It’s complicated.

Even when a woman sticks the landing, divorce still has strong class implications across generations.  From Bloomberg’s Divorce Is Making American Families 66% Bigger

This holiday season, many Americans may need a flow chart to figure how they’re all related. What do you call, for example, your stepmother’s son’s live-in girlfriend’s 11-year-old son?

Related:  The normalization of the trashy single mother.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Divorce, Status of marriage. Bookmark the permalink.

139 Responses to It’s complicated.

  1. Frank K says:

    What do you call, for example, your stepmother’s son’s live-in girlfriend’s 11-year-old son?

    A stranger?

    OT. Here’s a funny our resident Salvation Army member might laugh at.

    http://www.gocomics.com/theargylesweater/2017/12/18

  2. Pingback: It’s complicated. | @the_arv

  3. Anonymous Reader says:

    A conversation back a few years ago with a man who had just become a father was illuminating. He was not looking forward to that year’s Thanksgiving, because there would be tension between the families: his mother and stepfather, his father, his wife’s mother and boyfriend, and his wife’s father and new wife. Serial polyandry hasn’t lived up to the expectations of maximal haaaaapiness…

  4. Frank K says:

    because there would be tension between the families: his mother and stepfather, his father, his wife’s mother and boyfriend, and his wife’s father and new wife.

    I am blessed in never having faced such a nightmare scenario, And if I were such a third wheel (which would never happen, as I would never date or marry another man’s estranged wife), I would like to think that I would have the common sense to politely pass on an invite

  5. thedeti says:

    Off Topic:

    Susan Walsh (no relation to Matt) at HookingUpSmart gets ready to hang it up. I won’t link there so you’ll have to check it out yourself.

    And almost 6 years to the day after her little spat with our host.

  6. earl says:

    What do you call, for example, your stepmother’s son’s live-in girlfriend’s 11-year-old son?

    A bastard?

  7. What do you call, for example, your stepmother’s son’s live-in girlfriend’s 11-year-old son?

    A bastard?

    Not the kids fault his mom is a ho.

    Stigma needs to be places on the wrongdoer, however I don’t think that will happen until a reset (probably hard). When man’s provisioning ability reinflates in value this type of stigma may attach as women try to monopolize those resources (and it will be the women exhibiting this social order).

  8. Developmentally-incomplete Biologically Unrelated Socially And Legally Connected Cohabitationally Involved Offspring Unit Designation 11Y.O.S.

    Or in casual conversation, “Short B.U.S.”

  9. Anonymous Reader says:

    What do you call, for example, your stepmother’s son’s live-in girlfriend’s 11-year-old son?

    “Hey, kid”. Same thing you’d call any other 11 year old boy. Then find him something to do away from the females that doesn’t involve an LCD screen. Pick up sticks in the yard to make a fire in the fireplace, or toss a tennis ball for the dog. Shoot baskets in the driveway. Skip rocks on the nearby pond.

    Think of a boy in that situation as a foster child who showed up at Big Brothers.

  10. DrTorch says:

    Yeah, I came across these obits last week. Look at the complicated description of parents, and the long list of siblings and their various last names*

    http://www.legacy.com/obituaries/limaohio/obituary.aspx?n=hali-ladd&pid=187521987

    *Some are probably married names.

  11. feeriker says:

    Think of a boy in that situation as a foster child who showed up at Big Brothers.

    Yep. You can bet that a kid like that has a whole host of mental and emotional health issues that are only going to get much, MUCH worse the more time he spends with Mom.

  12. feeriker says:

    This holiday season, many Americans may need a flow chart to figure how they’re all related.

    Another symptom of a civilization on the verge of collapse.

  13. Frank K says:

    Susan Walsh (no relation to Matt) at HookingUpSmart gets ready to hang it up.

    You made me look 🙂

    I found this little gem in her “About” page

    I came of age during the 70s and 80s, witnessing (and enjoying) the effects of the sexual revolution. My generation straddled the line between traditional dating and hooking up, and I’ve experienced the pros and cons of each

    Straddled the line? Either you sleep with men who are not your husband, or you don’t. To paraphrase Yoda: Do or do not, there is no straddle.

    But I love how this former carousel rider (who admits to enjoying the “effects” of the sexual revolution) thinks that just because things worked out for her that she is some kind of wise sage who can guide young people through today’s even more toxic swamp. I didn’t take the time to read her “wisdom”, but I really doubt she’s telling young women to save themselves for marriage.

    I’m not familiar with the spat she had with Dalrock, but I can imagine how it went. I’m guessing that she defended premarital sex, as long as it was with a high value man that could lead to marriage.

    It is interesting how this mindset has evolved over the decades:

    At first it’s OK to sleep with your serious BF, as that could lead to marriage.
    Then the ante was upped, now you had to live with him for a few years before he will propose.
    Then the ante got raised again: you had to sleep with a guy after the the nth date, in hopes that he will become your BF you will move in with him and eventually marry.
    And today, where women are “friends with benefits”, where there is no implied promise of relationship progression, but who do it anyway, hoping that it will lead to dating, then cohabitation and eventually marriage

    You’ve come a long way, baby!

  14. Frank K says:

    This holiday season, many Americans may need a flow chart to figure how they’re all related.

    I think it’s very easy to know who is family and who is not, but then I have a very different understanding of what marriage is than what is considered “normal” these days. I suspect that at some point the word “family” will become meaningless.

  15. Clearly, we are one step closer to utopia. Hail the day when everyone is a bastard, and no one knows who his father is. Hooray for feminism!

  16. OT: And then sometimes it’s not complicated.

    EPL death of blue-hair diver-thoty seeker.

    http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-18/taxi-driver-arrested-rape-murder-british-diplomat-lebanon

  17. She had a masters in “masters in International Security”.

    Color me impressed.

  18. earlthomas786 says:

    @Boxer…

    Destroying the nuclear family has really caused civilization to grow and strengthen by leaps and bounds. Look how good the Soviet Union is.

  19. anonymous_ng says:

    @Frank K which would never happen, as I would never date or marry another man’s estranged wife

    Yeah. If I remarry, it will be to a widow, or a woman with no kids who has never been married. Not much chance at my age of finding a virgin.

  20. theShield220 says:

    @Boxer
    In the land of the Gamma males, the Beta male is king!…

  21. Dear Frank:

    This was about 2012 or so, when ya boy Boxer was considerably more naïve; but, I can answer the question, because I got sucked into the drama…

    I’m not familiar with the spat she had with Dalrock, but I can imagine how it went. I’m guessing that she defended premarital sex, as long as it was with a high value man that could lead to marriage.

    Step 1. Susan Walsh took offense at something posted on Dalrock blog
    Step 2. Susan Walsh authored an article on her own blog, accusing the author of Dalrock, as well as several regular commenters, of threatening to murder her family.
    Step 3. As I had no dog in the fight, I thought this might be true. Thus I asked, at Susan Walsh’s blog (Hooking Up Smart) for a link to some evidence.
    Step 3.1. Note that when I asked her for evidence, I was totally open to the fact that she was being honest. There are lots of kooks on the internet, and many of them hurl impotent threats. Thus I was totally prepared to troll whoever was goony enough to do this.
    Step 4. Not only did Walsh not have any threats to show, but she almost immediately accused y’r friend and humble narrator of being part of the conspiracy to murder her and her relatives in the dark of night.
    Step 5. I concluded, with some justification, that the accusation was a request that I not ever go to Walsh’s HUS blog any longer. I thus logged off for the last time.

    In short, it’s just another tradthot (TM Roosh V) wimminz looking for some attention. I also note, with amusement, that this happened around some major holiday (either American Thanksgiving or Christmas), and thus illustrated how lonely and isolated that poor woman must be. At the same time other people are enjoying friends and family, she is desperately making up lie after lie on the internet, in a lame attempt to garner some attention.

    Regards,

    Boxer (The Historian, I suppose).

  22. thedeti says:

    Boxer:

    Actually it was more like this:

    1) Susan said “Divorce and frivorce are overblown in the manosphere, which was said in large part out of exasperation and emotion. Dalrock wrote a post which easily disproved that assertion. Or, if you don’t accept it was disproved, then Dalrock came forward with a large amount of evidence sharply disputing the truth of the claim.

