Several readers pointed out the anachronism in the Stanton quote I included in my last post:
Ask any young woman how she vets all the nice young men who approach to decide who will advance to the bonus round of an actual date. She will ask if you rewind your VHS tapes before returning them to Blockbuster, or just pay the fee.
The 1990s VHS/Blockbuster reference however is deliberate by Stanton. Stanton is showing off how with the times he is, that he knows what is happening now. He may as well have written:
Unlike you squares I know what the hep cats are doing today! They aren’t going to the malt shop to sock hop like we did in the 1990s!
I write that because the 1950s dating norms Stanton assumes his audience will be shocked to find are no longer practiced weren’t practiced in the 1990s either. Even worse than that, what he is describing wasn’t really what was going on in the 1950s. Stanton’s dream of a world where unmarried women are queens holding court, deciding which gallant suitor to bestow her favors on exists only in his imagination.
Stanton knows this, but the lie is too tempting because by telling it he can puff himself up in comparison to the loser men of today. The implication is that in his day, men were men and women were glad. Something mysterious has happened to men, while women have only become more fabulous! Stanton closes his essay with a claim that young men today are different than young men in the past, because older men have failed to mold them into real men (men like he was at their age):
Rest assured, our problem today is not raising toxic males. It’s raising passive males. Those are males who are not even sure what the right thing to do is, much less possess the courage and assertiveness to know when to demonstrate it or how. Masculinity can only be taught, encouraged, and even demanded by the previous generation of both men and women. Men teach and call younger boys up into it, and women set before the young male what he must do if he wants a shot at them.
The culture that says, “We don’t know how to turn these boys today into men” is tragically passive as well. We need to be men, all of us, to hitch up our collective trousers and teach our boys what manliness is and what it is not and demand they act on it. If nothing else, there’s a whole generation of young women hoping someone will step up and do so.
But Stanton isn’t consistent with this narrative. In his lecture Marriage is a feminist institution Stanton claims that men have always been shiftless losers, and it is only due to women marrying shiftless losers and making them man up that anything ever got done in the world. He offers the example of Jamestown in 1611, which he says was foundering until women came over and married the passive colonists and made them into men:
In Jamestown the mother country sent men over to start the colonies in America as an economic venture. They expected the colonizers to come over here and start creating and start growing stuff, making stuff, sending it back to the mother country, and riches would happen. Well they sent this guy Sir Thomas Dale in 1611 to go over to Jamestown because no checks were coming to the mother country from the colonies…
He reported back to the mother country: The men are involved in their usual daily work, which is bowling in the street…
What happened was the mother country said we know how we can get the men working. We’re not going to send drivers, you know crack the whip and get them working, we’re going to send women. And the women, the men will be interested in the women, and the women will set the tone for what the men should do. You know what, before you have access to me, I want a nice cabin, and I want to be able to cook stew, tomorrow. So the men have to start doing, and that’s what they did. And one thing led to another, the women got men to work, they got them to buckle down, and 200 years later, boom. We have America, one of the greatest nations, the greatest nation in the world. Why? Because women showed up, and got men doing what men are supposed to do. That is what marriage does.
So which is it? Did something mysteriously happen to men in the last few decades that made them (in Stanton’s mind) shiftless losers? Or have men always been shiftless losers, and Stanton’s recent screed is just a long winded way of yelling get off my lawn?
It gets worse, because Stanton offers himself as an example of a shiftless loser that had to be made into a man by his wife:
My situation, I grew up as a skateboarder in the panhandle of Florida. Surfer. I was a good kid, didn’t get involved in drugs, didn’t do bad things. But that was my life. School, I didn’t spend a whole lot of time in that. So I continued in that, after I got married and Jackie said, “you know what Glenn, here’s how it’s going to be” and what did I do? Okay, I guess I’m going to have to go to college. I was scared to death of college. Didn’t think I could survive there. Didn’t think I could compete there. But this woman was making me do something, this either or, so I went and did it and I became a better person.
Again, I would have never imagined that I get to do the things that I get to do today. Written a number of books, things like that. But I am who I am because Jackie said not you can do it, you will do it. And every man here knows that that’s true. So the bargaining chip for the man is, it’s going to work out better for me if I be what she wants me to be.
It’s quieter at home, she’s more likely to make the kind of food I like, I’m going to get physical access to her more often, and that sound simplistic, but there are those things. So the guy’s bargaining chip is to be a guy, and guess what he finds out it works pretty well for him. And that he’s happier than his “free” bachelor friends.
Here is the video segment the quote above is transcribed from:
Stanton regularly refers to himself as a passive loser in need of constant direction of his mommy-wife. In his brief bio at Boundless Stanton says that he never picked out and bought an item of clothing for himself until he was 28. This is one of the most important things Stanton wants you to know about himself:
Glenn T. Stanton is the director for family formation studies at Focus on the Family. He debates and lectures extensively on the issues of gender, sexuality, marriage and parenting at universities and churches around the country. Glenn is the author of four books and a contributor to nine others. He’s a huge Bob Dylan fan, loves quirky movies, and picked out and bought the first piece of clothing for himself when he was 28. Glenn and his wife, Jacqueline, have five children and live in Colorado Springs, Colo.
Although his narrative changes whenever expedient, there is at least some consistency to Stanton’s message. While Stanton wants to pose as the only real man in the room, he clearly has deep feelings of inadequacy as a man, something he projects onto other men of all eras.
Related: Stanton’s dilemma
What a beta.
Pingback: Kids these days | @the_arv
@Joe, I think you’re ranking Stanton too high…
Jamestown men bowling, rather than working, in 1611?
Seems to me there’s an easy economic explanation. From the Wikipedia article on Thomas Dale:
“Perhaps Dale’s most lasting reform was economic. In 1613, without stockholder consent, Dale abandoned the communal agriculture which had proved unsatisfactory and assigned 3-acre (12,000 m2) plots to its ‘ancient planters’ and smaller plots to the settlement’s later arrivals. Measurable economic progress was made, and the settlers began expanding their planting to land belonging to local native tribes.”
Private property does wonders for one’s motivation.
How and why is is that the most simpering beta males are the ones that put themselves out there as the experts? and worse still, they get constant affirmation by other beta males so they are only encouraged to spew more of their doctrinal diarrhea.
A normal, healthy man would never wait till 28 to buy his first outfit by himself (like a big boy!!), and if by some chance that did happen, he would certainly not brag about it because he would ashamed.
This notion that “women civilize men” maybe the one of the biggest myths in all Western history. I’ve read history after history suggesting that “until the women came and married the men, the Western US”, or “the Frontier”, or “the Colonies” were floundering or violent.
What they never mention is that the women searched out the single men since they weren’t marriage material, for whatever reason, and would end up in their own homelands as old maids, Nuns, or disgusting whores.
Now since old maids and disgusting whores are super-awesome, women don’t have to search out for a man to protect and save them from a horrible future.
“…picked out and bought the first piece of clothing for himself when he was 28.”
This pastor is the leader of Christian men?
@Gage – “How and why is is that the most simpering beta males are the ones that put themselves out there as the experts?”
Because the alpha males are too busy getting laid and don’t know what all the fuss is about. My All-American football playing Father admitted that he only got girls because, “he was good at football.” It’s also why Mick Jagger or Tom Brady writing a pick-up book would be the shortest book ever written.
