Over on Sigma Frame, we read a somewhat sharp but well-written riposte to my contention in The Good Woman, specifically, that when one individual marries another, s/he needs to keep those promises. Our brother replies:
Marriage to an ex-rider is like sweetened lard icing on a cake of poop. It looks appetizing, until you cut into it and take a bite, suddenly realizing the main ingredients are not eggs and flower. The batter has been deflorested, and the eggs have developed chromosomal abnormalities.
And what if you “promised” to eat the whole thing… and it’s the only cake you’ll ever eat for the rest of your life? Worse, you find that after you swallow, you only get a haughty snicker, with not even a bit of remorse or gratitude?
This is what marital fraud feels like. This is why the RP advice says to avoid it.
Boxer argues that in a situation like this, it comes down to commitment. But the reality is more nuanced.
What my brother does not do is to spell out the clause, in those marriage vows, that allows for easy divorce if one party discovers something s/he doesn’t like in the history of the other. The omission is understandable, since there is no such addendum. The vows are un-esoteric, carnal, and easily understood by everyone. They were meant to be so.
If you are a female, your promise is to respect, honor and obey. If you are a male, your promise is to love, keep and cherish.
From this day forward… until death do us part
Our patriarchal fathers wrote those vows carefully, and handed them down to us for a reason.
Now, if one party breaks the contract after consummation, that’s one thing.
Otherwise, you’re expected to keep those promises… until when? Well, the brothers just told you.
Consider an analogy: If you invest in some project, and the members of the board steal your investment and run away, then you can have those scumbags thrown in jail. A court would award you some compensation, and in the ideal world, you’ll be made whole.
If, on the other hand, you invest in some project, and the project goes according to plan, but the project doesn’t return what you originally hoped, you are out the difference.
Is this difficult to understand? I don’t think it is.
If my readers want to go over to Sigma Frame blog, and start innovating un-patriarchal concepts like “marital fraud,” in an attempt to get out of the promises they make, then those men need to quit pretending to care about patriarchy. Those men are male feminists. You can’t fight frivolous divorce while excusing it, and you can’t object to the degenerate culture of frivolous divorce while promoting it.
Down below, Derek sez:
Virginity should be held in honor. His wife was not a virgin, but she’s still his wife and he has a duty to love her. He didn’t have to marry her, but he did anyway. He has to live with his choice.
Then Sharkly sez:
You were saying that her emotional state means she should get a pussy-pass out of the public naming and shaming for her sin that the Bible prescribes, as you pointed out. That is white knighting, as is your excuse making for her, and always insisting on assuming only the best about her, past the point of foolishness.
I didn’t read Derek’s comments that way. Maybe I missed his white knighting.
The reality is that Driscoll made an investment. If his partner is breaking the contract, then there are remedies available, which don’t include impotent whining and bitching in public. If his partner is not breaking the contract, then he needs to shut the fuck up and quit whining and bitching in public.
Public bitching and whining is unmanly. The time for reading the prospectus is before one invests.
If you marry someone with a past, then that past is independent of your promise. The purpose of this blog is to encourage young people to be good consumers. My work is not meant to make those people a bunch of whiny legalists, who condemn frivolous divorce in others while looking for loopholes to justify their own.
I don’t read them that way either.
Which is why I’m somewhat shocked that when I say my standards for marriage include virginity…I’ll get pushback from such guys like sockpuppet Strand who say they are as rare as unicorns and that I have no choice but to marry a (somewhat) virginal NAWALT wife.
I can’t stop wimminz from fornicating with cads…but I can voice my rebuking to them that the path they are taking is destructive and stop myself from getting married to one.
If we would just honor contract law .. which a marriage is via a government license .. we would put an end to this crap.
Because it’s a fundamental responsibility of government to enforce contract law.
It’s the responsibility of the buyer (i.e. the menz) to ensure the product (i.e. th wimminz) is in the proper condition for sale.
Don’t complaign about known defects you purchased. But if you think you are buying a new unit and it is expressed as a new unit for sale .. that’s a legit complaint.
You wimminz should pay attention .. as I’ve mentioned before theft by deception is a crime .. also breach of contract is a crime.
You wimminz should be concerned .. because very soon your ODO (odometer) will be a matter of record. How you wimminz ask .. you’ll be amazed that the technology you used as an accomplice will be used in a court of law.