    2) Dalrock called her out on it, and said, in effect, “if it really is true that divorce is overblown, prove it”

    3) When faced with evidence, Susan first doubled down, then said “no I didn’t really say what you claim I said”, then Dalrock said “yes you did say exactly that and here’s a link to where you said it”, then Susan doubled down again, then Dalrock said “Bullshit”, then Susan said “don’t hit me I’m a girl!” and went back to doubling and tripling down.

    Here is a link to the post posted on December 20, 2011, which post and comments speak for themselves.

    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/12/20/is-frivolous-divorce-overstated-in-the-manosphere/

  23. The Question says:

    “What do you call, for example, your stepmother’s son’s live-in girlfriend’s 11-year-old son?”

    The son of a thot living with the low-class son of another probable thot married to your also low-class father.

    Strangely, they have yet to have Hallmark greeting card for that type of relationship.

  24. The Question says:

    This reminds me of when I first heard about the musical “Mama Mia!” – everyone was raving about the songs and actors/actresses. Meanwhile, I was appalled at the utter low-class nature of the plot – a girl trying to figure out on the eve of her wedding who her father actually is, because her mother thotfully banged three guys in a single weekend and then thought having a father wasn’t important for her kid.

  25. Mycroft Jones says:

    Thanks for the history, Boxer. I left Susan Walsh alone after I made my case for Biblical morality as the solution to a lot of the issues she and her younger ladies were grappling with. I saw their replies and realized I was dealing with a different species of being. Later, Vox explained the rhetoric/dialectic difference, and I understood intellectually what my gut had already told me. Or, to quote old dad: “Women are ruled by their emotionz, son”. Also, around that time she came out in the open with her college sexual history. She may have been loyal to her husband, but the carousel cray-cray comes out even decades later. People think we’re dummies wanting a virgin wife. And that may be almost 100% impossible in this day and age. Doesn’t mean we can’t have an ideal, or know how things SHOULD be.

  26. Canon Rex says:

    Of course we are reaching the utopia. The just city, according to Socrates in The Republic, has children in common who don’t know their real fathers. Family does not matter, we are all family!

    Only the strongest men get to reproduce, though. The rest have to be scammed by the system to believe they have a chance.

    Wait a minute…

  27. jrackell says:

    as if Bloomberg gives two hoots what the retards in fly-over land call their dysfunctional family members. However, pulling the wool over their eyes so they don’t get too uppity as to why there’s no jobs or how opioid billionaires can rake in billions from their immiseration — that’s definitely in Boombergs remit. Families are 66% larger because millenials have been BTFO’ed economically, et cetera et cetera — not some ha ha family feud of what the inbreds call their bastard spawn.

  28. SirHamster says:

    What do you call, for example, your stepmother’s son’s live-in girlfriend’s 11-year-old son?

    A bastard?

    Not the kids fault his mom is a ho.

    Not his fault to be born, but the term and all its negative status is part of hitting his mom in the feels, which is part of warning all the young girls feeling tingles. And that negative status is from the action, not the label. Create a new term, and the nature of bastardry will bestow it the same meaning.

    Part of the correction is to stop considering only the individual and to protect the community and all of its short-sighted and emotionally-driven members.

  29. Dear Deti:

    Here is a link to the post posted on December 20, 2011, which post and comments speak for themselves.

    Thanks for this! I was a year off, and it makes sense that it was Christmas 2011. I had not yet become a regular reader of this place.

    I still marvel at this arrogant wimminz, who took disagreement over some abstract figures to the level of “I don’t feel safe in my own home!” Here’s hoping Mizz Walsh has recovered from the unspeakable trauma of having people disagree with her on the internet.

    Best,
    Boxer

  30. Cane Caldo says:

    Had this article tabbed open to do a post on it. You beat me to it. Next!

  31. Oscar says:

    Reminds me of a line from “Second Hand Lions”.

    “It’s not the kid’s fault he’s got a damn lousy mother.”

  32. TheLastCoyote says:

    If a book I saw in the new release my local library the other day is any indication, the incidence of divorce and complicated family trees is not going down any time soon.

    The book in question is called “How Not to Hate Your Husband After Kids.” I am not making this up. Written by a journalist named Jancee Dunn – why am I not surprised a journalist wrote this book?

    The book description on Amazon references Dunn’s “well-meaning but blithely unhelpful husband.” What kind of man tolerates his wife writing a book portraying him as a dunce?

    It’s currently #13,448 on Amazon just 9 months after it’s release. So it’s not lighting up the charts, but it’s published by a mainstream publisher, has 127 reviews posted on Amazon (almost all positive), and positive third-party blurbs from mainstream publications and the obligatory shrink or two. Which means the book, even just based on the title alone, is playing some small part in the overall effort to portray men as incompetent fools while positioning women as the arbiter of men’s competence as fathers.

    If I’m really feeling like a glutton for punishment, I’ll check the book out from the library and give you a field report. But I think we all know pretty much what the book is going to say.

  33. Random Angeleno says:

    Strangely, they have yet to have Hallmark greeting card for that type of relationship.
    All you need is one that says “Hey kid!” Done.

  34. Dalrock says:

    @Frank K

    I’m not familiar with the spat she had with Dalrock, but I can imagine how it went. I’m guessing that she defended premarital sex, as long as it was with a high value man that could lead to marriage.

    I pissed Susan off two different times. The first was a satirical post I did in response to one of hers. In her post a young woman wrote in judging the performance of her date. I shared some excerpts from Susan’s reader and then presented a (made up) letter to me from the date. I thought it was funny. Susan did not.

    The second time I pissed Susan off was when she said that frivolous divorce was wildly overstated in the men’s sphere. In response to a comment at her site complaining about divorce theft, Susan challenged “Provide stats for this or shut up.” I provided stats, and Susan was furious. Later she claimed one of my commenters threatened to track her down and harm her. When I asked for a link to the comment so I could address it, she wouldn’t provide me one.

  35. earlthomas786 says:

    Or, to quote old dad: “Women are ruled by their emotionz, son”.

    Not his fault to be born, but the term and all its negative status is part of hitting his mom in the feels, which is part of warning all the young girls feeling tingles.

    Bingo to both points.

    Even the most red pill of woman still gets hit more by feels and emotion than logic and reasoning.

  36. The second time I pissed Susan off was when she said that frivolous divorce was wildly overstated in the men’s sphere. In response to a comment at her site complaining about divorce theft, Susan challenged “Provide stats for this or shut up.” I provided stats, and Susan was furious. Later she claimed one of my commenters threatened to track her down and harm her. When I asked for a link to the comment to I could address it, she wouldn’t provide me one.

    Data is for nerds and/or is sexist. Depending on whether or not Grrl Power in STEM is the narrative of the day.

  37. Random Angeleno says:

    Secondhand Lions was a good flick, definitely worth watching.

    Back on topic, here’s another shout for “it’s complicated”: did anyone catch the Daily Mail article that detailed Meghan Markle’s extended family relations? Seemed like anyone who wanted to track that needed a scorecard. So much for Catholic girls. Hard to say, I know, I’m Catholic too, but there it is. Cannot believe she is getting into the royal family with a background like that.

  38. Gunner Q says:

    God is Laughing @ 1:14 pm:
    “OT: And then sometimes it’s not complicated. EPL death of blue-hair diver-thoty seeker”

  39. Novaseeker says:

    Aww, bigger families due to chao — I mean tolerance — means more to love, right? #lovewins again

  40. Novaseeker says:

    Cannot believe she is getting into the royal family with a background like that.

    They have to be relevant to the thot masses in order to stick around, generationally. I.E — the next generation of royals needs to be like the masses of thots, otherwise the royal family gets canned, so they’re thotifying themselves.

  41. Caspar Reyes says:

    I think it was right after the Susan Walsh to-do that I started reading Dalrock, whom I had found indirectly through Athol Kay’s MMSL, which turned out to be my gateway drug into the manosphere (after googling “I hate my wife”, being in a state of utter and complete desperation). I’m talking suicide was the next step if I didn’t find answers.