“Chapter One: Be Mick Jagger”
If a guy can approach a woman, get her to meet up with him one on one later and charm her enough for sex then he can do the same to another woman *and* he’s demonstrated that that woman is open to having that done by another man – as long as he’s sufficiently charming.
Why would a guy who follows this allegedly Christian script follow up with marriage? What’s actually in it for him?
Civilization was created by men for men.
And AMOG’s gonna AMOG.
Cucks gonna cuck.
Virtue signaling, virtue signaling everywhere!
This is why meme warfare is so powerful.
Blue pill beta men pedestalizing their female keepers like this loser operate in the echo chambers of betaland, raising beta boys and go-girrrls; they know who butters their bread.
Aspirational status seeking must be in accordance with the gynocentric hierarchy. His AMOGing, like all churchian cucks, really comes down to communicating the foundation of their true religion: the original sin of being male and the sacred transformational power of the female.
Their stories of transformation are always some variant of fallen man meets holy woman. Everything innate in man is flawed while the remedy is always the repeated intervention of the innate divinity of women.
He speaks of passive men. Yet what is more passive than a story of supposed masculine transformation that requires female intervention at every point of challenge?
Indoctrinating the next generation of boys into the beta draft horse model of female worship is evil. Building a better beta is really the best possible outcome. But in reality, the beta factories are failing hard at evein this timeless task.
The tapestry of lies is threadbare. Even as a blue pill beta kid raised by a weak but “good” and loving* father I always knew something was deeply wrong with my dads tacit and explicit view on these matters. The kids are not ok, in part because the truth finds a way and the people who should be guiding thwm toward it are instead chosing to amog and twist the tales further into the darkness.
*Much anger and resentment comes when a loving father passes the pretty lies to his son. Some of my greatast tests of forgiveness have been to release my dad from his own failures and to take up the duty of manhood upon my own shoulders.
These are the transformations worthy of mention. I know I am far from alone in communities such as this.
Marriage is a feminist institution?
Doesn’t this hint or even prove he’s a male feminist…and as such his two rules would be all females are goddesses and all men are evil passive scum?
Okay. I finally get his point but it was clear as mud to me. Perhaps he has received some feedback on his earlier writings, and has learned that his understanding was way out-of-date. If so, it is unfortunate that he doesn’t realize he is still out-of-date, just not as far as he was.
Related post from Rollo is relevant to this comment:
https://therationalmale.com/2018/08/20/a-sense-of-ownership/
So he openly admits to playing the part to bargain for sex.
Chump
That’s the gist of what he’s saying. The Pilgrim men couldn’t hack it on their own so “the mother country” sent women to Virginia to “set the tone”.
It’s hilarious, because women in that community were the property of their husbands or fathers and weren’t allowed to speak during religious services. But we’re to believe they “set the tone” of the early American colonies.
>> In his lecture Marriage is a feminist institution Stanton claims that men have always been shiftless losers, and it is only due to women marrying shiftless losers and making them man up that anything ever got done in the world.
I don’t see any reason to conflate the influence of women with “feminism.”
As I see it, THE INFLUENCE OF WOMEN has a lot of utility. I don’t need women to guide me… but I think it’s foolish to think that men are not DEEPLY MOTIVATED by women.
Running a lot of game, and watching “2nd tier guys” try to break thru into mating and dating… the “carrot” of access to women is insanely motivating. I’ll start with myself. I am a better man… because I wanted to get laid more, and had to grow to be more sex worthy.
I don’t “submit applications” to women, showing them my accomplishments, hoping to be chosen. That is not what I mean. We get better. And we step up and lead (which itself is a type of better), and we get more women saying “yes” to our offers as they notice our betterness.
Related point: I have a friend that is VP of Sales. He gets his team going (all men), then hires one hot, but reasonably successful woman as well… and the guys all step up a notch.
Male competition (against other men, and even again weaker versions of themselves) moves the world.
It’s also a rejection of original sin – i.e. if women civilize men, then who civilizes women? If women are born civilized, then they do not need salvation. They are saved by virtue of vagina.
Makes you wonder if they both think the vagina is their savior.
Turns women into dictators and men into simps.
Whereas those who hear and follow the words of the Savior, Jesus Christ, build their house on rock.
@earl
He does think the vagina is the most powerful force in the world: https://www.boundless.org/relationships/the-most-powerful-force-in-the-world/
Yet another fake pastor. May this worthless POS die and burn in hell ASAP.
I see.
So rather than point out sex before marriage is fornication and therefore a grave sin which puts the woman’s soul in peril…they point out it’s the most powerful force in the world for a woman to say yes or no to sexual interest from a man. It’s basically restating that sexual liberation ’empowers’ a woman.
I also noticed they never mention who the ‘sole commitment gate keeper’…as if women hold all the cards in the market place and men have no leverage of their own.
Assuming for the sake of argument that the liar Glen Stanton actually knows any 20-something women, and that he actually listens to them, and that he actually heard their words, I wish I’d been there to ask one question of each girl:
“How many abortions have you had?”
Just to see the looks on their faces, and to hear the spluttering from the liar Glen Stanton.
As Gen X I started dating in the 90’s and things have changed a lot. I think what Stanton misses is that “yes” to a date proposal from a woman is largely meaningless in the age of Smart Phones and Social Media. When I grew up in the 90’s when you got up the nerve to ask a girl out and she said “yes” it meant a small amount of commitment on her part. It meant that on Friday at 7:00PM you would be picking her up and she would be ready and waiting for you when you arrived. You at least knew, no matter how bad things went from there, you had a date and you would be seeing her and given an opportunity to woo.
Now things are different. A girl is entertaining many offers through FB, Social Media, Texts on her phone etc… A “yes” no longer means she is committed to going out with you on Friday night. It only means she will entertain your offer against all the other offers she received that week. If you come up short, for any reason, she is going out with someone else. However, if you are lucky, her date goes badly and she has been drinking and feeling frisky, you may get a text as a “Justin case” at 3 in the morning.
I would entertain the possibility of being rejected, shamed, laughed at with her girlfriends etc… for a firm commitment to actually go on a date but not just to be one of the “options” lined up that week.
Might be a good question to ask any woman who seems to get easily offended. You might have found the source.
Especially if they don’t quickly answer ‘none’.
Gage says:
September 14, 2018 at 3:07 pm
How and why is is that the most simpering beta males are the ones that put themselves out there as the experts?
******************************************************
Because his wife told him to.
Just finished scrolling through comments at Federalist. Theres a lot of useless rabbit trailing of the “butbut men do bad things!” and attempts at AMOGing over “real men”, however there are a number of truthful comments. The one that is most current is quite on the point:
‘ the only guys who pursue a woman who hasn’t shown any signs of interest are guys that you should run from. It’s creepy, not romantic to show that much interest in someone who hasn’t reciprocated at all’
Yes…signs of interest are at a minimum something a woman must do if she wants a guy to pursue and ask her out. It can be as simple as eye contact and a smile (although talking helps too).
I imagine this would be Stanton going to the mall today.
Or what Stanton would do if you told him what the current dating scene is like.
LOL
“hep cats”
“justin case”
“old-fashioned chivalry dorks”
@Steve Johnson:
If a guy can approach a woman, get her to meet up with him one on one later and charm her enough for sex then he can do the same to another woman *and* he’s demonstrated that that woman is open to having that done by another man – as long as he’s sufficiently charming.