*Sounds of me waking up from a happy dream*
It also doesn’t help that the divorce industry is pretty much like big business. I know divorce lawyers and family court judges have a job to do but I wonder how they sleep at night.
My first vehicle I bought had a salvage title hence why it was cheap…I couldn’t complain to the dealership to take it back when the transmission blew up in it. However fraud like not mentioning that is deception.
I’ll create a new company with the slogan…Before you marry this wimminz…show me the WifeFax.
“Show me the WIFEfax” ™
I like it .. HEH
Fortunately brothers these days have more of a wealth of information than those in the past. Faceberg, insta, and any other social media devices will tell you more than you need to know.
If she has more selfies than any other photo, lots of bikini pics in exotic locations, or talks about how her baby daddy doesn’t pay…well you’ve been warned.
or .. WIFEfacts ..
More better ..
.Show me the WIFEfacts. .
Frankly though Earl ..
These younger menz are treating every womenz as a “savage title”. So .. you may nevva make any money of your idea.
And .. I can’t disagree with their approach.
Every woman who wants a husband engages in deception, and every man who wants a wife engages in deception.
Men lie about all sorts of things (height, sexual history, job prospects, family money, the list goes on.)
Deception in furtherance of salesmanship isn’t the way of women. It’s the way of people.
On a related note, one thing I do admire about our historical patriarchal fathers is the fact that they saw marriage as permanent. There was never any whining after the fact. They married, and then they got on with living. They concentrated on getting ahead in business, serving their community, raising nice kids and just enjoying the family life. There was never any of this womanly whining (a la Marc Driscoll) about how princess banged one more member of the football team than she told him about, and what a slut Mrs. D was for omitting the fact that she didn’t disclose every session of ass-to-mouth at the age of seventeen.
Driscoll (and his allies) should be glad they have the time and luxury to complain about this sort of nonsense. In the old days, all their energies would be taken up in the fields and on the factory floor, and those men were happy just to come home to a hot dinner and eager fucking, both prepared by a nice wife.
I see a little problem with your argument, in your arguing Sigma frame from a position of what you label ‘patriarchal thinking’, and it is that ‘patriarchy’ as a concept or attitude/way to do things in family and society is a complex structure or fabric of behaviors and norms, that are interconnected and influence and support each other. You pick one feature of a complex system and demand this one particular feature or principle to be strictly observed in such an environment, that is generally hostile toward the patriarchal system as a whole and other features of that system are discouraged or made impossible to realize. Because ‘patriarchal thinking’ would not be limited to keeping vows, but would by definition involve policing daughters’ chastity and strict repercutions against players eg from women’s brothers or fathers.. So your point seems to me a bit like criticizing somebody to be reluctant to follow rules of gentlemanly fight when attacked by a bunch of thugs.
Dear Ofelas:
Please see inside text…
This is actually a fair point, because while my definitions of masculinity and patriarchy are extant on this blog, I didn’t feel the need to spell them out in this post.
Basically, I’ve cribbed my definition from Jack Donovan. What we’ve got are 1. Strength, 2. Courage, 3. Mastery, and 4. Honor.
It is not impossible to realize any of these four components of masculinity. These four components of masculinity, spread through a society generally, compose my concept of patriarchy. That isn’t extant, but if enough men individually adopt the four components as described, patriarchy will result.
Of course that’s true. 4. Honor isn’t a sufficient condition of patriarchy. It is a necessary condition, and it’s the precept that Sigma Frame is publicly deprecating.
The rules of honor aren’t always easy to follow. That’s rough, but it’s part of manhood. If you marry a former prostitute, and if that former prostitute is a faithful and loving wife, from the moment she takes those vows, from this day forward, until death, then you need to respect the word you gave, to her and to your people, and keep that promise.
Keeping promises is often difficult. There is no law of nature that entails manhood to be an easy thing to achieve.
Best,
Boxer
Boxer,
Once again you’ve succinctly nailed the point. While I had framed my reply in the Christian religious context, the reality is that I can’t bear a man who whines and complains about the the situation he put himself into. I teach my sons that a man takes responsibility for his choices and doesn’t moan about it.
If I ever have a dream that my wife slept with 99 of the 100 boys in our senior high school class (and the social studies teacher), none of you will hear about it.
Driscoll is, justifiably, disappointed that all he gets is used-goods duty sex. He is out the difference. But it’s still his project and he’s bound by the contract. If he has duty sex, genuine love, and a bunch of children, that’s not a terrible return on investment. Publicly denouncing your wife is a good way to ensure that you only have one of those three things.