    The Susan Walsh thing didn’t make sense to me then, and it lost me within five comments on a quick reread just now. That and similar debates (is game a tool, what is a true Conservative, etc.) all seem hair-splitting, no true Scotsman, did-not-did-so, this-is-my-sandbox nonsense that makes the eyes glaze over. There are men on the verge of pulling the trigger on themselves, and these tempests in teapots rage.

  42. Dalrock says:

    @Caspar Reyes

    There are men on the verge of pulling the trigger on themselves, and these tempests in teapots rage.

    Agreed. However, we did get some humor out of it all. I think it was Greenlander who called Hooking Up Smart “a finishing school for hos”. Hilarious.

  43. earlthomas786 says:

    whom I had found indirectly through Athol Kay’s MMSL, which turned out to be my gateway drug into the manosphere

    Interesting…that’s how I found out about all these places too.

  44. Caspar Reyes says:

    @Dalrock

    we did get some humor out of it all

    And I realize that everybody is at where they is at, and not everyone is at the trigger point. You have my gratitude for your years of yeoman’s work, which I credit in great part for my still being on-planet.

  45. Lovekraft says:

    It’s similar to when the hyphenated last-name FeministCrazeoftheMonth came out in the 90s and I honestly asked a few of their proponents what would happen when children with hyphenated last name marries another one? Will there now be four last names? And so on, down the line?

    Whether the International Feminist Sisterhood actually came up with an answer is irrelevant because the basic premise is ridiculous: if a simple time-honored tradition of taking the husband’s last name is discarded, then anything goes.

  46. BillyS says:

    Deti,

    A root problem was the name of her site. You can’t do stupid stuff in a smart manner….

  47. thedeti says:

    I missed the Clueless Daters post. But Dalrock and Susan kissed and made up after that one.

  48. Pingback: It’s complicated. | Reaction Times

  49. Anonymous Reader says:

    @TheLastCoyote

    Here’s a brief article by the authoress:

    http://www.cosmopolitan.com/lifestyle/a9147248/how-not-to-hate-your-husband-after-kids-jancee-dunn/

    It’s not all bad advice, but it’s pretty superficial. As one should expect, because women do not really understand women. Underlying all the “how not to hate your husband” is — betaization, and conservative feminism. The book may well be just an expanded version of the article.

    Suggest men read the Cosmo article and maybe a review at Goodreads, with The Glasses on in order to see what isn’t being said.

    There’s a whiff of John Gottman in her text, for example in mentioning that a lot of daily good deeds make life better, and a suggestion that even when a woman cannot have sex with her husband she should still be touching him oftn — which is not a bad thing necessarily. Early Gottman (80’s / 90’s) work was pretty good. That’s when he demonstrated scientifically many things such as the 4 marriage killers (“contempt by wife” is one) that are useful. Unfortunately he just turned into an equalitarian equalist conservative feminist in the last 15 years or so.

  50. squid_hunt says:

    Sorry about going back to the original topic, but my solution has been simple: I refuse to go back on holidays.

    My dad and mom are divorced. My dad and stepmom (who raised me) are divorced. The last time I was home on Christmas, I was there for a week. I got a day and a half with each parent. From my grandma to my aunts and uncles, to my sisters, no one wanted to work together. Everyone wanted me to drive to their house personally to see them because the 15 hour drive wasn’t enough. My whole family was exhausted by the time we left. And everyone STILL griped about not getting any time with us.

    I have had it. No more. They want holiday time, they can come here with the kids in their element and no one else to bother us. Strangely enough, everyone’s too busy to show up on the holidays.

    Divorce sucks. We need to quit pretending like this needs to be normalized.

  51. Spike says:

    In Australia, the land of the Feminist and corresponding mangina, a columnist grappled with the same complicated question.
    She decided that a “family member” is someone you share a tube of toothpaste with.
    They like to call themselves “progressive”.

  52. Random Angeleno says:

    Speaking of royals, we may consider Meghan Markle the new poster girl for “stick the landing” propaganda. We’ll never hear the end of that one. Even the most fiendish and devious anti-male entities could not have done better.

  53. It amazes me to see people complaining about the erosion of civilization, while using spelling and grammar that would have outraged my third-grade teacher. Come on, people, you don’t hit someone “in the feels.” And “wimminz” isn’t a word.

    Either you’re for standards, or you aren’t.

  54. jabrwok says:

    Not the kids fault his mom is a ho.

    Stigma needs to be places on the wrongdoer, however I don’t think that will happen until a reset (probably hard).

    Unfortunately the stigma being on the kid as well is usually justified, though it’s probably in some respect a self-fulfilling prophecy. From what I’ve read (correct me if I’m wrong) most children born and raised out of wedlock suffer from pretty much every social pathology there is at much higher rates than children born into traditional married households. Higher rates of academic failure, higher rates of crime, higher rates of sexual abuse, both received and dished-out, higher suicide rates, higher rates of drug abuse, etc.

    I suspect that much of the stigma against illegitimate children resulted from communities seeing how so many of them turned out, and then generalizing as people are wont to do, irrespective of any contribution the community itself may have made towards the children’s unfortunate upbringing.

  55. David says:

    Come on, people, you don’t hit someone “in the feels.” And “wimminz” isn’t a word.

    So? ‘Mangina’ is not a word found in Webster’s Dictionary either. Do you want that word to be discontinued?

    Either you’re for standards, or you aren’t.

    Are you a paragon of high standards? If so, prove it.

  56. Gunner Q says:

    The Real Peterman @ 4:44 pm:
    “It amazes me to see people complaining about the erosion of civilization, while using spelling and grammar that would have outraged my third-grade teacher.”

    For your lulz, check out this link:

    https://www.bbc.com/pidgin

  57. Novaseeker says:

    if a simple time-honored tradition of taking the husband’s last name is discarded, then anything goes.

    Well it’s even dumber than that. A woman who “keeps her own name” is still obeying patriarchy because “her own name” is her father’s name. The only real rebellion here that is any way consistent would be (1) having a reset (i.e., a one time mandatory choice based renaming of surnames by all women everywhere) and (2) thenceforth all daughters being assigned their chosen mother’s surname — so there you have a matriarchy.

    Otherwise, all you’re doing is taking daddy over hubby.

  58. Opus says:

    When I was young the great fear of parents was a five letter word, drugs. Times changed and Susan Walsh’s great fear – so i deduce from her latest essay at Hooking up for Hos – is that her daughter would be the slut she was but land badly. This has not happened (any more than most people were formerly adversely affected by drugs) and Miss Walsh is soon to marry. Happy ending. Mrs Walsh was projecting.

    Once upon a time people with double barrelled names were of the Upper Classes or people who aspired to be such. Now a double-barrelled name is merely evidence of illegitimacy. Spanish women do not change their name at marriage; the children take their Fathers first surname and affix to it their mother’s first surname. Every surname is that of a man; no such thing as a female surname.

    The half-blood prince is to marry the half-caste celeb on the same day as the Cup Final which is the equivalent of holding it as the same time as the Super Bowl.

  59. feeriker says:

    In Australia, the land of the Feminist and corresponding mangina

    Man, what a far, Far, FAR cry from the Down Under I visited 36 years ago. Then again, in terms of sociological evolution, for any part of the western world these days, three and half decades might as well be three and a half millennia. Sad.

    It amazes me to see people complaining about the erosion of civilization, while using spelling and grammar that would have outraged my third-grade teacher. Come on, people, you don’t hit someone “in the feels.” And “wimminz” isn’t a word.

    Will somebody please introduce our brother Peterman to “parody” and “satire?”

    Well it’s even dumber than that. A woman who “keeps her own name” is still obeying patriarchy because “her own name” is her father’s name.

    Ironically, it’s just as likely to be her grandfather’s surname, or even her great-grandfather’s surname, given the inter-generational nature of bastardy, in which a woman’s mother and grandmother were both likely to be single-mother skank-hoes (see Black America for Exhibit A here). The point is that whatever surname she hangs on herself, it is always a MAN’S family name.