Why would a guy who follows this allegedly Christian script follow up with marriage? What’s actually in it for him?
Indeed, if a man is not serious in his devotion to the almighty God, why would he? He can play at church while banging whores, and so long as he keeps it somewhat discrete, no one will say a word. It’s almost as if his ability to play the field means he is high value enough that his sin is no longer sin; at least in the eyes of the degenerate churchians.
Moved this over as its more relevent here. (From a conversation in august with deti at another blog.)
My personal thoughts on the future from another blog.
Deti
Good analysis of the strata Today.
Look at it from the viewpoint of the 20 year olds today.
One thing guys are great at is realistically sizing up where they are in the spectrum, no rose colored glasses.
Your ” middle 60% of men are the husbands of the average to below average women, most of whom will end up divorced.”
Yup they know it but now freed from the burden to marry and provide and father, they will see this as their future and sidestep it.
These are the “good guys”. The middle managers, tradesmen, farmers. The steady joes. They will have moderate jobs as always but without a wife and family they will have money out the ass. Half of them will retire by 40. Because they can afford it!!
They wont win the sex carousel but they will attract enough for occassional ons, strs.
But they will win so much more in freedom, peace and less financial pressure.
As for the “And bringing up the rear are the omegas – the truly unlucky, the hideous, the morbidly obese, the moderately to profoundly autistic, the mentally disabled. They get nothing.”. To be brutal they always have. But now with vr porn etc. thgey may have a outlet they never had before.
Yes for the already trapped of our generation it sucks.
But the brave new world ten years from now it will be great for men.
Because as Justaguy said …as always. We adapted. We dont want it. But it works…enough.
mgtowhorsemansaid:August 29, 2018 at 1:08 am
Btw I am not gleeful at all this. Thats sarcasm.
Id love to see every Bert out there have what I have.
But its over.
We must look forward.
And men who adapt will carve out a better end result
Largely because they are not dependent on the world to carve it for them.
As often said. Be for you. If anyone wants to come for the ride, great. If not, its a great life to live when you only have to answer to yourself.
Why do I x? Because I can and because I want to. Period.
P.s. I am solidly in the 60% and I know it. Why if it ever went south I would never ltr again. I know its value and what it requires and its not worth it for what I could get.
mgtowhorsemansaid:August 29, 2018 at 1:18 am
And ten years out to adapt deti’s analysis
“Next is the average to attractive women. They also get what they want. Fun hot sex in their 20s followed by” ok sex in their 30s followed by nothing. Working til they retire with a few strs even ltrs because they are attractive. But because the 60% men sidestep marriage, they will support themselves until they retire with their cats.
Next is the average to below average to ugly women. They get a little of what they want – sex when alpha slums it, then” nothing. The 60% can still get the attractive ones above for strs, these average to ugly women become the new incels. Some get thirsty pump and dumps but no one even STRs them.
See with marriage off the table it totally changes things.
And marriage IS off the table for the kids my sons age.
Just look at the dalrocks analysis or talk to a twenty year old.
mgtowhorsemansaid:August 29, 2018 at 1:24 am
Our generation was great for women and sucks for men.
The next its going to be great for men and suck bad for women.
Because remove all the relationship stuff, at the end of the day people still need to have food, shelter, a purpose to live for.
Which men provide by instinct, hell for something to do. Who ever Told a man to go climb a mountain or build stuff? They just do.
Only now all the societal controls to share that have been removed. They will always provide it for themselves. Just now everybody else…..
Get your own!!
You can’t or won’t?? Too bad, so sad. Not my circus not my monkey.
It wont collapse, it will just be dfferent.
All women are not gold digging whores!!
Most are goodish girls who just do not self reflect and so have no understanding of their own hypergamous natures just as many men cannot control their need to dominate.
I agree marriage is not easily entered into.
I have a serious problem with whoring. Both clinically and morally. It is an outlet at best.
I see the way forward, not that I want it, but realistically it will be peoplke having a series of semi serious short term relationships.
As the immortal Frank sang
“If we’d thought a bit ’bout the end of it
When we started painting the town
We’d have been aware that our love affair
Was too hot not to cool down
So good bye, dear, and amen
Here’s hoping we meet now and then
It was great fun
But it was just one of those things”
It lasts as long as it lasts but both parties knowing its not permanent and when its over just part saying no harm no foul.
Be very careful in such a lifestyle.
Myself if things went south I have repeatedly said I would not ltr or str. But I wouldn’t go onsing either. I would simply retire to my books and the woods and my ponies and the quiet. Alone.
Commitment may be dead.
But that does not reduce us to rutting animals.
There is something in between.
@Zarathustra
Deti and I think some others mentioned in another thread that dating was a ritual in the midwest in the 90s. I don’t recall anyone dating in high school, and when I went to college in the late 80s I didn’t see it either. However, I think it was my freshman year that I had it in my mind that I should be asking girls out on dates, probably from old TV shows. I only made that mistake once, but all of my buddies laughed at me for being so foolish (and it really was).
Eventually I learned that you met girls at keg parties and escalated from there, and had a few girlfriends that way*. Aside from my freshman year, the closest I came to a traditional date was going out to lunch with my (now) wife. We worked at the same place, and she had taken an interest in me before I knew who she was. After we had established good rapport and I could tell she was interested in me** I suggested we grab some lunch, so we went to a restaurant in the same mall we both worked at on our lunch break. I believe I did pick up the check, and I remember holding her hand as we walked back to work. But had it not worked out it would have just been two coworkers going to lunch. I had no desire to artificially raise the stakes to create workplace drama.
*I remember reading about hookup culture in a newspaper in the mid 90s and thinking how much the world had changed. However, the real difference was we never used the term “hookup”. Other than that, it is what we operated under.
**One thing I had forgotten about but my wife remembered clearly 20 years later is one of the times she came to my work area to talk to me, and I had suggested she join me in whatever I was going to be doing that Friday or Saturday night (probably going to a party). She declined, saying she had to pick a friend up from the airport. I evidently took this as a lame excuse, and started to “next” her. She was really bothered, because she really did have to do that. But she managed to reassure me that she was interested so at some point I asked her to lunch.
Pingback: Kids these days | Reaction Times
This is pretty incredible.
When I was 28 years old I was a captain in the United States Air Force. People’s lives and careers hinged on my being able to make good decisions in stressful situations. For the record, I am not stating that I am the most well-adjusted man walking the earth. I am certainly not. But I cannot fathom that I would ever take leadership advice from someone who, at age 28, for the very first time, was able to purchase clothing without female supervision.
The woman dug you to begin with verified again.
Perhaps most women now are so socially awkward or expect the man to do everything they have no clue how to display interest to a man.
-they are successful career women who will not settle for a guy who isn’t *more* successful than them, but alas, men don’t care if a woman has a prestigious job
See: Li$a Anderson of Boundless. A perfect example, and paid member of the FoTF flesh-eating amoeba.
Did Glen teach her or vice versa? She claimed John Piper “wasn’t John Piper” until his wife made him that way. So, even a simp can’t simp without permission. Permission from the Goddess Conglomerate. Simp building is taught to new hires during familiarization week perhaps, or contracted out to Lifeway.