Here it is, if you want to call it that. A wife who loves her husband enough to have sex despite her psychological fear of intimacy and physical discomfort, even occasionally, isn’t something to scoff at. I’ve failed to properly vilify her for not doing her God-ordained conjugal duty on a more regular basis. A loving, compassionate husband acknowledges the failings in his wife and works to make it better, if possible, and lives with the consequences of his choices either way.
Here is a not-so-very-secret thing about marriage: partners often disagree on the frequency, timing, or method of sex. It’s very real and is not best served by one partner declaring to the other that they must do whatever the other says. This is especially true if there is a psychological or physiological problem (e.g. vaginismus or impotency). They have to work it out.
Really, it should be the VAG-fax.
Heck he has little to complain about…he got married to her at 21 and knew her for 4 years before that. So not only should he of had enough intel on her…he still got her in youth. Most guys have to wait until she turns 29.999999 when she decides she’s done with the partying and thrills.
http://marshill.se/marshill/2010/08/15/18-lessons-from-18-years-of-marriage
I’ve had a chance to look at the book in more detail. The book was written by both husband and wife. She was OK with him writing that stuff publicly and it was written in a context of his repentance. So he was an idiot, but eventually realized the error of his ways. Good for him.
Here is what his wife had to say in Chapter 1:
So, she was in fact repentant (but wrong about the leaving part).
This is not far from the truth. The book discloses that neither of them were virgins before they got married. He had previously had sex with other women. But perhaps more importantly, they both had premarital sex together; he thought he had deflowered her. When they finally got married, there was trouble in bed.
Well now I really don’t feel any pity for the guy. That’s probably a big reason why he acts like a man child in front of other men he’s accusing of doing the very things he did.
Interestingly enough there was a recent TIME article that pointed out this phenomenon too. The guy had plenty of premaritals with his eventual wife but when they got married he didn’t even know how to talk about sex with her. Makes me wonder how many of these stories (fornication before marriage…drying up after) end up the same. Seems like men don’t realize they are sold a bill of goods when they ‘test drive’ before marriage.
http://time.com/5297145/is-sex-dead/
He is devout. He saves himself for marriage. She does not object, so perhaps he considers her devout as well.
On the wedding night, he discovers that she is actually a genetic and physical male.
She presented herself as something she was not in order to attract his committment to her. But it’s his problem, right? At the marriage altar he vowed to love her until death, and so he should just buck up and live with his situation, right? It would be whiney of him to look to the law for relief from being defrauded, right?
Fraud is fraud, regardless of detail. As a society, we have decided that it is not kind to require the defrauded to live without possibility of relief from the fraud.
One is a victim of fraud when he is tricked into committing to someone or something he would not otherwise have committed to. Seeking relief from that fraud is not whining. It is something allowed under the law. It is simply getting on with life.
Of course, in those jurisdictions where adultry is no longer illegal, good luck on getting the court to agree that a fraud has been committed. Which creates another in a long list of reasons to be wary about getting married.
Straw-man, tu quoque, and probably a bit of equivocation, too. Great work jamming so many logical fallacies into one response. Try again at leisure.
Oh LOL! It’s really uncool for her to have banged a couple of frat-boys, but he is beyond reproach for all his dalliances.
There’s a story in the Hebrew bible about Judah, a degenerate who has sex with his daughter-in-law, and then later condemns her for having sex… before realizing that he was the man she did the dirty deed with. Laughable and pathetic.
Leisure?
Oh .. you mean catfish noodlin .. HEH!
Even da wimminz do it down here in LA (lower alabama) ..
..
..
Fella’s .. anybody seen her “WIFEfacts” ™ .. asking for a friend.
She looks a little young to me (I’d guess her to be 17) but she’s already very attractive. You young brothers could do worse than wifing up someone like that.
Make sure she loves her father and grandfathers, and keep her away from the wimminz studies department, and go for broke.
Hannah Barron ..
She’s 22 (july 1996).
I believe her dad films her for all her outdoor activities.
I only use her as an example of what passes for a healthy woman in an instagram / social media world. A few of the younger brothers at work follow her is how I know about her.
* I’ve seen a few video’s .. so I can’t vouch for her or her WIFEfacts ™.
22, thin, no oddball piercings, tats, or clown hair…actually smiles and has a skill.
