Revisiting the Beauty of Purity

How does a woman’s appearance change after illicit sex?

Readership: All; Men;

Introduction

A reader, Random Angeleno, asked a pertinent question.

“A potential wife will never tell him if she did OnlyFans or other sex work.  She will presumably have removed all that in her attempts to stick the landing.  So how to check that out?  Image searches?  Phone snooping?  Internet archive?”

A man could spend days searching for a woman’s past online and still come up empty. But the proof is in the pudding.  You can get a taste of her history from her appearance and mannerisms — IF you know what to look for. 

I used to believe that only men were clueless about this, but that it was evident to females. But during a discussion with my wife, I learned that women are also completely unaware of how, and how much, a woman changes after she becomes sexually active.

This post takes a look at several photographs and memes that highlight how women change after defloration, heartbreak, and/or years of casual boinking.  It should become apparent to the reader that purity is indeed more beautiful than sexperience.

Case Study 1: Haley Carr

Before: Her eyes are bright.  Her hair is clean.  Her face glows with inner joy.  She doesn’t need makeup to feel beautiful.  She’s wearing attractive clothing.  She’s confident, humble, exuberant, and smiling.

After: Her eyes are dull and lifeless.  Slut eye is setting in.  She dyed her beautiful blonde hair black, and it’s oily.  Her face is grey and has a flat affect.  Weirdly sculpted eyebrows.  She’s wearing eyeliner and mascara.  Duck lips hide her shame and bitterness.  She’s wearing a revealing top.  She’s shifty, arrogant and proud.  In short, she’s moving up the ladder of $1ut indicators.

She posted these photos on social media, with a snide “lmaoo”.  Why should she be proud of this change?  Why should she feel ashamed of her previous innocence?

Another symbolic aspect of this image is the lighting.  In the before image, there is a beautiful, brightly lit chandelier.  In the second image, there is a recessed light with the lightbulb missing and the wires hanging out of the socket.  I’m sure this artistic detail is unintentional, but it represents very well the differing states of her body and soul.

Case Study 2: The Best D!ck Meme

I’m not sure if these images are real or staged, but nevertheless, they make an excellent pictorial comparison between innocence and depravity.

Update: Deti identified the model as Margot Robbie in both photos. The first one is her as a very young, very attractive woman. The second photo is Robbie as the DCEU character, Harley Quinn.

Before: High in confidence and self-esteem.  Dressed attractively and appropriately.  Genuinely joyful and fun-loving, vivacious, and bubbly.  I could imagine her to be very classy and popular.

After: Her eyes are hard-set and determined.  Heavy mascara, disheveled clothing, Consumed with feral desire.  Self-abasement, demanding.  Licking her lips with thoughts of c0ck conquest.  I could imagine that she makes happily married women very insecure.

Case Study 3: Katie Katzmann

This is Katie Katzmann from the TV reality show, Labor of Love.

Her body has aged well, but her soul has seen corruption.

Before: She has a warm smile.  She appears vivacious, attractive, sociable, popular, and personable.  Her eyes show intelligence, curiosity, and hope.  Her backward thrust shoulders indicate confidence and comfortability in her skin.

Intermediate: She’s lost her hope and vitality, but she still clings to a semblance of self-esteem.  Arms crossed in front of her body indicates her disdainment for life and her inability to trust. Her self-confidence has morphed into self-protection. 

After: Self-esteem is gone, replaced by a painfully evident 1,000 c0ck stare.  Hard set gaze shows her determination to attain control, and accompanied by a hint of cruelty.  Clenched jaw shows entrenched anger and arrogance.

It is interesting that she apparently didn’t want a baby until the latter stage of her development.

Case Study 4: Bella Thorne

I am sad to include Bella Thorne as a case study in this essay, because her defilement was forced upon her at a young age. For more details about this, please read this article from Collective Evolution: Popular American Actress shares that she was molested at Disney from ages 6 to 14 (2020 August 25).

