The Feminist Life Script

What western culture teaches young women to do with their lives.

Readership: All
Authorship: Deti submitted a comment describing the Feminist Life Script rather succinctly.  Recognizing the value of this comment, Jack revised Deti’s comment and wrote this post.
Origin of the terms: To the best of my knowledge, Dalrock was the first to use the term Feminist Life Script and describe it in his posts, A very long season (part 1). (2017 July 3), and (part 2) (2017 July 10).  He also coined the term, Sticking the Landing, which refers to the ability of women to enter into marriage after a decade or so of postpornication.

Introduction

Why are a woman’s solipsistic dreams so much more important than submitting to a fantastic man who loves her?  Not even sexual bonding is enough to get her to tune into her God ordained purpose as a woman?  WTH???  And no matter how good her life might be, fantasy land will always be “better”.

Elspeth is correct that it is the parents’ fault.  It’s also the ambient feminism that everyone swims in.  Modern Western culture IS feminism.  Everyone and everything is feminist.  Even Christian women are feminists who are against abortion.

All women, and I mean ALL women, born after about 1960 are marinated in feminism and are feminists.  All women in the US over the age of 25 are feminists, and I don’t care what anyone says to the contrary because it’s not true.  EVERY man who has gotten married in the last 40 years married a feminist.

The Cultural Narrative

Young women and daughters are repeatedly saturated with the overarching dominant cultural narrative which undergirds the Life Script, which is basically this:

You can’t ever depend on a man and you can’t ever trust a man.  Think about the D’s: Divorce, death, disability.  What if he leaves you, cheats on you, dies on you, or becomes a cripple?

You need a career so you can stand on your own two feet if you have to.  You need college.  You need job training.  You need to earn your own money.  You need to compete on equal footing with men.

You are equal to men in every way, you can do anything a man can do.  You don’t have to take any crap from a man and you sure as hell don’t have to “submit” to him.  Any man you marry will be a completely 50/50 equal partner with you and you MUST insist on that.”

You are sexually liberated in the meantime before you get married.  If you’re a Christian, then it’s not really OK to have premarital sex, but you’re going to anyway, so just make sure that if you do, you do it with men you love or at least like a lot.  Or, if you’re a non-Christian, you can have all the sex you want with as many different men as you want and there will still be hot, attractive, resources-rich men waiting for you when you’re done with that.”

A Tinder profile of a 22 year old American woman.

The Ideal Life Script

This cultural narrative leads young women to believe that the Feminist Life Script is the most reasonable and optimal approach to living.  This Life Script comes in two phases, (1) Season of Singleness, and (2) Sticking the Landing.  These phases are entailed as follows.

Life Script Phase 1: Season of Singleness

All her friends and every woman she knows around her age are doing these things.

Higher Education – At the least, get a bachelor’s degree or extensive job training.  Earning a master’s or Ph.D. degree will put you on top.

Friends / Sex and the City Lifestyle – Move to a population center, get a job, and live alone or with roommates who are doing the same thing you’re doing.

Career comes First – Keep working.  Advance in career, become competent or even proficient.  Change jobs if necessary.

Have fun.  Make some frivolous purchases like $800 Louis Vuitton handbags.

Travel to fun and exotic tropical destinations.

Sexual Liberation – During all of the above, you are dating both for fun and in the hopes of meeting a marriageable man.  You are having sex with most of those men.  Some are false starts.  Some are short term, no more than 3-6 months.  Some are long term.

Again, all her friends and every woman she knows around her age are doing this.

Life Script Phase 2: Sticking the Landing

It is alleged by some that many, even most, women meet the man they will marry by age 23, which is an appropriate age for a woman to marry.  But marriage is postponed in order to fulfill all the goals of Phase 1, which takes her out to at least age 25.  The reported average age from relationship start to marriage is 4.9 years.  As a result, the female’s average age at first marriage is now 28 and creeping upwards.

So here is where Phase 2 begins.

Marriage – Meet the man who she will marry.  Get married in an equal partnership marriage.

Children – Have one child, at most two.

Continue Working – The options are to stay home, work part time/flex time, or continue full time.  But even if she should choose to quit working and stay at home, she must never think degradingly of herself as a Stay at Home Mom and/or Housewife.

Husband does the Nesting – In addition to working full time, her husband also works and does significant chores around the house in order to take the stress off her, as he’s expected to do, because she is his “equal” in every other significant way.

Direct the Nesting – It’s not her job to do most of the housework and child rearing.  She is busy working at her career and should only have to do half of the housework.  The husband is to do the other half.  She decides what he needs to do, and how it should be done.

Life Script Phase 3: Frivorce with Kids, Cash, and Prizes

Phase 3 is fully optional, but about half of all women who make it to Phase 2 will proceed to Phase 3.  Part of the reason is because there is a glut of western jurisprudence which lays out tried and true paths to Phase 3 (with the help of a divorce lawyer), such as Divorce Theft, No Fault Divorce, the Duluth model, and the Tender Years Doctrine.  All this legislation supports the goals of Feminism in undermining Headship, and Empowers™ those women who wish to continue chasing after any of the original dreams promised by the Cultural Narrative (above) which were not fulfilled during either Phase 1 or 2.  Consequently, the average duration of marriage in the U.S. is only 8 years.

Image taken from The Economist: When the Embers Grow Cold (2014 February 14) [Identity Wall]

Concluding Statements

The reason why a woman’s solipsistic dreams are more important than submitting to a fantastic man who loves her are laid out as follows.

  1. Her “dreams” (or, her life survival) predominate over marriage and everything else until she’s at least in her early to mid-20s.  During the time when she’s most attractive and most able to secure “a fantastic man who loves her”, she is spending that time getting educated and job trained so she can do what mom and dad and everyone else told her – Don’t ever be in a position where you have to depend on a man!  Instead of looking for a man to take care of her survival, she’s doing it herself and not nearly as well as a man can.
  2. She’s entitled to “have fun” before she gets married.  Travel, make and spend money.  Date (i.e. have sex with) attractive men and hope that maybe one will commit.  Of course, Dating = Sex.  (The word dating is used as a polite euphemism for illicit sex.)  Everyone is doing this.  Your parents, church and pastors usually know this but look the other way.
  3. The way to find a husband is to find attractive men, have sex with them within 3 dates, and then find out if there’s enough “compatibility” there to keep dating.  Then hopefully you get exclusive.  Then hopefully, when everything is “right”, you get married.  Here “right” means EVERYTHING must be in place: His career, her career, sufficient money, a decent place to live, and plentiful access to transportation and culture.  She must also be jaded satisfied that she has acquired enough “life experience” necessary to satisfy her YOLO needs and FOMO fears, and she must do this before she agrees to marriage.
  4. Submission is almost completely omitted from the narrative.  Women are not to submit to men.  A woman dating a man is not to take the submissive position.  A wife is not to submit to her husband, or if she does, she submits only when she wants to and only when she approves of the husband’s conduct.  She has everyone’s permission and approval to approach men and marriage this way – even from her church and her pastors, and certainly from her mother, and almost always from her father (if she has one).  Absolutely no one will tell her she is to submit to her husband “in all things, as unto the Lord” – not even her church, not even her pastors.  Submission to a man equals dependence on him, and remember – whatever the cost, she cannot be in a position where she has to depend on a man.

All women are doing this.  Including Christian women.  We know this because the church has now been almost completely converged and subsumed into the ambient dominant feminist culture.

Related

This entry was posted in Courtship and Marriage, Decision Making, Disorders, Divorce, Female Power, Feminism, Models of Failure, Politics, Sanctification & Defilement, SMV/MMV, Society, Solipsism, Vetting Women. Bookmark the permalink.

124 Responses to The Feminist Life Script

  1. cameron232 says:

    While I agree that the lifescript leads them astray by promising other things women want, a very fundamental issue (maybe the most fundamental issue) is implicit in your summary sentence. They want a “fantastic” man and believe they can get one, being strong, independent, amazing, beautiful women – each and every one of them.

    They want it all. The alpha and beta, the best of the masculine and feminine, all in one man. And they aren’t told they can’t have it all. So, discontent when they have to accept the consolation-prize-man.

    It’s biology. Men are incentivized (in the hyperbolic extreme), to an infinite supply of women (they can’t have this either). Women are incentivized to the perfect (“fantastic”) man.

    To anticipate an objection, yes, the spirit can overcome the flesh. Women and men can, through grace and the gift of agency/will, overcome this. But this is why you’re seeing what you’re seeing with women.

    What should they be told? You aren’t “fantastic” you’re a mix of plusses and minuses just like the man who will marry you. If you want to marry the best man for you, you shouldn’t follow the lifescript, you should try to be the best you can be and recognize what men actually value for marriage. If all you want to do is F-around, well that’s easy – it comes naturally.\

    BTW, everything with women now is “amazing” the adjective preferred over “fantastic.”

    Liked by 6 people

    • redpillboomer says:

      “They want it all. The alpha and beta, the best of the masculine and feminine, all in one man. And they aren’t told they can’t have it all. So, discontent when they have to accept the consolation-prize-man.”
      You hit the nail on the head with the phrase ‘all in one man.’ They’ll go through their twenty’s rejecting ‘Mr. Good Enough’ to keep holding out for ‘Mr. Perfect;’ and ‘Mr. Perfect’ doesn’t exist. Even men that supposedly check off all the boxes, the ‘high value male’ as the manosphere refers to him: Think of the superstar pro athletes, leading male A-List actors, Doctors, lawyers, CEO’s, etc. when the woman ends up locking him down, many of these ladies end up divorcing these men. Why? Can’t get more ‘perfect.’ or ‘high value’ than those guys–looks, money, status, fame, but even those guys are found wanting in the end. “He wasn’t this enough or that enough, an abuser, etc”

      Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        when the woman ends up locking him down, many of these ladies end up divorcing these men. Why? Can’t get more ‘perfect.’ or ‘high value’ than those guys–looks, money, status, fame, but even those guys are found wanting in the end. “He wasn’t this enough or that enough, an abuser, etc”

        A large element here is raw opportunity cost.

