The Centrality of Sex in Western Culture

SEX, above all else!

Readership: All
Length: 3,000 words
Reading Time: 10 minutes

Introduction

In the aftermath of the “sexual revolution” of the 1960s-1970’s period, Western culture has assigned sex to be the central identifying factor of human flourishing. The issues which animate the gaping divisions of our culture are all sexual in nature, and the reconstruction of our cultural institutions during the same period — whether economic, familial, educational — have all been undertaken to enable a widespread sexual libertinism, even if the enjoyment of the same is often theoretical for many individuals.  This central emphasis on sex has grown steadily, and with increasing intensity and fervor, over the past several decades. Today it’s pretty much at ground zero — culturally viewed as the sine-qua-non centerpiece of all human flourishing.

  • Our most burning political and cultural disagreements are all about “sex” and issues relating to sex.
  • Sex is what people are trained by the culture to desire in and for themselves, from the inside out.
  • Sex lies at the center of the behaviors expected from peers in the second and third decade of life (HS, college, 20s, and even 30s for some).
  • Our expectations of courtship and marriage and even of adolescence are all molded by the idea that sexual satisfaction, and an “on-time, normal sexual developmental process” (which always involves sexual activity in adolescence or shortly thereafter) is the central element of human flourishing.
  • Our life scripts for the timing of critical life events are designed around accommodating plenty of sex with various partners prior to marriage.

Against this background, with all of its implications, the centrality of sex becomes the dominant theme of much of human life.

Of course, sex IS central to human life for biological reproduction and the inherent satisfaction of our desires for intimacy.  It always will be, and always has been.  But it has never been *culturally* centered like it is now, such that it crowds out other cultural, developmental and human priorities and thereby becomes a system of “adverse domination”, whereby everything is measured through sexuality and its impact on sexuality and sexual expression, either implicitly (most often) or, increasingly, explicitly through various means of cultural, educational and, ultimately, political advocacy. 

This deliberate and powerful cultural centering of sexuality serves to take a naturally strong thing — the power of sex — and put it on steroids in terms of its impact on the lives of individuals.  It becomes the dominant theme of life, instead of taking up its proper place as an important theme, like food is, but not the dominant theme to the exclusion of other, important themes in a balanced approach to life.

This shift in emphasis unfortunately doesn’t end when one “graduates” from the young set, because there are large industries, including beauty, cosmetics, medical, fitness, porn, and the celebrity class, that are all bringing sexuality and its related emphasis on “hotness” and “sexiness” forward in life, with many, many more “hot” women appearing now in the late 40s-50s range than ever before.  This trend will continue, so as to keep sex on the front burner in terms of how it is perceived in importance, throughout most of life, age-wise, in the decades ahead — to age levels where, in the past, this kind of sexual emphasis was simply either exceedingly rare if not totally absent. 

It’s high school forever and ever… and ever, it seems.  It never ends.

Your life, for the next …. 70 years!

The Way It Is Now – A Gynocentric Socio-Sexual/Marriage Marketplace

The system is pathological precisely because it places sexual satisfaction — and that means primarily the female sort, because the male sort is much easier to manage — at the highest level of social, cultural and personal importance.  This is a problem because women tend to be sexually fickle.  While the sexual desires of each sex, taken apart from the other, are antisocial in effect, the sexual aspects of the prior regime did not represent the vindication of male sexual priorities, but rather the vindication of social priorities by channeling sexuality towards children and the married life. That social system was replaced by a gynocentric one centered around female desire, which itself is based around women’s fickle and hypergamous sexual tendencies, which are not socially beneficial in the least. 

Women, as we know, divide men into roughly three groups sexually.

One group is the group with whom many women would engage sexually without a prior relationship, or even the hint of one, being in place — men who generate such a strong sexual desire, or lust, in many women that women are simply drawn to them sexually. Women will also have relationships with the men in this group, many of which end up rather dramatic and rocky due to the large degree of sexual attention these men get, but few will be able to have a truly successful long-term relationship with one of these men.

A second group contains the men with whom women will engage sexually in the context of established (or getting established) relationships that are based on compatibility, common interests and goals, and a host of other factors women find attractive for long-term pairing. Women do fall in love with these men, but the degree of pure sexual lust is lower than it is for men in the first group, generally (in some cases, much lower). What these men do not provide in the grist for sexual lust, they provide in various kinds of support — emotional, paternal, mentoring, and financial. The sexuality in these pairings, over the long-term, often is mostly comprised of “maintenance sex” or “intimacy sex”, but this isn’t very satisfying to women over the long-term, and in our culture, with its radical centering of sexuality as the core of human flourishing, it often fails as the basis of a successful marriage.

The third, and final, group contains the men who simply do not register sexually or romantically at all, and are often described in the ‘sphere as being “invisible” to women. These are recognized as males, or perhaps as men in a theoretical sense, but do not register sexually as men, but more as a greyed out/neuter gender to women. Women depend on these men in various capacities indirectly due to their participation in the economy in various support and utility roles, but this of course is very different from individual attraction and interest. Most women, if pressed, will claim that “some woman is for him somewhere, but he is just overlooking them”, when in many cases they know, interiorly, that this is not the case, but the reality is that life is not fair and that there are losers of both sexes and so on. That is certainly true, and always has been, but …. there are way more male losers now than there have ever been in history, because of the hypergamous skew in a female-centric mating system, and their numbers are seemingly growing generationally.

A key idea is that women expect and demand different things from each type of man.

From men in Group One, they expect access to exciting (even if actually unsatisfying at times) sex, emotional roller coaster rides and the like. From men in Group Two, they expect egalitarian partnership, respect, support and emotional intimacy, without drama. From men in Group Three, women expect them to stay away, period, if they don’t want them to get HR called on them.

Women demand each from each, according to his “type” in the woman’s mind.

As Jim says in The Three Magic Words (2020 August 7), women’s ideal world is a world of women having unlimited access to loving, supportive, beta husbands/fathers AND unlimited access to hot, strong, dominant monkey sex with physically or socially dominant men.  BOTH at the same time, not both in the same man, because women know that both in the same man is exceptionally rare.  But since most women can’t pull this off (i.e., they can’t juggle one man of each type at the same time), we instead get the defect/defect or cooperate/defect models being deployed. (Jim’s post on this, linked in this paragraph, is essential reading for understanding these forms of relationship style, because they are dominant in our culture currently.)

Jim also states, quite accurately, that there are almost no men that can balance the alpha and beta roles successfully, either before or after marriage.  The few men who can be both are the rare exceptions, because they must be both in a way that is credible to a specific woman. Women’s definition of credible is weighed heavily towards the sexual authority line of men, while the support/intimacy traits are merely an afterthought. Scoring well in the sexual authority area typically requires that a man has already proved himself to be credible to other specific women (pre-selection), and this necessarily requires a long list of pre-marital sexual conquests.  Moreover, it should be obvious that the man is the first kind of man described above, those for whom women will not impose rules for sex — that means he has broad sexual authority with women generally, and is in control, and therefore is the kind of man they want the dominant monkey sex from, and not the second kind of man who has to trade something (negotiate) for sex.   Thus, the nature of the beast requires that the man’s history should involve “conquests” and not only girlfriends. 

Either way though, attracting and/or retaining a woman for or in a marriage in our culture today requires a very strong emphasis by the man on keeping her well and truly properly banged silly — a requirement which was never in the course of history expected of men as a requirement to avoid punitive divorce, and one which most married men will NOT be able to satisfy for the reason I set forth above — that is, most men are not the kind of men that women want this from.

Case Study: My Own Marriage

My own marriage had similar features, albeit being different in a million small details from any other marriage situation. 

I had a very low N when I met my ex, and she was N=0.  We had all kinds of non-intercourse sexual interactions before we married, but never all the way, and always restrained.  In part that was Catholic upbringing (we weren’t avid Mass goers when we met, but the upbringing rubs off) which led us both to place a different value on sex (compared to the wider culture), and to have a visceral negative reaction to sex outside of committed situations.  We came close to sex a few times during the engagement but at that point it was more of a religious matter to avoid it because we had gone back to church by then.

Anyway, we never ended up having great sex in the marriage.  Chemistry was not good when it came to actual sex (which was surprising given our own history). Libidos were not matched and “sexual styles“, for lack of a better word, were divergent.  Desires seemed to ebb and flow on different schedules, and on different wavelengths.  We tried various things to make the sex work better, and it just didn’t happen.  My ex was also high libido, but she had specific sexual desires which were different from mine, while also having an array of limits and strictures despite being high libido. 

We also preferred sex at different times of the day, when our energy levels were different, and this was a big problem. (My high energy time was her low energy time and vice versa.) All of these issues could have surfaced and been vetted had we actually had sex before marriage, and if we had done that, we probably would have not gotten married after all because we were a bad match sexually, and in this culture people simply do not marry someone under those conditions if they are aware of it before marrying.  We were both very intellectual, so I think we each figured we could work it out somehow, but sex doesn’t work that way — it has its own rules and if you don’t really fit viscerally, your sexual satisfaction with that person will be subject to a “cap”, as it were, beyond which it will not go.

In any case, I am fairly sure that a marriage with the kind of sex that mine had was a marriage that didn’t end in divorce prior to 1970. It was the kind of situation people muddled through. But in our culture where sex is centered in an extreme way, it is simply very hard to keep a marriage together in that kind of situation — the pressures are too great, especially on the woman (because poor sexual satisfaction for women is seen as a telltale sign of a “bad kind of old fashioned marriage”, in the eyes of most everyone).

Prioritizing Sex upsets the MMP – and Marriage!

On the other hand, however, in this imbalanced culture, with its overemphasis on sex, we will of course struggle ourselves to find mates if we choose to personally de-prioritize sex.  That goes without saying, or it should. It works to impede getting a woman to want to be with you.

I experienced the same thing as Jack did — when I was chaste, women sensed it, did not like it, and backed off. My general lack of interest in pre-marital sex cost me several relationships in my early 20s.  Women want to kick the tires sexually as much as men before they select a man as a mate — again, because sex and sexual satisfaction are at the core of human flourishing today, and, for women specifically, one of the main points of feminism was to increase women’s sexual satisfaction by allowing them to pick mates based on sexual satisfaction, desire, and prowess, rather than economic need and other situational/contextual factors.

This isn’t often spoken of openly, because it doesn’t need to be — women “just get it” about the liberal sexuality contained in feminism, because it is visceral for them. Female sexual desire and its vindication lies at the very heart of the feminist enterprise, full stop, and this is so obvious to women in a visceral sense that it doesn’t need to be stated openly — and men’s cluelessness about it doesn’t change that reality.

As Jack reported earlier, the average age of first time sex is getting lower, and the average age of first time marriage is getting higher. One factor contributing to these trends is the reality that women want and expect rather satisfying sex today. To make matters more difficult, there is an element of fantasy which people find difficult to part with, especially women.

The whole argument for the “Test Drive” is based on the prioritization of sex in the relationship. Sex is, by far, the most important thing, so it’s imperative that they get this right – at any cost.

If they don’t realize this before marriage, they invariably realize this afterwards. There are so many women who get unhappy in their marriages due to sex, even though they never insisted on having a porn star sex life prior to getting married, only later on decided that they wanted to have much better sex in their marriages.

Case Study: Nikole Mitchell

In the scenario where a woman doesn’t realize her incredible expectations for sex until after marriage, we find that “success” isn’t only about attracting a woman up front, vetting properly, and getting into marriage.

This is what happened in the Mitchell’s marriage, to some extent.  Nikole (W from last month’s series) wanted better sex than John (H) was providing, and that in itself was a 180° turn for her.  She talks in a few places about how she became more aware of her body and her needs and desires and so on, and as she let go of formal Christianity, she embraced her sexual desires more fully.  But the key is this was a change from what she was when she got married. According to her husband, she had a mainstream sexual history, and was rebellious as a teenager, but she wasn’t promiscuous.  She claims that she never had an orgasm until she masturbated herself later in her marriage and that she never had an orgasm with a partner until after her separation.  Certainly sexual attraction would have played a role in Nikole’s choice of a husband, without question, but it was only later on that she adapted the cultural norm of centering her life around her sexual satisfaction and pleasure. It seems likely to me that this led her to proceed to become dissatisfied with her marriage over time, as normally happens, and potentially unattracted to her husband. And eventually she left the marriage to pursue a new career which she found sexually exciting, as well as lucrative.

Conclusions

The kind of sex in marriage that almost all of our grandparents, and by extension almost all married humans, had until only a few decades before, is no longer generally acceptable now that sexual satisfaction is at the core of human flourishing, culturally, in a way it never was.

This generally lower level of “sexual satisfaction” in the past was much less of a problem because throughout history we did not have a culture that placed human sexual satisfaction at the center of its definition of human flourishing.  Today we do, so what was tolerable for much of human history is now intolerable.

My specific point here is that even if you do “save yourself” prior to marriage and end up finding another low or no N woman, it does not at all mean that the problem of sexual satisfaction will not come up in your marriage, and blow it up. 

For some (most) women, it makes them uninterested at the outset, whereas for others they will only become dissatisfied and uninterested later on, during the marriage — but the common theme is that eventually, given, again, the central emphasis our culture places on sexual satisfaction (especially for women — our own satisfaction is much easier to attain), if the man isn’t pounding the woman how she likes, when she likes, as much as she likes, and as violently as she likes, rejection will happen. Whether or not you are married makes no difference at all, unfortunately.

Related

This entry was posted in Choosing a Partner or Spouse, Courtship and Marriage, Culture Wars, Desire, Desire, Passion, Determination, Discernment, Wisdom, Divorce, Female Power, Feminism, Freedom, Personal Liberty, Holding Frame, Hypergamy, Purpose, Relationships, Sanctification & Defilement, Self-Concept, Sexual Authority, SMV/MMV, Society, Vetting Women. Bookmark the permalink.

193 Responses to The Centrality of Sex in Western Culture

  1. cameron232 says:

    Good post – I guess the question is: how do we reproduce the conditions where sex isn’t the center of human life? Short of economic collapse/return harsh conditions, I’d say keep your children isolated from the popular culture and public schools as much as possible.

    “BOTH at the same time, not both in the same man, because women know that both in the same man is exceptionally rare. “

    I think women learn this eventually (that it’s rare in one man). But it seems like young women often believe/hope the Alpha @$$hole secretly has a heart of gold, that only she can bring out in him (‘cause, you know, she’s so unique!!). After all, they often marry and/or have kids with the Alpha @$$hole. She only gets it after the 3rd or 4th time that he leaves her for another woman.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Lexet Blog says:

      I don’t think we can. Marketing and corporations make too much money off of it.

      Even rap, which used to be based and red pilled, stopped producing lyrics like these a long time ago :

      “Don’t f___ with her, her a— is average
      Only f__ with the ones with the whole package
      Who gives a f__ if yo’ a__ look good
      If yo’ a— can’t cook good, that’s on the hood (that’s on the hood)
      Fine bi____, you s___ out of luck
      ‘Cause I’m prolly gon’ eat more than I f—- (more than I f—-)
      You got do it all, not just send them all
      Cook and cleaning, love a ni—— s—- drawers
      Naw, I’ll keep you flossin up at Ready Tellers
      The kinda s___that make them other b____s jealous”

      Ice cube.

      “They get hated on in eighty songs and exaggerate it all so much
      They make it all up, there’s no such thing
      Like a female with good looks who cooks and cleans”

      Eminem.

      Jokes aside, our technological innovation led to a society where the only need for the opposite sex is for sex

      Liked by 3 people

      • SFC Ton says:

        Goes back to my leave america deal.

        There are much less toxic places in the world. Things here will not go back to right for generations, mayne not even then

        Liked by 3 people

  2. Oscar says:

    This generally lower level of “sexual satisfaction” in the past was much less of a problem because throughout history we did not have a culture that placed human sexual satisfaction at the center of its definition of human flourishing.

    That’s false. Have you ever heard the saying, “women are for babies, boys are for pleasure”?

    I have. In Muslim countries. Muslim men are absolutely disgusting (see the revolting “Dubai porta potties”).

    Western men were equally disgusting, before they became Christians. Ever heard the term catamite? It’s a mispronunciation of the name Ganymede. In Greek mythology, Ganymede was a young Trojan boy that Zeus “fell in love” with, took to Olympus, made an immortal (which meant he’d never age), and kept as his cup bearer, and boy toy.