Before: This girl is super cute! She is playful, curious, and trusting.

Intermediate: Bella’s countenance shows the obvious deterioration of purity, but she also displays a beleaguered self-esteem that accompanies the violation of her free will. Her eyes are hollow, indicating withdrawal and mechanical distrust. Her hair is cared for, but fake, indicating that she’s presenting an image that is not her true self. Not playful, not curious, and the sparkle of hope is gone.

After: Bella has reached an age of accountability and now faces the full brunt of the damages inflicted upon her. Thus, her true self has returned, but looking haggard and desperate.  Her hair is disheveled, she has a repugnant nose ring, and her overall appearance conveys deep sadness and hopelessness. Yet, in spite of all this, I think her demise has not yet reached its nadir, because she still roils in the fake bravado claim that her “body is too much for Insta”.

My word…

Case Study 5: Kim Kardashian

We’ve all seen that eye-popping image of Kim’s @$$ on the cover of a magazine that, for some reason, we can’t remember the name of anymore. But I didn’t know how cute she was when she was younger.

Before: She’s very sweet and feminine, and a little bit sensuous. Rather attractive, really. I could even believe she was kindhearted and conscientious.  She seems like a girl you might want to marry – except that touch of sadness makes you wonder.

After: The first overall impression is striking.  But when you look deeper, you can tell she’s totally fake. She’s had a nose job which gives her nostrils a V-hook. Botox lips, and something unnatural about her lower face and jaw, like she’s clenched her teeth in rage for the last decade. Heavy mascara, and a salmon-hued, spray-on tan. There’s a strange, vacant yet piercing look in her eyes which are glazed over with a 1KC stare. She’s proud about being able to evade the wall for a few more years.  The sadness has overtaken her, transforming her into a lost spirit hiding behind the mask.  There’s no way she would ever make a good wife now.

Case Study 6: The Doughnut Meme

Enuff said.

Conclusions

The deception of perception and the slow slide into depravity comes in slow gradations that are hardly noticeable from day to day, but over the years, one’s true character shows through.

Haley Carr and Katie Katzman chose their defilements, presumably to revenge an ex, or assert their independence, if not simply for the fun of it all. Because they made the free choice to ride the carousel, they are ostensibly satisfied with their choices (so far).

Bella Thorne and Kim Kardashian have sought out socio-sexual liaisons, fame, and popularity as a substitute for sadness and emptiness inside, respectively. As long as these sources are propping up their needs for attention and identity, they will continue to cruise the fast lane.

God’s grace is shown to them in the fact that they’ll never know what blessings they could have had, if they had made different choices in life.

These case studies are noteworthy examples of a trend that has been happening on a society wide scale. People have been conditioned to believe that sexual experience and a worldly aura is equivalent to sexual authority. In other words, men and women alike tend to think that women with a figure and a notch count are more attractive than women characterized by purity and innocence.

NovaSeeker observed this growing phenomena as well.

“The problem is that the “corrupted” look is now being spread as the “normal” look thanks to the power of social media, and as this continues to happen, we will see more blurring here, making it progressively harder to discern the tells, in a reliable way.”

Novaseeker’s reply to Random Angeleno described the brash acceptance of the “corrupted” look as desirable.

“What’s coming next is the normalization/mainstreaming of OnlyFans type activity by women. There are married women who are active with sexual content on OnlyFans right now, like Ana Cheri. Also the fact that so many OnlyFans “content creators” use their actual real names and not fake names like porn actresses have almost always done indicates that these women don’t think they have anything to be ashamed of. And as more and more celebrities pile into the OnlyFans space, that will, in fact, happen.

So that’s what’s next — because it’s already starting.”

The key phrase is “normalization/mainstreaming”.