        Social media and dating apps have created a world in which male attention for women, and female access to all kinds of men, is at peak levels historically. Women have literally never had this many opportunities at their finger tips. One important impact of this is that the massive increase in opportunities available to women has dramatically, I would say drastically, driven up the opportunity cost for an attractive woman to commit to one of the opportunities or, once she has done so, to remain so committed in the face of a continued surfeit of opportunities. The opportunity cost experienced/perceived by attractive women has simply never been close to anything like it is currently.

        Now we can clearly say that this is short-sighted — the opportunities do not last forever, that is true. And we can also clearly say that it is not the case that all women have the same actual degree of opportunities, because not all women are attractive enough to generate them, but in general, it’s clear that at least the upper 60% or so of women are experiencing historically high levels of opportunity, and therefore historically high levels of opportunity cost, well into their 30s. For the most attractive that continues well into the 40s now thanks to improved methods of targeted nutrition, training, skin care and cosmetic medical treatments.

        Young people generally describe this as “FOMO” — FOMO is just another, less geeky sounding, way of saying “opportunity cost”. FOMO is nothing other than the fear that what is behind the next swipe on Tinder may be much better than the guy who just proposed to you, so the cost of accepting his proposal seems higher because you may be missing out on a better guy you will swipe tomorrow, or next week, or next month. After all there’s always hot guys swiping you. Maybe one of them is better than this guy — who knows? And if I accept this guy’s proposal, I’m stuck, and I will never know those guys or be able to choose them. Same reasoning in reverse for a woman who is already married and looking to branch swing — “so many hot men out there who are more attractive objectively than my husband is, why should I stay with him when there are obviously so many other opportunities knocking at my door, I mean look at all the likes I get on Instagram? That post I put up yesterday with no makeup, hair in a towel, looking plain jane as can be, has 30k likes already, and over 100 DMs. Why am I married to this dork again?”

        It’s the fear that the opportunity foregone is actually a better opportunity than the one in your hand, and it’s dramatically impacting women’s behavior and thinking in these areas, even if the opportunities are more seeming than real. That is, even if there are few “actual opportunities” for quality relationships, the fact that there is a lot of attention increases the level of potential opportunities in such a way that it drives up perceived opportunity cost to stratospheric levels.

        Liked by 4 people

      • redpillboomer says:

        Well put NovaSeeker, I know a Christian lady from a program I coached in who is 30 now, married to a handsome, athletic man her age, who is also a chemist by profession. I thought, “Ideal young couple” when I first met them four years ago when they were both 26. I’ve been able to observe from a distance some interesting developments in their relationship. Instead of starting their family (and as far as I’m aware she’s fertile), she got involved in acting. Prior to acting, she had a job with a Christian publishing house. Of course, with the acting career she has (nothing major, all local as far as I can tell), she posts pics in all sorts of costumes, and with her effusive personality, she makes just about everything she wears look good on her. She’s very outgoing personality wise and fairly good looking (7, maybe an 8), but what gets my attention is she is one of the biggest attention whores on social media; I mean even the secular young women are no match for her when it comes to the amount Instagram posts–multiple posts daily.

        She doesn’t get super crude in her pics, maybe some tight yoga pants with hint of camel toe, or a plunging neckline to show a bit of cleavage. Her big thing is provocative posing–pics of her bust, ass, many times with some sort of innuendo thrown in, sucking on a lollipop like it’s a cock, that sort of thing. She’s a fitness buff and has her own personal trainer, so there are a lot of gym pics, all workout related, however many of the poses are sexually alluring in some fashion–squats from the side that show her curvy ass in action, for example.

        One of the big red flags that goes up besides all the provocative posing, is the amount of dudes in her pics. Being an aspiring actress, she travels with this acting company she’s a part of that does murder mystery dinner theater shows. All sorts of pics driving down the road with male actors in the car, hotel shots with them hanging around in her room partying (clothed), and lots of acting pics with them in it hamming it up with her, holding her around the waist, etc. . I know the stereotype of many males in acting, kind of effeminate, maybe even gay in some cases, but not these guys. Several of them seem fit, handsome and have charismatic personalities to boot. When I see this, all I can think of is ‘Danger Will Robinson!’

        What goes through my mind when I think of her is, “When are you going to start your family? You’re thirty, time is going by and your clock is ticking. Your financial situation is stable with hubby pulling in some good money, yet you’re out there on social media and in the world acting like the Christian version of a THOT.” Maybe nothing is going on, maybe I’m being too judgmental, but it sure seems to be a slippery slope she’s out there playing around on. She’s way too provocative with too many dicks in the vicinity. The husband, while alpha in many ways, is really beta when it comes to his wife and her carrying on the way she does. He seems to let her just go about her business. Guess I’m old school in my thinking, but I couldn’t imagine years ago when my wife was her age allowing my wife to act like that. I would of said, “HELL NO!” and been mate guarding/cockblocking all the way.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        The husband, while alpha in many ways, is really beta when it comes to his wife and her carrying on the way she does. He seems to let her just go about her business. Guess I’m old school in my thinking, but I couldn’t imagine years ago when my wife was her age allowing my wife to act like that. I would of said, “HELL NO!” and been mate guarding/cockblocking all the way.

        Yeah I have a post brewing in the hopper about this kind of thing, but a different situation (a more publicly known one).

        Suffice to say: where there is smoke, there is generally fire. A man’s instincts in this area, in terms of alarm bells, are generally well justified, and a woman behaving like that is not an innocent by any means.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Sharkly says:

        the Christian version of a THOT

        LOL It couldn’t be that she just is a THOT, who is pasting Christ’s name onto her act.

        Well, considering all her many attractions that she posts online; her husband seems to have won the THOTtery! /S

        Liked by 1 person

  2. Scott says:

    I tend to be in a bubble of people who have actually “stuck the landing”, or damn near close. So the reading of this while cringeworthy, occurs through that lens.

    One friend of mine (another psychologist who is one year group ahead of me) and I were talking at lunch and I asked her if she always wanted to be a psychologist. It was the context of commiserating over how much of a sacrifice it is to attend 5 more years of school, internship, post doc, etc. Mind you, at this point in her life, she was a married (and very cute) 30 something, with her first baby on the way. Her and her extremely high earning husband met when they were seniors. So, he was able to essentially pay cash for her PhD and all she had to do was go to school. She was a psychology undergrad, he is a chemical engineer. So immediately after college he was a 6 figure guy.

    She said “I didn’t always dream of being a psychologist. But I just knew that what ever Iwas going to do would awesome!

    (You have to read “awesome” here in that way they day it, you know?)

    At about 33, she looked nothing like the women in that age bracket represented in the meme in the OT. She is still, 10 more years on, something to look at. The year she left the army, she wasn’t sure what to do, so, she travelled the world for year, meeting her husband when he could get the time off in exotic places all over the globe.

    So, it is that I thought, “well sure, surrounded by your choice of men who can provide pretty much anything your hearts desire would make ‘awesome’ a thing you could accomplish.

    The life script is pretty cool. But its for rich, good looking people.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Elspeth says:

      Women who live clean and/or are well cared for (usually by a good man), age well. It’s possible.

      That we look a little less well preserved as we age is a definitive truth, but women who don’t have a hard living, sexual free-for-all life and take care of themselves sometimes look better than women 10 years their junior who live that life.

      The world is in many ways completely upside down.

      And again, Jesus. For good measure.

      LOL.

      Liked by 4 people

    • Novaseeker says:

      Yes, there are entire communities where the women have essentially stuck the landing. Almost all of them are gifted both genetically in terms of appearance and in other ways (intelligence, drive, discipline) and most of them come from solid families of origin as well (generally almost never chaotic ones). If you have that “success mix” bag of tricks combo of all of looks, smarts, discipline and upbringing, you can get away with … a lot in your 20s, to be honest, and stick the landing in your late 20s/early 30s with a “fine” husband (not a superhunk, generally, like you were dating when you were 24, but more than fine for long term husband and child raising now that all of your peers are also getting married).

      Other outcomes vary depending on what part of the puzzle is missing.

      Women who have the smarts, discipline and upbringing but lack the top tier looks tend to end up frustrated with men because they are proverbial girls who can “sleep up” in their early to mid-20s (and often do), but either passed over one of these guys for marriage when they were asked in the late 20s or, more commonly, aren’t good looking enough to get one of the better quality guys to marry when they are around 30, so they end up writing articles for The Atlantic and Medium about why men in their 30s suck and are all Peter-Pan manboys or obsessed with looks. Some of them salvage things late with a guy of lesser quality than the ones who were available in her 20s. Some of them end up like Kate Bolick.

      Women who are good looking and smart and have at least a fairly good upbringing but lack personal discipline end up either having quiet abortions to cover for their “unforced errors”, or have some sort of traumatic breakup with Chad-gone-bad, after which they sometimes try to run away and force a reset by changing city/job/etc. Always be skeptical of the attractive woman who seems to check the boxes but just turned up in Seattle out the blue from the East Coast at 32, looks kind of worldly, and is “open to new beginnings”.

      Women who have the looks and smarts and discipline but come from a chaotic family background are the most tragic of the bunch, because they really are often trying to do things the right way to stick the landing in the educated striver class, but they just can’t get completely free of the gravitational pull of the familial black hole to avoid it sucking them in at the worst possible times — unreconstructed siblings, cousins, parents, often play cameo roles in wrecking the chances of girls like these when they are otherwise doing everything right, or trying to. Some of these do actually turn out sticking the landing .. generally, though, it’s only the ones who go cold turkey, more or less, on the family ties, keeping the family at very long distance, limiting contact with them, and seeing them infrequently so as to limit the chaotic contagion. Often the ones who do this more effectively move thousands of miles away and keep it that way.

