“The one” vs “my one and only”

One of the more toxic ideas in our culture is the idea of “the one”.  This concept is the foundation for women’s sacred path to marriage;  once a woman finds “the one”, everything will be right and honoring her marriage vows will be easy.  This is closely linked with the nonsense idea that sex is moral so long as there is (non committed) commitment, and/or love.  If her promiscuity involves love or (non committed) commitment, then she isn’t being a common tramp, she is searching for “the one”.

We know given the explosion in single mothers that this idea is toxic to children and fathers.  What isn’t often discussed is how toxic this idea is to the woman herself.  Part of the problem when we evaluate the concept of the one is it sounds like something different, not unlike “no sex before monogamy” or “no sex before commitment”.  If you weren’t paying close attention, you could easily mistake these for a belief in marriage.  In fact, I would wager that nearly everyone makes this mistake.

It isn’t just others whom women are fooling when they think this way;  they are also fooling themselves.  Looking for the one to marry and remain faithful to is actually feral female behavior dressed up as self discipline and morality.  They have perverted the lifetime marriage concept of “my one and only” by substituting in the Lifetime idea of the perfect man.  Due to their solipsism what they can’t see is this perfect man is essentially the same perfect man all of the other women seeking “the one” are looking for.  In fact, the fact that other women are also looking for him is one of their requirements.  If they understood this the folly of their never ending search would become immediately evident.

Core to this foolishness is the assumption that attraction is unique for every man and woman.  While the woman is lying to herself about her own nearly universal set of preferences in the perfect man, she is also lying to herself about those of men.  While she wants a man with a specific combination of social dominance, worldly success and prowess, intelligence, physical strength, attractiveness, loyalty, and kindness, so does every other woman out there.  While the more minor details as to the perfect mix might vary slightly from woman to woman, the basic set of ideal men is incredibly small.  This is true for men as well.  The basic attraction factors of youth, beauty, femininity, and loyalty/chastity are the same for all men, and only a small percentage of women fit in the “most attractive” category.  Thus, it isn’t the case that there are two people out there who would be most attracted to only each other, while others might not find them very attractive.

Making this worse for women is the more they hop from man to man (even if they avoid sex), the less attractive they tend to become while their threshold for feeling attracted to a man goes up.  They end up with more and more expensive tastes and less to bargain with.  This is especially true for sluts, as well as for women who have children (initially in or out of wedlock).

Looking for the one is a prescription for misery.  No matter how many Lifetime movies she watches, the never married/divorced single mother isn’t going to attract a better class of man now that she is older, has the baggage of another man’s children, and has a proven track record of not being able to pick a man she could stay with.  The concept of the divorcée or never married single mother trading up to a better man is as laughable as the expectation of turning in your 10 year old Buick for a brand new top of the line Cadillac.

This is why the “true life” divorce fantasies sold to women all end up being so absurd when you examine them just a little bit closer.  Match.com’s claimed “true life” story of the middle-age-with-kids divorcée receiving a sudden declaration of lifetime commitment from Ethan the secret multimillionaire hunky handyman might be proof that this kind of story really does happen.  But when you look just a bit closer you find out it was written by a woman who specializes in writing just this kind of tale as fiction.  Likewise Elizabeth Gilbert’s Eat Pray Love memoir of how she divorced her way to a better man is breathtaking to feral women across the globe.  However, when you look a bit closer it turns out that her new man is nearly 20 years older than her, mostly bald, and appears to be shorter than her as well.  Even with this step down she explains in the follow on book that he married her to get a visa and come live in her house in the US.  Yet another celebrated tale of divorcing up is How Stella Got Her Groove Back.  In the movie Stella’s new man was handsome and manly.  In real life, he was visibly gay, and (what are the odds?) married her for a US visa.

Contrast this with a prescription for a woman to find happiness.  She looks for the best man she can marry while she is young and hasn’t lessened her ability to bond and fall head over heels in love, and decides that he is her one and only, for better or for worse, in sickness and in health, for life.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Choice Addiction, Feminine Imperative, Finding a Spouse, Marriage, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

140 Responses to “The one” vs “my one and only”

  1. okrahead says:

    The One is God… Making a human on Earth “the one” is idolatry. What womyn fail to accept is that the marriage vow is not simply a promise to a man, it is a promise to God and a covenant sealed by God.
    An older, wise preacher friend of mine (now passed on) used to comment that for him to maintain a successful marriage he and his wife had to be fully committed to pleasing God… because they could never fully please each other. He explained that he did not expect any woman to be able to commit to him for a lifetime for who he was; rather he expected his wife to commit to him because of her commitment to God.
    This used to be common teaching in most churches, yet as churchianity has replaced the Gospel with feminism we find more and more of the pagan notions infiltrating the church, including the pagan notion of the “soul mate”. Womyn, ever looking for the perfect romance, embrace this notion, since it teaches them that once they find their soul mate their gina will forever tingle and they will never have to actually work or sacrifice to keep their marriages intact, and that if they are for any reason unhaaaaaaapy this is proof they are not with the “soul mate” God intended, so it is okay to divorce the unlucky fellow, grab the cash and prizes, and move on to (allegedly) greener pastures.
    Only when churches return to teaching that the first and foremost commitment in the marital relationship is to God will this nonsense cease. Unfortunately too many pastors and evangelists are profiting from the current condition for this to happen before a large-scale societal crisis. No doubt God will call these hirelings to answer for neglecting their flocks, but meantime those of us who are able must do what we can to withstand this false teaching.

  2. Jack says:

    “Making this worse for women is the more they hop from man to man (even if they avoid sex), the less attractive they tend to become while their threshold for feeling attracted to a man goes up. They end up with more and more expensive tastes and less to bargain with. This is especially true for sluts, as well as for women who have children (initially in or out of wedlock).”

    I think Roissy has a maxim on this exact ugly truth. He says…”The more success you have with women, the more disillusioned you will become.”

    Women are so off the charts from reality is utterly shocking. I’m a 35 year old single man bring in about 155k a year. And the way the mid 30′s women act is down right scary. The shot clock is ticking and they are searching high and low for mr. money bags. It’s awful.

  3. Ezra says:

    Okrahead, this is so true. So many of my female “friends” in the past have frivorced their good husbands because of this “soul mate” garbage. They were all pagans, although some believed themselves to be “Christians.”

    These women will go through man after man, husband after husband until they realize that the goal is not to “get the perfect man” but to become a woman worthy of a good man, and in doing so, honor God and their marriage vows.

  4. GKChesterton says:

    I like what you are trying to do here but I think you are attacking the wrong thing. There is a reason we have adopted the idea of “the one” and I think the cultural trend behind it is largely good. It is an extension (as you point out with your “only) of the concept of the helper found in Genesis. A woman should bond with one man.

    A search for this is acceptable, but there is a very narrow range of acceptable methods for searching. She _should_ be a bit choosey. Just as he _should_ be choosey and tightly rational. The problem is _how_ that choosiness is happening. In fact, it isn’t very choosey at all.

    Chesterton once quipped: ” The object of opening the mind, as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.”

    Something along the same lines can be said about choosing a marriage mate. You are choosing, not living out a whore’s dark fantasy.

  5. David Myers says:

    When I taught an adult Sunday School class, one of the couples in the class got a divorce because they both had decided that they had married the wrong person and that someone else was their respective “soulmate.” I met with the husband, but was unable to dissuade him. Later, I taught a lesson against this idea of “the one” or “the soulmate.” At the time, my wife was on the fence — she disapproved of the other couple’s divorce, but she was inclined to believe a more spiritual version of “the one.” That more spiritual conception was the idea that God has a specific will for every decision in each of our lives, including (especially) the choice of a mate. So my understanding (and the Bible’s teaching) — that, while God clearly has a sovereign will for our lives that will be for our good and His glory, we don’t usually know the specifics of that will and don’t need to knock ourselves out trying to figure it out in advance, but are responsible to act within His revealed moral will and to make decisions with wisdom — was unromantic and was an insult to her, because theoretically I could have married any of a number of women and still been within God’s will. (Nevermind that, in the real world, I had affirmatively chosen her and was committed to keeping my vows to love her until death.)

    Fast forward about 15 years. My now ex-wife, 13 months out from the divorce that she initiated because she was unhaaaappy, is 3 weeks away from remarrying. Her fiance is twice-divorced, older, short, has a hard time writing a coherent sentence, has theology that she (rightly) considered flaky up until 12 months ago, lives 400 miles away in a very rural area 50 miles from anything, inspires no affection whatsoever from our 3 boys and active dislike from our daughter (who will, unfortunately, have to relocate to live with them, at least to start). She met him online and has only spent alternate weekends with him (no sex — that would be a sin). But she is haaappy, and he is the one, as evidenced by (a) the “divine appointment” of how they met online even though each was outside the geographical parameters of the other and (b) the fact that he prays with her and “his prayers are answered.”

    I give them anywhere from 6 months to 2 years. I pray that my children are not infected with her abysmal theology and praxis. I also pray that God comforts them and matures them despite her putting her pursuit of her own happiness above her (first) marriage vows and her children’s best interests, even though she couches it all in religiosity and professions of love for God and for them.

  6. Dale says:

    Even when they find someone better, what drove the previous marriage apart may prevent any new relationship being successful. L., a former girlfriend had divorced an unemployed, alcoholic husband, fortunately we broke up before I was unemployed (and could quit drinking immediately). A. would have found me (engineer) better than the truck driver husband, but her own demons kept us apart.

  7. So true. Where do women come up with this nonsense? The US media and entertainment industries have a lot to answer for. But the universities and churches also peddle this rubbish.

    “Making this worse for women is the more they hop from man to man (even if they avoid sex), the less attractive they tend to become while their threshold for feeling attracted to a man goes up. They end up with more and more expensive tastes and less to bargain with.”

    Well said. Also true. I’ve encountered it first-hand during my forays in the Southern California dating scene over the last decade. The number of single, childless attractive women in their 30s and 40s around here is mind-boggling. I’ve been out with quite a few of them. What strikes me is their self-deception, barely-camouflaged anti-male hostility, and incredible arrogance. It’s the arrogance that really gets me. Who the f*ck do these ageing bitches think they are?, I find myself thinking. They’re punching way above their weight. American females simply don’t live in the real world. Men are merely bit-players, or supporting cast members in the American female’s fantasy world. I don’t know what will happen to them as they grow older, alone. I see lots of anti-depressant medication and cats in their future. I believe women don’t commit suicide as often as men do, so I’m afraid these women will be with us for some time.

    On a related note, I occasionally see an older, well-known male pornstar heading into the gym or grocery store in my neighbourhood. He’s always smiling–and always alone. Perhaps he prefers it that way. A friend of a friend actually knows the chap and reports that he’s not a particularly happy man. Surprise, surprise.

    This afternoon I stopped by the grocery store for a bottle of Bombay Sapphire gin. As I was queuing up to pay, a group of cute twentysomething girls behind me were discussing the front cover of a supermarket tabloid magazine. The main story featured some actress or other who has decided to have a child by herself. The girls enthusiastically agreed with her decision. A couple of them stated they intended to do the same.

    I wonder how long the scenario can last.

  8. Drew says:

    Good topic and thoughts, but needs more development.

    For example, the entire article is about “the one”, yet doesn’t mention Romanticism, the opposing reaction to enlightenment (reason), facts, and science which spawned the childish concept.

    There are additional logical mathematical arguments to make, which shows how foolish “the one” concept is. See XKCD’s discussion of soul mate…
    http://what-if.xkcd.com/9/

    But logical arguments are not as effective against people caught up in an emotional ideal. I am not the best with emotional arguments, it is an area in which I need to grow… Possibly one could be constructed based on the confusing and lying nature of emotions. “Today I love the mate, tomorrow it is hate.” It is clear to me what morals do is put limits on irrevocable actions despite the emotional energy of a relationship.

  9. Lex Lutheran says:

    If a person used the same method in their career search as the average hypergamiscuous ameriskank, they would be holding out for CEO pay with barista responsibilities. And ten weeks’ vacation per year.

    News flash: The reason something gives you butterflies in the tummy is because it is out of your price range, but you somehow have convinced yourself that you could actually get it.

  10. Dalrock says:

    @GKC

    I like what you are trying to do here but I think you are attacking the wrong thing. There is a reason we have adopted the idea of “the one” and I think the cultural trend behind it is largely good. It is an extension (as you point out with your “only) of the concept of the helper found in Genesis. A woman should bond with one man.

    A search for this is acceptable, but there is a very narrow range of acceptable methods for searching. She _should_ be a bit choosey. Just as he _should_ be choosey and tightly rational. The problem is _how_ that choosiness is happening. In fact, it isn’t very choosey at all.

    I’m not attacking choosiness at all, and I’d challenge you to point out where I have ever done so (in this post or any previous one). I am attacking the process (actual and thought) of swinging from man to man in a quest for “the one”. Women who take their marriage hunt seriously from the beginning are in the best position to find the best man they can get. My advice to women as I’ve repeated in so many posts has been to not settle, find the best man they can get. But once they do so they should stop searching, and commit to him as “their one and only”.

  11. UAI says:

    …A typical DataKind two-day “hackathon” last month in London attracted 50 people who worked in three teams. One pored over the records of Place2Be, which offers counselling to troubled schoolchildren. Crunching the data showed that boys tend to respond better than girls, though girls who lived with only their fathers showed the biggest improvements of all. The charity did not know that…

    http://www.economist.com/news/international/21564831-innovative-charity-rallies-geeks-good-cause/print

  12. sunshinemary says:

    If she’s going to search for “the one” before having children, it’s not such a very big deal I suppose. She’ll likely end up a spinster, or a post-divorce spinster maybe.

    The problem is when the search for “the one” is dragging children along behind it. Divorcing your children’s father due to unhappiness is basically saying, “Children, I don’t really love you. I will always put my wants before your needs. I am willing to cause you severe pain and inflict damage on you in order to follow my own desires.”

    I have been quiet and polite when women have told me about their frivorces in the past. I will not be doing that anymore. I have promised myself that I will say aloud what I wrote above the next time someone tells me about her frivorce. I hope I will have the nerve to say, “You don’t really love your children.” I hope more and more people will be willing to say that.