In the past marriage was to prevent fornication. Now, you must fornicate (and be good at it) to have any hope of being worthy of marriage.
@Dalrock – Nice story. Unfortunately now, unlike the 90s, the girl you hooked up with at that kegger isn’t the girl you married. BTW, many wives (and children) were made at many drunken Medieval festivals in Europe!
But, these events were for the young and unmarried. I have no idea what the older divorced/never married/widowed set do to find a proper wife.
Both times I have seen Stanton’s job title, it looks like it is “Director of Family Fornication…”
And it doesn’t surprise me.
Anyone read Richard Philips book, “The masculine Mandate: God’s calling to me?” He is speaking at a men’s retreat next year that someone told me about. The excerpts and book reviews at Amazon make it appear to be more of the same complementarian bile, but I want to hope my impression is wrong.
And yet the divorce risk skyrockets (with women) even after fornicating once…let alone with multiple partners.
Goes to show how backwards and messed up we are. Fornicating is a good way to increase divorce. Hence why marriage is a still a good idea to prevent fornication…but fornication is a good way to increase your chances of having a divorce.
It gets worse, because Stanton offers himself as an example of a shiftless loser that had to be made into a man by his wife:
His wife must truly find him revolting by now. Why isn’t she converting him into alimony?
This notion that “women civilize men” maybe the one of the biggest myths in all Western history.
It is catastrophically stupid, since exactly the opposite is true.
Case in point, single vs. married men have similar voting patterns.
But single vs. married women have dramatically different voting patterns. This is simply because when a woman marries, she is more likely to copy her husband’s voting patterns and political beliefs (which, 90% of the time, is an improvement from what she was when single).
Doesn’t this hint or even prove he’s a male feminist…
Yes. Plus, remember that a ‘male feminist’ is always a creepy predator in disguise.
The only reason Glenn Stanton won’t get #Metooed is that his SMV is too low to have had any such trysts. Harvey Weinstein was in a position of immense power. That is the only difference here.
@Damn Crackers
Many “civilized” character traits are fruits of the holy spirit. They credit women for the work of Jesus Christ our Lord in the hearts of the saved.
And the work of men since agriculture to build civilization and the
civilized patriarchal family unit（also ordained by God).
@Damn Crackers
Ha! I am exceedingly fortunate that I didn’t end up marrying a woman I hooked up with at a kegger!
hopefully cuckservatives like glenn will all be incel from now on.
That’s the big issue here…women think they are goddesses and men think they are their saviors and they both forget who the real Savior is.
A wife who humbly submits to Christ and her husband can win him over without a word. 1 Peter 3:1
Yes, kids these day: https://www.yahoo.com/news/straight-student-fatally-stabbed-mich-202159627.html
A 16-year-old girl was fatally stabbed in her classroom — and police say the killing stemmed from an argument over a boy.
Danyna Gibson was a straight-A student at Fitzgerald High School in Warren, Michigan. On Wednesday morning, she and another girl got into a loud fight over a boy, police say. The other student, a 17-year-old girl, allegedly used a kitchen-style steak knife to stab Gibson twice in the chest. She died at a nearby hospital about an hour later. …
The station reports that the 17-year-old suspect — whose name has not been released — was also a straight-A student.
In a press conference, Dwyer told reporters that a 17-year-old male student was connected to the incident, and said that there is a possibility that he had relationships with both girls.
This guy again,sounds like the gerbil is still stuck up in there.
His reward list for having married:
1.It’s quieter at home
Better without having married.
2. she’s more likely to make the kind of food I like
I Make the kind of food I like Every Time.Better w/o wymens
3. I’m going to get physical access to her more often
I’ve got access to my hand and or toys at All Times.
4. So the guy’s bargaining chip is to be a guy
Better w/o wifey
5.He’s happier than his “free” bachelor friends.
NOPE NOPE NOPE
total fail from the stanster
It’s been like this since the early 90’s, even within the church. It became the formal rule-of-the-road by the mid-naughts. No doubt this parallels the divorce rate. Nowadays, many of those who wish to save themselves for marriage are finding that they have to follow this script if they ever want to marry. It’s brutal.
@earl
”That’s the big issue here…women think they are goddesses and men think they are their saviors and they both forget who the real Savior is.”
Indeed
@Gaza
”Their stories of transformation are always some variant of fallen man meets holy woman. Everything innate in man is flawed while the remedy is always the repeated intervention of the innate divinity of women.”
He speaks of passive men. Yet what is more passive than a story of supposed masculine transformation that requires female intervention at every point of challenge? ”
So women are Jesus Christ in other words. What blasphemy.
”she and another girl got into a loud fight over a boy, police say. The other student, a 17-year-old girl, allegedly used a kitchen-style steak knife to stab Gibson twice in the chest. She died at a nearby hospital about an hour later”
I would support the death penalty for this 17 year old murderer.
The article is dated September 11, 2018.
The last Hollywood movie offered on VHS was in 2005–13 years ago. Blockbuster closed in 2013–5 years ago.
The guy is so out of touch that he mentions VHS and Blockbuster in an article aimed at young people. How can anyone expect him to offer RELATABLE advice to a younger generation.
Might as well label the guy “Mr. VHS”, to point out that he’s so out of touch that in 2018 he talks about VHS as if it’s still a thing.
I figured out why I am such a loser.
I never heard of any of these people until reading about them here,
Dalrock–
Deti and I think some others mentioned in another thread that dating was a ritual in the midwest in the 90s. I don’t recall anyone dating in high school, and when I went to college in the late 80s I didn’t see it either. However, I think it was my freshman year that I had it in my mind that I should be asking girls out on dates, probably from old TV shows. I only made that mistake once, but all of my buddies laughed at me for being so foolish (and it really was).
Eventually I learned that you met girls at keg parties and escalated from there, and had a few girlfriends that way*. Aside from my freshman year, the closest I came to a traditional date was going out to lunch with my (now) wife. We worked at the same place, and she had taken an interest in me before I knew who she was. After we had established good rapport and I could tell she was interested in me** I suggested we grab some lunch, so we went to a restaurant in the same mall we both worked at on our lunch break. I believe I did pick up the check, and I remember holding her hand as we walked back to work. But had it not worked out it would have just been two coworkers going to lunch. I had no desire to artificially raise the stakes to create workplace drama.
*I remember reading about hookup culture in a newspaper in the mid 90s and thinking how much the world had changed. However, the real difference was we never used the term “hookup”. Other than that, it is what we operated under.
**One thing I had forgotten about but my wife remembered clearly 20 years later is one of the times she came to my work area to talk to me, and I had suggested she join me in whatever I was going to be doing that Friday or Saturday night (probably going to a party). She declined, saying she had to pick a friend up from the airport. I evidently took this as a lame excuse, and started to “next” her. She was really bothered, because she really did have to do that. But she managed to reassure me that she was interested so at some point I asked her to lunch.
Yes.
“Serious” girlfriend number one (junior year, HS, 1987) — I asked out on a date, which became two, then three, etc.
Number two (About a year later) — again, there was a definite first “date”
Number three — met at work and was invited by her friends to her surprise birthday.
And so on for several years of serial monogamy. The constant was never really dating. It was a very obvious signal from the girl to me. In most cases, a girl I probably would have not noticed otherwise.
In the first case, she kept coming around and being at places where I was going to be. (And she normally would not). Laughing at my jokes a little harder than everyone else (even the ones that weren’t that funny, etc).