  60. Sigma Frame says:

    Dalrock, Boxer, Deti, thanks for commenting on the history of the altercation with Walsh. Character is revealed in the way people contest their arguments.
    It seems to me, that many riders who have made the rounds are overly paranoid – offense and indignation abound with them. If I am not mistaken, this seems to be par for the course. As I recall, in the 19th century, many people had the notion that sexual promiscuity led to mental illness. My observation on paranoia seems to be fitting evidence for this case. (They also believed masturbation led to blindness. heh.)

  61. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    As if TV ads weren’t feminist enough, Britain bans TV ads featuring women in traditional roles: https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/gender-stereotyping-in-uk-adverts-to-be-banned-next-year-1-4638851

    Harmful gender stereotyping in advertisements is to be banned across the UK next year.

    A new rule will be introduced in the UK Advertising Codes following a review of gender stereotyping by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), which found more needed to be done to tackle advertisements featuring stereotypical gender roles and characteristics.

  62. PokeSalad says:

    Straddled the line? Either you sleep with men who are not your husband, or you don’t. To paraphrase Yoda: Do or do not, there is no straddle.

    Au contraire, mon cheri……she did plenty of straddling, you can be sure of that.

  63. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    there would be tension between the families: his mother and stepfather, his father, his wife’s mother and boyfriend, and his wife’s father and new wife.

    And yet, Hollywood movies and TV shows always depict such events as the happiest of family gatherings. Only a judgemental Neanderthal would fail to see the copious love and bonding that occurs in “blended” families. For families come in all shapes, sizes, and colors.

  64. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Males patrons don’t pay as much for works by female artists: http://theartnewspaper.com/news/female-artists-really-do-earn-less-than-men-survey-finds

    Affluent men consistently rate women artists lower than their male counterparts, leading to a discrepancy in prices at auction, according to a new report by the University of Luxembourg.

    The findings, published in the paper, Is gender in the eye of the beholder? Identifying cultural attitudes with art auction prices, reveal that works by women fetch on average 47.6% less than those by men at auction.

    “Male buyers are a driving force of the auction market and yet we see that they are also more likely to think that women’s art is inferior,” says Roman Kräussl, the art economist who led the report. “Our research adds to the mounting evidence of discrimination towards women that is systemic in so many industries.”

  65. feeriker says:

    They have to be relevant to the thot masses in order to stick around, generationally. I.E — the next generation of royals needs to be like the masses of thots, otherwise the royal family gets canned, so they’re thotifying themselves.

    You’ve hit the nail squarely on the head. No matter how fiercely the Royals and their defenders try to deny it, all Western institutions are in a race to the bottom, and the British monarchy is no exception. While in times past thots recognized themselves for what they were and at least pretented to aspire to something higher, that is no longer the case. Utter degenercy is “in,” the principles underpinning the monarchy are seen as degenerate and backward, and, because a de facto “Dictatorship of the Proletariat” best characterizes public opinion, the thot majority won’t stand for anything reminding itself of its true low nature. Thus the (not-so-subtle) signals from the gutter culture that the Windsors either “thotify” themselves, or that Prince Willy face the possibility of someday having to get a real job and live like the commoner that the “Thotatorship” will turn him into.

    Britain’s biggest historical mistake: the Hanoverian dynasty being such weak monarchs as to allow the institution to be transformed from absolute monarchy into the constitutional (i.e., figurehead) form.

  66. sipcode says:

    We have become “corrupted from the SIMPLICITY that is in Christ [The Word].” The church “preacheth another Jesus.” 2 Cor 11:3-4

  67. Anon says:

    “Our research adds to the mounting evidence of discrimination towards women that is systemic in so many industries.”

    See, this is why AI is going to be a disaster for the FI. These idiots that twist themselves into a pretzel rather than recognize the obvious truth – female ability is lower – will find it increasingly impossible to cover up the truth that AI forces everywhere.

    As another example :

    In response to a comment at her site complaining about divorce theft, Susan challenged “Provide stats for this or shut up.” I provided stats, and Susan was furious. Later she claimed one of my commenters threatened to track her down and harm her. When I asked for a link to the comment so I could address it, she wouldn’t provide me one.

    See, a woman lets emotion take the place of cold, hard facts. I can count on one hand the number of times a woman used graphs and charts to maker her point, which is why they get so angry when a man who likes graphs and charts (Dalrock, in this case) presents them and proves the woman wrong.

    AI will not back down, and will simply plow through all this, exposing an endless array of politically incorrect truths.

    In fact, it is already beginning :

    https://www.wired.com/story/machines-taught-by-photos-learn-a-sexist-view-of-women/

  68. Anon says:

    When Elizabeth II passes, the monarchy should be abolished. It is well past time for this tourist attraction for fat old ladies to end.

  69. Anon says:

    From Bloomberg’s Divorce Is Making American Families 66% Bigger

    Yeah, and in return, family bonds are 95% weaker.

    The idiots failed to take that into account in their stupid headline.

  70. Jack Russell says:

    Sussanah’s Still Alive. Here is a song by the Kinks’s for you Susy.
    There is a line in the song which will remind you of your college days. “She sleeps with the covers down, hoping somebody gets in. The song is from 1967 and is only 2 min 10 sec long. Has other lines which sound like they could be written about Susan today.

    https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=the+kinks+susannah%27s+still+alive+

  71. feeriker says:

    From Bloomberg’s Divorce Is Making American Families 66% Bigger

    Yeah, and in return, family bonds are 95% weaker.

    The idiots failed to take that into account in their stupid headline.

    Libtards of both sexes share women’s ignorance of cause and effect.

  72. earlthomas786 says:

    Yeah, and in return, family bonds are 95% weaker.

    The idiots failed to take that into account in their stupid headline.

    They have to make it like their tactics are strengthing the family instead of the reality of weakening it.

  73. Lost Patrol says:

    @ Anon

    AI will not back down, and will simply plow through all this, exposing an endless array of politically incorrect truths.

    Doesn’t the linked article in fact highlight the notion that humans could be forced to make the AI politically correct?

    I know I don’t get it, and you are tired of explaining it, and I want your version to come true anyway so don’t waste any energy on it; but the article all but states that engineers are training the AI using biased training aids, and maybe efforts should be taken to make that AI more woman friendly during its learning phase.

    The company has an internal ethics committee dedicated to keeping AI in the company’s products in line.

    Researchers and engineers working with COCO and other datasets should be looking for signs of bias in their own work and others’ he says.

    “It’s a really important question–when should we change reality to make our systems perform in an aspirational way?”

    Code Word – Aspirational. This sounds like a start to making the programmers and engineers, in google-esque fashion, develop their AI using narrative approved materials. AI is putting women in kitchens, so we’ll teach our version that women are actually on construction sites.

    Even if it doesn’t work, and AI ultimately does its own thing, surely efforts will be made to coerce the humans into making AI toe the line?

  74. Ofelas says:

    Jack Russell:
    reminded me about another Kinks’ very ‘prophetic’ (on a general societal scale – the social media, attention seeking instawh*ring etc) song, which is off topic here though – the last track on the Village Green Preservation Society (great album by the way) :

  75. earl says:

    As I recall, in the 19th century, many people had the notion that sexual promiscuity led to mental illness. My observation on paranoia seems to be fitting evidence for this case. (They also believed masturbation led to blindness. heh.)

    Not physical blindness, but spiritual blindness. If there is anything that makes a person turn upon themself, it’s masturbation.

    And once the sexual revolution was heating up…you’ll notice that’s when psychology took out the sexual degenerate acts as mentally ill.

  76. Opus says:

    Some very curious and gratuitous views up above as to the British constitutional settlement – as if it was affecting you. Face it: without the British monarchy you would have to invent someone to mock; far better then to leave it as it is – and you never know, maybe one day that American woman with the welsh name will be Queen to Henry IX.

  77. earl says:

    See, a woman lets emotion take the place of cold, hard facts. I can count on one hand the number of times a woman used graphs and charts to maker her point, which is why they get so angry when a man who likes graphs and charts (Dalrock, in this case) presents them and proves the woman wrong.