      Women who have looks and discipline and a good family background but are not that smart have a very hard time sticking a landing in the upper middle striver class, because men in that class tend to screen for mom smarts. Often the best bet for these girls is to “looksmax” things, the female way, which takes both good genetic looks and discipline, and go for one of the relatively few remaining trophy wife positions and try to stick the landing that way — a key issue is accessing the men who are looking for this in 2020, and this is where family connections come into play. When this approach goes south, this kind of girl can go spectacularly off the rail, accessing OnlyFans and so on as a way to cash out on her discipline-honed looks, and the less well-connected her family is, the more likely this kind of outcome is (which isn’t sticking the landing).

      Liked by 4 people

      • thedeti says:

        Nova

        Yes. Thank you. This explanation sets out what I have been thinking about but couldn’t articulate well.

        You can “stick the landing”, if and only if you have looks, smarts, discipline, and solid family of origin. This explains the Hooking Up Smart phenomenon: White, upper middle class, college educated, employed women from two parent families in their late 20s and early 30s still able to find decent husbands and have small families (one, maybe 2 kids, 3 if they’re doing really well).

        With the HUS set it was almost all white women, women whose parents are physicians or lawyers or college professors or bankers or C-suite corporate officers. Still married to each other, usually both work. They went to NYU or Georgetown or Duke or Penn or UNC or UVA. They all work in prestigious high status jobs that are predominantly male occupied: banking, finance, “consulting”, advertising, PR, or some other cushy office job they got through dad’s connections (less often law or medicine because they had just the bachelor’s degrees). They usually don’t work in traditional female jobs: teaching, social services, nursing, or clerical. They have at least one long term relationship under their belts, and they broke up because of moving or his job or her job or “just didn’t work out”. They’re well put together: makeup and hair on point, always well dressed and accessorized, height weight proportional, keep in shape, and limiting or avoiding recreational drug use for at least the last couple of years.

        But these are pretty much the only women who stick the landing. You have to have most or all of those characteristics to do it. White, intact family, UMC on up, at least a bachelor’s degree, employed, and good looking. And we all know the HUS ladies were not exactly restrained in their sex lives.

        Nova, I know the women you’re talking about, and there are some of them here, but they are concentrated in the Twin Cities, Chicago, and DFW. I am convinced they are coastal transplants from New England or southern California. They draw attention anywhere they go because there are few of them here.

        I see this also in the Midwest, to a slightly lesser degree. These can also stick the landing. Mom and Dad are still married to each other but parents worked in slightly less prestigious occupations: Local elected official, lawyer, GP physician, school district administrator, successful small business owner. They’re overwhelmingly white. Their degrees are from Big Ten or MidSouth universities, or Northwestern or Vanderbilt or Univ of Chicago or Miami/Ohio. Many went to small super expensive liberal arts colleges like Ripon, Oberlin, Grinnell, or Luther. (There are dozens of these little prestigious colleges around the Midwest with enrollments of 2500 or less, they are very well known nationwide, admissions are quite selective, the courses of study are rigorous, and their graduates succeed in work and life.) They work in jobs for which you need a bachelor’s degree – social work, social services, insurance, PR. Or they’re headed to law or med school. They’re also well put together, dressed well, absolutely none below HB 7, but not as pronounced as on the eastern seaboard. These women can also get away with a lot of promiscuity and partying it up in their 20s. They can stick the landing quite well.

        Both of these groups can also walk out the life script pretty much to a T, if they want to.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        This also reminds me of something you have said before – that the elites are selling to everyone a lifestyle and manner of living that works only for the elites. “Elites” being upper middle class, strong family background, college educated, employed earning good money, and usually white.

        The refrain is “Look, everyone, all you need to do is just do it the way we do it. Just be more like us! Go to college, get a job, start working, and you too can make it just like we did. It doesn’t matter that you’re not white, or you came from a single mom household and haven’t seen your father in 15 years, or that you lack future time orientation, or you’re not all that smart, or you’re not as physically attractive. Doesn’t matter! Go to college, get a job, and start working and earning money, start looksmaxing, and you’ll be just like us!”

        Of course, it doesn’t work, because they aren’t “just like” the elites. They lack the connections, the attitude, the future time orientation, and the cultural and social markers that help women move up like the elites do. They don’t look as good or dress as well, or “clean up” as well. They don’t have a sense of life stability that comes from living in an intact family. This is why what works for the HUS/elite set won’t work for most anyone else.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Jack says:

        @ NovaSeeker, Deti,
        Dalrock had a post or two about how “Marriage is for the Elite“.

        Going off your comments, it is easy to see why. Only UMC and above with the qualifications you mentioned are able to “stick the landing”.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        This is why what works for the HUS/elite set won’t work for most anyone else.

        Right.

        This is really one of the central contradictions in American society currently, and one of the greatest sources of tensions. The society has been set up, in everything from social mores to education system to economy and living arrangements, to facilitate this specific lifestyle that truly is centered on a handful of large cities — certainly the coastal megalopoli, but also places like Atlanta, DFW/Houston/Austin, Twins, Chicago, Miami, Seattle. And pockets of it have spread to places like Charlotte and Boise and Columbuis and so on, but generally it is not very widespread outside of these cities, where it, in the case of some of them, is utterly dominant (DC, SF Bay, Seattle are probably where it has the greatest percentage of the total population — DC and SF are truly crazy outliers nationally yet dominate the political arena and the tech/internet industry, respectively, and are therefore among the most influential places. They design systems which everyone else has to follow, and those are systems that work for them and for people like them. Everyone else is expected to be like them, as well, to the best of their ability, and to move to these cities as well (hence the response that rural areas don’t have any problems a u-haul can’t solve).

        Feminism is one of the main drivers of this, coming as it did squarely from this social class, and always having the priorities of the women of this class at its forefront. The rest of the women got a mixed bag — some obviously beneficial things and a lot of things that were arguably worse, while life vastly improved in virtually all ways for ambitious, smart, upper middle class white women, the group around which most priorities in our society clearly revolve today.

        Liked by 4 people

  3. thedeti says:

    I didn’t decline a contributing author spot… just thinking about it.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Sharkly says:

      thedeti,
      I too would like to make a post about your comment. It is a good analysis of the situation, and seemingly puts much of what is wrong in a nutshell, plus it seems to have aggregated a lot of the conclusions that the Christian manosphere is coming to. I previously made mention of your comment and my intent to use it as the basis for a post:

      Apparently great minds think alike. While Jack has done quite an excellent job, and we probably share many of the same readers, I will probably still make a post using your comment as the basis, since I really think it was good enough that it bears a little repeating, and I will likely add my own insight reflecting off of aspects of it that I might choose to highlight. If you would like to participate or contribute to that post, just contact me via the contact page at my site. I’ll probably begin putting it together this weekend. Any additional thoughts that you have relating to that comment and its subject matter would be greatly appreciated, and I might include them in that post as well. I think your comment is a good summation of our times and I am glad Jack has highlighted it with a timely post. I’ll be praying and thinking about how best to utilize it as well.

      Liked by 4 people

      • thedeti says:

        Sharkly:

        You can do anything you want with anything I write. All I ask is that if you attribute any writing or concept to me as original author, you quote or paraphase it accurately.

        I also want to point out to everyone that the “Life Script” concept is not something I came up with. I did not originate it or fully explicate it. Dalrock and Novaseeker did, and have written about it and explained it far, far better than I ever have. The only reason I wrote about it at length here in that thread was because I thought it explained and added to the points being made.

        Thanks to all.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Sharkly says:

        For my writings on my blog, I would say something similar. Feel free to use them. I have made no attempt to monetize my blog and don’t anticipate doing so. If God has freely given me some unique truth to share, I won’t be hiding it behind a paywall. I’d like for the truth to get spread, almost regardless of how it is spread.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Sharkly says:

      thedeti,
      I have now reposted your comment, along with an enjoinder to plan and act differently:
      https://laf443259520.wordpress.com/2020/12/24/no-patriarchy-for-my-daughter/
      Contact me or reply at that post, if there is anything you want changed.

      Like

  4. ikr says:

    Women should be pairing off 15-20, and the stragglers (late bloomers) 20-25. Historically, for thousands of years, women were birthing their first at an average of ~13yo. The Japanese with their ‘Christmas Cakes’ and Chinese with their ‘Sheung Yu’ are quite dialed in.

    The clustering and corresponding photos (which were selected to support the point, obviously) does further highlight the importance of early marriage.

    What should have been included in ‘relevant’ is the graph of attraction ages (eg. what age woman is a given age male attracted to, and vice versa, for 15-45). Women seem to always want a man within 3-5 years of their age, while all men of all ages prefer a range of 17-24. I believe you have hosted this elsewhere on your blog. Form.
    What should have been included in the article proper are the graphs of 1st birth complications against age, where stillbirths, retardation, et al. decline after 16 or so, then start to rise around 24. This might have been part of one of Dal’s exposes. Function.

    In both her form and function, a woman is rapidly on decline after ~24, and the precipice for both sometime 30-34ish. Those two graphs of harder data than JAMIEGERTZ(LOL) opinion-piece make a far more comprehensive argument against the Feminist Life Script.

    Denise’s attitude is exactly on point. What is wrong is not her attitude, but monogamy.