As long as she hasn’t been fishing for tube snakes she’s already in the top 10 percent when it comes to the women scale in feminist clownworld.
Perhaps he should have done the ‘how dare you’ speech to a mirror.
The tone of the book is repentant: they both made decisions that they regretted. They explicitly denounced their own acts of fornication. Yet it is also clear from reading it that they think what she did was somehow worse than what he did. It’s a subtle, but clear, double standard. She apparently lost her virginity while she was dating him, so ouch that really hurt his ego. He laments in the book that he never dated anyone who didn’t cheat on him.
I can understand someone with standards like earl who has sworn off all fornication and has chosen to only consider marrying a virgin. But this is a guy who was not a virgin when he started fornicating with his future wife… and he states that he wouldn’t have married her if he had known she wasn’t a virgin and had cheated on him. I guess fornication isn’t a deal breaker, but cheating is? Plus in the video he counsels fornicating couples to break up, something he himself did not do (they stopped having sex after they were convicted of their sin).
Yeah I think we found the source of his rage and his need to puff up his chest to weak men. He’s still mad at the guy she decided to deflower her.
Did she not make herself out to be a virgin at marriage?
Errr I mean with hime before marriage?
If I were to speculate, I’d guess neither of them were too willing to spill their guts about any of their other partners. I think this is normal. One doesn’t want to scare off the wo/man that s/he is in love with, after all.
Only after the vows are said, do such details gradually come out. Then, allofasudden like, folks have all manner of hard feelings. “You said I was the only one…” … “I never said any such thing…” etc.
As I alluded to hours ago, this is a disease specific to this degenerate, luxurious age. One hundred years ago, your great-grandparents (and mine) had much more important things to worry about. People who whine about such stuff are revolting. It’s enough to make one wish for a famine, or something.
Nope. She made herself out to be a virgin while they were dating. She lied to him when she claimed he was the first one she had fornicated with. Regardless, it’s still a double standard. Arguing about whether this or that sin is relatively more important is just “determining the price“.
I miss typed and corrected my question ..
The answer to which is a BIG fat .. YES .. she LIED.
Men and Women are not equal .. therefore there can be no single standard.
Men have never been expected to be virgins at marriage. Women have been. Welcome to the old knowledge our elders passed down.
Regardless .. she held herself out as the standard he desired. She knew he would disovow her if otherwise.
She didn’t have a problem with the double standard and neither do any right minded individuals. Why .. because she concealed it from him. She didn’t stand up and demand a single standard. No she knew the score brother.
So .. she is his great deceiver .. where has that been a problem before (if I only could remember .. heh) .. she was out of time and he had plenty to recover at that point.
Is it best that they had never fornicated prior to marriage? Yes.
Once again .. I have nevva met a womminz who regretted pre-marital sex .. she just regrets that anyone she doesn’t want to know .. know.
And therefore .. I don’t believe she is truly repentent.
Oh .. just because she said he had the right to divorce her .. is a sad little trick beta’s fall for. She packed your bags and sent you a guilt trip. She knew her lil beta chump would stick around. And it worked .. he did.
It takes a really strong or weak man depending to stick around after this .. frankly I’d ditched the bitch.
I’ve ditched wimminz for a whole lot less .. a whole lot less.
Indeed .. first world problems.
It warms my heart to see old fashioned family values. It doesn’t happen hardly enough anymore. All but a distant memory of a youth I wasted chasing airplanes.
Heck I haven’t cut or split tree’s for firewood in years. I haven’t raised a garden in years .. inside just my generation I’ve done less fishing and hunting and hard labor around the house I did as a kid .. heck .. we’ve all gained free time with all of our luxuries .. and what do we have to show for it ..
“Idle hands are the devil’s workshop.”
Come on. You’re acting like a first-year f00kin’ reader.
Wimminz repent by acting the part. Wimminz have no conscience to speak of. It’s unreasonable to expect wimminz to have remorse over pretty much anything.
You’ve never met a wimminz who has regretted sex after the fact, because wimminz typically don’t give a shit about sex, an hour after they’ve had it.
Lots of nice chaste Christian bros get their undershorts all knotted up with the knowledge that Boxer banged the woman they later married. They imagine that their little ladies all think about me, and relive the sexy-time. What a laugh!
