world’s heart. He is able to and does all the man stuff for his wife, yet wants his daughter to be a princess warrior.”
Zactly. This is now the default-setting for men with daughters — with ‘conservatives’ and Christians among the most ardent supporters of yugogrll-ism.
Dads of daughters didn’t do this when I was young, because:
1) Government, and all of society, did not incentivize the parents of daughters to avoid early marriage, and to set American grrls on the (cock carousel) career path.
2) It was popularly understood that tossing boys/men out of education and employment, and replacing them with females en masse, was cultural suicide, and was an overt betrayal of national security and the general welfare. Such parents would have met with significant social disapproval, because people understood then that such a selfish and greedy scheme eventually would come back to affect EVERYONE. That is, everyone else somehow would end up having to make up the difference, and society would be tremendously de-stabilized.
Which is exactly what happened, in case anybody’s keeping track of mass-slaughter incidents and male homelessness in the current United Sisterhood. Ain’t a coincidence.
Daddy doesn’t want princess to be ‘dependent upon some man’, meaning, some OTHER man. He wants Princess to himself, until she’s 32 or so, at which point daddy provisionally will allow some desperate shlub to marry her, and pick up her Lifelong Tab. By this time, Princess cannot ‘be dependent’ on another man, even if she wished. So she remains daddy’s OWN princess psychologically. Tidy! Very tidy.
After the wedding, some doofus dork picks up the bills, but in reality, she will be ‘married’ to daddy the rest of their lives. The Princess Warrior remains lifelong Daddy’s Little Princess, and guess who gets the Warrior part? Yup it’s Senor Thirsty Shlub, kneeling before her with a ring, while her ex-boyfriends from the past two decades send her text-messages. :O)
Seems counterproductive to go on a long hunt for someone else’s garage, rather than start your own meetings in your own garage.
Invite a few serious people over for Sunday morning meetings. Hold your own eucharist, and give your own 100% antifeminist sermon. Problem solved.
You apparently can’t read then.
Well is this true all the time…do all heavy girls outlift skinny boys?
I’d be willing to bet overall skinny boys can outlift heavy girls more often than not. If that is a lie or myth…I’ll eat crow.
Novaseeker on hypergamy
The idea isn’t necessarily always upgrading. The idea is that women are attracted to “higher”. Women are made that way, because they were made, from the beginning, with men being “higher”.
It is very important to clearly differentiate between hypergamy and unrestrained hypergamy. What we have in the Anglosphere and increasingly in the rest of the world is hypergamy unleashed, not under any control or limitation outside of a particular woman’s head and social circle. Since carousel riding is often part of a social circle, there’s effectively no limit.
As Nova observed in his entire comment, hypergamy is a feature of women, not a pathology. It is akin to men’s preference for a waist-to-hip ratio of 0.70 or so. Men’s behavior is strictly constrained, so we don’t see gangs of men kidnapping pretty girls with that hip/waist ratio to imprison in private harems. The very idea is ridiculous.
But unrestrained, uncontrolled hypergamy is quite a bit like that ridiculousness. Allowing a 20-something woman to have sex with as many men as she wants, pretending there are no real-world consequences, then demanding that some man wife her up when she’s 29.999 years old is not all that different. Before anyone points to “carried off to a harem implies violence!”, let me just say one word: Duluth. That wheel of misfortune is backed up by plenty of implied violence.
Unrestricted, uncontrolled, unleashed hypergamy – that’s what we have, and as Rollo made very clear a couple of years back, “Hypergamy doesn’t care”. It’s hindbrain stuff, reason can’t touch it.
Societies that survive do more than control men’s behavior. They also control women’s behavior.
Dr. Torch
Plenty of heavy girls will be able to lift more than lighter 15 y.o. boys.
Every Gaussian distribution has skew ends. The tails don’t necessarily say anything about the median. To put it another way, “some” and “all” are not the same word.