    What one worships, one will become like. Greek and Roman men used to keep young boys (catamites), whom they would castrate to prevent them from becoming masculine, and use to satisfy their sexual urges (which their wives could not satisfy), because they “placed human sexual satisfaction at the center of their definition of human flourishing”.

    And there was plenty of lezbo sex, too.

    Noe of this is new. See Romans 1. Our culture is just going back to its pagan roots, because it abandoned its Christian roots.

    Liked by 2 people

    • cameron232 says:

      @Oscar,

      With respect, I think what he wrote is generally true for most people simply because for the vast majority of humanity (e.g. my European and American ancestors) life was very harsh. Not because they were all virtuous (as you point out they weren’t).

      They didn’t have the “luxury” of placing sex at the center of society.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        Cameron,

        That depends on how far back you go. Every pagan culture – every single one, without exception – has gods and/or goddesses of sex. That’s not a coincidence.

        Think about the word culture.

        The root word is the Latin word cultus, which means “a system of worship”. In other words, worship is central to culture. A culture that places sex at the center of worship – as pagans do – places sex at the center of culture.

        Go back and read Romans 1 and Leviticus 18. Why do you think the Holy Spirit felt the need to inspire those two chapters? Now, do a word search for Asherah, and Ashtoreth – a pagan goddess of sex – in the Bible. How many times does it appear, in how many books and chapters? Why do you think that is?

        Liked by 1 person

    • Novaseeker says:

      I will grant that pagan cultures were highly sexualized. I would rephrase my point as being that the lack of sexual satisfaction on the part of either spouse as a valid reason to dissolve a marriage does not appear until our times — it is new, and it has having a devastating effect.

      The Roman paterfamilias was buggering his catamite, and also using his other slaves for sex, typically, but the core relationship with the wife was never seen as being based on sexual satisfaction, and so the lack thereof was not a valid reason for upsetting the marriage. This has been changed, and not to the way it was in pagan times, when the paterfamilias had the status that he had in the Roman family — it was changed into a form that did not exist also in Greco-Roman times.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        It’s true, for example, that Rome eventually adopted a form of no-fault divorce, but because of the entire social structure, there was not the cultural expectation and pressure inside marriages relating to marital sexual satisfaction being a critical driver of this — and there is no historical evidence that it was. There were likely some Roman aristocratic women who did precisely that, but this did not create a culture in Rome that emphasized sexual satisfaction in marriage — if anything the high degree of tolerance for extra-marital sexual activity for married persons, especially for the paterfamilias (which is contrasted with today, where such activity remains highly scorned socially especially when engaged in by men) would indicate that it was expected that to some degree the marriage would not provide the degree and kind of mutual sexual satisfaction that is expected in many circles today.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Oscar says:

        the core relationship with the wife was never seen as being based on sexual satisfaction

        I can agree with that, but not with…

        and so the lack thereof was not a valid reason for upsetting the marriage.

        If screwing everything with or without a pulse is not “upsetting the marriage”, then what is, in your opinion?

        Like

  3. Novaseeker says:

    If screwing everything with or without a pulse is not “upsetting the marriage”, then what is, in your opinion?

    By “upsetting the marriage” I meant divorce. I should have been more clear. It was not viewed socially as a justification for divorce.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. redpillboomer says:

    “My general lack of interest in pre-marital sex cost me several relationships in my early 20s. Women want to kick the tires sexually as much as men before they select a man as a mate — again, because sex and sexual satisfaction are at the core of human flourishing today, and, for women specifically, one of the main points of feminism was to increase women’s sexual satisfaction by allowing them to pick mates based on sexual satisfaction, desire, and prowess, rather than economic need and other situational/contextual factors.”
    This is a lesson I had to learn, actually re-learn. In my early twenties, I had several girls, STR (GF) and ONS. I realized early on, the females expected me to make a move relatively early, by second or third date at the latest, if we were to go on to a gf/STR type relationship. Yes, they did the pretense of putting up token resistance with their words and hands (moving mine away a couple of times as I attempted to fondle them). I learned early on that this resistance was to maintain the pretense of being a ‘good girl,’ i.e. not appearing too easy. Looking back, all of them put up some sort of token resistance to my sexual advances, but before long the resistance faded as the kissing and petting got really hot and heavy and my hand/fingers worked their way into her panties; not too long after, the clothes came off. The party girl/barfly slut expected you to make your advance right away once you were alone with her. After some quick heavy kissing, more often than not she would be taking my clothes off for me while I returned the favor. THEN, I became a Christian. I backed off all of it to learn about God and grow spiritually. Eventually, I wanted a Christian girlfriend really badly. I figured these were the truly good girls and they’d want the nice guy approach, dates, romance, flowers, etc. So, that’s what I tried. Before long, I noticed that third or fourth date didn’t happen, she’d lost interest and had some excuse for not seeing me again. Couldn’t figure out why. So I withdrew from the dating scene to lick my wounds and grow some more in my faith and career. I guess I went MGTOW for two or three years before the acronym was ever invented. When I came back to the Christian dating scene in my late twenties, I employed the lessons of my young twenties, but I’d stop short of intercourse to maintain some sense of ‘righteousness before God.’ And yes, I found the Christian women to be almost identical to the secular women of my early twenties; usually by the third date, heavy kissing and petting, and I could tell they wanted me to take them all the way. So, the point of all this, yes, what you wrote about in this post, I experienced. It is a sex first priority culture, not a traditional courting/marriage culture anymore, even the Christian girls are part of it too. My future wife btw was one that was ready to do it all when we dated just to keep me. She related to me later, that her fear was the OTHER Christian girl I had been dating, and that I was in the process of breaking it off with, would give me everything sexually and she’d lose out to her. My future/eventual wife related to me she was willing to ‘out fuck’ the other girl if she’d had to. Funny thing was, I wasn’t doing the other girl at the time, just making out heavily. But to your original point, YES, this is exactly what goes on when they are battling over a ‘Group 1 guy.’ I think I was borderline between the Groups 1 and 2, but in their eyes, I guess I was a 1 guy because I now had significant status and resources building up in my career endeavors, and was handsome and fairly well built (not a giga chad or anything like that, but pretty good overall from my workouts in the gym).

    Liked by 2 people

    • Joe2 says:

      And yes, I found the Christian women to be almost identical to the secular women of my early twenties;…

      I found that Christian women can have some very strange / unusual ideas about sex. It’s fortunate they made their ideas known at the outset.

      Christian woman #1 was truly a good girl, no hanky-panky before marriage. After marriage, she said that we’ll have our fun for six months and then start a family. And after we start a family then what happens to sex? That’s it, zip, nada, none – we live like brother and sister.

      Christian woman #2 looked prim and proper. Before marriage no sex. After marriage she said she would never deny me sex, but her participation would be strictly passive and I should never expect her to touch me in a sexual way. Thus, having sex with her would be like having sex with a blow-up doll.

      I think Christianity provides an excellent opportunity for women to appear virtuous when in reality it serves as a cover for some sexual hang-up or aberration.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. thedeti says:

    As I was trying to think of something pithy and meaningful to respond in support of this meaty post, I have two things. The first is that the current state of affairs underscores that, at bottom, sexual relationships are about power. (I mean sexual relationships in the broadest sense here, in every way in which men and women, and individual men and individual women, relate to each other, individually and en masse.)

    Roissy’s maxim holds true: For one sex to realize its sexual imperatives, the other sex must yield. If one sex “wins”, the other “loses”.

    Before our last sexual revolution, men were the “winners”. This was enforced by restricting women- restricting choice, restricting their extramarital sexual behavior, regulating their independent interactions with society. Dad and male family members must endorse and approve her choices. Men were restricted too, but not as much or as severely as women were. Men won, women “lost”.

    Of course, women did not like that, so now women’s power in every sense of the word has been brought on par with men. That’s not just in professional life. It’s everything – economic, cultural, social, religious, and legal. It is like this in interpersonal, one on one relationships – women are men’s equals in every significant way. It’s at the granular level down to how men and women relate to each other everywhere and in all circumstances: acquaintances, coworkers, churchgoers, social friends, everything. Men don’t have any power that women do not also have.

    This isn’t really natural for men. Men naturally gravitate toward being in charge of and controlling places, things, and situations. We are commanded to be responsible. To be responsible, you must have authority. To exercise authority you have to be in charge – you control it, you take care of it, you direct its course, you determine its use and disposal. Well, men really can’t do that anymore if every decision they make has to be second guessed, checked, examined, and tacitly approved, by a woman somewhere – be that his mother, his wife, his coworkers, his teacher, his pastor, or some other woman near him.

    Men also naturally go out and conquer – we master ourselves and our surroundings. This allows men to then go out and earn, and take, individually or as part of a tribe. We take (earn) jobs, whereby we take (earn) money, property, and, yes, women. We use and possess that which we take, and use it to gain influence, dominion, and more of what we want, whatever that is.

    It is natural for men to do this. The male social imperative is to WIN – to defeat other men. To join tribes and help your tribe to defeat other tribes, and take their money, land, stuff, and women. This is natural. It is in every man. Every man wants to win. He wants to get money, land, stuff, and women, and the way you do that is to WIN. He wants that so that what he “wins” is HIS. He takes them. They now belong to him, to do with as he pleases.

    This is what Jim was talking about with “You Are Mine” in relation to a woman. A man wants to take a woman and make her his own. She will “belong” to him. Not in the sense of slave ownership, but of grave responsibility. You don’t get to have a woman unless you have what it takes to keep her. You have to be strong. You have to have money. You have to be able to keep others away that might try to take her. You are fully personally responsible for her and her children. She is his by her choice. His “ownership” of her is loving caring stewardship and lordship. She is subject to him, but he takes excellent care of her through protection and provision. In return, she gives herself to him and stays willingly. He “takes” her, but she willingly gives herself in return.

    Men will gladly take on this responsibility, so long as he has the concomitant authority to carry out that responsibility. That means she has to do what he says on the “big stuff”. That means he decides the overall course of the relationship. That means his word is final, to her and the children, and cannot be questioned unless laws are being broken.

    Now? Men can’t “own” anything. Men cannot take any “ownership” interest over anything in their lives. Certainly, most men have been deemed unsuitable to “own” or have a woman. Even if he marries her, he cannot claim her as his own. He cannot expect her to remain faithful to him. He lives under the threatpoint that his failure to do it the way she wants will result in a woman’s taking what he has from him.

    His authority and ability to “own” either has been stripped from men, or men are required to share it with women, or a woman (his wife), who acts as a court of review to affirm, modify, or reverse his decisions. The punishment for “contempt” of “court” is no sex, and divorce rape. Men cannot take ownership or authority over anything. However, it has been set up so that men are still responsible, mostly for accumulating resources and then turning them over to a woman or women. Women don’t mind being “owned” so long as the man doing the “owning” is capable enough, rich enough, AND sexy enough to justify her surrendering almost all of her power to him.

    It’s just that most men don’t meet her stratospheric standards. Most men never have. But she still had to give it up to whomever married her because that was the price of getting to be called “wife”.

    Not anymore.

    All this has had the unintended effect, I think, of setting men adrift. It is natural for men to be in charge. It is natural for men to own what they have. Now that they cannot do that – they have no power – men don’t know how to act or conduct themselves. Men don’t know what to do with themselves. Of course, the top 20% of men can still act like this and take “ownership”. The bottom 80% cannot. They have tried egalitarian. They have tried submitting. Women don’t like those things. They have tried acting like top 20% men, and that results in them getting arrested, falsely accused of rape, accused of sexual harassment, job loss, accusations of marital rape, and divorce rape. Women stand by and complain about the situation they created, and demand that bottom 80% men fix it by waiting until they’re in their late 30s to get an “egalitarian” “complementarian” marriage.

    Men are just now figuring out what to do. Their solutions have been to either (1) avoid marriage entirely, give up on wife and family, and settle for owning inanimate objects that don’t demand the right to act as an appellate court over their decisions; (2) learn game and have sex with many women while owning as little money and things as possible; and (3) a blend of (1) and (2) calibrated to their needs. (And women STILL don’t like any of these things.)

    I am not sure how to end this, other than to say the story of man and woman is one of constantly shifting power, and power struggles. Right now, women are “winning” (and ironically, when they “win”, everyone loses).

    Liked by 4 people

    • thedeti says:

      I really think everyone believed that men would just keep doing what they had been doing before the sexual revolution – working, making money, marrying women, and making and supporting families – only that men would be sharing their authority and responsibility, and even giving up some of it, to relieve them of it. Everyone really believed men would just wait for their turns.

      Men gave up much of their authority, I think out of a misguided sense of love – because the women, whom they loved, said that that’s what they wanted. So if your woman, whom you love, tells you she wants something, you give it to her or get it for her, for no reason other than you love her (and you assume she respects you). Turns out that whenever you tell a woman “yes” to everything, she loses respect for you. Why? Because she no longer has to submit to your authority. She is now her own authority – because you gave all of it to her.

      So, now, women stand around with all this power and authority that most of them don’t know how to use, and found out they really don’t want, and wail and whine about the absence of “Good Men”.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Oscar says:

        Men gave up much of their authority, I think out of a misguided sense of love – because the women, whom they loved, said that that’s what they wanted.

        Where have I read that before? Couldn’t be Genesis 3, could it?

        Liked by 3 people

    • Oscar says:

      Roissy’s maxim holds true: For one sex to realize its sexual imperatives, the other sex must yield. If one sex “wins”, the other “loses”.

      By contrast, when both sexes submit to God’s imperative, both sexes win.

      Liked by 3 people

      • thedeti says:

        True. Except that even Christian women are in and of the world now. Christian women use the power dynamic to their maximum advantage.

        Liked by 2 people

    • SFC Ton says:

      Life is a 0 sum game

      Like

    • cameron232 says:

      @thdeti,

      “Before our last sexual revolution, men were the “winners”.

      I assume by winners you mean what the sexes typically want. Under patriarchy women didn’t get what they naturally wanted (i.e. their ideal) so not “winners.”

      I think early/mid twentieth century Patriarchy (which was pretty mild Patriarchy) produced an equitable (on average) system, at least based on objective standards of equity where an average man could expect and lifelong bond with an average woman and vice versa. You married more or less your equal at a fairly young age and didn’t/couldn’t trade up.

      “women are men’s equals in every significant way.”

      Better really. If you watched network TV you’d realize that a 50-something, overweight, type-2 diabetes black woman (Queen Latifah) can beat the sh_t out of male criminals.

      Like

  6. Elspeth says:

    I agree about restructuring of culture so that sexual desire is at the core of how we measure satisfaction in life. You’re 100% and knocked that part out of the park.

    Not buying what you’re selling, however, when you assert that sexual issues can’t be worked out. I know form experience (after kids threw a real monkey wrench into our individual circadian rhythms and chronotypes), that where there is a will, there is a way. When you want to make it happen, you figure out how to find that bridge between your mismatched energy level clocks, sleep imbalances, etc. You just do.

    I think one of the major reasons that couples don’t pull out all the stops, communicate uninhibited, and get creative about finding their sweet spot is that there are other things going on in the relationship that go beyond whatever sexual compatibility issues they may be having.

    We have learned over the years from talking to couples that -barring genuine medical problems- that by the time the sex thing has gotten to be a major deal, there are 100 other little cuts causing the relationship to bleed out. Conversely, the motivation to recapture the passion is driven by the fact that the relationship is good, and it’s totally worth it to *Benadryl a baby, wait for them to fall asleep and go for it at 4 in the afternoon so you can sleep at 10.

    Not advocating that. Just using it as an example.

    Like

  7. thedeti says:

    The second point I have is that the sexual revolution has laid bare women’s depravity and inability to handle the power they were mistakenly given. Allowing a young woman unfettered use of her sexual power is like giving a foaming at the mouth radical the keycodes for nuclear warhead launches. But that is what we’ve done. We have seen in real time how women choose when left to their own devices.

    First, they have sex with the sexiest men they can find. They claim they just want to be wives and mothers, but that is for “someday” because they really do believe hot sexy men will always be around to wife them up when it’s time for that. They believe this because from ages 16-25, all they can see are hot sexy men everywhere. The carousel is pervasive and permissive enough that everyone gets a free ride. Almost all women take at least one or two spins to try out a pretty horsie, realizing only afterwards that she can’t take the horsie home with her. The diehards keep trying, though. Or, they give up and just decide to enjoy the ride until their tokens are used up or they get kicked off.