  13. Dalrock says:

    @SSM

    I have been quiet and polite when women have told me about their frivorces in the past. I will not be doing that anymore. I have promised myself that I will say aloud what I wrote above the next time someone tells me about her frivorce. I hope I will have the nerve to say, “You don’t really love your children.” I hope more and more people will be willing to say that.

    Good for you SSM. I think this absolutely needs to be done. One way to do this would be to express heartfelt concern for her children given what we know this does to them. It is unlikely she will outright argue with you at this point, even if she senses the (righteous) judgment. One would have to be a monster to argue with the wellbeing of children. Then you could follow on detailing how you recently explained to a young woman (perhaps your own daughter) that she had a sacred obligation to make sure she could stay married before getting married, and especially before she had children.

  14. Anonymous Reader says:

    Not quite on topic, but not quite off topic. Recall the article about servicemen’s suicides, and how they are not all about PTSD?

    http://www.businessinsider.com/marriage-is-probably-the-worst-thing-a-young-marine-can-do-2012-10

    These wives of Marines may or may not have found The One. But they sure have found Twenties, Fifties and possibly Hundreds…

  15. Bob Wallace says:

    I had a woman (a Filipina, actually) tell me recently that for the past several months, when she met a man, she told herself, find somethimg attractiive about him, see if I can find the best thing about him. She said that suddenly lots of men suddenly became attractive to her, She was shocked, and told ,me she realized there are lots of “the one” out there.

    [D: Good insight. I'm going to use that.]

  16. ybm says:

    Anonymous Reader says:
    October 28, 2012 at 7:21 pm

    If an invader ever showed up on these shores and a call came up to defend “our women and children” I think I’d become a collaborator.

  17. 22to28 says:

    I have these conversations a lot with women. A recent exchange:

    Her: I plan to buy a car with a big engine.
    Me: Why intentionally pollute? Don’t you care about future generations?
    Her: I don’t care about future generations.
    Me: I can respect that. Its not like you are planning on having kids or anything.
    Her: No, I’m planning to have kids.
    Me: With who?
    Her: I’m sure the right guy is out there for me.
    Me: I’m sure he is, but why don’t you think that you’ll be the right girl for him?
    Her: What do you mean?
    Me: I’m certain there are decent guys you could marry right now who would be excellent fathers and excellent providers. But you aren’t attracted to them. There are relatively few guys out there that you would be genuinely attracted to. And just about every women out there would be attracted to them to. So for every 10 guys that you could possibly consider the one, there are 100 women competing for him. How do you plan to compete with all those other women?
    Her: Well, I know I’m fat and stuff, but I’m a nice person.
    Me: But you aren’t satisfied with a guy who is simply a nice person.
    Her: It’s not very nice for you to say that.

    Dalrock makes a good point that I’ve been thinking about for a while. Women live this fantasy where everyone’s tastes are different and diverse. But people are not all the precious and different. Most people are about the same and all around pretty boring.

    I recently talked to an ex-girlfriend who insisted that she knew a small, but elite group of men who had knowingly married fat, unsexy women, because they fell in love with the beautiful woman inside and didn’t care that the outside of that women would never give them a boner.

    I though about what she was telling me and realized something. Sure, there are some men that will marry a women who is clearly not someone anyone would want to have sex with, but there are some women out there that will marry a man who has no interest or hope to ever earn an income. It does happen.

    The great lie is that men are can be attracted to a woman for reasons other than sexual desire and while that may be true, sexual desire is central to the specific interest in a particular woman. If that isn’t the central motivation, its because the man has given up hope of landing a high value woman.

    No. They are into you because you are hot and they aren’t with a hotter woman because they just don’t have a shot with a hotter woman. And if you aren’t hot, they are with you because they can’t get with a hotter women or you are funny or something.

  18. Sorry to hear about a totally crap situation when you clearly loved and wanted to make it work with your wife. Here’s to you remarrying a stunning woman significantly younger and more attractive than your wife!! ;)

  19. Lori Gottlieb is brutally honest in how long it can last, at least for individual women:

    Ask any soul-baring 40-year-old single heterosexual woman what she most longs for in life, and she probably won’t tell you it’s a better career or a smaller waistline or a bigger apartment. Most likely, she’ll say that what she really wants is a husband (and, by extension, a child). To the outside world, of course, we still call ourselves feminists and insist—vehemently, even—that we’re independent and self-sufficient and don’t believe in any of that damsel-in-distress stuff, but in reality…every woman I know—no matter how successful and ambitious, how financially and emotionally secure—feels panic, occasionally coupled with desperation, if she hits 30 and finds herself unmarried… And all I can say is, if you say you’re not worried, either you’re in denial or you’re lying…

    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/print/2008/03/marry-him/306651/

  20. imnobody says:

    @sunshinemary

    Good for you. Expect the hamster to go overdrive: “But my kids cannot be happy it I am not happy! A happy divorce is better for the kids that a bad marriage!” And so on and so forth.

    @22to28

    I recently talked to an ex-girlfriend who insisted that she knew a small, but elite group of men who had knowingly married fat, unsexy women, because they fell in love with the beautiful woman inside and didn’t care that the outside of that women would never give them a boner.

    John Lennon did a lot of harm.

  21. One of my better flukes, given I was young and ignorant, was taking a woman who doesn’t believe in soulmates and instead believes in working to keep the relationship solid. The concept of soulmates is a poisonous crutch — the idea that there is magic that makes love easy.

  22. 22to28 says:

    @3rd Millenium Men

    “Ask any soul-baring 40-year-old single heterosexual woman what she most longs for in life, and she probably won’t tell you it’s a better career or a smaller waistline or a bigger apartment. Most likely, she’ll say that what she really wants is a husband (and, by extension, a child).”

    I’d have to agree that this is what most women crave by age 40. Unfortunately, this is a little late for soul-baring self-awareness. The damage is done when between the 20-25 age range, they are convinced that they need the feminist merit badge in order to be happy and that hubby, house and kids will all fall into place “because God has a plan for me.”

    Never mind the children throughout the third world that starve to death daily. God has a plan for YOU as he watches them starve due to preventable lack of nutrition.

  23. Johnycomelately says:

    Good advice on a micro level but it doesn’t change the facts that at the macro level things are royally stuffed up.

    Here is a post by an attractive chaste devout Christian who admittedly had her first kiss after 30 years of age, teaches economics, is well versed in scripture and intelligent.

    The price of attention.

    http://delesmuses.blogspot.com.au/2011/09/when-price-is-too-high.html

  24. van Rooinek says:

    she knew a small, but elite group of men who had knowingly married fat, unsexy women, because they fell in love with the beautiful woman inside and didn’t care that the outside of that women would never give them a boner.

    …because THEY ARE GAY and they need beards. Either that, or the women are really, really rich and they are male golddiggers.

  25. David Myers says:

    @sunshinemary:

    “The problem is when the search for ‘the one’ is dragging children along behind it. Divorcing your children’s father due to unhappiness is basically saying, ‘Children, I don’t really love you. I will always put my wants before your needs. I am willing to cause you severe pain and inflict damage on you in order to follow my own desires.’”

    Let me know if you ever find a divorced woman who will agree with your description of their priorities. In my case (at least it seems to me), It gets worse. We have two teenagers still at home, the daughter with her and the son with me, and we live less than 1/2 mile from each other, allowing a lot of contact outside of regular custodial time. Her search for “the one” is resulting in her moving 400 miles away at Christmas time. I cannot understand how any loving mother, much less one who is so churchified, could separate her daughter from a loving, involved father to go live with a stranger; could separate her special needs daughter from everyone and everything she knows to go live in an isolated rural area where she’ll be attending a tiny high school with little or no special education services or transitional services; and, most stunningly to me, could leave her youngest child 400 miles away, so that he will see her only rarely and only for short periods of time (he is old enough that his summers will be full of baseball and work, which will prevent any long summertime visits, and she’s too far away for many (if any) weekend visits during the school year). I honestly do not believe I would make the same choice for even the most desirable woman in the world. I hope to God I would not, and I hope to God that if I thought about it my family and my guy friends would slap me silly. Instead, her friends (Christian and non-Christian alike) applaud her romantic adventure and assure her the kids will adapt. Most galling, the Christian counselor for our daughter (female, divorced and remarried) is at least as much an apologist for my ex-wife as she is an advocate for our daughter. (I knew I was in trouble when the counselor encouraged me to drop my objections to the relationship when it resulted in an engagement only 3 months after they had first met each other in person, telling me that I needed to “move on.” My attempt to explain that a Christian man who objects to his ex-wife’s stated intention to commit adultery, and who declines to date so long as his ex-wife remains unmarried to preserve the possibility of reconciliation, is not simply failing to “move on.” Met with a glassy stare.)

    @3rd Millennium Men:

    “Here’s to you remarrying a stunning woman significantly younger and more attractive than your wife!!”

    That’s my second choice in this situation — as long as the younger, more attractive second wife is also smarter, has more character, doesn’t regard sex as a (dirty) chore, has had at least one orgasm in her life and knows how to achieve another, and actually knows how and is willing to love and respect her husband. I really would like for my kids to see a genuinely good marriage before they make any irreparable mistakes of their own for lack of a good example.

  26. 22to28 says:

    @van Rooinek
    …because THEY ARE GAY and they need beards. Either that, or the women are really, really rich and they are male golddiggers.

    My ex-gf, who is absolutely fabulous company and probably the most fun woman I have ever met, believed that these men did what they did because they had achieved, as a lifestyle, some high Christian ideal. They’d moved past earthly things and had become better men.

    What is easier to believe? That these men, a minority less than 1% of the population, had something wrong with them, her story was missing some of the facts, or they were just lying to themselves? Or that they had somehow managed to move completely past all of their biologically determined, instinctive, historically life-giving instincts all so that they could land a fat woman and love every moment of it?

    I never met these men, to whom she referred, but I would really love to. I can’t know for sure, but upon meeting them, I think that it would be I that had a story to tell.

    This ex-girlfriend of mine was attractive enough for me to want to lay, as more fun to hang out with than anyone I’ve ever met and up to a point, I really thought that she was a keeper. But somehow, these sort of beliefs that she had, that amounted to “it makes sense to me for absolutely no reason, I just think that this is how the world works” scared me to the point where I broke up with her.

    She ate ice cream two or three times a week on impulse and I figured, once her body stopped letting her get away with such culinary choices, it was only a matter of time before she decided that I needed to be an elite man, someone who would appreciate her despite her fat ass.

    Rest in Peace, my boner.

  27. “This is true for men as well.”

    Well, it’s obvious that most men have a far wider spectrum of what they consider attractive than most women.

    “I had a woman tell me recently that for the past several months, when she met a man, she told herself, find somethimg attractiive about him”

    I think that’s great advice. That’s pretty much how most men view women, I’ve found. “Wow, look at her lips!” or “oh man, she has the prettiest hair!” etc. Didn’t someone do a blog post about this idea recently? I think I read about it here at Dalrock’s site, in fact.

  28. Shameful says:

    Can we really blame the media? These stories are about as realistic as a Bond movie. You dont see a generation of men pretending to be James Bond with his license to kill.

    Seems to me its more the media giving women the fantasy they want. With proper hamsterbation reality fades from view.

  29. “Divorcing your children’s father due to unhappiness is basically saying, ‘Children, I don’t really love you. I will always put my wants before your needs. I am willing to cause you severe pain and inflict damage on you in order to follow my own desires.’”

    Amen to that.

  30. Buck says:

    @
    “Ask any soul-baring 40-year-old single heterosexual woman what she most longs for in life, and she probably won’t tell you it’s a better career or a smaller waistline or a bigger apartment. Most likely, she’ll say that what she really wants is a husband (and, by extension, a child).”

    No matter what her level of social , employment or academic achievement, if she is without a man or a child, she and her friends will consider her life a failure.

  31. Random Angeleno says:

    I had a woman (a Filipina, actually) tell me recently that for the past several months, when she met a man, she told herself, find somethimg attractiive about him, see if I can find the best thing about him. She said that suddenly lots of men suddenly became attractive to her, She was shocked, and told ,me she realized there are lots of “the one” out there.

    [D: Good insight. I'm going to use that.]

    This isn’t original, the Private Man had a post about this awhile back; he called it an exercise for women.

  32. krakonos says:

    @van Rooinek, 22to28
    I have noticed similar phenomena with young men (marrying fat, unsexy women). But i find a different reason for it. Due to explositon of single mothers craving for bad boys and soft polygyny there simply noone better they could ever find.

  33. Opus says:

    I did not intend to comment on this thread – either I could not quite see the way in, or perhaps I had nothing to add; I was more amused by the Hamsters popping up (like meerkats) on older threads – but I feel compelled to suggest that SSM (supported by Dalrock) may be ill-advised to do what SSM proposes, namely call out women on their frivolous divorces. The trouble is you will look bitter and judgemental (in a matter which is not your immediate concern). You can’t change the past. They have to come to realisation – dare I say it – through grace, because I am sure that reason will not cut it. So, my proposal would be something like the following:

    Woman: Yeah, I divorced my third husband.
    Opus: I am sorry to hear that.
    Women: Don’t be, he deserved it.
    Opus: Doubtless.

    Then in the words of the song “Just walk away Renee”.

    I suspect that indifference will cut deeper.

  34. @22to28 “I’d have to agree that this is what most women crave by age 40. Unfortunately, this is a little late for soul-baring self-awareness. The damage is done when between the 20-25 age range, they are convinced that they need the feminist merit badge in order to be happy and that hubby, house and kids will all fall into place “because God has a plan for me.”

    Absolutely. That’s why I think men need to turn the dating game back in their favour. I’ve run things like Flake On Girls (FOG) Week: http://3rdmilleniummen.wordpress.com/2012/10/09/a-post-for-women-and-words-of-advice-on-the-dating-game-part-2/

    It somehow needs to be done on a larger level though. More women need to understand that their ridiculousness is not allowing themselves to properly love men, and consistently driving men away.