I guarantee most girl cross country runners, even those not elite, will outrun all of the lineman, and most of the rest of the football team.
Non sequitur. Football players run at most a mile warmup, unlike cross country runners who have a typical day of 1 mile warmup, some 440’s, 3 mile practice, 1 mile cooldown. On the other hand, how much can the typical cross country girl runner benchpress, let alone deadlift? Even those elite? This is a dumb comparison.
Let me be more clear: I guarantee most girl cross country runners, even those elite, will be unable to block a single play against the average lineman. Some of them would find it hard to move very fast just from the weight of the pads / helmet / etc.
Torch, high school hockey teams have defeated US and Canadian Olympic women’s hockey teams more than once. Those are your highly trained, elite, women – beaten by teenagers.
Testosterone is a heck of a hormone. It does a lot of things, including “affect muscles of the upper body”, the ones involved in lifting.
C’mon, what’s this all about, Torch? You have some kind of emotional investment in this non-issue. Your daughter not make the wrestling team, or something?
Anonymous Reader May 23 6pm
“Torch, high school hockey teams have defeated US and Canadian Olympic women’s hockey teams more than once. Those are your highly trained, elite, women – beaten by teenagers”.
-Happens world-wide too, AR. in Australia the Women’s Olympic Soccer Team got beaten 7-0 by a boy’s under-15’s.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3609949/Matildas-lose-7-0-Newcastle-Jets-15s-Rio-Olympics-warm-up.html
Would the topic be less argumentative if skinny boy and heavyweight girl were placed in numerical ranges.
My friend has run over the 100,000 miles and knows about the topic says that anything over a quarter mile ( or maybe a 200m, I can’t recall which) are no longer races because of physical limits. That distance is about 40 – 50 yards for me, but that’s another story. So I think most runners I know consider a half mile and more endurance events. We still use the same word,”fast” to talk about the results, but strictly speaking, being faster should mean a 200m race or less.
I had a female classmate in high school who was elite (her brothers too) at 1 and 3 miles. She was the entire female track team because we didn’t have any other women runners. I was faster in a hundred though and probably the 220 too, but I’m not sure, but she would easily beat me at other races.
I weighed much less than Earl but was able to do tons of pushups and pullups. No way any girls were matching my strength and I was skinny by any objective definition probably.
I have no doubt even late blooming skinny 15 year old boys have more testosterone than any 15 year old heavy girl.
So to even say ‘plenty’ is wrong. At best it’s rarely.
I want to thank Dr Torch for being even more pendantic than I usually am. It makes me feel better.
The world records for almost all women events are equivalent to the world records held by boys age 15-17. By around 15 it is already over because puberty has completed for all but the most rare girls and they have reached their max height and untrained muscle mass and the boys are mid puberty and generally that is enough on the average case to pass the average girl. I am not sure what the obsession is with distance running but it follows the same patterns. The girls are much slower than the boys already by that point. You can always find exceptions but the averages hold well.
You apparently can’t read then.
Whoa, total burn, from the clown who is 0 for 2 in addressing what was actually written.
Well is this true all the time…do all heavy girls outlift skinny boys?
Classic fallacious response from someone who was shown to be wrong. So typical. 0 for 3.
Torch, high school hockey teams have defeated US and Canadian Olympic women’s hockey teams more than once. Those are your highly trained, elite, women – beaten by teenagers
*shrug* Yeah? So what. That’s not the discussion. Not in the least. If you can’t stay on topic then leave me alone.
Non sequitur. Football players run at most a mile warmup,
No, b/c Oscar’s sloppy language means the comparison is valid. He may not know how to use English, I do.
I guarantee most girl cross country runners, even those elite, will be unable to block a single play against the average lineman.
Wow, figure that out yourself? Who said anything different? You can’t find real fault w/ what I actually wrote so you make up things.
Every Gaussian distribution has skew ends.