    This is why when it comes to being a good mother to her children…that’s her optimal authoritarian role. When it comes to being the head of the family, leading a company, a nation, or civilization…it’ll cause the place to fall apart.

  78. squid_hunt says:

    @Opus
    “Face it: without the British monarchy you would have to invent someone to mock”

    If you don’t think an antiquated royal monarchy, controlled by a constitution and parliament, who espouses democratic collectivism is mock-worthy, you need a sense of humor.

  79. DrTorch says:

    Last Coyote wrote What kind of man tolerates his wife writing a book portraying him as a dunce?

    Same man that hears it from the pulpit every week?

    Last week at church the sermon was from 1 Samuel. The pastor stated that although Elkanah clearly loved Hannah, he “didn’t love her well”? Really? Because I’d say there’s a strong argument that he did love her EXTREMELY well. But somehow, although unrelated to the message of the sermon (waiting, connected to the Advent) the pastor needed to bash a man who loved and cared for his wife, despite her shortcomings.

  80. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Living in Los Angeles, I recently came across this casting notice for UbderX, a film that’s in pre-production.

    The character descriptions are interesting, and provide insight into the sort of stories that Hollywood is telling. Compare the male and female character descriptions.

    Miles Male 25-33: Josh Hutcherson/Adam Scott-type; relatively small in stature, nice guy type, wouldn’t immediately strike you as a hero, but who can transform into something dark and brooding; a failed millennial who goes on an incredibly misguided attempt to become a vigilante after losing his fiancé, job, and being forced to drive uber.

    Naomi Female 35-40: a badass CEO who is eight months pregnant and incredibly frustrated to be home on forced maternity leave. Incredibly capable and confident; after a chance encounter she takes pity on our hero Miles and becomes his unofficial “sensei” teaching him how to fight and generally dolling out tough love.

    Emma Female 23-31: smart, witty, her quirky unique style doesn’t fit in at the law firm where she just began working 80 hour weeks; she has been Miles’s best friend since college, and as she sees him have a mental break down and go on a quest to be a hero she becomes torn about whether to enable his increasingly insane behavior; this is particularly hard as she is secretly in love with him.

  81. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    That’s UberX.

  82. jg1 says:

    Question: Would it be considered sexist, to ask for a male waiter to serve me at a restaurant as a single guy going to eat to avoid sexual harassment allegations in this poisoned well of gender relations?

  83. earl says:

    The pastor stated that although Elkanah clearly loved Hannah, he “didn’t love her well”?

    It wouldn’t surprise me if some of these bloviating pastors would go so far as to say that God didn’t love Israel well.

  84. earl says:

    The character descriptions are interesting, and provide insight into the sort of stories that Hollywood is telling. Compare the male and female character descriptions.

    Nothing new there. The cesspool keeps vomiting out the same stuff.

    Hollywood is really keen on the saying: ‘If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.’

  85. @RPL She can’t be too much of a bad-ass CEO if she can be forced to go on maternity leave.

    If Emma is working 80+ hours a week, then she’s too busy to be in the movie. They need to find someone like a hooker who would be out on the streets for the guy to interact with.

  86. Oscar says:

    RE: Hyphenated last names

    In Latin America, everyone has two last names. Your father’s last name comes first, then your mother’s last name. It’s a way to acknowledge a person is related to both families.

    When a woman gets married, she drops her mother’s last name, takes her husband’s last name, but keeps her father’s last name.

  87. earl says:

    If Emma is working 80+ hours a week, then she’s too busy to be in the movie.

    Perhaps in the real world. In cinema fantasyland she works 80+ hours a week, has a clean and well-maintained apartment, an exciting social life, always looks well dressed and beautiful, and has many male suitors. You can do that when you take out time consuming things like sleep, eating, showering, bowel movements, working out in the gym, commuting to and from places, and doing the actual 80+ hours of work.

  88. Jason says:

    …..I’m sure the movie will be a huge hit and success (sarcasm)

    @Frank K, yeah…funny comic……rang the “silver bell” all day at Macy’s in Uniform (I am one of the few actual Salvation Army soldiers that actually rings in full dress……a common thing pre 1965). I was a good day…..lots of nice folks. Cool for Fresno (45 degees). Had one or two self righteous middle aged women tell me “they don’t give to the Salvation Army because of our hostility to gays, lesbians, transgenderd, and women”

    Told them to have a “very merry Christmas!”

  89. Had one or two self righteous middle aged women tell me “they don’t give to the Salvation Army because of our hostility to gays, lesbians, transgenderd, and women”

    I’m going to start giving to the Salvation Army for that very reason. Thanks!

  90. Dr. Torch:

    Last week at church the sermon was from 1 Samuel. The pastor stated that although Elkanah clearly loved Hannah, he “didn’t love her well”? Really? Because I’d say there’s a strong argument that he did love her EXTREMELY well. But somehow, although unrelated to the message of the sermon (waiting, connected to the Advent) the pastor needed to bash a man who loved and cared for his wife, despite her shortcomings.

    I know that story, and just to be sure, I went and reviewed it, here:
    https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1+Samuel+1&version=KJV

    These feminist priests are dumb as hell, and the only people more ridiculously stupid than they are is the men who give them money, so that they can keep inverting the message in the text, and erasing the manly and womanly qualities of all its heroes. I hope you didn’t give this fool any of your money.

    If these idiots want to keep at this, then let the feminist priests go get real jobs, and shift for themselves. Keep your money for yourself and your children, as Elkanah surely would have done.

    Boxer

  91. Lost Patrol says:

    The Salvation Army is hostile towards more than half the planet? That must make for very long days.

  92. Jason says:

    Funny thing is Boxer…the Salvation Army in the USA (don’t know about other Commands of Territories) has more women “members” than men.

    I have my criticisms of “The Sally Army” (and my criticisms are legitimate) but I will defend the “red kettle” appeal. We have had several outside audits to “prove / demonstrate / show” that over 93% of the money raised in the “red kettles” goes to direct action: food, clothing, drug rehab programs, electric / heat / rental assistance

    It’s a good fund raiser. I’ll defend it, that is why I do put 50-100 hours on the kettle every season.

  93. earl says:

    Because I’d say there’s a strong argument that he did love her EXTREMELY well. But somehow, although unrelated to the message of the sermon (waiting, connected to the Advent) the pastor needed to bash a man who loved and cared for his wife, despite her shortcomings.

    I read the passage Boxer put up…seems the pastor forgot how the Lord was involved in all of this and what His part was. Much like I think most feminist/cuck type pastors are.

    Also of note…how much it hurts a woman to be childless and how her rival provoking that cuts to their bone. It was true back in Biblical times as it is now.

  94. Dalrock says:

    @Caspar Reyes

    And I realize that everybody is at where they is at, and not everyone is at the trigger point. You have my gratitude for your years of yeoman’s work, which I credit in great part for my still being on-planet.

    Thank you. That is very humbling.

  95. Damn Crackers says:

    God loves divorce. It fulfills the first commandment to go forth and multiply.

  96. Gunner Q says:

    earl @ 7:29 am:
    “Nothing new there. The cesspool keeps vomiting out the same stuff.”

    Preggo Rocky Balboa is new. He can’t go back to being a Fortune 500 executive until he pops so he moonlights at the boxing gym for Kylo Ren. Star Wars: UberX! And this time the lovesick Stormtrooper will have boobs, too.

    God is punishing Hollywood by twisting its dial to 11.

  97. BillyS says:

    I worked for a CIO in the past (several levels down) who proudly proclaimed at one meeting that the girls she birthed had her last name and the boys her husbands, per their agreement on marriage.

    She was (ironically?) not well liked by the women in the group I worked in, but she was certainly a sign of the times.

  98. BillyS says:

    Boxer,

    Elkanah failed in the worst way in modern religious thinking: His wife was not completely happy. He didn’t make her have a child, so he was at fault. Whether he had control over that is irrelevant. His wife was unhappy in an area and that is always the husbands fault!

    Get with the program!