    Dalrock’s writing is doing EXACTLY that. How do we market it to a wider audience is the question.

    Brilliant post Dalrock.

  35. Miserman says:

    I see the difference between “the one” and “the one and only” in the church as indicators, at least somewhat, of how the faith itself is viewed. “The one” seems to grow from mystical and superstitious religion (feminine and emotion-driven Christianity) whereas “the one and only” comes from religion that is factual, rational, and practical, regardless of where the emotions of its adherence are swimming on any given Sunday (biblical Christianity).

  36. Miserman says:

    David Myers said,

    When I taught an adult Sunday School class, one of the couples in the class got a divorce because they both had decided that they had married the wrong person …

    This provokes the question: For the Christian, is there a “right” and “wrong” person to marry outside of the biblical admonition against unions with non-Christians? While a Christian man should be picky in choosing who he ultimately settles down with, when he finally does settle down, then the woman is neither the right or wrong person, but rather the person he chose to marry.

  37. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    This topic reminds me of the Rifleman’s Creed. “This is my rifle. There are many like it, but this one is mine.”

    This is my husband. There are many good men out there, but this one is mine.
    This is my wife. There are many good women out there, but this one is mine.

  38. Paul says:

    @johnnycomelately

    Quite the article, clearly demonstrates the relationship between the apex fallacy and ‘where have all the good men gone’?

    As someone who knows a thing or two professionally about economics, let me state unequivocally that I don’t want her teaching my kids economics. Yay for make-work feel-good jobs for da wimmenz.

  39. Durasim says:

    The problem is when the search for “the one” is dragging children along behind it. Divorcing your children’s father due to unhappiness is basically saying, “Children, I don’t really love you. I will always put my wants before your needs. I am willing to cause you severe pain and inflict damage on you in order to follow my own desires.”

    Thank you. South Park put their spin on this point some years ago.

    Stan’s mom: Stanley, you know you’re the most important thing to me, right?

    Stan: If that’s true, then get back together with Dad, for me!

    Stan’s mom: Stanley, you have to understand how divorce works. When I say you’re the most important thing to me, what I mean is you’re the most important thing after me and my happiness and my new romances.

    Stan: Oh.

  40. slwerner says:

    Only tangentially related tot eh topic at-hand, but another woman who has previously been discussed on this forum has also decided that her husband just wasn’t her “one and only”.

    In news that will shock non of Dalrock’s long-term readers, Occupy Movement run-away, child abandoning wife Stacey Hessler has divorced her husband – and won a cash prize for doing so:

    Mother-of-four who abandoned family to join Occupy camp in New York divorces banker husband… and pockets $85k while giving him custody of children

  41. van Rooinek says:

    @van Rooinek, 22to28
    I have noticed similar phenomena with young men (marrying fat, unsexy women). But i find a different reason for it. Due to explositon of single mothers craving for bad boys and soft polygyny there simply noone better they could ever find.

    I know all about desperation, having been a virgin til my wedding night (well into my 30s… ugh). And if the only choices are fatties, or dying a virgin, it’s better to die a virgin. Indeed, better to marry a repentant ex-slut with an n>400 — but who looks great — than a faithful fattie. (Back in my single days, I dated examples of each type, and let me tell you, I was a lot happier with the ex-slut.)

    Fortunately I eventually found someone that fit into neither category. But if I had to back in time, and choose between Miss 400 (n) versus Miss 180 (Lb)…. no contest, I’d take Miss 400.

  42. The Continental Op says:

    Mother-of-four who abandoned family to join Occupy camp in New York divorces banker husband… and pockets $85k while giving him custody of children

    85K is a bargain to get rid of that slag. Check out her pictures, she has her hair in dreadlocks. Total freakazoid wallowing in filth, screwing anything that moves. She probably thinks 85K is a massive take. Haven’t we had stories like that from commenters here?

  43. Pingback: The Soul Mate Myth «

  44. Martian Bachelor says:

    ” American females simply don’t live in the real world. Men are merely bit-players, or supporting cast members in the American female’s fantasy world.” (LagunaBeachFogey et al)

    Here’s one idea on how/where the fantasy originates:

    “A young woman girl person typically gets her puberty sex feelings a few years before anyone wants her having sex. So they say WAIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! with about ten times that many exclamations points.

    “So what is that person to do in the meanwhile? Yep, you guessed it. She percolates like a 50 liter samovar, her sexuality burbling and squirshing and dripping back down, which unsatisfied hormonal desire manifests as an emotional delusion. She enters into a fantasy land and sublimates all her normal lust into a handy romantic fantasy about waiting until that special moment with Mr. He’s The One.

    “Then when it does finally happen her emotional universe snaps like a spring loaded trap, catching the guy by the leg. He has to chew his leg off to get away.”

    – mr internet

  45. 22to28 says:

    @van Rooinek

    “And if the only choices are fatties, or dying a virgin, it’s better to die a virgin. Indeed, better to marry a repentant ex-slut with an n>400 — but who looks great — than a faithful fattie. (Back in my single days, I dated examples of each type, and let me tell you, I was a lot happier with the ex-slut.)”

    The truth is, there may be no such thing as a faithful fattie. There are certainly plenty of unmarried or recently married women who have every intention of being faithful and some longer married women that have succeeded in remaining faithful. However, from the onset, all women are hypergamous by nature. With divorce more acceptable than ever, fewer and fewer young women who were raised properly by both parents, a fatties odds of being faithful are hardly higher than that of a slut’s.

    Previous sexual behaviour is the only reliable indicator of future sexual behaviour, so a fattie has a reduced likelihood of cheating as she has a reduced likelihood of getting laid at all, but a fattie also has the disadvantage that her lack of sexual history may not be of her choice, so may therefore be more likely to latch onto opportunities to “find herself” later on.

    Fatty or hottie, any girl with previous sexual experience is a risky and poor choice. Once the can of worms has been opened….

    Anyway, we all know that ugly, fat women can be just as bitchy and self-deluded as hotties, if not more so.

    What’s to say that they are really the better risk? They’ve already been unable to control their eating. How can they possibly control their other base desires? At least a hottie has enough self-control to stay smoking hot. For her, its a matter of what she wants. For a fattie, she can’t even put of momentary desires (donuts) for long term desires (a hot stud).

  46. Prof. Woland says:

    This is exactly why I have a Russian wife. The dirty secret is that these women mature much quicker than their American counterparts. They have fewer options which means that they are forced to make decisions and live with them. As a consequence a Russian woman in her early 20s is probably going to be much better marriage material than a 35 year old American. Evan a young attractive women with options (and the good looking ones have options) understands that they have to settle whereas women here are in perpetual seeking mode which is something you cannot build a successful family upon.

  47. van Rooinek says:

    a fattie also has the disadvantage that her lack of sexual history may not be of her choice, so may therefore be more likely to latch onto opportunities to “find herself” later on.

    Yea, I saw that in a coworker. Before I worked there, she had been (according to her) morbidly obese, and her husband had paid for the stomach-stapling surgery or whatever it was. It worked, and by the time I started there, she had leaned down and was quite attractive…. and DIVORCED and ON THE HUNT. Ah, hypergamy.

    And did she actually think that telling me the story, would get me interested in her? Apparently so. Ugh… no thanks.

    What’s to say that [fatties] are really the better risk? They’ve already been unable to control their eating. How can they possibly control their other base desires?

    I actually DIDN’T say that. I don’t know that to be generally true at all. I”m speaking of specific examples of people I knew and in some cases dated. Even assuming that the fatty has perfect virtue (which, as you correctly point out, is a questionable assumption), the repentant ex-slut is still a better choice…. if (and only if) fatties and burned-out sluts are your only 2 choices.

  48. 22to28 says:

    @van Rooinek

    “I actually DIDN’T say that. I don’t know that to be generally true at all. I”m speaking of specific examples of people I knew and in some cases dated. Even assuming that the fatty has perfect virtue (which, as you correctly point out, is a questionable assumption), the repentant ex-slut is still a better choice…. if (and only if) fatties and burned-out sluts are your only 2 choices.”

    Yes, don’t worry, I see your point. You’re making a philosophical assertion, concerning the lesser of two evils. Obviously, this is a simplified scenario, created to make a point.

    My subsequent point would be, philosophical meanderings aside, I suppose, that we basically are screwed no matter what we do. But, I’m sure you’d agree with that. And yes, if all my money is going to be likely taken from me in a frivolous divorce, I’d rather bang a hottie for a few years first. Rather than have lame sex with a fattie who, once I pop my cherry and sex isn’t a big deal any more, won’t be any help in getting it up. Bring on the Viagra!

    Do you know what a good substitute for Viagra is? Not shoving your face full of pie, you ugly fat woman.

  49. The Soul Mate Myth
    https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/10/29/the-soul-mate-myth/

    The uncomfortable truth about the soul mate myth is that no one ever actually finds their mythical soul mate – they create their soul mate or they don’t. It’s far more practical to mentally create an idealized soul mate with someone immediately available than it ever will be to wait for a soul mate.

    This is where the evangelical religious connection falls apart. The soul mate myth is a glaring example of how the church has become feminized. Look at any luminarie of churchianity (and especially the male ones) doing sermons, authoring books or doing speaking engagements about ANY gender issue – solid marriages, christian dating, even the lame re-masculinization pastors, all of them actively or passively endorse the soul mate myth.

    http://www.crosswalk.com/family/marriage/become-your-spouses-soul-mate-11598993.html?ps=0
    http://harvesthousepublishers.com/book/the-soul-mate-marriage-2009/

    I would challenge any bible ‘scholar’ to scripturally prove the concept of a soul mate to me. In fact if anything Jesus himself expressly contradicts this idea:

    23 That same day the Sadducees, who say there is no resurrection, came to him with a question. 24 “Teacher,” they said, “Moses told us that if a man dies without having children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up offspring for him. 25 Now there were seven brothers among us. The first one married and died, and since he had no children, he left his wife to his brother. 26 The same thing happened to the second and third brother, right on down to the seventh. 27 Finally, the woman died. 28 Now then, at the resurrection, whose wife will she be of the seven, since all of them were married to her?”

    29 Jesus replied, “You are in error because you do not know the Scriptures or the power of God. 30 At the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage; they will be like the angels in heaven. 31 But about the resurrection of the dead—have you not read what God said to you, 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’[a]? He is not the God of the dead but of the living.”

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but this doesn’t sound like a glowing endorsement of the soul mate myth – in fact it reads as just the opposite.

  50. van Rooinek says:

    philosophical meanderings aside, I suppose, that we basically are screwed no matter what we do

    Well… in the end, I finally got happily married. 10 years, 3 kids, all seems well. So I guess I got screwed the RIGHT way… at long last.

    But being single til the late 30s is pure misery for a religious monogamist who wanted to marry before 20. And thanks to my long, hateful odyssey, alone in the wine-dark sea of singleness, I can testify first hand that the Manosphere mostly gets it right. Continuing the Homeric references,… I can understand exactly why so many men of my generation, and those after me, are being turned into pigs by their encounters with seductive witches. Or being drawn to their destructiuon by the porn-Sirens of the internet. After almost 3000 years, those sagas still have relevance.

  51. Buck says:

    @
    Yea, I saw that in a coworker. Before I worked there, she had been (according to her) morbidly obese, and her husband had paid for the stomach-stapling surgery or whatever it was. It worked, and by the time I started there, she had leaned down and was quite attractive…. and DIVORCED and ON THE HUNT. Ah, hypergamy.

    I thinks it’s pretty well known that if a married woman gets a boob job, stomach staple,face lift, lip injections, botox or any other surgical beauty enhancement ….IT’S NOT FOR HUBBY…she is on the prowl. Every woman I’ve ever known or heard about who has had any “enhancement” dumped the old man within 5 years of the procedure.
    So guys, if snuggums wants a boob job, start your divorce defense strategy IMMEDIATELY!

  52. ybm says:

    Greeting friends. While perusing the dirty backalleys of the internet I was accosted by a young woman called TWRA (Traditional Womens Rights Advocate). SO I followed her home, here’s some comments that I would love to see Dalrock’s commentators analyze, positively or negatively:

    “Why are men standing still and not defending patriarchy for what it is as it is the safety net for women. Feminists have shunned the need for a man to take care of a woman many men fear to sound patriarchal because he will called a woman hater. Alternatively, other men just do not care, they enjoy that they no longer have a patriarchal responsibility to take care of women. These are the irresponsible men who consider themselves feminists who think in terms of equality, since it benefits them because now they do not have to support a woman to have her as his wife.

    Now he does not need to be the breadwinner now he can bed any girl he pleases, because feminists taught that women should give their bodies up to random men. This is the epitome of degradation to women, society and women themselves degrade their bodies in order to fit into a socially acceptable sphere of “dating” and “hooking up.” Why so little respect for a girls virtue and chastity? The answer to this question is that men are no longer pressing a patriarchal standard on girls to protect them.”

    http://femininemystiquetwra.wordpress.com/

  53. deti says:

    “Looking for the one to marry and remain faithful to is actually feral female behavior dressed up as self discipline and morality. They have perverted the lifetime marriage concept of “my one and only” by substituting in the Lifetime idea of the perfect man.”

    Great post Dalrock. I think the sentences above are key to understanding the concept of women wanting “The One” or “The Soulmate”. Rather than reining in and harnessing hypergamy, the concept lionizes and indulges hypergamy. Her hypergamy rules her, rather than her mastering it.

    Your average girl nowadays is told how awesomely wonderful she is. Her mother, teachers, pastors/priests, and others in authority over her constantly affirm and validate her. (I omitted her father because her mom divorced him years ago. He has almost no authority or influence in her life.) Everyone tells her how beautiful, talented, smart, intelligent and promising she is. She learns quite early on that, using her sexuality, she can easily control and manipulate most men. But her sexuality holds little sway over the most attractive men, whom she chases with a vengeance.

    As she ages, her life puts her into contact with men of ever-increasing quality. She can easily get boyfriends, but ditches them as soon as a better man comes along. The problem is, a better man ALWAYS comes along. No matter how good her current man is, no matter how many of her “requirements” he meets, she can always meet a man who has more of them. She can always find a man who is better looking, smarter, makes more money, or is more confident. She thinks she is getting closer and closer to the ideal, but falls short every time.