So? Oscar claimed it was “extremely rare”. Meaning what? .5%? 1%? 3%? See, Oscar takes his very limited experience, multiplies it by his poor observation, then adds his vague language and sloppy writing, all to exaggerate his ridiculous claim that ultimately gives some credence to the grrl power movement when he’s shown to be ridiculously wrong. Then Earl shows off the irrationality he’s plagued us with for years. I’m not going to apologize for not associating w/ fools.
C’mon, what’s this all about, Torch? You have some kind of emotional investment in this non-issue. Your daughter not make the wrestling team, or something?
Wow, that makes no sense. Care to cry a little more because you like a fool? Oscar is the AMOG who is afraid of any athlete who doesn’t do bench press 3x a week. Lots of bad coaches out there who spread misinformation. My bet is Oscar’s W-L record isn’t very good so he’s bitter toward everyone else.
@ DrTorch says:
May 23, 2018 at 10:01 pm
“Oscar is the AMOG who is afraid of any athlete who doesn’t do bench press 3x a week.”
Actually, my kids and I rotate between pull-ups, strict press, chin-ups, and bench press, so we only bench press once a week. You read minds almost as poorly as you read English.
@ Kevin says:
May 23, 2018 at 9:45 pm
“The world records for almost all women events are equivalent to the world records held by boys age 15-17.”
In sports that require a lot of strength and speed (which was the subject from the beginning, until someone brought up cross country), the disparity is even worse. See CJ Cummings above. At age 16, at a body weight of 152 lb, CJ’s best clean and jerk was 407 lb. The gold medal female clean and jerk in the 152 lb weight class at the Rio Olympics was 319 lb.
That means that at age 16, CJ’s best clean and jerk was 88 lb heavier than that of the best female Olympic weightlifter in the world of equal body weight (Xiang Yanmei, who was 24 at Rio).
As AR stated above, testosterone is a hell of a hormone.
Dr. Torch
That’s not the discussion. Not in the least. If you can’t stay on topic then leave me alone.
What is the discussion topic?
Oscar is the AMOG who is afraid of any athlete who doesn’t do bench press 3x a week.
Oh, it’s a personal issue? My apologies for intruding.
Opus…..in the late 1970’s we had a infamous movie called “Bad News Bears” and it was about a little league baseball team, and of course……a girl joins and “kicks ass” and the team starts winning. This type of thing has been going on a long time. What was once edgy is now “mainstream” and expected.
The original movie is from 1976 or thereabout was kind-of funny. Me entering little league in 1978, it was kind of go to movie for kids n’ baseball. The recent remake amplifies this narrative about “girls kicking ass” about ten fold.
No girls on my little league team…but the area I grew up in, girls played field hockey for “their” junior / little league sport.
Just the times I guess. Baseball season is here again all! Go SGF Giants, and those bums from LA can take it back to the southland with ’em 🙂
The Guardian laments: When will Hollywood give us a genuinely queer superhero?
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/nov/07/hollywood-lgbt-superheroes-thor-ragnarok
The need to flourish in international marketplaces has played its part. While US and UK audiences might be largely fine with queer superheroes and gay Jedi knights, censors in countries such as China and Russia would almost certainly not be. Hence, studios have tended to veer on the side of caution.
There was a great deal of fuss earlier this year when it was revealed that the Yellow Ranger in the latest big screen version of Power Rangers was set to become Hollywood’s first queer superhero. In the end, a creative decision that was flagged up as a game-changing moment in cinematic history ending up looking pretty weak.
So, female athletes are fierce! Huh? Are we really having this discussion?
Is this the time when I’m supposed to bust out some of my many badass stories from back in the day to defend my manhood? Do y’all want to hear how much I lift when I’m not smashing these tiny keys with my swole fingers? Well, If she can’t grow hair all over her back like me, she’s nothing!