Here’s the news, fellas. None of your wives gave a damn about me while she was faking her orgasm, and she sho nuff doesn’t remember me now. Those stories divorced men tell, about how easy it is for their wives to completely quit them and start dating Chad… all the wimminz I’ve been with did that process, one hour after I quit talking to them. Every single one.
You’re making my point.
They are not truly repentent .. not a one I’ve met anyway.
Fella’s you’re not special .. you’re just next the in line.
And .. the only TRUE regret is that anyone know that was not meant to know. Not the sex. If they do regret it .. if they do it’s because someone found out that shouldn’t have.
Example .. Her boyfriend finds out (or she thinks he’ll find out) about her and another guy .. well then .. he raped me.
Another example .. She always lies about her true notch count .. why? Will 30 be any less of a slut in anyones mind as 60+? Same with a girl who now wants a man to think she’s not a slut by holdimg out. She loves sex .. but she’s playing this fool to believe otherwise.
I don’t for a second think they regret the pre-marital sex. They didn’t at the time .. did they? No they only care if they get caught by the wrong person.
That’s my observation anyway.
Nonsense. He scored twice, she scored once. She did it while they were dating, he did it before. He failed to give his virginity, she failed to give him her virginity. She lied. The double standard is picking a side in this race to the bottom. To quote a smart dude (slightly modified):
I agree with honeycomb. Driscoll had a double standard but at least he was honest about it. His wife willfully conned him into a problematic marriage he would have avoided.
RichardP points out that some people get conned even worse, buyer beware, but at some point it is a fraud to be dealt with, and not something to just sweep under the rug as just as much the buyers fault.
If women don’t regret their sexual sins you’re going to need a way to make them regret it, or have a strong enough deterrent, like execution, to get Patriarchy running again somewhat like it did in the past. I think the Bible calls out public denunciation, before excommunication, for those who fail to repent after private and semi-private confrontation have failed.(it ain’t just whining, and ideally the clergy would handle the speaking for you, so you don’t have to be the one “whining”)(also if Driscoll and his wife are, by agreement, offering their story as a cautionary tale for others, that is then different from one sided denunciation or shaming) I do think all women are capable of true repentance, and salvation is not to be had without it. However women truly repenting from sin is a rare thing today, and it is becoming rarer among men also. I think some of the folks saying fornication ain’t no big thing to be whining about, are minimizing their own. God says a ton about sexual sins in the Bible. Is He just whining? Hopefully it is because I’m Godly, but, It is a big deal to me too.
Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice shame on me.
He laments in the book that he never dated anyone who didn.t cheat on him.
I’m beginning to think he may have picked the females poorly due to his false blue pill beliefs. I know I would have chosen differently if I had known much of the red pill stuff I’ve learned in the last year. In hindsight, I was led like a lamb to the slaughter. I was just happy to go for a fun walk on a pretty day, I didn’t know she was taking me to the slaughterhouse. Bait & Switch She loved, adored, and joyfully submitted to me, so I married her, and it all flipped off like a light switch. Suddenly she can’t respect any man, though she wishes she was one, and she starts a public defamation campaign against me for being the exact same man she had “loved” before. Sorry you have to hear this. Us whiners gonna whine!
Not really…for starters it kicks you out of the Kingdom of Heaven and leads to things like idolatry. Wimminz may not regret it unless they get caught but they sure still show the consequences of it…and that’s certainly the thing that would get my shorts in a bunch. You can’t have knowledge of even a guy like Boxer slipping in without it leaving an imprint even if her feelz don’t show it one hour after the fact.
However the thing Boxer does bring to light is…sounds like fruitless fornication with degenerates is dare I say…boring. Not like the way the pervs in Hollyweird want to portray it.
And I’d agree with Derek…Driscoll is more mad that he was lied to that he wasn’t the first cad to fornicate with his eventual wife. Nonetheless he still put his head in the noose by marrying her and that’s another thing fruitless fornication can do to guys…put them in that fog, noose, or chains of that type of woman.
It may not happen to all guys…but it happens to quite a few. They get the fog and bonding from the act and can’t see clearly the type of woman she truly is.
This is an important point. It is why I made sure to post the reference to the book and back off from my initial criticism (which went too far). That said, while he repented of many sins (which is great!), the book portrays her sin as worse. As earl noted:
So as he is writing the book he really believes that his wife’s fornication was worse than the fornication that he was actively doing with her simply because she lied about it. It is hypocrisy. He recognized his own failings but continued to fail to consider the depth of consequences for those actions. Consider another piece of earl’s wisdom:
Earl said this in the context of the TIME article, but it applied to Pastor Driscoll as well. After having a ton of premarital sex, they were unable to talk to each other about it once they got married. A lie was the least of their worries, but he (and his wife) would harp on that, taking the spotlight off himself. This is dodging personal responsibility and dodging taking ownership of his own situation: it’s making excuses.