  99. Jason says:
    December 19, 2017 at 9:00 am
    ….Had one or two self righteous middle aged women tell me “they don’t give to the Salvation Army because of our hostility to gays, lesbians, transgenderd, and women”

    December 19, 2017 at 9:30 am
    …We have had several outside audits to “prove / demonstrate / show” that over 93% of the money raised in the “red kettles” goes to direct action: food, clothing, drug rehab programs, electric / heat / rental assistance.
    …”

    One thing that I’ve ALWAYS admired about The Salvation Army is how their organization DOES NOT have high-paid upper level big-shots who ‘live it up’ on the contributions, as contrasted with other ‘non-profit charities’ that will remain unnamed here.
    For that reason alone (in spite of being a non-Christian), I ALWAYS give generously when it’s time for the Red Kettles to make their appearance. I LIKE knowing that the money that I give will get to where it’s supposed to go: to those who need it, NOT in some phony’s pocket.
    Don’t let any virtue-signalling SJW phonies get you down; your charity is possibly the world’s finest, and you’re doing good for the best reasons.
    Merry Christmas, and Bright Blessings be upon you!!

  100. Dear Billy S:

    Elkanah failed in the worst way in modern religious thinking: His wife was not completely happy. He didn’t make her have a child, so he was at fault. Whether he had control over that is irrelevant. His wife was unhappy in an area and that is always the husbands fault! Get with the program!

    My mistake. Of course, you’re right. The point being that no matter how decent, moral, upright, studious or devoted a husband is, he’s still an asshole.

    Sign me up for some of Father Pastorbator’s sermons. I clearly need some re-education.

    Boxer

  101. Dear Damn Crackers:

    As part of my eclectic religious education, I sat in on some Talmud lessons at one point. It’s a shame I didn’t stick with that, but I didn’t live in the area long enough. I also can’t cite the source, because if you’ve seen a copy of Talmud, it resembles a huge set of encyclopedias.

    God loves divorce. It fulfills the first commandment to go forth and multiply.

    The rav was quoting some commentary by (someone I don’t remember), who said that when a single couple divorces, God feels the same emotions (sadness, rage, furious anger, etc.) that he did before he decided to flood the world. He’s only held back by his covenant with the people of Noah (which would be all of us, Jew and non-Jew alike) from wasting us all in a horrible, worldwide calamity.

    Whether you believe in God or not, I think that’s a really interesting take, and it’s consistent with both the Jewish prophets and the Christian church fathers. God hates divorce. He hates it. It inverts the natural order of creation. If I were one of these Christian wimminz who was thinking about divorcing her man to pursue tinder flings and alimony, I’d contemplate that for a while.

    Boxer

  102. Damn Crackers says:

    @Boxer

    Thank you for recognizing my sarcasm. It is sometimes tough to get across on these posts.

    I am always thoroughly confused by the Talmud. Is it Law? Is it a set of recommendations? Is it a set of arguments of one Rabbi vs. another? I don’t know if your lessons gave you an answer, but I always assumed it was supposed to be the oral commandments of Moses.

    So, I have no idea about the validity of those writings about Jesus boiling in excrement in hell. The WNs who post online commentary swear its in there, but I don’t know if it is a sacramental belief of Rabbinical Judaism.

  103. Damn Crackers says:

    @Boxer

    Steve Sailer once said the Torah is the law, and the Talmud is how to out-lawyer God.

  104. I am always thoroughly confused by the Talmud. Is it Law? Is it a set of recommendations? Is it a set of arguments of one Rabbi vs. another? I don’t know if your lessons gave you an answer, but I always assumed it was supposed to be the oral commandments of Moses.

    My understanding is that it’s just commentary by scholars. There’s wisdom in there, and there’s a lot of nonsense, and then most of it is someplace in between the two. I found the divorce comment to be apropos at the time, and it’s only grown on me with time.

    I mean, if there were a creator, and he’s anything like the character the texts describe him as, why wouldn’t he be pissed off when people frivolously divorce each other? If I were a believer, I’d be very careful before I went down to the divorce court to file those papers. God is not an enemy you want to make.

    I should note here that I’m not Jewish, and have never had any extensive Jewish education. I do find the similarities between Jews and Mormons sorta interesting; though they have a three-thousand year head start, we also consider ourselves the self-appointed “chosen” tribe.

    Best,

    Boxer

  105. Does the Talmud say which God get more pissed about, abortion or divorce?

  106. Gunner Q says:

    “I am always thoroughly confused by the Talmud. Is it Law? Is it a set of recommendations? Is it a set of arguments of one Rabbi vs. another?”

    According to God, it’s a set of traditions created by rabbis to nullify God’s Law. Mark 7:1-13.

  107. Jack Russell says:

    Had one or two self righteous middle aged women tell me “they don’t give to the Salvation Army because of our hostility to gays, lesbians, transgenderd, and women”

    I’m going to start giving to the Salvation Army for that very reason. Thanks!

    Like Jason said (and independent audits) say over 93% goes to the cause it is going to. I would never give to the United Way. They give to lesbian groups and other sjw causes. U2 frontman “Bono’s so-called charity, only 3% does. Rest is for salaries, high living etc. I only give to them and the local critter-aid.

    BTW, Dion had a song out in the early 60s called Runaround Sue. Give it a listen. I am sure Susy Walsh cringes when she hears that song.

  108. Jack Russell says:

    My previous post should have said I only give to the Salvation Army and critter-aid.

  109. Opus says:

    I don’t give to Charity and since an unpleasantly unforgettable experience when I was just twelve years old but I do sometimes buy The War Cry which is The Sally Army’s weekly newspaper. Everyone likes the Salvation Army but it seems to me that their paper is schizophrenic. Parts of it I dislike intensely but then most weeks Nigel Bovey interviews a practicing scientist about what they do and how it fits with his faith (no Mr Dawkins there are clearly a lot of scientists who are also believers) and I always find the interviews fascinating and often complicated technically. I dropped Bovey an E-Mail suggesting that the interviews really ought to be issued in book form. I did not receive a reply.

    I like to see Salvationists in their Uniform.

  110. American says:

    Susan certainly won’t let something as dry and banal as scholarly empirical data get in the way of what she feels must be true.

  111. Novaseeker says:

    Does the Talmud say which God get more pissed about, abortion or divorce?

    It would take a while to determine that. The Talmud is really a collection of arguments and counterarguments from rabbis and other scholars that was collected and arranged over time. It isn’t easy to discern what “the Talmud says” in a definitive sense about very much — it provides arguments for various points of view on various Jewish legal questions, but asks almost as many questions of the reader as it answers. It is, as it seems, completely alien to the Christian tradition and any significant school of Christian thought (Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox alike).

  112. Lovekraft says:

    Anon: “Yeah, and in return, family bonds are 95% weaker. The idiots failed to take that into account in their stupid headline. ”

    I remember explaining to some female co-worker about to frivorce that, pre-divorce, the children see the mother and father as basically a complete unit. 100%. Or 50/50 if you press the matter. I then went on to say that, post-divorce, the parents are definitely split, causing confusion for the children. And should either or both remarry, this number goes down accordingly.

    The number is speaking about the importance and status of the parent in question. Of course, the feminist will double down, trying to force her number to get back to at least 50% but, being forced, the kids will see through this attempt.

  113. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    It’s my understanding the Talmud contains loopholes to the laws. Andexceptions to those loopholes. And loopholes to those exceptions. And so on.

    For instance, the OT restricts one’s movement to the home during Sabbath. The Talmud explains that anything within your walls is within your home. And those “walls” can include a collection of fishing wires and freeway walls that encompass much of Los Angeles: http://www.laeruv.com/boundaries/

    So the Talmud explains that you can enjoy your Sabbath walking and shopping all over Beverly Hills, West L.A., Bel Air, etc. No problem, since you are still within your home as long as no one cuts those fishing wires.

    This is why Jesus told the Pharisees “Let your yes mean yes, and your no mean no. Anything more than this comes from the evil one. (Matthew 5:37). Because rabbinical oral tradition had invented loopholes wherein a promise you made was technically not a promise, so you were off the hook. Or you could say “yes” when the truth was “no,” and you were technically not lying, despite fooling the listener.