    Liked by 1 person

  5. redpillboomer says:

    Yes, that is a good summary of the Feminist Life Script that was given above. In having listened to Manopsphere content creators the past three years or so, both secular and Christian, every one of those points has been made and covered over and over again. A very good analysis of the PROBLEM, and it is one hell of a problem nowadays, what about the SOLUTION? Yes, that has been covered too, but can it be accomplished this day and age on a scale where it impacts society at large? I agree the more traditional route can be followed by a female here and there (usually because of her upbringing), i.e. remains a virgin or has a very low body count (N=1)>Gets her four year education to be an educated wife and mom to be>marries her HS or college boyfriend by say 22-23-24 at the latest, young hubby is also making something of himself>Starts having her babies in her twenties, done by her early thirties at the latest>raises the kids, supports hubby in his career, earns some money with a home business>kids all grown by her mid-forties>husband doing well in his career, six figure guy, wife now goes to school or work>and so forth. I know two women right now who are doing just this, so I know it is do-able by individual women, but can we ever get to something like a critical mass with western women as a whole doing it? Anyone think this is possible, short of a revival by God, in this day and age? Has the Feminist Life Script ‘won,’ down line consequences be damned?

    Liked by 3 people

    • Ed Hurst says:

      Of course it’s possible, but barring a miracle of God’s mercy, I submit that His wrath on the sins of the West makes it a near zero probability that it would happen.

      Liked by 4 people

  6. Maureen Foley says:

    How do you expect women to trust men who post disgusting things about teenage girls?!!

    Like

    • Ed Hurst says:

      I think it’s more a matter of trusting God. The point here is that men don’t trust women in our American culture, and why they shouldn’t. God’s plan was for men around 30 to take a wife roughly half their age. Age peer marriage is a Western perversion. Maybe you need to cite an example of what you find disgusting. Without context it’s hard to answer your question.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Maureen says:

        You’re asking me what I found disgusting about a grown man having sex with a child?

        Like

      • Jack says:

        @ Maureen,
        You are mistaken about the context. I don’t endorse child marriages, and I don’t encourage sex outside of marriage. If young women are looking to “date” and have sex, then I would encourage them to marry, rather than follow the feminist life script.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Ed Hurst says:

        I was guessing you would say that, but it wasn’t that obvious by your terse trolling.

        Like

      • Sharkly says:

        LOL Methinks Maureen doth protest too much. Her repressed latent fantasies of the past are expressing themselves through her overhyped display of outrage. Sorry Maureen, you won’t be able to go back to your youthful years and seduce an older man now. At your age all the older men are probably all headed into care homes. LOL But, at least you can now enjoy trolling some attention from men like Ed and I, whom you never stood a realistic chance with back in your day.

        Liked by 4 people

  7. Maureen Foley says:

    What makes you think a 14-18 year old girl would be interested in YOU

    Like

  8. Scott says:

    I’m fairly open minded about critiquing our culture when it comes to encourage stable Christian family formation.

    But a 30 year old snooping around here 4 years from now when my daughter is 15 is kind of where that stops for me.

    Liked by 2 people

    • lastmod says:

      Made the point myself on Dalrock and other forums Scott. Lots of talk about “older men prefer / should get with / date” these younger women…….

      YET

      Al the men in the ‘sphere would in no way let their 18-20 year old daughter be courted by, or married to a man who is 35 to forty….even if he was the most “holy” of men

      Liked by 3 people

      • Jack says:

        @ Lastmod,
        Holiness doesn’t count for much these days, unfortunately. But if the man was a business tycoon, I’m sure many parents would be jumping for joy about their new son-in-law. We are living in a material world.

        Liked by 4 people

      • Lexet Blog says:

        There is a bit of hypocrisy in the standards, last mod, but speaking from experience,
        If any decent single guy aged 25-35 shows up at a church, there will be parents who prey upon him and try to set up a marriage

        Like

      • Lexet Blog says:

        While at the same time other families (with older daughters) will strongly object.

        Classic cockblocking

        Like

    • Elspeth says:

      Yeah, Scott. I’m with you, as we have a 14-year-old daughter. Not cool on a Christian site, IMO, to promote a grown a** man who promotes viewing young girls that way. And while it is true that a man of a certain level of looks, wealth and status can attract much younger women, it’s not the norm. It just isn’t.

      Maureen is not wrong, because we live in the West. In the west, 14-year-olds are children.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        I’m with Elspeth and Scott. I have a 14-year-old daughter. No way in hell I’d let a 30-year-old come sniffing around her.

        Median age of marriage for women was 22 in 1890; same age as my wife when we married. That’s a good age.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Jack says:

      “But a 30 year old snooping around here 4 years from now when my daughter is 15 is kind of where that stops for me.”

      I believe your fears are misplaced. 15 is when we should be talking to our daughters about marriage, because this is about the age when they start taking an interest in men. Remember, teenage daughters go snooping too. My oldest is 14 now, and she is always talking about which boy she likes at school.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Scott says:

        Is there a 30 year old virgin at your church whom you would approve of marrying your daughter next year?

        Liked by 1 person

      • Jack says:

        @ Scott,
        I hesitate to be a matchmaker. I will teach her as well as I can and pray for her to meet a suitable person at the right time.

        Like

      • Lexet Blog says:

        First off, it’s commenters who keep bringing the age down to make an extreme example. 2- it’s a biological reality that there is an age of curve when it comes to being considered attractive

        Q- is it natural for there to be an age gap between a couple, with the male being a little older than F? Yes. Absolutely, especially to establish authority.

        Q2- at what age does that become inappropriate? When you are old enough to be their dad (I actually know a few people in marriages like this, and they work); let’s say a decade is too much if she is 18, but the age gap can expand as she is older.

        Unfortunately, we are living in a time where we have to talk about extreme gaps because of the culture. In our economy, Young men do not have established households until late 20s, early 30s. In fact, 60% of those 18-22 don’t earn income because they are in college accruing debt.

        For a father, you have to either promote an early marriage with someone who has an established economic footing, or teach your daughter to remain chaste while courting a younger guy who demonstrates potential, and who can accept a Lower standard of living until that time.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        @Lexet:

        The original graphic above had 14-18 as the choice age for sex with young women. It also offered some pretty graphic imagery about what that experience is like.

        The initial, earlier commenters (admittedly those of us with 14-year-old daughters or similar age) objected quickly.

        Jack wisely modified the graphic to what you see now, beginning at age 18.

        Like

      • Lexet Blog says:

        Statistical models all show 16-18 as a peak.

        Historical laws show people could marry at 15-16

        People also matured mentally sooner back then, and life expectancy was significantly shorter.

        Women having children at older ages is a benefit of modern medicine.

        Like

  9. lastmod says:

    “God’s plan was for men around 30 to take a wife roughly half their age.”

    Quote scripture, and verse. Never came across this in the Bible. “Thou shalt take a wife roughly half your age around 30”

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ed Hurst says:

      It’s a question of understanding known Hebrew social practices. Everything the Old Testament says about marriage was based in a culture where common men didn’t get close to non-family females until age 30, and then they would seek an arranged marriage. The girls being married off were generally around 15. God was quite pleased with this setup, and never once spoke through a prophet about changing it.

      As for the cultural reluctance of the folks here? I’m hardly surprised and not going to argue, since culture does matter. The whole point would be that our culture needs serious help before we can live the way God intended. Not going to happen. Instead, God is going to destroy Western Civilization.

      Meanwhile, protect your teenaged daughters, because you would likely face legal consequences. But don’t think that evil is the only explanation for adult male interest in those teen daughters. Nor is it a matter of being fallen. It’s how God wired us. That doesn’t mean it’s the only way to proceed, but if our culture weren’t so worthy of wrath, and if we did things closer to the Bible, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Oscar says:

        The Talmud recommends men marry between 16 and 24. Since the Talmud is based on Jewish custom and rabbinical tradition, and the Bible doesn’t tell us at what age ancient Jews married, it’s logical to conclude that they married at similar ages.

        Like

      • Ed Hurst says:

        The Talmud is a Hellenized perversion of ancient Hebrew traditions. Jesus panned it as an attack on divine revelation, as He taught the genuine Covenant of Moses. Nothing in Judaism should be taken as a valid expression of ancient Hebrew ways.

        Like

      • lastmod says:

        “It’s a question of understanding known Hebrew social practices”

        Ah! Now its an “understanding” of Hebrew practices… but before it was “God’s Plan”. Got it! 😉

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        The Talmud is a Hellenized perversion of ancient Hebrew traditions. Jesus panned it as an attack on divine revelation, as He taught the genuine Covenant of Moses. Nothing in Judaism should be taken as a valid expression of ancient Hebrew ways.

        I agree that the Talmud is not inspired Scripture. That should be obvious to a Christian. That’s not my argument.

        However, the Talmud based on Hebrew tradition and customs. It’s therefore a reflection of “known Hebrew social practices”. Whether those practices were approved by God, or not, is a different matter.

        Like

      • Ed Hurst says:

        Nope. The Talmud does not accurately report ancient Hebrew social practices accurately. I don’t have time here to summarize the library of material you’d have to read to understand that. Common Hebrew men rarely got married before age 30; that’s a historical fact.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        Common Hebrew men rarely got married before age 30; that’s a historical fact.

        What sources do you have to support that assertion?

        Like

      • Ed Hurst says:

        You aren’t likely to find them, because the books aren’t online. There was a time back up through the 1980s when you could still get your hands on really good studies in Hebrew social history.

        Here’s a summary: The Talmud is an elitist document. It represents a narrow group of upper middle class/lower noble class materialistic idiots. Those men could afford to get married at age 20-25. The average Hebrew peasant — the vast majority of population — couldn’t afford a family until around age 30. It’s also when peasants were taken seriously as “men” in a society dominated by elitist Pharisees. This is based on studies of economic indicators, and includes a few bits and pieces of reporting from outside sources during the historical time frame.

        These materials have been suppressed. I watched it happen with my own eyes during the 1990s, when Dispensationalists and Zionists started silencing those studies. The ones posted online have been censored for the most part. The ones they couldn’t get taken down have been labeled “antisemitic”.

