Empowerment turned demotion.

Blogger Michele Zipp at Cafe Mom confirms the status marker marriage serves for women in 5 Reasons ‘Boyfriend’ Is the Worst Word for Divorcees:

3. It feels like a demotion. The word “boyfriend” feels juvenile. “Fiance” feels snooty. “Husband” feels accomplished. Anyone can have a boyfriend…

But since marriage ended, you’re back to (shudder) boyfriend. It’s like you’ve been left back when all your friends graduated.

Note the text regarding the “like” button at the bottom of the Cafe Mom pages:

Click “Like” if you’re a single mom — and proud!

The linked Proud Single Moms Facebook page must be enough to make Glenn Stanton’s heart nearly burst!  So many heroes in one place.

Another divorcée writes to Slate’s Dear Prudence asking if it is normal that the divorce empowerment hasn’t kicked in yet (emphasis mine):

I divorced my husband of six years this spring, and even though the initial excitement of a new lease on life was exhilarating, I have found actuality to be just dreary and dismal. I fear I am spiraling downward and I have no way to stop it. My friends have given me some support, but I really don’t think they fully understand the depth of my despair. I really don’t know if I am reacting normally to this life change or if I need some help. When I pleasure myself (which unfortunately has been necessary since the split), I always end up in tears because it reinforces how lonely I am. Recently, I have even taken to only shaving one leg so when I lie in bed at night I feel like a man is next to me.  Should I expect this sort of reaction even after close to a year of mentally ending my marriage?

About these ads
This entry was posted in Choice Addiction, Divorce, Fantasy vs Reality, Hold my beer and watch this, Post Marital Spinsterhood, Stantons Heroes, Status of marriage. Bookmark the permalink.

318 Responses to Empowerment turned demotion.

  1. crowhill says:

    Only shaving one leg so she can feel like a man is laying next to her? That is certifiably psycho.

    If a man said something equally nuts — like that he shaves one leg so he feels like there is a woman next to him — his guy friends will practically tar and feather him. For his own good.

    How do other women react to this kind of psycho behavior from other women?

  2. Feminist Hater says:

    How do other women react to this kind of psycho behavior from other women?

    They blame men.

  3. Alexander says:

    What he said.

    My friends and I had a joke about this – get so lonely you’d almost paint the nails on your left hand.

    Don’t think anyone actually followed through with it though…

  4. I guess that new lease on life was really just a sales pitch from the devil.

  5. Dalrock says:

    @Crowhill

    How do other women react to this kind of psycho behavior from other women?

    Very often via gloating disguised as empathy.

  6. Manlyman says:

    Cats are hairy…

  7. Remo says:

    Are we really supposed to feel sorry for these stupid women? OH MY GOSH, OH MY GOSH! I’M LIKE SO TOTALLY DEPRESSED RIGHT NOW BECAUSE – I’M LIKE – HAVE TO HAVE A BOYFRIEND INSTEAD OF A HUSBAND. I DID LIKE MY FRIEND AMY SAID AND DIVORCED MY EX AND NOW HE’S IN JAIL CAUSE HE CAN’T PAY ME AND NOW I FEEL LIKE I CAN’T HOLD MY HEAD HIGH CAUSE YOU KNOW, I’M NOT MARRIED!

  8. 8to12 says:

    This woman destroyed her life, because she bought into a lie. That divorce would empower her to create a wonderful new life for herself.

    The value of the typical divorced woman in the marriage marketplace is close to zero. She’s probably past he sexual prime and heading down hill fast. She’s probably too old to give her next husband children. If she’s bringing children along with her, her value is a net negative as the next husband will have to take on the additional burden of raising and paying for another man’s children. Why would any man think that’s a good deal?

    On the other hand, her value as a wife to her first husband was sky high. He’s invested time with her. They probably have children. They probably created a family unit. It’s unlikely he will be able to recreate that family unit with a future wife.

    I can’t remember where I saw it, but wasn’t there a study of women that had filed divorce and found that 5 years later the women who decided NOT to go though with it and stayed married were happier than the women that divorced?

    [D: I linked to some studies on that here.]

    It all just highlights how important it is (for both men and women) to make their FIRST marriage work. That means picking the right person THE FIRST TIME. There really isn’t a do-over card for marriage. Screw it up the first time, and your life is screwed forever.

  9. Angainor says:

    Reminds me of a exchange on The Big Bang Theory:

    Raj: “Sometimes I get so lonely, I sit on my left hand until it goes numb then I put it in my right hand and pretend I’m holding hands with another person.”

    Amy: “I do that to. Sometimes the left hand tries to cop a feel… and I let it.”

  10. Swithunus says:

    “HAVE TO HAVE A BOYFRIEND” but, but…she hasn’t got a boyfriend has she?

    can she sue everyone that sold her the idea of divorce as empowerment? I would say that they sold her a pup, but sold her a load of cats would be more appropriate.

    next week she’ll probably be telling all her maried friends how good the free and single life is. Misery loves company, if you lack morality, why not pay it forward?

  11. lzlozozozozozozol!

    OMG she copied da GBFMz! Recently, I have even taken to only shaving one leg so when I lie in bed at night I feel like a women is lying next to me and my honeyz so we be in a threesome or foursomesz!

    lzozlzozozo

  12. Saint Velvet says:

    Recently, I have even taken to only shaving one leg so when I lie in bed at night I feel like a man is next to me.

    Keyboard ruined. Now slightly nauseous. You can’t make this stuff up. Sadly that does sound like something is really wrong with her, but I suspect it was with her long before her urge to divorce.

  13. Only shaving one leg so she can feel like a man is laying next to her? That is certifiably psycho.

    Oh I dunno,…

    http://www.injapanthisisperfectlynormal.com/girlfriend-lap-pillow/

  14. LiveFearless says:

    Michelle Zipp celebrated the pain she believes the man ‘should’ feel. The song that was number one in the world TWICE this year. She reviewed Kai’s performance of Bruno Marshere . FYI, the meme is now allowed in the mainstream. Our teams are writing it in: the show!

  15. WillBest says:

    This reminds me over the fight of the gender neutral third person pronoun singular. When I was in elementary school it was “he” and nobody had a problem with that, but by high school we had to either write the awkward “he or she” or use he and she interchangeably. If we stuck to “he” (but not “she” I tested this twice) we were downgraded.

  16. 8to12 says:

    @swiftfoxmark2 said: “I guess that new lease on life was really just a sales pitch from the devil.”

    I’m convinced women continue to push this advice to validate their own bad decisions.

    It’s as if watching someone else destroy their lives in the same way they did makes them feel better about their own destroyed life.

  17. crowhill says:

    @Rollo, those guys look Japanese. You’ve read about the weird stuff going on over there, haven’t you?

  18. WillBest says:

    She reviewed Kai’s performance of Bruno Mars

    Every one of Bruno Mars’s songs that make it to the radio makes me cringe. I don’t know if he balances out his vagina worship on the b-side with some straight up misogyny, but I died a little inside when he was announced to be doing the Super Bowl this year.

  19. alcestiseshtemoa says:

    Recently, I have even taken to only shaving one leg so when I lie in bed at night I feel like a man is next to me.

    LOL!

  20. 8to12 says:

    @crowhill says: “Only shaving one leg so she can feel like a man is laying next to her? That is certifiably psycho.”

    Psycho? No. Desperate? Yes.

    What will make her psycho is bumping into her ex with his new wife (the one that’s 10 years younger than her and still slim and attractive). The fact that the husband SHE DUMPED has moved on (an up) will make her crazy.

    The irony is he probably would have been perfectly satisfied to have remained married to his first wife. If she had been willing to work WITH him they probably both would have been happier.

  21. alcestiseshtemoa says:

    I think this would be her theme song, since the woman is divorced and lonely.

  22. Bob Wallace says:

    I had this image of a woman with one goat leg and one human leg.

  23. Grampy_Bone says:

    @WillBest

    FYI Bruno Mars actually wrote this song:

  24. Sometimes, I don’t know if I should feel sad for a Christian woman who is a divorcee.

    Mutual friends from a church I attended set me up with a single woman (I rate at 7/10) recently. A day after I was introduced to her, I asked my friends if they were absolutely sure she wasn’t some guy’s girlfriend or something. It was inconceivable to me then that someone like her would be single.

    It was only on our first date together when she told me about her sad story — she married a man who already physically abused her before they made their marital vows in church. Fifteen months later (and after a major tiff between them landed her at the hospital with a bleeding artery), he divorced her. Because they had no children (she was on the BC pill which displeased him), she was awarded $1 alimony only.

    She is now 38. When I asked her how many boyfriends she had, she told me (point blank) she couldn’t count cos there were too many of them (suggests that she rode the carousel).

    When I explained to her my thoughts about how Christians who are divorced cannot remarry (unless their spouse passes on), she said my interpretation of the Bible was wrong. She claimed that the pastor told her (before she signed the divorce papers) to move on to the new phase in her life. She took it that she was now free to remarry. She also argued that (a) her cell group would ask her if she had been seeing anyone romantically, (b) she was the innocent party from the divorce cos her husband initiated it and he remarried another woman a few months later (i.e., he committed adultery first), and (c) she believed that God is a loving God and He would not bear to see her suffer being alone for the rest of her life.

    As a man, there is not much I can do to persuade or encourage her. And I told my female friend (who was part of the group which set us up) to be strong source of support for her.

    (Admittedly, I was a little smitten by her but I knew that following my heart would be sinning against God. )

  25. sunshinemary says:

    When I pleasure myself (which unfortunately has been necessary since the split), I always end up in tears because it reinforces how lonely I am.

    Welp, I don’t need to “pleasure myself” since, unlike Ms. Fabulous Frivorcee, I have a husband to do that for me, but I will cop to experiencing a rather delicious thrill of schadenfreude upon reading that sentence. /kidding

    Actually, her letter is heart-breakingly sad. I’m glad she wrote it if it will save others from her awful fate. If more women are honest about the reality of divorce, as opposed to the fantasy, perhaps it will serve as a warning to the herd.

  26. gdgm+ says:

    Re: Dalrock’s comments in the OP on the “status marker” aspect of marriage and divorce, this was also on the ‘Cafe Mom’ site he referenced:

    10 Things You Should Never Ever Say to a Divorcee

  27. hurting says:

    http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2013/09/19/empowerment-turned-demotion/#comment-93703

    Misery loves company. More accurately, miserable divorced women love to share their misery.

    I have made it my mission to educate men as to the horrors of divorce, offering a standing invitation to my still-married friends to come visit my new single life replete with its milk crate end tables and peruse my paycheck that shows the roughly 30% haircut I’m taking. I counsel them to do what it takes to improve their marriages and get divorce out of their heads when confronting the daily struggles of marriage.

    Does my ex-wife or her coven view the world similarly? Not likely.

  28. The_Collapsar says:

    There’s definitely some truth to the demotion argument. Even as a kid it was always strange to hear middle-aged women mention having “boyfriends.” As for that divorcee, I feel pretty horrible about her situation…but she has nobody to blame but herself.

  29. dragnet says:

    @ crowhill

    “Only shaving one leg so she can feel like a man is laying next to her? That is certifiably psycho.”

    In a weird way, my heart went out to her upon reading this. It is, after all, an extremely vivid depiction of the desperation that loneliness born of bad decisionmaking can engender.

    I can’t help but feeling as if this woman may have a mental illness though (ie, severe depression). It’s normal to be lonely after divorce, but it really feels like she’s going to a dark place that most don’t even after something that traumatic.

  30. 30words says:

    Dalrock- you were recently part of saving a man from a frivorce with two small children. It was a female long ago friend of mine. When she told me her plans I used your wisdom to point out why she shouldn’t do it. I’m sure there were many other factors (as I’m not a big influence on her or anything like that) but the situation has improved and that family is back together for now. Thanks for your work. M

    [D: Outstanding! Well done! Thanks for letting me know.]

  31. Peter Blood says:

    I wouldn’t be surprised if some people go crazy because of their bad decisions, it’s one way to deal with the consequences. How else to explain the general madness pervading our society?

  32. The bigger question is. . .

    Why are women being encouraged to divorce?

    Why is it set up that women receive cash and prizes for destroying a family?

    Who profits form this?

    Please discuss.

  33. Ton says:

    Alimony sucks; divorce…. Not so much

  34. Elspeth says:

    This is timely, Dalrock. Earlier this week my husband did some contract work for the “girlfriend” business owner of an older gentleman he is acquainted with. She needed to stop by here to drop off some things relevant to the work. She’s about 60, I wager. Maybe a bit younger.

    After she left my yougn daughter asked me who that woman was. I told her the lady’s name and she asked how we knew her. I answered, ‘Well she’s Mr. Bill’s girl..er..lady friend.”

    My older daughters all started laughing and noted how ridiculous it is that a woman that age is someone’s “girlfriend.” They said “Ladyfriend” isn’t much better but it’s certainly better than calling her a girl. I do have a question though.

    This woman was indeed divorced, but suppose she was widowed and dating, so not as scandalous. How should her gentleman refer to her? I hear older people using the words ‘girlfriend’ and ‘boyfriend’ all the time and it makes me cringe.

  35. Elspeth says:

    As for the one hairy leg. I am assuming this woman never wears skirts?

    That was just weird, though Dragnet is right. It’s a powerful if deranged illustration.

  36. LiveFearless says:

    “I’ve taken to only shaving one leg so when I lie in bed at night I feel like a man is next to me” Hmmm, where would these thoughts of leg-hair differences come from? Here’s 23 seconds of a woman’s leg hair meme depicted in a future world ritual. FYI, this video “E.T.” only has 238,000,000 views on the KatyPerryVevo channel. But of course, it’s had no influence on relationships. Look no further than the performing artist that’s current #1 song cheers “I am the champion, and you’re gonna hear me ROAR…Get ready because I’ve had enough!” (scripted for her, not written by her) Of course, it’s meant to influence the rapid destruction of relationships between men and women. Katy Perry is just the talent used to be the face and voice of the scripted narrative. Tell your friends at FOTF that these songs have more influence than any of their sickening projects will ever have. Thank God for that since FOTF is one of the worst offenders in the race to destroy the family… They just do it as an army of false prophets… and that’s much worse. What’s funny is that we see the comments about FOTF here, but no one has stated the truth about their deception on the FOTF pages.

  37. earl says:

    “Empowerment” is one of those jargon words with double meanings and lies behind it.

    If women want real empowerment…be available, find, and support a good man. We are born with the power…and we’d like to use it for good…not evil.

  38. LiveFearless says:

    @GBFM Who profits form this?
    I do.

  39. Dalrock says:

    @gdgm+

    Re: Dalrock’s comments in the OP on the “status marker” aspect of marriage and divorce, this was also on the ‘Cafe Mom’ site he referenced:

    10 Things You Should Never Ever Say to a Divorcee

    That is a good one. I saw it when preparing the post, and considered including some excerpts from it but decided to keep the post short. Thanks for pointing it out.

    My personal favorites are:

    7. “What a bummer! … Hey, do you want to come to my heart-themed couples-only baby shower?” Not unless the baby shower has a game that involves watching a divorced woman drink herself into a coma.

    and this rail against female solipsism:

    3. “OMG. Do you think I’ll get divorced, too?” The good news for you is that divorce is not contagious. The bad news is you may get divorced for being so damn insensitive and self-centered.

    The denial of frivolous divorce is also worth a mention:

    5. “My husband and I had problems — but we decided to try harder and work it out.” Don’t assume that just because my name is Kim, I Kardashianed my way out of my marriage. Sometimes the best intentions, dogged determination, and all the counseling in the world just isn’t enough to fix what’s broke. That’s a scary thing to accept — which I suppose is why many people haven’t.

    Note the lack of a non frivolous reason to divorce; it just didn’t work out. Yet she still frames her divorce as anything but frivolous. As I’ve mentioned before no divorce is ever frivolous, even if the divorcée tells you it was.

  40. Why are women being encouraged to divorce?

    Why is it set up that women receive cash and prizes for destroying a family?

    Who profits form this?

    A family-law attorney told me (to justify the existance of no-fault-divorce while at the same time justifying his very existance to make money from no-fault) that any contract that is in perpituity is unlawful. I told him that I agreed. I don’t believe in contracts in perpituity. But that is not a reason for no-fault-divorce, nor is it an excuse for you to make a living off of destroying people’s lives. It isn’t a valid reason because we all die. Death ends a marriage. A marriage (by the very definition of it) could never be in perpituity because we haven’t cured death.

    He just stood there and started smiling at me and turned and walked away. He knew he was beat, knew that my logic on that was unassailable. Good, f-ck him. F-cking homewrecking lawyer.

  41. earl says:

    “He just stood there and started smiling at me and turned and walked away. He knew he was beat, knew that my logic on that was unassailable.”

    When you silence evil…you did something awesome.

  42. Bee says:

    @Ton,

    Did your ex think she was a better Christian than you? Did she think she was more spiritual?

  43. lgrobins says:

    “The word “boyfriend” feels juvenile. “Fiance” feels snooty. “Husband” feels accomplished. Anyone can have a boyfriend…”

    Eh, call him your “Dom” (if he is). That will stop people in their tracks Not everyone can have a Dom.

  44. donalgraeme says:

    The sad thing is that most women will still not learn. No number of articles like this can ever sway them from their special princess bubbles they build up around themselves. Only by using personal stories, pointing to examples of other divorced women in their lives, will they see the writing on the wall.

    By the way, Dalrock, I was curious if you ever came to any kind of solid idea on what place in the female hierarchy of needs this desire for a husband for status falls. I’m not quite sure myself, so I was curious what your thoughts were.

  45. LiveFearless says:

    @WillBest but I died a little inside when he was announced to be doing the Super Bowl this year.
    The ultimate beta male anthem: This perfectly crafted narrative song hit number one twice this year. Just think of the number of relationships that have been destroyed by the repetition of these lyrics in the hearts and minds of a few hundred million people. On June 1, 2013, his Mom died at age 55… 99 days later, the Super Bowl performance was announced. Blogger Michele Zipp at Cafe Mom ‘Bruno Mars tribute’ the day after his Mom passed away.

  46. JDG says:

    Blowing up your marriage in the first place is certifiably psycho.

  47. lgrobins says:

    I agree that marriage is a status marker so the marriage must have been pretty bad to leave and give up that precious status, but then again, I guess she thinks she can easily marry again. But even then it has the stigma of second husband and in the girl world of competition, that doesn’t score as high.

  48. feeriker says:

    8to12 said: I’m convinced women continue to push this advice to validate their own bad decisions.

    It’s as if watching someone else destroy their lives in the same way they did makes them feel better about their own destroyed life.

    Right on the mark. I’ve pointed out before that men have NOTHING on women when it comes to kicking, dismembering, and devouring other members of the herd when they’re down. Women have not only refined Schadenfreude to a fine art, but have weaponized it by adding malice to it as well.

    Example: The angry, bitchy, carousel-riding, duplicitous, mentally unbalanced single “friend” of a married woman who goes out of her way to destroy her girlfriend’s marriage. If she can’t be happy, then by God, none of her friends will be either!

    I can only imagine the she-wolf pack that is going to tear the Dear Prudence correspondent limb from limb, if it hasn’t already.

    Proud Single Moms Facebook page

    Following that same theme, there might as well also be a “Proud Suicides” or “Proud Degenerate Gamblers” Facebook page.

    When I pleasure myself (which unfortunately has been necessary since the split), I always end up in tears because it reinforces how lonely I am. Recently, I have even taken to only shaving one leg so when I lie in bed at night I feel like a man is next to me.

    Schadenfreude, thy name is now feeriker (something I recall about sleeping in the hard bed you’ve made for yourself).

  49. 8to12 says:

    @IBB,

    The lawyers are just the vultures picking at the carcass. Others actually killed the institution of marriage.

  50. feeriker says:

    .The good news for you is that divorce is not contagious.

    Based on simple casual observation of the society around me, I raise the BS flag and blow the BS whistle on this statement.

    [D: You are correct.]

    lgrobins said:

    I agree that marriage is a status marker so the marriage must have been pretty bad to leave and give up that precious status, but then again, I guess she thinks she can easily marry again.

    There’s absolutely no reason, based on what we read in her letter to Dear Prudence, to think that there was anything particularly awful and insufferable about this woman’s marriage, or even anything “wrong with it” by rational standards (to say nothing of biblical ones). From the tone of her writing it seems clear that she initiated the divorce and that it was a typical frivorce (hubby probably stopped giving her gina tingles, or she realized that his “betaness” finally came to outweigh any utility she was getting out of him within the context of marriage).

    As for her marrying again, that’s a possibility. We know that white knight manginas are a bountiful species out there. HOWEVER, it’s very unlikely that any man, no matter how desperate and gullible, is going to stay married for very long to an issue-laden drama queen who stops shaving one leg so that she can imagine that a man is lying in bed with her.

  51. The worst part is, no matter how many of these beeyotches hit the wall, there will be no shortage of betas, gammas, sigmas, omegas, and thetas to wife them up. Screw that! More dudes need to do that love tourism stuff Roosh does and stop giving these girls attention.

  52. @LiveFearless

    @GBFM Who profits from this?
    I do.

    *brofist*

    @lgrobins

    Eh, call him your “Dom” (if he is). That will stop people in their tracks Not everyone can have a Dom.

    “Sir” is the preferred nomenclature.

    Better, go all out I Dream of Jeannie style, and refer to him as “Master.”

  53. 8-to-12

    The lawyers are just the vultures picking at the carcass. Others actually killed the institution of marriage.