Seriously, I may have foolishly compromised a lot of my standards when I fell in love and got married, But one rule I never broke was that I’d never date a chick who might be able to beat me in a fight. Not that any of those exist outside of the movies. Anyway, why discuss fierce Jockstrap wearing females that nobody on here is going to be fool enough to date anyhow? It sounds like somebody above might have a fetish about being physically dominated by a female? But that’s just my speculation. And there’s no need to respond with your panties all up your crack if it isn’t you, ‘cuz then we’ll know it really was you. LOL
Feminist dads – I did wanted to please my dad and honour my parents’ hard work in giving me a good education, so I felt I ought to go to university, study science and pursue a career, indeed I didn’t know how to do anything else.
I do struggle to understand why the manosphere places quite so much blame on the choices of pretty immature girls. I accept blame for my own choices but aren’t we all dumb at 14 -16? I look back i wonder how i could and should have done things differently. I think often women look back to their younger self and the dumb naivete with which they made those decisions and view themselves as forever young and innocent rather than mature and culpable. They/we blame a lifetime of bad choices on a few early naive ones. So I understand the manosphere reaction to adult women but where it starts is a somewhat different story?
Hypergamy – I think novaseeker is spot on. I think women need to be aware of their own hypergamy and keep it in check in the same way that a man keeps faithful rather than running after a younger hotter version. It seems as though women dwell on fleeting attractions because they think it is ‘real love’ or an indication that their current relationship is wrong or whatever rather than chalking it up to biology and ignoring it.
i think the need to be a help meet is a little overlooked in discussing drivers of attraction in women. I know you guys know that is what women should be. We are crying to be led whilst refusing to follow. But it is still an innate drive as strong as hypergamy -or is it part of hypergamy? I guess I see hypergamy as the simple biological attraction created by a man we perceive to be higher. I see the drive to be a helper as more of a life vision need. The desire to invest, build, create something. The parallel to a man’s drive to make something of himself in the world. We need a man though!
rachel says: We are crying to be led whilst refusing to follow.
So, the disharmony is between the ears of the woman who refuses to follow what her all knowing and loving creator prescribes. Yet she’ll spend forever and a day blaming her husband’s leadership style for her rebellion, because she has been taught she is basically good, and doesn’t want to admit to herself that she is bad, and rebellious by nature.
I wish there was a better short term solution than “Game”.
did I read it right? That the woman has a life vision for how she is going to be a helper, what she will invest, build, and create, you just need the male as an accessory to get started on that vision?
BTW, about how old are you now, and what are you doing with your life now? After your honor for your parents and naivety led you down the career girl path? Are you riding the carousel? Hitting the wall? Married and unhaaapy? or Red Pilled and full of joy?
I don’t understand Dr. Torch’s writing style on this topic. Seems to be unproductively assertive, and all over one single statement, about heavy girls being as strong skinny boys. I ask again, put numbers on these categories to make that specific, and off-topic, discussion less strident. What is heavy, what is skinny, what is the age and the contests?
For reconciliation purposes, his point was that by saying boys are stronger, we inadvertently enable a rebellious heart in girls and their Dads when the daughters achieve physical victory.
I buy that, and think that is a very bland conclusion- pride is a temptation of victory is how I seeit in different words.
But back to the bone of contention, the girls under 12 are much stronger and aggressive (and already ugly IMO) compared with when I was that age, but it still seems a stretch to say (some undefined percentage at an undefined age) are stronger than boys. All that was only to service the warning that we shouldn’t enable a sinful pride. Sheesh.
As far as I can remember, one comment posted on the long-defunct website The Spearhead alleged that society is innately, fundamentally averse to thinking about men, especially young single men, in terms of incentives.
All the ongoing media brouhaha around “incels”, “deadbeats”, “failsons” and “Peter Pans” is probably good confirmation that this commenter was 100% right. The notion that men respond to incentives, just like women and children do, is completely off people’s radar in general. I cannot think of a better proof of gynocentrism.
Seems to be unproductively assertive,
Why am I “unproductively assertive” when it was Oscar who made the rash claims that are demonstrably wrong?