But it’s worse than this. Modern women have the idea that purity and virginity is something to be ashamed of, which is more of a secular man’s perspective on men. The “pure look” is being denigrated as a laughingstock of childish naïvete and “immaturity” (e.g. Haley Carr’s snide remark), and the “corrupted look” is being typecast as sexual virility in the positive sense, and it is now taken to be a desirable expression of sexual authority. The negative sense of it indicating the first few shades of a gradual slide into perdition is not recognized, communicated, nor perceived.

If we could somehow continue the photo progression into the afterlife, we would see the corruption, darkness, desire for power, desperation, haughtiness, sadness, etc. continue to grow until the person is totally transformed into a demonic lost soul.

People don’t understand how dangerous this really is, because it is so prevalently cast as the glorified norm (glorified evil, that is). I wrote this post because we need to hone our discernment to be aware of this.

It is my hope that this photo essay might dispel this mistaken belief by contrasting the dead pan countenances resulting from illicit sex against the natural attractiveness of an innocent, vibrant, undefiled heart.

Know what to look for, men!

Related

About Jack

Jack is a world traveling artist, skilled in trading ideas and information, none of which are considered too holy, too nerdy, nor too profane to hijack and twist into useful fashion. Sigma Frame Mindsets and methods for building and maintaining a masculine Frame
This entry was posted in Addictions, Choosing a Partner or Spouse, Discerning Lies and Deception, Female Power, Glory, Maturity, Personal Growth and Development, Models of Failure, Personal Presentation, Sanctification & Defilement, Sexual Authority, SMV/MMV, Vetting Women. Bookmark the permalink.

151 Responses to Revisiting the Beauty of Purity

  1. SFC Ton says:

    A lot of that is due to how early women hit the wall, which I think occurs way, way sooner then most folks account for

    Liked by 4 people

    • RMIV says:

      yeah like 18

      you’re in there before anyone else or forget it, there’s no arresting their descent on the greased trash chute that is their trajectory

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Elspeth says:

    O/T but tangential for Novaseeker (and maybe Scott):

    I’m currently reading Carl Trueman’s, Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self.

    He lays out his case that the sexual revolution is the natural result of the trajectory of hundreds of years of Western thought. From Rousseau, the Romantics, etc. I’m only 1/4 in but I find it compelling.

    Don’t know if you’ve read it, but thought you might find the subject matter (consolidated such as this is) interesting.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Novaseeker says:

      Yes, in part I agree with Trueman. I have not read his entire book but I’ve read long pieces from it and articles he himself has written about it.

      I agree with Trueman’s idea that it follows from Rousseau and the basic idea that it is social oppression which corrupts a basically good humanity, and that therefore liberation from such restriction will tend towards bringing out the best in people and making them flourish. That’s the core idea behind most of progressive type thinking, including feminism. It obviously isn’t a Christian idea because Christian anthropology is very different, but the Rousseau-ian idea lies as the fundamental underpinning to the later development in thought (which was of course reflected in politics, ideology and policy, as thought is, if it becomes influential enough) which eventually led to the idea of liberalism as conceived by John Stuart Mill, which was immediately coupled (by Mill himself) with feminism. Feminism cannot further its own project without the sexual revolution — it’s a necessary/core part of the feminist project, because the fundamental “subjection” of women is sexual and biological in that women historically bore the primary burden of sexual activity in their own flesh.

      Of course here the shark gets jumped, because Rousseau’s idea of the “natural good” is quickly cast aside by the overwhelming desire for personal liberation — even if that liberation requires the freeing of oneself from the constraints of nature so as to achieve a way of living and self-conception that is “post-natural”. So feminism moves quickly past the liberation of women from mere social constraint (Rousseau) and towards liberating women from nature’s decree (exceptionally safe and reliable contraception and abortion) so as to enable a post-natural form of women’s liberated selves. This, precisely because liberation from social constraint “was not enough”, given that the main practical constraint on women’s free sexual expression was biological and not social, and that it was this biological reality which served to hem in women in other ways (pursuit of personal individual power, wealth, fame and so on). So Rousseau was pushed past — well beyond the noble savage and towards the post-nature high-tech liberationist, a creature who is just as much a product of a socially mediated technoculture as they are liberated from its predecessor.