    Tender conversation between daughter and frivorced mother, could I sell this as a children’s book or maybe do the skit at PBS kids?

    “Mommy, how come that new guys sleeps over so much, he’s always here?”

    “Well sweetheart, Javier is mommy’s new boyfriend. He’s having a hard time finding a job right now so he doesn’t really have a place to live. So mommy shares her bedroom with Javier.”

    (puzzled look) “But I thought daddy was your boyfriend?”

    “No sweetheart. Your father was my husband. And when he was, mommy shared her bedroom with your daddy. Now mommy shares her room with Javier.”

    (puzzled look) “But that room was for you and daddy?”

    “Well sweetheart, sometimes mommies and daddies don’t stay together. Sometimes when mommies aren’t happy they go and see a special person who wears a nice robe and this police has the police come by the house and help mommies with their problems with the daddies. And another special person who wears a suit in the room with the person who wears a robe works for the mommies and that person writes up some paperwork to give to the daddies to let them know that they don’t get so share the bedroom with the mommies anymore.”

    (puzzled look) “So…. what happens to my daddy”

    “Oh, I think he goes to live in a room in a place called a halfway house with all the other daddies who don’t get to share the bedrooms with the mommies anymore.”

    (starting to put it all together) “So does Javier become my daddy?”

    “Well, he’ll be your daddy here in the house. But your real daddy will be your daddy every other weekend when your mommy and Javier got on little trips.”

    (now really starting to get it) “OHHHH!!! So it’s like Sally at play-care, she has the step-daddy?”

    “No sweetheart, mommy will never marry Javier.”

    (puzzled look) “But why? Why does he get to share bedroom with mommy if you don’t marry Javier?”

    “Sweetheart, the mommies get something called alimony from the daddies. This is some money that the mommies need to live on when they don’t want to stay married to the daddies anymore. If mommy re-marries, then your daddy doesn’t give your mommy money. And without the money, we can’t buy things and Javier wont stay with mommy.”

    (satisfied) “Ok I understand. So when I get married, I can get a Javier too when I don’t want to be married anymore?”

    (laughing and smiling) “I suppose so!”

  54. 40yearoldredflag says:

    I disagree with Lord of the Alphas.
    They may date them.
    Maybe, and even the village idiot eventually smartens up.

  55. Michael says:

    “divorced my husband of six years this spring, and even though the initial excitement of a new lease on life was exhilarating, I have found actuality to be just dreary and dismal.”

    – At least she admits it.

    “I fear I am spiraling downward and I have no way to stop it. My friends have given me some support, but I really don’t think they fully understand the depth of my despair. I really don’t know if I am reacting normally to this life change or if I need some help.

    -I wonder if she is able to see the mistake of her frivorce (Assuming she frivorced)

    “When I pleasure myself (which unfortunately has been necessary since the split), I always end up in tears because it reinforces how lonely I am.”

    -Now she knows a taste what some good men had to endure.

    “Recently, I have even taken to only shaving one leg so when I lie in bed at night I feel like a man is next to me.”

    -And she can’t handle it. Enjoy your spinsterhood sister. Hope it was worth it!

    “Should I expect this sort of reaction even after close to a year of mentally ending my marriage?”

    -In the past, during her prime years, she would not have had time to react.

  56. 8oxer says:

    The ultimate beta male anthem

    About three years ago I was banging a sweet little blonde ho’ who was a hot little number, despite an obvious and astronimical notch count and a proclivity to lie to me about stupid crap I didn’t care about.

    About six weeks into the fling, she started making all the usual “what do you want out of this relationship” demands/queries, and I was preparing to bail. She could smell me getting more distance as the days passed, and she seemed to grow ever more frantic to change my mind, but doing all the wrong things in order to effect a reconsideration. (She would get more pouty, demanding and difficult, rather than becoming more compliant and eager to please).

    As if in a last ditch effort to get some acknowledgement, she burst out one evening: “This is our song!” The song was that faggoty Bruno Mars anthem about how the man thinks his ho’ is “Amazing, just the way she is” or some such tripe.

    My response was totally spontaneous and authentic. I laughed in her face. That was the last time I saw her.

    I think of her fondly.

    Boxer

  57. deti says:

    The brilliant point of the post and of the article Dalrock cites is that, from the horses’ own mouths, the facade of divorce happiness is shattered. Oh, ladies like to put on a show of how divorce “freed” them to find their new men.

    Truth?

    A divorced woman’s value is almost zero. Alphas don’t want her unless they’re slumming. She has to put out for betas to get attention. she’s basically a pump and dump. Her ability to secure commitment from another man, and the quality of man who will offer her commitment, is sharply reduced.

  58. Jeremy says:

    lol, only shaving one leg… AHAHAHAH…

    She could sleep with a dog on the bed, that’s sorta-similar with the exception of the face licking.

  59. Jeremy says:

    @30words says:

    Dalrock- you were recently part of saving a man from a frivorce with two small children. It was a female long ago friend of mine. When she told me her plans I used your wisdom to point out why she shouldn’t do it….

    Did you ask her if she’d already created a cougarlife.com account? I think that would do it.

  60. 8oxer says:

    Only generally topical: Heartiste has an article up which justifies the good work of the Dalrock writers/editors in keeping marriages alive in an age of divorce court primacy.

    http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/09/19/the-silent-castrati/

    Tear down that damnable sticker-chart, men.

  61. Mark says:

    @Dalrock

    Another great post….Congrats!

    (From 30 words)………””Dalrock- you were recently part of saving a man from a frivorce with two small children.””

    See what happens when someone like yourself chooses…and tries to educate other people….you get RESULTS!….^5’s…..and Congrats again!

  62. Michael says:

    @ Jeremy,

    Allot of them do sleep with their (sometimes flea ridden) dogs at night. For allot of these women a dog is the only way out. It’s the only way they will get ANY attention or social interaction at 40 or chance of any meaningful social interaction with the opposite sex.

    My neighborhood is brimming with 1) Spinsters and 2) Their dogs. They are very irritating because they EXPECT you to pay attention to their dogs. To pet their dogs. To comment about their dogs. Tell them how cute their dogs are etc.

    When you ignore them they look down and up, down and up while they “consult” with their dog on it’s “opinion” of you.

    A dog is the perfect proxy for a Spinster. I wouldn’t be surprised to see cat ownership decrease in the near future as more of these Spinsters opt for dogs. Especially the little toy dogs.

  63. Ton says:

    Bee, she did indeed.

    I’d not base anything on my marriage or how it played out. She was unfaithful and instead of telling me, her and our pastor sabotaged the marriage. That level of subterfuge makes for a bad data point.

    I never introduce a woman as my girlfriend or the like. She is simply my girl, and we aren’t friends. In return I am Ton, her Sir or her Mr. in public. It gets the point across with out going overboard like Dom, Master, Owner

  64. Pirran says:

    Cafe Mom is the site that just keeps on giving. A proving ground for every manospherian template ever devised. Take Michele Zipp (please). Here’s the feisty single Mom in all her glory:

    “I’m a high heel wearing writer, magician, sleuth, and twin mama with tattoos. My not-so-secret past includes doing time as the Editor of Playgirl magazine. I get personal on Mommy With Tattoos and mouthy at Daily Momtra. I’m obsessed with taking naps, 70s vintage, chocolate chip cookies, reality TV, and Mexican food (not too spicy, please).
    Sipping on:
    breastmilk”

    My current favorite post on Cafe Mom is the following pump-and-dump hamster rationalization so by-the-numbers Roissy you’d think it was a satirical guest post (for extra joy, check out the responses to the first, fierce, cold douche of reality from poster “Blue”):

    http://thestir.cafemom.com/love_sex/155847/my_first_postdivorce_fling_was?next=1#comments

  65. hoellenhund2 says:

    Didn’t “ladyfriend” originally mean “female friend of a woman”, not necessarily a lesbian one?

    Other than that, yeah, it’s ludicrous that the terms boy/girlfriend are still widely used. They originate from the times when traditional sexual norms still reigned but premarital sexual relations were tolerated as long as they were taking place for a short period, between people that were already set to marry in the near future anyway. The terms themselves imply that they refer to young people, boys and girls, not people in their late 20s or older. It’s ludicrous when middle-aged spinsters refer to their transient sex partners as “boyfriends”. No, they are old men or gigolos.

  66. hoellenhund2 says:

    By the way, just how lame-ass, butt-ugly does a woman have to be to not even be able to convince a man to have sex with her and then sleep with her?

  67. lgrobins says:

    “I never introduce a woman as my girlfriend or the like. She is simply my girl, and we aren’t friends. In return I am Ton, her Sir or her Mr. in public. It gets the point across with out going overboard like Dom, Master, Owner”

    Nice! “my” (mine) being key. A woman doesn’t want a friend–a boy friend. She wants to be his.

  68. Michael says:

    (cont.)

    My building has allowed dogs into the building because they charge a (non-refundable) pet deposit of $1500 per dog and $150.00 month “pet rent”. This has attracted more career type Spinsters into the building because it’s very hard to find a place in Los Angeles that will accept pets.

    There are allot of Spinsters with dogs. Now I’m finding fleas every now and then in my “luxury” apartment. My place is Modern Minimalist combined with a “Star Trek” Theme. It looks really cool. I keep my apartment cleaner than American Psycho and go out of my way to keep this place a panty moistener.

    The last thing I want is a flea jumping on a dates leg. I’m bitching to the management but they say they can’t do anything. These Spinsters are not taking care of their dogs. Their fleas are somehow hopping upstairs. If they had a husband they would not need a dog.

    Mark my words. Spinster cat ownership is going down. Spinster dog ownership is going up.

  69. Casey says:

    At least the truth is outed in this article.
    The ‘romanticized’ notion of divorce quickly gives way to reality.

    That reality? Simple, if you are a middle-aged woman, with a plunging SMV……..your options will be limited.

    I mentioned this before in another post; a wife of a friend of mine puzzling why all these divorced men & women in their 50’s don’t get together. To her……..associative mating is suddenly a relevant and sane a choice, now that women desire it in their 50s.

    These same women squandered their sexual capital in their youth, and have pissed far too many men off to suddenly buy that ‘carton of milk’ with ‘yesterday’s date’.

    A divorced woman with a ‘frivorce’ history, another man’s children, and a plunging SMV……is NO BARGAIN to be had.

  70. Mark says:

    @Dalrock & Rollo

    I had this URL sent to me……http://www.ihatemen.org/…..I see that the bloggers name is mentioned in an above post….”Michelle Zipp”. Read the articles!…..I find this nothing but pure unadulterated HATRED!….The reason that I post to you two gentlemen is because you both have GREAT BLOGS….but,you NEVER preach this sort of hatred….nor do I believe that you ever would.You both have the inept ability to look around you in society and see things that are happening…and are going to happen….of which many readers and posters greatly appreciate!….and I thank you both for that! This kind of garbage really makes me take a “different” look at women!….It will never make me “hate” women but,it sure makes me take a second look at the “quality” of women that are out there today! I have not posted any comments on her blog….but,I feel that I am going to…..very politely..and very nonchalantly as an educated man who finds this sort of thing despicable,deplorable and contemptuous!

  71. oblivion says:

    @8to12

    “The lawyers are just the vultures picking at the carcass. Others actually killed the institution of marriage.”

    no sir, in florida (just a few months ago) it was the family law court and the greedy lawyers that fought hard against it. the bill to reform alimony and child custody passed both the house and senate, but was vetoed by the govener. i comes up again this year and govener is getting even more pressure from mens groups. im pretty angry about this, i moved to florida because it would have been the only sane state to get married in. if the govener signed the bill it would have made it so any marriage under 11 years would NOT have included alimony and children would have been split between parents 50/50. It is straight up GREED that is killing marriages. Greedy women want cash and prizes and to be TAKEN CARE OF for giving NOTHING! It is GREED by BIG BUISNESS to take most of the assets from family units, and it is GREED & POWER MONGERING by the state to take CONTROL of the family unit. Im not trying to go all gbfm on this but a vulture eats something that near death or dead. Men in marriages today are like a single wildabeast being stalked by an entire lion pride.

  72. 30words says:

    Thanks for the thumbs up guys. This friend of mine was being influenced by her divorcee boss and, sadly, my closest friend (a widow). I also had an opportunity to point out to this widowed girlfriend just how CRUEL it was for her to advocate a divorce. I think I turned her around too- she has seen first hand, through no fault of her own, what the reality of the marriage and sexual markets are like for a woman with 2 kids. (And we are all young- quite young- you’d be surprised).

  73. Michael says:

    @ Pirran

    She will soon get what she deserves. To be passed around like the whore she is – IF anyone wants to fuck her. She just a victim of herself:

    She says:

    “We were just kids when we married sixteen years ago, so breaking up was a seismic event in my life. We’d been together almost my entire adult life.”

    She had been smart enough (or just dumb luck) to marry in her physical prime and pair bond which – in concurrence with the data and theories on this blog and others – resulted in a 16 year marriage. My money says it would have been longer if she had not initiated divorce. She blew it up.

    After 16 years she is not acclimated to courtship or dating of ANY form so she goes to Match.com the ARTIFICIAL MARKET OF ONLINE DATING. To her surprise she gets ALLOT of emails. Her ego balloons. Getting Frivorced was the best thing I ever did! She picks the best man who promptly fucks her on the first date.

    That’s the high she is on.

    So she irresponsibly goes on to PROMOTE HER CHOICES to other women.

    It won’t until later when she finally gets it. In the meantime other women are choosing and being (in some cases unintentionally) suckered into thinking they can “have it all”. This fantasy of of divorce being the best thing they ever did.

    It makes me sick!

  74. oblivion says:

    sorry 8to12 to clarify

    a gun needs to be loaded, aimed and the trigger needs to be pulled to hit a target. without all three of these factors coming together correctly a man wont be harmed.

    loaded=womens expectations
    aimed= at a man
    trigger pulled= the lawyers (divorce)

    bonus points for woman if she calls the poilce to report “abuse”

    abuse= a hollowpoint bullet

  75. 8oxer says:

    Michael sez:

    Mark my words. Spinster cat ownership is going down. Spinster dog ownership is going up.

    I’ve noticed this trend myself, and your take on it is very interesting. It’s particularly among the better monied class of female wage-slave spinsters you and I seem to date. Just in the past year, several of these ho’s have chosen dogs over cats (now that I think of it, I wonder where the specific cats I remember disappeared to: it is possible that pets are as disposable as men in the slit’s mind).

    It’s usually a little yappy type ankle-biter with a “cute” name like “Chiquita” that I end up tripping over.

    Regards, Boxer

  76. 8to12 says:

    @chokingonredpills,

    The woman you described brought it all on herself.

    When I asked her how many boyfriends she had, she told me (point blank) she couldn’t count cos there were too many of them (suggests that she rode the carousel).

    Carousel riding: mistake 1.

    a man who already physically abused her before marriage

    Didn’t run like hell the first time he physically abused her: mistake 2.

    she married a man who already physically abused her before they made their marital vows in church.

    She married a man that was already physically abusing her: mistake 3.

    These were her CHOICES. She chose to marry this guy, knowing exactly the kind of guy he was.

    You have to wonder how many decent Christian men (guys who live out their beliefs in everyday life) she passed on over the years, simply because they weren’t “bad boy” enough for her. Again though, that was HER choice.

  77. Play her a song?

    Counting flowers on the wall, that don’t bother me at all
    Playing solitaire ’til dawn with a deck of fifty one
    Smoking cigarettes and watching Captain Kangaroo
    Now don’t tell me I’ve nothing to do.

    Add a line about shaving one leg and a body length pillow maybe.

  78. deti says:

    That reality? Simple, if you are a middle-aged woman, with a plunging SMV……..your options will be limited.

    Yeah. The SMV and dating options of a woman aged 40 and over look much like those of an average young man from ages 18 to 26 or so. Limited. slim pickings. The young man offers cheap, easy commitment, supplication and pedestalization, takes what he can get. Hopefully he can get a used up carousel refugee. He gets a sex partner; she gets the title “wife” (until she no longer wants it).

    The middle aged woman offers fast, easy sex, hassle and drama free, no muss no fuss, and takes what she can get. Hopefully she can get a 21 year old drunk hardbody frat boy to cut his sexual teeth on her. He gets his rocks off; she shows her friends that “she’s still got it”.

  79. 8to12 says:

    Maybe the spinster dog uptick has to do with not wanting to be the stereotypical spinster cat woman. “I’m not a spinster, because I’ve got a dog, not a cat.” (hamster on overdrive).

    I’ll bet there is also some dating advice floating around telling women to buy a dog instead of a cat, because men love dogs and hate cats, so if you want to attract a man you need to get a dog. It that’s the case, then someone should also tell them that men hate little yapping dogs worse than cats (and nagging wives).

  80. Anonymous Reader says:

    When I pleasure myself (which unfortunately has been necessary since the split), I always end up in tears because it reinforces how lonely I am.

    C’est dommage….

    Tangentially, I don’t go into big box drugstores much, but had to go to a Walgreens for a friend the other week. The store layout was different than others I’ve been in so I wound up trawling a few aisles in order to locate what was needed. So I got to note, back behind the cosmetics (which includes sunscreen), the Interesting bit of psychology that puts feminine hygene products, baby hygene products, pregnancy tests and condoms & lube all on the same, short, aisle. And upon the top shelf in a pastel colored box, a few “health aids” (battery powered).

    Time was, those were sold in “adult video” stores, or over the web (I’m sure Amazon has a large selection, for example), how high does demand have to be for such devices to get shelf space in a high-turnover business like Walgreens, I wonder?

  81. oblivion says:

    @anon reader

    wow, i guess i havent been in a drug store in awhile. thats crazy!!

  82. Anonymous Reader says:

    8to12
    I’ll bet there is also some dating advice floating around telling women to buy a dog instead of a cat, because men love dogs and hate cats, so if you want to attract a man you need to get a dog. It that’s the case, then someone should also tell them that men hate little yapping dogs worse than cats (and nagging wives).

    In order to have a dog that can be walked on a leash, as opposed to having it walk you, a person needs to display genuine Alpha traits to the dog. The dog has to have it made clear that it is not the pack leader, the human is the pack leader. For many breeds, that means the human must consistently discipline the dog with clear instructions, that must be followed. The dog must never be allowed to get away with disobedience – “Sit!” must be followed by an action, if it is not then remedial training is needed ASAP.

    Modern women are among the last people whom I would expect to be able to do this. So what will happen is a collection of ill-trained mutts that yank the leash, won’t come when called except for food bribes, won’t sit / stay, and likely to bite anyone foolish enough to get too close. Hmm. What does that word picture remind me of?

  83. MarcusD says:

    The good news for you is that divorce is not contagious.

    Actually, it seems that is (see: http://simulacral-legendarium.blogspot.ca/2013/07/re-httpdalrock.html, particularly the Aberg source).

  84. Ton says:

    If I am ever king of america….. it would be a bad, bad day lawyers.

    I push the ownership line early early early. Sets the tone and is usually completely new to the girl

  85. Bee says:

    @Ton,

    Thanks for the feedback.

    I saw similar false spiritual superiority by the female in my parents marriage. I think it is common among religious couples and it causes a lot of problems.

    Your case may not be as much of an outlier as you think. Tthoughts of spiritual superiority (pride) often gives the female the license they need to rationalize anything. Fortified hamster food.

  86. Opus says:

    ‘The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers’ Henry VI Part 2 Act 4 scene 2

    Ton, Shakespeare observed four centuries ago that this was a common refrain. So much did I enjoy the quote that I had a T shirt with the quote emblazoned thereon – white on black. One day in D.C. I was stopped by a (white) guy who said that it was a great T-shirt, and where could he get one just like it as he himself was a lawyer. I explained that I had bought it in England and with the same, perhaps, perverse enjoyment.

  87. feeriker says:

    A dog is the perfect proxy for a Spinster. I wouldn’t be surprised to see cat ownership decrease in the near future as more of these Spinsters opt for dogs. Especially the little toy dogs.

    As a dog lover, I call that canine abuse of the worst conceivable sort. Imagine a poor pooch being sentenced to be the chattel property of one of these sad-sackettes, becoming her emotional handkerchief with four legs. If I were a dog in such a predicament, I run out of the house, into the street, and throw myself in front of the first moving car I laid eyes on. (Naturally, as a dog person, I believe most cats DESERVE to be sentenced to life with an angry spinster. At least cats have a temperament tailor made for such an animal-human relationship).

    Maybe I need to volunteer at the local SPCA to ensure that no pooches meet up with such a fate. Euthanasia is more humane by comparison.

  88. Pirran says:

    @Michael

    “It makes me sick!”

    True, but it does provide a jaw-dropping demonstration of a CH “dark triad” Alpha male leading her around by the ring in her psyche without a trace of awareness (either in her or most of the commentators) of what had just transpired.

    The trouble is, we’re all standing behind the curtain with the Wizard gawping at the gullibility of Dorothy and the gang, knowing these grrrls will never develop the insight to tear it down.

  89. 8oxer says:

    ‘The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers’ Henry VI Part 2 Act 4 scene 2

    I used to think this way. These days I’m more in tune with Max Cady (played by Robert DeNiro).

    Why kill all the lawyers? Best I remember, they was just doin’ right by their jobs.

    I’m related to a disturbing number of attorneys, and have dated several also. They’re sorta like tax collectors or prostitutes: People who saw an angle and started working it. It’s generally nothing personal.