    This reverses and corrects only as she approaches The Wall and the quality of men willing to consider her starts declining precipitously. By then it’s too late — she can’t pull the attractive men she once could. They won’t even consider her for STRs. It’s pump and dump only for her now with the attractive men. She will now have to start looking downmarket for marriageable men.

    Even more debilitating is the Evangelical American Princess, raised up in Churchianity. Everyone has told her she’s God’s special princess; a Daughter of the King. Only the very best will do. God has a special plan for her life. He is preparing The One Special Man for her. And God is not a man that He should lie. And since He is God, He knows what she wants and needs. He knows all the bullet points, all the options she MUST have. If the man is not perfect in every way; if he does not meet every. single. one. of the 463 bullet points, he is not the man God has for her and he is not The One.

    She heads out, armed with her 463 bullet point checklist. She dates the men, even sleeps with a few. But none meet all the bullet points and all are NEXTed. This goes on for years, until it is too late.

  54. Woman: Yeah, I divorced my third husband.
    Opus: I am sorry to hear that.
    Women: Don’t be, he deserved it.
    Opus: Doubtless.

    “The one consistent thing in all of your failed relationships, is you.” – Despair.com

  55. Mint says:

    I actually don’t have a problem with women looking for “the one” (as long as they’re serious about it, which means the one and only). The real issue, as Anonymous Reader said, is that, for the most part, they are not looking for the one, they are looking for (and finding) dozens, scores. (from October 28, 2012 at 7:21 pm–Great comment, BTW).

    If they were actually, sincerely looking for the one (and only), that would be fine.

  56. Martian Bachelor says:

    Johnycomelately, ybm – those two chickhamsters you’ve found are totally wack!

    The full moon must have turned you into, well, lunatics. Nothing personal. Get well soon, and happy trails on finding your way safely out of those dirty backalleys of the internet.

  57. Cail Corishev says:

    I don’t even think obesity has much to do with self-control. There’s a red pill on that too, and it says (the short, short version) that our hormones drive consumption much more than the reverse, that our fat cells aren’t powerless in the process, that what you eat is more important than (and controls) how much, and that people who are desperate to lose weight are given the worst possible advice by government and media. She may be throwing massive amounts of willpower at it, starving herself on low-fat processed grain foods and stimulants, and failing to lose weight until the lure of the pie becomes unstoppable.

    Having said all that, it really doesn’t change the resulting situation. I may sympathize with an obese woman, but that won’t make me attracted to her. For a man to marry a woman he’s not physically attracted to is as terrible an idea as for a woman to marry a man she doesn’t respect. He may tell himself she has a wonderful personality and great mothering instincts — and he may be right — but if he’s turned off by her body, he’s not going to be able to hide that, and it’s going to mess things up. He’s going to be tempted to fill that need on the side, and even if he resists that, she’s going to fear that he will. She may begin accusing him of imaginary infidelity, which will reinforce his temptations — “I’m getting blamed for it, might as well do it” — or she may resent him for pretending and learn to hate him for it. It’s the whole “a woman scorned” thing on a simmer.

    I’d also agree that obesity or general unattractiveness is no guarantee that her virtue is intact. There’s probably no such thing as a woman so unattractive that she can’t get sex. A 400-pound woman with no teeth can have an N of hundreds if she wants to. A woman’s N is controlled by her willingness, not by her attractiveness.

  58. lavazza1891 says:

    Shouldn’t it be “doubtlessly”? As in “he doubtlessly deserved it”. Or is it “It’s doubtless that he deserved it”?

  59. deti says:

    Cail: “There’s probably no such thing as a woman so unattractive that she can’t get sex.”

    van Rooinek: “Even assuming that the fatty has perfect virtue (which, as you correctly point out, is a questionable assumption), the repentant ex-slut is still a better choice…. if (and only if) fatties and burned-out sluts are your only 2 choices.”

    My sense is that most men have an attractiveness “floor” below which they simply will not go for sex. IOW, if a particular woman isn’t on or above that floor, he will not have sex with her no matter how desperate or horny. My sense is that “floor” is pretty low for most men.

    I agree most men will go for the hot slut over the virtuous fatty. A hot slut will nearly always be able to get sex, or a BF or a husband.

  60. van Rooinek says:

    Cail: “There’s probably no such thing as a woman so unattractive that she can’t get sex.”
    Deti: My sense is that most men have an attractiveness “floor” below which they simply will not go for sex

    I’m with Deti. For me, there are some women who are so profoundly unappealing,that even if I were given a life sentence with no chance of parole or escape, with just me and her alone on a remote island — or even another planet — it just WOULD. NOT. HAPPEN. NOT. EVER, IMPOSSIBLE. NOT. WITH. HER. She might as well be a chimpanzee.

    Of course, clearly — judging by their nuclear rejections — some women feel the same about me! If I were the last man on earth, or their last chance to avoid lifetime celibacy, they’d still tell me no.

  61. tbc says:

    2 quick thoughts:

    Firstly, Some guys like fat women or at least women with (as we used to say) ‘a little meat on their bones.’ And some ‘fat’ women are very in touch with their sexuality, and not because they have some self-esteem or other messed up issue: they just like sex and know how to work what they have. This is especially true in some minority communities. But very very few guys like morbidly obese women, no matter what their cultural background.

    Secondly, I have the chance to work with quite a few young people in the context of ministry (where I can assure you the hormones and hamsters are alive and well). One of the most frequent questions I’m asked, usually by women, is ‘How can I tell if someone is “the one”‘, meaning of course for marriage. I always answer by telling them that “the one” is whoever you marry, that there is no biblical warrant for any idea of soul mate (which makes the idea of remarriage after being widowed ludicrous), and that the question itself shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how God intends for us to live. So in light of this, chose well. Marriage is a sentence of life without parole.

    Most of the time the reaction is fairly stunned silence as they expect I will feed them some pablum about God giving signs and all of that. Then I proceed to deflate the Romantic bubble further by letting them know that marriage and life has little to do with romance and everything to do with the daily performance of mundane tasks, that it is one of God’s instruments of sanctification (as is singleness) and that if they have no intention of submitting wholeheartedly to their husband (or loving their wives as the case may be) that they should not get married.

    Anything I should add to my advice?

  62. deti says:

    tbc:

    Yeah, when I talk about fat women I mean morbidly obese women, who are like 75 lbs overweight.

    There are plenty of women who are between 10 to 40 lbs overweight who are quite attractive and sexy.

    Re the attractiveness floor: I remember being at a house party as a college junior and having an, ahem, homely girl chasing me all over the house. I finally had to leave. I had not been with a girl for six months. I was desperate and horny and I am sure was giving those vibes off loud and clear. Nonetheless, sex with that girl was Not. Going. To. Happen. Ever. Under. Any. Circumstances.

  63. There is no “romanticism” when women ponder “The One”

    It is simply the apex of hypergamy, the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, where they will finally be able to relax, get fat, and crack on other women who don’t have what she has. She won’t even have to work on herself OR the relationship, because he’s The One! Of course, hypergamy is far too slippery of a slope to ever achieve the summit.

    It’s the height of mercenary thought, not a departure from it.

  64. Ezra says:

    “Even more debilitating is the Evangelical American Princess, raised up in Churchianity. Everyone has told her she’s God’s special princess; a Daughter of the King. Only the very best will do. God has a special plan for her life. He is preparing The One Special Man for her. And God is not a man that He should lie. And since He is God, He knows what she wants and needs. He knows all the bullet points, all the options she MUST have. If the man is not perfect in every way; if he does not meet every. single. one. of the 463 bullet points, he is not the man God has for her and he is not The One.

    She heads out, armed with her 463 bullet point checklist. She dates the men, even sleeps with a few. But none meet all the bullet points and all are NEXTed. This goes on for years, until it is too late.”

    @deti: this is excellent. My husband was briefly engaged to two such women; Churchian women. One “dumped” him because he wasn’t “holy enough for her” (although she was busy giving B.J’s to another guy she just met when the dumping occurred). The other was the recipient of the dumping, by my husband, because my husband did not wish to support her unemployed father (who was perfectly capable of working for a living, btw.) She went into a tizzy, telling him he ‘wasn’t a true Christian’ and all sorts of wickedness, and going on and on about how he “wasn’t good enough a Christian for HER, anyway.”

    Neither of these women are married yet, and they are either approaching forty rapidly, or they’re already there. They both know that my husband and I married, and that we have multiple little children. I feel very sadly for both of them, but I am extremely grateful that my husband did not settle for women like this (even though one of them dumped him, he would have taken her back, he did love her). If he had, he would be constantly measured against their definition of godliness and he would have to defend his standing with God daily – as measured against their extreme holiness and righteousness.

  65. Ezra says:

    @tbc: One of my female friends (years ago) met a man online and began “online dating” long distance. She lived in MN and he in LA, and he was a minister of a small congregation there. He specifically told her that he “did not like fat women”, and so she deceived him by sending pictures of herself when she was quite a bit less in weight.

    He agreed to meet her, and she conveniently took everything necessary to fill out a marriage license (copies of her previous divorce, etc.) to their FIRST MEETING! Prior to leaving, she told me that she heard God tell her, “You are free to choose” or some such statement.

    Off she went to meet this man, and I warned her that if she “chose” him, she would be bound to him, and she had better choose him carefully and for the right reasons.

    She called long distance to tell me they had married on the Jewish new year. I cautiously offered congratulations.

    Two weeks later….TWO WEEKS…she phoned and asked me for money so she could get “home”. I told her that her home is with her husband. She had dragged her adolescent daughter from a previous marriage to this new marriage, and the daughter didn’t like the new husband. Also, the new husband had a granddaughter in his custody, and new wifey didn’t like the time that the child required – or that the child existed at all! Sad and pathetic. The new husband spent his time painting the home, and not doting over new wifey. He would not allow expensive internet service in his rural home and this inflammed his new wife. They had sex and she became irritated from it, and promptly blamed him for it saying to me that he must be “diseased” and must have given her herpes or something!

    She took the marriage license with her when she fled LA (some fool gave her the money; not me!) and never filed the paperwork; now she claims the marriage never existed. I guess she should tell that to the man and his congregation who all witnessed this mess.

    Although I hear from her now and again, we are not friends. She chose. She didn’t like what she chose, and then she wanted any excuse available to escape her choice, like an irresponsible toddler. Looking back, I believe God may have told her she could choose – to try and teach her that she should choose a marriage partner very, very wisely. She could have been sanctified and purified into some semblance of a godly woman had she submitted to Christ and her new husband.

    She rebelled against both.

  66. FuriousFerret says:

    Cali is totally right about the diet.

    The people that are fat are carb addicts. Junk food carbs really anything besides veggies and fruit are as bad as crack.

    When you diet on a low carb diet, you aren’t hungry whereas on traditionally low calorie diet you need your fix. It’s like a crack addict cutting down on just a little crack per day not the full blown crackfest and then wondering why he’s craving more crack.

    The arguements against low carb is that’s haarrrrdddd to keep on it long term, I love my carbs. Well you know who loves alcohol, alcoholics. Do you tell them that it’s ok to just drink four beers a day and then get mad at them when they go on a bender?

    If traditional advice of low calorie diet and exercise with so many people desperate to lose weight is not working, why the hell do we keep offering this as the solution? Take the diet red pill.

  67. tbc says:

    @Ezra – I wish I could say I am shocked by your story but it seems that nothing is shocking these days. It is interesting that she had a sense of God telling her she could chose. Now I’m generally hesitant when people begin saying that God told them this or that thing, but I believe it does happen, and in this case it seems that it may well have been an occasion for her choosing sanctification and godliness over whatever hamster of sinful indulgence was running loose in her brain — and that choice might well have been to NOT marry the man and allow God to work on her character and maturity especially since she had already been married once. Having chosen against wisdom to marry the man, God could certainly have used him and the marriage as a sanctifying tool in her life, but clearly she was not interested in any growth in godliness.

  68. MackPUA says:

    @SS

    “It is simply the apex of hypergamy, the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow, where they will finally be able to relax, get fat, and crack on other women who don’t have what she has. She won’t even have to work on herself OR the relationship, because he’s The One! Of course, hypergamy is far too slippery of a slope to ever achieve the summit. ”

    Excellent example of status whoring … lol

    The One is essentially a biological rationalisation of serial promiscuity …

    A woman will find any man attractive, if she can find some socially dominant feature in the man

    For most women, because they think anything emotional is real …

    While anything logical is discounted unless accompanied by an emotion, unless a mans looks are accompanied by an emotional context, regardless of how good a mans looks

    The one is basically a search for who ever allows her to hyper-rationalise what her emotions tell her is real

    Dominant men allow her to logically align her emotions, without strong men in her life who dont put her in her place, her emotions become misaligned with reality

    As emotions are so context & socially driven, she leaves herself unable to rationalise or explain why she’s attracted to men who’re able to control the emotional context & social encounter

    As most women attribute reality to their emotions, controlling the emotional context ie controlling the conversation, ordering food for her, etc., …

    You force her into your logical frame of reference of the world, instead of her emotional context of the world

  69. Anonymous Reader says:

    Ezra, tbc, another possibility is that woman was “told she could choose” by the voices in her head.
    I leave it to you to fill the details out – my suggestion is simple: rationalization hamsters can have the power of speech, at least a private form of “inner speech”. I write this because more than once I’ve personally seen people claim “God told me…” to do or say something that was clearly in their own best interest, or in concert with their current infatuation(s).

    But there could be other explanations.

  70. tbc says:

    @ANON – no doubt she clearly could have been listening to the voice of hamster rather than the Vox Dei, but I always want to leave the door open for the Spirit of God to intervene.

  71. David Myers says:

    @tbc:
    “Anything I should add to my advice?”

    Your advice is excellent. May your tribe increase — both those who teach girls before they’re married and those who teach women who are already married.