    After they get kicked off, or, more commonly, decide they don’t like the carousel, they start looking at all the other men they know. Friends, friends of friends, coworkers, guys they go to church with, guys they know from the neighborhood, school acquaintances, men they meet just going through life. Most of them are hopelessly unattractive to her. She is perplexed that all the hot sexy men are either affixed to the carousel, or are in a long term relationship. Having ramped up her taste for alpha men, these lesser beta men just will not do. But she has to pick one, or stay single. Most women pick one.

    That used to be “good enough”. What’s different now is that women have to do all this alone, and with no help or perspective from others. They do it this way because their mothers did it this way. (I know this because I grew up with and went to school with their mothers.) Their mothers gave them almost no help at all. Their fathers were not even around to do anything. Or if their fathers were around, their mothers neutered them. Even if the fathers disapprove, the opinion is advisory only – father can withhold only his blessing. He has no right to forbid anything.

    What’s also different now is women’s skewed perspectives on what they expect from sex, sexuality, and marriage because of their “AF” phases. Women get insanely distorted pictures of what sex is really like. Men are criticized for thinking that PornHub is reality and “Deep Throat” is a documentary. Well, women’s experiences cause them to think smut books are reality, 50 Shades of Grey is a documentary based on a nonfiction book, and SeekingArrangements is a shopping website. You just go to Match or POF or OKCupid and pick out the man you want from The Man Store. And once you do, he will be Perfect In Every Way. Off the Rack, pret a porter. This leads women to bitter disappointment and later divorce, or simply tolerating a marriage that doesn’t work.

    It is primarily because of young women developing skewed and distorted notions of what sex and a sex life are really like. It is a result of us, society, allowing inexperienced and immature girls to use a dangerous tool that has immense power and force and that can maim you for life or kill you if you don’t know what you’re doing. And most of them have no idea what they’re doing.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Oscar says:

      The second point I have is that the sexual revolution has laid bare women’s depravity and inability to handle the power they were mistakenly given.

      To be fair, if I’d had that kind of power at 17, I’d have been a nightmare. Also, who gave young women sexual power is God. Fathers, mothers, and the older women of the church are supposed to bridle that power. The problem is that – for the most part – they stopped doing their job.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        I agree that people have fallen down on the job, but part of what God gave women were natural consequences of sex that tended, generally, to tamp down women’s behavior. Never perfectly (shotgun weddings etc), but to a large degree there was a natural incentive not to abuse the sexual power. Women were vulnerable to getting pregnant, loverboy running off, and her life being ruined. That’s how God designed it. That made it easier to enforce, because women themselves feared the God-given consequence — again, not always, and not perfectly, but enough to make for a social order.

        That was taken away, more or less fully, and the consequences for sex were made fully opt-in for women. That, more than anything else, changed everyone’s power to influence women’s sexual decisions. Taken together with women’s economic emancipation, which happened around the same time, and that power became nearly zero.

        Liked by 4 people

      • Oscar says:

        Even that is not new. The Greeks and Romans used abortifacient herbs, and performed uterus-scrape abortions. But then, maybe that’s one reason why the Romans had no-fault divorce way back in the 1st Century BC.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        @ Oscar, as I understand it, in baby-murdering societies, when you have strong Patriarchy you have infanticide. When you have strong-Matriarchy, you have abortion.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ Cameron

        The Greeks and Romans had both abortion, and infanticide. Both were common.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        @Oscar, yes I believe abortion became more common in the late (Western) empire as women gained influence but I’m not a historian.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ Cameron

        I believe abortion became more common in the late (Western) empire as women gained influence but I’m not a historian.

        Have you ever read The Didache? It’s an ancient Church tract subtitled “The Lord’s teaching to the heathen by the Twelve Apostles”. Some historians believe it dates to the 1st Century A.D. Here’s a short quote.

        http://www.thedidache.com/

        “Thou shalt do no murder; thou shalt not commit adultery”; thou shalt not commit sodomy; thou shalt not commit fornication; thou shalt not steal; thou shalt not use magic; thou shalt not use philtres; thou shalt not procure abortion, nor commit infanticide; “thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s goods” ~ The Didache

        Abortion and infanticide were both common enough in the early Roman Empire that the Church (and likely the Apostles themselves) felt the need to preach against both of them.

        Both abortion, and infanticide were common among the Greeks and Romans. The Church has been fighting both since its inception.

        There is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9).

        Liked by 1 person

  8. Scott says:

    It’s interesting that a society that has become drenched with sexual obsession is currently experiencing the worst sex drought we’ve ever had as a correlate.

    For everyone, married, single, whatever.

    Liked by 6 people

    • redpillboomer says:

      I’ve heard that in passing, but how do you know for sure? Is there a reliable source that documents it? Or is it anecdotal and hearsay?

      Like

    • redpillboomer says:

      And why the drought?….Not doubting you, just seeking greater clarity on the subject.

      Like

      • Scott says:

        I have no idea that’s why I brought it up

        My understanding is that self report survey data has been tracking a steady downward sex frequency for quite sone time now

        Like

      • Scott says:

        Testosterone is down
        Birth rates down
        Sex is down

        My guess is it’s because we have a nihilistic/narcissistic/culture of death

        Sex, when done right, is a celebration of life.

        Liked by 4 people

      • Oscar says:

        @ Scott

        Sounds a lot like the “mouse utopia”.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        Why the drought?

        Based on what I know from the sphere and what the millenials and iGen are saying –

        –nihilism. Nothing matters, nothing has any meaning.

        –sex is meaningless. It’s just something you do with someone you like, like going to a movie or getting ice cream. If something becomes meaningless, you don’t really much want it, or want to do it. So– more and more of both sexes who have just stopped caring about it.

        –more and more people of both sexes lacking the basic social skills to meet, socialize, escalate, and close the deal with each other sexually.

        I mean lacking even a fundamental understanding of how to socialize. I mean they have no in person social skills at all. They have to use smart phones and apps and PCs and video game consoles to “talk” to someone. They literally cannot use their voices and bodies to communicate.

        –male testosterone on a steady decrease. which creates “males”, not men. It creates men with no purpose, no drive, no desire.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Oscar says:

        @ Deti

        Ve ah nihilists!
        Ya! Ve believe in nahsink!

        Like

    • cameron232 says:

      Not surprising at all. Hypergamy unleashed. If she doesn’t want to have sex and doesn’t have much incentive to think she needs to, then she won’t.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        More or less, yes.

        I think it’s the specific intersection of technology and hypergamy. Technology has truly weaponized hypergamy to a degree never seen historically, with women screening very strictly on dating apps and such. In response, many guys have dropped out, in terms of stopping trying very hard to be attractive, because they can’t make the tight screen of a dating app, and technology provides also to them a “bone” in the form of porn, instagram and the like as well. So there are fewer attractive men as well — that is also actually happening.

        So when you get women’s standards increasing and tightening due to hypergamy being steroidally boosted with technology (in addition to everything else that was boosting women already) coupled with men becoming less attractive due to simply not trying much because it’s hopeless trying to make the new bar women have set … you get what we see today.

        Liked by 3 people

      • thedeti says:

        If she doesn’t want to have sex and doesn’t have much incentive to think she needs to, then she won’t.

        In light of Nova’s comment about the intersection of technology and hypergamy, this raises the question: “If women really don’t want sex or incentive to have it, then why are they using dating apps to meet men and why do they still express so much interest in attractive men?”

        I think at first blush the answer comes around full circle to why the OASIS exists: Women want attention. They absolutely crave it, like men crave the sexual act. If a woman has to have sex with a man to get and keep his attention (or money, or whatever else she wants from that man), she’ll do it even if she’s not sexually aroused. Of course if she’s around an attractive man who’s pushing the buttons, she will get aroused, but it’s not necessary for her to have sex.

        This is a reason why more and more girls are turning to sugaring. They get attention. They get money. They can’t seem to get boyfriends to take them out and pay, so they turn to sugaring. They can’t seem to get men to bite the bullet and wife them up, at least not until she panics and he relents because he’s so hard up. So they turn to sugaring. They are prostitutes for all intents and purposes, but they really don’t care and don’t have any kind of moral problem with this at all.

        It’s because women want attention, and they’ll get it any way they can. Just as men want sex, and they’ll get it any way they can.

        Liked by 3 people

      • thedeti says:

        Technology has truly weaponized hypergamy to a degree never seen historically

        Not just weaponized it – enabled it, like one enables an addict with his addiction. When an addict has enablers, he just keeps right on going, and he gets progressively worse. The enablers just sit back and keep supporting it, or putting up with it, whilst getting increasingly frustrated. The addict sees no problems with his behavior, because, well, it’s not a problem until it’s a problem. The addict is getting everything he wants, in large part because all his enablers allow it and support it and provide the means for his addiction to continue.

        So it is women and hypergamy in the 21st century. All of society enables women’s hypergamy. Unlike addiction, where it’s a problem the enablers tolerate, hypergamy is seen as a force for good in women’s lives. Hypergamy’s enablers love hypergamy, encourage it, egg it on. Support it, invite more to participate, and provide the means absolutely free of charge.

        No one sees this as a problem… yet. But the facade is starting to crack.

        “Where are all the good men??”

        “I can’t find a man to even take me out on a date… and that’s men’s fault.”

        “There are no ‘economically attractive’ men (i.e. men who make more money than me).”

        “Oh well. Guess he’ll just haffta do.”

        Liked by 2 people

  9. SFC Ton says:

    It’s high school forever and ever… and ever,
    ……

    At almost every level. Its a lot easier to control immature people vs grown men

    Liked by 5 people

    • Oscar says:

      Free men are the easiest to govern. You pretty much leave them alone, and they just get stuff done. The trouble is that the petty tyrants that govern us absolutely refuse to leave us alone. When that is the case, free men eventually become nearly impossible to govern.

      Liked by 6 people

      • SFC Ton says:

        Yup much easier to control easy to manipulate high school kids which means it easier to make more money of them. Easier to get high school kids to go after dumb sh-t for short term gain even when it will be a long term loss.

        etc. etc.

        Liked by 3 people

  10. lastmod says:

    sex above all else has been actively preached in the ‘sphere for a long time now. Why the sudden change?

    Like

    • thedeti says:

      did you take your blog down?

      Like

      • lastmod says:

        Because I played music in my video clips as background noise, I had “copyright” infringements. I was told to “remove” the videos with music in them, or my blog would be shut down. I refused….it wasn’t a broadcast. It was background music and noise. WordPress shut it down. No one read it anyway, or watched the videos. I averaged about six views a week. No biggie.

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        Yeah, I don’t understand that Jason. The blog wasn’t for profit. You weren’t making money on it. I always thought the issue was not playing the music on a blog; it was playing the music on a blog and using that blog to make money. I suppose WordPress makes money on the blog, and it was WordPress, not you, who might get into trouble for copyright issues. It’s their platform, so they get to decide.

        Sorry about that.

        Like

  11. feeriker says:

    Testosterone is down
    Birth rates down
    Sex is down

    My guess is it’s because we have a nihilistic/narcissistic/culture of death

    Sex, when done right, is a celebration of life.

    I think you’ve nailed it.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. Eric Francis Silk says:

    A couple points:

    You really can’t compare Greco-Roman sexual mores to post-Sexual Revolution values. Current values are gynocentric whereas Greco-Roman ones were patriarchal, to begin with. I highly recommend the book From Shame To Sin by Kyle Harper as an excellent resource on Greco-Roman sexual values and the Christian values that replaced them. Modern values are alien to both Greco-Roman and Christian values.
    If staying a virgin turns women off and is no guarantee of a successful marriage then what is the point of doing it? Isn’t that the definition of maladaptive?

    Like

    • SFC Ton says:

      And at one point both the Greeks and Romans had very strict rules aginst homosexuality, infidelity etc etc. That was back when they were up and coming. The whole Greek city state thing makes that even more co fusing and Pagan Europe at points in time had the death penalty for two crimes; homosexuality and being a coward.

      Some of these civilizations lasted for a long enough stretch of time you can use them prove or disprove any point you want.

      And for all points of time the elites had their own rules so saying how a wealthy dude behaved isn’t necessarily gonna be what was considered legal, right, just etc etc

      Liked by 3 people

    • Oscar says:

      If staying a virgin turns women off and is no guarantee of a successful marriage then what is the point of doing it?

      Who is your Lord? Is it women? Or is it Jesus Christ?

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Oscar says:

    Totally Off-Topic: Everybody loves to bag on the Boomers (and I can’t say that I blame them).

    https://amgreatness.com/2021/02/07/the-baby-boomers-dismal-legacy/

    There is no generation about which so much has been said, written, filmed, and sung as the Baby Boomers; most of it by the Boomers themselves who have, from their youth, been absolutely enthralled with . . . themselves.

    Helen Andrews’ new book, Boomers, is a welcome corrective to the steady stream of hagiographic literature produced since the first Boomers picked up a pencil, a camera, and a guitar.
    ……
    If you want to understand the Baby Boom generation you might start with this epigram: Extremism in the defense of vice is our liberty. I don’t think anyone ever put it quite that way, but it could be a Boomer slogan.
    ……
    Ultimately, Andrews concludes that “the Boomers leave behind a dismal legacy. In all the fields touched by the six Boomers profiled here—technology, entertainment, economics, academia, politics, law—what they passed on to their children was worse than what they inherited. In some cases, as with Steve Jobs and his products or Camille Paglia and her books, they left behind accomplishments that are impressive and worthy of gratitude. But the overall effect of the Boomer generation has still been essentially destructive.”

    Ouch. My hope is that my kids, or my grandkids, will be the Re-Builders.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Scott says:

      When you confront them about the fact that they essentially threw the baby out with the bath water, they absolutely lose their shit.

      Because Woodstock or something.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        We Gen-Xers are just not idealistic enough, man! I got so tired of hearing about the Boomers’ “idealism” from my ex-hippie high school teachers.

        Also, it just occurred to me that bagging on Boomers is very much ON-topic, since they’re the ones that ushered us into our 1984 / Brave New World utopia.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        And because Kennedy. Camelot. When all was right with the world. When the Boomers were going to change the world.

        I will be SO glad when the liberals stop talking about Kennedy, and the cons stop talking about Reagan.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Scott says:

        They had the stupidest, short sided mantra ever..

        Trust no one over 30

        They believed they would never be 30, I guess.

        Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        Trust no one over 30

        They believed they would never be 30, I guess.

        In the late 80s, we tried a variant of that in college.

        “F**k the establishment! (Until we join it in a couple of years!)”

        Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        The thing is … it wasn’t the Boomers. I mean, not completely the Boomers. The Boomers didn’t create themselves. They were created by the generation that raised them, coddled them, and created a world in which what the Boomers did in the 60s and 70s was not only possible, but which was tolerated and won the day, long before Boomers had any real political power.

        Kennedy …. was not a Boomer. Johnson … not a Boomer. Marcuse … not a Boomer. Nor Derrida, nor Foucault, nor de Beauvoir, nor Steinem, etc.

        The Boomers were/are a large generation that took a match that had been crafted, marinated in kerosene for decades, and handed to them by the likes of the above, none of whom were Boomers, and they then proceeded to light the match while the generations who were “in charge” at the time of said lighting did nothing to stop them. Were/are the Boomers selfish and narcissistic destroyers? Without question. But the rot came from well before the Boomers, and the Boomers themselves were following the directives of the “elders” at the time, who had been well infiltrated by a radical set of people — a determined group that ended up getting its way by means of the Boomers, but who were not, themselves, Boomers.

        Everyone blames the Boomers, because they were the ones who lit the match they were handed — fair enough. But any serious understanding of what happened has to go back to generations well before the Boomers — the ones who were the true architects of the mess we find ourselves in today.

        Full disclosure: I am a GenX and not a Boomer — I have the same reflexive distaste for them as most others of my generation do.

        Liked by 4 people

      • cameron232 says:

        @Novaseeker,

        Yeah, men didn’t tell women “no” in 1919.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Scott says:

      If you guys are interested in something really interesting on this topic, check out James Lindsays 4 part you tube dissection if Herbert Mancuse “repressive tolerance” (1965)

      It really explains a lot about how we got here.