  90. If the ex husband, in a bid to not feel lonely, sleeps with a bean bag chair, well, better off I say.

  91. TFH says:

    Recently, I have even taken to only shaving one leg so when I lie in bed at night I feel like a man is next to me.

    Wow. Just when we veterans think we cannot be surprised any more, the level of hamster-behavior sinks to yet a new low.

  92. boze says:

    makes you think that virtues such as prudence and justice might have actually served to keep people happy LOL

  93. Ton says:

    Could be Bee, could be. Who’s to know?

    There is nothing new under the son that includes holding lawyers in disdain.

    At one point in the usa lawyers where held in such low regard they could not work for a wage. That ended as land speculation took off.

  94. Ton says:

    So if what a lawyer does is nothing personal does that mean the lawyer, judge and cops not take it personal when I recover my alimony payments from their cash?

  95. Legion says:

    Before reading the comments and OT…

    Should I shave my legs if I want to nail lesbians? (Sorry Dalrock)

  96. Twenty says:

    A family-law attorney told me (to justify the existance of no-fault-divorce while at the same time justifying his very existance to make money from no-fault) that any contract that is in perpituity is unlawful.

    That principle would cast the War Between the States in a whole new light, wouldn’t it?

  97. Mark says:

    @Michael

    “”Mark my words. Spinster cat ownership is going down. Spinster dog ownership is going up””

    You are correct my friend.My family owns several apartment & condo towers.I have the luxury of having to deal with the Superintendents that work for us.This is the Super’s Number One complaint.Women and their dogs,which are the lap dog(shits-u’s,etc.).I am an animal lover but,these women are at work all day,the dogs continually bark and defecate all over the apartments.It is guys like yourself that lodge the complaints to the Super….and I do not blame you! As soon as the Super makes any threats towards the tenant about the animal the spinster counter threats with taking the Landlord to “Rental Court”.It is a joke! I have spoken to my father extensively about this problem and have come up with a solution.Stop renting to Wimmin! When a guy like yourself moves out of an apartment it is 95% of the time nice and clean.When a women moves out it is a disaster.I have directed our Super’s to take legal action against the “Wimmin Tenants” countless times….and we WIN! They have to pay damages etc. But,not just the animals….Wimmin tenants are BS.They cannot fix shit…they are slobs….never pay the rent on time(90% of bounced rent cheques are from Wimmin)…have no consideration for other tenants,always take someone else’s parking space,etc..etc. Wimmin tenants take up to 10 times more of the Super’s time with their BS than do the Men tenants.

  98. Uncle Silas says:

    As someone who suffered through nearly eight years of a sexless marriage, I’m happy to be free of the malignant narcissist who nearly drove me mad. My financial health is a loads better, too (note to future grooms–live in a state without alimony law). Although some people worry that I’m isolated, I’m content that my social life only consists of my siblings and parents, my daughter, and a few close friends. That’s enough for me. Trying to seduce a divorced harridan or a desperate former carousel rider sounds absolutely miserable. I suppose I could, as I’m reasonably fit and make good money as a physician. However, too much chaff, too little time. Listening to Bruckner, Brahms, and Dvořák or reading Scott, Trollope, and Conrad in my spare time sounds far more rewarding. Providing men aren’t destroyed financially and emotionally by the family court system, I believe they can handle solitude far better than women after divorce.

  99. Slargtarg says:

    @MarcusD: “Speaking of cats”

    Crazy Cat Loving Woman

  100. hoellenhund2 says:

    “I had this URL sent to me……http://www.ihatemen.org/…..I see that the bloggers name is mentioned in an above post”

    It’s hilarious that they only show pretty women with perfect bodies in the blog header. After all, it’s common knowledge that it’s exactly this type of woman that is likely to become a rabid misandrist. Right? And, by the way, why isn’t the fat acceptance crowd complaining about that blog header?

  101. Opus says:

    I suppose that a woman agreeing to a man’s proposal to marry, created a contract of sorts, although I cannot quite see what the consideration was – would an agreement that you would sleep with me also create a contract that you would be bounden to perform even were you to think better of the idea, I ask rhetorically? If a man bailed on the engagement to marry, previously, she could then sue the man for breach of contract – presumably to recoup the money that she would have gained from marriage or perhaps because she was now that bit lower down the Marriage Market – no one wants a rejected woman any more than one wants a Divorcee. Marriage, however, is for life and only the irretrievable breakdown of that marriage (or its being annulled by reason of being void or voidable) can even now end marriage.

    Lawyers have no more emotion in your divorce than Dentists do in your filling, or Doctors in the ending of your cold – or perhaps actors in the absurd lines that they are required to speak, though some eventually become in distinguishable from their roles (and thus typecast) and really think they are their characters.

  102. @Ton

    her and our pastor sabotaged the marriage

    The so called “churches” in America are nothing but literal whorehouses, telling you whatever you want to hear, so long as the whore pastor (i.e., employee working for a paycheck) can convince you to stay in the seat when the plate gets passed.

    This is reason no one can take a single so-called “Christian” seriously anymore. Quite literally, these “pastors” are nothing but a bunch of second-rate “liberal arts” majors (they studied “theology” instead) and they don’t do an ounce of honest work, or contribute a single thing to the community – they pose with various Bible verses; using rhetoric that a bright high school senior would laugh at. They ALL want to get on TV, or sell books, or get known for some BS rhetoric. The leftys are generally speaking, smarter. “Christians” – ESPECIALLY – Evan-jelly-calls – are NOTHING – not a bit better – than a second rate Oprah Winfrey.

    Morons. Liars. Phoneys. Every last one of them. Show me a SINGLE so-called “Christian” – especially, a Protestant/Evangelical – that “stood up” and risked a single thing, a single DOLLAR (calling: GBFM) in the last decade.

    Not a a ONE. They were too busy kissing John Hagee’s a** – after all – he was cashing the BIG CHECKS for the GOP and the Israel lobby. The Jews actually bought the hooker a private jet. Not a word from the fake-assed fraud whiney bitches like John Piper, that f*gg*t from Alabama – nothing more than the next generation of the TV Evan-Jelly-Poop whores – scamming little old ladies with their TV shows begging for fiat dollaz. And the comedians of the Southern Baptist Convention – LOL.

    Pfft. Frivorce and Fornication are NOTHING compared to what white “Christian” “men” sold out to in the last decade.

    Frivorce is a punishment from God. Your wives were RIGHT to leave your Tea-Party, GOP-supporting, “Al Qaeda” fighting loser asses. TV watchers.

    Thank GOD for Dead Soldiers. Thank God for pouring out His vengence on you, and your entire fake, fraudulent, disgusting “Evangelical” culture – which is, was, and always has been nothing but a Satanic plagarism.

    Burns, don’t it? Enjoy hell.

    Sick. Gross. The ENTIRE “Evangelical” culture in the USA is nothing but Satanic poison. Every last one of you.

    You people have NEVER been Christians. You’ve all been a fraud since day one.

    “The prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so: and what will ye do in the end thereof?” Jer. 5:31

  103. freebird says:

    “counting flowers on the wall” refers to the man observing fake morality in women,like yourself,and finding it so unattractive he would rather be alone,or is alone,in a crowd on unattractive women.

    Wallflowers=flowers on the wall.

    God does indeed laugh,at you.

  104. freebird says:

    Flowers on the wall, a lone man’s song indeed.
    The deck of 51 indicates the wallflowers he is watching are one card short of a full hand.
    Captain Kangaroo refers to clownish child like behavior.

    Of course he’s playing solitare,who would not be given those Moral Dominate Wallflowers?

    You’re welcome!

    God laughs

  105. oblivion says:

    i went by the ihatemen site, im a bit shocked that mens rights groups are considered “hate sights” and a sight that advocates that “all men are be killed” isnt. Im even more surprised that a women would want all men killed. woman naturally dont get along with other women, there all busy plotting and scheming against eachother. if all the men left the planet, women would be at eachothers throats and in short order the world would be blown up. dont worry guys, after the world is blown up and there is nothing left but a few cockroaches, cher, and a handfull of women, they will blame it on the patriarchy.

  106. Feminist Hater says:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/world/europe/pope-bluntly-faults-churchs-focus-on-gays-and-abortion.html?_r=0

    [D: The link is interesting but I removed the comment. There is no need to start a Prot vs RCC flame war.]

  107. @8to12 said: “I’m convinced women continue to push this advice to validate their own bad decisions.

    It’s as if watching someone else destroy their lives in the same way they did makes them feel better about their own destroyed life.”

    Really, that’s due to the natural vice of women: envy.

  108. Jeremy says:

    How do people keep a straight face dealing with people like that cat lady? I would have laughed in her face. It would have gone like this…

    *old woman screams at me about cat care*
    Me: “Are you serious?”
    *old woman screams at me some more about cat care*
    Me: LOL

  109. Feminist Hater says:

    Sorry Dalrock, is wasn’t meant to start a flame war. I basically consider all Christian leadership to be in bed with Satan at the moment. I am by no means stating that Protestant leadership is any different. However, after reading that article, it would seem the cardinals at the Vatican just elected Satan’s bro…

  110. GKChesteron says:

    @Fem Hater,
    The current Pope is…well…Latin. He’s prone to opening his mouth too quickly and the press is eating him alive. In action he’s also South American Latin and therefore redpillish. I do tend to want the German back.

    @Dalrock,

    The legs…was both sad and wrong at the same time.

  111. Opus,

    If a man bailed on the engagement to marry, previously, she could then sue the man for breach of contract – presumably to recoup the money that she would have gained from marriage or perhaps because she was now that bit lower down the Marriage Market – no one wants a rejected woman any more than one wants a Divorcee. Marriage, however, is for life and only the irretrievable breakdown of that marriage (or its being annulled by reason of being void or voidable) can even now end marriage.

    That was when men were sick enough in the head to believe that an unruptured hymen was a woman’s greatest selling point as making her marriage material. (Shut up GBFM, you are not permitted to comment on this.) This conflict of interest was solved with diamond engagement rings (which are nothing more than virginity insurance.)

    http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/04/the-strange-and-formerly-sexist-economics-of-engagement-rings/255434/

    Once upon a time, diamond rings weren’t just gifts. They were, frankly, virginity insurance.

    A now-obsolete law called the “Breach of Promise to Marry” once allowed women to sue men for breaking off an engagement. Back then, there was a high premium on women being virgins when they married — or at least when they got engaged. Surveys from the 1940s show that roughly half of engaged couples reported being intimate before the big day. If the groom-to-be walked out after he and the bride-to-be had sex, that left her in a precarious position. From a social angle, she had been permanently “damaged.” From an economic angle, she had lost her market value. So Breach of Promise to Marry was born.

    So the law punished men who wanted to “f-ck and run.” The free market fixed all this (made the breech of promise law obsolete) with engagement rings. Now if he “f-cks and runs” she keeps the $5000 ring as compensation for his early penitration. Basically (with no-fault-divorce), this turns would be wives into whores and would be husbands into Johns and marriage into nothing more than legalized prostitution.

  112. Yes!

    “So the law punished men who wanted to “f-ck and run.” The free market fixed all this (made the breech of promise law obsolete) with engagement rings. Now if he “f-cks and runs” she keeps the $5000 ring as compensation for his early penitration. Basically (with no-fault-divorce), this turns would be wives into whores and would be husbands into Johns and marriage into nothing more than legalized prostitution.”

    One of the major differences between prostitution and marriage is that no Pimp would ever charge a man for the past-use of a pussysyzyz, whereas ministers front the marriage regime wherein men are forced to pay for past use of a pussysyyssyys.

    This is why Ministers hate prostitution, as monopolists naturally hate fair competition, free markets, and level playing fields.

    lzozozo

  113. Jen says:

    Well, if I encounter anyone contemplating divorce, I will definitely point out the many “cons” of divorce to them, instead of remaining mute in fear of offending.

  114. Well, if I encounter anyone contemplating divorce, I will definitely point out the many “cons” of divorce to them, instead of remaining mute in fear of offending.

    Good. Thank you Jen, you are helping.

    You’d be even more of a help if you “shunned” a woman who frivorced her husband thus showing her that there are costs in society for taking such actions.

  115. MarcusD says:

    @Feminist Hater

    I wouldn’t trust the NYT’s interpretation and presentation of those things. The media wants the Pope to not be Catholic.

  116. Jen says:

    IBB – Sadly, we currently have “reverse-shunning” in effect in our office. About a year ago, we (myself included) were planning a luncheon/baby shower for a single mom in our office. This was her second baby – different father. Three older women, two white and one black, expressed dismay at “rewarding” single mom for her bad decisions. They were basically shunned until they acquiesced and participated in the baby shower.

  117. Hf says:

    What in the hell!? That is some truly weird shit right there in that Prudence quote. Straight up crazy, it is

  118. Random Angeleno says:

    Have a little experience with landlords and apartment managers: to a man, they always preferred renting to single men, even young roommate situations over renting to single women…

    Re the Pope: he didn’t actually say that much. All the old orthodox beliefs are still in effect…

  119. feeriker says:

    Now if he “f-cks and runs” she keeps the $5000 ring as compensation for his early penitration

    Late one weekday afternoon a few years back, on a day that I was off of work, my wife happened to have the idiot box on and Judge Judy (GAG ME!) was presiding over a case involving a (formerly) engaged couple in which the WOMAN admitted that she had “f***ed and ran” on her fiance who was the plaintiff.

    I was absolutely floored when Judy Bitch ordered that, among other judgments against the woman (apparently the crux of the case had to do with the man suing to have his property returned in the aftermath of their split), the woman had to return the $10K diamond and 18-karat gold engagement ring the man had given her. Judy Bitch made it clear to the defendant that “that ring represents a contract you made with the plaintiff to become his wife, a contract that you unilaterally broke. That ring was a form of consideration on Mr. [X]‘s part. Since you broke the contract unilaterally, that consideration must be returned to him. You CANNOT enjoy a form of unjust enrichment at the plaintiff’s expense by keeping the ring after you’ve broken your contract. If you don’t perform your contractual obligations by marrying Mr. [X], you forfeit possession of the ring. Return it to him!”

    While I find Judge Judy Bitch to be generally insufferable, I found myself cheering her loudly on this one. Needless to say, the defendant tried to argue that the ring was her property whether she remained engaged to the plaintiff or not because it was a “gift” and thus unconditional, but Judy Bitch would of course hear none of it.

    Every once in a while a little justice inadvertently leaks out of an otherwise corrupt system. I wonder how often a verdict like this one is replicated in the event a dispute in the aftermath of a broken engagement reaches court.

  120. Opus says:

    I have to confess (these things stick in the mind) I have always been somewhat horrified by single mothers; perhaps it is their effort to persuade me that it is as normal as the Sun rising in the East that makes me balk at it. Mind you I am even more horrified by the notion that a woman can have her own child murdered in situ, so I am not sure which is the worst. I suppose I should just suck on all that male privilege which is mine.

    I wish that when I was younger my parents had advised me as to why (despite the temptations) dating a single mother (divorced, frivorcing or bastardising) was something one should avoid at all costs – never mind those with an N number into three figures or any of the other horrors woman can now produce e.g. having false rape allegation form. I suppose (Divorce being so rare) my parents had never been so advised and thus it never occurred to them to advise me. My Father told me that when he was young there was a girl who was illegitimate and that all the men just would not take her seriously as a marriage partner. How far things have since sunk!

  121. My Father told me that when he was young there was a girl who was illegitimate and that all the men just would not take her seriously as a marriage partner. How far things have since sunk!

    You see I’m not so sure that this is regressive. I think your father and all the other men in the community were wrong to treat her that way. Now I’ll say why.

    The “bastard” is sinless. It’s not their fault that their parents weren’t married. In that sense (that all important sense of shame) the shame associated with the term “bastard” should be directed ONLY at the mother and the father for bringing said “bastard” into the world. The “bastard” could never be held responsible for their unfortunate creation.

  122. I was absolutely floored when Judy Bitch ordered that, among other judgments against the woman (apparently the crux of the case had to do with the man suing to have his property returned in the aftermath of their split), the woman had to return the $10K diamond and 18-karat gold engagement ring the man had given her. Judy Bitch made it clear to the defendant that “that ring represents a contract you made with the plaintiff to become his wife, a contract that you unilaterally broke. That ring was a form of consideration on Mr. [X]‘s part. Since you broke the contract unilaterally, that consideration must be returned to him. You CANNOT enjoy a form of unjust enrichment at the plaintiff’s expense by keeping the ring after you’ve broken your contract. If you don’t perform your contractual obligations by marrying Mr. [X], you forfeit possession of the ring. Return it to him!”

    While I find Judge Judy Bitch to be generally insufferable, I found myself cheering her loudly on this one. Needless to say, the defendant tried to argue that the ring was her property whether she remained engaged to the plaintiff or not because it was a “gift” and thus unconditional, but Judy Bitch would of course hear none of it.

    (shrugging)

    Doesn’t really matter. By the time Judge Judy Bitch’s judgement came down, the defendant had probably already pawned it or sold it. And the money to replace it is gone, never to return. That why it MUST be her property (a gift) because she doesn’t have it anymore to return it to him.

    So although there is a judgement, I’m guessing it was never actually acted upon and the plaintiff got nothing except a judgement that could never be enforced since you can’t take blood from a stone.

  123. oblivion says:

    @ibbby by going on the tv court shows, the program pays out the judgements.

  124. About a year ago, we (myself included) were planning a luncheon/baby shower for a single mom in our office. This was her second baby – different father. Three older women, two white and one black, expressed dismay at “rewarding” single mom for her bad decisions. They were basically shunned until they acquiesced and participated in the baby shower.

    That’s everywhere. The only way those three older women win their “coalition” is if they get to 50.1% of the women in your office to join their side. Then (provided the Queen-HR-Generalist-Bee is with them) the other side would acquiesce much to the dismay of the single mom who could never “get it.” And even then, if those three women had held their ground on principle then the sunning wouldn’t have worked because they wouldn’t want to be part of the social contract created in that office.

    In retrospect, those three women were not all that dismayed. If they were, they wouldn’t have wanted to associate with those women in their office who reward this single-mom-behavior no matter HOW they were treated.

  125. @ibbby by going on the tv court shows, the program pays out the judgements.

    Well that makes sense. Of course both parties want to go on Judge Judy. At least this way the girl who pawned/sold the ring that no longer belonged to her wouldn’t have to answer for her lack of moral agency. The program simply makes her former fiance “whole” at their expense, not hers.

  126. Opus says:

    @IBB

    Someone surely married the bastard-ess, but marrying a girl with no parents is worse than marrying a woman from the lowest of the low. The point is, this: why should a man with options marry a girl who is illegitimate? If you argue that status is unimportant then so be it, but I think it is important (and very obviously so). The fact that a girl is illegitimate says something about her background.

    I once dated a girl who had been adopted. Her adoptive parents (working class) were lovely people – I felt sorry for them – perhaps unable to have children themselves they had adopted a woman so different. The bitch married, and after knocking out a few children divorced her thick-brickie husband, and all I could think (as I usually do) was that ‘there but for the grace of god…’.

    I regard the 1860 sensation novels (which I haven’t read) by the likes of Wilkie Collins as sentimental nonsense.

  127. Opus says:

    Stop press (you’ll love this)

    Just checked the news, and first up a UKIP MEP at their national conference has lost the Party Whip (Americans will have to look all this up) for referring to a room full of female delegates as ‘Sluts’. I almost choked on my coffee. I think he must be mistaken as they are surely Courtesans. :):):)

    Would an American Congressman dare say the same????? Hahahahahaha

  128. Opus,

    Someone surely married the bastard-ess, but marrying a girl with no parents

    She has parents. She wasn’t an orphan (also sinless.) She was a bastard.

    is worse than marrying a woman from the lowest of the low. The point is, this: why should a man with options marry a girl who is illegitimate?

    Because he loves her and the shame associated for her unfortunate creation are that of her mother and father, and their’s alone (not hers.) What did she do to deserve to be shunned? Why is it ever the bastard’s fault that he or she is a bastard?

    If you argue that status is unimportant then so be it, but I think it is important (and very obviously so). The fact that a girl is illegitimate says something about her background.

    Yes it does. And I get your point. I get it. But what you are missing is the point of moral agency and accountability. How is her background in any way her fault/choosing? It isn’t.

    I once dated a girl who had been adopted. Her adoptive parents (working class) were lovely people – I felt sorry for them – perhaps unable to have children themselves they had adopted a woman so different. The bitch married, and after knocking out a few children divorced her thick-brickie husband, and all I could think (as I usually do) was that ‘there but for the grace of god…’.

    I can’t speak for England but (and I hate to get all Ann Coutler with the data) in the United States children who are adpoted typically have the most promising futures. We love to crunch data in the United States and its in, children who were adopted by loving parents have the lowest rate of incarceration, the lowest rate of having children of their own out of wedlock, and typically the highest per-capital incomes. Steve Jobs was adopted.

    It all goes back to family. You you were born legitimate by loving parents, that’s great. If they sty married you are most likely going to have a promising future. You were wanted and are the result of love between two people who joined together in Holy matrimony. If you were adopted by a married couple, you were SELECTED by that couple to BE their child! Even better Opus. Arguably, the best. You you REALLY have self-esteem.

  129. Opus says:

    @IBB

    That reminds me of what the bitch used to say her adoptive parents used to say, that she was selected, much as you might choose a dog from kennels, but despite this choice element it is not really convincing is it? Protesting just a tad too much.

    I am surprised by your statistics.

  130. Mark says:

    @oblivion

    “”i went by the ihatemen site, im a bit shocked that mens rights groups are considered “hate sights” and a sight that advocates that “all men are be killed” isnt. Im even more surprised that a women would want all men killed.””