    As for something to add, how about: “And if you ever think that you have biblical grounds for a divorce, remember that (a) you don’t get to decide that by yourself — you must have the concurrence of your church leadership (assuming they have a biblical understanding of marriage and divorce), and (b) even if your belief that you have biblical grounds for divorce is confirmed by godly church leadership, divorce is not required and is probably unwise; you, your children, your husband, and everyone you know will almost certainly be better off if you stay and keep working on it.”

  72. deti says:

    “For me, there are some women who are so profoundly unappealing,that even if I were given a life sentence with no chance of parole or escape, with just me and her alone on a remote island — or even another planet — it just WOULD. NOT. HAPPEN. NOT. EVER, IMPOSSIBLE. NOT. WITH. HER.”

    Yes. But I have not met very many of those profoundly unappealing women that I would never ever have sex with. Most all women will get the job done.

  73. MackPUA says:

    Actually Low Stomach Acid, is one of THE MAIN causes of obesity

    If you have low stomach acid, even a low carb diet will not work

    Unfortunately low stomach acid is an epidemic, ie notice the massive sale of anta-acids, heart burn, acid reflux … ALL caused by low levels of hydrochloric acid

    Over 50-70% of the population suffers from low levels of stomach acid

    IF you have low levels of stomach acid, you are GUARANTEED to become bloated & overweight AND eventually obese

    If you want to loose weight, RAISE your levels of stomach acid with HCL Acid tablets with Bitters & THEN go on a low carb diet or paleo diet

    Btw the vast majority of ppl who get colds, hayfever etc., do so because stomach acid DIRECTLY regulates the amount of dangerous bacteria & viruses

    Hydro-chloric acid kills the vast amount of viruses & bacteria, low levels in your stomach basically guarantee you come down with a cold or flu

    The Obesity epidemic can be attributed to junkfood & high carb diets, ie ALL vegetable diets are high carb diets … as photosynthesis creates carbohydrates in plants …

    But the main causative factor is Low levels of hydrochloric acid in the stomach, which is WHY you see the INUIT tribes & Indian tribes, with bloated stomachs & overweight for their height

    IF you want to loose weight or fat, the first thing you should be taking is Hydrochloric acid tablets & bitters …

  74. van Rooinek says:

    But I have not met very many of those profoundly unappealing women that I would never ever have sex with. Most all women will get the job done.

    No. You’ve just forgotten them. You probably walk by one or two every day.

    Once upoin a time, one of them fell in love with me. Our minds were so attuned we finished each other’s thoughts and sentences, we had no value or belief disagreements to speak of, and we were very comfortable around each other… and sadly, she was strongly attracted to ME. Everyone at church got on my case, as they knew how compatible we were, and they knew how frustrated I was at my extended singleness, so they tried to encourage me: “VR .. You two are a PERFECT MATCH. You’re always complaining about being single… well, HERE is the ONE you’ve been waiting for!! What’s wrong with you?”

    The plain fact was, I had NO desire for her. She wasn’t hideous — she had a pretty face, and several other guys in the church liked her, actually — but she lacked one thing that I just had to have in order to react physically. And yet, I was just as aware of our “perfect” compatibility as she was. I could see it as clearly as she did, and the rest of the church did. I questioned my own sanity, and told myself I was being shallow. I actually tried with all my might to reprogram myself, to somehow force myself to find her attractive…

    …. and I found, I COULD NOT. If she were the last woman on earth, or if she were my last chance at getting married (a possibility which crossed my mind, I was already in my 30s), the answer was still no. The attraction just was not there for me, even when I made an EFFORT to cultivate it. Of course, I couldn’t very well go around blabbing the truth, but I did confide in the senior pastor (who supported my decision).

  75. Looking Glass says:

    @vR:

    I hate to ask this, but I can only see 3 possibilities: She was insanely overweight, flat as a washboard (and looked like a guy, as a result) or her butt was completely non-existent. Since the last two can be fixed, I’m guessing it was the first one?

    I can understand the “last chance” thinking. Been there myself, got really lucky she broke it off. (How I ended up in this neck of the woods. One of the best things that ever happened to me, actually)

  76. 22to28 says:

    @Deti, van Rooinek

    “But I have not met very many of those profoundly unappealing women that I would never ever have sex with. Most all women will get the job done.

    No. You’ve just forgotten them. You probably walk by one or two every day.”

    I have very high standards. They relate more to the type of woman than to the precise appearance, although if I was focused on getting married, appearance would also be important. But just to get the job done, the group of women would not be small, but many would make the “not even if she’s the last woman on earth” category.

    I’ve trained myself to not need sex (the biological urges do remain constant, but I’ve socialized myself to not feel like I must have it). So, with most women, I would not care to even picture it. Anyone 200 LB+, I wouldn’t even want it with the lights off.

    @van Rooinek
    “The plain fact was, I had NO desire for her. She wasn’t hideous — she had a pretty face, and several other guys in the church liked her, actually — but she lacked one thing that I just had to have in order to react physically. And yet, I was just as aware of our “perfect” compatibility as she was. I could see it as clearly as she did, and the rest of the church did. I questioned my own sanity, and told myself I was being shallow. I actually tried with all my might to reprogram myself, to somehow force myself to find her attractive…”

    Been there. Done that. I generally would find any white woman as undesirable on the long run. I could abide an Asian, Black or Hispanic woman with a low starting BMI and a low genetic likelihood of filling out.

    I dated a girl for eight months who was very compatible, but physically, it was never there for me. I broke it off, cried a bunch, but never regretted the choice. In fact, I haven’t shedded a tear about anything since.

  77. Bob Wallace says:

    Random Angeleno says:

    “I had a woman (a Filipina, actually) tell me recently that for the past several months, when she met a man, she told herself, find somethimg attractiive about him, see if I can find the best thing about him. She said that suddenly lots of men suddenly became attractive to her, She was shocked, and told ,me she realized there are lots of “the one” out there.”

    “[D: Good insight. I'm going to use that.]”

    “This isn’t original, the Private Man had a post about this awhile back; he called it an exercise for women.”

    The Private Man picked it up from the Filipina I know. I can even tell you the site he got it from: the Sanctuary, by Spacetraveller.

  78. Anonymous Reader says:

    tbc
    @ANON – no doubt she clearly could have been listening to the voice of hamster rather than the Vox Dei, but I always want to leave the door open for the Spirit of God to intervene.

    Probably we have a different collection of experiences that affect the way we view such statements.

    I used to know some people who were certain that God was guiding their footsteps home from the bar, since they arrived safely every time despite being so drunk they were seeing double. Well,apparently God decided to stop guiding a couple of them, at some point. RIP, as the saying goes.

    I’ve known, from a safe distance, women who somehow were led through a series of pony rides on the cock carousel by the hand of God, or so they insisted every time they got back on for another turn. The fact that a man could go from being “God’s gift” to being a rotten, no good, SOB in the space of about 90 days didn’t seem to make any difference a few months later, when God once again sent a twue wuv. At least I was able to talk one of my friends away from a couple of those riders; the kind who choose their beta via “oopsie” pregnancy, in one case. This was long, long before I put on the glasses, but even at a young age I noted that some women’s prettiness does not last very long – 3 years, in one case, from a pretty good looking gal to a hard eyed barfly.

    Then there was the younger sister of a friend of a friend who lived near by. Young sis had dropped out of high school, and run off to live with big sis. I gave young sis a ride to the local “alternative” high school two times, where she was working on her GED. She earnestly informed me that she was grateful to God for her miscarriage the previous year, that she’d perhaps induced by jumping off of the roof of the house a few times, because she didn’t want to have to get an abortion (at the age of 15).

    I could go on with examples. Prosperity gospel, anyone? But I won’t hijack the thread. You’ll just have to pardon my cynicism. When I encounter someone clearly engaged in selfish behavior, operating on the basis of “I want right now what I want”, doing things that are very likely to turn out bad in the long term or even intermediate term, and they insist “God told me to do this”, I’m inclined to suspect that the only “God” involved is the one they see in the mirror over the aptly-named vanity. Very likely the same one who insists that women should spurn all mere mortal, inferior men in their search for the One And Only.

  79. ar10308 says:

    @VR,
    I am very much in a similar situation as you were with your friend who you couldn’t find attractive.

    The only single woman in my church is someone who I get along pretty well with, but her face and body are unfortunately completely unattractive to me. I feel sorry for her even, but I know that I could never be aroused by her so to lead her on would be completely unfair to her.

  80. ar10308 says:

    @YBM,
    That femininemystiquetwra blog is very interesting. It takes the position of legitimate pride in traditional feminine roles and responsibilities.

  81. Crank says:

    @VR

    “but she lacked one thing that I just had to have in order to react physically.”

    A huge butt? A FUPA? :)

  82. “Rest in Peace, my boner.”

    LOL

    I feel sorry for some of you chaps. I really do.

  83. 22to28 says:

    @ Laguna Beach Fogey

    “I feel sorry for some of you chaps. I really do.”

    The others can speak for themselves, but don’t you dare feel sorry for me.

    I’m living the dream, brother.

  84. van Rooinek says:

    I hate to ask this, but I can only see 3 possibilities: She was insanely overweight, flat as a washboard (and looked like a guy, as a result) or her butt was completely non-existent.

    The 3rd one is within burst radius of the target. Tall or short, blond or dark, big or small chested (anything more than a mouthful is a waste)… doesn’t matter attractionally. But she’s gotta have nice flared breeder hips.

    It’s not a question of fat or muscle (although obviously anorexia can ruin even the best physique), it’s a question of nonchangeable bone structure. Skinny boy hipped women do nothing for me, I need a wide hips topped by a thin waist, or I have a failure to launch.

  85. UnicornHunter says:

    @22to28 – Hell Yeah!!!!

    A divorced friend was in town over the weekend and when he asked how I’m doing post divorce, I told him. The bad part is that there are no women in my life. The good part is that there are no women in my life.

    Not a lot of sex, and sometimes I’m lonely. BUT, I’ve no women drama. I spend my money on me and the kids. And, I’ve got all the time in the world to work on a new business, learn to play the drums, travel, and most recently learning to play the bass guitar.

    Hell yeah.

  86. Random Angeleno says:

    Random Angeleno says:

    “I had a woman (a Filipina, actually) tell me recently that for the past several months, when she met a man, she told herself, find somethimg attractiive about him, see if I can find the best thing about him. She said that suddenly lots of men suddenly became attractive to her, She was shocked, and told ,me she realized there are lots of “the one” out there.”

    “[D: Good insight. I'm going to use that.]”

    “This isn’t original, the Private Man had a post about this awhile back; he called it an exercise for women.”

    The Private Man picked it up from the Filipina I know. I can even tell you the site he got it from: the Sanctuary, by Spacetraveller.

    That’s pretty sloppy sourcing, Bob. The Private Man posted “A Dating Exercise For Women” here:
    https://theprivateman.wordpress.com/2011/10/27/a-dating-exercise-for-women/
    While the earliest post by Spacetraveler on her Sanctuary blog is dated 12/27/2011. She’s a good writer, but her entry would have definitely followed TPM’s, not preceded it as you assume.

    Perhaps you are thinking of Bellita, a Filipina who liked TPM’s post so much she linked back to it 3 times. Unfortunately her blog is restricted now, but if you got it from her, then you now know where she got it from…

  87. lavazza1891 says:

    Deti: “My sense is that most men have an attractiveness “floor” below which they simply will not go for sex. IOW, if a particular woman isn’t on or above that floor, he will not have sex with her no matter how desperate or horny. My sense is that “floor” is pretty low for most men.”

    You have to add availability and discretion to the mix. If a woman offers (free) sex discretely and with no drama, she earns quite a few points compared to a woman where rejection, indiscretion and drama is in the books.

  88. Miserman says:

    MackPUA said,

    Actually Low Stomach Acid, is one of THE MAIN causes of obesity.

    In that case, men enduring the stress of modern marriage should be the healthiest and skinniest guys around. ;-)

    (joking)

  89. Elaine says:

    @3rd Millenium Men

    “Ask any soul-baring 40-year-old single heterosexual woman what she most longs for in life, and she probably won’t tell you it’s a better career or a smaller waistline or a bigger apartment. Most likely, she’ll say that what she really wants is a husband (and, by extension, a child).”

    I’d have to agree that this is what most women crave by age 40. Unfortunately, this is a little late for soul-baring self-awareness. The damage is done when between the 20-25 age range, they are convinced that they need the feminist merit badge in order to be happy and that hubby, house and kids will all fall into place “because God has a plan for me.”

    Actually it is not soul baring self awareness at middle age. It is the hormones. As women edge towards the close of their fertility windows, their bodies scream out for children. The biological urge and imperative is very very strong. Like the need for sex, but times a thousand. It is constant. It is relentless. It is merciless. Even married women with children experience this as they edge into perio-menopause in their late 30s to mid 40s. The constant nagging of the beleaguered husbands for that one more kid – the 3rd or 4th or even 5th. Still working on hubby for our 3rd. He’s threatening a vasectomy.

  90. deti says:

    “You have to add availability and discretion to the mix. If a woman offers (free) sex discretely and with no drama, she earns quite a few points compared to a woman where rejection, indiscretion and drama is in the books.”

    Well, yes. I was just talking about physical attributes.

    I dated a very good looking woman for 4 years. Near perfect for me physically. But the drama, head games, shit testing within an inch of my life, rejection and nagging slowly escalated to the point where I finally broke up with her. I just couldn’t take it any more.

  91. @Ezra

    “Even more debilitating is the Evangelical American Princess, raised up in Churchianity. Everyone has told her she’s God’s special princess; a Daughter of the King. Only the very best will do. God has a special plan for her life. He is preparing The One Special Man for her. And God is not a man that He should lie. And since He is God, He knows what she wants and needs. He knows all the bullet points, all the options she MUST have. If the man is not perfect in every way; if he does not meet every. single. one. of the 463 bullet points, he is not the man God has for her and he is not The One.

    Even a relatively hot Lolo Jones knows the sting of this neurosis:
    https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/07/09/the-adolescent-social-skill-set/

  92. deti says:

    Dalrock:

    As I read this again, it strikes me that what’s really going on here is that young women are loath to make a choice and stick to it. You’ve written about this before:

    http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2010/11/07/the-other-side-of-hypergamy-fantasy-of-the-forced-choice/

    You have an entire category on Choice Addiction — the notion that women have a multitude of choices; and they don’t want to be limited and constrained in how they live their lives.