        If you can find any living seminary professors who are somewhat on the conservative end of belief, and who aren’t Zionist, you may find a better confirmation than that.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        You aren’t likely to find them, because the books aren’t online.

        Okay. What are the book titles? Surely you learned how to cite a book reference in all those years of study. Better yet, what contemporary (preferably primary) historical sources did those books cite?

        Like

  10. lastmod says:

    Lots of talk about N Counts too….but when you “holy” men when you were younger were contributing to this higher “n count” of these hot young women……….why do you get a pass, and get rewarded with a trophy wife but the women in question “spoiled her chances”

    Like

    • Ed Hurst says:

      I don’t claim holiness in the meaning you use it here, but I didn’t find keeping my virginity that hard. In college, a majority of the guys I associated with were like me in that respect. While churchianity is loaded with cads today, it wasn’t always like that, not everywhere.

      Liked by 1 person

  11. Scott says:

    Mine would be something 18-21 marrying a college senior or a little older (he’d be like 21-24)

    (Or fill in college senior with journeyman apprentice whatever)

    This is basically a freshman meeting a senior and she can continue her courses if she wants, or start having babies and return to whatever it was she was studying later.

    My IDEAL in the current climate would be to have them live here (I have an extra apartment) and get on their feet while he starts making money.

    We have nice little Catholic college with a teaching credential and a nursing program right here.

    They could do that, rent free for a couple years while she has little ones at home and he works out the details of career.

    Liked by 2 people

    • redpillboomer says:

      “Mine would be something 18-21 marrying a college senior or a little older (he’d be like 21-24).”
      That was the old ‘M.R.S. (Mrs.) Degree’ model, and it worked quite well during the 1950s through maybe into the mid-70s or thereabouts.
      When I got married at 30 (thirty years ago), my wife was 21, almost 22; and it worked very well. She was mature for her age, got a man who had established himself in his career and made fairly good money. A year after our marriage, she was pregnant with our first child, second one the next year. Nowadays, even that model seems archaic. Young women are waiting until what, an average age of 28 or 29 to get married? In many cases they’re TRYING to get married if they can find a marriageable man (Where have all the good men gone?) that can meet their inflated expectations of what a man needs to have in order for M’ Lady to even consider allowing him the privilege of escorting her high N-count figure clad in a White Weeding Gown down the aisle. Historically, 28-29 was considered an ‘old maid’ back in the day; thirtysomethings were called spinsters. How the hell did we get to this place in our culture? The question is rhetorical, I’ve got a pretty good idea how we got here. The real question, is there any going back? Not like a return to the 50s or anything, but an SMV/MMV self correction of some kind within our culture where the women stop running their N-counts into the double digits by the time they’re 25, certainly thirty; telling Chad, Tyrone, Juan, Achmed, Pookie & Ray-Ray “Thanks, but no thanks when they’re 18-24; I’m looking for a husband, and you’re definitely NOT husband material.” It would also be nice to hear in reply from the ladies on this site, not just the men, if they think it is at all possible in this post-modern era to get some semblance of what once was going again.

      Like

      • Novaseeker says:

        an SMV/MMV self correction of some kind within our culture where the women stop running their N-counts into the double digits by the time they’re 25, certainly thirty; telling Chad, Tyrone, Juan, Achmed, Pookie & Ray-Ray “Thanks, but no thanks when they’re 18-24; I’m looking for a husband, and you’re definitely NOT husband material.” It would also be nice to hear in reply from the ladies on this site, not just the men, if they think it is at all possible in this post-modern era to get some semblance of what once was going again.

        Not likely unless there is some kind of general collapse economically, which has the effect of a cultural reset. The mass of women (that is, not some small group of Christian outlier women) won’t be looking for husbands at those age ranges again unless economic necessity forces them to do so, which would only happen if there were a massive economic collapse. That’s possible, of course, but it’s long been “manosphere porn” for such a collapse to occur.

        Like

  12. Scott says:

    I hesitate to be a matchmaker. I will teach her as well as I can and pray for her to meet a suitable person at the right time.

    Not so much talking about match making. I’m talking about influence and setting the parameters for achieving your blessing.

    At 14, if you are even a half way dominant, primary male figure in her life you still have time to make those left and right limits clear. Girls, no matter what they say, no matter how much they roll their teenage eyes at you, hate to disappoint strong dads like that.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Scott says:

      All of the women you guys hold up as examples in the sphere— Elspeth, Hearthie, Mychael had very strong dads (in Mychaels case her grandfather) who they were terrified of disappointing. This carried them into marriages where they are being loved by husbands who remind them of their dads, at least on some level.

      Powerful, strong fatherhood is the only leverage you have right now. The society doesn’t encourage it. So you just have to strut around your little kingdom and hope your wife and the littke ducklings follow.

      It’s lame, but that’s the deal.

      Liked by 6 people

    • Elspeth says:

      Girls, no matter what they say, no matter how much they roll their teenage eyes at you, hate to disappoint strong dads like that.

      This is straight truth, no chaser. The problem is that the vast majority of American dads don’t have this kind of influence with their wives, and so they don’t have it with their daughters either. I’m not saying it’s all those men’s fault, but it is true nonetheless.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Sharkly says:

      “I hesitate to be a matchmaker.”
      Sorry to hear you hesitate and stumble short of being a patriarch, Jack.
      Its a good patriarch’s job to arrange for her to marry a sensible man.

      Sirach 7:23 Do you have children? Instruct them. Train them to be obedient from their youth. 24 Do you have daughters? Be attentive to their chastity, and don’t be too indulgent with them. 25 Give a daughter in marriage, and you complete a great task; but give her to a sensible man.

      Thankfully I am here to point you back towards God’s holy patriarchy before your daughter is 29.5 and still looking for her mythical man worthy of a “goddess”, “daughter of the King”.
      Just tell her you’ll handle it for her, and that she doesn’t need to sweat it, but just prepare herself to adore the good man that you will find for her. And that her task is to believe in his dreams and faithfully work towards his goals and help to him become a great man.
      And by all means get her married off before she becomes a damnable fornicator.
      Tick Tock … I’m glad we caught this early.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Sharkly says:

      As I recall, Scott tried to set up some sort of matchmaking consortium, but was having difficulty getting interested families. Which is a shame, since all good Christian families should want something like that, unless they prefer the Feminist life script instead.
      I suspect a big part of the problem is Feminism again. Only one young Christian man out of a thousand is good enough for their goddess daughters, but that one young man has around 400 young women who are all willing to have him, so their daughter’s chance of marrying is about nil until she’s a used up anxious pill popping 30 year old who is finally willing to settle for just a good man.

      Liked by 3 people

  13. Elspeth says:

    “Elites” being upper middle class, strong family background, college educated, employed earning good money, and usually white.

    You don’t have to be UMC or white to have a good life, or even a beautiful one depending on your values. That thought process is what has given way to our hugely influential victim class, which spans the ethnic spectrum, by the way. I know several white 20- and 30-somethings who stupidly blame the system because they don’t live at the same level as their middle aged parents. They simply use blacks and latinos as cover for a more sinister agenda. Can you say clueless?

    The recently departed, and very intelligent Walter E. Williams (renowned black libertarian economics professor who grew up in the segregated south and helped shaped my political economic philosophy) wrote a column way back in 1995 titled, “How Not to Be Poor”:

    https://www.capitalismmagazine.com/2005/05/how-not-to-be-poor/

    It’s not glamorous, and it isn’t a get rich quick scheme, but it works. We’re so stupidly materialistic that we fail to appreciate how wonderful it is to be love, be deeply loved, be healthy, and have our basic needs met. Social media has crippled our ability to have a measured view of life and what to expect from it. So..we have these crazy ideas about living at the same level as people who started out from a different place than we did.

    I don’t know if you watched the video link I posted to you in the Masculine Dilemma thread, but what stood out to me was this woman’s inability to appreciate that most of us are average, and that despite her relative financial success as a small business owner, an average guy was basically what she should expect, because she is an average woman. Most of us are average, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

    We are solidly Middle middle class. We live pretty well, but not extravagantly. We have to budget, and all that good stuff. But…so what? Husband and I enjoy one another and our family so much that there is no amount of money or “fabulousness” that would be worth this.

    We have trained the youngest generations (and I means starting with ours, Gen X), to prioritize all the wrong things, and then we wonder why women (and to a lesser extent men as well) follow prescribed life scripts that fail to provide a fulfilling, happy life.

    And can we stop pretending that young women came up with this stuff on their own? That feminism isn’t what it is because men allowed it, voted it in, upheld it in the courts? These gals are plainly and unequivocally doing exactly what their fathers and mothers have taught them to do.

    Liked by 5 people

    • thedeti says:

      Elspeth

      I agree with everything you said in your comment above, so I’m not sure what your criticism is. I think the disconnect is we’re talking about two different things. You’re talking about a good and beautiful life, which is nothing at all like the life script ideal being sold to all young women, regardless of whether they actually have the wherewithal to attain it.

      You quoted the elites clause, but you didn’t quote what I put immediately before it which makes the clause clear:

      that the elites are selling to everyone a lifestyle and manner of living that works only for the elites. “Elites” being upper middle class, strong family background, college educated, employed earning good money, and usually white.”

      There is a big difference between the “life script” ideal; and the good and beautiful life.

      Life script: Affluence, prestige, status, large amounts of disposable income, fulfilling and highly compensated career, life-enriching cultural experiences, luxurious well appointed homes and cars, husband with equally highly compensated career to facilitate lifestyle and of decent physical appearance and compliant personality to facilitate egalitarian marriage, vacations of ever increasing expense and exotic locations, fantastic mindblowing sex EVERY time sex is had, completely free of conflict and drama, and one or two designer, high achiever children who will do everything you did as they grow in age and experience and who will inherit whatever estate you are able to leave them. All financed on credit if need be.