    Thanks! This is why I posted the link.I find it absolutely deplorable that a site like Dalrocks or Rollos is considered “HATE SPEECH”…….and a site like ‘I hate men’ is considered “free speech”?????…….no double standard there?….WTF?……thanks for taking a look at it….that is what I wanted posters such as yourself to see!…..Shalom!

  131. feeriker says:

    The fact that a girl is illegitimate says something about her background.

    It really depends on the girl and the specific circumstances of her birth and upbringing. In general, I’m with IBB in that I don’t place any label of shame upon a bastard child for their condition, as they most certainly did not ASK to be born a bastard and had no say in the process. However, you do bring up a good point in that there is a potential risk involved to anyone who would marry such a person.

    A child born to a single mother, especially in today’s society, is very likely to be steeped in the current modern cultural thinking that devalues fatherhood, intact families, and a sense of what we think of as Christian morality. This means that they are very likely to become sexually promiscuous as they pass puberty (probably having had no real role models –especially male ones– to steer them in the opposite direction), will be unable to pair bond with one member of the opposite sex, and will find the concept of monogamy and life-long marriage an alien one. Someone born into bastardy who exhibits these traits will most certainly display them instinctively and clearly to anyone they come to know on an intimate (though not necessarily sexual) and long-term basis. Anyone seeking marriage under the framework of Christian living will know to avoid such a person born out of wedlock as a candidate for a potential mate.

    OTOH, there still remain even in today people born out of wedlock into our cesspool culture who not only have NOT absorbed its ethos, but who are actively repulsed by it based on their own experiences growing up in the worst of it and who are committed to NEVER perpetuating to the next generation what they experienced. Such a person might be acceptable marriage material, but it would take a LONG period of acquaintance and intimate courtship before one could decide if the risk was worth any potential rewards.

  132. Silas says:

    It really doesn’t matter if the bastard in question is blameless or not. They still have the lack of experience with a functional family, as well as the genetic heritage that led to the dysfunction. That sort of thing can be overcome, but not usually, and especially not in the current culture. Marrying someone like that is exposing your children to that potentiality of dysfunction, which means the old notion of propriety was a correct observation.

    It’s not nice, but it is a measure to cut off evil. The truth normally hurts. Why do you think so many of the poor suffer as they do? Shouldn’t their children be able to overcome poverty and achieve high paying jobs? The trend is that failure tends to breed more failure, and so, generational dysfunction is a real phenomenon. The only thing we can do is encourage people to limit the damage and to work towards maturity, rather than aiming for the kingdom all at once.

  133. Mark says:

    @Hipster

    “”They were too busy kissing John Hagee’s a** – after all – he was cashing the BIG CHECKS for the GOP and the Israel lobby. The Jews actually bought the hooker a private jet””

    I know who Pastor John Hagee is……..and I am Orthodox Jewish. The reason that I know of him was I was channel surfing one night(5 years ago) and came across his program.It was on the “Jewish Prayer Shawl”…and he had 3 Rabbis sitting in the front row.The thing that impressed me was his knowledge of the Prayer Shawl as Christian.99.9% of (so called)Christians have never even heard of the Prayer Shawl….let alone give a documentary on it….so that kept me watching. I have to admit as a Jew that I was very impressed with his knowledge of the history and relevance of the Prayer Shawl.Please do not get me wrong with my post to you……I am not trying to start a religious debate or anything of the sort.I admired the man for his knowledge as a Christian for something that is strictly Jewish….and VERY sacred! I guarantee you that a Roman Catholic Priest would have NO such knowledge! As far as the “jet” is concerned?….very interesting!….I want to research this a bit more.I am not saying that you are incorrect……we Jews are good at “buying influence” when we have to!……Shalom!

  134. That reminds me of what the bitch used to say her adoptive parents used to say, that she was selected, much as you might choose a dog from kennels, but despite this choice element it is not really convincing is it? Protesting just a tad too much.

    I am surprised by your statistics.

    I was too until I looked it up.

    Kids born and raised by single moms do the worst as adults. Kids adopted (whether they were born bastards or not) do the bes as adultst. Children born by and raised by married couples do extremely well, but not quite as good as kids adopted by a married couple. At least in our country this is the case. But these successes are data on kids who were adopted at orphanages here in the United States, not kids imported from Guatamala, Russia, China, or India (somethng that has only been happening for the last 25 years of so.) I’m not even sure we HAVE orphanages in the United States anymore (as they are very expensive) pretty much just cheaper to put them all in Foster care and pay a “functioning family” money to care for those children who are wards of the state. Either that, or just pay the single mom government money to keep and raise her kid (the absolute WORST thing you can do to the kid.)

    Now, if you are in foster care and you NEVER get adopted, then yeah, your adult life is more likely to suck than if you were born and raised by a loving, married couple. What made all the difference is being chosen by the couple. We shall see what happens to these millenial adopted kids (now in their late teens and very early twenties) who were chosen by their adoptive parents and were imported from another country.

  135. Random Angeleno says:

    @feeriker

    Late one weekday afternoon a few years back, on a day that I was off of work, my wife happened to have the idiot box on and Judge Judy (GAG ME!) was presiding over a case involving a (formerly) engaged couple in which the WOMAN admitted that she had “f***ed and ran” on her fiance who was the plaintiff.

    I was absolutely floored when Judy Bitch ordered that, among other judgments against the woman (apparently the crux of the case had to do with the man suing to have his property returned in the aftermath of their split), the woman had to return the $10K diamond and 18-karat gold engagement ring the man had given her. Judy Bitch made it clear to the defendant that “that ring represents a contract you made with the plaintiff to become his wife, a contract that you unilaterally broke. That ring was a form of consideration on Mr. [X]‘s part. Since you broke the contract unilaterally, that consideration must be returned to him. You CANNOT enjoy a form of unjust enrichment at the plaintiff’s expense by keeping the ring after you’ve broken your contract. If you don’t perform your contractual obligations by marrying Mr. [X], you forfeit possession of the ring. Return it to him!”

    While I find Judge Judy Bitch to be generally insufferable, I found myself cheering her loudly on this one. Needless to say, the defendant tried to argue that the ring was her property whether she remained engaged to the plaintiff or not because it was a “gift” and thus unconditional, but Judy Bitch would of course hear none of it.

    Every once in a while a little justice inadvertently leaks out of an otherwise corrupt system. I wonder how often a verdict like this one is replicated in the event a dispute in the aftermath of a broken engagement reaches court.

    I am not so surprised. In my circles, it has always been accepted that if the girl is the one breaking the engagement, she should return the ring though other unconditional gifts (birthday or Christmas presents, etc.) don’t have to be returned. By her cheating on him, she broke the engagement.

  136. feeriker says:

    I am not so surprised. In my circles, it has always been accepted that if the girl is the one breaking the engagement, she should return the ring though other unconditional gifts (birthday or Christmas presents, etc.) don’t have to be returned. By her cheating on him, she broke the engagement.

    I guess what surprised me most was that this longstanding and common[?]-sense legal approach would even be acknowledged, let alone enforced, in a small claims court structured for a TV program catering to a modernist, female-dominated viewership (or that someone like “Judge” Judy Scheindlin, of all people, would be the one to enforce it).

  137. I guess what surprised me most was that this longstanding and common[?]-sense legal approach would even be acknowledged, let alone enforced, in a small claims court structured for a TV program catering to a modernist, female-dominated viewership (or that someone like “Judge” Judy Scheindlin, of all people, would be the one to enforce it).

    Exactly. The fact that a “Judge” must enforce something that is simply common sense is nothing but a lack of moral agency and hamsterization on her part. It is a shame that we got here. But here is where we are. I think oblivion is right, they had Judge Judy hold court because the show pays for most of the judgement (so she gets off Scott Free if she already sold/pawned/smoked/freebased the ring.)

  138. It really doesn’t matter if the bastard in question is blameless or not. They still have the lack of experience with a functional family, as well as the genetic heritage that led to the dysfunction.

    No, to all of this.

    I can’t speak for Opus and British culture, but ours (the United States) is supposed to be a merit based system. Its supposed to be (even if it isn’t entirely.) And anyone (by their own merit) can accomplish anything, I truly believe that. That is the American Dream.

    To hold the bastard accountable for the irresponsible and immoral actions of the parents of the said bastard, is (to me) not only unAmerican, it might be unChristian.

  139. Jen says:

    IBB – I still give the three women in our office credit for attempting to enforce a standard of morality. Unfortunately, the reverse-shunning worked. They were right, and the rest of us were wrong.

    I was worried about Single Mom having low self-esteem over the “baby daddy” not sticking around. Also, I did not think it fair for her to be shamed when he was not. In the end, I have learned that Single Mom has no low self-esteem issues – quite the opposite; “baby daddy” managed to get himself killed before the baby was even born. Single Mom decided not to waste her time attending his funeral.

  140. Opus says:

    Ah, yes, The American Dream. We in Britain don’t have a dream: that is because we are awake.

    Do you think that the Duke of Cambridge would have married Kate Middleton had she been illegitimate and her parents divorced – I should think not. Look what happened to that Wallis Simpson. Legitimacy matters even though it may seem unfair on the illegitimate. Some people are short, others fat, others ugly (though none are born old) and some are born poor. I cannot demand the hand of Helen of Troy just because I fancy her; I have to demonstrate worth just as a woman has to demonstrate those things that make her marriageable, and illegitimacy is almost certainly a deal breaker though it can hardly be her fault.

    Perhaps I am just too unchristian or perhaps it is a little different in England, where class (which would include legitimacy) matters.

  141. Do you think that the Duke of Cambridge would have married Kate Middleton had she been illegitimate and her parents divorced – I should think not.

    I’m not so sure.

    Your future King (just a heartbeat away) is already in direct violation of The King James Bible (Luke 16:18). How pleased would the Prince of Wales’ ancestor, King James the 1st be at all of Prince Charles’ marital woes? He had a 20 year old Virgin Bride, England’s Rose (IMHO, Diana was one of the 5 most wonderful women in my lifetime), but he could not stay faithful to her. That is all on Charles.

    I am thrilled for the Crown that William chose such a lovely bride and now Princess. But given what his daddy did, William could have hooked up with Amy Winehouse.

    Legitimacy matters even though it may seem unfair on the illegitimate.

    Was not the greatest Queen in the entire HISTORY of the Crown born a bastard, daughter of a whore? I believe she was.

  142. Ton says:

    Fair certain the OT says childern born out of wedlock are barred from the assembly of God for three generations) or there about)

  143. Michael says:

    @ Mark,

    That’s very interesting. It does not surprise me to hear women, even Spinsters, take up more of the Landlords time. They seem like they have allot of time on their hands for some reason. They are usually always alone, looking for “chances” to talk to you. Thank you for reading my post. I would like to see a study on dogs cats and Spinsters to see if my hunch is correct.

    As another commentator said “I’m not a Spinster because I have a dog” “Spinsters own cats”

    That seems to be the feeling I get as well.

  144. Listening to Bruckner, Brahms, and Dvořák or reading Scott, Trollope, and Conrad in my spare time sounds far more rewarding.

    That shuffling sound you hear is multitudes of PUA’s stopping, like zombies when they sense heat, and heading for the library.

  145. Anonymous age 71 says:

    @Michael: talk to a vet. They have things you can use on your carpet to kill off those fleas, and a vet may be able to sell you something pretty much undetectable. You should not have to but reality says you must.

    @Hipster Racist: I assume you have all done word associations. If I say UP, you think DOWN. If I say WHITE you think BLACK. Well, if you say CHRISTIAN MALE, I think ARROGANT, POMPOUS CONCEITED JACKASS. I came to that response after noting Christian males for over 30 years. Full disclosure: I have known two or three exceptions.

    @ibb: You do not hold a bastard accountable for her mother’s sin. Someone just explained it very well. When you marry, you want the very best. A child who was raised by a single mom, or anything but a functional married couple is not the very best, because they don’t know how to be a wife. Anything but a woman raised in an intact and functional two biological parent family has a much higher divorce rate. What does Dalrock call what you did? Re-framing. If you want to marry a bastard, go for it. Lawyers gotta’ eat, too. But, please don’t give bad advice like that to other men.

    Your claim of Unamerican and/or UnChristian for not marrying a woman damaged by her mother’s actions would be laughable, but it’s not funny.

    This is based on the feminist/White Knight viewpoint that when you marry you must be fair (usually pronounced by dearies as fay-er). Hogwash. Fair is not on your checklist. Your first duty is to your children. You are obliged to provide them the best possible mother; one who has at least a basic idea how to keep a husband so they aren’t raised by a divorced mom. That idea must come from watching her own parents in action.

  146. oblivion says:

    @micheal

    come to think of it…your right, women with little dogs are the new spinsters…i cant believe i missed that, its all around me.

  147. DEN1 says:

    @ Opus
    September 20, 2013 at 3:54 am:

    Whenever I hear the term contract as it relates to marriage, I instantly refer to a new term I have come across

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_promise

  148. Recently, I have even taken to only shaving one leg so when I lie in bed at night I feel like a man is next to me.

    I’m about 70% certain that this is a facetious line, as I seem to remember “one shaved leg to stave off loneliness” as a laugh-line that I’ve previously heard.

    A.J.P.

  149. Thanks, Mark! Your post illustrated my point better than I could. As an orthodox Jew – basically, the exact opposite of a Christian, a follower of a religion that completely rejects Jesus Christ – you find support among Evangelicals and Xian-Zionists. Like John Hagee, who knows a lot about Pharisee/Jew superstitious customs like prayer shawls.

    The Evangelicals cater to you, they are very impressed with Jews, especially, the orthodox Jews with their odd customs like circumcision and the whole cutting up chickens and waving them around your head thing.

    It’s funny, the Evangelicals want to “out-Jew” the Jews, mimicking various Jew customs and learning Hebrew. I’ve read at least a joke where they talk about hiring a Jew consultant to turn their Evangelical church into a “Hebrew Christian Temple” complete with various customs borrowed from the orthodox Jews.

    I expect them to start wearing black hats and growing out the little curly sideburns any day.

    Of course, to embrace Judaism is to reject Christ. Which is something you, as an orthodox Jew, would want the goyim to do.

    Maybe we can all “bond” over complaining about the (Christian) shiksas and how naughty they are?

  150. @Hipster Racist

    L.O.L.!

  151. greyghost says:

    This is the Beta Anthem I have played this at work (mechanic) as a sing-a-long

    Ton
    You should have sung this to your ex. Y’all would still be together in love.

  152. Opus says:

    @InocentBystanderBoston

    I thought Henry married Anne Boleyn. Either way Lizzie remained the Virgin Queen and not even the King of France was prepared to marry her (or was it the other way round). Either way she saw off the Spanish (with a little help from The Pirate Raleigh, and not a little from the weather and obviously God was on our side too which is always quite useful) such that we have not been troubled by the Spanish since that time.

    As a New Englander you will of course be pleased about all this, as the abolition of the Monasteries and the ending of paying Tribute to Rome produced the money and motivation to go off and inhabit the New World commit genocide against certain indigenous peoples and have Witch trials (leaving us free and in peace to enjoy the remainder of The Renaissance). At the same time we ventured off to freely trade every where else the oceans would take us, thus becoming Top Nation – ousting the French who in terms of population greatly outnumbered us at the time – and the Dutch too.

    It is with regret that there was disagreement in 1776 and also in 1812 (which you lost) but we have had no later disagreements save that in the 1960s we invaded (once again) but this time only your Billboard Top 100 such that your native artists were entirely excluded and then later still, stole all your best acting Oscars. You arte clearly suckers for Thespians with fruity voices – god help you.

  153. sue says:

    the only people who have any room to gloat are those who have never been divorced. but then again, what will the Lord have to say to the never-divorced gloaters on the last day? wouldn’t we be surprised if the Lord welcomed “hairy leg” into His kingdom, and bid many of the gloaters to depart (to everlasting burning). all of us, whatever our marital situation, best guard our fingers and our mouths. just sign me in-fear-n-trembling.

  154. Able says:

    Many years ago I read, for professional reasons, the clinical definitions of psychopathy. Peruse a basic examination of it at, for example, Wiki. The epidemiology indicates a rate of between 0.6% (UK) and 1.2% (US), with a prevalence four times higher in males than females.

    I wondered at that, from personal experience in A&E – and then it clicked. What is seen as ‘abnormal’ pathological behaviour in males is … just your average females ‘normal’ behaviour.

    Check out the diagnostic tool, the PCL-R.

    Hare Psychopathy Checklist (Score 2 for each point. A score of >25 (UK) or >30 (US) elicits a clinical diagnosis of psychopathy.)

    Facet 1: Interpersonal

    Glibness/superficial charm
    Grandiose sense of self-worth
    Pathological lying
    Cunning/manipulative

    Facet 2: Affective

    Lack of remorse or guilt
    Emotionally shallow
    Callous/lack of empathy
    Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

    Facet 3: Lifestyle

    Need for stimulation/proneness to boredom
    Parasitic lifestyle
    Lack of realistic, long-term goals
    Impulsivity
    Irresponsibility

    Facet 4: Antisocial

    Poor behavioral controls
    Early behavioral problems
    Juvenile delinquency
    Revocation of conditional release
    Criminal versatility

    Other Items
    Many short-term marital relationships
    Promiscuous sexual behavior

    I can’t say I’ve met many ‘ladies’ who didn’t score < 38 (Check out the definition of malignant narcissism to see how many ladies you know fit that bill as well).

    Both explain a great deal about how feminism and its patently hypocritical tenets continue even after the considerable damage they've done.

    As an aside, I know a number of ladies who despise the clear bias in systems such as Family Law and yet … when pushed each and every one admitted she would use every underhanded advantage they gain by these systems to 'punish' a man who dumped them/didn't live up to what they think they deserve so they dumped him. PCL-R to a tee!

  155. Tango says:

    Dalrock, I have to bookmark this site, excellent. Thanks instapundit for the link
    @innocentbystanderboston – re legalized prostitution: Though our marriage was dry (in more ways than one), I still took my-then wife on an overseas business trip in hopes of reigniting the flames (of love). We had sex that would make a National Geographic photographer blush ~six times in eight days. Midway though one passionate session, my brain told my body, “Hey, I’m paying for this. It ain’t love.” Sure enough, as soon as we got home my advances were spurned just as they were before the trip.
    @HipsterRacist – I am an evangelical Christian of the type you despise. For a couple decades or so, evangelicalism has jumped on the golden uterus bandwagon and told husbands to love their wives (which, when translated means, “Give her everything she wants.”) and has not told women to respect their husbands. The result has been that Christian men, myself included, abrogated leadership in our homes under the banner of loving our wives. We gave our wives what they said they wanted (equality) and abandoned loving strong leadership, which, I think, they really do want.

    My ex appears to have put on quite a few lbs since the divorce after 25 years of marriage. True to form here, she now has two new dogs, that bark a lot.

    Funny story about the dogs of our marriage: about a year before we separated, middle daughter and I picked up a rescue from a local pound. A day after I moved out to a house a short walk through the woods away, my wife texted me saying, “the dog’s not happy here. he needs to live with you.” Cool. Two days later our other dog packed up her tennis ball and took a walk through the woods and moved in. She figured it out, too…

    [D: Welcome Tango.]

  156. deti says:

    Opus:

    Haha, classic! Good on you jolly Brits ! We didn’t hold that little 1776 thing against you too much. After all, we did kinda help you out a little around 1944.

  157. Tango says:

    Opus “My Father told me that when he was young there was a girl who was illegitimate and that all the men just would not take her seriously as a marriage partner.”

    @innocentbystanderboston September 20, 2013 at 2:40 pm
    ” I think your father and all the other men in the community were wrong to treat her that way. Now I’ll say why.

    The “bastard” is sinless. It’s not their fault that their parents weren’t married. In that sense (that all important sense of shame) the shame associated with the term “bastard” should be directed ONLY at the mother and the father for bringing said “bastard” into the world. The “bastard” could never be held responsible for their unfortunate creation.”

    I agree with you both. However, the issue at hand is not one of sin, but the real potential for daddy issues that will only make marriage more difficult. In pre-marital counseling, my then fiance’ stated, “I never really had a father so I need a father more than I need a husband.” I should sue the counselor who let that drift past. While my ex is legitimate, the issue of daddy issues haunted us from the beginning. In my new state, I am realizing I don’t have to deeply understand why a particular woman has issues with her ex or her father. Once I get a whiff of daddy issues, I am his-to-ry.
    I think we are witnessing the 2nd generation fruit of the free-love era of the 60s and 70s and it’s only going to get worse. If I want to marry again, I may go shopping overseas.

  158. Callous/lack of empathy

    This one needs better explanation. Women crave empathy, from others and to others. They just deselect men for the experience of empathy, for the most part. Of course I would say there need be mention of pathological empathy. No surprise that I would say that.

  159. GKChesteron says:

    @Ton,

    For all my disagreements with Ton he is correct. The citation is Deut 23:2:
    “A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord.”

    Now the Law often was expected to be handled with mercy and is stated as mostly “maximum penalties” however it does show we are pansy asses about this. Either God was not wrong or we are.

  160. Feminist Hater says:

    CKChesteron,

    was exactly does that mean. If you’re a bastard child you might as well commit every single sin in the book and then some?

  161. GKChesteron says:

    No it means you start life in a disadvantageous position. All of us do but a bastard is in a worse spot. Because of this society does well to treat you a bit skeptically. The Scripture does not say they are automatically damned.