The second one we worked together and she kept telling her supervisor that she wanted to be transferred to the area where I worked. (And making it obvious).
The third one, I was flat out told by her friends that all she wanted for he birthday was for me to be at her party.
Dalrock,
“We worked at the same place, and she had taken an interest in me before I knew who she was. After we had established good rapport and I could tell she was interested in me** I suggested we grab some lunch, so we went to a restaurant in the same mall we both worked at on our lunch break.”
This is also the same way guys should propose marriage. When I proposed I was 99.99% sure my wife would say yes. And she did right away. I did not try to surprise her with a ring, we shopped for rings together because I wanted the ring to be the style she wanted. Contrast this with the guys who try to use surprise and external social pressure to coerce a gal to say, “Yes”. The guys that propose in the stands with the Kiss Cam or at a mall with some musicians present.
Swanny River,
“Anyone read Richard Philips book, “The masculine Mandate: God’s calling to me?” ”
Never heard of him or the book.
Usually men who demand other men to ‘man up’ to women are projecting their own emasculation.
It should also be noted that even in the 80s, if you chose to go the aesthetic “dating” route, by the time you had a girl interested enough to say “yes” to a first date, it meant that all you had to do was run the gauntlet correctly for sex on the third date (or “third time you were alone in whatever context you want to name it.”)
Usually men who demand other men to ‘man up’ to women are projecting their own emasculation.
There it is. Couldn’t quite put my finger on it between dry heaves while watching the posted vid.
Excellent insight.
The 1990s VHS/Blockbuster reference however is deliberate by Stanton. Stanton is showing off how with the times he is, that he knows what is happening now.
I disagree. I think it shows through an inability to sort through his memories and put them in the proper perspective.
As I’ve gotten older (and I am older than most of the people here), I’ve realized that my memories haven’t aged; they don’t turn into faded mental photographs. Things I did 50 years ago are just as fresh and relevant in my mind as they were when they happened.
I could talk to a young adult today about the thrill of buying a record album. How it was more than just music; how the album artwork and linear notes created an experience. And it would seem like yesterday–to me. And I could easily fall into the trap that the young person would instantly relate to what I was saying. Until they ask: “were records those big black things”?
Stanton made the mistake of assuming that if he understood and related to something, everyone else understands and relates to it. So, even if he knows the example is out of date, he still assumes others understand it and can relate to it.
And it is a major mistake. It shows someone who can’t walk a mile in someone else’s shoes; who can’t get out of his own experience cocoon and see the world from another’s perspective.
When i went to church singled groups it did not seem like women were there to date. That is, the few attractive girls. Most seemed like ugly losers or fatties.
Its definately fuck*ng happeneing, today on my FB feed a female acquaintance was complaining about her shit her life was being single and all (I happen to know she broke up with a stunningly handsome guy not that long ago as he didnt give her the “financial security” she needed (I think).
And cue a flood of #metoo’s from women in their early 40’s all complaining about the same thing – 3 dates in 8 years and no call backs and so on, now these women are hot to troy, keep themselves in shape, now are prob all completely mad as hatters, but still. And they know – KNOW – that if they aint getting tail in the 30’s, they aint gettin none after that either.
I have no men AT ALL complaining about getting no women on my feed. Most of the guys are in 1 of 2 categories 1)-im in a marriage but if it were to end – never again. 2) – been there never again.
We are going to have a legion of depressed unhappy the like of which we will have never seen before. But the feminist fuggernaught rolls on regardless.
The other issue that im seeing even in the last few days, women causing so much trouble\catastrophe in peoples lives that EVEN women are starting to get utterly sick of it. Now that’s saying something.
@Minesweeper
Two questions:
1. How many of those women do you suppose are taking some antidepressant drugs, and how many would admit it?
2. Why are you still on Face Book?
At some point the craziness that has taken men to pieces for a generation will start to affect women. Seeing them lament a life with no kids, financial support, husband, love, family – you’d think they would stop their full frontal attack on the patriarchy\family\civilisation but no, they bought the lies and I doubt they can ever change their minds.They are too old now to change opinion. But not too old to complain and they havnt even had their government collapse yet due to the lack of men’s tax’s.
That will come.
Shoot a young lady I know in her early 20s mentioned she’s only been on one date in 4 years. And it’s not like she is physically ugly either. I gave her the chance to join me on an activity and she turned it down. I guess that whole cause and effect again.
@AR,1)-prob all, 2)-i do have some good friends on their from different countries\continents, Its messenger is quite reliable (better than skype), but its worse than it used to be. Also, watching the coming train wreck can be amusing, and it lets me plop bits like this into D feed every now and then.
Lets me know what all the hip young guns are up too – you know – that group that Glen belongs too.
I do interact on twatter too, Im trying to stretch my endurance just to see how long I can handle a swim in the slime pool of humanity.
@earl, yeah, no doubt every single one of these women has turned down some guy who didn’t measure her artificial minimum requirements. Shit if your not getting hit on in your peak, you can forget the rest.
In all seriousness, has anyone here had or had friends/family who had good luck trying to date in church? Especially in the 20-30 age group? I’ve gotten plenty of tinder dates but church girls give you their number despite having a boyfriend, or the say “oh sorry, I’m just looking for friends right now” even AFTER giving you their number.
“A 16-year-old girl was fatally stabbed in her classroom — and police say the killing stemmed from an argument over a boy.”
A girl named Tanaya stabbed a girl named Danyna over a boy named Dontavius (my guess). If you want your children to die of old age, don’t give them such ridiculous names!
I’ve got dates…but they usually don’t last long and I often get the friend speech (which I don’t really take them up on…I’m polite when I see them…but I don’t really want a woman friend in that way). Then one time in a big group talking about our state in life most of the single women liked being single and had no real desire to meet guys or get married.
Hence why I came to the conclusion they really don’t want to get married anymore than the secular ones do.
So the Stanton’s of the world acknowledge the hook-up culture, but claim that M’ladies are the gate-keepers of sex? Why then are they “calling out” men? The vast majority of men won’t force themselves on women…white men, that is.
@archerwfisher
In the 20-something cohort as far as I can tell there are men and women who meet in various campus groups, then marry either in college or after graduation. That’s not quite the same as “dating in church”, though. “Dating in church” seems to be more successful when a man from one church and a woman from another church in the same denomination or “close enough” happen to meet and spark. Their immediate social circles may have some overlap, but it isn’t the same as seeing each other every Sunday. IMO there are a lot of forces, especially including the Cult of Courtly Love but also the cult of twu wuv and the cult of The One, that make it especially difficult for a 20-something man and woman to “court” in the typical US church. The pressure for instant success, just for example. Whereas Jane at 1st Baptist and John at 3rd Baptist can get to know each other without a mob of older married people constantly looking over their shoulders asking “How’s it going? When are you two getting married?”.
All the examples I have come from churches of 200 people or fewer, perhaps in the megas of 500+ people the social environment is different.
Does Stanton make it clear that his views are just an OPINION and following his teaching involves risk that your outcome may be different? In other words, regardless of how appropriate he may claim his views are, the application of his views is not a guarantee of future results. Professionals such as financial advisers and doctors inform their clients / patients of the risks involved with a course of action. Stanton should be held to the same standard.