No, you have a legitimate beef with that woman who broke her vows. Perhaps you shouldn’t whine about it online, but at least your criticism is well-justified. Children often complain about the sins of others while simultaneously being in the act of sin. Pastor Driscoll was acting like a child.
Sharky and Richard forgot the difference between a man and a woman. Many such cases!
Oh .. I’ve picked sides alright .. and Pastor D is just a mere ben-uh-factor of my bias.
How many women can beat men at .. Olympic Games? .. College Games? .. Life or Death (i.e. War) Games? .. Brain Games? (e.g. Noble Prize .. Patent’s .. Scientific Advances .. Societal Developers .. War / Tactical Thinkers .. Great CEO’s .. etc.) .. Most productive workers? .. Least time off employees? .. etc.
If you demand to “White Knight” for wounded birds (aka th wimminz) then by all means .. go ahead. I’ve picked sides. The men are the better gender.
As for your argument .. it to is also moot. The number of times you sin is moot. Any sin is a death sentence without Jesus Christ as your Lord and Saviour. Any! Once is all it takes brother. You know this and acted (above) in bad faith. Shame on you.
Recall when Jesus told the gathering that those without sin throw the first stone .. knowing he was the only one who could .. and he didn’t .. what did he tell her? Can you go fourth and sin no more without Jesus Christ brother? I’ll wait. Oh that’s right .. do goodness doesn’t earn you a trip to Heaven.
Back to regret and repentence if I may .. I don’t think you understand wimminz brother .. you’re fortunate to not know them like I do. They’re all prostitutes brother. Do you think men should just marry prostitutes? Do you think a leopard can change its spots? Neither do I.
I regret knowing so many womminz brother. That’s between me and GOD .. and as it has been said already .. the number is of no concern.
I’ll say jt again .. men and women are not equal and don’t share the same standards in life (e.g. men gave always been held to a higher standard in all the above I’ve mentioned).
If you havem’t been told .. life ain’t fair or nice brother. Men know, INSTINCTIVELY, a good wife will come from a virgin bride. Hence why defrauding someone of that could get you killed outside the USofA. [1] And as a man of international travel I have seen a lot of different cultures. One thing remains. Virgin brides are the standard. Notice nothing about virgin husbands. Th wimminz are keenly aware of this fact. [2]
Act accordingly brother.
[1] .. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/7733272/virgin-bride-for-sale-facebook/
[2] .. https://abcnews.go.com/2020/WomensHealth/story?id=123701&page=1
Dear Brother Honeycomb:
Please see below…
You’re conflating the standard with the ideal. Moreover, I’ll argue that you are absolutely wrong about traditional cultures allowing for male promiscuity.
The ideal, as I have seen it (in Latin America and Eastern Europe) is that both male and female were traditionally married shortly after puberty. Most marriages were arranged, even though this arrangement is not explicit. The families would throw Johnny and Janie together, round about age 15. Johnny and Janie would magically “fall in love” as a result of their summer baling hay together. Then the families would act all surprised, and approve of the union, and there’d be a wedding.
It’s really not rocket science. Put two opposite-sex mammals together and they will end up becoming attached.
Today, the ideal is a bit more difficult to achieve, and I think it’s likely that neither man nor woman are untouched by the time of the wedding, even in the most traditional ethnic groups. Even so, it remains the ideal, and people are expected to pay their respects to it.
The fact that our disease-ridden culture vomits all over these healthy folkways doesn’t make playa culture normal, nor does it mean that men can have successful marriages to virgins after banging sluts in a hedonistic frenzy.
Would you want a skank-ho male slut of a playa as your son-in-law? I didn’t think so.
Best,
Boxer
Boxer ..
No doubt the IDEAL situation is 2 (two) non sexually active youngsters to marry.
Even today this is the best case. But it doesn’t happen here anymore than outside the USofA.
Wealth talks .. IDEALism walks.
I’m not conflating anything. I see tge world for how it is .. not as it should be. That would be like going back to being a blue-piller .. it is not I that needs a reality check.