  162. Dalrock says:

    Another kind Instalanche from Glenn Reynolds. He nails it:

    STILL WAITING FOR THAT FEELING OF POST-DIVORCE EMPOWERMENT TO KICK IN.

  163. Feminist Hater says:

    Say your great grandfather or mother were a bastard child? Then what?

    What I’m getting at is: When does it end, at what point does an innocent victim stop being blamed for something they couldn’t stop even if they tried?

  164. Feminist Hater says:

    sue, as far as anything goes. ‘Hairy leg’ would need to repent of her sin, as we all have to. What’s the point of your comment? I’m guessing it’s the usual, “DON’T JUDGE ME!!!!!!”

    Please, for the last time, we cannot judge anyone, what we can do is judge their choices and bid them not to make them again and sin no more. However, to leave them in sin and not rebuke them…. I wonder what God would do to such a lukewarm believer?

  165. Martian Bachelor says:

    Empath… Interesting reading: Women as Martyrs (H.L. Mencken)

  166. sue says:

    how’s this for a “hampster” nugget! could it be, the reason “hairy leg” is unable to score a one-nighter – let alone a marriage proposal – is that the Lord put a thick hedge about her, in order to preserve her from committing additional sin AND to bring her to (eventual) salvation? oh, and all that ice cream she has been eating? could be part of that hedge. think about it. juzt sign me in-fear-n-trembling.

  167. Ton says:

    Now I’m reaching way back in my memory…. but if I recall correctly bastard children were expected to not have children of there own.

    Often the best way to ensure adults don’t continue to mess up( in this case commit sins) is to make life hard on their kids. We say one of the reasons there is a large number of single moms is because we as a nation make it easy to be a single mom. Apply that to the law regarding bastards and it seems less harsh.

    Also the verse CK supplied isn’t not necessarily speaking about the condition of the bastard child’s soul. Always figured it referred to social standing.

  168. mustardnine says:

    @ Martian B

    Very interesting reading from Mencken. Even BEFORE the feminazism of our own generation.

    But . . . he was just an old CURMUDGEON, wasn’t he. (Shaming language?)

  169. deti says:

    “could it be, the reason “hairy leg” is unable to score a one-nighter – let alone a marriage proposal – is that the Lord put a thick hedge about her”

    Let’s hope so. Let’s also hope that she might stop complaining about it. Let’s also hope that she might accept the consequences of her prior sin such that she doesn’t engage in it anymore.

    Repentance involves not only not doing the sin anymore; but having a change of heart. It would include remorse and regret at the prior choices. Repentance is not evidenced by complaining to all who will listen about how unfair it is that she cannot continue to sin; or how unfortunate it is that she has no opportunities to sin.

  170. Mark says:

    @Hipster

    “”Thanks, Mark! Your post illustrated my point better than I could.””

    You are very welcome.

    “”As an orthodox Jew – basically, the exact opposite of a Christian””

    No….I go to the Synagogue with the OT…….you go to the Church with an OT/NT

    “”John Hagee, who knows a lot about Pharisee/Jew superstitious customs like prayer shawls.””

    I believe this to be because of the strong ties to the Holy Land.

    “”The Evangelicals cater to you, they are very impressed with Jews””

    None of the ones that I know.If anything they are always trying to convert us.There is such a thing as a “”Christian Jew””.Hang around here long enough and you will meet one.We have posted each other several times.

    “”Jews with their odd customs like circumcision and the whole cutting up chickens and waving them around your head thing.””

    Circumcision is a custom adopted from us.It has more to do with hi-gene than anything else.The only chicken that I have ever seen in the Synagogue was KFC.

    “”Evangelicals want to “out-Jew” the Jews, mimicking various Jew customs and learning Hebrew””

    Again,Christians with devout ties to the Holy Land.

    “”hiring a Jew consultant to turn their Evangelical church into a “Hebrew Christian Temple” complete with various customs borrowed from the orthodox Jews.””

    The Customs of which you speak can be found in your Bible………the OT/NT version that you carry to Church on Sundays.

    “”black hats””

    I believe that you referring to the Kippah?………I do not wear mine if I attend a Christian Church.Kinda of makes me stand out in a crowd……know what I mean?

    “”Of course, to embrace Judaism is to reject Christ””

    I want to let you in on a little secret my friend……..Jesus was Jewish!………and so were all of disciples……..sorry to break the bad news to you!

    Shalom!

  171. imnobody00 says:

    “”Of course, to embrace Judaism is to reject Christ””

    I want to let you in on a little secret my friend……..Jesus was Jewish!………and so were all of disciples……..sorry to break the bad news to you!

    Shalom!

    Well, not completely true, only half true. Of course, Jesus belonged to the people of Israel and his religion was based on the one of the ancient Israel (with the new things He brought) . But the religion of the ancient Israel is not modern Judaism, which was created the first millenium of the Christian era after the destruction of the Temple. While the religion of Israel was based on the Temple, modern Judaism is based on on the Scriptures (the Tanak – Old Testament- and the Talmud, which was not written until centuries after Christ).

    After the cosmic shock of the destruction of the Temple, all sects within the religion of Israel were destroyed, except two: Pharisees (which created a new religion: Judaism) and JudeoChristians (which created a new religion: Christianism). Both religions were very different from the religion of the ancient Israel (which was unabled to be practiced because the Temple was gone) but both retained elements of the religion Israel (for example, as scholars have stated, Christian liturgy ressembles more the liturgy in the Temple than Jew liturgy).

    The precedents of modern Judaism – the Pharisees – were attacked once and again by Christ. So saying Jesus was Jewish is misleading, because it implies He was member of the people we call now “the Jews”. He was not.

  172. imnobody00 says:

    I forgot: Shalom!

  173. greyghost says:

    Tango
    You have a point about a fatherless woman as marriage material. In this feral world marriage is foolish period BUT some still need to do it as the topic shows. Marriage is a status marker for women and at this time in history it is one of only a few checks we have on feral women. (all)
    A bastard female is not marriageable not in this world today. A woman from an intact family as in when you come to visit her family the home you enter is where her married to each other mother and father live, would be more likely to live her life the same way. Sounds like a good point to add to the tool box of a young man looking for a wife. A good way to change the behavior of women in general is to get it out that women of single mothers are not for marriage but casual sex or late night didn’t hook up with what I wanted I’ll call you booty calls would be a more fitting roll for such women. That message should be made available in the 6th grade sex ed class.

  174. Cane Caldo says:

    @GKC

    No it means you start life in a disadvantageous position. All of us do but a bastard is in a worse spot.

    Actually, it means that his male kin are on the hook to carry his sins and sacrifices into the temple on his behalf because he is not allowed to go in. If he has no male kin, then the priests are on the hook to go seek bastards out, and so redeem them.

    This theme should sound familiar.

    It’s no “worse” than it is to not be a priest. Women–in turn–were not “worse” off in their exclusion. It simply was not their place.

  175. Feminist Hater says:

    Ah yes, the Churchian Forum. Haha, it’s so laughable now, I used to get upset but now I just laugh. Let them eat shit.

  176. Feminist Hater says:

    I love the topic of edumacation. Those bitches will spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to get a piece of paper that teaches them to hate themselves, their country and their men. They will spend that amount of money to get their Mrs degree and that’s it. Yet, for a pittance, you can study all you want to by use of the Internet and online colleges; so you can still get that useless piece of paper if you want. However, the point being, the knowledge is all online now, there’s no point in going to University unless you enjoy being mindfucked by lefty crackpot smoking libbies.

    I’m surprised Churchian girls want to go to colleges that teach them God and men are evil and to blame for everything. Oh no wait…. I’m not.

  177. MarcusD says:

    Read the whole thing. I’m going to see how much I can overload their minds with data and research. What’s so funny is that the people who brag about their level of education make the most basic errors in argumentation.

    I’ll have to throw away my experiment account after this, though.

    By the way: does anyone (with an older account) want to jump in and scatter them? Single point of argumentation is hard to keep up…

  178. Lawks says:

    Single Leg has to be a troll. Man, if that actually is a window into the Mind of Woman I don’t want to be within five feet of one. That is one of the nastiest posts I’ve ever read on the Internet.

  179. Feminist Hater says:

    Eh, I read the responses, I don’t really enjoy arguing my case with such people anymore. I’ve grown tired of it. In the end, they don’t care and they just follow, repeatedly, the same rationale they always do: Women have the freedom to ..blah blah blah and then call you some name. It’s mind numbing and boring to read through their trash. Women have the freedom sure, and so do men, and there are consequences to your actions, however, they are not interested in such consequences and if they want to pursue all this stuff and they want to marry old, slutted out women, go for it, I’m all for them doing that, so one has to take care of the trash and it ain’t going to be me.

    It really doesn’t matter at all. They will follow their pursuits until their demise and there’s nothing you or I can do about it. My energies are better spent elsewhere, thanks.

  180. Norm says:

    So this woman is feeling down after pleasuring herself. Cry me a river. I doubt she wanted to let her husband pleasure her too often when they were a couple and she probably seldom pleasured him.

  181. eon says:

    A better solution to the problem of bastard children would be to put them in good boarding schools, while not allowing the mothers to have more children and requiring them to pay child support.

    Being raised in a bastardized environment, and not the fact of being a bastard, is what causes the long term problems.

  182. Kate says:

    What a refreshing and enlightened perspective, sue. Of course, its far more fun to gloat, which is why most people can’t resist doing it. That lack of restraint is just a different variation on the very sins they condemn in others. Far better to be hit with stones than to do the throwing, in my opinion. The only way to view them is with pity, for their arms must be very sore indeed.

    A woman married six years should not expect to feel anything close to a whole person again for roughly three years. The woman mentioned who had been married sixteen years and described spending her entire adult life with her ex-husband will have even greater difficulties. She will face having to learn to date with what Rollo terms an “adolescent skillset.” Unless she is lucky and is scooped up right away, it will be brutal. One can only hope that it will result in them being reunited before its too late.

  183. Of course, to embrace Judaism is to reject Christ

    This only refers to Talmudic Judaism and not to Messianic Jews.

    Christians per Galatians 3: 28, which means both Greek and Jew, should not allowed themselves to be waylaid by Christ-deniers, of all stripes and especially of the Pharisee and Talmudic type.

    A.J.P.

  184. In a strange coincidence, the news platform Al Jazeera ties anti-racist or anti-white activist Mr. Timothy Wise to Mr. Hugo Schwyzer. http://tinyurl.com/m78pk5y

    Best regards,

    A.J.P.

  185. grey_whiskers says:

    @TFH says:
    September 19, 2013 at 7:10 pm

    Recently, I have even taken to only shaving one leg so when I lie in bed at night I feel like a man is next to me.

    Wow. Just when we veterans think we cannot be surprised any more, the level of hamster-behavior sinks to yet a new low.

    Time to buy stock in Cannondale and Specialized.
    The fish now need bicycles.

  186. No it means you start life in a disadvantageous position. All of us do but a bastard is in a worse spot. Because of this society does well to treat you a bit skeptically.

    Being a bastard born when bastards were bastards (1962), yes, disadvantageous is as good a term as I’d come up with for myself. I can say unequivocally that it has had major effects on all aspects of my life and likely those lives of my kids as well. I would take great care in comporting with bastards (male or female equivalent) for marriage partners. But the preponderance of bastardy now and since a couple decades has made it a common family tree of a very odd shape with weird branches that are drawn in, un-grafted to the original tree.

  187. Spacetraveller says:

    “The word “boyfriend” feels juvenile. “Fiance” feels snooty. “Husband” feels accomplished. Anyone can have a boyfriend…”

    I am not sure if anyone has brought this up yet, but in the UK, the word ‘partner’ is often used to cover up this deficit in status. I don’t like that word, but I can see that it serves a useful function in this context.

    Do you Americans use this word?

    In Europe, there are equivalents: in the french-speaking world, for instance, the word is ‘conjoint’.

    It is almost as if no-one wants to correct the original problem, but would rather go to all the trouble to invent new words to pacify the hamster.

    I think a better strategy would be to correct the original problem.
    But then again, I am an idiot, I suppose…

  188. Pingback: the Revision Division

  189. redpillsetmefree says:

    In related news, I’m starting to get to the point where I can see the post-Wall face in girls in their 20s.

  190. From the LATimes:

    “Five years ago, the future looked bright for Janet Barker and her family.

    The eighth-grade English teacher had a secure job with annual raises. Her younger daughter was excited to be starting at UC Santa Cruz. Her divorce was about to be finalized, and she would soon have her small two-bedroom house in Redondo Beach to herself.

    After years of tending to others, Barker looked forward to a few indulgences. There would be long-delayed travel to Europe and charity work in Africa. She toyed with the idea of moving to the East Coast.

    Then the financial crisis struck in 2008. She has abandoned her dreams, and these days, she’s just trying to hold her family together. Five people squeeze into her 1,000-square-foot house because they can’t afford to live anywhere else. She’s supporting her ex-husband, their daughter, an unemployed son-in-law and a grandchild.”

    –You have to read btw. the lines, since the article is giving the wife’s saintly gloss on the whole situation (has she really allowed her husband back in out of disinterested charity?), but with a Sociology-grad daughter with a greencard husband in tow, the whole thing makes an, ahem, rich paradigm of the “demotion”, not just for the frivorcee wife, but the whole of society. Are these lolzlolzlzs or tears?

    http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-dreams-on-hold-20130922-dto,0,4020745.htmlstory

  191. xxxxx says:

    SunshineMary said :

    Actually, her letter is heart-breakingly sad. I’m glad she wrote it if it will save others from her awful fate. If more women are honest about the reality of divorce, as opposed to the fantasy, perhaps it will serve as a warning to the herd.

    It is obvious that this woman divorced for no good reason. Any woman who comes out of a very damaging, toxic and even violent marriage would be savouring her new found freedom from torment and abuse, and not yearning for the company of another man for a very very long time (unless she has psychological or mental problems).
    I wonder why the letter writer did not opt for a trial separation first. At least this way there might have been a little modicum of chance that she could have gotten back with her husband once she realised the grass wasn’t greener………

    I think 8to12 said something about choosing the right partner the first time because the cost of failure, especially for a woman, is very very high. Not to say that it doesn’t apply to men as well. I know of a man who married a woman because he was so smitten by her looks and couldn’t wait long enough to find out that she was bi-polar. His life has been hell ever since, and now with three young children in the picture (whom he cares for singlehandedly due to his wife’s illness) his life is pretty much over before it had even started. Yes. he was someone I dated previously, who chose looks over the stability I could have provided…………

  192. Kate says:

    “His life has been hell ever since, and now with three young children in the picture (whom he cares for singlehandedly due to his wife’s illness) his life is pretty much over before it had even started. Yes. he was someone I dated previously, who chose looks over the stability I could have provided…………”

    Yes, this happens too. And it is sad. Two men I cared for very much passed me over due to my “baggage” and chose someone else and ended up getting cheated on and having their hearts broken. One was just a girlfriend, but the other married her and is now divorced for the second time :( I honestly hope he doesn’t marry a third time. I don’t see how he can afford it. Of course, both these men contacted me afterwards to see if I would give them another chance. I hope you have found already or will soon find someone who appreciates your good qualities, xxxxx.

  193. greyghost says:

    Having that guys wife as legally crazy and being the primary caregiver for his kids is the best stroke of luck any man can have.

  194. sue says:

    granted, hairy-leg was horribly deceived by the consumerist (satanic) culture and she must pay the penalty of a bleak life. isn’t that enough for you people? such blatant cruelty! sounds like “hairy leg” isn’t the only one who needs to repent of sin. just sign me, did-i-fall-into-a-juniorhigh-timewarp?

  195. greyghost says:

    Sue
    If it will make you feel better I pledge to shave one of my legs to feel like I’m sleeping with a tranny behind my wife’s back.
    All
    be sure to laugh at me and tell me I have no rights to my kids and should be ashamed of myself etc. etc. until sue say, “back off greyghost I think he’s cute. Dalrock your readers are a bunch of assholes, except for you greyghost, I still think you are cute.”

  196. earl says:

    Sue…

    She ruined her husband’s life too.

    Don’t women ever get how much their whims affect others?

  197. JDG says:

    MarcusD – I tried to post over there but couldn’t get registered. Those women are feminists and most of them would deny it. Only one even tried to address the studies presented and even she (like the rest) was ultimately only interested in finding out where the dissenter stood on the subject so as to somehow disqualify him.

    They were not interested in the evidence laid before them, and openly proclaimed that their personal experiences and conclusions superseded the data. They appear to be unable to see the obvious message that choices have consequences, and the wrong choices are being made unless we like what is happening to our society.

  198. earl says:

    “They were not interested in the evidence laid before them, and openly proclaimed that their personal experiences and conclusions superseded the data.”

    In other words…they are all Eves.

  199. JDG says:

    Perhaps I misspoke because the wrong choices are being made, and there are some who do like what is happening to our society.

  200. herbie says:

    earl says:
    September 22, 2013 at 8:34 pm
    “Sue…

    She ruined her husband’s life too.

    Don’t women ever get how much their whims affect others?”

    That would require empathy. True empathy.

  201. imnobody00 says:

    @Sue

    Every time a man does something wrong it’s his fault. Nobody cares about his fate. He shouldn’t have done that (as in “He should have kept it in his pants”)

    Every time a woman does something wrong, it’s anybody else’s fault. Society or the man who is closer to her. In this case, consumerist society. We are awful creatures for judging her. We are bad and she’s a victim: a poor angel deceived by society. She’s so victim that she detonated a marriage expecting excitement and exhilaration. She destroyed a marriage and we are the ones who need to repent. This is modern Christianity. The one who violated God’s law is a victim and deserves our pity (if it’s a woman). But the true sinner is the one who judges her (thought Jesus judged all the time)

    Sorry, Sue, I won’t repent and your childish attempts at shaming are so trite that make me laugh.

    Why does every American woman use the same shaming language? The same sentences, the same arguments, the same childish attitude: “She’s a victim. It’s not fair. You are immature and bad. Daddy these guys make me feel uncomfortable!”. I guess every American woman receives a book called “Shaming for complete dummies” the day turns 18. The book is three pages long and has lots of drawings.

  202. DeNihilist says:

    According to some psychiatrists, most divorced woman want to get back with their exes, within 2 years. This sounds like they are right.

  203. oblivion says:

    @imnoobodyoo

    “I guess every American woman receives a book called “Shaming for complete dummies” the day turns 18. The book is three pages long and has lots of drawings.”

    that made my day :)

  204. anonymous_ng says:

    While it certainly sounds like a tinfoil conspiracy, I wonder to what degree no-fault divorce/single motherhood/etc isn’t a way to keep the economy growing which must be maintained at all costs.

    A 1960s style family in a small house with a stay at home mom needs X amount of stuff. If mom goes to work, then you need X+y stuff. If mom kicks dad to the curb, then you need X+y+Z stuff.

  205. MarcusD says:

    @JDG

    The absolute weirdest thing is that marymary1975 claims that she has “a bachelor’s, two LLMs and a JD” (#171), but her responses (starting with #261) sound like something a 15-year-old would write. They are so beyond illogical.

    All of those people in the thread arguing about how great higher education is don’t appear to being using theirs.

  206. hoellenhund2 says:

    The average woman has basically traditionally believed that she or any other woman cannot possibly be responsible for anything bad in the world – it’s always the fault of some nasty man, or a group of nasty men, either directly or indirectly. The rise of feminism hasn’t changed a thing in that regard.

  207. Opus says:

    ‘Charity work in Africa’ – as she samples the native males. By the way, for just how long now can we blame the 2008 for impecuniosity?

    I detest the term Partner, much as I mock the soubriquet Ms. What on earth does partner mean? Aspiration to marriage without marriage? Or is it a way to cover over the fact that your Partner is actually your fuck-buddy or booty-call. Or is it a case of ‘love you long time’ as the Thai girls say when by long-time they mean the duration of your vacation in Bangkok or Pattaya? You know that Partner is a cover for something else. Not having a Partner, should I feel disadvantaged in some way?

    Although there are exceptions , when thinking about my friends and acquaintances, I observe that the most successful marriages are those of women who married men who achieved great success in worldly terms . You know, Chief Executives, Managing Directors, Senior Partners, that sort of thing, not of course that those guys were in those positions when they first married. I therefore propose that every woman should marry a man who will become a Chief Executive or Vice President. That is my tip for a happy marriage. Of course appointing women to such positions will reduce the number of such men. Feminism is such a double bind for women.

  208. greyghost says:

    Opus
    The term partner to me has been connotated as a homosexual lover in inclusive PC speak. It is not boyfriend, girlfriend or husband , wife the PC way is partner or spouse.

  209. @Kate

    You obviously dont realise you were in the wrong for having that baggage in the first place …
    typical woman

    It never really registers … those men did the right thing passing over your slutty baggage & used 2nd hand vagina …

    Gloating over past men, is all spinsters & catladies like Kate really have left …

    It never really registers with these women, how screwed they really are …

  210. Opus says:

    @greyghost

    Homo-sexualists will soon be marrying each other. They will both have husbands. The idea of men marrying each other, is really very silly. Homosexuals are not in the male Dominance Hierarchy and thus their achievements are not used to attract women indeed men have little choice but to shun and avoid them. Marriage is the prize for the successful man who can persuade a woman to marry him. The Homo-sexual has not even entered the contest, indeed he will be thrown out should he assert his right to even be on the lowest rung of the hierarchy (as would Rapists and others committing sexual crimes against women – which is perhaps why false rape allegations are so damaging and why male divorcees although not thrown out go to the bottom of the hierarchy – whereas female divorcees are cosseted by their sisters, as born-again nearly virgins).