      Good and beautiful life: Finances are comfortable but not exorbitant or extravagant, debt reduced, paid down or eliminated if possible. Good job/career that pays well but does require hard work and “heavy lifting”, option to work part time or take some years off to raise children, decent but not-too-expensive vacations now and again, a comfortable home without too much flair, cars that work well, a husband she is sexually attracted to, loves, and gets along with, a good sex life that works for the both of them, personalities conducive to resolving and getting past inevitable conflict, and as many children God chooses to bless you with, who will be happy, healthy, well adjusted, and will find their own ways with your guidance. Financed with as little debt as possible.

      The point I was trying to make is that the elites are selling ALL women the “life script”. Including women who cannot attain it. In fact, MOST women will never attain the life script ideal. But, it’s being sold and pushed on women to such a degree and in such a widespread pervasive manner that (1) most women believe it to be attainable, and (2) nothing less will do.

      This is what’s causing so much disappointment in women today – because they can’t have the life script, they don’t have what it takes to achieve it. They feel like utter failures because they did not attain what they would never have been able to attain, because most women don’t have what it takes to attain it. As you and I both know, only a few women ever live the “life script” ideal up there. Most women are capable of attaining the good and beautiful life, if they are willing to do what it takes to get it. Most women live some form of the good and beautiful life, with some variations.

      The point is that “Good and Beautiful” isn’t nearly good enough for our current cultural zeitgeist. It used to be, but it isn’t anymore.

      Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        Interesting isnt it that under the “Life Script” ideal the husband is to be perfect in every way:

        –extremely professionally competent and highly compensated

        –fantastic in bed

        And yet

        –decent appearance

        –compliant personality

        No man can possibly be all of these things all of the time. Nevertheless, this is the expectation. This is what life script women demand of their men. It’s an impossible standard, and again leads to all kinds of disappointment and resentment.

        Liked by 3 people

      • thedeti says:

        I guess, to put a finer point on it: Current western society does not consider the Good and Beautiful Life to be “sticking the landing.”

        Liked by 3 people

      • Sharkly says:

        “No man can possibly be all of these things all of the time. Nevertheless, this is the expectation. This is what life script women demand of their men. It’s an impossible standard, and again leads to all kinds of disappointment and resentment.”

        Well, that is because every single whoring church teaches women the satanic doctrines of Feminist Discontentment, that girls are far more entitled and deserving than they really are, and that all men are far less glorious and honorable than they really are:
        https://laf443259520.wordpress.com/2020/05/14/feminist-discontentment/
        It shifts the female’s natural hypergamy, their desire to mate with a “god”, into a realm of impossibility, by stealing all men’s divine image and glory and transferring them to women instead, making her disappointment guaranteed.
        Turd-Flinging-Monkey said that, all women want a man they can look up to. And you don’t look up to an equal. So this stupid Feminist lie of sexual equality has to be shoved back down the memory hole, and all men must be given back their birthright, the matchless image and glory of the Most High God. And religious leaders are the worst about shitting on other men. Like the 450 Prophets of Baal, they all just need to be killed off in the name of God.

        James 3:8(KJV) But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. 9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. 10 Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.

        How can we claim to honor God, if we don’t honor His earthly representations? It is a treacherous thing to categorically slander men, who are the images of God.
        Matthew 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. 41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

        Liked by 1 person

  14. Oscar says:

    For all the talk of girls marrying in their teenage years, the reality is that the median age of marriage for women in the US never dipped below 20, and that was when a surplus of heroic, available young men returned from war and got college degrees, and good jobs at a rate previously unheard of.

    In 1890, the median marriage age for women was 22. What, exactly, is wrong with that?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Lexet Blog says:

      You have to remember those figures are mostly based on census records and are generally very unreliable. There were plenty of “off books,” “illegal” marriages in the 1800s, and back then, you also had common law marriage.

      Like

      • Oscar says:

        Hey, if you have more reliable data, let’s see it.

        Like

      • Lexet Blog says:

        There’s literally a lack of reliable data

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        Then we do the logical thing, and go with the most reliable data available to us, which is the data I presented.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Lexet Blog says:

        “Reliable” lol.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        “LOL” seems to be the standard response from people with no data to back their assertions.

        Like

      • Lexet Blog says:

        You want data on a lack of data. You are an incredible genius

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        Still no data to contradict the data provided. Imagine my surprise.

        Like

      • Lexet Blog says:

        Why don’t you look into how unreliable census data has been over the years, and imagine how bad it was 100 years ago.

        Then wake up to the fact that states don’t keep records in the same way as each other. Cities and counties within states don’t as well.

        Do you really think records from the late 1800’s are accurate? Why don’t you look up the Dawes rolls, to get an accurate census on the Native American population … oh wait, most of those records were destroyed by fire.

        Get the point, Sherlock?

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        While I side with Scott, Elspeth and Oscar about teen-girl marriage, I suspect Lexet is correct about off-the-book marriages being common. My 22 year old grandfather married my 15 year old grandmother (in West Virginia).

        Liked by 1 person

    • Oscar says:

      Why don’t you look into how unreliable census data has been over the years, and imagine how bad it was 100 years ago.

      It’s not my responsibility to support your assertions. It’s your responsibility to support your assertions. So far, you haven’t. That’s on you, not me.

      Get the point, Sherlock?

      Says the guy who thinks “LOL” is a clever response.

      Like

  15. redpillboomer says:

    “We are solidly Middle middle class. We live pretty well, but not extravagantly. We have to budget, and all that good stuff. But…so what? Husband and I enjoy one another and our family so much that there is no amount of money or “fabulousness” that would be worth this.”
    Well put!
    And these are the people that I’ve seen the happiest, middle class, maybe slightly upper middle, but content with what they have and who they are. They’re not trying to be someone they aren’t, or going into depression that they’ll never be one of ‘them,’ what’s now referred to as ‘high value men’ and women (read the 9’s, 9.5s and 10s). Most of us fall inside the big ‘bell’ of the bell-shaped curve. We have a society that focuses on the two ‘tails’ (4-6 standard deviations out from the mean), especially the right tail, and even more so the outliers of that tail (six standard deviations-Six Sigma). Our media focuses on those individuals and endlessly parades their accomplishments before our eyes (and their foibles too). Just look at any grocery store checkout stand full of magazines, do you see any ‘average’ people on those covers? Then look around the store, see any ‘uber exceptional’ people (the 9s, 9.5s and 10s) walking around? This is what creates a lot of the discontent in the ‘average folk’ that they’re not measuring up to, not ‘living the dream’ as they say. Think about the Manosphere tropes of women wanting it ALL in one guy-Let’s call him Mister Giga Chad: the ‘Six Sixes’ as it’s sometimes referred to–6+ feet tall w/ killer good looks, six pack abs, 6 inches plus in the pants, six figure salary, six-hundred horse power car (great wheels to ride around in), and ‘6000’ square foot home (an exaggerated figure)-i.e. real nice living arrangement (Bachelor pad or possibly a nice home). Our culture tells young women this is the standard and ideal, ‘average’ or slightly above average just doesn’t cut it anymore–until they’re in their 30s, and maybe not even then. You know, when I go to the gym, there are a lot of young men and women in there working out. I’d say I only see a few of the guys hitting today’s height, looks and physique ideal (standard now?), just two of the Six Sixes. Who knows what the other four Sixes are like in those guys. AND, AND we have no idea if the guy has any personality, moral character, charisma, etc. to go along with the height, looks and physique. I wouldn’t be surprised if some of the ‘average’ or ‘ slightly above average’ dudes in the gym aren’t running circles around the studly guys in four of the other Sixes (which are not readily assessable, i.e. observable to the eye in the gym), and the PCC department (personality, character and charisma). I look at those ‘Average’ and ‘Slightly above or above average’ guys and think, damn, they’re all invisible nowadays, and I was one of them 30 years ago! However, back then, things had not quite degenerated to the point in society that I felt invisible; no, I still occurred to myself as visible and relevant in the SMV/MMV. Dating/Mating standards and ideals are so ridiculously inflated in 21st Century America; maybe COVID will bring it down a notch or two as a result of the impact it has had on may peoples lifestyles. I’m not sure if the pandemic will have any long range effect on these ridiculous standards and ideals we have out there nowadays, but maybe that is one good thing that could come out of this shit show we’ve lived through called the year 2020, who knows?

    Liked by 2 people

    • lastmod says:

      RPB. You lost me with “four sixes” and PCC and other talk………..

      Most men today are deemed losers by women… yet… we still hear daily that “men just have to learn game / talk to women cause they don’t bite / be confident…

      All these standards AGAIN are set by women, and men as usual are swallowing it as truth. The ante is so upped now… IF I was younger man today I would probably kill myself. I was always “below” average back in my late teens. Let’s say a 3 or 4.

      On today’s scale with women, I would be a 3, probably a 2.

      Personality doesn’t matter according to game and all the other BS around it. Only athleticism, being funny, and having masculine pursuits. BTW, how many of you are rebuilding a 1964 Impala at home??? None I would guess. I call a wager that 99.9999% percent of all men in here cannot throw a football like Eli Manning or play 3rd base like Mike Schmidt. I’ll take a dump in my slacks right now if you really can.

      Like

  16. lastmod says:

    Scott Says: “Is there a 30 year old virgin at your church whom you would approve of marrying your daughter next year?”

    Thank you. You said it in the way I wanted to express… but couldn’t.

    Again… a tad bit “good enough for thee but not for me” tone of this forum concerning this matter.

    Like

    • Lexet Blog says:

      Everyone wants the best situation for themselves. They are the exception.

      This paradox of recognizing what has to happen, and refusing to act upon that belief is a trademark of the American middle class.

      On politics: they all want to separate and have war, but they all vote for their incumbent officials, and no one pops off a shot to start a war. Even rioters have limits.