      Lindsays you tube page is called “new discourses”

      Like

  14. Oscar says:

    REALLY Off-Topic: There is nothing new under the sun.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-9237493/Roman-soldiers-payslip-1-900-years-ago-reveals-left-BROKE-military-deductions.html

    A payslip made from a sheet of papyrus shows a Roman soldier was left penniless 1,900 years ago after the military took out fees for certain items.

    The document was made out to a Gaius Messius, who participated in the Siege of Masada that was one of the last battles during the First Jewish-Roman War.

    The receipt shows Messius received 50 denarri as his stipend, but fees for barley money, food and military equipment were taken out that totaled to the amount of his full pay.

    Not that I would know anything about that.

    Liked by 4 people

    • feeriker says:

      Not surprising at all. I wonder if they had pay deductions for “funding the old legionnaire’s home.” The Navy did this in the decade before I retired. Everyone had one dollar taken out of their bi-weekly pay for “Navy Retirement Home Fund.”

      Liked by 1 person

  15. feeriker says:

    [B]agging on Boomers is very much ON-topic, since they’re the ones that ushered us into our 1984 / Brave New World utopia.

    They brought the plan to fruition, but they had a lot of help in the planning and strategic design stages from the two generations that preceded them.

    Liked by 2 people

    • SFC Ton says:

      It’s my experince that very few people want to go down the who set this up rabbit hole

      Mostly becuase the man o sphere is way, way more progressive then they’d ever want to come to grips with

      Liked by 1 person

  16. feeriker says:

    I always thought it was weird to have federal payroll deductions to pay — myself.

    I think this is mostly a propaganda-based conditioning move. Make the proles think that EVERYBODY pays income taxes, no matter what their station in life. Most swallow it without questioning it.

    A similar analogy is the churchian hireling who makes a show of putting money back into the collection plate every Sunday, which really just means giving his own money back to himself.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Elspeth says:

    The stupidity of people actually choosing to be in the MP (either or the SMP or MMP variety) in middle age is just insane. It’s like someone said “High school for life”. Unlike Scott, I didn’t find high school to be the best thing ever.

    I will be 50 in 6 months, and I’m not ashamed of that. Is what it is. I’m extremely happy in a marriage relationship that I fully recognize as atypical. We didn’t know it was atypical until friends began to tell us so. We feel blessed, and neither of us is looking to go anywhere.

    On a good day, I look really good, and I won’t try to pretend I am not aware of it. But I have to work at that. Today I didn’t, and at the present moment, I am in what I refer to as my heavy cycle. I am constantly wrangling with the same 20 pounds every 18 months. Being 5’9″ with long arms and legs and kind of Amazonian is helpful for camouflage, but I want to be healthy. I think I look a mess today, frankly.

    Did that stop some dude from nearly scaring me to death today to get my attention to say hello? I thought I had a flat tire or something, but… Nope. I’m too old to be flattered by it anymore either, I realized. At least I wasn’t today. I barely looked at him, just trying to escape.

    But I thought about this thread and what Nova’s caption under the prom picture said, “Your life…for the next 70 years!”

    Why on earth do people CHOOSE that? How do they live like that? How is it in any way preferable to staying married and doing the work?

    I swear I just do. not. get. it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Oscar says:

      It’s like someone said “High school for life”. Unlike Scott, I didn’t find high school to be the best thing ever.

      I hated school from the time I started public school in the USA. Jr. High was the worst, but High School wasn’t fun. I never understood people who said (not that Scott ever said this) that high school is supposed to be the best time of your life. Even as a kid, I thought “good Lord, I hope not!”

      College was difficult, but fun. The most fun time of my life (so far) was being stationed in Germany, when it was just my wife and me, before the kids. I had enough responsibility to make a decent living, but not so much that I felt overwhelmed, and we spent all our free time (of which we had a lot, compared to now) traveling all over Europe.

      Now, that was a good time!

      Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        @Oscar,

        High school (and middle school) was decent but the best time of my life was being a little boy and wandering – being able to entertain yourself just being outdoors, playing in ditches, bombing turtles and gators in the lake with dirt, creating forts, wandering the orange groves of Florida to find “ghost towns” (abandoned workers’ quarters), hiding in the thick groves of Australian Pines and chucking rotten oranges at semi-trucks, hiding from the Sheriff deputies when they came looking for us, the thrill of believing that we might have to run from mythical 1000-lb man eating hogs which lurked in the swamps.

        The 2nd best time of my life was being a young father with two toddler boys– marital and family bliss and you don’t have to worry about your kids (yet) and you haven’t screwed up fathering (yet).

        Liked by 1 person

    • Novaseeker says:

      Why on earth do people CHOOSE that? How do they live like that? How is it in any way preferable to staying married and doing the work?

      Short term vs long term and a culture which supports disposability — that, coupled with the fact that divorce tends to be contagious in terms of running through peer groups of women, and there’s your answer.

      Our culture celebrates divorce — literally. People have divorce parties. Medium and similar places are filled with articles, almost all by women, about how difficult it was to go through a divorce but how it made them stronger, and how much better their lives are, and so on and so forth. Medium is filled to the brim with stuff like this. In that kind of context, it’s not going to be uncommon for people to opt for exit visas over “doing the work”.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Oscar says:

        Our culture celebrates divorce — literally. People have divorce parties.

        One of my buddies from my oil field days celebrated his divorce with a drunken party that ended in a one-night-stand for him. I did not attend the party. He told me about it afterwards.

        Now he’s married to a woman 20 years younger than he is.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        I have said this before…

        Never before in recorded history has there been such a large amount of middle aged unmarried women (aged 35-55), most of whom are still attractive enough to command male sexual attention. That is a huge part of what is going on as well.

        I live in a small city in the midwest, about 150 miles from three large population centers. These women are everywhere. Of all shapes, sizes, and races. Most of them are attractive enough to participate in a brand new SMP subcategory that they themselves created. As I’m writing this it occurs to me that this new SMP subcategory is pressuring the overall SMP/MMP in ways never before seen.

        It is creating a huge sexual market, but only a small percentage of men can tap into it: Silver foxes, sugar daddies, and physically attractive younger men. So this is a market that a lot of men can’t participate in.

        A large percentage of these women express little interest in remarrying. This means the market will never clear itself. This subcategory will always exist and will probably be continually glutted.

        This subcategory might press younger women to marry and stay married because they don’t want to be 35 and over and unmarried. Or it might press some younger women not to marry at all, because that new SMP subcategory looks attractive to them. That doesn’t seem to be happening yet. But, a lot of women seem to be sort of sliding into the new 35 and up category, or escaping it at the last minute.

        Just thoughts off the top of my head. We are seeing just the beginnings of this. It will be interesting to see how this new 35 and up group responds to coming economic pressures.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        Never before in recorded history has there been such a large amount of middle aged unmarried women (aged 35-55), most of whom are still attractive enough to command male sexual attention. That is a huge part of what is going on as well.

        Yes. The “aftermarket”, if you will, as in “after getting divorced market”.

        One of the phenomena that is currently flying under most people’s radar (unless they are in this demographic of older and single themselves) is how large this group is, and what it is — and isn’t — doing. It’s large due to the divorces — there are a lot of divorces, still, even with a lower divorce rate (due to the lower marriage rate). And remarriage rates have fallen so divorced people are tending to stay divorced for longer, which drives up the size of this group at any one period of time.

        The dating market in this age range is very active, because it’s very large. It’s also very much based in apps now, like it is for younger people.

        Many of the women in this group are not unattractive as well — generally very few of them are “beautiful”, but many fall into some part of the “attractive” group. They are often not in a hurry to remarry, and they can date rather attractive men if they are sexually active, especially younger men, which has been a fast growing trend over the past 5-10 years in my own observations. You can tell the ones who are interested in remarrying, because they tend to date very different men — men around their own ages, mostly also divorced. The rest? Not so much. But there’s plenty of dating, and therefore plenty of sex, taking place with the women who are “just dating” in this group.

        This is really something that, as you rightly say, is a new phenomenon: a more or less permanent, large group of older singles dating and having sex without being married.

        As I said above … it’s high school forever.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Scott says:

        Deti/Nova-

        A very large percentage of them (30 something divorcees) don’t even care if you are married and 20 years older than them.

        Ask me how I know.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Oscar says:

        @ Scott

        I get hit on more often when I have kids in tow, usually by single moms in their 30s. It’s like they see kids and greying temples and they think “stability!” This is the way it usually goes.

        Her: Your kids are so cute!
        Me. Thanks.
        Her: You’re so brave to take four little kids out all by yourself!
        Me. This isn’t even half of them.
        Her: Ha, ha, ha! You’re so funny!
        Me: No, I’m serious.
        Her: How many kids do you have?
        Me: Nine.
        Her: Runs away!

        Every time. It’s hilarious!

        Liked by 3 people

      • Scott says:

        I get the comments about how brave (or whatever) it is when I have them with me. I am not sure how I feel about it, because its condescending to men in general.

        Often, its something like “I can’t believe I am seeing a man out taking care of his kids” with the distinct suggestion that most men are too stupid/bad/whatever to “give the wife a break” or something like that.

        Look around ladies. Men with their kids, no woman around are EVERYWHERE. It’s no big deal.

        The society has bought the lie that men are totally incompetent in every area of life, including parenting.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        Often, its something like “I can’t believe I am seeing a man out taking care of his kids” with the distinct suggestion that most men are too stupid/bad/whatever to “give the wife a break” or something like that.

        Look around ladies. Men with their kids, no woman around are EVERYWHERE. It’s no big deal.

        My guess: it’s just the easiest thing that comes to mind in terms of something to flirt with for them. They know that married men with their kids is not a unique thing, of course. What is unique is coming across one to whom they are attracted enough to want to flirt, and so out blurts that flirt line.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        @ Nova

        My guess: it’s just the easiest thing that comes to mind in terms of something to flirt with for them.

        They’re trying to appeal to a man’s desire to feel brave, and heroic. Besides, they’re looking for a white knight to rescue them from their bad decisions, so they’re screening for the willingness to do so.

        By the way, I’m not deluded enough to think they’re attracted to me. They’re attracted to my resources, that’s why they run when I tell them I have nine kids. I have a good career, but with nine kids I have less disposable income than your average Chick-fil-A employee.

        Liked by 6 people

      • Ame says:

        Our culture celebrates divorce — literally. People have divorce parties. Medium and similar places are filled with articles, almost all by women, about how difficult it was to go through a divorce but how it made them stronger, and how much better their lives are, and so on and so forth. Medium is filled to the brim with stuff like this.

        divorce, as you’re well aware, is a multi-billion dollar industry. smart marketing to create divorce parties. evil, but smart.

        and those women are all propping themselves up on lies to keep them from sinking and facing their own truths. part of propping themselves up is keeping fit and sexually alluring.

        divorce does not make you stronger; it makes you weaker. it doesn’t matter whether you wanted it or not, divorce sucks. and it sucks the life out of you.

        these women feed off one another, but they’d stab each other in the back without blinking an eye if they could ‘have it all’ and make all those other women envious.

        married people are often hit on more often than single people, and women are going to find married men with children especially magnetic. i find this intriguing. i think that we present ourselves differently when married – a kind of aloof confidence that says ‘i don’t need or want you,’ which might be some kind of combination of safe and challenging.

        Liked by 2 people

  18. Scott says:

    High school was not the best time of my life. It was a time I that enjoyed, like I do every other time.

    I do not remember back to it as being particularly awkward or difficult to navigate, as so many do.

    It was fun. And the next thing was fun. And the next.

    I’ve always been like that.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Elspeth says:

      Scott,

      It was fun. And the next thing was fun. And the next.

      I’ve always been like that.

      You sound exactly like my husband in that regard. Unless something truly devastating has happened (such as a death in the family), he is never NOT having a good time.

      I didn’t find high school awkward or painful. It was just kind of “meh” and “blah”.

      Like

  19. thedeti says:

    I absolutely hated high school. I did a few fun things, but overall it was stressful, awkward, uncomfortable, and painful. I was glad it ended. I would not want to go back to that time in my life for anything. I wouldn’t ever want to relive those 4 years.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Oscar says:

      I once told a friend that if I had the choice between re-living Jr. high, or re-living my two tours in Afghanistan, I’d pick Afghanistan 10 times out of 10.

      High school wasn’t nearly as bad, but still sucked.

      Liked by 1 person

    • feeriker says:

      I hated high school, too, but couldn’t really put my finger on any one reason why at the time. I think a lot of it had to do with both the social scene (I was NOT one of the “‘in’ crowd”) and the fact that whole public education system in Commiefornia was just entering the beginning of its “downhill slide.” I also recall hating the 70s (I was in HS in the second half of the 70s) while living in them. Little did I realize then how absolutely nostalgic for them I’d be within just a couple of decades.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Oscar says:

        I was a scrawny, nerdy, awkward, late-blooming kid, and the youngest in my class, so yeah, I hated school. I made some life-long friends in high school (one married my sister), so I do have some fond memories, but all those memories are of our “adventures” outside of school.

        By senior year, I was 6’0″, so things improved dramatically, even though I was still scrawny. Plus, I was taking college classes, so I wasn’t spending much time at school.

        Liked by 1 person

  20. Ame says:

    school – not sure i ever ‘loved’ or ‘hated’ school, except for 4th grade. hated 4th grade. had some teachers i didn’t like in middle and high school, but i had two bff’s in middle and one in high that i hung out with, and that, plus a job i liked, was pretty much my focus. college was good b/c of the friends i made, a few i’m still friends with. but i was never passionate about school, itself. i wasn’t in the popular group, but my high school was large, so i’m not sure who the pop group was, but i was in my group, and that group came from my school, another school, work, and a ‘church’ group. for me, i guess, it was just a stepping stone to the next place.

    as a Mom, though … man, i hate public schools. really wanted to homeschool from early on b/c my girls wanted to be homeschooled, esp Oldest, but their Dad refused and got a court order keeping me from doing so, because he could (he was hs’d some and hated it, and he wanted out girls to go to ivy league schools – neither has ever been interested, and he liked having that control over us). we were able to get some good special ed and dyslexia services for our girls, and we did have some amazing teachers along the way. unfortunately we had some terrible teachers, too. neither of my girls had significant social issues in school – or none that we couldn’t work out and learn from, they just didn’t like it.

    but, Oldest only did one year of high school. then her dad did more bad things, and their psychologist and psychiatrist were ready to take him to court, so he gave permission for her to be taken out and homeschooled, which she needed b/c she’d become suicidal over it all. and he knew that he couldn’t win against ‘expert’ testimony of two professionals. i pulled Aspie Girl after 2 weeks of high school – their dad had died six months earlier, so when the HS sped dept did stupid things that dramatically affected her, i pulled her out. neither has ever missed it, not one day – except the music program, which was exceptional. but, choices.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Oscar says:

      I feel for you and your girls. American government schools suck.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Ame says:

        Thank you, Oscar. They’re past that now, though. Oldest both takes college classes and works online. Aspie Girl is on her own trajectory and doing well.

        But, man, public school was a ton of work for me. I stayed on top of it. I have no doubt many a teacher were glad to see us go. Didn’t have to get involved too much with Oldest, but it was pretty much weekly and often daily with Aspie Girl and special ed.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Oscar says:

        Ame,

        I’m glad your girls got through that phase, hopefully mostly unscathed. May God bless you and yours.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Ame says:

        thank you, Oscar. it’s interesting what time does to memories. perhaps that my daughters are doing so well helps, but after their dad died, i told them that if they didn’t do anything else for the rest of their lives, they would work towards forgiving him. and i made them do the work to forgive him. it took several years, but they both forgave him. he is mixed up in their public school experiences – the two cannot be separated.

        b/c of this thread, Oldest and i talked about this just a little bit ago. it’s nice that we’ve forgiven him; we can talk about his bad and good and smile and laugh, even, and we’re okay. not saying something doesn’t come up from time-to-time that makes it hard; that’s life. but we’re doing well. we’ve come to see his life as tragic, because it was, to hold onto the good, learn from the bad, and take the next step.

        sometimes it’s really hard on me as i look back and wonder … if … but i try not to let myself go to those places. nothing good comes from them.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Elspeth says:

      A lot of people fail to recognize that homeschooling really is a family effort and that if the dad is not on board (and plenty are not for a range of reasons), it will not be successful. I applaud your vigilance with your girls while they navigated that. far too many people are totally ignorant of the fact that their kids’ education is ultimately their responsibility, even the kids are attending school.