      At bottom here, then, I see the issue as running deeper than Rousseau and the romantics. One can trace it back to Voltaire’s restatement of a very old idea — “I think, therefore I am”. This self-conception is different from Rousseau’s and ultimately has more power than it, because it locates the actual center of liberation in the “mind”, of which the body is seen as a mere servant, tool, or object of manipulation. Indeed it is from Voltaire’s resurrection of this old idea that our current predicaments and obsessions can be traced fairly easily, because contemporary humans think in a Voltairean sense almost intuitively today, seeing the world and their own physical selves as solely things, objects to be manipulated according to the desiring will, which arises in the thinking mind. Hence the easy ascendance of LGBT ideology — after all if it’s really true that “I think, therefore I am”, how can not be true that if one thinks one is a woman, one is one? That is, if the essence of one’s being is in one’s mind, then surely if one thinks oneself a woman (or a man), then one is one, regardless of the physical “encasing” in which said mind finds itself. The same holds true for other “gender expressions”. [[As an aside, note that sexual orientation will soon be viewed this way, too (it was only peddled to be akin to immutable physical characteristics so as to piggy-back on civil rights era legal precedents which were developed to apply to skin color … noone who is gay and over a certain age really believes that most gay people are ‘born that way’ because they all know many gay people who were not).]]

      So while I agree that Rousseau had his influence on the overall progressive project, it jumped the shark in favor of a more Voltairean view, because ultimately Voltaire’s view is more “liberating” than Rousseau’s in that the Voltairean view doesn’t subject the liberating/liberated self to anything at all other than the desires created by its own mind which are, in its view, the essence of one’s being, full stop.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        And of course I mixed up my French philosophes — I was thinking of course not of Voltaire but of Descartes. Voltaire had his similarities with Descartes, but it is the Cartesian mindset that I meant to refer to in the above, and not the Voltairean. Need more coffee!

        Liked by 2 people

      • Eric Francis Silk says:

        Liberation from social constraints didn’t bring out the best in people as Rousseau thought it would. Instead it brought back the War Of All Against All. That includes the realm of sexuality. In that sense, Hobbes was right.
        Unfortunately we have no Leviathian we can contract with. Not when it comes to sex anyway.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        Liberation from social constraints didn’t bring out the best in people as Rousseau thought it would.

        Right. No orthodox Christian would ever agree with Rousseau’s core idea either, because if Rousseau is correct there is no need for Christ. Rousseau’s view is inherently anti-Christian. Rousseau himself appears to have been a nominal Calvinist, but he also clearly repudiated the idea of original sin, which is certainly a core concept in any Calvinist theological system.

        Liked by 4 people

      • SFC Ton says:

        Read through that a few times.

        With much respect to you Nova, it reminds me why I think philosophers should be punched in the face on the regular, excluding the Stoics of my choice 😉

        The rest of it really is pointless mental masturbation

        Liked by 3 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        “The rest of it really is pointless mental masturbation.”

        Yep, I actually agree, but the problem is that ideas have influence, whether we like that or not. Millions of Europeans learned this, to the dismay of many of them, in the 20th Century.

        “I mean, who cares what some full-of-himself-bald-jackass who is exiled in Geneva thinks about anything? Totally removed from reality, that fool and his cronies over there. Pox on all of them…” …. then twenty years later … “Oh, shit …...

        Ideas don’t matter until they do. The same thing is happening now. We all dismiss what gets discussed in the academy as mental masturbation and irrelevant (and I agree that this is what it is in actual substance), but the next thing you know it’s being enforced on everyone, because ideas have influence, and when the influence of ideas meets power … blam, it’s game on.

        Liked by 3 people

      • SFC Ton says:

        You ain’t lying boss which is why I think good men with common sense should punch them in the face when they open their pie hole

        Liked by 2 people

      • Elspeth says:

        Ideas have consequences. The “conservative” , for lack of a better word, is only realizing this right now. The revolutionary has always understood it.