  114. Boxer (Secret King of All Gamma Males) says:
    December 19, 2017 at 11:49 am
    “…The rav was quoting some commentary by (someone I don’t remember), who said that when a single couple divorces, God feels the same emotions (sadness, rage, furious anger, etc.) that he did before he decided to flood the world. He’s only held back by his covenant with the people of Noah (which would be all of us, Jew and non-Jew alike) from wasting us all in a horrible, worldwide calamity.

    Whether you believe in God or not, I think that’s a really interesting take, and it’s consistent with both the Jewish prophets and the Christian church fathers. God hates divorce. He hates it. It inverts the natural order of creation. If I were one of these Christian wimminz who was thinking about divorcing her man to pursue tinder flings and alimony, I’d contemplate that for a while.”

    IMHO, these so-called “Christian wimminz” — just like secular women — have shown by their own actions that they haven’t any concern whatsoever about ‘how God feels’ about what they do.
    Why? Because they don’t believe in nor worship ‘God’ anymore — what they glorify and what they worship is themselves.

  115. feeriker says:

    …but the article all but states that engineers are training the AI using biased training aids, and maybe efforts should be taken to make that AI more woman friendly during its learning phase.

    I’ll probably suffer for asking this, but doesn’t the term AI, by its very nature, connote the ability of a program to use raw logic to overcome any biases that would lead it away from any logic-based decision? If not, what then, exactly is “intelligent” about a program that acts lllogically and irrationally due to hardcoded biases that effectively override any “intelligent” decisions and actions?

    “Artifically Applied Feminine Imperative” (AAFI) or “Artificial Applied Politically Correct Cybernetics” (AAPCC) would be more appropriate labels.

  116. seventiesjason says:

    Thanks for the encouragement men. From the slums of Victorian esst-end London the Salvation Army was raised up. It’s the finest export of British Christianity to the world.

    Do not forget the time of need in this season of hope! Blessings of Advent and arrival of the Savior!

    Will do a Christmas favor to you tomorrow. I will post a pic of myself in uniform. It’s our tradition in the era our movement was raised up. The uniform in the Sally Army does not make one holy.it is only a means of expression. An outward sign of a hopefully a deep inward change! Thank you so much for your kind words.

  117. feeriker says:

    God hates divorce. He hates it. It inverts the natural order of creation. If I were one of these Christian wimminz who was thinking about divorcing her man to pursue tinder flings and alimony, I’d contemplate that for a while.

    Alas, “introspection” is not a gift with which God endowed most women.

  118. Mark says:

    @Boxer

    “”My understanding is that it’s just commentary by scholars. There’s wisdom in there, and there’s a lot of nonsense, and then most of it is someplace in between the two.””

    This is a good definition.

    @Novaseeker

    “”The Talmud is really a collection of arguments and counterarguments from rabbis and other scholars that was collected and arranged over time. It isn’t easy to discern what “the Talmud says” in a definitive sense about very much — it provides arguments for various points of view on various Jewish legal questions””

    Another good definition.

    “Talmudic Jews” place a lot faith in the Talmud. Personally,as a Christian Orthodox Jew I do not.I find it nothing more than Jewish scholars debating and rationalizing away God’s laws.

  119. It’s my understanding the Talmud contains loopholes to the laws. And exceptions to those loopholes. And loopholes to those exceptions. And so on.

  120. Anonymous Reader says:

    freeiker
    doesn’t the term AI, by its very nature, connote the ability of a program to use raw logic to overcome any biases that would lead it away from any logic-based decision?

    No. Much of what is mis-labeled as “Artificial Intelligence” typcially consists of a system trained to recognize patterns. The basic “back-error-propagation neural network” dates to the late 80’s. However with really big data to train a pattern recognizer they can become quite accurate at recognizing patterns. There’s a lot of discrimination possible between a network trained with, say, 50,000 patterns (1990’s) vs. one trained on several million patterns (recently). But there is no logic involved. The original research attempted to model single neurons. It’s a bit more advanced, but not much. There’s no programming, either, the network in a sense “self programs” during the training cycles.

    Rule-based systems are “logical” in the vague sense that any group of rules can be logical. But there is no reasoning involved, just application of rules in some fashion. The most basic being IF – THEN – ELSE form, but there are others.

    tl;dr
    No.

  121. Anon says:

    Lost Patrol,

    Even if it doesn’t work, and AI ultimately does its own thing, surely efforts will be made to coerce the humans into making AI toe the line?

    By definition, humans can’t do that. Advanced AI (like Deep Learning) delivers a result without explaining how it did it. Humans cannot strip out the fact-based approach to insert feminist-approved garbage.

    Upthread, we see an art gallery faggot say that female artists sell less, and he automatically asserts that this is ‘misogyny’, when the real reason is fundamentally lower female talent. AI will cut right to the real reason.

    Plus, when human jobs are vanished by AI, female jobs (which are repetitive, require little agility, and often make-work) are far more vulnerable.

  122. Anon says:

    feeriker,

    I’ll probably suffer for asking this, but doesn’t the term AI, by its very nature, connote the ability of a program to use raw logic to overcome any biases that would lead it away from any logic-based decision?

    That is correct.

    By definition, it is tasked with performing a certain task or process more productively than a human, and will often have to find the path on its own (Deep Learning). Any attempt to hammer lower-productivity beliefs into it will, by definition, not work, or competing companies using unsupervised AI will rapidly outcompete it.

    Observe the growing raft of whining about how AI is coming to ‘sexist’ (aka logical and productivity-prioritizing) conclusions :

    https://www.technologyreview.com/the-download/608700/ai-learns-sexism-just-by-studying-photographs/
    https://www.technologyreview.com/s/609129/the-dangers-of-tech-bro-ai/

    I don’t have a dystopian view of AI. I don’t see killer robots. I’m so much more focused on the narrow applications, and I think that if you look at every single one of those narrow applications there is a chance that it negatively affects women. I don’t think artificial intelligence is the issue here; it’s the additional issue rather than the cause. ”

    Only a woman could refer to herself in every single sentence in an article that is supposed to be about technology.

  123. Luke says:

    jabrwok says:
    December 18, 2017 at 5:21 pm
    “Not the kids fault his mom is a ho.

    Stigma needs to be places on the wrongdoer, however I don’t think that will happen until a reset (probably hard).

    Unfortunately the stigma being on the kid as well is usually justified, though it’s probably in some respect a self-fulfilling prophecy. From what I’ve read (correct me if I’m wrong) most children born and raised out of wedlock suffer from pretty much every social pathology there is at much higher rates than children born into traditional married households. Higher rates of academic failure, higher rates of crime, higher rates of sexual abuse, both received and dished-out, higher suicide rates, higher rates of drug abuse, etc.

    I suspect that much of the stigma against illegitimate children resulted from communities seeing how so many of them turned out, and then generalizing as people are wont to do….”

    Not a hoax that bastards tend to turn out badly, but a fact:

    http://www.fclu.org/parentless-statistics/

    EFFECTS OF FATHERLESSNESS – US DATA
    BEHAVIORAL DISORDERS/ RUNAWAYS/ HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUTS/CHEMICAL ABUSERS/ SUICIDES
    85% of all children that exhibit behavioral disorders come from fatherless homes (Source: Center for Disease Control)
    90% of all homeless and runaway children are from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census)
    71% of all high school dropouts come from fatherless homes (Source: National Principals Association Report on the State of High Schools.)
    75% of all adolescent patients in chemical abuse centers come from fatherless homes (Source: Rainbows for all God’s Children.)
    63% of youth suicides are from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. D.H.H.S., Bureau of the Census)
    JUVENILE DELINQUENCY/ CRIME/ GANGS
    80% of rapists motivated with displaced anger come from fatherless homes (Source: Criminal Justice & Behavior, Vol 14, p. 403-26)
    70% of juveniles in state-operated institutions come from fatherless homes (Source: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Special Report)
    85% of all youths sitting in prisons grew up in a fatherless home (Source: Fulton Co. Georgia jail populations, Texas Dept. of Corrections)

    THESE STATISTICS TRANSLATE TO MEAN THAT CHILDREN FROM A FATHERLESS HOME ARE:
    5 times more likely to commit suicide
    32 times more likely to run away
    20 times more likely to have behavioral disorders
    14 times more likely to commit rape
    9 times more likely to drop out of high school
    10 times more likely to abuse chemical substances
    9 times more likely to end up in a state-operated institution
    20 times more likely to end up in prison

    Juveniles have become the driving force behind the nation’s alarming increases in violent crime, with juvenile arrests for murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault growing sharply in the past decade as pistols and drugs became more available, and are expected to continue at the same alarming rate during the next decade. “Justice Dept. Issues Scary Report on Juvenile Crime,” San Francisco Chronicle (9/8/95).”
    TEENAGE PREGNANCY
    Daughters of single parents are 53% more likely to marry as teenagers, 164% more likely to have a premarital birth, and 92% more likely to dissolve their own marriages.
    71% of teenage pregnancies are to children of single parents. U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services
    CHILD ABUSE
    The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services states that there were more than 1,000,000 documented child abuse cases in 1990. In 1983, it found that 60% of perpetrators were women with sole custody.”