      Liked by 2 people

      • feeriker says:

        far too many people are totally ignorant of the fact that their kids’ education is ultimately their responsibility, even the kids are attending school.

        THIS.

        Actually, it’s worse than ignorance; too many parents actively and willfully REFUSE to take responsibility for ANY aspect of their children’s upbringing. It just demands “too much effort.”

        Educating them, in particular, is an especially repulsive idea, given that 1) most parents probably hated school themselves, having been victims/survivors of Amerika’s government education gulags, institutions that frequently instill in their victims a lifelong aversion to learning; and 2) homeschooling one’s children means spending a great deal of time with them, an idea that most modern parents, including “Christian” ones, sicken at the thought of.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Ame says:

        thank you, Elspeth.

        i didn’t think to mention that we were divorced by that time, though it was just a couple years past the divorce. he left when Aspie-Girl started kinder; Oldest started 2nd. rough years.

        homeschooling would have been challenging, but public school was brutal.

        however, what satan meant for evil, God used for good. not that we don’t have a mess of scars, but God is bigger than all that and has already used my daughters in various ways because of what they’ve gone through.

        far too many people are totally ignorant of the fact that their kids’ education is ultimately their responsibility, even the kids are attending school.

        yes. very much, yes.

        and it’s heartbreaking when kids know their parents don’t care – chaperoned enough to see it, a lot.

        Like

  21. lastmod says:

    In my town. The elementary school was k-6 and the high school was 7-12. After I returned from West Germany as an exchange student in the summer of 1986, I was sent to a private boys boarding school about two hours south in Albany, New York.

    I was bullied terribly. In my hometown school….having an older brother with Downs Syndrome…in rural, very small town America was still viewed in the 1970’s as something odd. The bullying really started in 7th grade. Sides / alignments made in school. No crossing over allowed. I would defend myself. I would be suspended. I did nothing, I was then told to “stand up for myself”. I couldn’t win. No one even let me play. After that pummeling I got on Halloween at school in 1984, and then the house got egged…shoe polish on the screens of the house….the crank calls all day and night for about a week………my parents decided I should go “to Europe” as an American-Exhange student for a year. I did. I lived in West Berlin from July 1985 thru August 1986. Super positive experience.

    I returned to the USA, and my parents enrolled me a boys school (better chance for getting into a supposedly better college). I spent my last two years in high school being pummeled in “sock / blanket” parties. Dealing with very middle to upper middle class white boys who were better than men in everything…and had a ton more going for them. I hated the dress code (but I did follow it), hated gym class, and really had a low opinion of my “fellow men” by the time I got into college. The only thing I had going for me was that I was way taller than average. I did like a few teachers I had those last two years…..ten times better than ANYTHING in a public school for sure.

    I just found it odd that I was bullied and had to suffer because I had a brother with Downs Syndrome and parents that actually cared about me. All I can blame now is just bad genetics and not born at the right time.

    I have no desire to ever return to high school, or see anyone I ever went to high school with….in Albany or Lake Placid.

    Like

    • Novaseeker says:

      I lived in West Berlin from July 1985 thru August 1986. Super positive experience.

      Ah. I was in WB for the academic year 87-88. Indeed, Berlin at that time was a great place to be young. Really a special time and a special place.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Oscar says:

      really had a low opinion of my “fellow men” by the time I got into college.

      That explains a lot.

      Like

      • lastmod says:

        Who asked you? Besides….your attitude towards me “furthers” this opinion of mine

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        No one asked. Besides…. your opinion of my “attitude” towards you is you projecting your “low opinion of” your “fellow men” onto your fellow men.

        Like

      • lastmod says:

        Don’t you have something else to do…..like curing cancer or developing a mag-lev? I mean…….me having a low opinion of my fellow men…..this explains “a lot”

        Good. Pat on the head and a “you really showed everyone here” that you are the real man in the room. I have dealt with jerks like you my whole life

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        Don’t you have something else to do…..like curing cancer or developing a mag-lev?

        Twice by lunchtime, donchano?

        you are the real man in the room

        I’m the only man in my living room right now.

        I have dealt with jerks like you my whole life

        How’s that projection working for you?

        Like

    • cameron232 says:

      @lastmod, sorry man – that really sucks.

      My public high school was approximately 1/3 lower class white, 1/3 lower class black and 1/3 middle class (mostly white kids) – the “preppy” crowd I guess. I had a few close friends and got along with the preppy crowd but wasn’t part of it (they were mostly on the swim team or other activities that didn’t interest me).

      Most altercations I had were with the local whitetrash boys (the ones whose dads probably beat the hell out of them every other day). They seemed to hate us kids who had a good family life. I got along great with black boys (I actually had a number of them stand up for me – they seemed to have an innate sense of fairness) but there seemed to be a subset of black girls who hated all white males so there were some altercations (verbal) there.

      All actual fistfights I’ve ever been in were with lower class white males who I didn’t do jack sh-t to.

      Liked by 2 people

      • lastmod says:

        It was all white where I grew up. Still is come to think of it. The last time I visted was in 2017 on that hike. The Adirondack Mountains are the only redeeming thing in that region of New York State. They are poetic, inspiring and mystical. I don’t really miss the area I grew up in other than that. The thrashings I got in gym class. Coach not stopping it, but not discouraging it either (He died a drunk, and thrice divorced). Just being a teen who didn’t belong or fit in (even if I wanted to, would not have been tolerated or allowed but the school heirarchy). I recall begging my parents everyday for weeks on end to not “let me go to school”

        Their interventions were minor. They would pay the school a visit here and there and talk to the principal…..but they firmly belived that “it wasn’t that bad” for me (they had blind trust in the system). After that beating (and I was covered with bruises, and ugly purple-yellow welts that I received ON school property in gym class) in 1984 I think they finally accepted that maybe it was that bad.

        I know the logic of the sphere is to say “well, you must have deserved it” and “stop being a dork” or “lift weights, train, and take on all 20 guys like Segal”

        The best revenge was leaving and not bothering to look any of them up, or acknowledge them that rare time I did see / bump into them while I was back from boys school, college or as an adult visiting from California.

        This is the reason why I hate the 1980’s. It’s also part of the reason why I probably am the way I am today. christianity is suffering right? Yeah…I must have deserved it, or god had this amazing plan for me (sarcasm).

        This trip down amnesia lane does make me understand how far I have come and how I would never wish high school on anyone. It’s gotta be worse in some ways with social media today. Anyway…..college years of 1988-1992 were decent in Vermont. I’ll never get those times back. I was not big man on campus, nor popular with the ladies….but I did enjoy college very, very much

        Liked by 1 person

    • Ame says:

      having an older brother with Downs Syndrome…in rural, very small town America was still viewed in the 1970’s as something odd.

      my sister was also special needs, and while my mom did a lot of things wrong, she fought for my sister and tried out various schooling options to get her through … before special ed was a thing.

      and i hear boarding schools can be brutal. my mom grew up in boarding schools, and though i know little about it (and i really don’t want to know) i know she was treated terribly. there’s wealthy enough to attend, and then there’s wealthy. she fell into the former; the mean kids into the latter.

      Like

      • lastmod says:

        In defense of single sex boarding academies / prep schools: the education is much better. there is “no one” to impress female-wise so classroom debate and discussion was of a much more mature level. The homework was challenging. The dress code helped enforce “no class distinctions” and it was run on a quasi military style. Not “military” but there were rules that were enforced in principle. Lights out. Study time. Room checks. After my year in West Germany, I was okay with being away from home…..so that issue was not a problem for me. Hazing was heavy and frequent….expecially if you were “that one” that everyone could get away with doing it….and that was me. I was allowed to work on weekends, so I got a job at the Gap in the Crossgates Mall….and you could have a car if your grades were above a 3.3 average. I kept my mouth shut about the BS and torment I was getting there because I knew my parents had to struggle to send me there.

        The cons: effing elitiest people. I was considered one of the poorer students there, and since I was from “the Adirondacks” it was assumed I was inbred, lived in hut, and had no running water. Teen boys are brutal to each other…not just razzing…..but full-on evil. When I hear of this “code” men have and “brotherhood” I still sneer at it. Most men would sell any of their friends for nookie, female attention or just to one-up their fellow man. Prep schools are full of these types. The cost. Way too expensive . I could have gone to the local Catholic High School in Plattsburgh and probably got a decent education (better than the public school) but my attendance at mine didn’t get me into Dartmouth (which is where I wanted to go).

        My older brother was the only person that I can say actually loved me in a pure childlike way. People are so freaking cruel. Let me add it was not a blessing from god to have a brother like this the people who tell me this don’t have siblings like this, or children like this….where their health problems almost bankrupt their family.

        Like

    • Scavos says:

      @lastmod Albany, Lake Placid, Adirondacks…these bring back memories. Definitely agree with you on Albany(including Troy and Schenectady). Not places I’d want to return to. Adirondacks and Schroon Lake are definitely nice.

      Like

      • lastmod says:

        I was born in Schenectady at the now gone St. Clairs Hospital. My father’s family came from Poland in 1946 and settled in Amsterdam (carpet mills there were full of Polish immigrants) and then the family bought a small farm in Glenville.

        My parents were married in Saratoga Springs in the sping of 1965, and lived there until 1970 when they bought the land and built the house I grew up in just outside of Lake Placid…….Waaayyyyyy out in the country. Our property abutted Adirondack State Park land. I lived in the Town of Keene, went to the Lake Placid Central Schools. My parents commuted to work in Plattsburgh. SOmetimes my dad had work down in the Schenectady / Albany area and would stay with his relatives while he worked jobs there (Construction)

        Are you a native Upstater??

        Liked by 1 person

      • Scavos says:

        Yes, born and raised in Saratoga, the land of spring water, SPAC, and horsetracks. I’ve been to Plattsburgh a few times, when it was warm. Most of my time spent in the Adirondacks was Lake George, Ticonderoga, and Pottersville(the complete opposite of the one in It’s A Wonderful Life haha), where I went to college.

        Liked by 1 person

      • lastmod says:

        Saratoga was unrecognizable when I visted in 2017. My mother’s funeral was at the Anglican church (Bethesda) right downtown in February 2008 and it alread was being really built up. It was the same church my parents were married in. I was ‘christened’ in that church in 1971 evidently. Saratoga is nothing like the memories of vacatioing there in the 1980’s. My father’s was in Plattsburgh. My father’s headstone is in the Veterans Cemetery at the Saratoga Battlefield evidently. The American Legion sent me a picture of it. My mothers name is on it as well….but her ashes were scattered in the Mettowee RIver in West Pawlet Vermont.

        Dr. Alan Justin was my orthodontist in Saratoga Springs……..but he had a satellite office in Plattsburgh. My parents lived on Elm Street (west side) from 1965-1970.

        Fantastic story. SPAC is awesome. Saw Yitzak Pearlman conduct the NY Symphony at SPAC in 1999 on a visit back there…..and I saw Lollopolooza 1992 there as well

        Liked by 1 person

      • Scavos says:

        “Saw Yitzak Pearlman conduct the NY Symphony at SPAC in 1999 on a visit back there…..and I saw Lollopolooza 1992 there as well”

        Nice! That must’ve been awesome! My experiences at SPAC were Journey in 2011 and Blotto in 2009.

        “My mother’s funeral was at the Anglican church (Bethesda) right downtown in February 2008 and it alread was being really built up.”

        I know the place. I’ve been by there countless times. And yes, a lot has changed in Saratoga. What I recall growing up in the 90’s is vastly different from the present. I left the state years ago, only to return for my grandfather’s funeral. The whole place was familiar and alien at the same time.

        Liked by 1 person

      • lastmod says:

        Small world my friend! Saratoga is a nice little city. My undergrad was about an hour away from Saratoga, just across the border in Vermont……..so I would visit Saratoga often when I was in college (1988-1992). I saw Jimmy The Greek at the racecourse in 1990. Had massive crush on a gal that worked in the Strawberries record shop downtown back then……….Lake George…..Schroon Lake, I have hiked and camped that whole area (Putnam Pond / Crane / Treadway Mountain / Pharoah Mountain). Hiked (bushwhacked) around to the top of Rogers Slide on Lake George………a messed up drug fueled night in 1991 at Gaslighjt Village (lol). Memories! So good to know a native Upstater is on here

        Liked by 1 person

      • Scavos says:

        Likewise.

        Like

  22. lastmod says:

    The memories are fading. I lived with a very wonderful German family in central West Berlin near Tiergarten. I attended Berlin Stadt Gymasium. I had a host brother my age (Jens was his name) and my older brother Frank was in some vocational training school (h, 22 at the time….a hero to me since I didn’t really have an older brother to look up to back home). Seeing all the British, French and American troops everywhere….the last thrashes of the ‘cold war’ right on the dividing line. Checkpoint Charlie. Riding the Stadtbahn late, late at night………as a teenager! Seeing the Berlin Philharmonic perform in the summer of 1986. Hanging at Kranzler Cafe on the “teen nights” and just seeing a different part of the world at that age.

    I did get very homesick around Christmas 1985 as I recall. I could speak German fluently when I left…..but not really now. My host family took a holiday in Cologne for two week to see relatives. That was fun. A very long time ago. I admired how impeccably clean West Germany was. Tidy, and picked up

    Liked by 2 people

    • Novaseeker says:

      Ah — Tiergarten wasn’t too bad. I lived in Kreuzberg for 4 months in a 4th story walk-up (pre-war) that used to be a squat .. no central heating, East Berlin guard towers about 3 blocks away. The last 6 months I lived in a modern apartment in Charlottenburg about three blocks from the palace.

      Berlin then was like having lived in a museum piece from the perspective of today. Every place has changed in 30+ years, but few places in Western Europe have changed as much as Berlin has in that stretch. That old “West Berlin” is a museum piece, now, Jason — it doesn’t exist. When the two parts of the city were reunited and then fairly quickly re-stitched together, literally everything changed in both of them. Berlin is still fun to visit, but it doesn’t feel like “West Berlin” did at all — it’s much bigger, busier, more crowded, much more mainstream (as the capital, all of the German media establishment is now based there etc), and the places have all changed utterly from what they were like then.

      Some of my favorite memories were the “curry-wurst”, grabbing a cheap lunch of Gulaschsuppe at the top of KaDeWe, all night discos on the weekend (I actually won a dance prize with my ex-GF at one of them), pulling open the doors on the U-Bahn (for others: they were all manually operated) early as the train was coming into the station and feeling the breeze against my face, Kneipen literally everywhere, taking the Night-Bus back from Bahnhof-Zoo more times than I care to imagine (and knowing the menu at the pizzeria on that square better than I’d like to admit), and all the trips I made to East Berlin, that great communist Disneyland where you had to make like Cinderella and leave before midnight. It was just a special place and time, and one that is no more — like a museum display at this point really.

      Liked by 1 person

      • lastmod says:

        Went to “Ost Berlin” twice while I lived there……the museum was incerdible. The Nefertti bust, the Gate of Ishtar……amazing collection of Egyptian art. The Greek works were astouding as well. I remember the East German coins were aluminum and floated on water…..lol. I was 15 / 16 when I lived there so I was a total teen. Record shops….clubs designed for the teen crowd………school………hausafgabe (homework). Chores in the home.

        The biggest culture shock for me at the time…..remember I was a teen……was noticing that teen German girls didn’t shave their legs or pits. Much more open about sexuality…….the teens my age (even my host brother) behaved like teens that were a few years older in teh USA where I came from. Walking out on to the back patio and my host mother sunbathing nude…….I didn’t really drink too much then (I was trying to be a good American representative) but I did pick up cigarette smoking full time there. Saw a real “Caberet” show a la 1920’s style……..my host brother and I went to see Sting….and I saw David Bowie perform there as well. My older brother Frank took me to see his “fav” English band “The The” (Matt Johnson) and it was at a small club.

        Our experiences were much different I am sure, but it was something that I’ll never forget/ I have clippings, pictures, flyers still……..but it was something I’ll never really forget. It was a difefrent world, time and a much different Germany too. Glad we share something in common for once 😉

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        Glad we share something in common for once

        You’d find that far more often if you didn’t have such a “low opinion of” your “fellow man”.