    It is perhaps the love which would be better off not speaking its name. Such men would be better employed joining a Roman Catholic Monastic order. One of the better qualities of the Catholic religion is that it enabled those who chose not to marry to find an alternative way to live. The same applied to women. I am betting that Mother Dolores Hart will (after her death) soon be made the first Catholic Movie-Star Saint.

  211. oblivion says:

    in typical feminist fashion, she is being held on a $25,000 bond. She kidnapped an infant. if a man did what she did the bail would have been half a million easy. all the women get upset when men point out the painfully obvious.

  212. Kate says:

    @rmax: Charming though you are, I must disagree on all counts. It isn’t wrong to have a child with your husband. It isn’t wrong to have been a virgin for him. It isn’t wrong to enforce consequences for destructive behavior.

    If it wasn’t wrong for those men to mislead and mistreat me, why weren’t they rewarded with happiness and faithful wives? Yet, even those men are more honorable than the two who did sleep with me and did so under false pretenses (one of them a “Christian” man).

    It is not gloating to point out that men sometimes suffer the consequences of their actions as well. It is a caution. I am neither a spinster nor a catlady. But if I hadn’t put myself and the world under the microscope, or had the protection of certain men, its likely I would be.

  213. earl says:

    “Yet, even those men are more honorable than the two who did sleep with me and did so under false pretenses (one of them a “Christian” man).”

    It may have been under false pretenses…but the sex was still real. You still allowed them to sleep with you because you wanted them too. Sweeping your part of the sin under the rug is not going to get rid of it. Repentance and contrition is very important.

    Eve ate the apple under false pretense…but she still saw the apple as juicy and delicious.

  214. Kate says:

    I certainly take responsibility for my share, but no more than my share. If you want women to trust you and treat you well, give you their innocence and eternal loyalty, you must be careful to protect them- even from yourselves. And women have their role in this too. Its why the one-hairy- legged woman is better off locked in her sadness than out gallavanting. It is a misinterpreted blessing, as sue explained.

  215. greyghost says:

    If it wasn’t wrong for those men to mislead and mistreat me, why weren’t they rewarded with happiness and faithful wives? Yet, even those men are more honorable than the two who did sleep with me and did so under false pretenses (one of them a “Christian” man).
    Kate
    Kate you have learned nothing in all of your experiences including the time spent here with some of the most thoughtful men in the country. You slept with those men because it felt so good at the time. It is ok every bodies doing it. You were not mislead or mistreated you got what you wanted at the time. Unless you are 45 plus years old at the time you were all girl power and if the gina tingle was there it was right and good, especially if he said he was Christian. When did you decide to be a wife ( helper to a Christian man. even a non Christian. a guy with no game that beleaves in being responsible and focus on a safe and secure house hold. You know the boring loyal dude that makes you go ewwww! get lost creep)
    I have two daughters one is twelve I hope to never have her sincerely make the comments you are making here.

    “I certainly take responsibility for my share, but no more than my share. If you want women to trust you and treat you well, give you their innocence and eternal loyalty, you must be careful to protect them- even from yourselves.”

    The serpent with the bowl of gina tingle and status will always be there he has to be there. feminism did it’s best thru the sacrifice of men, children and the church, and law with abortion, misandry, and churchianity to make the serpent love and happiness but the truth never lies. Let go of the lie there never be enough consensus that will bring you the spiritual satisfaction or joy you think is there in that lie.

  216. xxxxx says:

    rmaxGenActivePUA

    Hang on a minute – Damaged women are women who married legally, had children in wedlock but divorced ? Even if it was the man who decided to divorce ? Even if the man was physcally violent ? I’m not saying I know anything about Kate’s past situation but you are doing exactly what men here accuse women of doing – lumping all single moms into the same category irrespective of what their circumstances actually were.
    If women are to be blamed for their bad choices in husbands then men must equally accept blame for their bad choices in wives. Having said this though, I accept that the consequences for men in divorce are a lot harsher than that for women, even though it is women to tend to end up alone after divorce.

  217. hey dalrockz!

    when you think about it, you are running the world’s largest church group for menz, roviding humble leadership while displaying manly traits such as wisdom, humor, logic, reason, faith, humility, cheerfulness, tolerance, and good willz lzozlzozo. you are doing everythhinzg dat mark stantonsz et al claim to be doing as they lust after money fame power t book delasz, while you long only to serve god humbly and anonymouslsyz zlozozozozl

    in da GBFM HOMER’S ODYSSEYZ odysseusz often went anonymous and posed as a beggarz just as jesus and socrates were lowly and pennylessz but it just goes to show, dalrockasz, dat da soul is from where infiniete welath dereveivez zlzlozozlozo

    Socrates: “Virtue does not derive from money, but money and every lasting good of man derives from virtuez lzozlzozoz.”

    So it is dat mark standtonz servesz da master of mammmonz, but one cannot serve two masterz, and dalrocks servesz da higher masterz.

    keep up da good workz and time is on your sise sidez!! zlzozozo as da soul is immortrals zlzozlz

    [D: I appreciate the intent behind the kind words but want to clarify that this is not a church, and I am not a pastor.]

  218. Kate says:

    Wrong. You have learned nothing because you judge without knowledge. Until another time. In the meantime, enjoy the day.

  219. greyghost says:

    If women are to be blamed for their bad choices in husbands then men must equally accept blame for their bad choices in wives. Having said this though, I accept that the consequences for men in divorce are a lot harsher than that for women, even though it is women to tend to end up alone after divorce.
    That is why we have this blog to educate men on the type of women that are bad choices. divorced women and baby mommas it doesn’t matter what the romantic female rationalization is a single mom makes for a bad choice in wife. She doesn’t have toi be alone she can be a booty call but never make a woman like that a wife. don’t forget the gandarusa young man.

  220. mustardnine says:

    Kate says:
    “I certainly take responsibility for my share, but no more than my share. If you want women to trust you and treat you well, give you their innocence and eternal loyalty, you must be careful to protect them- even from yourselves.”

    What she should have said was:
    “I certainly take responsibility for my share, but no more than my share. If you want women to trust you and treat you well, give you their innocence and eternal loyalty, you must be careful to protect them- even AND ESPECIALLY from THEMSELVES.”

    There, fixed it for you.

    And this is precisely what young Christian beta males CANNOT do, as these girls ignore them and follow their hormones and poor-damsel fairytales and you-go-girl scripts and princess-entitlement-greed-mentality for the irresponsible Alpha McBadboys, whether ‘Christian’ or not.

    I have seen this happen my whole life (including to my relatives, we are church people), when I was a young Christian beta myself. I’m a grandfather now. Btw, it was true in my father’s generation also (WW2).

    Not saying it HAS to be this way; it doesn’t. But that is the way it IS, and the regular commenters here have it exactly right.

  221. Manlyman says:

    Sunshine Mary has resorted to censorship now. It seems one is not allowed to call her out, no matter how nicely, when the evidence clearly points that she is rebuiilding the mound.

    Apparently Ton that goes for you too.

  222. Georgia Boy says:

    Slate has Windows 8’ed itself, I see. Good, hope its readership falls.

  223. herbie says:

    @Earl.

    “Eve ate the apple under false pretense…but she still saw the apple as juicy and delicious.”

    Every word of God is flawless, Earl. There is no ‘apple’ written, Eve partook of the forbidden fruit, the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, then tasted by Adam also. Even if it was “juicy and delicious”, which would also be adding to the Word of God with false doctrines and risk of poison, any claim added to scripture must be false.

  224. Kate says:

    @Manlyman: I wonder if any lesson of compassion will result from all this. If one might get a taste of what deti and others have patiently explained: that living with bad treatment from a partner might, over the course of time, become insurmountable when there is no attraction to bind them.

    In the movie, Contact, an astronaut is given a suicide pill before her mission. She says something like, “I can’t imagine any reason why I would need this.” The man offering the pill says “It is given to you for the reasons you can’t imagine.”

  225. Every time a woman does something wrong, it’s anybody else’s fault. Society or the man who is closer to her. In this case, consumerist society. We are awful creatures for judging her.

    Women. Are. Not. Moral. Agents.

    If they were, society would not always be giving women a pass on (well) pretty much everything.

  226. mustardnine says:

    Herbie says,

    any claim added to scripture must be false.

    This would include the claim that any claim added to the scripture must be false.

    Remember the old logical warning?
    “All generalizations are untrue — including this one.”

  227. Anonymous age 71 says:

    >>Feminist Hater says:
    >>September 21, 2013 at 12:54 pm

    >>Say your great grandfather or mother were a bastard child? Then what?

    >>What I’m getting at is: When does it end, at what point does an innocent victim stop being blamed for something they couldn’t stop even if they tried?

    This is easy. History is filled with tales of men and women who were raised in circumstances conducive to failure. Who stirred their stumps and rose above their birth.

    But, you never give them a free pass. They have to earn it.

    The whole point is, they can stop it if they try. But, don’t marry one who has not yet tried AND SUCCEEDED. Your children deserve the best as a mother — or father. Not to grow up as an experiment in ‘fayer-ness’ to bastards.

    Go into East St. Louis, make sure your next of kin card is up to date. Look at the third generation baby mammas, and their fourth generation bastards. Tell us how many of them are suitable for marriage? What percentage of children born there will be successful to the point anyone wants them for the parent of their child?

    Yet, once in a while someone does escape their fate. But, they must prove they have escaped, no one must give them a free pass.

  228. [D: I appreciate the intent behind the kind words but want to clarify that this is not a church, and I am not a pastor.]

    llzozozozlzl yah i know da feelingz

    Jesus never had a church nor was He ever a Pastor zlozozoz

    in fact da Scribes and Pharisees religious elders had it in for himz lzozlzoz

  229. This is easy. History is filled with tales of men and women who were raised in circumstances conducive to failure. Who stirred their stumps and rose above their birth.

    But, you never give them a free pass. They have to earn it.

    What do you want them to do? How do they “earn” it? Be specific.

    Girl is a daughter of a single mom, You don’t want her to marry your son because she is a bastard. What could she do to “earn” your son? What specific things must she do? Same thing for a young man who was born a bastard. What hurdles must he jump over to “earn” your daughter?

  230. feeriker says:

    Sue spouted: granted, hairy-leg was horribly deceived by the consumerist (satanic) culture and she must pay the penalty of a bleak life. isn’t that enough for you people? such blatant cruelty!

    Oh no, we mustn’t EVER make a poor little snowflake uncomfortable by reminding her that it was her own reckless choices that led her to the state of misery she finds herself in (not to mention the other lives that her foolish, selfish decisions undoubtedly upended or even ruined). No, we have to TAKE PITY ON snowflake. We must remember that she’s really just a helpless little child who, in the end, discovered that making informed, considered, grown-up decisions just wasn’t in her and that for this reason she needs to be coddled and comforted like the mental teenager she’s always been. All that “empowerment” stuff, she discovered too late, just doesn’t work (at least until she’s ready to make the next foolish move in her life, at which point “grrrrl power” will reassert itself as hamster power), so we have to just issue her a free PP here.

    Oh, and I just have to wonder: Had “hairy leg woman” been “smooth leg guy” who described shaving one of his legs to simulate laying in bed with his ex-wife in order to assuage his loneliness, would Sue and the hen chorus be sympathizing with him or mocking and ridiculing him as a crazy loser?

    I think I know the answer that you’d offer up, Sue, but don’t do it. It’ll just make you look ridiculous.

  231. I think I know the answer that you’d offer up, Sue, but don’t do it. It’ll just make you look ridiculous.

    I don’t think Sue is going to come back.

  232. earl says:

    I must say….Satan has done a great job splitting up the sexes.

    Women blame men for every sin they commit…men get fed up for being blamed for every sin a woman does to the point we don’t care about them anymore.

    I’m going to give these women some advice…get rid of your part of the sin through repentance and contrition. I do that as much as possible.

    It doesn’t matter what some smooth talking serpent told you…the action still counts. When I was younger I had people tell me drinking a lot of alcohol would me “cool” and part of the group. I didn’t blame those kids when I got drunk…I stuck the alcohol down my throat and had to atone for that sin. It’s the same when some man convinces you that he should stick something else in you.

  233. Anonymous age 71 says:

    By coincidence, yesterday in Baptist Temple in the Third World region I live in, the pastor took something out of Hosea. I can’t understand him very well, so I simply ignored him and read the book of Hosea.

    I have what is called a Study Bible. That is, all through it, there are inserted bits of information, explaining things to we who have not gone to seminary, heh, heh.

    The book of Hosea is the tale of Hosea who married a ho. The notes say it is not known for sure if he actually married a ho, or if that was to make a moral point.

    Or, if he was married to a ho (Bible word for ho is harlot) did he marry a ho, or did his wife become a ho after they married? I suspect each of us would have his own theory on that.

    Anyway, she was allegedly a ho. She spent a lot of time seeking adulterous dick, wherever she could find it. And, bad things happened to her for being a ho.

    The book is allegedly an allegory for Israel at the time. Israel was apparently being a ho against God, and Hosea’s wife was used as that allegory. All the bad things that happened to her were going to eventually happen to Israel. I think. I am not sure. If you are curious, look at it. Even if you are not a believer, it won’t hurt you, heh, heh.

    Hosea per NAS, verse 2:7.

    “And she will pursue her lovers, but she will not overtake them;
    And, she will seek them, but will not find them..
    Then, she will say, “I will go back to my first husband,
    For it was better for me then than now.”

    I am guessing this was after her Wiley Coyote Moment, not sure. Or, maybe her N count became stratospheric?

    ANYWAY, HE TOOK HER BACK, WITH CONDITIONS. Chapters 1-3 tell his story, the rest of the book reports his sermons over 30 years.

    This taking a ho back with conditions reminds me of two men who called me in the 80’s. If I tell you one story, I have told you both stories.

    He came home from work one night. A note on the table told him she found someone else, and to get the kids from the sitter. She was gone.

    He did not call me for advice.

    He buckled down and was both mommy and daddy to his kids.

    After a few months, he gets a call from hundreds of miles away. She tells him she realized she had made a mistake and wants to come back. Translated: her new guy dumped her worthless rear end, and she is starving. He does not call me for advice.

    He wires money for the bus ticket home, and takes her back. He does not call me for advice.

    After six months or so, she files for divorce and petitions for custody; child support; and property settlement. He does not call me for advice.

    Since he took her back, the judge considered he had forgiven her sin, thus he was not allowed to present the abandonment of those kids as reason for her not to get custody. So, she gets custody; child support; and property settlement.

    NOW HE CALLS ME FOR ADVICE. Now that res judicata prohibits any further trial for custody.

    Guess what? That no count Father’s Rights counselor is apparently worthless, not able to supply any useful help once a final ruling was issued.

    Having had two such cases, I contemplated what I would have told him, had he called me when she first wanted to come home. Almost exactly like Hosea in 3:4, I’d have told him to send her no money. Tell her you didn’t send her away. If she can find her way back, come back. If not, when they find her body in the canal, they can let you know. (Yes, the mother of your own children, who would have been 1000 times better off if her body were found in the canal, rather than living the rest of their childhood in her custody.)

    Find another place to live; get a job; no sex; no dating; visit the kids once a week only with supervision; pay her own bills and maybe a few bucks of child support. And, if she does well, after a year, she can come back.

    Of course, he should have called when she first left. I would have told him to immediately get an attorney to obtain a temporary, emergency custody order for those kids, based on her abandonment, then go to CSRU and file a child support claim, even if she is gone.

    My true feeling is to tell him to do whatever he had to do to keep her away from those kids forever. But, men are pretty stupid about their wives, and they must have a way to get her back if they can. So, this would be a compromise.

  234. feeriker says:

    Kate you have learned nothing in all of your experiences including the time spent here with some of the most thoughtful men in the country. You slept with those men because it felt so good at the time. It is ok every bodies doing it. You were not mislead or mistreated you got what you wanted at the time. Unless you are 45 plus years old at the time you were all girl power and if the gina tingle was there it was right and good, especially if he said he was Christian.

    Greyghost nails it.

    Oh, and Kate? What on earth would have led you to believe that the man who slept with you “under false pretenses” and who claimed to be a “Christian” actually was one? Wouldn’t the fact that your not being married to him at the time (if I understand your post correctly) would have provided you with something of a hint that the “Christian” label was fatuously self-applied and that any self-respecting woman who cared about her moral integrity would have run the other way, forthwith? Were you not sufficiently familiar with what the term “Christian” means in terms of what it means in terms of a man’s beliefs and lifestyle to know that any man CLAIMING to be one while demanding to sleep with a woman to whom he was not married should have served as a big, bright red warning flag?

    You don’t come across as an uneducated and unworldly bumpkin, so I have to believe that you knew EXACTLY what you were getting into, as well as what the potential consequences and risks would be. To have put ANY stock in what a “Christian” man claimed as he was having sex with a women to whom he was not married says as much about motivated you as about what motivated him (and again, the word “naivete” doesn’t apply here).

  235. hey dalorcksz!! da GBFM often finds himself in da same (or at least similar) situationz as you!! as if we inhabit paraalel univerese!!

    [D: I appreciate the intent behind the kind words but want to clarify that this is not a church, and I am not a pastor.]

    friday nightz when da gbfm be twerkingz:
    [GBFM: I appreciate the intent behind the kind words but want to clarify that this is not a music video, and I am not miley cyrus.]

    back at da gbfm’s place:
    [GBFM: I appreciate the intent behind the kind words but want to clarify that this is not a porn movie, and I am not an actor.]

    saturday nightz clubbingz:
    [GBFM: I appreciate the intent behind the kind words but want to clarify that this is not a university, and I am not a professor.]

    back at da gbfm’s place:
    [GBFM: I appreciate the intent behind the kind words but want to clarify that this is not a wedding, and I am not a groom.]

    back at da gbfm’s place 2 AM:
    [GBFM: I appreciate the intent behind the kind words but want to clarify that you are not miley cyrus, and I am not robin thicke.]

    sunday mornningz gbfm makingz coffeez:
    [GBFM: I appreciate the intent behind the kind words but want to clarify that this is not a starbucxlxlozlzks, and I am not a barista.]

    da last one chocked me up to say as i am still a sad sad man having been fired form my bariatas ajobz zlzlzoziz

  236. Manlyman says:

    I posted these two posts in regards to my previous posts being removed:

    “Manlyman September 23, 2013 at 11:38 am
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    Interesting. My comments, which were quite harmless and non-offensive and in which I attempted to explain my postion were removed.”
    Manlyman September 23, 2013 at 11:39 am
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.

    PS- As were Ton’s comments….”

    Her responses below:

    1. [ssm: No comments by Ton have been deleted.

    By the way, you are quite a little gossiper, aren't you. And people say women are gossips.]

    2. sunshinemary Post authorSeptember 23, 2013 at 1:02 pm

    Then Elspeth spewed: “Yes, you are already being accused of ‘censorship’ over at Dalrock’s.”

    SSM’s reply: “LOL! That’s right, ’cause I am just that powerful. Why, I almost control the whole entire internet. Ha!”

    She denies the censorship, yet the posts aren’t there.Rebuilding the mound indeed.

  237. earl says:

    Women have been effectively misled that taking a hit or two wouldn’t damage themselves too bad for marriage.

    The problem is even 1 or 2 missteps can do it. So it shouldn’t matter if it is a false or true pretense…outside of marriage it is damaging….don’t do it until you are married.

    Your body isn’t like a man’s body. It is a weaker vessel and can’t take the abuse like a man’s body can and has to. Treat it as such…it is a temple.

  238. Her responses below:

    1. [ssm: No comments by Ton have been deleted.

    By the way, you are quite a little gossiper, aren't you. And people say women are gossips.]

    Do what you want Manlyman, but my advice to you is for you to NOT post at Sunshine Mary’s. Read it only, comment here. I read Mary’s blog. I would not post on it.

  239. Manlyman says:

    Don’t worry about that apparently I’ve been “banned”. I really do care though. I just want to let people know that if they were under the delusion she’s diiferent that she’s not. AWALT.

  240. Manlyman says:

    Should be ” I really DON’T care though”.

  241. Kate says:

    No, he doesn’t nail it. He doesn’t even have a hammer. I don’t wish to insult those who are true exemplars of what Christianity means, but there are a lot of people running around under that label who are nothing of the kind. And sometimes it takes a little time for that to be revealed. And shame on me, yes, for not figuring it out sooner. Lesson learned.

  242. gdgm+ says:

    Another facet related to the original OP: my local paper’s ‘USA Weekend’ Sunday magazine yesterday had ‘Millionaire Matchmaker’ Patti Stanger on its cover:

    Patti Stanger talks dating”

    “I lied about my age to get you,” Stanger says to her boyfriend of 16 months

    and Patti’s Do’s and Don’t of Dating

    Summing up, Stanger says, “A lot of people over 50 think it’s ‘Game Over.’ It’s not. Don’t get discouraged. If you open up the papers, you see many people getting married, often for the second or third time.

    N.B. The online version of the article is slightly different than the printed one that I saw first.

  243. Feminist Hater says:

    Yea, I’ve done the same thing as IBB – only read and don’t post.