  124. BillyS says:

    Feeriker,

    Women fail thinking in many ways. My wife could tell my daughter in law that “God hates divorce” as a reason why our recent divorce hit my granddaughter hard, yet then get mad attached my daughter in law when I happened to hear about it and texted my wife about restoration.

    My ex didn’t see any conflict between the two elements.

  125. earlthomas786 says:

    Alas, “introspection” is not a gift with which God endowed most women.

    No most women are very introspective. What they seem to lack today is not taking into consideration that someone just may have different emotions and feelings from the ones they are feeling.

  126. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    From what I’ve read (correct me if I’m wrong) most children born and raised out of wedlock suffer from pretty much every social pathology

    And yet, there is a long literary tradition of portraying bastards as strong, silent, brooding heroes. As misunderstood, angry, young men. The sort of men that give women the tingles.

    The most popular male character on Game of Thrones is Jon Snow, the bastard son of Ned Stark.

    Jamie and Tyrion Lannister are also bastard sons (the spawn of brother/sister incest), with a large fan followings.

  127. Lost Patrol says:

    This is no doubt the bottom line, ($$$) pun intended, and not intended.

    Any attempt to hammer lower-productivity beliefs into it will, by definition, not work, or competing companies using unsupervised AI will rapidly outcompete it.

    I don’t think of myself as a mean spirited person, mostly, but I do look forward to the downstream effects of this –

    when the real reason is fundamentally lower female talent. AI will cut right to the real reason.

  128. Anonymous Reader says:

    Luke
    EFFECTS OF FATHERLESSNESS – US DATA

    There are other studies that separate out children of divorce from children of never-married parents. The effects are similar.

    If there was a disease, a sickness spread by germ or virus, that does to children what divorce does to them we would see a national effort to eliminate it.

  129. thedeti says:

    Red Pill Latecomer:

    The funny thing is that most bastard sons, and most sons of divorced moms, grow up to be at the far end of the extremes: hypermasculine to the point of thuggish criminality; or emasculated, feminized, whipped pussy bitchbois.

    I think it was Ricky Raw at the now-defunct website The Rawness who pointed out that sons raised primarily by women tend to approach life as women do. Black men in gangs tend to display the stereotypical men raised by women. They’re overly emotional. They can’t let anything roll off their backs and they can’t ignore anything. They respond with hyperemotionality to every perceived slight or “diss”. Every “diss” requires a response in kind, leading to neverending feuds. They hold grudges and get revenge, albeit in violent ways. They tend to solve problems with emotionality and feelings, instead of logic and reason. Their daddy issues are so profound they seek out acceptance from older men who were raised just like they were and have much the same pathologies. Being men, they sort themselves into hierarchies with the most violent, least restrained men at the top.

    Or they go to the other extreme. They’re hyperemotional, but they respond with despondency, despair and depression rather than with violence. They don’t have male friends; they prefer the company of women and have a lot of “platonic” relationships with women, most of whom they’re attracted to. Having never seen men interact, they don’t know how to interact with men or other boys their age. When slighted or faced with conflict, they run away, react with sadness and fear, are subject to crying jags, and cave in. They will not stand and fight, even when they are clearly in the right and even when their own wants and needs are plainly not being met. They will sacrifice their own wants and needs to avoid conflict or placate men around them. They believe this will make others like them, and it leads to the “covert contracts” Glover talks about in No More Mr. Nice Guy. They have no idea how to set boundaries and as a result, others walk all over them. It creates “nice guys” who are emasculated, feminized, and who cannot or will not set boundaries. When they do try to set boundaries they tend to veer to the other extreme, lashing out in anger, rage and despair.

    Such is the life of a boy raised by a single mom. And such is the destruction single moms create.

  130. Hose_B says:

    @thedeti
    I hadn’t connected the emotionality of the different scenarios. Good insight.

    They will not stand and fight, even when they are clearly in the right and even when their own wants and needs are plainly not being met. They will sacrifice their own wants and needs to avoid conflict or placate men around them. They believe this will make others like them, and it leads to the “covert contracts” Glover talks about in No More Mr. Nice Guy. They have no idea how to set boundaries and as a result, others walk all over them. It creates “nice guys” who are emasculated, feminized, and who cannot or will not set boundaries. When they do try to set boundaries they tend to veer to the other extreme, lashing out in anger, rage and despair.

    This is what the church calls servant leadership. So even in men that don’t take this approach because they “believe this will make others like them”, they are being taught that they should take this approach because its “Christian”. Of course its not, but they label it so because its just a twist away.

    for example, “They will sacrifice their own wants and needs to avoid conflict or placate men around them.” It is Christian to sacrifice your own wants and needs, but NOT when the motivation is to avoid conflict or to placate men. Christ never placated, but he sacrificed his own wants and needs.

    It takes such a small twist to make good Christian doctrine very wrong.

  131. thedeti says:

    And what happens to men in the second category is that their relationships with other people are poor because they dont’ know how to create those relationships. They don’t learn the give and take. They don’t learn proper boundaries – neither how to set them for themselves nor respect them in others. They aren’t masculine. They can’t befriend men because they don’t know how; and they can’t attract women because they’re sexually unattractive because they’re not masculine.

  132. Lost Patrol says:

    @thedeti and Hose_B

    They can’t let anything roll off their backs and they can’t ignore anything.

    I’ve always noticed this kind of man but never made the connection until you pointed it out. That makes complete sense. Rare is the woman that will back down one inch, even if the matter was trivial or she was plainly dead wrong. A man raised entirely under that model is bound to be the same way.

    It is Christian to sacrifice your own wants and needs, but NOT when the motivation is to avoid conflict or to placate men.

    Well put. Niceness as maximum virtue, no matter the cost, is wrecking church manhood.

  133. thedeti says:

    Lost:

    Yeah. The first kind is a man with the hyperemotionality of a woman, but with the uncontained rage and brute physical strength of a man. And from what we’ve seen in gang violence, that’s a lethal combination. Funnily enough – those are the guys who also get the most tail.

    The second kind is a man with the hyperemotionality AND mentality of a woman, who cannot or will not assert himself and stand up for even the smallest of things he needs. He takes it and takes it and takes it and takes it, for years, for decades, until he snaps. And that can also be lethal.

  134. thedeti says:

    But most often it’s not lethal. He just gets divorced. Or he loses his job. Or he ragequits his job. Or he goes on a rampage like the Michael Douglas character in “Falling Down”. Or he otherwise has some other sort of social or professional “bottom” that gets him to the men’s sphere and he is faced with taking either the red pill or the blue pill; he is handed a Pair of Glasses.

  135. American says:

    @seventiesjason; I’m inclined to agree with you that the Salvation Army may be Britain’s finest export. However, I’m also inclined to agree with the late George Head who used his sidearm to shoot members of the Skeleton Army as they murdered and assaulted Salvation Army folk while attempting to burn down the Salvation Army’s barracks.

    The Salvation Army is too pacifist for my taste though I do respect them for a great deal else and must acknowledge their brave sacrifices in standing up for the Christian worldview in a place and time that did cost some Salvation Army members their lives for doing so. At least they accept self-defense and just war theory (see St Augustine and St Thomas Aquinas).

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

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