        Like

      • lastmod says:

        F*can off

        Like

    • feeriker says:

      I, too, was an exchange student in West Germany (Munich) in 1978 between my Junior and Senior years of High School. Those were the days!

      Sadly, I haven’t been back to Germany since then. Many other parts of the world, but never got back to Germany. I somehow doubt that it’s anywhere near as nice now as it was then. But is anywhere, anymore?

      Saddest of all, my once almost native-fluent German is all but gone now through lack of use (it sucks to be a polyglot living in North America).

      Like

      • lastmod says:

        Never made it to Bavaria…though I would have liked to have seen it. This is actually interesting. Three people in this forum have been to West Germany to study or live aty some point befoer the cold war ended. Sehr intressant!!!

        Like

  23. redpillboomer says:

    “That used to be “good enough”. What’s different now is that women have to do all this alone, and with no help or perspective from others. They do it this way because their mothers did it this way. (I know this because I grew up with and went to school with their mothers.) Their mothers gave them almost no help at all. Their fathers were not even around to do anything. Or if their fathers were around, their mothers neutered them.”
    Yes, this is something that I noticed in the case of one beautiful, intelligent, articulate 27 year old (at the time) CC rider I knew. Intact home, Dad and Mom and two older brothers. They seemed to lean liberal politically, but had certain conservative ways about them. For example, Mom and daughter dressed very nicely, really in a fairly classy way, not slutty by any stretch of the imagination. Dad was an IT professional, so was oldest brother; second brother I believe was working on a Ph’D at a university somewhere in Ohio. Mom ran a daycare I’m pretty sure. Daughter was smart, articulate, masters degree and had a career as an Occupational Therapist. You’d think this is the formula for a positive life outcome….BUT, Mom seemed to run the home, Dad followed her leadership. Brothers were doing their own thing in life. Younger brother and daughter were locking horns over different things. Point? Nuclear family, three males to provide dear daughter male leadership, and the daughter–feral as can be. Lesson? Even the intact, ‘traditional homes’ still breed this stuff thedeti talked about above: “First, they have sex with the sexiest men they can find. They claim they just want to be wives and mothers, but that is for “someday” because they really do believe hot sexy men will always be around to wife them up when it’s time for that. They believe this because from ages 16-25, all they can see are hot sexy men everywhere. The carousel is pervasive and permissive enough that everyone gets a free ride. Almost all women take at least one or two spins to try out a pretty horsie, realizing only afterwards that she can’t take the horsie home with her. The diehards keep trying, though. Or, they give up and just decide to enjoy the ride until their tokens are used up or they get kicked off.” Precisely the scenario affecting the beautiful 27 year old I knew. Now 30, about to turn 31, and … Well, you all know the rest of the story without me even going any further into it. Oh so stereoptypical, and oh so sad for us as a society.

    Liked by 4 people

  24. Ame says:

    OP – finally got a chance to read through the whole OP.

    Novaseeker, what i understand that you’re saying is that, in this over-sexualized culture where there are no boundaries and abominations are extreme, and sex has become the center of everything, women are using the excuse of being unhappy with sex to get divorced.

    this is really no surprise when we understand the nature of women and the nature of mankind.

    the nature of women is spelled out in genesis 3:

    -Satan went to the woman because she was easily manipulated.
    -It only took a little idea that what she had wasn’t enough for the woman to act on that.
    -Women are easily led to believe something else is better.
    -The woman blamed the serpent and never took responsibility for her choices.

    women today are no different. they are easily manipulated. little thoughts and ideas cause them to question everything and to act on that. we are easily led to believe something else will be better. we rarely take responsibility for our own choices.

    everything marketed to women proclaims they have the best sex something – info, clothing, whatever. women talk – they’ll either brag about how great their man is, or they’ll talk about how terrible he is. so what they’ll do with that is add together all the good things about other men and expect her man to be all of those things all the time, regardless of who and what she is.

    women keep pressing the boundaries of what’s better for her … not what’s best, but what’s better, and we’re really great at justifying what we want to justify. so, since marriage is no longer a boundary, and divorce is easy, she’s going to walk on over.

    unless there’s something that keeps her in line, that creates a boundary she’s unwilling to cross. that can be her relationship with Holy God – that she truly fears God. that can be one or both parents, family, a group of friends. whatever that boundary is will be tested in this world.

    the nature of mankind – which is shown all through the bible.

    i find it interesting that all through Moses leading the people out and to the promised land, God says through Moses over and over and over and over ad nauseam … remember who your God is, remember what He’s done, write it on your foreheads, think of it day and night, teach it to your children. 

    then God tells them through Moses that when they come to the promised land, they’ll have to fight for it and destroy everyone there. why? because the inhabitants had become so debase and filled with such despicable sin, following other gods, that they were unredeemable.

    Deuteronomy 20:16 “But of the cities of these peoples which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance, you shall let nothing that breathes remain alive, 17 but you shall utterly destroy them: the Hittite and the Amorite and the Canaanite and the Perizzite and the Hivite and the Jebusite, just as the Lord your God has commanded you, 18 lest they teach you to do according to all their abominations which they have done for their gods, and you sin against the Lord your God.

    fast forward to the beginning of Judges, and in Judges 1:27-36 it is written how they didn’t kill all the people. And then:

    Judges 2:10 When all that generation had been gathered to their fathers, another generation arose after them who did not know the Lord nor the work which He had done for Israel. 11 Then the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, and served the Baals; 12 and they forsook the Lord God of their fathers, who had brought them out of the land of Egypt; and they followed other gods from among the gods of the people who were all around them, and they bowed down to them; and they provoked the Lord to anger. 13 They forsook the Lord and served Baal and the Ashtoreths. 14 And the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel.

    the evil and worshipping of other gods, which included a very debase sex culture, was so prevalent God wanted them wiped out. and when Israel didn’t wipe them all out, the evil infiltrated Israel so profoundly that “the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel.”
    and we see this ebb and flow all through the bible … God’s people turn to Him, then they turn from Him and do evil, God’s anger turns hot against them, they turn back, His mercy is abundant.

    i ponder about these things in our current, unrestrained sexual culture.

    (btw – i can never read the OT anymore and all the wars and how they killed off whole groups of evil people so the evil people can’t infiltrate their ‘clan’ with their evil women and ways, without thinking about Ton 🙂 ; i’m sufficiently warped!)

    Liked by 3 people

  25. Elspeth says:

    @ Scott:

    I get the comments about how brave (or whatever) it is when I have them with me. I am not sure how I feel about it, because its condescending to men in general.

    Often, its something like “I can’t believe I am seeing a man out taking care of his kids” with the distinct suggestion that most men are too stupid/bad/whatever to “give the wife a break” or something like that.

    It is condescending to men, but as Nova said, it’s mostly a flirting technique.

    The other problem is that in our culture, everything is “brave” now, and everyone is wildly exceptional for doing the most mundane things that every human has done since time began.

    We recently heard Voddie Baucham say something that made me want to stand up and cheer. He said (roughly paraphrased), “Giving birth to a baby is not a miracle or a superpower. Women do it every day, and have been doing it since the beginning of creation. It’s so ordinary and natural that we can time when the baby is going to be born. We need to stop saying that child bearing is miraculous. Every person in here arrived on earth the same way, that’s how common childbirth is.” There were 1000 people in that building.

    His ultimate point was that making every birth a supernatural miraculous thing takes away from the truly miraculous birth that was the advent of Christ. But still, I appreciated him blowing a hole through the popular narrative that having a baby makes a woman a hero.

    We have such a dearth of true exceptionalism that we look for it everywhere, and when we can’t find it, we make it up.

    But most of those women are just trying to steal you from your wives, LOL.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Oscar says:

      I appreciated him blowing a hole through the popular narrative that having a baby makes a woman a hero.

      In the popular narrative, she’s only heroic is she’s a single mom. And she’s even more heroic if she murders her baby in the womb.

      Like

      • Elspeth says:

        On the left, yes, what you say is true. Particularly in the dominant culture.

        But even in conservative Christian circles, we constantly hear about “the miracle of childbirth!” Or we applaud women who, when facing an unplanned pregnancy, “choose life”.

        The bar for what is exceptional or heroic is so incredibly low. Everyone is a hero now, and everything is brave.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        The bar for what is exceptional or heroic is so incredibly low. Everyone is a hero now, and everything is brave.

        I first started noticing that when I returned from my first tour in Iraq. “Every Soldier is a hero!”

        No, we’re not. I’m not. I’ve served honorably, but not with distinction. I’ve done what my peers have done, nothing more.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        Medical workers e.g. nurses are now being described as “superheroes” not just heroes in my area.

        I kinda felt the same way about military personnel (particuarly pencil-pusher ones) but as someone who didn’t serve I always felt guilty thinking that – we’re taught on the right to quasi-worship people who were in the military.

        Liked by 1 person

      • redpillboomer says:

        I was military, and I had a hard time wrapping my head around being called a ‘Hero.’ To me, we did what we were supposed to do, nothing more, nothing less. We appreciated and coveted the SUPPORT of the American people, and their sincere thank you’s went a long way with us; however, the ‘Hero’ stuff, no, didn’t feel it. It seemed a bit over the top to me. Real military hero’s were combat troops that did things like D-Day, Battle of the Bulge and so forth. I got goosebumps watching HBO’s Band of Brothers. Those guys really were heroes; and yet, they never thought of themselves that way during and after the war. They did what they had to do, survived and made it back, many of them had to deal with it for the rest of their lives. Can you imagine a WWII combat vet watching what has taken place the last fifty years or so? And the groups we keep lauding as ‘Heroes’ these days? Must blow their minds, the one’s still left.

        Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      “But most of those women are just trying to steal you from your wives, LOL.”

      Meant tongue-in-cheek or not?

      I ask because I’m not a woman. Women flirt in the workplace with married men with children. It isn’t clear to me if they just want to be noticed or if they want the man to escalate.

      Some of the women who do this are married, some not. I suspect that a large number of children signals something in the female brain. It’s not like the man is extraordinary for being able to impregnate his wife a bunch of times – almost any guy can do this – boring-Bob-the-engineer. I don’t know if it’s what the man represents – ideal family life or something.

      Some of them are young wives whose husbands don’t want to have kids or keep delaying it.

      Either way, many women are fascinated when you have a large family.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Oscar says:

        boring-Bob-the-engineer

        Hey, now! I resemble that remark!

        Liked by 2 people

      • Elspeth says:

        Some women, depending on their particular situations, are genuinely fascinated and touched to see a man with a bunch of young kids in tow.

        Despite the reality that Scott pointed out about how common this is (we all see men with their kids ALL THE TIME), we have been so thoroughly and successfully indoctrinated with the lying meme of the husband who doesn’t help out, many women can’t help but react to an obvious rebuttal to it.

        And then…there are those who are flirting for a myriad reasons. They are attracted to the man in question, and they are wondering if he thinks she’s attractive too, even if she doesn’t mean for anything to come of it.

        Some, usually divorcees, really are looking for an attractive guy who shows signs of stability, and the wedding ring isn’t necessarily a deterrent. The assumption is usually that a man with a wife and a bunch of kids is probably in some way bored or dissatisfied with his life, and ergo, is easy picking, LOL. She already knows he’s not commitment phobic, she needs to know if he’s unhappy enough to be taken in by her interest.

        I feel like a terrible cynical person right now, but I’ve seen too much among women over the years, my husband has been too often propositioned, and Nova’s thesis here about the centrality of sexual happiness as the measure of life is so blatantly obvious that I don’t think it’s at all wise to assume benign intent as the norm.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        Crap didn’t mean to “like” my own comment – missed the reply.

        “I feel like a terrible cynical person right now, but I’ve seen too much among women over the years, my husband has been too often propositioned…..”

        I received the same exact one-liner from two different women with whome I was working in closed areas alone: “You know we’re alone in here.”

        I told my wife but refused to tell her who. I was astonished when my wife correctly guessed one of the women based on how the woman reacted to my wife when my wife called my job looking for me. The whole thing freaked me out.

        The women in our work group pitched a fit at our annual ethics meeting (one literally started to tear up) because one of the men said he preferred his office door to remain open when he has a woman in his office -well this thing is why.

        I have several other married male friends at work who have had similar issues. One (white male procurement guy) had a woman sit in his lap uninvited. One (white male engineer) had a woman rub his leg, uninvited. One (an Arab American) had a woman rub his shoulders uninvited. One (a black fifty something preacher who dressed very formally) was propositioned in the elevator by a much younger woman (he actually explicitly scolded her and didn’t get in trouble for it).

        Some women also have a habit of visiting you in your office for no real reason.

        None of us are “hot” stud men by the way.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Ame says:

        be very, very wary of those women. do leave your office door open.

        Horseman at Spawny’s would tell you to wear a bodycam.

        see them as the little demons they are.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        One (a black fifty something preacher who dressed very formally) was propositioned in the elevator by a much younger woman (he actually explicitly scolded her and didn’t get in trouble for it).

        You gotta love it when upstanding black men use the melanin armor for good.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        “be very, very wary of those women. do leave your office door open.”

        Can’t – work in closed areas (that means classified) – can’t have cellphones, cameras, doors closed no windows.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Ame says:

        ouch.

        i have a close friend whose Husband has a job like that. they had hired a woman, once, who began to give him little issues. his wife would advise him on how to interpret and handle those – to be alert, to be very careful with everything you say and do. she wasn’t controlling him … it’s just that men don’t see the interpretation the same way women do.

        just throwing ideas out … would it be possible to let someone else know when a woman is in your office with you and then to let her know so-and-so knows she’s there. dictate into some something that woman just walked into your office for meeting after she walks in so she hears you. have women sign and in-and-out form on your desk when they walk in and when they leave?

        above all, pray. pray a hedge of protection around you every single day … spiritual hedges are very powerful, so much so that Satan doesn’t even question them b/c they’re God’s boundary: Job 1:9 So Satan answered the Lord and said, “Does Job fear God for nothing? 10 Have You not made a hedge around him, around his household, and around all that he has on every side?

        pray daily that God would send angels to fight for you and protect you.

        pray that God would open your eyes and ears to the truth going on around you. 2 Kings 6:16 So he answered, “Do not fear, for those who are with us are more than those who are with them.” 17 And Elisha prayed, and said, “Lord, I pray, open his eyes that he may see.” Then the Lord opened the eyes of the young man, and he saw. And behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire all around Elisha.

        pray the armor of God … Ephesians 6:13 Therefore take up the whole armor of God, that you may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand.
        14 Stand therefore, having girded your waist with truth, having put on the breastplate of righteousness, 15 and having shod your feet with the preparation of the gospel of peace; 16 above all, taking the shield of faith with which you will be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked one. 17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God; 18 praying always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, being watchful to this end with all perseverance and supplication for all the saints—

        have your wife pray these with you and for you daily.

        do not assume these women are innocent and naive … assume they are calculated and cold and would take you out in an instant while saving their own butts. if at all possible, do not ever talk about anything personal; keep it all business. personal gives them a little sliver to seep into.

        remember the struggle is spiritual, and for some reason Satan has been given permission to attack you fiercely: Ephesians 6:12 For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        These are working computer labs – sometimes there’s several people in there, sometimes you and someone else, sometimes just you. My friend ended up having sex with a woman and was caught and fired. (she was too).

        It happened twice – I didn’t respond at all either time. It seems easy to control escalation – just act real cold and professional – don’t say any words that can be used against you but make it known your not “friendly” with tone and body language. Both women left the company anyway.

        I don’t know about the guys that have been physically touched – Elspeth said her husband corrected the woman – I think that is dangerous professionally – IMO if you embarrass a woman she might try to get revenge. Our families depend on us to eat and sleep indoors.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        You have to treat women the same as men (in theory) or you are a bad sexist man. If you treat women differently by doing something to prevent being falsely accused or to prevent anything inappropriate then you are a bad person. One minute we’re all potential rapists, but then the next when we try to use simple techniques (leave the door open when you can) to prevent problems we’re discriminating (one woman described this as being as bad as making black people sit at the back of the bus in the old days). WHen “keep your office door open” was suggested by one man the girls got mad and one was almost in tears; “you men are much more of a danger to us than we are to you.” THis is a bunch of engineers and analysts. ALmost every serious case I know of is woman-on-man harassment. The worst cases I’ve seen with men-on-women harassment is men saying crude things (not even really propositioning them just saying things they’d say to one of the guys in the locker room).