Amazing what women will do to get/keep an Alpha.
And if you don’t fornicate then something is very wrong with you. You’re suppose to have a high partner count to be husband or wife material. The whole “kiss a lot of frogs to find a prince” nonsense. And when there bogus marriages crater they shrug and move on, as if they had broken up with a casual girlfriend.
One thing that stuns me is the number of coworkers who have “blended families”,and I’m talking about educated professionals. It seems so normal to them to “raise” another man’s children (and to have another man raise their children)
Dal, as a general comment….wow. You have been knocking it out of the park for months now. Simply outstanding, comprehensive, and on point. You MUST commit some/most/all of this to a book. There would be a huge audience….
No, no book. If God leads him so, then so be it, but “there would be a huge audience.” What is that? That’s what churchians cream their pants for.
I went to a large Presbyterian church in the 90’s with a 24- 35 singles group that had 200- 300 people- that’s just the singles. Some dating, but now when I look back only a couple handsome guys got a wife out of it, and one normal guy with got a plain jane wife. That was it. Angst and confusion for everyone else.
It fits well with the churchian teaching of calling evil ‘good’ and calling good ‘wrong’.
I’m sure that high partner count prepares a couple well for their future divorce.
Archerwfisher asks who had good luck trying to date in church
There might (?) have been two opportunities when I was 19 to 21. And also one fat woman was strongly hinting, but while I can be friends with an obese person, I never found them physically attractive/acceptable for marriage.
A fourth woman clearly told me I would never be good enough for her, and then a couple years later seemed to be flirting/open to me, but I incorrectly accorded to her the respect that I would a man. As such, I decided that she was no doubt reasonably mature, and therefore she would only have communicated that I would never be good enough, if she was sure her answer would not change. Thus I did not pursue her.
Other than the above, I never met with success nor was aware of even any possibilities. But I was strong spiritually, memorizing Scripture, and not a jock. In my experience, the effect on a woman, of me displaying significant wealth or significant skill, is rather amazing. Whether you find a woman in church seems to have little effect on her gold-digger-ness. BTW, has anyone else found the gold-digger rejection videos hilarious? Not the best example, but here is one… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFpTrkXQM5c
Three references to ‘mother country’ in one short excerpt. Gotta admit, this punk knows his gyno-groveling. He knows whose nation it is, and exactly who he must supplicate and stroke. Mommy bought all his clothes until wifey became mommy! and baby does it show.
God hates cowards. He doesn’t expect us to save the world but He does expect us to comport ourselves with the masculinity he instilled in us. To do otherwise is to shame Father. Jeshua does not look upon that kindly. Sin is one thing. Mocking our Creator is something else.
Stanton needs to be slapped a few times. Made to chew his prissy bow-tie. Not that it’d help him. It’d help me, though.
archerfisher,
In all seriousness, has anyone here had or had friends/family who had good luck trying to date in church? Especially in the 20-30 age group? I’ve gotten plenty of tinder dates
You have just answered your own question. Sunday Morning Nightclub is a superb place for quick pump-and-dump hookups. That is its only purpose. It is a terrible place to find a wife. Let all the cuckservatives in church pick up the tab for these women; their sole purpose is to fornicate with transient PUAs that go to Sunday Morning Nightclub *without* wasting time meeting any other people in the church (certainly not the older women or ‘men’).
If you cannot find a wife at a Saturday Night Nightclub, why would you find one at a Sunday Morning Nightclub?
I saw this youtube link on reddit. Its relevant because it seems she’s seems to be a good christian girl. She rambles on and on so you could be excused to not wanting to watch it. Anyhow claims never to have never been kissed until 22. Strongly implies she’s a virgin. Yet never had a real boyfriend. It seems because she only wants a man who’s VERY TALL. This is paramount. And we can assume he must also have an attractive build and face.
And he should also be a God loving man, but that’s not as important. She ventured onto Online Dating, and actually found some men who met her physical requirements, but gave up on it when she realized they all wanted sex almost straight away. Now she’s restricting herself to real life dating, but don’t worry she’s not going to settle. She deserves it of course because she’s a hot girl.
@Frank
”It seems so normal to them to “raise” another man’s children”
Polyandry?
“” she and another girl got into a loud fight over a boy, police say. The other student, a 17-year-old girl, allegedly used a kitchen-style steak knife to stab Gibson twice in the chest.”
Guess the race.
Q: “How many of those women do you suppose are taking some antidepressant drugs, and how many would admit it?”
A: Almost all of them, and none.
Hence why I came to the conclusion [churchian women] really don’t want to get married any more than the secular ones do.
Of course they don’t. They’re utterly indistinguishable from secular women in every other aspect of their lives, so why would they differ in their attitudes toward marriage?
A little past the 1″ mark, that Christian Karla — AND her friend Rebecca — both say they want a guy who’s “six one and above.” Indeed, it’s the only requirement they give. Being at least 6’1″ is what gets you in the door to be considered.
Close to the 2.20″ mark, they waffle about whether it’s necessary for their man to be a church-going Christian. It would be nice. They don’t want to settle. But they seem iffy on this point.
Karla also emphasizes that she’s not judgemental, she respects all beliefs, etc. (A must, so as not to be flagged for “hate speech” by YouTube.)
Red Pill Latecomer says:
September 15, 2018 at 10:18 pm
A better documentary artifact of what constitutes a churchian girl (as opposed to a Christ-following one) would be difficult to find.
Two more women who are going to end up alone and on headmeds in cat-filled apartment after either never getting anywhere with attainable men, or after marrying the WRONG men and winding up as divorce statistics.
How old is Karla? Maybe 24-25. Yet its obvious she feels almost no pressure to marry. If we give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she’s chaste, she’s still what others here describe as a “carousel watcher”. 6’1″ is her minimum, and she probably thinks she’s being modest with that requirement – even though that’s only about 10% of the population.
Meanwhile her ideal is actually 6’3″+. If you go to about 6.00 in the video I linked she described how she met her ideal man on Tinder I think. He was 6’3″, and “outdoorsy” (i.e. fit, muscular) and we can assume handsome or she wouldn’t have swiped right on him. She on the other hand describes herself as “nice” and “funny” and a “sexy hot latina”, so they were perfectly matched in what they brought to the table, right?
Is such entitlement common among young unmarried church women?
She’s not a ‘sexy hot’ latina but I’ll grant her the ‘latina’..
She has frizzy hair, a big nose, bad skin, a lazy eye and looks to be on the heavier side; and that’s just looking at the picture used as a thumbnail.. her expectations further erode any chance she has at finding a half way decent man closer to her level..
A Christian women on Tinder… that should be all the red flag necessary to disqualify her as wife material. She’s a pump ‘n dump.
Minesweeper says:
September 15, 2018 at 11:47 am
At some point the craziness that has taken men to pieces for a generation will start to affect women. Seeing them lament a life with no kids, financial support, husband, love, family – you’d think they would stop their full frontal attack on the patriarchy\family\civilisation but no, they bought the lies and I doubt they can ever change their minds.They are too old now to change opinion. But not too old to complain and they havnt even had their government collapse yet due to the lack of men’s tax’s.
That will come.
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/10/15/how-the-destruction-of-marriage-is-strangling-the-feminist-welfare-state/
A Christian women on Tinder… that should be all the red flag necessary to disqualify her as wife material. She’s a pump ‘n dump.