  244. Kate says:

    I agree with you, Earl. I really do. I wish I could have saved my relationship with my ex. I tried everything I knew how- at the time- with no guidance. Ten (of my supposedly best years) of my life with him. Never with anyone else. I cared for him through cancer. I saw him ruining our lives with his drinking. I ended the marriage. He was as relieved yet sad as I was. He wanted nothing to do with our daughter, but I made him spend time with her. Now he can’t spend enough time with her. He was happy to take half my assets, which I agreed to though everyone thought he should get nothing. He lives across the street on property I gave him in a house paid for with money I settled on him. He has been cancer-free almost nine years now, and we do the best we can with the situation. It is a constant trial. In my mind, I sacrificed having a husband so my daughter would have a father; he wasn’t/isn’t capable of doing both.

    NB: Manlyman, I saw the comment you wrote last night. It was censored as it was gone not fifteen minutes later.

  245. Anonymous age 71 says:

    @innocentbystanderboston says:
    September 23, 2013 at 12:39 pm

    >>What do you want them to do? How do they “earn” it? Be specific.

    >>Girl is a daughter of a single mom, You don’t want her to marry your son because she is a bastard. What could she do to “earn” your son? What specific things must she do? Same thing for a young man who was born a bastard. What hurdles must he jump over to “earn” your daughter?

    With 7 billion humans on the planet, why are you fixated on the small percentage of people statistically proven to have a much higher divorce rate than even the average, which is pretty bad as it is?

    I don’t know how to make it any clearer. If you want to commit acts of self-destruction and harm to your kids, go for it, be a Real Man[tm], show them just how ‘fay-er’ you can be. After all, why should any man think he deserves the very best? Self-image issues, there?

    As Cyrano said, in the play, if you were smart… Well, if you were smart, you would be looking for the best person you can find, not arguing about being fair to a specific person with the odds against him/her as a spouse. If you do it right, you do it only once. Of course, if you do it FAIR, you may still do it only once. After the divorce, you will have no resources to try again.

    This attitude is why we men are essentially slaves to women today in the USA. We all have a bit of White Knight in us.** We feel compelled to rush to the aid of women with problems, in hopes of proving our weak manhood.

    Doctor Laura wrote two books, one for men; one for women. Ten Stupid Things XXXXX Do. And, one is the same for both lists. Men who choose to take troubled women, hoping to be the mighty hero rushing to the rescue of the poor, abused woman. And, women who think they can change a drunken bum.

    When you take in a defective woman, she can create problems ten times faster than you can fix them. Like the fairy tales of my generation. When the suitor for the princess chops one head off the dragon, it grows two new ones.

    But, since you wish to argue, I can do that.

    Actually, the true test of that daughter of a single mom, is she must successfully raise a daughter while staying in a stable marriage, no divorce, then you can marry that third generation daughter. That breaks the ten generation chain. That grand-daughter will have been raised in an intact marriage, and will know how to be a wife. But, do try to avoid your kids spending much time with great-grandma. She will mess them up.

    But since you are determined to argue the point. What must she personally do before you want to marry her? (I am not talking your son, you are the one with the attitude to worry about.)

    She, Sweetums Bastard Girl, has to get her college degree in a marketable career, and have a job, and have her college debt paid off. And, no other debt. She still has no idea of how to be a wife. But, at least when she divorces you, there is a limit how much alimony she will get.

    White Knights have self-esteem issues. They don’t think they deserve the very best, and as a result, they seldom ever get the very best. So, they are willing to make a bastard; or a divorced woman; or an unwed mother, the mother of their children. You actually deserve better than what you are talking here. At least I hope so.

    **White knight in us: I am also guilty as charged. I also assumed I did not deserve the very best. In both marriages I was dumber than a rock. Only because my current wife of 38 years is Mexican, did I avoid divorce at her hand. I did many things wrong, but did have hidden strength of character to survive anyway. With a certain amount of luck and several miracles.

    With all the things wrong I did, I am well aware that I knew of no one else who did those things wrong, who had anything but dire troubles.

    The first thing I did wrong was take a step-daughter. For me, she even today, 40 years later, she was the best thing that ever happened in my life. I still do not know one other person who found a step-child to be the best thing they ever did. I have heard of such men, but have not yet met one personally. It would be morally dishonest as an experienced counselor not to warn other men against taking step children into their marriages.

    Have you ever had a really scary close call of any kind? Driving on a rainy night, and a car you did not see in advance goes flying by, about 100 mph, and you realize you were within inches of death? Well, when I look back at the stupid things I did in my life, that’s how I feel about those things. Only by the Grace of God am I still alive!

    And, we are indeed at risk of death based on who we marry. The suicide rate among divorced men is at least 4 times the base rate for society.

  246. 71,

    That is a lot of hamsterwheeling there.

    It isn’t a matter of being a “White Knight.” To me, it is a matter of accountability. A bastard does not inherit the sins of their parents. You want to hold that against them, fine by me. I’m not going to do that.

  247. Random Angeleno says:

    @IBB, good luck with that approach…

    Chances are excellent the typical bastard is more broken than those who grow up in two married parent households. Not saying there aren’t broken people from stable families, not saying there aren’t success stories among bastards, only saying that the preponderance of the evidence leans against bastards. One ignores that at his own peril. Dr. Laura has that much right for both men and women: don’t take on broken people as spouses. Hence, using parentage as a filter is a very valid thing to do. So again I say to you, be careful and watch your six if you continue with your mindset.

  248. Ton says:

    To the best of my knowledge ssm has not deleted any of my post.

    I’ll leave it at that.

  249. Some Guy says:

    @innocentbystanderboston —

    You don’t get it.

    I married a bastard. I married a non-virgin. I married a woman that did not group up with a man in the house except for a step-father she claimed was a sociopath. To top it off, she even claimed to have been “raped.” (Was it “rape-rape” or just “rape?” Somehow, I don’t think it was the former.)

    These are all red flags. I ignored them all because I was a “nice” guy and I thought she liked me. This is a life-ruining mistake in and of itself, but seeing her worst qualities in my children is an even bigger deal. I had no idea that the ancients actually knew a little bit about this stuff.

    Guys not having standards about this is a big reason we have such a mess right now. We bemoan the weak signal that women give out for being serious about marriage and marriage-minded men. This is exactly the signal that we are responsible for in kind. Legitimacy, low n count (if not virginity, no rape tales or violent encounters, and being in a positive relationship with a father (or at least a father figure) are very reasonable filters for guys that are serious about having a successful marriage.

    A simple prohibition against marrying a woman that fails on any of these points would serve the average simpleton far better than whatever it is that you’re arguing for.

    PS Sunshine Mary is a prime example of why women are prohibited the ministry and/or teaching men. That’s another thing the ancients knew a thing or two about.

  250. Some Guy says:

    “group up” should be “grow up”

  251. Mark says:

    @IBB

    “”I read Mary’s blog. I would not post on it.””

    Myself also,…………………..posting on it would be setting myself up ………to get banned!

  252. Some Guy says:

    “(if not virginity” is missing the close parentheses. Sorry.

  253. 8oxer says:

    Sunshine Mary is a prime example of why women are prohibited the ministry and/or teaching men. That’s another thing the ancients knew a thing or two about.

    I’ve argued with Sunshine Mary on her blog before, and she always impressed me with her evenhandedness and sense of humor. The Dalrock blog is not the Sunshine Mary blog, mind you, so all of this back and forth about her and her blog, here, is totally irrelevant.

    Generally, if you don’t like someone’s blog, you can quit posting there and find one you do like, or you can start your own blog and show the wayward blogger up by posting better articles than she manages. If any of you jokers have it in you to do the latter, make sure you hit me with the URL. If there’s good content there, I’ll go read it daily, and I’m sure lots of other brothers will too.

    Regards, Boxer

  254. Mark says:

    @Kate

    “”He was happy to take half my assets””

    COOL!………..so now you can relate to a man in divorce court!………Remember equality?

    “”He lives across the street on property I gave him in a house paid for with money I settled on him””

    Cool Again!………..I hope you are paying for his new g/f also?……No offense,but,this is the sort of thing MEN see everyday in Family Court.Why don’t you be a real DOLL and give him alimony…it would make my day!……L*………..Shalom!

  255. Someguy,

    You don’t get it.

    No I get it. I understand fully the points that you and ’71 are making. And I even agree with the danger that you have stipulated. I am just saying that you can make any of those points with any woman coming from any set of circumstances.

    Its a big risk for men (particularly Christian men who want to have a sincere Christian marriage.) In that sense, you’ll never hear me give a guy a hard time because he insists on living with the woman first because this is really the ONLY WAY to know for sure if she is truly marriage material or not (in my mind.) There are just too many risks involved (too many of man’s laws stacked against the man if he is determined in following God’s law.)

    I get it. And I’m your ally. I’m with you and ’71. But these issues pretty much exist for all women in pretty much all circumstances. You aren’t safe anywhere.

  256. MarcusD says:

    On the topic of empowerment [NOTE: Read the URL before clicking - WARNING: Do not view while eating]:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2425323/How-311-pound-Denise-Jolly-learned-redefine-body-beautiful.html

  257. 8oxer says:

    @MarcusD:

    Jesus, I am gonna need to mainline viagra to get over viewing that spectacle, if I ever want to get it up again. Vomitrocious.

    The sad thing is, she’s cute, even for a 30 something. She’d easily be a 6 or 7 if she would put down the doughnuts and work out a little. What a waste.

    Boxer

  258. PS Sunshine Mary is a prime example of why women are prohibited the ministry and/or teaching men. That’s another thing the ancients knew a thing or two about.

    I wish this were the case. I have known entirely too many female Pastors and I have disliked each of them. I gave every single one of them a chance, but in the end, they did nothing for me and did not speak truth to power about Christ. Being a woman was more important each time than being a Christian.

  259. Kate says:

    @Mark: All of this happened five years ago (several years before I even knew of men’s issues or the manosphere). Therefore, I figure men in divorce court can relate to *me*. Sometimes it does bothers me, but mostly I still think I did the right thing.

  260. Mark says:

    @IBB

    “”I have known entirely too many female Pastors and I have disliked each of them””

    My sentiments exactly!……….I know female Rabbis……no thanks! That is one thing that I appreciate among the Roman Catholic Church……..NO FEMALE PRIESTS!…….Correct me if I am wrong here…..but,doesn’t the NT say something about Wimmin wanting to be “men of the cloth”? A female Rabbi is a huge insult to the Synagogue but,the people don’t seem to care…….I would never attend a Synagogue with a female Rabbi…….NO THANKS!

  261. feeriker says:

    Mark @ Kate:

    @Kate

    “”He was happy to take half my assets””

    COOL!………..so now you can relate to a man in divorce court!………Remember equality?

    “”He lives across the street on property I gave him in a house paid for with money I settled on him””

    Cool Again!………..I hope you are paying for his new g/f also?……No offense,but,this is the sort of thing MEN see everyday in Family Court.Why don’t you be a real DOLL and give him alimony…it would make my day!……L*………..Shalom!

    LOL, yes, I do think that this is what really is chapping Katie’s ass: the mare has been shod with a stallion’s shoe and it HURTS LIKE HELL.

  262. feeriker says:

    Mark said:

    A female Rabbi is a huge insult to the Synagogue but,the people don’t seem to care…….I would never attend a Synagogue with a female Rabbi…….NO THANKS!

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but I assume that you’d only ever have that to worry about that if you were a “Reformed” Jew. AFAIA, Orthodox and Conservative congregations are still very strict about the “no female rabbis” rule (and good for them for standing fast!). Again, though, I’m willing to stand corrected on that if I’m mistaken in my assumption.

  263. Mark says:

    @Kate

    “”I still think I did the right thing.””

    Of course you did!…….it is called “Equality”…..you know what I mean…….what you and your sisters always wanted!…..You Go Grrrrrrrrrl! ………….Would you like to get married again?……I will marry you!….and then I will file for divorce.You would love going to divorce court with me.I am a Jewish businessman .I will take you for every penny that you have…and for many years to come!…………..((after I hire well paid Jewish attorneys…and pay off the Jewish Judge……..L*))……..I don’t want an answer at this moment…..you can think about it…..and we can always have our time here on Mr.D’s blog……………*SIGH*…….Shalom!

  264. Mark says:

    @feeriker

    “”Orthodox and Conservative congregations are still very strict about the “no female rabbis” rule””

    You are correct Mr.Feeriker!………F*** the “reformed” synagogues! They are a NOTHING! A hot spot for Femi-Nazism…nothing else! I would never even set foot in a Synagogue as such!

  265. Bee says:

    @IBB,

    “It isn’t a matter of being a “White Knight.” To me, it is a matter of accountability. A bastard does not inherit the sins of their parents.”

    The Bible disagrees with you on this point. Everyone, including bastards, inherits sins of their fathers for 3 or 4 generations.

  266. Kate says:

    Final lesson of the day: when you treat people well, you are generally treated well in return. But, in some cases, people are just deranged :)

  267. earl says:

    “doesn’t the NT say something about Wimmin wanting to be “men of the cloth”?”

    I’m not sure…but it does say that they should not teach or exercise authority over a man. So female rabbis or pastors should not be listened to.

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Timothy%202%20:%209-15&version=NASB

  268. Mark says:

    @Kate

    “”But, in some cases, people are just deranged””

    Flattery will get you NO WHERE!…….L*……….Shalom!

  269. Mark says:

    @Earl

    “”I’m not sure…but it does say that they should not teach or exercise authority over a man. So female rabbis or pastors should not be listened to””

    I am pretty sure it does.Got to research this a bit.I am sure about female Rabbi’s…..Thanks.

    “”female rabbis or pastors should not be listened to””

    Hence,no female Priests in the RCC………..Thanks again!

  270. Bee,

    “It isn’t a matter of being a “White Knight.” To me, it is a matter of accountability. A bastard does not inherit the sins of their parents.”

    The Bible disagrees with you on this point. Everyone, including bastards, inherits sins of their fathers for 3 or 4 generations.

    Is it 3 or is it 4? Its one or the other, right? If the Bible is going to disagree with me then it should be clear, yes?

    More to the point, if a bastard isn’t worthy of marriage, then the bastard isn’t worthy of having children. Forget 3 or 4 generations, there will BE no future generations if everyone followed the Bible, yes? The Bastard will not only remain spouseless, they will live a life that is childless. The end.

    I’m big on the Bible, huge. I just want consistancy.

  271. greyghost says:

    IBB
    I don’t know if you are a man or not but it not about fairness or what’s “right.” You are building a stable household for your children. No body needs to explain a goddamn thing no bastards is no bastards. And if it bothers you so much make sure you don’t give birth to one. That is how that cross is borne.

  272. greyghost says:

    Looks like your story has changed Kate. I thought you where tricked into making love by that bad 10 percent. Now you have a story about a bad husband you had to end a marriage with and buy him a home close by for the kids.

  273. Bee says:

    @IBB,

    You are entitled to your own ideas and opinions but not to your own facts.

    FACT: A simple reading of the Bible says sins of the father carry on for 3 or 4 generations.

    If you don’t like that or don’t understand it fine, but your ideas on this matter are not Christian teaching.

    You are exaggerating – we can have future generations because not everyone is a bastard, or descended from bastards.

    Also, the Bible never says not to marry a bastard. Lots of unwise behavior is not prohibited.

    Marrying a bastard is not wise, especially if you don’t believe they have inherited “spiritual/cultural” problems. Guys and gals should know the unique risks a future marriage entails.

  274. Anonymous Reader says:

    IBB, it appears that you believe in the “blank slate” theory of humanity. Is that correct?

  275. greyghost,

    I am a man and as a man it most certainly IS about fairness and what’s “right.” Damn straight sir.

    Lets turn this around a bit, sorry if this stings, but this meant to make a point: I don’t know if you are a alpha or beta, sort or tall, ugly or good looking, intelligent or stupid, or not but it not about fairness or what’s “right.” You are building a stable household for your children. No body needs to explain a goddamn thing no short, stupid, ugly, or beta/delta/gama men for husbands. Tall, intelligent, good looking alphas ONLY. And if it bothers you so much, no one gives a damn because this is not about what is fair or right. That is how your logic is borne.

    See the difference?

    As a man, I’m big on accountability. I’m big on moral agency. People are responsible for their own actions. That’s enough. You do NOT have to answer for the irresponsible actions of your parents or grand parents. You are born, you get a clean slate. What you are saying is that a bastard (by their very nature) could never be square with the house in this lifetime and it doesn’t matter if its fair or right.

    No. No. No.

    That isn’t Christian. It is unChristian, immoral, and just plain WRONG. If you don’t want to marry a bastard, I don’t care. Don’t marry them. But to take the position that they aren’t marriage material (be they men or women) simply because of the sin of their birth, well, you need to unlearn that which you have learned.

  276. IBB, it appears that you believe in the “blank slate” theory of humanity. Is that correct?

    Correct.

  277. Random Angeleno says:

    @IBB, the sins of the father theme is only found in The Old Testament, not in The New Testament; I can go along with you on that point. But … the preponderance of modern day evidence is still against you. Yes you have to vet anyone coming into your life. Yes you are correct in that everyone has moral agency for their own actions. That said, you will still find that the bastard is more likely to be broken than the normal child. All evidence points in that direction. But you are extremely resistant to this…

  278. RA,

    @IBB, the sins of the father theme is only found in The Old Testament, not in The New Testament; I can go along with you on that point.

    Thank you. I was wondering when someone (anyone) was going to catch on that this (3rd or 4th) generation thing of inheriting sins of the father wasm’t Christian.

    But … the preponderance of modern day evidence is still against you. Yes you have to vet anyone coming into your life. Yes you are correct in that everyone has moral agency for their own actions. That said, you will still find that the bastard is more likely to be broken than the normal child. All evidence points in that direction. But you are extremely resistant to this…

    I am not resistant this this. I agree with you. Completely. The data speaks poorly for the chances of the bastards. You correct, vet anyone coming into your life. And you might want to vet a bastard even more….

    …but give them a chance. Give them the chance you would have a woman give you as a man. Just a chance.

  279. Cane Caldo says:

    @Bee

    FACT: A simple reading of the Bible says sins of the father carry on for 3 or 4 generations.

    For the record, Ezekiel 18 seems to be in order.

    1 The word of the Lord came to me: 2 “What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge’? 3 As I live, declares the Lord God, this proverb shall no more be used by you in Israel. 4 Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die.

    [...]

    19 “Yet you say, ‘Why should not the son suffer for the iniquity of the father?’ When the son has done what is just and right, and has been careful to observe all my statutes, he shall surely live. 20 The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.

    Once, all of humanity were vegans. God changes things; including when and how He chooses to instruct us according to our needs.

  280. ManlyMan says:

    @ Kate: It wasn’t that bad was it? I do recall referring to Zippy as one of the girls but the rest I thought was harmless.

    @Ton- I realized it after as I saw the short comment I thought was deleted. However, she did leave a snarky comment for you.

  281. Bee says:

    @Cane Caldo,

    Thanks. I missed this.

    Do you believe in dispensations? Is this a new dispensation?

  282. Spacetraveller says:

    Aww, it DOES seem incredibly harsh to exclude someone from marriage to one’s son or daughter PURELY on the basis of their legitimacy or lack thereof.

    But…marriage is such an important issue, one needs to approach it with a ‘hard heart’ in many ways…is the other person’s attitude to life compatible with yours? Are their values in line with yours and your family’s?

    If the bast…um, illegitimate person clearly sees no shame in their own upbringing, then I guess it makes sense to avoid them if YOU do. (However, it is also worth taking into account that they might be just as ashamed of unmarried Mum’s actions as you are, but out of compassion and a sense of loyalty to her they would not show it?)

    Perhaps he or she was raised by a grandmother or aunt who disapproved of unmarried Mum’s actions and so are actually quite prudish – more than you would expect?

    I think what IBB is saying is…don’t be too quick to judge. Which is right.

    It is not the illegitimate status per se which deems someone unsuitable, but what they think about this status. Do they revel in it (“I am a bastard and proud”) or are they secretly ashamed of this and would do everything in their power not to end up the parent of an illegitimate child themselves?

    That is the crux of the matter.

    For that matter, a ‘legitimate’ person who thinks it is cool to be an unmarried parent is just as unsuitable as an illegitimate person with the same mindset, no?

  283. Another Guy says:

    @innocentbystanderboston

    You seem to have a big chip on your shoulder with this bastardy business. Your view of the world is only going to hurt you, because most people don’t even get a first chance. As Christians we aren’t promised a wonderful life this first time around, but called to “work with what we’ve got” as the modern saying goes. That’s because we do not suffer just the consequences of our own actions, but the consequences of everyone else’s actions and our parents’ actions. This world is a world of actions and consequences.

    So the two relevant bastardy verses have been quoted already, and the meanings are not mutually exclusive to one another. Bastards suffer from their parents’ mistakes, but do not have to atone for their parents’ mistakes. At the same time, a bastard has the status brought upon by their parents. I think a lot of you evangelicals imagine that once you become a Christian, that the effects of sin disappear.

    The truth is that while the Lord may forgive you, you retain the body that you have until death. The spirit perfects you until that day, but UNTIL that day, you are still a sinner. The consequences of sin are always within and without you. That you imagine a gulf between the Old and New Testament shows a bit of intellectual dishonesty in of itself. You can hardly call yourself a regenerated Christian when you look for loopholes for your favored interpretation like just another pagan degenerate.

  284. I think what IBB is saying is…don’t be too quick to judge. Which is right.

    That is what I am saying.

    For the bastard, there is two real directions they can go given their unfortunate circumstances: shame (which they shouldn’t be feeling) for their situation which manifests itself in a desire to NEVER repeat the sins of his or her parents which is good or acceptance for the situations which manifests itself in a willingness to repeat the behavior which is bad. So: VET! Vet, vet, vet. Find out which it is.