        Liked by 1 person

      • Scavos says:

        @Ame

        “do not assume these women are innocent and naive … assume they are calculated and cold and would take you out in an instant while saving their own butts. if at all possible, do not ever talk about anything personal; keep it all business.”

        Definitely took that to heart a few weeks into working in an HR position. The backstabbing was vicious, and then people started wondering why I came off as the strong, silent type. Thankfully, I got out after a few months with my sanity still intact.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        do not assume these women are innocent and naive … assume they are calculated and cold and would take you out in an instant while saving their own butts. if at all possible, do not ever talk about anything personal; keep it all business. personal gives them a little sliver to seep into.

        Indeed. I always kept it at arm’s length at work. For most of the past 12 years I have had an all-female work group — literally I was the only guy in a group of 12 or so women. The only way to survive that gauntlet was to keep things at arm’s length — no friends, no favorites, no closed doors, no lunches with anyone, no confidantes … none of it. Far, far too dangerous, even leaving aside the #metoo type stuff, which is a no-brainer to avoid. Women are very tricky to deal with in the workplace — they are very easily offended, they are very sensitive about social things and especially perceived slights that will fly under a man’s radar screen generally such that the best policy unless you are a pro manipulator personality type is to keep it very arm’s length and keep your private life private as much as possible.

        Liked by 2 people

  26. Elspeth says:

    My husband keeps his office door open when women visit also. Didn’t stop a blonde bimbo from leaning up against his back with her boobs touching him while he worked on something for her. He scolded her as well. He’s been asked out, been texted with some really weird stuff.

    I really do think a lot of it has to do with the fact that so many women know that red blooded men react to sexual overtures, and sadly (not to indict men but it’s true), far too many men have proven that they can be manipulated that way.

    My husband is good looking, an objectively handsome man. He has a great face, 🙂 Friends of mine (of all races and mostly not black women) who would never in a million years try anything have said to me, “SAM is a good looking man.”

    He’s tall (6’2″) and broad shouldered, but not in tip top shape like Scott or Oscar. He could stand to lose 25 or 30 pounds, for sure. But he’s outgoing, fun, and has a great smile. He’s also brutally blunt when asked his thoughts about something, and for some strange reason women seem to lap that up. Even when you’d think they’d be offended by his honesty. I actually don’t usually mind when they call and ask him for the brutal truth, because someone needs to tell them, and the nature of his work means a LOT of people -including women- have his cell, and if we’re going to eat, there’s not much I can do about that, LOL.

    Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      “far too many men have proven that they can be manipulated that way.”

      A friend of mine here (married with two daughters) was fired about 5 years ago for having sex in a closed lab with a young woman – someone walked in on them.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Novaseeker says:

      I really do think a lot of it has to do with the fact that so many women know that red blooded men react to sexual overtures, and sadly (not to indict men but it’s true), far too many men have proven that they can be manipulated that way.

      Very true. It’s kind of an “across the board” truth of the current situation: what used to be boundaries are now porous, and so they don’t generally get respected by either sex. Men do the same thing when it comes to attractive married women, obviously — if they can get her in bed, they will, and most of them are not worried about her marital status.

      There’s even the commonly-repeated lie that you can find on internet forums, Medium, reddit and similar places from men and women alike to the effect that men and women who do this (i.e., target people they know are married) are not an issue, because they do not have any promises they are breaking, and it is only an issue for the married person, so you should not feel in any way that anything the other, unmarried, person is doing is “wrong” — self-serving BS from people who don’t understand that respecting the boundaries of marriage is supposed to be a part of the *social” contract, because we all benefit from marital stability, and therefore people who go around placing marriages at risk are to be criticized.

      That idea has basically gone away today. I think the reason is that cheating is so commonplace, and there are so many “other woman/other man” types around. It also doesn’t help that mainstream sites like CNN and The Atlantic and what have you are periodically running “trial balloon” type stories on “consensual non-monogamy”, planting the seed in the general public discourse of the idea that “monogamy is unnatural and unrealistic” and “monogamy is based on the ugly human emotion of jealousy which, like fear, is always negative and should be banished from our lives” and so on.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Oscar says:

        “monogamy is based on the ugly human emotion of jealousy which, like fear, is always negative and should be banished from our lives”

        Part of the problem is that most people, including Christians, confuse jealousy and envy.

        Jealousy is good, and right. God is a jealous God. Jealousy means protecting that which rightly belongs to you. Envy is evil, and violates the 10th Commandment. Envy is the desire to take that which does not belong to you. It’s the opposite of jealousy.

        If my wife saw me kiss another woman, she’d be right to be jealous, because I belong to her. I’m her husband. I’m not anyone else’s husband.

        If some other woman felt “jealous” when she saw me kiss my wife, she’d be absolutely wrong, because I don’t belong to her in any way. That’s envy, not jealousy.

        Christians need to use the two words correctly.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        “There’s even the commonly-repeated lie that you can find on internet forums, Medium, reddit and similar places from men and women alike to the effect that men and women who do this (i.e., target people they know are married) are not an issue, ………”

        Some women I guess repeat this lie, but plenty of married women still hate shameless hussies and not just the ones that go after their husbands – they hate them in principle.

        I would guess it has to do with whether the woman is in a relationship she is happy with and whether or not she feels vulnerable to losing her husband/boyfriend to another woman. If she doesn’t value her man or isn’t in a relationship, she is more likely to identify with women who mate poach vs. a woman who sees herself as vulnerable to mate poaching.

        And then there are nice women like Elspeth and Ame who disagree with female matepoaching based on Christian morality and not just their personal interests.

        Liked by 1 person

  27. redpillboomer says:

    “It happened twice – I didn’t respond at all either time. It seems easy to control escalation – just act real cold and professional – don’t say any words that can be used against you but make it known your not “friendly” with tone and body language.”
    I learned to do this the last few years of my job in the military. We had one four cubicle work center area and it had two males, two females in it. I was their supervisor. I walk in the cubicle to talk to the fortysomething blonde co-worker about a project and she is sitting on one of those big, gym type bouncing balls instead of her chair (she was supposed to have some issue with her back and needed it in her cubicle for therapeutic reasons). Anyways I walk in and she’s bouncing really hard up and down on that ball, she shifts her seating and says something lascivious like this to me as she begins a unmistakable, provocative, hip grinding motion on the ball, “This is my favorite exercise to get ready for my favorite sport!” Then runs her tongue along her lips and leers at me. I just turned around and walked out. Now, I’m a red blooded male and ordinarily I’d like things like that in the right setting, but this creeped the hell out of me with the environment we were in. We’d been having sexual harassment training out the wazoo throughout the organization, and this just occurred to me as way over the top given the environment we were in at the time-SH training, MeToo movement, et al. As I sat at my desk and thought about it later, what occurred to me was, if I’d done something like that (whatever the male version OF THAT might be), I’d have the wrath of Personnel (HR) descend upon me like some demon straight from hell. Her…absolutely no problem for her. They were getting away with whatever and it all seemed to be a fun game to them of, “See what I can get away with that you can’t–Haha?” I had another instance where I had my credit card out to pay for something, and one of my other female co-worker SUPERVISORS comes and takes it right out of my hand and says to me, “Thanks, I’ve got a real use for this. You will get well paid back later!” Wink wink. And the meaning behind the ‘wink wink’ was not my imagination. I knew exactly what she meant. I assume she was kidding, probably was, but who knows. Again, If I’d have done it, same shit storm as above would have happened to me. Crazy how work centers could be like this from the female side of the organization even as all this sexual assault/sexual harassment was gathering up a head of steam and the witch hunts were on during the last half of the last decade. Glad I’m retired now.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ame says:

      that is so crazy. and i doubt these women were on anything at the time they did this and were in full control of their faculties.

      Like

    • cameron232 says:

      @rpboomer

      Those bouncing balls are exercise balls – we had a girl who brought one in for her desk and would bounce up and down on it. It was clear she was trying to be sexy but she looked retarded to me.

      I’ve never had anything so physically explicit as what you describe. One of the young girls a few years ago sat down in front of me in an already short sundress and kept fidgeting so it would rise to near panty level, then pulling it down, repeating same thing. Same girl did the twirl my hair, bite my lip routine – she left – the good thing is young people cycle in and out of here.

      “Now, I’m a red blooded male and ordinarily I’d like things like that in the right setting,”

      You know you’d think it would give a middle age guy who never had to beat women off with a stick an ego boost but this sort of thing just depresses/blackpills me. It just makes me think most all women are bad (yeah I know that’s not true ladies).

      Like

      • Novaseeker says:

        One of the young girls a few years ago sat down in front of me in an already short sundress and kept fidgeting so it would rise to near panty level, then pulling it down, repeating same thing. Same girl did the twirl my hair, bite my lip routine – she left – the good thing is young people cycle in and out of here.

        Hard to tell if she was trying to bait you into doing something that she could then use to punish you (because guys like you all deserve to be punished, of course, culturally — that’s what the culture is screaming anyway) or if she was just trying to gin up some excitement for herself — i.e., seeing if she could get some reaction out of you may have been in itself exciting for her. Of course she could have been angling for more than that as well, in terms of a punchline, but often with younger girls it’s that they are just looking to see if they can get a reaction fed back to them because it’s gratifying, and the fact that it skirts the rules, and that she knows you would be taking a real risk to react, makes it all the more deliciously exciting for her, even if she has no interest in taking it any further (as is typically the case in these situations). Either way, it’s no risk to her, so all fun for her. It’s real risk for a man, though, which is why it’s always best just to ignore these situations regardless of how obvious they are. No upsides for men in that scenario.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Oscar says:

        In my experience, young girls just want attention, and maybe a little drama. Deny it to them, and you’ll be fine. It’s the older ones who are desperate to “stick the landing” (especially for the second time) that you really have watch out for. Those chicks are dangerous.

        Or, maybe I just radiate stable, boring engineer energy.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Joe2 says:

        “Now, I’m a red blooded male and ordinarily I’d like things like that in the right setting,”

        I think it’s more common than we may want to believe, it can occur when you least expect it and it can be quite explicit.

        Once time at the end of a routine medical exam, I had to provide a urine sample. No big deal; I’ve done it before. The doctor left the room and a female assistant (young and attractive) returned with a container for the sample. She stood right next to me and said, “Do you want me to hold it for you? (double entendre). Really, I’m not an invalid and the container even had a handle. I said, “Thank you, but I think I can manage.” She briskly walked out of the room.

        A medical office was not the right setting.

        Like

  28. Pingback: Women’s sexual desire is narcissistic | Christianity and masculinity

  29. lastmod says:

    You men just lead very exciting lives. Women hitting on you……..sending IOI’s “all the time” at work, walking around, at the doctors’ office…….life indeed isn’t fair, just or even worth it some days.

    Like

  30. cameron232 says:

    My comments about IoI’s received at work are intended to understand how females work since I’m not one and can’t claim to have the female mind.

    I have had a few of these in 20+ years at teh same company (with them heavily skewed towards recent years). As indicated by me and others, I interpret them as women looking for male attention not my irresistable alpha male status (LoL) seeing that I’m an extremely average looking man with thinning hair and a 5’10” skinny frame (think “bird-boned” Josh Hawley but older).

    Also, as indicated, some of these incidents I believe are a result of women being fascinated with fathers and men who are “taken” not the man’s attractiveness.

    So this is not male locker room bragging FWIW.

    Like

  31. Ame says:

    redpillboomer says:
    2021-02-11 at 8:49 am
    “It happened twice – I didn’t respond at all either time. It seems easy to control escalation – just act real cold and professional – don’t say any words that can be used against you but make it known your not “friendly” with tone and body language.”
    I learned to do this the last few years of my job in the military. We had one four cubicle work center area and it had two males, two females in it. I was their supervisor. I walk in the cubicle to talk to the fortysomething blonde co-worker about a project and she is sitting on one of those big, gym type bouncing balls instead of her chair (she was supposed to have some issue with her back and needed it in her cubicle for therapeutic reasons). Anyways I walk in and she’s bouncing really hard up and down on that ball, she shifts her seating and says something lascivious like this to me as she begins a unmistakable, provocative, hip grinding motion on the ball, “This is my favorite exercise to get ready for my favorite sport!” Then runs her tongue along her lips and leers at me. I just turned around and walked out.

    cameron232 says:
    2021-02-11 at 7:22 pm
    @rpboomer

    Those bouncing balls are exercise balls – we had a girl who brought one in for her desk and would bounce up and down on it. It was clear she was trying to be sexy but she looked retarded to me.

    I’ve never had anything so physically explicit as what you describe. One of the young girls a few years ago sat down in front of me in an already short sundress and kept fidgeting so it would rise to near panty level, then pulling it down, repeating same thing. Same girl did the twirl my hair, bite my lip routine – she left – the good thing is young people cycle in and out of here.

    then these girls go and tell their girlfriends what they did … in detail … including your response. and her girlfriends are ALWAYS on her side.

    (giggling and leaning over the table like she’s telling a secret) “I was in Cameron’s office and kept wiggling so my dress would rise up, like this (scoots back chair to show friends, scoots back to the table, giggling). Then I twirled my hair and bit my lip.”

    “What did he do?”

    “Nothing!”

    “Can’t believe he didn’t do anything!”

    whole table is laughing.

    Like

    • cameron232 says:

      @ame,

      Sundress girl did her thing in a conference room. She had a boyfriend – she moved to be with him. Her hair twirling look, lip biting act was a seperate incident.

      “Young wife” visited me in my cubical (I”m too low ranking to have an office). “Young wife” liked to show me pictures of herself (not explicit pictures in any way).

      I dont’ think the young girls are looking for anythign but attention from middle aged men. And maybe daddy issues IDK.

      A priest once told me “the first look isn’t a sin” meaningn you can’t help noticing sometimes but you don’t have to leer. I am incapable of “escalation” anyway since I am pretty shy and still nervous around women trying something like this (I guess a good thing). I literally sweat profusely when stuff like this happens.

      Of the two suggestive things that were said to me, one was a 40 year old wife/mother and one was a 50-ish divorcee. The cases I am aware of where a woman did something physical (woman sitting in married friend’s lap, same woman rubbing another married friend’s leg) the woman was in her forties. Some other incidents I”ve heard about but didn’t see the woman.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Ame says:

        i knew a woman who was divorced with kids. her husband and mine were both sleeping with prostitutes during the years we knew each other. she went wild, though, after the divorce. she was in her 40’s, and, from what i heard, was sleeping around a lot, making very suggestive moves, and then bragging about it.

        she’s one who ‘stuck the landing,’ as they say, with her 2nd marriage, and has done well since. i’m thankful esp for the kids (who i knew and loved).

        Liked by 2 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        A priest once told me “the first look isn’t a sin” meaningn you can’t help noticing sometimes but you don’t have to leer.

        When I was a kid, growing up Catholic, a few of my friends and I were chatting with a priest after Mass once. This was a visiting priest, he was from Malta — must have been around late 30s at the time, quite “handsome” I would say from a straight man’s judgment. Anyway, he was clearly ogling one of the young women who had been in the group chatting with him, as she walked away — she was an attractive college aged girl. One of my friends kind of nudged him with his elbow (we were teenagers) and said something like “hey, aren’t you a priest?”. The priest looked at him and said “Yes, I am a priest, but I am also a man. Because I am a priest, I can’t touch a woman … but I can still look.” And he smiled broadly, chuckling.

        Again, this guy was fairly attractive as far as I can tell and was one of those priests who moved around a bit.

        Yep.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        In defense of some young women. I have to add this.

        I see examples of young, pretty girls who want babies with their husbands and the men are more interested in getting a puppy, a nicer car, whatever. I don’t mean to sound like Pastor “man up and …..” but I wonder if this isn’t why some of young women show some interest in older men, men with families, etc.

        Someone might say that these men are worried about being screwed with child support. Maybe. At some point, you have to trust to love – life isn’t risk free, it never was.