There are no Christian women on Tinder. Everyone knows what Tinder is all about, and no Christ-following woman would have anything whatsoever to do with.
Like I said upthread, she’s a stereotypical churchian whore who is outing herself as such with her attention-whoring videos. Pretty soon she’ll drop the faux veneer of Christianity altogether.
Is such entitlement common among young unmarried church women?
Of course it is. Once again, they are completely and utterly indistinguishable from secular, non-believing women in every other aspect of life, so why would they be any different when it comes to sex and marriage? In fact, many of them are much WORSE due to the false sense of salvation and the arrogance therefrom that comes from all the false teaching they’ve been fed, as well as the pedestals that churchian mangina men (including their own fathers and pastors) have put them on.
She has frizzy hair, a big nose, bad skin, a lazy eye and looks to be on the heavier side; and that’s just looking at the picture used as a thumbnail.. her expectations further erode any chance she has at finding a half way decent man closer to her level..
Like all the other deluded she-lemmings out there, she’ll come to that realization too late, only after she goes over the cliff at age 30, still single and without any prospects, and slams hard into The Wall below.
Karla also describes the church she visited as AMAZING.
There’s that word again. For these modern young women, everything is (or must be) amazing or awesome. They demand that a man fill every moment of their lives with amazing awesomeness.
God would never let an unhappy moment touch the lives of these Daughters of the King.
This is probably just me being a bit pedantic, but my interpretation of the quote:
“Ask any young woman how she vets all the nice young men who approach to decide who will advance to the bonus round of an actual date. She will ask if you rewind your VHS tapes before returning them to Blockbuster, or just pay the fee.”
…is that this is specifically meant to be anachronistic on the part of Stanton; that is, the anachronism is the point.
Does anybody rent VHS tapes from Blockbuster anymore? No, nobody does, so whether you rewind your imaginary rental tapes or just pay the imaginary fee doesn’t really matter.
In the same vein, if modern young women – unlike young women from prior generations – are no longer being approached by young men (as was the topic of his article), then if you were to ask these women how they go about “vetting” all of the imaginary young men who do still approach them then you’d find that one method is kind of equal to any other in terms of its real-world value: Zero.
It sounds sort of like a negative version of “Is the Pope catholic?” to me; it’s meant to be a rhetorical question given in response to Stanton/the reader by frustrated young women:
“Hey, person who’s wearing sports gear, do you like exercising?” – “I dunno, is the Pope catholic?”
“Hey, modern young woman, what approach do you take in evaluating all of the nice young men who approach you?” – “I dunno, do you rewind all of your Blockbuster tapes or do you just pay the fee instead?”
(i.e. ‘I dunno, what’s your preferred process for doing something that no one does anymore? *sigh*’)
Yep, I think you’re right. If this is the case, then women need to ask themselves what happened that men are no longer asking them out. Be honest with themselves.
The incentives offered to men changed and the risk of failure grew more, hence fewer men will step up to the chopping block. Incentives matter. I’m fully out of sympathy though. Women can either ask the men they like out or they can enjoy their cats.
A good suggestion for ladies would be for them to evaluate the men in their lives, find one they like and work their way into his world as a companion and not a competitor. They do not have to wait for men they like to all come and ask them out, they can set the ball in motion themselves. I love that they will never listen to such advice and will continue to be lonely and complain to Ms Stanton.
Just like you now no longer have to rewind old VHS tapes nor even go to the rental store, you can now download or watch movies on a streaming service, women don’t have to wait for men to ask them out, they can go and do it themselves. Evaluate the men you like and work, work, work, to gain his trust. Women will have to put up or shut up.
None of them do until 29.999999999999. They don’t want to waist one minute of their beauty and youth on their husband.
With their laundry list of requirements that’s another sign they have no pressure. And I think height is just another example of how they avoid marriage…because if you cut it to 10% of the population your chances of marriage go way down. Add on to it how much money he makes and whatever else that makes the percentage go down and you see the entitlement is main reason why they avoid marriage.
Besides I’m 6’4″ and muscular…has that improved my marital chances? No.
“A little past the 1″ mark, that Christian Karla — AND her friend Rebecca — both say they want a guy who’s ‘six one and above.’”
Can they possibly be any more vague and shallow?
Yeah, they’re going to be single for a while.
And yet no marriage happened…I wonder why that is.
Height and near impossible superficial requirements is nothing more than a 20s woman saying ‘I’m young, wild, and free…marriage isn’t for me (until 29.999999)
“A little past the 1″ mark, that Christian Karla — AND her friend Rebecca — both say they want a guy who’s ‘six one and above.’”
Only 1 in 10 men are 6-1 or taller. So they have just knocked out 90% of men.
Once they work in the other numbers (college educated, good job, etc…) they have probably narrowed their possible husbands down to less than 1% of the population.
I want a woman who has supermodel looks, big boobs, a 4 star chef, and is submissive to me all the time. I deserve it because I’m awesome and the son of the King.
That’s pretty much the male version of their delusion.
(i.e. ‘I dunno, what’s your preferred process for doing something that no one does anymore? *sigh*’)
Yep, I think you’re right. If this is the case, then women need to ask themselves what happened that men are no longer asking them out. Be honest with themselves.
First of all, I think you guys are giving women far too much credit for being able to come up with a rejoinder with that level of sophistication. Second, the proposed first-step solution (i.e., women being introspective and honest with themselves) is about as likely to happen as a dog meowing and climbing trees; women just are not wired to do any such thing (among other things, the ability to do so requires recognition of cause and effect, and we all know how women do at that).
@ingracious
Correct. Many commenters misunderstood that even after Dalrock pointed it out in the OP with,
The commenters can be forgiven for misinterpreting Stanton’s failed attempt at irony because nothing Stanton claims to have observed actually happened. His observations are actually his fantasies. Not only that: He is so absorbed in those fantasies that he regales the world with facts of his own history because he is unaware those facts war against his fantasies.
Long story short: Stanton is a self-deluded liar so it’s no wonder that a reader of his words would misunderstand his meanings.
“I want a woman who has supermodel looks, big boobs, a 4 star chef, and is submissive to me all the time. I deserve it because I’m awesome and the son of the King.
That’s pretty much the male version of their delusion.”
Ha ha. Great. It’s so true also. I’m never married and my divorced buds and I have a recurring joke about just going to the extreme max of saying what we want in a future wife; “I just want a women with long, dark hair, DD’s with skinny arms and a perfect butt. Doe eyes, full lips. Tall. She has to be a minimalist and quiet with a really balanced temperament. She’s happy to stay in and read with me and likes to spend weekends hiking and camping. She has to be a committed weightlifter, especially squats and she has to be content with clothing from goodwill. On our wedding day, she’ll be happy to get a turquoise ring to go with mine and we’ll say our vows outside in someone’s field followed by a dance with a decent caterer. Honeymoon on the coast of Oregon in an RV. If I find one like that then, yeah, I’ll consider marriage.”
For us it’s a very funny joke to actually verbalize what we want and to know how hilariously unrealistic and impossible that is. Yet women do this all the time and it’s no joke at all.
It’s worth noting that outside of the physical beauty aspect of that above description, I personally can achieve all of those other demands with absolute ease. Yet no women ever would.
Westray
Hence why marriage and other long term commitments are dead.