You all are out of calibration if you think th wimmimz are regretful of not saving herself for marriage.
I don’t like Pastor D .. or his choice to profit off his story (amazingly his prostitute wife agreed to profit from their story) .. but that wasn’t what I was talking about.
He screwed (heh) up .. she screwed up .. they got married .. and just like two wimminz .. they went attention whoring.
Being a man is a lot more about sucking-it-up and just getting work done without running your pie-hole.
He can’t seem to do either.
And still not married .. I wonder why?
Bill Clinton had a secret server too ..
Dear Boxer,
Can it be that ‘the standard’ possibly is ‘the ideal’ , only after some fine-tuning over time and adjusted according to each sexes proclivities? (like: some experience with women helps the man to deal with her shit effectively, so actually supporting the stability of their unit, can make him in her eyes attractive – preselection, then the obvious difference between penetrating and being penetrated and how that affects the psychological aspect of how the two relate – the fact of in principle ‘surrendering’ and having one’s physical integrity breached on the woman’s side fostering her submission (feeling ‘owned’) and bond, while on the other hand a woman already ‘surrendered’ a couple of times with couple of men can have her loyalty (that, as the discussion here mentioned, can’t really be expected to be grounded in her ethics) divided and loyalty to one particular man hence diminished, contrary to men who even in such case are honor-bound (as you mentioned) and will more probably act accordingly. And then also some evidence (not really anecdotal, it’s quite common), that women in general simply don’t care (that much), while men often do.
Even Christian women: https://girlwithadragonflytattoo.com/2018/11/09/email-questions-virginity-is-a-pile-of-horse-manure/
(Stephanie’s second comment under the article)
‘And still not married .. I wonder why?’
It certainly is a mystery….my guess is because guys were afraid of committing to such a strong wonderful woman because they were all stuck in the Peter Pan phase.
I mean that’s the conclusion all wimminz seem to come to when they hit the wall…so it must be true.
You fella’s can’t get one by Earl .. oh wait .. HEH! /S
Men know runt (womminz) when they see it .. or smell it .. or hear it .. or touch it .. a man knows and adjusts accordingly.
Recall fella’s she wouldn’t have come forward if it hadn’t been for Linda Tripp’s recordings. Monica was not happy that anyone found out.
Men could forgive a repentent woman .. they just don’t exsist in today’s modern womminz.
The mistake men make is they place male thought processes and interspection onto th wimminz. They have neither.
Red-Pill men know the score.
(“unit” should have been rather “union”, excuse my English)
Not a short read .. heck it’s the Atlantic .. so calling it journalism is a stretch ..
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/12/the-sex-recession/573949/
Read to the end .. you may have a different take than I do .. so I’ll avoid spoiling it for yenz’.
I went off on a rant on Twitter about this yesterday and today. She spent months writing this thing and it is amazingly tone deaf. Things not found anywhere in the article: feminism, divorce, sexual revolution. Some select quotations:
Quarter century? We’ve known this for four decades. It’s almost as if something happened in the 60’s and 70’s… hard to imagine what that could be, but she didn’t figure it out. Moreover, the decline is almost entirely the fault of women marrying later, as the age gap between men and women has been nearly the same for a century.
And then she goes on and on and on and never really gets it.
Here is her tweet, stated without a hint of intentional irony.
She’s really surprised that Tinder (!!), porn, free-sex attitudes (i.e. sexual revolution), and “sex-positive” culture (lol!) would lead to less sex…. considering each and every one of them contributes to the decline of marriage, increase in divorce, and lots of fornication. Each and every thing she listed violated God’s plan for sex and takes the joy out of it.
Sadly brother .. as it was / is planned.
Other select quotes:
Look at the graph at the Dalrock link. You can clearly see that women used to marry older men during periods of economic distress. As Americans got generally wealthier, they married younger. Since the sexual revolution and feminism, economic security is less a factor: marriage has been replaced with women being educated and working.
Yet another woman who doesn’t know that the 20’s are the most fertile years. Plus, we’ve been aborting our best babies for decades, something she, of course, doesn’t even mention. Why would 20-25 abortions per 100 live births factor into birth rates? You spend decades telling women that they should use birth control and abortion to prevent having a family and focus instead on having convenience sex, and then you wonder why Millennials are selfish and don’t want to sacrifice their personal pleasure for children?
I can’t even….
And we have this ..
https://gab.ai/brannon1776/posts/36004227
He’s had to much to think .. that’s for sure don’tcha’know.