    Boys and men learn early on that making choices and following a certain path means other paths and choices are foreclosed. You select one or two things or paths or choices, and you stick with them. If they don’t work out, you can change course, but you don’t get to go back to square one and start over. You start from where you are.

    With regard to women, few men have a wide range of choices. Most men don’t have many choices. Most men must learn to work with what they have and select a woman from a very small pool of women within his SMV range.

    Most women are not so limited. An average or slightly above average woman can have sex (but not much else) with the top men, and get relationships with the next tier of men. What she does not seem to realize is that the seemingly unlimited all you can eat smorgasbord will not last forever. She’ll run out of choices as time goes on, and her selections will become increasingly limited as she gets older. This is why the path to happiness for a woman is to select the best she can as soon as she can, and stick with him.

  93. Anonymous age 70 says:

    One of the reasons it is so hard to get people to go low carb for good health, is the large number of people pushing a strange and peculiar diet because it happened to work for them.

    The Atkins Institute with well over 50,000 patients, found 95% of them were successful on low carb, and not one word about stomach acid.

    I am sure there will be people with low stomach acid who became healthy with acid tablets. But, acid reflux is very common among fat people, which would indicate lots of stomach acid.

    Also, low carb does not work for all genetic types, but almost always on those of European ancestry, which is a high percentage of people in the USA. And, Mexico, believe it or not.

  94. The One says:

    The mate of every soul is the Creator…

  95. @Deti- I wonder if the aversion to making a choice and sticking to it, for women, stems from the subconscious awareness that she cannot trust herself to do so.

    She may never admit that to herself, but deep down, she knows how scattered and uncertain she is, esp after some time on the carousel. Mustn’t make a choice, because she knows her track record of choosing poorly.

    Plus, you never know when Prince Charming might show up. No one tells her he’s not coming.

  96. PRS says:

    Truth offends people and especially women. “The Cost of Delaying Marriage.” This is one article that has “offended” lots of them.

    http://www.boundless.org/2005/articles/a0001135.cfm

  97. 5iver says:

    I come from a conservative, religious family from Southern Europe. I am what you call an ‘alpha male’ or high-status man, and when I started dating from puberty onwards, I always dated with marriage/family in mind, being completely oblivious to the amoral opportunism of women back then… Looking back at my youth (I’m 27 now) I would consider it ‘semi-beta’ mode but also, as a righteous, young man I really had no idea women would be so feral…

    People here are always counting about low N etc. but I have to emphasise that it’s not only the number of people a woman has slept with, but the number of times she has done so. I have a ‘high’ N but I haven’t had a lot of sex in my life, because my reaction to having to adapt to feminism and the sexual revolution is ONS/STR…

    You can meet women with ‘low’ Ns of 2 or 3… but this entails that she was engaging in serial monogamy… dating each of these guys for a year or two (or three), and thus, before moving on to the next ‘boyfriend’ and again engaging in regular sex… So a girl with an N of 2 or 3 still has been having regular sex for many years on end, and is thus, completely unsuitable for marriage and family…

    The worse part of this is that the serial monogamy girls show no sign of repentance or reflection on their actions, and comparing themselves to their slu**y girlfriends, they actually think of themselves as ‘virtuous’. I had a close girl-friend of mine state how she views sex as holy and sacred, when she is just another girl who has spent her entire youth having regular sex in ‘long-term relationships’.

    It is not only their slu**iness that upsets me, but their sense of righteousness and entitlement while doing so.

    I am ashamed of how I have ended up in my behaviour towards women looking back at how I was as a popular, attractive teenager and how I am now… Worse of all, is that my parents don’t understand how feminism/sexual revolution has been accepted completely by the female herd.. They think surely there are some girls who haven’t engaged on the c*ck carousel, but that is simply not the case…

    I am about to start dating a very attractive and smart girl, with an N of 2 (that she admits to)… but again, I am sad before it even begins, as I know I will never be able to bond with her to the point that I would want to propose marriage and starting a family together and it disheartens me. What will eventually make me break up with her in an obtuse way will be again, when she will view her emotional and sexual baggage as something righteous if/when I eventually confront her about it.

    We truly are a sacrificial generation, I am just so glad I have this blog where I can commiserate with like-minded people.

  98. MackPUA says:

    Not meaning to hijack this thread, just adding to the conversation on low carb diets …

    Most dietitians & nutritionists dont mention low levels of stomach acid, even though most ppl with bloat or overweight, have low levels of stomach acid at epidemic levels…

    Too much food, & over eating REDUCES your stomach acid levels

    As your body secretes hydrochloric acid ON DEMAND, its not always in your stomach …

    A body fed on junk food & high carb foods, destroys the bodies ability to SECRETE hydrochloric acid on demand, when you eat food

    Basically if you dont eat food, you dont have stomach acid, its secreted on demand

    A poor immune system, damaged by a low quality diet, no longer secretes HCL acid, whenever you eat a substance

    Essentially Im not discounting Low Carb diets, im just stating low stomach acid is one of the main culprits, for those with bloated stomachs & overweight problems

    High levels of stomach acid, actually improves your ability to digest food, the higher the ph the more nutrients you digest

    Theres plenty of ppl with weight problems & bloated stomachs, on low carb diets

    Low levels of stomach acid, is ridiculously common to the point of being an epidimic, which is why I brought this subject up

    Theres no such thing as too high stomach acid, as stomach acid is HIGHLY DILUTE

    Acid reflux, heartburn etc., are ALL caused by low levels of sodium alkalis being secreted by the body

    These alkalis are regulated by the levels of HCL acid, TOO LOW HCL acid & your body refuses to secrete sodium alkali’s, releasing HCL acid into your system

    Im not stating low carb doesnt work, basically if you’re NOT getting results on low carb diets the main culprit is most probably low stomach acid …

    Just look at an geographic photo of low carb Inuit tribes & primitives & you’ll see even with amazing access to incredible quality nutrition, with bloated stomachs & overweight

    Ultimately Malabsorbtion is the MAIN culprit of obesity

    Whether its caused by junk food, or high carb vegetarian diets, its the resulting malabsorbtion which is the cause of obesity

    Obesity regardless of the cause, is a survival response to starvation

    Essentially if you’re obese, you’re body is sufferring from extreme malabsorption

    If you’re not getting results from low carb diets, or paleo diets, you should add HCL acids & Bitters

  99. van Rooinek says:

    5iver: when I started dating from puberty onwards, I always dated with marriage/family in mind, being completely oblivious to the amoral opportunism of women back then… as a righteous, young man I really had no idea women would be so feral…

    Amen, brother.

    my parents don’t understand how feminism/sexual revolution has been accepted completely by the female herd.. They think surely there are some girls who haven’t engaged on the c*ck carousel, but that is simply not the case…

    Again, amen brother. My Dad died before it got really bad, but my Mom (who lived another 21 years), could never quite believe what I was telling her about the modern dating realm. She just couldn’t wrap her mind around the idea that there just wasn’t a large pool of nice girls out there, waiting for me to find them.

    Although thankfully she lived long enough to see me marry and have kids, I don’t think she ever understood WHY it was SO DAMNED HARD and TOOK SO LONG for an oldfashioned holdout like me, to get married. In her generation I would have been a prize catch, and would have had my pick of brides at an early age.

  100. MackPUA says:

    As an Addendum to my above post:

    If you’re STILL not getting results, even with HCL tablets, add HIIT & a natural none caffeine thermogenic

    As exercise & thermogenics, along with high levels of stomach acid, DRAMATICALLY increases your bodies to absorb nutrients

    Basically increase your bodies ability to absorb nutrients, & you’re body stops being in a starvation mode & stops CREATING FAT

    REMEMBER you cant become obese by eating food, ONLY by damaging your bodies ability to aborb nutrients, does your body start to CREATE FAT as a survival mechanism

    IF you want to seriously beat your bloat, or overweight, or obesity research what I’ve posted & research the BIOLOGICAL & nutrition CAUSES of malabsorbtion

    Obesity is the effects of a damaged immune system, caused by disease & poor diet

    Viruses & micro-bacteria can also cause obesity

    Virus & micro-bacteria caused obesity mainly occurs because of low levels of hydrochloric acid, as stomach acid is the MAIN defence the body uses against obesity & stomach cancer causing viruses & microbacteria

    Virus & micro-bacteria caused obesity, also may be more common then diet induced obesity, as low levels of stomach acid leaves behind huge amounts of undissolved microbacteria & viruses ….

    Increase your levels of stomach acid & you WIPE OUT obesity causing viruses & microbacteria, as stomach acid regulates these viruses & microbacteria

    You’ll obviously have to add extra protocols to get these Obesity causing viruses & microbacteria, outside of your stomach …

    For proof research the levels of H.Pylo bacteria, averaging at around 50-60% of the population in most first world countries like Britain or the U.S

    Again obesity is the result of A DAMAGED immune system, damaged by a low quality diet, hence no longer secretes HCL acid, whenever you eat, low levels of hydrochloric acid exposes the stomach to massive amounts of micro-bacteria & viruses, which DESTROY the bodies ability to ABSORB NUTRIENTS, forcing the body to CREATE FAT as a defence mechanism

    A low carb diet, WILL WORK FOR MOST people, but for others diet is the FIRST step in the chain of events which prevent them from loosing weight

    Again im not ragging on low carb diets or paleo diets, as im a paleoist …

    People deserve to know a bigger picture, when it comes to obesity, its not as simple as dietary mediums …

  101. 5iver says:

    I always enjoy your posts van Rooinek… I guess I should share more about my life now..

    Being immersed in theology and religion from a young age, i really wanted to be a righteous man growing up, and had told myself I would not have sex before marriage, much like your story (yet i did not end up being as righteous as you).

    I really enjoyed dating and flirting with girls while they were young and innocent, so had girlfriends pretty much consistently from ages 12 to 20… I didn’t have sex with any of these girls, all of whom were very attractive… However, we would do everything but sex, more due to the insistence of the girls rather than mine… At around age 20, I became disillusioned as I saw women all around me (many whom I had grown up with) start having sex in non-committed committed relationships as Dalrock so poignantly points out, and essentially retreated in my own little cave, where I stopped dating and stopped going out much… It was selfish of me looking back, that I was disappointed that women did not behave in the way I expected them to, but I also think it was that I was understanding the long-term consequences of their promiscuity… I have coined a phrase for these women: “The promiscuity of your youth echoes in eternity.”

    My sister got married (to the only man she has ever slept with as she was raised properly) and recently had her first child, and my parents and I engage in frank discussions about my personal life and they wonder if they will have the possibility of seeing grandchildren from me before they die… I tell them that I am more and more comfortable being single as I grow up…

    My lifestyle at 27 is not that different from when i was 20.. I rarely go out (when I do it is because of an obligation to a close friend or a girl really has been chasing me enough that I become semi-motivated to have a ONS/STR with her), and really do enjoy spending my time reading books, playing video games and hanging out with my guy friends…

    What the sexual revolution was intended to do was provide people with more freedom and more ‘options’, yet this hasn’t been the case… All women will have sex out of ‘love’, which just means that if they are attractive enough to get attention from that cohort of 5%/10%/20% of top-tier men that they find really attractive, they will ‘put out’ out of love. Again, I have become very good at seducing women (I lost my virginity at age 24) and everybody who knows me would consider me a ‘ladies man’ and all that, and the worst part of it is, the more of a bad-boy I am with women, the more women that are attracted to me and line up to have a sexual experience with me. I am completely disillusioned and just want to retreat to my cave of my family, a few friends, and my hobbies.

    The worst part of all this is that I am comfortable in my life as a bachelor, who insensitively plays women when they try hard enough to get close to me, and I cannot see that changing in the future unfortunately… I never wanted it to be this way but it isn’t my choice.

  102. deti says:

    @ Samuel Solomon:

    “I wonder if the aversion to making a choice and sticking to it, for women, stems from the subconscious awareness that she cannot trust herself to do so.”

    I think that’s the bottom of it. The surface explanation, and how I think this starts out, is that she starts out not having to make a choice and so never really learns how to make good ones. If she makes a bad choice, she leaves the relationship/hookup and because of her looks and the male scarcity mentality, never has consequences for it.

    Until several years pass.

    Then she looks back on the wreckage of her love/sex life and the truth dawns on her: She’s not very good at selecting men of good character. Adding to the problem is that the men who tingle her are either not marriage material or are of poor character. And, she isn’t attracted to the men of good character who would be good marriage material.

    Another problem, and one that I think gets overlooked, is who the girl associates with, hangs out with. who she sees, where she goes, where she spends her time, and what she does on a daily basis. These are what create, calibrate, and set her attraction triggers. A father is key here; because a father tends to notice them better than a mother does and tends to control those people, places and things. In part he controls them because he knows exactly what goes on there, who is there, and what kind of men will be pursuing his daughter and how they do it. He knows these things because he used to be one of those men. Most of the time a father’s bullshit detector is much more honed and developed than the mother’s.

    I think attraction for a girl is part environment and can be malleable; and it’s why people like Dalrock suggest that a woman can calibrate attraction by choosing the venue. If she doesn’t want to be a slut, she shouldn’t hang with sluts. If she doesn’t want asshats, maybe she should spend some time in other places and avoid the douchebags.

  103. van Rooinek says:

    we would do everything but sex, more due to the insistence of the girls rather than mine…

    Yeah, been there myself a few times, when I was younger. Tthat’s another aspect of the red pill — church and culture unanimously portrayed men as the sexual aggressors, and women as the noble resistors. LIE LIE LIE. Even with “Christian” women, it was always me that had to put on the brakes — a few times, later than I should have, granted, but, I DID stop… over their objections.