I have no problem seeing things quantified, but I do have a problem w/ everyone finding their own personal logical fallacy and trotting them out
No one on this board likes it when the media portray dads as buffoons like Homer Simpson or Peter Griffin, yet several of you are living down to the stereotype and don’t have the integrity or honor to change.
If Oscar and Earl want to be clowns, that’s their choice. My choice is to point it out.
Hollundhund-
Its actually quite breathtaking when you think about it the fact that western men get up, go to work, pay taxes –ie, participate in all the heavy lifting of civilization– at all.
I use the analogy a lot–but I think most of us, and I include myself in this, are simply like Boxer from “Animal Farm.” It’s just in the nature of men to ask, no matter how fast the ship is sinking (or the project is failing) to declare, “I’ll just work harder!”
Dr. Torch,
Good question. Because you went quickly to commenter’s character instead of making the case clearer with numbers. You could have a different size or age of the boys and girls in mind than they do, but you won’t know because you ramped it up.
Scott: Its actually quite breathtaking when you think about it the fact that western men get up, go to work, pay taxes –ie, participate in all the heavy lifting of civilization– at all.
Ah, but without women in the workforce, civilization would lose its jewelry designers, human resources administrators, boutique clerks, crystal healers, radio therapists, life coaches, pilates instructors, travel and foodie bloggers, and gender studies professors. How then could we function?
Some of it is the times Scott.
Kids are promised the world. Everyone gets a trophy kind of thing….
My parents after I finished college (undergrad) pretty much cut me off. It was a bit of a shock. It seemed to come out of nowhere. They were a bit naive about the world I was entering back in 1993. “Just get a job, and everything will work out” seemed to be their attitude. I can’t really fault them. The world of 1964 was long gone by then as well…..oh sure, I could move back home…but it was made CRYSTAL CLEAR in a hard-copy agreement of what would be allowed, and what would not. No way was I going to move back home.
I did the logical thing (sarcasm) I borrowed a heap of money for grad school and delayed reality for two more years. Grad school was actually hard, and I went to a decent one.
I made mistakes when I was hired by IBM and moved to California. Spent too much………did stupid things with money, barely “knew” how to keep a budget. It was when I read Ayn Rand “Atlas Shrugged” and “The Fountainhead” is when I began to take a different approach to things. I don’t “deserve” a high paying job “just because” and the USA didn’t “owe” me a living.
Drugs and drink aside…….
I am no means ready to retire. I don’t have it all figured out but I do have a killer work ethic (it was the thing that kept me alive during the last big recession. I will take any job……..and I did).
I know this meandering a bit (results / aftermath of a bad drug addiction) but when I quit “blaming” the world, women, the folks down the street, the popular and cool kids, the Methodists, banks, and the anything else that may or may not deserve blame
Things got better…..on all levels. The greatest gift my parents DID instill in me was a killer work ethic. What I have right now isn’t too much, but its paid for. I have “nice” things and I worked for them. I don’t apologize for what I have. I don’t feel guilty. I have a few solid things going for me right now……and I’ll be “doggone” at this point if I am going to spend my last 25, 35, or 40 years “upset” and entitled and blaming someone else for my shortcomings.
This whole “peter pan” thing or whatever its being cvalled this week is a fitting answer to the culture. I tell younger cats to “vett” out a woman throughly. Get out of debt. Travel. Have an adventure. Grow your skills, you don’t know everything, Limit your sex partners. WORK HARD. Don’t expect the world to care about you (it won’t and shouldn’t), and take advantage of the freedoms we still do have to get prepared for tougher times. READ BOOKS about anything. Pray and stay away from drugs……..like, far away……..
Boxer in Animal Farm was an example, and I related to him in the story as well…….but in the end the “system” sent him to the knacker when he was of no more use to the State. When or if that times comes in this culture for men like me…….No friggin way!!!! I will not go quietly into the night!