      Like

  17. Farm Boy says:

    Meanwhile, protect your teenaged daughters

    Oddly enough, I have a recent post on that topic

    https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2020/12/14/integrated/

    Like

  18. feeriker says:

    @Lexet:

    For a father, you have to either promote an early marriage with someone who has an established economic footing, or teach your daughter to remain chaste while courting a younger guy who demonstrates potential, and who can accept a Lower standard of living until that time.

    I think we all need to start being realistic about the future long-term economic stability of ANY man living in the western world, be he young or old, married or single, Christian or not. If anyone has been paying any attention to the events of the past year, “economic stability” for everyone is going to be a very, VERY illusive goal for the foreseeable future, probably for the rest of our lives and our children’s lives, at a minimum. We’re all going to have to either adjust our expectations of what constitutes “economic success” (or “sustainability,” “viability,” or whatever other word you prefer to use here), or reassess the viability of marriage and family formation. I think I know which one of those two options God would have us choose. While Paul urged those not “burning with passion” to refrain from marrying and forming families in the dark times he saw ahead, I’m unaware of God urging His children as a whole to refrain from marrying and forming families in hard times. This seems to be another aspect of Western (particularly American) culture that has slowly corrupted the perception of God’s ways.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Lexet Blog says:

      Well, there are passages in the Latter half of the OT that refer to women being turned to sin, or being conquered by invaders, as judgment on Israel and Judah for their apostasy (referred to as whoredom).

      We are a society under judgment. The criteria to determine that (such as Romans) makes that clear

      Liked by 2 people

  19. Oscar says:

    Can a young man set himself up to support a family today? Yes, he can.

    Let’s do the math.

    An 18-year-old man, fresh out of high school, can start an electrician’s apprenticeship program, assuming he has the aptitude for it. My electrician friends tell me they’re desperate for drug-free people with a clean record and a good work ethic.

    The average electrician’s apprentice makes $17.53 / hour* in the USA (varies by city). Assuming he works full time, that’s $36,462 / year, not counting taxes, or overtime.

    At this point, he’s only 18 years old.

    It takes four years (give or take a year) to become a journeyman electrician, making $25.35 / hour* on average. Assuming he works full time, that’s $52,728 / year, not counting taxes, or overtime. And, electricians I know get a lot of overtime.

    Keep in mind, our hypothetical young man is now 24 years old, making at least $50K / year with zero debt. Here in Missouri, that’s pretty good money.

    If he’s been smart, lived with his parents, and saved up, he’s more than ready to marry a young woman, buy a little starter house, and start a family. Or, if his parents are like Scott, live in the barndominium apartment for a couple more years, and save up even more.

    Let’s keep going.

    In two more years, our enterprising young man can become a master electrician. Now he’s making an average of $31.58 / hour*. That’s $65,686 / year, not counting taxes or overtime.

    And he’s only 26.

    And, there are companies paying master electricians $55 / hour, which is $114,400 / year, not even counting overtime.

    So, can a young man make a good living today?

    Yes, he can.

    Oh, and by the way, all the electricians I know kept working through the “lockdowns”, because they’re “essential workers”.

    Quit choking on black pills, do the math with your kids, and advise them accordingly.

    *Salary averages from indeed.com.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Oscar says:

      I just realized I made a mistake. It takes 4 years for an apprentice to become a journeyman, so if he started at 18, he’d be a journeyman at 22, not 24.

      Master electrician takes another 2-4 years, so he’d still be a master electrician most likely at 26.

      Like

      • lastmod says:

        My father was a lifelong Union Carpenter and Joiner. It takes longer depending on: How much you give to the Union. Swear alligiance to the Democratic Party and play politics at work.

        My father didn’t become a “master carpenter” by the books until he was well into his forties, but in action he could run circles around the men who were already labeled this by the books. My dad held his own chart, and in the end had to be promoted and advanced because businesses who were contracting began to specifically ask for him to be the Foreman or they wouldn’t sign the contract for work to be done.

        He held to what was right in true in his heart over advancement, or office / shop politics or wages at this age or that age.

        Oscar is not counting of course down times in the economy. My father was out of work many times over the decades too. My father would take ANY job that the Union Hall offered in bad times….even if it was a day job or laborer for a few weeks (beneath his skills) because he believed a “job is a job”

        I asked him once why he did this “I’m an immigrant, I knew poverty and strife in Poland, a honest days work is just that. Too many in the Union won’t take ANY job that is supposedly beaneath them”

        He crossed picket lines in 1982, was smeared by Union leadership and fellow brothers, and after the economy picked up……he was still in HUGE demand. The Union couldn’t blacklist or blackball because HIS WORK was ten times superior to anyone elses in the region.

        A rare breed. Miss him more than ever. Also, making 17 to 20 bux an hour would not be good enough for most men with daughters in the Christian world. He needs to own a house, have the college fund maxed out for his children and be ready to be a “leader” by 20 or “he isn’t a real man, and is wasting his life”

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        Oscar is not counting of course down times in the economy.

        I’m also not counting up times in the economy. What’s your point?

        People of any education or job training can find themselves out of work temporarily. I’m an engineer. I lost my job in the oil industry when oil prices tanked. I was out of work for months. Then I got another job. What’s your point?

        You mentioned unions multiple times. You do realize that tradesmen don’t have to join the union, right? Especially now that most states are Right to Work states. What’s your point?

        Also, making 17 to 20 bux an hour would not be good enough for most men with daughters in the Christian world.

        $17-$20 / hour is what an apprentice makes. A journeyman makes about $55k / year on average, as I demonstrated above. A young man can be a journeyman by 22. From there, he can continue to get promoted, or start his own business, both of which lead to greater income.

        He needs to own a house, have the college fund maxed out for his children and be ready to be a “leader” by 20 or “he isn’t a real man, and is wasting his life”

        Perhaps you could take up your complaint with the specific men who specifically stated that is what they demand (if such men exist), as opposed to complaining to men who never stated anything of the sort.

        Like

  20. cameron232 says:

    RE: teen girls I agree with Elspeth, Scott and Oscar and even find the idea of getting with a just out of college girl weird – it’s weird when the person could be your biological child.

    At the same time, there may be a natural, biological tendency for men to prefer teenage not just because of “signs of youthful fertility” but because of “probability of virginity.”

    Men preferring even younger pre-teen girls (these men should be executed if they practice their preferences) may be a pathological extreme of a male tendency. Just like females who are attracted to serial killers are a pathological extreme of a female tendency.

    BTW, women use the sounding-like-a-very-young-girl thing on men all the time. When they flirt or are around a guy they are attracted to they do this baby-talk or lispy-voice thing to try to sound very young. Madonna did this in her rendition of “Santa Baby” I just heard on the radio – she sounded like a little girl with an Elmer Fudd speech impediment. And there’s that “sexy” Japanese or Catholic schoolgirl outfit thing that you see.

    Like

  21. Novaseeker says:

    On marriage ages, one has to be careful about the cultural assumptions, going both ways.

    In our culture it is surely true that teenagers, including female teenagers, are not socially and culturally raised to be ready to be married in their later teen years (15-18), which is probably why so many of the marriages that occur in this age range in our culture do not succeed. The families of origin, and the entire culture, do not foster a readiness for this emotionally and psychologically at these ages, currently, and so trying to force young marriage into that context is a bit, well, forced.

    At the same time, however, one must be very careful to avoid using absolute terms like “perversion” and the like when referring to the natural attraction, in a purely physical sense, that a heterosexual male feels for a post-pubescent female, regardless of her age. One can say that this is “culturally inappropriate”, and that is true — and certainly we culturally enforce this standard in our culture (it is not universal globally, and this is not merely a matter of “advanced societies”, either, as we can see from looking at Japan’s cultural assumptions in this specific area, which are notably and markedly different from our own). It is a very different matter to claim that this is “perverse”, however, given that perversion is something that is inherently unnatural, inherently deformed. The naturally occurring male physical attraction to post-pubescent females is not perverse — it is merely culturally inappropriate and forbidden, properly. in a culture where humans of that age are socialized as children and are not prepared, by their families or their cultiure, for relationships of that type with older people. Surely, St. Joseph himself was not a “pervert” for presumably being attracted enough to the almost certainly mid-teenaged Mary to become betrothed to her, despite being much older than she was. It was a naturally occurring attraction which, in that context, was not culturally inappropriate — it had nothing to do with perversion, one way or another.

    The distinction is important, because it is absolutely defamatory to claim that men who are in any way attracted to post-pubescent females who are under the current “legal age” in our culture are therefore “perverse” or “pedophiles”. Nothing could be further from the truth. These are natural and normal male attractions that we put a box around precisely because of the cultural climate we live in, and the fact that this climate, and the families living in it, are not preparing their offspring of this age to be married at this age, full stop. Not perversion, just culture.


    Which gets to a more fundamental point.

    At some level we are all compromised. There are compromises we choose to live with, based on the culture we live in, and where we personally draw the line in terms of compromises with it that we can live with while being faithful and still active members of this culture. This is one such area, because it markedly differs with past practice from hundreds of years ago, which suggests that it is not related to the faith, as such, that the acceptable marital age has moved up, but rather due to cultural exigencies, and Christians adapting to those in their habits of the whens and hows they managed the business of marrying off their daughters (and sons). While it’s a mistake, in my view, to suppose that the faith mandates marriage at the earliest possible physical age (there’s no reason to think that this is the case), it seems the exact same mistake to suppose that it mandates withholding from the same until a certain age, again, as a matter of faith. It comes down to how much we are of the world, how compromised we are with it, how different we are willing to be from it, and each of us makes our own decisions in these areas. I say that not to point fingers — I am personally no sort of “ultra” in these regards, not at all. But I do think we need to realize that we are all compromised by the culture, and we should resist the temptation to baptize or otherwise bless/sanctify our own reasoned compromises with the culture in which we live, rather than seeing them as just that — personal compromises that we personally judge as being appropriate, based on the culture in which we live and its broader standards, and how that fits into our own personal approach to living in the world but not of it, albeit ensconced in a particular time and place and its culture, including all of the norms of said culture. It is, it seems to me, a matter of drawing lines for practical reasons, and these lines will be intensely personal and practical — we should see them as such and not baptize them as something more than they are.