    And then at church I heard men shamed for being the ones that push for sex… by a pastor who was later outed as an adulterer…

    Also, re: your earlier post — I was thinking about this more:

    You can meet women with ‘low’ Ns of 2 or 3… but this entails that she was engaging in serial monogamy… dating each of these guys for a year or two… [but she] still has been having regular sex for many years on end…

    Once upon a time I dated a Christian girl who was an ex-prostitute, n>400 by her own admission. If all else had worked out, and the disease tests had come back negative, I would have been okay marrying her — and I have taken a LOT of heat for this here at Dalrock’s. But let’s consider 2 hypothetical women:

    Chick A had 3 long term boyfriends, and lived with each of them for 2-3 years
    Her n=3, however her total number of sex acts is 1000

    Chick B, had 1000 men. All were prostitution clients, one-night stands, or in one case, a rapist.
    Her n=1000, and her total number of sex acts is 1000.

    Which one has the more damaged pair-bonding capacity?

    .

  104. 5iver says:

    Van Rooinek, i can understand your reasoning completely, because the ex-prostitute is a lot less hypocritical about the baggage she has… I don’t want to give away too much about myself, but I have close friends who come from third-world non-Western countries and I regularly visit them, and am really intrigued by their cultural approach to women… (This is why I adamantly think that the best buffer to the excesses of feminism/sexual revolution is a society where prostitution is legally and culturally acceptable, as in the case of my friends).

    My friends would spend hours Skyping their girlfriends who are abroad studying, sending them elaborate gifts in the mail, professing their feelings to them, yet as soon as they would hang up, they would insist we go to the ‘massage parlour’.

    Now, the very first time I visited them in their home country, I was reluctant to trade money for sex acts, as a (former) righteous Westerner I thought it was immoral and wrong… After a lot of pressure, I relented and agreed to go (in their culture, men going together to engage in prostitution is some kind of ‘male bonding’ exercise that cements friendships) and was pleasantly surprised by the… it might surprise you for me to use this word… but… the ‘innocence’ of the act.. There was no hypocrisy, no games, just a man and a girl.. The fact that i couldn’t speak the language probably made the experience even more genuine and untainted compared to what I was used to in the Western world…

    Again, this wasn’t sex, but ‘sex acts’ that we engaged in with the girls.. I have only done it a couple of times and always at the insistence of my friends, and consider it to be an eye-opening experience from which I learned a lot.

  105. van Rooinek says:

    Hope you didn’t get AIDS…. And be ware of your soul…. but…

    was pleasantly surprised by the… it might surprise you for me to use this word… but… the ‘innocence’ of the act..

    No surprise, I get you completely. Even though I’ve never been in that situation, I intuitively get it somehow. “Innocence” is almost the perfect word for it. The ex-hooker just plain WANTED me, pure and simple, and without the guile or games that other women play.

    In other contexts, also, I’ve seen that evil — pure, undistracted, unselfconscious evil — can sometimes bear a disturbing resemblance to the good and true, if only because they share a purity of purpose. This is, perhaps, why tax collectors and hookers have an easier time entering the kingdom than Pharisees…. they have few or no pretenses to drop.

  106. FuriousFerret says:

    I’m definitely checking that out, MackPUA. Thanks for the info. I always keep an open mind and investigate. That seems to make sense because digestion is extremely important to the body.

  107. Random Angeleno says:

    @MackPUA, I’ve never heard of this low stomach HCL business. How does one diagnose this? Can the HCL tablets and bitters be given to older diabetics with obesity issues? Good links that discuss all this would be appreciated.

    Apologies to Dalrock for continuing this off-topic discussion.

  108. 22to28 says:

    @5iver

    “However, we would do everything but sex, more due to the insistence of the girls rather than mine…”

    Ya, this one always killed me. Girls are so pure, right? But it was always them pushing things further physically. It was only the ones with no experience who wouldn’t do this. If they weren’t virgins, it was simply a matter of time and usually less time than more.

    Of course, if you reject THEM physically, there is something wrong with you.

    I’ve somehow managed to cling to the last pieces of my virginity for the first 26 years of my life so far, but sometimes I wonder if I would really regret it if I’d just given in and given a hard, shift boning to a few of the girls who wanted it bad.

    “The worst part of all this is that I am comfortable in my life as a bachelor”

    Ya, ain’t that the truth. I’ve become to accustomed to managing my own sexual needs on my own…initially through years of female rejection and then due to moral concerns with actually having sex with a woman….so its not a strong motivation to pursue women.

    Sure, I still pursue women when I want to, as a hobby you could say, sometimes I enjoy their company, but I don’t miss it when I don’t. I just do something else instead with my time.

    I’ve started to wonder how I could ever give up what I have. Selfishness isn’t a motivator. I’d hate to spend money getting married because it would slow down some of my other goals…for example, building schools in impoverished communities. How could I put a stupid wedding cake before that?

  109. 5iver says:

    @22to28:

    I commend you for maintaining your virginity, but I just want to clarify that I never judge a man’s worth by his sexual (or lack thereof) exploits. When I finally lost my virginity, it wasn’t a life-changing experience as it is for a woman, in fact it really didn’t change my life in any aspect really… I would say that even for a righteous man sometimes it is good to gain sexual experience in order to be able to ‘weed’ out the sluts, but that is only the case for a man who pedestalises women… I think that even if I didn’t have these sexual experiences that my ‘slut detector’ would be as good as it is, mainly due to being raised in a patriarchal family with solid theological teaching. I know virtuous, intelligent men who are virgins and have no sexual experience, but their ‘slut detectors’ are just as good as mine…

    One consequence perhaps of having sex, is that I am able more to sympathise with sexually active women to a certain extent, and in a very weird way. While previously, I really did have the madonna/whore complex in putting women into categories of virgins and slu*s, I now understand the innate dependency women have on men… I mean when I ‘hook up’ with girls I do bond with them, make them laugh, share intimate stories about our past, our hopes for the future etc. and I do enjoy hanging out with them to a certain extent…. But the moment I started being like this, I also lost that marriage-minded mentality I had in approaching women as I grew up.. I only begin to really resent them when they reveal their entitled, delusional (& irrationally optimistic) hopes for the future.

    Another consequence of female promiscuity, as has been pointed out on Dalrock’s blog before, is that it dis-incentivised my productivity and behaviour completely. When I was younger, I would engage in sports, a whole lot of extra-curricular activities (stressing about getting into a good university, to get a good job, to become a good provider etc), educate myself in history and religion, as a means to becoming a ‘real man’ that relished the opportunity and challenge of marriage and fatherhood… Now a girl practically offers easy sex and company, and I am wary/apathetic of even taking her up on her offer.

    My mother did remark to me, when I visited home, how I have grown into a real man (I see my parents once a year)… Mainly due to my incorporation of the ‘red pill’

  110. Cail Corishev says:

    Chick A had 3 long term boyfriends, and lived with each of them for 2-3 years
    Her n=3, however her total number of sex acts is 1000

    Chick B, had 1000 men. All were prostitution clients, one-night stands, or in one case, a rapist.
    Her n=1000, and her total number of sex acts is 1000.

    Which one has the more damaged pair-bonding capacity?

    That’s an interesting point that I haven’t seen discussed much. Chick A may have bonded very closely with one or more of her 3 guys, while Chick B may not have bonded with anyone (though it’s still questionable whether she could). Chick A may have learned to be bored with sex, and to use or withhold it to control her men. Chick A is certainly more likely to still have emotional bonds with her exes.

    I’m still not sure I’d choose B over A, and B is likely to have major issues other than pair-bonding. But it may not be as clear-cut as it would seem at first. Make the difference less extreme, say a woman who had 20 drunken one-night stands versus one who had 2-3 “good” long-term relationships, and I might take the former.

  111. Pingback: Lightning Round – 2012/31/10 « Free Northerner

  112. Pingback: Father Knows Best: Act of God Edition « Patriactionary

  113. raef says:

    Chick A may have bonded very closely with one or more

  114. Mint says:

    Very interesting–and that’s why neither is acceptable to me, personally. I’ve heard so much about how A is better than B, but this is why I don’t like either.

  115. Dr. Blarf says:

    Two related comments in a convenient, single package…

    Firstly, it would be interesting to know the extent to which damage to children of separated/divorced couples is a self-fulfilling prophecy. “Divorce rape”, custody battles etc. always create bitterness and resentment between divorced parents, so it’s intuitive that children growing up in such an environment will suffer psychologically. But what about relatively equitable separations in which divorce rape is absent, child custody is split and the parents live in relatively close proximity? It would seem that the terms of a separation/divorce and the civility/attitudes of the parents have at least as much of an impact on the affected childrens’ psychological welfare than the fact of the separation/divorce itself. No separation is ideal for children, of course, but I don’t see why parents in such a situation wouldn’t have a considerable amount of control, through their attitudes and behavior alone, over the degree to which blood is bad and by extension toxic to their children.

    Secondly, the manosphere seems pretty unanimous and value-neutral about the idea that hypergamy and solipsism make “I’m not haaaaappy” a legitimate reason for a woman to exit a relationship, whether or not there are kids in the picture. That is to say, we understand women’s nature in this regard; the onus is on us as men to be game-aware or to have enough of a natural alpha dynamic such that “I’m not haaaaappy” never takes root in the minds of the women we love. Is it a Christian moral attitude toward the sanctity of marriage that informs Dalrock, SSM and others in painting as frivolous/selfish/irresponsible those women who exit their relationships and thereby dismantle their families because they’re “not haaaaappy”? I get that adults who have children SHOULD go into it with the idea that they’re together for the long haul, and I appreciate the role that marriage before God plays among people of faith in making such a normative scenario more realistic. But if we’re talking about non-abusive relationships coming to an end, there’s a good chance that the one getting dumped or served divorce papers is going to find his/her counterpart’s reasoning and actions frivolous/selfish/irresponsible. If a woman is unhappy in her marriage and unwilling to try and salvage it, then how is it better for her children to grow up in a household headed up by loveless dysfunction? Her decision to exit is hypergamy and solipsism at work as usual; to conflate that with actual disregard for the welfare of her children strikes me as a blatant fallacious shaming tactic. Per my first comment above, separated parents probably have more power than hangers on to the sanctity-of-marriage bit give them credit for when it comes to determining how much psychological trauma their children will endure.

    Anyway, it’s an interesting topic and there are certainly some interesting comments. Cheers, everyone.

  116. David J. says:

    Dr. Blarf: I believe it is a “Christian moral attitude [or better, I would say, a biblical attitude] toward the sanctity of marriage that informs Dalrock, SSM and others.” It is definitely what informs my comments. So, yes, regardless of gender, the spouse who divorces for reasons other than physical abuse, abandonment, or physical adultery (and perhaps other behavior on that spectrum, subject to church input) is being frivolous/selfish/irresponsible. In fact, I think it’s accurate, given the explicit vows the spouses took before God and witnesses, to describe a divorce without biblical grounds as treachery and betrayal.

    I wouldn’t know from personal experience whether children of divorce do better if the parents are calm and reasonable about the divorce, because my ex-wife’s frivolous divorce filing was accompanied by a lot of fear-filled, immature, selfish, wasteful behavior. And the kids (ages 14-21 at the time) suffered greatly and continue to suffer, because her immaturity continues (including getting remarried in 2 weeks to a twice-divorced man whom she met online less than a year ago and with whom she has only spent a few days a month since they met in person 8 months ago). Even apart from biblical application (or even personal honor), I take issue with the idea that frivolous divorce by a woman is ok because it’s in their nature. If they are not responsible to keep their vows despite their natural bent, they shouldn’t take the vows in the first place. I don’t cut myself or any other man the slack to say that it’s ok for me to break a promise I’ve made if it’s something that’s in my nature to do. Keeping your promises despite pressure (internal or external) to do otherwise is what adulthood, maturity, integrity, and setting an example for your kids are about.

    I also take issue with the idea that a good divorce is better than a bad marriage, simply on pragmatic grounds. Good advice and counseling are readily available to anyone who is willing to work on their marriage, so very few marriages have an excuse to stay bad. Statistics show that nearly all marriages that at one time are described as unhappy are, 5 years later, described as happy. Sticking with it generally works. Vow-breaking divorces are horrible examples for the kids, and can be expected to become a generational pattern, which is bad for society in general. And so on.

    The advantage of the biblical approach to marriage is that it’s not my subjective feelings (nor is it her subjective feelings) that determine whether my wife’s divorce filing was frivolous. The objective incompatibility of the divorce with the vows she spoke and the Bible’s teaching on marriage are the basis of that determination.

  117. siquaeris says:

    “…the onus is on us as men to be game-aware or to have enough of a natural alpha dynamic such that “I’m not haaaaappy” never takes root in the minds of the women we love.”

    Good idea in theory, but is it realistic? You have no real control over a woman’s happiness and game can only get you so far. Back in the day, when divorce was frowned upon, you could rely on commitment to help you get through those unhaaaaapy times. I believe that the ever-visible and socially acceptable choice of divorce is constantly being dangled before women. This greatly contributes to their unhappiness as it stifles their motivation to solve difficult problems, and sparks their hypergamic instincts.

    Without the commitment that marriage used to have, we have to hope that our game is solid, more solid than any other guys she might meet or fantasize about. I don’t think I want to rely on that. I’ll run game because it’s fun and, to be honest, a bit of a challenge to me. But at the same time I will not become too emotionally invested, or at the very least I’ll tell myself every day that this marriage might not last… which leads naturally to emotional divestment.

  118. apidistra says:

    I think no fault divorce is evil. Go ahead and do what you have to do, but stay together for the kids, unless it is totally impossible.

  119. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dr. Blarf
    Firstly, it would be interesting to know the extent to which damage to children of separated/divorced couples is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    Two quick points:
    1. The negative effects of divorce are seen even in “friendly” divorces. Perhaps at lower probabilities. But still the damage is done. Because men and women are not interchangeable parts, fathers and mothers are also not interchangeable.

    2. If current trends continue, divorce theft will be less and less of a problem, because 40% of children this year are born to women who aren’t married at all. The babymomma, with multiple children each from a different father, and the state supporting her as a loyal beta (our tax dollars at work) is one wave of the future.There is no question that the children of never married women are much more likely to see the negative effects of fatherlessness.