    I have a personal stake here. I am not a bastard. My grandfather was. And he made it his mission in life never to repeat the mistakes of his mother and father and to instill upon his children not to repeat the mistakes of his parents.

  285. MarcusD says:

    @Spacetraveller

    The concern is that divorce risk is genetically mediated. For example, people who are impulsive are more likely to divorce, and impulsivity is heritable (along with many other things: http://ussc.edu.au/ussc/assets/media/docs/publications/44_Hatemi_Trends.pdf#page=29).

    A number of studies have demonstrated associations between sensation seeking traits and measures of impulsivity. This study examined genetic contributions to the observed correlations between impulsivity and sensation seeking traits. Fifty-seven pairs of identical and 49 pairs of fraternal twins who were reared apart and 90 individuals who also participated in the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart completed the Control scale of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ; Tellegen, 1982) and the four subscales of the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Zuckerman, 1979), Consistent with previous studies, the Control scale was significantly correlated with the SSS. A Cholesky decomposition of the data indicated that the phenotypic correlations between the Control scale and the four subscales of the SSS were mediated almost entirely by genetic factors. In the final reduced model the proportion of the genetic variance of the Control scale in common with the SSS was estimated as 55%, and the rest of the genetic variance (45%) was attributed to the genetic variance specific to the Control scale. The results emphasize the importance of common biological mechanisms underlying associations between impulsivity and sensation seeking traits.

    Hur, Yoon-Mi, and Thomas J. Bouchard Jr. “The genetic correlation between impulsivity and sensation seeking traits.” Behavior Genetics 27.5 (1997): 455-463.

    M. McGue and D. T. Lykken (1992) found that divorce risk was, to a substantial degree, genetically mediated; prior research has identified numerous social and psychological factors that affect divorce risk (G. C. Kitson, K. B. Barbi, & M. J. Roach, 1985). The present study attempted to link these domains by examining the extent to which genetic influences on one such psychological factor, personality, explain divorce risk heritability. A sample of adult twins from the Minnesota Twin Registry completed a marital history questionnaire and the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (A. Tellegen, 1982). Positive Emotionality and Negative Emotionality factors were positively related to divorce risk, whereas Constraint was negatively related. In women and men, respectively, 30% and 42% of the heritability of divorce risk consisted of genetic factors affecting personality, and personality and divorce risk correlated largely as a result of these common genetic influences.

    Jocklin, Victor, Matt McGue, and David T. Lykken. “Personality and divorce: a genetic analysis.” Journal of personality and social psychology 71.2 (1996): 288.

    Recent research on the interplay of genetic and social factors in psychological development has several strands. First, genetic influences are important in the development of both competent and pathological behaviors (see review, Plomin, DeFries, McClearn, & Rutter, 1997a). Second, research is now focused on explaining these genetic influences. Figure 1 shows a simplified version of a model of reciprocal environmental and genetic influences (Kendler & Eaves, 1986; Plomin, DeFries, & Loehlin, 1977; Scarr & McCartney, 1983) that fits current data. Because the reciprocating process are evoked initially by an individual’s genotype this has been called the Evocative Model (Reiss, Neiderhiser, Hetherington, & Plomin, 2000). In Figure 1, “attributes” are heritable features of an individual’s reactivity, self-regulation, and cognitive skills. These appear earlier in development but do not necessarily affect overall adjustment. However, according to this model, heritable attributes evoke distinctive patterns of responses from intimates such as parents, children, sibs, and spouses. It is these evoked social responses that intensify and transform heritable traits into the profiles of heritable strengths and weaknesses that shape the individual’s adjustment.

    [...]

    Recent findings support this model. For example, step 2 suggests that differences in genotype among individuals would be associated with differences in the patterns of responses to them by their family and friends. Indeed, genetic differences among children and adults show substantial associations with the quality of their intimate relationships. These include, for children, the quality of their relationship with their parents as measured by self-report (Plomin, Reiss, Hetherington, & Howe, 1994) and by coded videotape (Dunn & Plomin, 1986; O’Connor, Hetherington, Reiss, & Plomin, 1995); their sibling relationships (Pike, McGuire, Hetherington, et al., 1996; Reiss et al., 2000; Rende, Slomkowski, Stocker, et al., 1992); and their peer and friendship relationships (Manke, McGuire, Reiss, et al., 1995). For adults these include their parental behaviors (see below) and their liability for divorce (McGue & Lykken, 1992).

    Reiss, David, et al. “Genetic Probes of Three Theories of Maternal Adjustment: I. Recent Evidence and a Model*.” Family Process 40.3 (2001): 247-259.

    From Turkheimer himself:

    Turkheimer, Eric. “Heritability and biological explanation.” Psychological Review 105.4 (1998): 782.

  286. greyghost says:

    IBB
    If think it is ok to marry a bastard child in this environment go ahead. I wouldn’t do anything to jack the wedding up. I just wouldn’t tell some young inexperienced young man that is not a factor. Example I have a seven year old son. I would advise him not to marry first off, then I would go into if you just have to son don’t choose this or that. One of those this or that would be a single mother, a bastard, child of a frivorced single mom, any woman that claimed to be a victim of any kind of abuse, slut or a woman over the age of 24. All others are booty calls no wife material at all BY LAW. (no woman really is by law) I’ll make sure he has gandarusa as soon as the first sign of girl interest in him or him in girls. I will also make sure he has a full awareness of the laws of misandry.
    I choose not to play churchian nice guy I’m going to be a father. I would ask my son in front of her if her parents are still married. Any negative answer and I would tell my son something to the effect of….. “She seems nice and attractive, date her for a while but she is not someone you should marry. There is nothing about her that says she knows how to be a supportive wife.” ” If I didn’t like her I would add, “she is for booty calls not wifing”
    That is the way I would handle my house hold and how I would advise a friend.

  287. Kate says:

    @greyghost: Its all the same story. This post is about what happens to women after divorce. I trust you can figure out the chronology.

    @Manlyman: No, it wasn’t. Don’t worry. I was banned too- way before it was cool;) I was told I was a slut for getting married. Since that isn’t very logical, I realized something was amiss. What’s alarming to me is how quickly women can turn from seemingly pleasant people into varying degrees of Emily Rose. I remember counselling a woman to leave a man who was cheating on his wife with her. And suddenly all of this bile started to come forth. This woman’s expectations of how she should have been treated, things that should have happened in her life that hadn’t, etc. erupted in what can only be likened to an exorcism. Try to take away a deeply held belief (even when it is harmful to that person) and they can become very unpleasant.

  288. Spacetraveller says:

    MarcusD,

    Thanks for the data.

    Like IBB, I get what you say. It is not that I am advocating seeking out illegitimate people for marriage proposals in some sort of warped altruistic gesture. All I say is that genetics/background is not everything. It is a multi-faceted process – choosing a spouse.

    What does this mean in practical terms? Most women already have quite a long list…to add ‘must be legitimate’ to that list would be asking for trouble. :P

    A man seeking a wife is usually hampered by her shield, poor availability of willing women (if he is young), and all sorts of stumbling blocks. If she is attractive enough to him and she is a good woman such that he is willing to bite the bullet and go for it (even though let’s face it, it could be a bad deal for him), I don’t think her illegitimacy on its own should leave him cold, unless it is accompanied by other unsavoury traits.

    In any case, if more people than we realise are actually illegitimate, where does this leave these people?
    If we are to believe that the cuckold rate is higher than once thought, God help us all :-)

    I just happen to think that there are much more robust determinants of suitability to marriage than…legitimacy.

    Don’t get me wrong. I myself am legitimate and being Catholic, I favour legitimacy wholeheartedly. So I am not ‘batting for the other side’ here.

    Having said all of the above, I still understand your concern. If the goal is to reduce the chances of divorce to nil, then I am with you all the way, and I am sure, so is IBB. Did I mention I was Catholic? :-D
    But if in reducing yours or one’s chances of divorce to zero, you also reduce your or one’s chances of marriage to zero, then this exercise would have turned out to be somewhat counterproductive, no? That is MY concern…

    It is a blancing act. No outright exclusions unless you have verified exactly what you are excluding. That way, you have no regrets. No kicking yourself in the belated knowledge that you have been too hasty in your decision-making.

    And now my hamster needs to go to sleep :-)

  289. MarcusD says:

    And one more thing to note: negative traits are rarely mutually exclusive. Impulsivity is correlated with unrestricted sociosexual orientation (and with alcoholism, irresponsibility with money, higher sexual partner count, and others), which is correlated with infidelity, which is correlated with divorce risk, which is correlated with poorer maternal attitudes, and the list goes on. So if you eliminate non-virgins (for example) you also eliminate a lot of people who are impulsive (probably the majority). There are atheists who wait until marriage – that’s no accident.

  290. Bee says:

    @IBB,

    I was wrong, my Old Testament Bible reading was not complete. My apologies to you.

    Do you believe any of the Old Testament is applicable today?

  291. imnobody00 says:

    @IBB

    I understand your granddad’s story but these were other times. People were taught accountability and duty then. Now, women are taught to follow their bliss. The whole society is conspiring against good principles.

    In my personal experience, women that I have dated and are daughters of single moms have always been problematic. I didn’t pay attention to this but now it is one of my main criteria. I always give them the benefit of the doubt but there has been no exception. Women from happy families are saner, kinder, less self-centered and more fun.

    Having said that, I am more than happy for you to marry a bastard. I don’t want to convince you. Life is better teacher than I could be.

    I will marry someone from a happy family, thank you very much. Live and let live.

  292. Most women already have quite a long list…to add ‘must be legitimate’ to that list would be asking for trouble

    Actually they could stand to trim back the unicorns from the list and add tangible things like this

  293. Cane Caldo says:

    @Bee

    Do you believe in dispensations? Is this a new dispensation?

    I’d have to answer “No”, with the caveat that I might. Honestly; I wouldn’t know what I was agreeing with if I called myself a dispensationalist.

    I trust what I understand the book to say. So, when after the flood, God says that it is permissible to eat flesh, then I understand that before the flood men and animals were not eating flesh, and so therefore Abel was a shepherd not for meat, but wool, and that when the lion and lamb lay down together it will be again, and not for the first time. In other words: Order will be restored.

    In that same vein: I generally understand God’s order in the way that lions and lambs lay down together not just in some future plan where everything is different and new, but when everything is new and also still the way it He has always desired it to be, but has withheld for our instruction; like a parent who makes artificial rules for bedtime so that the child learns healthy patterns of sleep. Unless the parent is a nutjob, those “arbitrary” rules almost universally conform to real and good sleeping habits. When we grow up we don’t go to bed because our parents tell us to, but we do go to bed when our parents told us, and of our own will, and at the natural time.

    All of that is not to say, “This is how it is”, but, “This is how I think about it”.

  294. Adonis says:

    Subscribed

  295. Eliezer Ben-Yehuda says:

    @hipsterRacist

    I shtupped your sister…. in the ante-chamber of the mikveh….. after I got her drunk on Sabbath Wine.

    Then I turned her over to my Ethiopian buddy. Not, not the nice guy in my Israel Air Force Reserves unit. I’m talking about the one who’s in the Kfir Battalion….. yeah, the one who got written up for beating the shit out of an Arabush who was waving that Fakestinian flag.

    You gotta problem with that, homie?

  296. I have to agree with her on one point: being in my 40s, the idea of calling someone my “girlfriend” just seems stupid. I think the word would stick in my throat. If boyfriends and girlfriends are ever appropriate, it’s when you’re young and just learning to deal with the opposite sex. At 40, if you like someone well enough to be introducing her to family and friends, what are you waiting for? Get engaged and get on with it, or move on; the clock’s ticking.

    This woman was indeed divorced, but suppose she was widowed and dating, so not as scandalous. How should her gentleman refer to her? I hear older people using the words ‘girlfriend’ and ‘boyfriend’ all the time and it makes me cringe.

    Same here. I know elderly women like that, who were devoted wives until their husbands passed away — still are devoted to their memories, in fact — but after a few years they found a widower to go dancing and attend social events with. I can’t blame them; being alone is rough after only a few years of marriage, so it’s hard to imagine what it’d be like after 50. As long as there’s no sex, there’s nothing wrong with it. It seems really weird to call them boyfriend and girlfriend, though. I think the ones I know just introduce them as, “My friend John.” That seems like enough.

  297. Opus says:

    @Cail,Corishev

    I always refer to my girlfriend as my girlfriend. I cannot think of a better title. Perhaps I never grew up. Were I to call her my friend that would surely suggest that I was in LJBF territory. ‘Friend’ always hides something and must be assumed to be a euphemism for something else. Friend should strictly be used for ones closest intimates of the same sex – no more than 4 or 5 – beyond that they are (in my girlfriend’s helpful expression) ‘friendly acquaintances’ which usefully distinguishes them from either family or work colleagues – who are more likely to be frenemies, especially for females.

    As a friend of mine said in passing years ago when being told in gushing terms that a certain female had three hundred friends (this was long before Facebook) ‘then she has no friends’. I think Aristotle is pretty spot-on about this in Books 8 and 9 of The Ethics.

  298. Ton says:

    What are they waiting for before putting a ring on it? I’m assuming for their mind to turn into snot and run out of their nose. Really cannot see how else a man is foolish enough to marry in there here and now.

  299. I was wrong, my Old Testament Bible reading was not complete. My apologies to you.

    Thank you.

    Do you believe any of the Old Testament is applicable today?

    Certainly, provided it doesn’t run perpendicular to what Christ has taught.

  300. Bachelor Taxxxxxxxxxx!

    Correct.

  301. earl says:

    Gravy…so I get to pay for her devil pills while she straddles a bunch of alphas.

    I really can’t wait for it to all burn down.

  302. Anonymous age 71 says:

    IBB continues to reframe issues. It is not about judging, nor about sin. It is simply avoiding known risks connected with how a woman is raised. To even consider a woman with a dramatically increased risk of divorce, simply to show how noble and fair you are pretty much explains why men are so messed up today by divorce.

    Some Guy says:
    September 23, 2013 at 3:22 pm BEST POSTING ON THIS TOPIC. Thanks, Some Guy. He was fair and his kids and he paid for it.

    IBB said, “It isn’t a matter of being a “White Knight.” Sure it is. He repeats it is a matter of fairness and many other parameters. Being fair to a woman, rather than selecting the best possible wife is pure White Knightery.

  303. Anonymous age 71 says:

    By the way, IBB’s statement about not paying attention to bastardy implies he can tell if a woman will make a good wife, by knowing her, or evey by shacking with her. (Let me note that shacking before marriage actually increases divorce rate after marriage.)

    There is no reason to believe IBB or any of the rest of us can select a good woman by juding her personality and other personal characteristics. Reality is most men simply cannot do that. And, with IBB focuses on irrelevant things like fairness and accountability, he proves he has no clue how to tell a marriageable woman any better than anyone else.

    Since most man absolutely cannot distinguish a good woman from a bad woman, the best one can do is avoid the categories of women which predict statistically divorce.

    By the way, in the US where most people drive, the best single test to know if a woman will divorce you is to watch how she drives. Seriously. A woman who has no respect for external authority will drive like a fiend, with no respect for driving laws. And, will also pretty much do what she wants in regard to her marriage vows.

    Also, women who drive with no concern for the safety of others will also divorce with no regard for the benefit of others.

    When a young lad, not yet an adult, pointed this out, we did an amateur study. We chatted up the divorced women. Virtually all of them admitted they drove like fiends, and told tales of talking cops out of ticketes. The long married women all told how carefully they drove, and their husbands admitted it.

  304. Mikediver says:

    “Time was, those were sold in “adult video” stores, or over the web (I’m sure Amazon has a large selection, for example), how high does demand have to be for such devices to get shelf space in a high-turnover business like Walgreens, I wonder?”

    Have you not seen the massive ad campaign for the Twister, I think by Trojan?

  305. Alex says:

    You’ve got teenage boys and even men in their twenties and thirties hugging a pillow at night pretending it was a woman. You’ve got women leaving one leg unshaven and pretending it is a man. Most men go home after work and watch women online that he will never touch have sex with other men right in front of him and laugh to his face while another man’s seed drips from her chin.

    This society is sick.

  306. Marriage 1.0 was intended for three reasons: to unite a male and female in a social contract of procreation, to jointly accomplish all the difficult tasks required to maintain the household, and to ensure mate-security and patrilineage. The benefits to men were obvious, but the consequences of failure were very low. Women were easily replaceable. There were benefits to women as well of course, since obviously women did not have the plethora of options that they do now, but the lack of options also meant that the consequences of failure were also prohibitively high. Men were not replaceable for women, like they are now. Women had reason to try harder, and accept less. Higher-level fulfillment like emotional completeness or personal accomplishments, these were not issues for us, because fulfillment was not what marriage was FOR.

    Marriage 2.0 is a different creature entirely. It serves no function for women anymore, now that we have so many options, save a provider of status. Under these circumstances, I can see why men these days would begin to believe that giving women legal rights and social options was the wrong decision, because its taken away options from them and given them to women (though this was definitely NOT the intended goal of feminism).

    I don’t agree with that interpretation of things, and I mean AT ALL, but I can certainly understand that men these days must be questioning the sanity of “permitting” women to have legal rights and social freedoms: it is possible that the tidal wave of options gained over the last 80 or so years has actually overwhelmed our ability to make reasoned decisions about marriage. However, the options are not my concern. My concern is that with all the options we have available to us, it so often seems to be the very worst of the options that we choose.

    http://www.yourtango.com/2011121948/marriage-new-status-symbol

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/living-single/201305/is-marriage-status-symbol-or-rebuke-uppity-women

    http://www.mommyish.com/2012/02/07/the-latest-family-status-symbol-marriage-700/

    Someone in the comments above said that men are incapable of discerning a good, marriageable woman from a bad one, and though maybe true in a great many cases, this I find really, really disheartening. Given that {most} women know what {most} men’s search criteria are, it is quite easy for a “certain type of woman” to lure a “certain type of man” using those criteria against them. So under these circumstances, it shouldn’t be terrifically surprising that women who seek status are the ones that are seeking (and finding) the willing husbands, and it shouldn’t come as much surprise either when the status-driven union fails.

    Those crap articles about ‘http://www.huffingtonpost.com/samantha-daniels/10-types-of-women-a-man-w_b_2911111.html’ or ’15 types’ or whatever (ironically, mostly written by women, for women, in the grain of “don’t be like this if you want to snag a man!) they pick at trivial personality issues to avoid displaying, like being jealous or not wanting to eat on a date, while completely avoiding the meaty stuff, like the negative effects of status-driven women who spend lots of money on improving their looks and sexual appeal to seduce mates of higher standing in the social hierarchy.

    Maybe these articles avoid touching on that delicate topic because there would be just too many women in the penalty box. Or because saying something like that would be “negative” or “anti-social”. Or maybe simply because it would disrupt the equilibrium that has been held in check for centuries.

    Meanwhile, if you are a person who would like to avoid “bad” marriage candidates, here is an easy one: unless you are yourself a status seeker, avoid relationships with people who make considerable effort to impress. I hope I don’t have to explain that any further. You should know exactly what you will get, if this is who attracts you. Yes, it will most certainly be called “sexist”, but I somehow doubt that this group of men really cares about that.

    Marriage has always had something of a status element, ever since cave men were mate-guarding. But its shameful that weddings (and engagements, and betrothals even, for that matter) have become a celebration of social value. From the engagement ring right through to the dress, its a sickening status display. Ours is not the only society that celebrates it either, if you do your homework. Marrying for status is quite possibly the WORST reason to dedicate your life to someone. It is almost guaranteed to be miserable.

    Marriage, by its premise, requires both people to succumb their individual identities to the covenant of the marriage. That is what our ancestors understood that we do not. If marriage is merely a salve for insecurity, whether as a defense against loneliness or shame, or an statement of social privilege, the socially responsible thing to do would be to stay out of it completely, because its destined for failure.

    I’m not saying every modern marriage is a sham, I know of a great many that are wonderful and loving and have the makings to undoubtedly endure the test of time. Nor am I saying that marriage is an outdated institution unworthy of preserving. I don’t even believe that these modern day circumstances necessarily mean marriage cannot succeed. But our lives are very different than they were in our grandparent’s era. We have a great many more choices now, so committing one’s life to someone is more difficult than ever when we are so complicated. The decision is much weightier, and requires a lot more careful research than we have been allotting to it.

    This is admittedly dicey terrain, a very difficult challenge indeed, but wouldn’t it be useful for a marriage-minded male to learn what it is that non-status-driven females want, and be able to use that to attract women into marriage? But this problem is two-fold: 1) men have never looked for that in a woman, because it does seem they actually ENJOY being distracted by shiny women things, and 2) non-status driven females are usually motivated in life by things that are not within men’s power to give them. Its a no-win situation for us all – the quality women are much harder to get, but to make matters worse, women’s “shiny thing” competitiveness is actually making relationships MORE about objectification and status, and overall less satisfying for everyone.

    But they do it, men, women objectify themselves because unfortunately, as much as you guys all say it doesn’t matter to you, the shiny-thing game works. It gets your attention. ALL women know that. ALL. And I think with this surge of PUA activity, I think men are learning that the shiny-thing game works for them too. Those who don’t play it are ignored, and that feels really bad. Maybe its not the good kind of attention, it may be shallow and superficial, but its attention nonetheless, and since we are doomed to be “socialized” creatures, attention is king.

    I don’t see it changing any time soon.

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