        Liked by 1 person

  32. SFC Ton says:

    Trusting to love is stupid

    Like

  33. Novaseeker says:

    Post-script “memo to the file” on the theme “High School Never Ends”:

    https://www.theblast.com/155123/sommer-rays-mom-joins-onlyfans-for-uncensored-content

    Like

  34. Ame says:

    cameron232 says:
    2021-02-15 at 5:09 am
    @ame,

    Sundress girl did her thing in a conference room. She had a boyfriend – she moved to be with him. Her hair twirling look, lip biting act was a seperate incident.

    “Young wife” visited me in my cubical (I”m too low ranking to have an office). “Young wife” liked to show me pictures of herself (not explicit pictures in any way).

    I dont’ think the young girls are looking for anythign but attention from middle aged men. And maybe daddy issues IDK.

    I dont’ think the young girls are looking for anythign but attention from middle aged men. And maybe definitely daddy issues.

    fixed that for you.

    here are some of my concerns …

    Sundress girl is a young girl at the time? somewhere she learned that behavior – hiking up her skirt, twirling hair, lip biting act – and she had practiced it enough that she was confident using it as though natural behavior. she was not in-experienced.

    she likely did have daddy issues. she definitely wanted the attention of men, and she was willing to go to practiced extremes to get it. and she probably shared this with her friends.

    so … when her friends hear about it, they respond, and she follows. if they respond in such a way that puts the man in a negative light, he’s doomed. doesn’t matter if he did anything or not. this is cancel culture, and if she has a team behind her, directing her, cheering her on, she’ll do it. few girls will do these extreme things in isolation, but we now have a whole culture that is feeding lies and twisting truth to these girls/women, manipulating them, driving them to be stupid. and the casualties are men.

    cameron232 says:
    2021-02-15 at 6:11 am
    In defense of some young women. I have to add this.

    I see examples of young, pretty girls who want babies with their husbands and the men are more interested in getting a puppy, a nicer car, whatever. I don’t mean to sound like Pastor “man up and …..” but I wonder if this isn’t why some of young women show some interest in older men, men with families, etc.

    if they want babies with their husbands, they need to (1) become Mama material – begin training on how to be a Mom and work at being the best wife ever to her own husband. and (2) wait till he gives the okay and honor and respect him in the waiting. my first Husband wasn’t ready for a long time. it wasn’t the only reason we waited to have children, but we did not try till he was ready, which was a couple years after i was ready. (3) even if he never gives the okay, she made a commitment, a vow, and she needs to honor that. it’s hard, sometimes, but hitting on married men with children is NOT an answer and will not solve any of her problems. it will only create a whole slew of new ones.

    Someone might say that these men are worried about being screwed with child support. Maybe. At some point, you have to trust to love – life isn’t risk free, it never was.

    if it were only child support, there might be a case. but it’s not only child support. it’s stripping him of everything. it’s running him through the mud. it’s taking his children away from him to where he never sees them again. it’s brainwashing his children so that by the time they are adults, they fear him. it’s cancel culture and destroying his name and his career.

    emotionally love her if you want, just don’t let it make your decisions for you. take risks, but do your due diligence first and make sure they’re as safe as possible. even then you might still get it wrong – i sure did with my first husband – but at least you’ll know you were smart going in.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ame says:

      I dont’ think the young girls are looking for anythign but attention from middle aged men. And maybe definitely daddy issues.

      actually … Deti would add to that that girls are looking for attention from men they are attracted to.

      Like

      • cameron232 says:

        “Deti would add to that that girls are looking for attention from men they are attracted to.”

        LoL – If skinny-headed guys like Josh Hawley are what chicks are into then I’m their man. I managed to keep my hair and keep myself in decent physical condition.

        One of my wife’s friends (an African-American wife/mother) told her I’m “handsome.” My wife’s former BFF told her she’s attracted to me (I already knew this because of how she acted towards me when the three of us went out to a restaurant/nightclub, making me dance with her and pulling herself towards me on the dance floor). But these are housewives/mothers – their attaction is calibrated differently than a young girl’s. And one of them is in a bad marriage.

        At best I could see where I’m not gross so if a young girl has daddy issues or something or sees the father/mature man thing as appealing.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        At best I could see where I’m not gross so if a young girl has daddy issues or something or sees the father/mature man thing as appealing.

        Not quite correct. It’s true for most older men. But most older men are either out of shape (many quite out of shape) and have hair issues. An older married man in an obviously stable marriage who is in good physical shape and has a full head of hair and is not otherwise problematic (not below average height, no obvious personality problems) is quite attractive to women in general, including a significant slice of younger women. You think you’re just “average”, but by being in shape and having a full head of hair and not being obviously problematic (not short, not crazy, long term married so preselected and not ditched), you’re well above average for your age of men, and above average for men in general in the eyes of many women.

        Don’t fall into the trap of viewing men the way men view women.

        Liked by 2 people

    • cameron232 says:

      @Ame, I guess I have one foot in the blue pill world – I can’t imagine having a young attractive wife (assuming she’s also nice and treats you well) who wants babies and not getting her pregnant. But I always had a strong desire to be a father from a young age.

      Sundress girl was about 24 at the time and attractive. Sundress girl’s dad and mom divorced and her dad married a much younger girl – maybe that’s the daddy issue. Her “stepmom” isn’t a great deal older than she is.

      “Young wife” is also attractive. She has an aggressive, dominant mother and a passive father. Young wife didn’t take her husband’s name when they married. This is a small work group we’re in so you hear about people’s personal life.

      I also got some mild IoI’s from “Skinny Engineer Girl” (very mild mannered) who worked into a watercooler conversation that she wasn’t married. When she saw my coffee mug with my children’s names on it that stopped immediately – she is some sort of Zionist Christian.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Ame says:

        Cameron – had to look up Josh Hawley since i don’t keep up with stuff like that.

        i think Novaseeker’s comment is valid, especially this: Don’t fall into the trap of viewing men the way men view women.

        and i think Josh Hawley is very attractive.

        but here’s the thing you’ll have to come to grips with, and it’s hard to articulate and even harder to understand.

        when one has lived their life like i presume you have from the little bit i’ve garnered from a few comment threads – you married relatively young, you are still married to your first wife, y’all have children together, you have a stable job/career, and you have a stable personality. your life is ‘calm.’ i know … parenting young children is not calm! … but this is relatively speeking.

        your life compared to those who have come from messed up homes, who don’t have any kind of stable worldview on which to build a life’s foundation, who are floating in this world without Jesus, without family, without anything grounding them to anything, your life is amazing. your children are growing up in a well loved, stable, secure home with two parents – two bio parents who are actually married and have not been married to other people, no other children, step children, etc. your life is VERY enticing.

        well … your life is VERY enticing … until some chick like that – young or any age, from a very dysfunctional background and environment, causes you (general you, not specific you) to compromise yourself for her, leave wife and kids for her, create that stable environment with her ….. and then she doesn’t like it b/c she doesn’t know how to function in stability. so the man is screwed in so many ways he can’t begin to unscramble the mess.

        that’s one of many reasons these girls are so dangerous.

        innocent? well … that’s relative, too. many truly have no knowledge of stability, and though they crave it, they are repelled by it when they find it b/c they don’t know how to live in it and how to live without chaos – both equally powerful.

        so you’re in a very precarious place in your life. you are extremely attractive to a lot of women who would likely have never given you a second glance before, and certainly not when your very smart wife snatched you up! this will continue because you will continue to become increasingly more attractive to women as you age

        it’s a good thing these seductive women make you sweat; stay far away from them. do everything necessary to prevent any kind of anything with them, as you already are. do pray for protection for yourself and have your wife pray for that, too.

        these other women crave what you have with the intensity Eve craved that forbidden fruit, on steroids, and satan is working overtime to get them to lure you into their trap, using every conceivable delusion to deceive you into thinking anything they might offer is okay. these other women will be all ages, both single and married, so beware. don’t think that b/c she’s married, she’s safe.

        you cannot think of them as innocent little girls who’ve had a terrible life, or poor middle aged women who’ve been treated terribly by some other man. they may be innocent in some ways, they probably have had and do have terrible lives … but you are not their savior. you are not their rescuer.

        do they need help? absolutely. they NEED Jesus. but your are not Jesus.

        can you pray for them? sure, but do so generically – pray for “all the women who need Jesus to find Him,” no specifics or names needed. if your wife wants to pray for them specifically and by name, that’s perfectly fine. but not you.

        you will find women have an intense love/hate reaction to you and what you have created … b/c they want it. they crave it. they are envious of it. but they totally do not get it. and it’s not your job to teach it to them.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Ame says:

        cameron232 says:
        2021-02-15 at 6:40 pm
        @Ame, I guess I have one foot in the blue pill world – I can’t imagine having a young attractive wife (assuming she’s also nice and treats you well) who wants babies and not getting her pregnant. But I always had a strong desire to be a father from a young age.

        Cameron – you cannot imagine how intensely attractive that is to single women … and probably married women who want to get pregnant. when a women craves to get pregnant, it short-circuits everything in her brain and controls all her behavior and actions. and this is not simply women who have never had children, it’s any woman who wants to be pregnant now.

        but, they don’t want you, per se, they want what they think you are and what they think you can DO FOR THEM.

        be like Joseph and run far from them.

        you will not understand or even begin to know what is motivating a woman to come onto you, so don’t try. just know that it’s bad for you, bad for your wife and kids, and run. protect yourself. stay far away. run if necessary.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Ame says:

        and, i should probably add this.

        the more you protect yourself, the more you reject advances, the more solid and stable your marriage and kids and life, the and the longer this lasts as time moves on, the more attractive you will become to other women. and for some women, they will see this as a challenge to break you.

        not trying to scare you, just trying to be honest.

        you have to understand the nature of women … the base nature of women is not simply to want what they cannot have, it’s to take what they cannot have while deceiving themselves that it’s okay for them to have the forbidden. this is a subconscious and controlling behavior. this is what Eve did.

        the nature of man, from Adam and Eve, is to accept what she offers. don’t accept what they offer.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        @Ame, thanks.Not scared – I have a lot of self control.

        My wife and i have been together since we were teenagers (late teens). We have a million memories, a million inside jokes, our children, so many things we share that noone in the world shares with us. Things I’ve told noone else, things she’s told noone else. If she passes before me, I cannot imagine ever remarrying. I cannot imagine trying to recreate with another woman what I have with her – I could never say the things I say to her to another woman. It would be as if everything I have with her was fake.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Ame says:

        That is incredibly beautiful and priceless, Cameron!

        Oh, gosh! I was actually thinking more in the line of another woman abusing your kindness and charity and lying and ruining your good name than I was thinking of you being unfaithful to your wife.

        You are wise to present only business at work so these women don’t have an opportunity to feel attached to you, not by anything you would intentionally do at all. You no longer have to do anything intentional to be wrongly blamed 😥

        The current culture does not care if something is true, they only care about the narrative.

        It would be wise to be weary of these other women.

        Hope this all makes sense – typing it into my phone between rotating power outages here in Texas cause trying to keep my phone on the charger when we do have power.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        LOL – I wouldn’t want to insult Josh Hawley – he’s the first skinny headed (famous) guy to come to mind. I have more wrinkles and gray.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        @Ame, I suppose women could lie and get you in trouble. I think this would be an unusual case. In the cases I’ve seen the man participated. I have a friend who was fired because he was caught having sex with a woman in a closed area at work. Apparently it happened multiple times. Whether she seduced him or not he was an active participant. He has a wife and two daughters.

        Liked by 1 person

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

  36. cameron232 says:

    You cannot imagine how important a father’s love is to his son’s understanding of and desire for healthy family life. I had a very exceptionally loving father – he was the reason why I always wanted a family.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Ame says:

      I cannot even begin to comprehend what a very loving father would be like much less a very exceptionally loving father. What a blessing ☺️

      Sadly my first Husband had a terrible father – a career pastor who was one way in public and another in private. All he wanted was his father’s approval, and his father refused to give it
      There was one time he gave him a few morsels, and it intensified his son’s craving.

      His father openly loved his second son more.

      And, even though his parents loved me and picked me for him, over the years as I submitted to my Husband and not my Husband’s father, his father turned on me until he was, and still is seething in hate for me.

      When his father turned on me, he made his son choose between them and me. He chose them. Our therapist said his sex addiction came out of that environment.

      Even at his funeral his father, and his brother who is also an ordained minister, were cruel to him in their eulogies … so much so that two very prominent people came up to me after and apologized.

      So, from the negative, I can understand the power a father has over his children for their entire lifetimes.

      Liked by 1 person

  37. Elspeth says:

    My wife and i have been together since we were teenagers (late teens). We have a million memories, a million inside jokes, our children, so many things we share that noone in the world shares with us. Things I’ve told noone else, things she’s told noone else. If she passes before me, I cannot imagine ever remarrying. I cannot imagine trying to recreate with another woman what I have with her – I could never say the things I say to her to another woman. It would be as if everything I have with her was fake.

    I really liked that comment, Cameron. Godly men who love their wives intensely after many years are often ignored in our culture. The assumption (often posited by men who are either divorced or whose marriages are unhappy in a million ways) is that the temptation is overwhelming because “how can a middle aged wife compared with a cute young thing?”

    But my husband, who has always had these challenges, says the same kinds of things you expressed here. He puts it like this: “There’s no woman who can make me risk what I have with my girl.”

    I am truly not worried or concerned about him losing control of his faculties and commitment in the face of temptation. When you’ve had more years together than you’ve had apart, and those have been happy years, and your passion for one another has remained intact, and there aren’t big fights or have never been separations, most people just don’t have a context for that. So they assume any red blooded man who has been married a long time must have to dig really deep to avoid the temptation.

    It may be rare, but even Scott’s comment about Mychael and her co-worker reading “The Excellent Wife” underscores that there are wives who have truly earned their husband’s complete and utter devotion.

    Liked by 3 people

    • cameron232 says:

      @Elspeth, She picked me. Picked me and chose to love me when I was a skinny kid that no other girl had picked and chosen to love. She deserves my lifelong loyalty.

      Having a very devoted father who modeled loyalty helps a lot. I’ve noticed that a lot of cheating men had cheating/disloyal fathers.

      It’s funny – our youngest daughter is the spitting image of my wife. I like to think she has the father that my wife was denied (through my mother in law’s choices).

      Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      @Elspeth, sorry to ramble but more thoughts.

      If your husband tells you about incidents (e.g the blond bimbo and her boobs) then I think that’s a good sign. I have told my wife about my incidents. I have nothing to hide. My only concern was she’d figure out who it was (in one case she did – thank God the woman left the company shortly afterwards) and tear into the woman.

      Also, I suspect an additional temptation is there for men who were mostly ignored when they were younger. It’s tempting for a man to tell himself “where was this when I was young, single, whatever?” If you never had a high opinion of yourself it’s easy to see how teh attention of a young attractive woman is validating. Men can tell themselves all sorts of negative things about their relationship: “If she doesn’t take care of herself as well as I do then she doesn’t really want me she just settled for me as her best option” , etc.

      If SAM is an objectively attractive man all this doesn’t apply.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        Your wife sounds like a truly beautiful -and wise!- woman, Cameron.

        You’re right. There are a lot of divergent elements in my husband’s story, but I can attest that a man who came from a home where the father struggled with fidelity can make the decision that he will not force his wife to endure that kind of pain and insecurity.

        So it’s true that SAM’s experiences are very different from yours, but our story is that as of later this week, we’ll have been married 27 years, and he is 47 years old. I’m 49. One of our points of joy is that (almost no other couple we know under 50), we’ve spent more years – and they’ve been good, happy years- with each other than we spent as single people or with our families of origins. We just feel really blessed and that the Lord has been very gracious to us given that his past and our courtship was far from anything resembling a Christian ideal.

        In either case, the level of peace it gives a wife to know her husband’s love for her tempers any outside temptations that present themselves cannot be overstated.

        It highlights how the transcendent, spiritual and physical bonds of marriage make the whole idea of sexual excitement as the central measure of human happiness seem banal and sophomoric by comparison.

        Liked by 3 people

  38. Pingback: The Lopsided Liberalized Mating Market | Σ Frame

  39. Pingback: Sexual competition continues after marriage | Σ Frame

  40. Pingback: The Christian Marriage Dilemma | Σ Frame

  41. Pingback: The Christian Conundrum | Σ Frame

  42. Pingback: Ethical Issues Surrounding the Christian Conundrum | Σ Frame

  43. Pingback: Deciphering Concepts of Attraction | 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