    It’s not difficult to raise children to an age where they can more or less function for themselves in the babymomma / “litter” mode. However, those children are not likely to be future surgeons, astronomers, particle physicists, application programmers, chemical engineers, etc. They aren’t even necessarily going to be employed at all, beyond the level of fry cook / call center worker / barrista. And the social overhead to deal with more and more dysfunctional humans, who are carrying around all sorts of baggage in their head that makes them they way they are is not free, nor is it cheap.

  120. Martian Bachelor says:

    But what about relatively equitable separations … but I don’t see why parents in such a situation wouldn’t have a considerable amount of control, through their attitudes and behavior alone, over the degree to which blood is bad and by extension toxic to their children.

    Ah yes, the good divorce, the ideal divorce… which, from a woman’s perspective – and that’s all that matters now – looks just like a great marriage, minus any sex. It’s the Marriage/Divorce 2.0 version of being involuntarily friend-zoned, after the fact. The only difference is the stakes are much higher. So all the required attitude and behavior adjustment is (as usual) the responsibility of the man. In a nutshell, what you’re advocating for is that during divorce rape the man do the equivalent of just “think of England”, “take it like a man”, “be a good sport”, etc. Or else!

    Yes, NADALT, but I’ve never seen any percentages from the family destruction lobby on the number of people using divorce responsibly (for lack of better term). -What could be called “filing jointly for divorce”, when the nature of the system is that that doesn’t exist. Man-fault divorce presumes the man guilty, and any foot-dragging or non-conforming during the process on his part just proves it.

  121. Martian Bachelor says:

    But what about relatively equitable separations … but I don’t see why parents in such a situation wouldn’t have a considerable amount of control, through their attitudes and behavior alone, over the degree to which blood is bad and by extension toxic to their children. (Dr. Blarf)

    Ah yes, the good divorce, the ideal divorce… which, from a woman’s perspective – and that’s all that matters now – looks just like a great marriage, minus any sex. It’s the Marriage/Divorce 2.0 version of being involuntarily friend-zoned, after the fact. The only difference is the stakes are much higher. So all the required attitude and behavior adjustment is (as usual) the responsibility of the man. In a nutshell, what you’re advocating for is that during divorce rape the man do the equivalent of just “think of England”, “take it like a man”, “be a good sport”, etc. Or else!

    Yes, NADALT, but I’ve never seen any percentages from the family destruction lobby on the number of people using divorce responsibly (for lack of better term). -What could be called “filing jointly for divorce”, when the nature of the system is that that doesn’t exist. Man-fault divorce presumes the man guilty, and any foot-dragging or non-conforming during the process on his part just proves it.

  122. Anonymous Reader says:

    Blart
    If a woman is unhappy in her marriage and unwilling to try and salvage it, then how is it better for her children to grow up in a household headed up by loveless dysfunction?

    It is better for her children to grow up in that marriage because they will be less likely to drop out of school, less likely to try drugs at all, less likely to try alcohol before they are 21 years old, less likely to have problems in their own relationships as adults, less likely to try sex in their teens (less likely to get pregnant / have abortions), less likely catch one or more STD’s, and so forth. Your argument may have been convincing back in 1975 or so, the years since then have made it clear that “loveless dysfunction” can be dealt with in a number of ways, all of which benefit her children. The years since then have made it clear that the price of divorce is paid by her children for the rest of their lives, and on average children of divorced parents have shorter life spans.

    Your use of the term her children reveals much, as do your 1970′s second-stage feminist sloganeering. Are you here to discuss and learn, or to finger-wag and lecture and shame?

    Reply, if you dare. I doubt you have the guts.

  123. Pingback: LIGFY – November Savings Time | Society of Amateur Gentlemen

  124. MaMu1977 says:

    A couple of points:

    1. Fat is relative. If you live in the world of Honey Boo Boo, a 300lb woman isn’t considered to be anything extraordinary. If you live in an upper (or even middle) class environment, it isn’t difficult to find women who think that Cristina Hendricks is fat. I live in New York City. The amount of women I’ve talked with who honestly believe that Mrs. Hendricks sexiness is based on her “attitude”(and not her 38D chest and under-30″ waist), would surprise you.

    2. “Soul mates” are bollocks. As a military veteran, I’ve noticed that about 50% of the long-term, “They have always looked so perfect together”, relationships have involved people who would have never met without the benefit of the military. I’m talking about, “He’s from Minnesota, she was born in Texas and raised in Wyoming”, relationships. I’m talking about, “He’s a black man from Alabama, she’s a Kazakhstani diplomat’s daughter”, relationships, or “He’s an Oklahoma dirt farmer’s son-turned-pilot, she’s the illegitimate daughter of the guy who founded Red Bull”, relationship. The happiest relationship I’ve ever witnessed involved the son of a Nazi and a black woman from Philly (two groups of people who think that misgenation is almost a cardinal sin.) And I don’t even need to go into detail about the millions of friendships that take place between people who would be “perfect for each other” in a romantic sense if they weren’t of incompatible orientations (like, to use a good example, the protagonist and “black best friend” on Scrubs.) “Will and Grace” was a TV show, but it isn’t difficult to find gay man/straight women (and vice versa) relationships that have held strong over thirty-plus years in more (and sometimes, even *less*) tolerant areas. They’d be “perfect” partners if it wasn’t for that pesky vagina or penis, but they’re still staying together in that house and walking in the park together on weekends.

    And as the xkcd link noted, nothing works if the timeframe changes. If you’re a seventy year old man with inoperable cancer and your neighbour’s four year old daughter treats you like you hang the moon in the sky, nothing fruitful will come of that situation. If you’re a fifty-three year old paraplegic woman and your “soul mate” is a fifteen year old heir to a fortune/royal title, he isn’t going to throw away his responsibilities to take care of you. People (mostly men) still fall in love with La Giaconda, even though the model for that famous portrait has been dead for almost 500 years. My father tells a joke about the fact that the most simpatico he’s ever felt with another human being was when he met a ninety-three year old Saudi imam during Desert Storm. My father, for his detriment, is a natural Alpha. The Arabic nonagenarian, despite being broke for the first sixty years of his life, has been married to over fifteen women (and twelve of his wives were attained prior to the discovery of oil on his land, which meant that yes, women were searching him out when he could count all of his goats without using a second hand and choosing him over men with dozens of goats and camels.)

  125. Anonymous age 70 says:

    >>REMEMBER you cant become obese by eating food, ONLY by damaging your bodies ability to aborb nutrients, does your body start to CREATE FAT as a survival mechanism

    It doesn’t matter much if we disagree, but what you say is simply not so. Obtain the books used in medical schools to train our doctors. I did, and the Physiology textbooks go into almost microscopic detail how the body processes the various nutrients.

    When you eat more carbohydrates than your body can use at that time, the rest of the glucose is converted to body fat. When you eat more protein than your body can use at that time, the excess is converted to body fat.

    Your comments are without a doubt the wildest fiction I have heard in a long time, even worse than the doctor’s claim that low fat; high carb is the best diet.

  126. Hurting says:

    Dr. Blarf says:
    November 1, 2012 at 9:56 pm

    Firstly, it would be interesting to know the extent to which damage to children of separated/divorced couples is a self-fulfilling prophecy. “Divorce rape”, custody battles etc. always create bitterness and resentment between divorced parents, so it’s intuitive that children growing up in such an environment will suffer psychologically. But what about relatively equitable separations in which divorce rape is absent, child custody is split and the parents live in relatively close proximity? It would seem that the terms of a separation/divorce and the civility/attitudes of the parents have at least as much of an impact on the affected childrens’ psychological welfare than the fact of the separation/divorce itself. No separation is ideal for children, of course, but I don’t see why parents in such a situation wouldn’t have a considerable amount of control, through their attitudes and behavior alone, over the degree to which blood is bad and by extension toxic to their children.

    Sorry for retreading ground others may have covered, but the above does give credence to the fallacy of the ‘good divorce’. Like unicorns and the Tooth Fairy, there is, for all practical intents and purposes, no such thing except in the comparatively rare cases of true (as in not informed by the view that only the man can be guilty) abuse and/or neglect. The entire matter is framed improperly from the start insofar as there is anything remotely equitable about a splitting of a marriage from a contractual standpoint. I offer the folllowing real world example for your consideration:

    Assume a man and a wife married for 19 years with two teenage children in the picture wherein the husband earned $100K working FT and the wife contributes $20K working PT per their mutual agreement. Wife decides that ‘she has had enough’ and files for divorce on no-fault basis. The original agreement was ‘until death do us part’; not so anymore. How is this contract dissolved? Answer – not like it would be in the rest of the real world.

    In the rest of the real world, a party to a contract can not typically dissolve it absent either a breach on the other party’s part or per previously agreed upon stipulations in the original contract. Absent either of these two factors, the party seeking to dissolve would need to buy his/her way out of the agreement by way of compensating the remaining party.

    If we applied this contract theory to our example, the leaving wife would do so with no compensation whatsoever – indeed because two can live as cheaply as one, and certainly four can live as cheaply as three, she would actually have to remit to the non-dissolving partner compensation so as to keep him whole. Put another way, the husband and the children in the example were accustomed to living in a household with $120K in income annually and the benefits accruing thereto (wealth). Why should they not continue to live in that way with the exception of the avoided expenses of the now gone wife/mother? What are the incremental avoidable expenses for one less person in a four personn household – probably not $500 per month. So yes, the wife might be able to successfully argue that she should keep $6K in the ‘rest of the world’ contract law application; the remaining parties, who did not breach the lifelong contract would at least not suffer financially from the desertion.

    In the U.S. domestic relatiions courts, however, a rarefied type of jurisprudence is practiced whereupon demands for no-fault dissolution of contracts are rewarded with cash and prizes. Not only will the non-breaching party (typically the husband) not be made whole as described above – he will be made to pay mightily. A lot of divorces look amicable on the surface, but they are negotiated in an environment wherein the women typically hold all the high cards. In our example, the man will give up 1/3 to 1/2 of his gross income and have his children taken away from him. Instead of one of the parties suffering material loss as in the ‘real world’ application, all four will suffer greatly; their lives forever altered for the worse. So one of the four can be haaaaaapier.

  127. Pingback: Links & Ladies: November 2, 2012

  128. Pingback: She needs more men! | Dalrock

  129. Pingback: Feral love | Dalrock

  130. Pingback: Lovestruck | Dalrock

  131. Pingback: Looking for The One | Donal Graeme

  132. Susan says:

    Wow this blog sure attacks the female species. What I cannot understand is the men that are willingly bedding the ladies yet we are the sluts and feminists. Where is the chivalry of being a provider like our fathers, waiting for marriage to have sex. Many of us ‘old’ girls tried to do the right thing, not looking for prince charming with wheel-barrow full of cash. It goes both ways gentleman. I have seen men pay for a call girl instead of court a decent woman. Blame it all on the woman. It takes two to tango. My bachelor single, bald, fat friends still want a ‘hottie’ 10-15 years younger. Well, look in the mirror Mister. Hope I do not sound too bitter (I prefer jaded) but some of these comments really sting. I guess over 40, single with no children. My life is done.

  133. MarcusD says:

    Wow this blog sure attacks the female species.

    It does not. I think you are failing to differentiate between criticism of females and criticism of common tendencies of females.

    “Where is the chivalry of being a provider like our fathers”

    “Chivalry” disappeared when it was branded as sexism (see e.g.: Viki, G. Tendayi, Dominic Abrams, and Paul Hutchison. “The “true” romantic: Benevolent sexism and paternalistic chivalry.” Sex Roles 49.9-10 (2003): 533-537., etc etc).

    “waiting for marriage to have sex”

    It is my understanding that many men do, assuming that it is not held against them (e.g.: 50% of women would not date a male virgin, according to the 2012 Match.com survey). What you must understand is that people (men included) respond to incentives and try to avoid penalties. The current sexual marketplace (viz.: Baumeister, Roy F., and Kathleen D. Vohs. “Sexual economics: Sex as female resource for social exchange in heterosexual interactions.” Personality and Social Psychology Review 8.4 (2004): 339-363.) is one where there is greater incentive to engage in premarital sex than there is to not do so. Incentives can in fact just be [incorrect] perceptions – and of course, either way, that doesn’t make premarital sex right.

    “tried to do the right thing, not looking for prince charming with wheel-barrow full of cash.”

    That’s not necessarily “right” (as in right/wrong). I think the word you are looking for is “smart.” It is the “smart” thing to do to not so drastically narrow your potential choices. I think many of the issues in this area arise when results are not to one’s liking – that is when criticism begins to flow quite freely.

    “My bachelor single, bald, fat friends still want a ‘hottie’ 10-15 years younger.”

    Let them. What harm does it do to you?

  134. Feminist Hater says:

    Maybe your ‘bachelor single, bald and fat friends’ want a hottie 10 to 15 years younger because the payoff of the slim chance of finding such a ‘hottie’ is still way higher than being with you.

  135. Feminist Hater says:

    And it doesn’t go both ways. Young women have all the chance in the world to get married when they’re young. They tend to blow their chances though, either due to fucking around or studying forever and wasting their youth…

    Time waits for no man, well.. woman in this case.

  136. Opus says:

    Women are not a species; Homo-Sapiens (commonly called Humans or sometimes Mankind) are a species which reproduce sexually and there are thus two sexes one being female and the other male. Susan is a Homo-Sapien and a female of that particular species. Susan has however failed to reproduce. This would be bad for the species were it not that in a species currently with six billion members nature is indifferent to such personal loss, which itself has been implanted by nature to ensure reproduction. Nature manipulates members of the species by making men desire to engage in sexual reproduction with women and so as to obtain the best possible genes women have evolved to resist such male sexual desire from all but the most desirable males – the so-called Alpha Males. Nature also gives men one-it is and gives women shaming tactics to use against men when their reluctance to facilitate male sexual desire has led the female of the species to fail to cash in her chips before the age of forty.

    This is genetic Calvinism but there are those who think the species (which are merely a social construct) does not really exist and that anything is possible, in which case there may be hope for Susan.

    Nature does not care about this blog.

  137. Pingback: Girls conspiring to turn other girls into sluts: a good reason not to send your daughters away to college. | Sunshine Mary

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s