    Liked by 3 people

    • cameron232 says:

      There’s a lot of individual variation in how say a 16 year old looks. That Greta Thurnberg climate girl looked like a little kid. There are 16 year old girls that look like women.

      It’s socially inappropriate and I agree it seems creepy for an older man to look at a teen girl that way. Even an unmarried man. Even an especially woman-like teenage girl.

      But there’s a difference compared to a man who is interested in pre-pubsesence. This sort of man – there’s something broken about him – biologically, psychologically – something broken that I suspect can’t be fixed. Just like a person who’s ok with incest. Just like a man who’s into rape (they’ve done studies – there are guys that like that sort of thing). These men are abnormal, fundamentally not culturally. Normal men are disgusted by that sort of thing.

      Liked by 2 people

  22. Novaseeker says:

    It’s socially inappropriate and I agree it seems creepy for an older man to look at a teen girl that way.

    I would say it a bit differently. It’s normal for a heterosexual man to find a mature looking teen female attractive — it isn’t a question of “looking at her that way” — it’s just a visceral reaction to a stimulus that is the most primal that there is. It is socially inappropriate to act on it, to comment on it, to remark on it, to rhapsodize about it, to idealize it, to promote it and so on, because of our culture and its standards. But not the “looking at” — that’s the precise difference I was getting at. Men will always notice visually attractive females, whether they are 16, 30 or 50. It’s what happens, what is said, and so on, based on that which is where the lines are drawn it seems to me, not in the “looking at”.

    Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      I was taught by a priest (a married one not a celibate) that “the first look isn’t a sin” meaning a man can’t help notice attractive females, particulary in a time when they’re half dressed all the time. The statement implies that continuing to look (which I think encourages lust) is getting into sinful territory.

      My standard for internal behavior wrt to these sorts of things (I’m sure I don’t manage perfection) is “how would I feel if my wife did this?” It’s not a matter of whether or not you’re caught doing something innapropriate- we should strive to manage our thoughts not just our actions. We will fall short of the goal but we should affirm the standard.

      Like

    • cameron232 says:

      rereading your comment I think you intepreted “looking at” as noticing – so I think we are in aggrement.

      Like

  23. Pingback: On the Ethics of Teenage Marriage | Σ Frame

  24. Ed Hurst says:

    C’mon Jason, stop trolling. The Hebrew people were meant to be God’s revelation; they were a manifestation of His plan for all of humanity. They failed in many ways, and the prophets pointed out those failures. Their lack of criticism for anything related to marriages between adult men and teenaged girls was is conspicuous by absence, given all the other divine condemnations of other sexual practices.

    Liked by 2 people

  25. lastmod says:

    I’m not trolling Ed. You stated “God’s plan was for men around 30 to take a wife roughly half their age.” and I asked for Scripture about this. I never recalled that from my reading of the KJV (I know its a big book, and perhaps you could have corrected me)

    Then is it wasn’t God’s plan but “It’s a question of understanding known Hebrew social practices.”

    And per usual, anyone who doesn’t agree with you is “trolling” and doesn’t have divine insight to what “God really meant”

    Like

    • Ed Hurst says:

      No, it’s just your frame of reference. At least some of us commenting here are trying our best to approach important questions from a distinctly biblical point of view. That point of view is ancient Hebrew, where nit-picking over semantics is not an acceptable form of discussion. If ancient Israel personified God’s plan, then anything they did that didn’t get corrected must have been according to plan. How hard is that to understand? The frame of reference is not America, nor any other part of the West. A little intellectual depth goes a long way.

      Like

      • lastmod says:

        That point of view is ancient Hebrew, where nit-picking over semantics is not an acceptable form of discussion

        God told you this? Nitpicking? If a 35, 30, or 47 year old man in my church or “holiness gathering” was “looking at” my daughter in a way that made her or me uncomfortable……and don’t play this coy nonsense of subtle differences. We all know what this looks like.

        He would have the snot decked out of him. You, Scott, Sharkly would not say to your daughter “He thinks you’re hot, we should allow you to date or marry someone like thiat….did you know in the Hebrew cultural tradition……..”

        I call whale sh*t on this. You all wonder why christianity is viewed as “creepy” by a good much of society.

        Think about this dicussion

        Like

  26. Ed Hurst says:

    Oscar, I’m not trying to dodge your question. I started my Bible education in 1974, and frankly never heard anyone suggest anything different than Hebrew peasants marrying around age 30. This was usually referenced to economic modeling studies. That includes conversations with professors, seminary graduates, and other scholars from several different denominations. It showed up in the textbooks I collected over the years, but was forced to abandon at some point a couple of decades ago. I can’t give you a simple footnote.

    The issue of suppression is quite real. You may not have seen it. It is the reason I cannot point to a website where you’ll find someone echoing my assertion.

    Like

    • Oscar says:

      Okay. So, you have no supporting evidence for your assertion. Where does that leave me? I can’t reasonably take some random dude’s internet assertion’s as “historical fact” with zero supporting evidence. Would you?

      Like

      • Ed Hurst says:

        I’ve said it would be books and professors, class notes, etc. This is an online forum, and the proof is not available online. If I’m some random dude, so are you. Why should I care what you believe or don’t believe? I’m just trying to answer your question within the limits of the medium. Your rejection is meaningless to me.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        Why should I care what you believe or don’t believe?

        I don’t know. You cared enough to try to change my mind. Why’d you care that much?

        I’m just trying to answer your question within the limits of the medium. Your rejection is meaningless to me.

        It was meaningful enough to you that you took the time to respond to it.

        Like

  27. Pingback: Average age of first time sexual experience (data) and what this means for Christians | Σ Frame

  28. JPF says:

    In the west, 14-year-olds are children.

    Agreed. And this is foolish.
    Some females at age 16 are not sexually mature, physically. Some are sexually mature far younger.
    When I was in grade 7, most of us would have been about age 12. One of these 12-year olds was a woman who had breasts that were likely DD cup or bigger. Only a blind person or a liar would have categorized her as a “child”. Yes, most people in our culture lie. This does not make those lies truth.
    About grade 8, so age 13, I found one of the 13-year old women very hot. If I had been 17 instead of 13 myself, and had a decent start on a career, and also lived in a healthier culture, it would have been very much to her advantage to marry as a then-13 year old.
    But instead she lived in this culture. And she failed to finish school within the standard 12 years. Instead of being a failure in school, she could have been very successful as a wife and mother.
    But yeah, any man that wants to marry a 13- or 14-year old, sexually developed woman, and to provide for her, and to protect her, is a bad man.

    I suspect the wealth of the nation is related here. Only wealthy groups can afford paying a woman to continue to be an unproductive member of society. And despite whatever McJob she has, an unmarried woman is failing to live up to her potential; other than a few outlier exceptions who are dedicated to serving the Lord.

    Liked by 2 people

  29. Pingback: No Patriarchy for My Daughter!!! | Laughing at Feminism

  30. redpillboomer says:

    “…..before your daughter is 29.5 and still looking for her mythical man……” “Interesting isn’t it that under the “Life Script” ideal the husband is to be perfect in every way: Extremely professionally competent and highly compensated, fantastic in bed; and yet, decent appearance, compliant personality”
    I worked with a couple of thirty something females (32, 34) a few years back in a coaching situation when I still had my Blue Pill mindset. I was amazed, STUNNED might be a better word for it, when I saw their ‘lists’ for husband material. In my older age (fifty something), with all my life experiences and successes, I didn’t meet but more than 2/3rd’s of the criteria. I mentally ran my 30 year old self through the checklists and even then, when I was fully qualified for marriage and did end up getting married, I only met about half of what was on their lists. I thought to myself, “You ladies are going to be spending the rest of your lives without husbands because few, if any men (let alone men your age), can meet these ridiculously high standards.” Of course in the intervening years since taking the Red Pill, I’ve come to realize how prevalent this mindset is within our marriageable age American women. It’s not just a ‘manosphere trope.’ Certain buzz phrases have arisen to describe the phenomenon: “Where have all the good men gone?” “I’m not going to settle!” “I have standards!” etc.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Novaseeker says:

      The women’s buzz phrases are supported by men’s buzz phrases about other men as well, like “men just need to man up”, and “men are just pussies today”, and “the women are waiting for men to catch up” and so on, so there are plenty of men who are in the “where are all the good men gone” mindset, provided that it’s generally expressed mostly in the “why aren’t any of these men as good as I am” vein, which comes naturally to us as men in our competitive, hierarchical mindset.

      Liked by 2 people

  31. Pingback: 2020 Sigma Frame Performance Report | Σ Frame

  32. Pingback: The Addictive Nature of the Online Amateur Sex Industry | Σ Frame

  33. Pingback: The Train Wreck – Speculative causes, influences, and alternate outcomes | Σ Frame

  34. Pingback: The Centrality of Sex in Western Culture | Σ Frame

  35. Pingback: The Futility of Justifying the Crash Landing | Σ Frame

  36. Pingback: The Christian Marriage Dilemma | Σ Frame

  37. Pingback: The Demise of the Christian Life Script | Σ Frame

  38. Pingback: Archetypal Therapy and Innate Personality Traits | Σ Frame

  39. Pingback: Viewpoints on Man’s Confusion about How God Works in the Life of a Believer | Σ Frame

  40. Pingback: Commonalities of Successful Marriages | Σ Frame

  41. Pingback: Cultural Influences | Σ Frame

  42. Pingback: Sticking the Landing is for the Elite | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s