Höllenhund says:
As far as I can remember, one comment posted on the long-defunct website The Spearhead alleged that society is innately, fundamentally averse to thinking about men, especially young single men, in terms of incentives.
That would be Zed’s famous observation along the lines of something like “Society used to relate to men in terms of carrot and stick. Now it’s just Gimme TWO STICKS!”“. Incentives are “out”, punishment and the threat of punishment are “in”.
Men are expected to just do the right thing no matter what it may cost them. Short term, medium term, long term – it’s just one endless “manUP!”, all risk, no reward. All stick, no carrot. All contempt, all the time.
Now societal deep thinkers are wondering why men are withdrawing…
@Jason
I watched the Bad New Bears sequel Bad News Bears Go to Japan a couple of times. Loved it. Who could not love a movie with Tony Curtis (in Sweet Smell of Success mode) and him speaking a little Japanese, Godzilla, Japanese Game shows, a heroine in her only movie appearance who was as cute as she was self–conscious and a Sullivan based score by L.A.s Paul Chihara. Can’t remember whether America or Japan were the winners. Totally under-rated 1979 movie.
All this arguing with Dr Torch does not add to my query as to the respective abilities of nine year olds. I hear what is said by Oscar but I – thinking back – just do not believe that even at that age girls are the physical equal of boys – all they seemed to do when I was that age other than natter was instigate Kiss Chase and be more than willing to show off their knickers. (Does this comment need translation into American? – natter, Kiss Chase, knickers)
Opus. I just love baseball. Such a Victorian sport. I am moving back to the San Francisco Bay Area in about two weeks……only a 45 minute bus ride to San Francisco and the Giants (can’t take my Vespa on the freeway over the Golden Gate…even though it can top out at 75 mph).
I played 3rd base in little league and shortstop in high school. My college didn’t have a baseball team (they had lacrosse and rugby though). I am one of the ten Americans that loves listening to it on the radio……..
It’s the only sport I follow.
“Field of Dreams” is a great baseball movie and so is “Bull Durham” and the old “Pride of St. Louis”
Probably onme of the best days of my life is when the Bo-Sox sent NY back to the Bronx in 2004
Baseball, disco sucks and Chicago from 1979
Weight lifting debates are tedious and cliche. No winners.
@ Opus says:
May 24, 2018 at 9:51 am
“I hear what is said by Oscar but I – thinking back – just do not believe that even at that age girls are the physical equal of boys… ”
Most are not, but there is a lot more overlap at that age than there is in adolescence. In adolescence, the gap widens, and the overlap decreases. By 15, there’s very little overlap.
Because you went quickly to commenter’s character
I wasn’t the one who did that.
instead of making the case clearer with numbers. You could have a different size or age of the boys and girls in mind than they do, but you won’t know because you ramped it up.
Once again, you’re wrong. We’re talking about 15 y.o. No range. So why even bring that up?
And since I didn’t make the ridiculous assertion, I’m not the one who should be filling in the numbers. Oscar made a claim, have him prove it.
He can’t.
The reason he can’t is b/c he’s wrong. I see the counter evidence all the time, that’s why I know he’s wrong. Instead he started back-pedaling and trying to re-define terms. Suddenly a race isn’t about speed anymore. He even made up a pretend sport trying to defend his absurdity.
Then all the wannabes chimed in, as if to prove their manhood they need to certify they can outlift girls.
Reminds me of something akin to the cartoon chivalry: this is cartoon masculinity. Except it’s been done before
empath, you of all people find a discussion of the lift tedious and cliche?
I’m shocked!
If it was that I can lift more than you yes. Besides, that kind of lift is nonsensical when the discussion is about whether a girl can lift as much as a boy. Girls, in terms of the “The Lift” , are very proficient at their own body weight because all of life is a huge self lift fest for them.
“He even made up a pretend sport… ”
What “pretend sport” did I “make up”?