We can do it ourselves with less effort and more satisfaction.
Oh and the one urge we need women for……?
After 35ish the drive goes waaaaay down from hourly to once a week. Another reason delaying looking for marriage is not good for women, the thirst drives the average man less.
(Average!! Thirsty chumps are always thirsty!)
Oh here he goes again with the fantasy of being a bad boy skater/surfer who ‘didn’t spend much time in school’ (but got into college). So the untamed maverick of Northern Florida had never chosen an article of clothing until 28?
Hmm….so his mother chose his bad boy skate/thrasher wear for him?
“Glenny!! Here’s a new Billabong shirt for you!! Now come give mommy a nuzzle.”
[D: Hilarious!]
He was an untamed rebel until his wive ‘saved’ him.
Give me a break.
mgtowhorseman,
Yeah, the drive goes way down especially as a wife’s age/weight goes up. Bring in a Slavic nanny in daisy dukes and see how things go.
Marriage is so dead. The only remaining incentive is the avoidance of cultural shaming which isn’t a true incentive. Cultural shaming is the main catalyst to action in communist countries…Hmmmm….Coincidence?
Whenever I even hear of a guy in his 20’s getting married, I just groan.
It fails for the same reason I found it absolutely hilarious. What girl ever says something so ludicrous? Even back in the heyday of VHS tapes, only a social spaz would really care if you rewind a stupid tape or pay a fine. It’s just a WTF moment into realising how Ms Stanton’s mind works. The guy is a social moron.
To this day, regular access to his wife’s sexy triple chin keeps Glenny tamed and happy to take the yoke. Because 50-something shrews who don’t work out and have had 5 kids will just keep a man in a euphoric state of sexual enslavement.
In his brief bio at Boundless Stanton says that he never picked out and bought an item of clothing for himself until he was 28.
Yet a retard like this has followers?
Better yet, who is making sure that this the the previous article are seen by Stanton himself? Without that, the loop is not complete. Boxer used to be good about that, but he is not around.
A little past the 1″ mark, that Christian Karla — AND her friend Rebecca — both say they want a guy who’s “six one and above.” Indeed, it’s the only requirement they give. Being at least 6’1″ is what gets you in the door to be considered.
So this very average-looking woman wants a man who by all accounts is in the top 10%.
This is consistent with the level of female delusion that we see elsewhere, with women on dating sites rating 80% of men as below average (not ‘unattractive’, but ‘below average’), which means women don’t know what ‘average’ means, even if the concept is taught in the 4th grade.
feeriker said,
First of all, I think you guys are giving women far too much credit for being able to come up with a rejoinder with that level of sophistication.
Of course. Women have no understanding of how women think, so are no more capable of that sort of self-assessment than a 9 year old child is.
Earl,
woman saying ‘I’m young, wild, and free…marriage isn’t for me (until 29.999999)
I would caution you from thinking that they get serious at age 30. This is not 2005 anymore.
Nowadays, they only get serious at 35, and still manage to land a cuckservative at age 38. Yes, even 38 y/os manage to land (albeit to someone they are utterly repulsed by).
Why the hell isn’t Stanton’s wife converting him into alimony?
Community: another share!!!
At 28, I had been slightly ahead of my friends and family by marrying. But many of those friends had not only caught up to me, they had surpassed me, buying houses and announcing pregnancies—two things I had wanted for myself. Instead, as someone else’s marriage was starting right in front of me, I was facing income instability, losing health insurance, paying down lingering debts, dividing assets and property, paying for divorce attorneys and mediators, and paying two rents instead of one, which quickly dashed any hope of near-term financial health and freedom.
https://www.harpersbazaar.com/culture/features/a22841511/how-to-survive-divorce/
feeriker — “In fact, many of them are much WORSE due to the false sense of salvation and the arrogance therefrom that comes from all the false teaching they’ve been fed, as well as the pedestals that churchian mangina men (including their own fathers and pastors) have put them on.”
Damn. it’s almost as if she lived in a nation that has a goddess for a deity, instead of God. Who being Father has no real home in that land. Despite the zillion churches and pastors.
it’s a puzzler all right. Doesn’t really make sense does it? Mystery.
http://www.freakingnews.com/Statue-of-Liberty-in-a-Bikini-Pictures-98070.asp
Hey now hang on. I’m starting to get an inspiration, could it be that . . . . . nah.
The Harper’s Bazaar piece by Jackie Bryant was as if some really brilliant AI bot was able to distill the modern female into one article. ALL the clichés are there. Unreal. Very high-end parody, but not too over the top. Not hilarious parody, much more subtle. Her shoulders being wider than his in their wedding pic….pretty much a microcosmic image. Then she sanctifies her ‘journey’ with a tattoo. Ugh.
Westray —
You are v much on the right track but turquoise rings? She will be satisfied with the ring you fashion for her from aluminum foil. Tell her you used Reynolds Aluminum because she deserves the best.
Explain next that your emerald-set gold band is requisite because you are a Precious Son of the King (h/t earl).
If her dad or relatives object, take time with them to share your hatred for rebellion against God, and your fondness for over/under shotguns.
Some telling tidbits from Jackie’s divorce article:
With all of my dreams and future plans extinguished, my family and friends — and some psychotherapists .. began encouraging me to undergo a “second adolescence,” something that countless rom-coms and magazines glamorize in how to deal with a break-up.
“Go out! Get drunk! Have sex! Go on a trip!” everyone said. As a professional food and travel writer, some of that was already on the docket …
During the rest of the visit, I learned of more pregnancy announcements, toured old friends’ new homes and felt bad that all I had to show for the last several months was a new tattoo and a lot of good stories. [i.e., random sex with hot foreign men]
I felt more acutely than ever that I was on a different path than most people close to me …
That last line is also telling. She worries that she is no longer part of the herd.
Pingback: It turns out they *both* want a tall man. | Dalrock
Joe says:
September 14, 2018 at 2:31 pm
What a beta.
No, VHS!
@westray
“Yeah, the drive goes way down especially as a wife’s age/weight goes up.”
Im 37 and my drive didnt decrease at all until after my wife had our 5th kid and didnt try to get the baby weight off. my sex drive dried up and I finally told her that she needed to start working out and eating better because her being lazy about losing the baby weight was not acceptable. After that little “pep talk”, she got serious about losing the weight and now she is back down to her pre-baby weight and still dropping. As she got skinnier, my sex drive ramped back up to as strong as ever.
So while age certainly affects male sex drive, my experience is that the attractiveness of the woman you are having sex with is just as big a driver as age. Having experienced a period of time with a chubby wife (albiet, chubby from having a child recently), I truly dont know how anyone has sex with a chubby or fat girl. and yet looking around, i swear that 75% of women here where I live are fat or obese. Its awful.
A woman who is willingly being fat is pretty much in rebellion from men & marriage.
I have often heard the phrase “death by chocolate”. I’m not sure how many people directly die from it, however I believe many people are maimed or at least disfigured by it. Some folks in the church should be fasting and praying about the current obesity epidemic. I nominate the fattest folks.
Some folks in the church should be fasting and praying about the current obesity epidemic. I nominate the fattest folks.
Has anyone here ever attended a church where the Sunday morning (or weekday evening “Bible” study) food offering has consisted of anything other than sugar and carbs? The next one I visit that serves/shares healthy food will be the first.