That Atlantic writer is really clueless, even after a great deal of study. I believe she started out by ruling out God’s truth, before she even started her investigation.
However there are some real gems of ignorance in there:
.Go back to the point in history where premarital sex became more of a thing, and the conditions that led to it,. she said, referring to how post.World War II anxiety about a man shortage led teen girls in the late 1940s and .50s to pursue more serious romantic relationships than had been customary before the war.
Premarital sex isn’t a symptom of moral decline, it was instead caused by World War II. Got it?
Take for example the online hate and real-life violence waged by the so-called incels.men who claim to be .involuntarily celibate.. Their grievances, which are illegitimate and vile, offer a timely reminder that isolated young people are vulnerable to extremism of every sort.
Incels, I judge you as hate filled and violent extremists, and your grievances as illegitimate and vile. However, whatever I want to bitch about is right in my own eyes, and you shouldn’t judge me for wanting to smash patriarchs, and muzzle moral people who see the incel’s grievances as valid.
The whole article is depressing and offers no group solutions, only individual coping advice.
I think I found the cause and group solution, but it wasn’t in the overly long article:
Hebrews 13:4 Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.
The author seems blind to that real cause and effect.
While I can’t rule out a guy breaking up with a gal because she is a virgin…I’m starting to get more skeptical that is THE reason why a guy breaks up with a gal.
Virginity to me would be seen as a positive and I would think even most men would prefer a lady who isn’t bombed out and depleted…however since wimminz have grown up neck deep in feminism in this country their attitudes are more of a reason why a guy splits rather than virginity.
Earl ..
It’s possible he was being honorable. He wasn’t looking for marriage. And he didn’t want to take something from her she had been saving for the one.
It’s also possible he was just looking for a fun-time girl and she would’ve been to much effort.
Either way .. her desire to be a virgin / marriage material hasn’t helped her selection process and how she’s going about searching for a man. (Re: Fooling around .. obviously with the bad boy not interested in marriage guy.)
Arranged marriages seem like a good idea(l) again.
The author discusses “Emma” a girl who is fat but not ashamed of her appearance. The decades long trend in obesity is just one of many trends contributing to less sex. I wonder how “April” ranked on the attractiveness scale.
The author failed to consider any red-pill concepts, including that the general female hostility towards marriage, propensity towards divorce, and baby murdering tendencies has led to a group punishment effect. Men with high MMV (or even low MMV) don’t want to take the chance and this punishes legitimate marriage-minded women. With the supply of female virgins so low, demand has fallen as well.
It would have interesting if she had interviewed a 9/10 virgin, but this would have meant talking to a 19 year old, already engaged, devout conservative Christian from an intact family. I doubt her bubble includes any 9/10 virgins.
I’ve been floating the idea around at home, and the wife has not objected. It’s not hard to see the benefits, but it will be a decade until the kids are old enough.
I doubt she has even one in her bubble. Heck it’s possible she’s making it up (re: virgin girl).
A good wife wouldn’t object to her husbands lead on this subject.
And .. yes .. it works.
We had a family [1] with us in church that was a homeschool family. Very old school. Our church stands out in Baptist circles .. and they stood out in our church .. if that helps.
4 girls and 2 boys. They had married 3 of the girls with one they were still searching thru young men that were interested .. both boys were not yet teens .. so years away for them. They had a network of like minded folks they used. So I know a network exsists to help your search .. probably assosciated with the homeschooling groups.
I approved of their efforts and methods. The husband wife dynamic was refreshing as well.
[1] To bad they moved due to his job relocation. His job moves him every 5 years or so due to promotions.
Pro-(e)Jection .. and the evidence is in the quote below ..
It was all the Patriarch’s fault .. oh wait ..
You mean she admitted that SHE didn’t want anyone to know?!?
SHE didn’t have any trouble telling her girl pal Linda Tripp .. humpf .. what could the disparity be .. I can only wonder.
ALL WIMMINZ want it both ways .. she got caught .. and it has ruined her future prospects of marriage and kids .. and don’t tell me she disn’t want those things .. ALL WIMMINZ do .. and to say otherwise is pure folly.
Get caught smoking the [wrong politicians] POLL (heh), pay the toll!
And she has never lead a normal life .. since.
[1] https://freebeacon.com/politics/monica-lewinsky-bill-clinton-urged-me-to-lie-under-oath-about-affair/