This reminds me of when my son played club soccer when he was high school aged. Every once in a while they played at team with a token “I’m as good as the boys” girl. It would always be comical to watch the super girl be utterly unable to keep up with the boys, who would not cut her any slack. Victories were important, as the best teams would get promoted to a higher league the following season, so everyone played to win,
I recall in one of the matches that our boys were extra aggressive with the slide tackles. A slide tackle is when you slide to strip the ball away from your opponent. As long as you go for the ball, it’s perfectly legal to knock down your opponent in the process. Well, long story short, after a few tackles the “I’m as good as the boys” girl starts to cry, The ref summoned our boys and told them to back off. Our boys refused, saying that this wasn’t a coed league and that the tackles were perfectly legal, and that if she couldn’t handle it, that was her problem. The ref backed off and the girl spent most of the rest of the match on the bench
“Just get a job”. It was hard then … it’s even harder now. Not to mention that it’s a virtual certainty that you will be laid off at least once in your career.
Pretty much the only jobs headhunters contact me about are 6-12 month no benefits temp gigs. They even expect you to relocate for them, on your own dime, And unlike in decades past, the temp gigs don’t pay more than a full time time job, sometimes they pay even less.
Apparently, fewer and fewer men are doing that, both young and older. Some because they can’t find a job, some because they just don’t care anymore.
The same happens in soccer. The mighty US Women’s National Team is routinely defeated in scrimmages by American high school boys.
Also in pro tennis, men who are ranked 700th or worse can easily defeat the either of the Amazon like Williams sisters. In fact, the ladies train with men, so that when they face another woman it feels much easier.
Seems the more this discussion goes…the more other commenters are pointing out how your assertions are often wrong.
But hey if insulting Oscar and me makes you feel better than heavy girls lift more than skinny boys…more power to you.
*that
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2777734-ronaldinho-reportedly-will-marry-his-2-fiancees-in-august-ceremony
It is time that I outed myself as a Rapist. Yes it is true; how could it not be. Returning from London yesterday evening but in the sunshine on the train – a fairly crowded one – I found a seat which was opposite that of a rather large middle-aged woman. As I sat down our eyes met and I gave a half-smile much as I would do to any man. She promptly stood up and moved to another somewhat more crowded part of the carriage.
Pretty much the only jobs headhunters contact me about are 6-12 month no benefits temp gigs. They even expect you to relocate for them, on your own dime, And unlike in decades past, the temp gigs don’t pay more than a full time time job, sometimes they pay even less.
Thank the H1B visas etc. I see hundreds of them going to work in my area each day. Accepting low pay b/c they’re not worried about turning any place into a ghetto just like home.
And these companies…they could have relocated to less expensive parts of the country (some SHOULD move to other parts of country) and hire Americans at that same rate, b/c cost of living is lower.
Win-Win for the US. So why doesn’t it happen?
Pingback: Progress to a post-marriage America: see the story! - Fabius Maximus website
Pingback: The family is dying. Here’s what science tells us about it. - Fabius Maximus website
Pingback: Too traditional to be traditional | Dalrock
There was a single mother at a church I use to attend, that wouldn’t marry her baby daddy because he wasn’t a Christian. Her thought was that believers shouldn’t be yoked with unbelievers. I believe the pastors supported her in this view.
The man was (humanly speaking) a very good man. He loved her and their son. By all accounts, he was a good father. He wanted to marry her, and she wanted to marry him. They just couldn’t marry since he wasn’t a Christian.
I don’t think she dated anyone else.
He was active in the son’s life and was a close friend of the mother. They spent quite a bit of time together.
When the son was about 10, dad got mom pregnant again. She confesses the “sin of fornication” to the whole church.
Around that time, we moved away. As far as I know, they never married.
The whole situation seemed insane to me.
I agree that Christians shouldn’t be yoked with unbelievers, but these people were ALREADY YOKED when they started a family together. For all practical purposes, the son (and second child) yoked them.