        Truman points out, and I believe rightly, that we are all to some degree complicit in the current state of affairs. It’s the stew we’ve all simmered in.

        To the extent that we make exceptions to the principle for ourselves while drawing a hard line for someone else, we engage in the exaltation of our individuality over the greater good.

        And when I say “greater good”, I’m referring to God’s transcendent Truth as revealed in His word.

        Liked by 2 people

      • SFC Ton says:

        You know I don’t read that many words written by a woman;)

        Liked by 2 people

      • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

        Even the Stoics ought to get slapped around. If you can’t fight, you really have no business philosophizing. You should be too busy in the gym or the ring to be thinking weak thoughts in a weak body.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Eric Francis Silk says:

      Rousseau didn’t come up with the idea. That’s on Locke. He based his philosophy on a hypothetical State Of Nature that nobody has ever found any proof for.

      Side note: one of Rousseau’s acolytes (who was also a prominent Girondin leader during the French Revolution) argued that cannibalism wasn’t inherently immoral because it was “natural”. I wonder how long it will be until we start seeing that argument being made again.

      Like

      • Elspeth says:

        I’m still in the beginning phases of the book, so I want to follow Trueman’s line of thinking to its conclusion to determine whether he offers me an opportunity to think of these things anew.

        Here’s the thing about Locke (from whom Thomas Jefferson poached “life liberty and property”, changing the latter to “pursuit of happiness” for literary effect): There was a strain of truth to Locke’s assertion that God created men with a certain type of equality between us all. And it is equally true that Scripture makes it abundantly clear that God grants individuals the rights to the property that is the result of their diligent labor. The Quartering Act, imposed upon the colonists by the British, was a large part of the impetus for the 3rd Amendment to the constitution.

        The problem with all of this is that the linguistics of it lead to the inevitable exaltation of individual expression over the grounding provided by the cultural institutions of faith, or even the polity.

        By the way Eric, I disagree with your assertion that the opposite effect happens in men as it relates to the OP. Male promiscuity might not produce an identifiable physical transformation (I would actually argue that this is nowhere near universal in women either), but apart from a genuine heart transformation prompted by faith, I’ve never seen a man who was a plate spinner pull off monogamous marriage successfully.

        Liked by 3 people

      • info says:

        @Elspeth
        Once a polygamist. Always a Polygamist.

        Like

  3. Novaseeker says:

    You can see it in numerous, numerous cases, if you look around.

    Maitland Ward is an easy-to find example — here’s a before and after: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/479774166536202426/ That pinterest is talking about her noze job, but the real difference is between how Ward looked when she was in her 20s and doing family sitcoms, and how she looks now as a porn star — lots, um, happened in between there that impacted her look, other than the surgery.

    Here’s another one: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/762445411900756491/ Now Kylie Jenner grew up in a terrible environment, it’s true — she basically had no chance to be anything other than a ho in that family of celebrity hos — but before all the whoring started she looked different than she does even a few years into the CC. Jenner is a very attractive young woman, either way, but the look is markedly different, in the obvious ways you mention in this post.

    And, to take a topic of a lot of recent conversation here, there’s always Nikole Mitchell. Mitchell is interesting because she has her life history, in visual terms, displayed for the world to see on Instagram: she has never created a separate account for her “professional” (ahem) pictures, and so you can trace her whole history, family life, family of origin and all sorts of visual information from that through her Instagram, including her personal appearance transformation in ways that track exactly what Jack is talking about in this post.

    Here is how Nikole looked in her earlier married years, as a suburban mom and housewife:

    Here is the dramatic shift once she gets her hair cut, with “before” and “after” on the same day:

    The difference in itself is dramatic. Notably, she has kept this hair more or less throughout her degeneration.

    We can see already how her look with her husband starts to become rather different from what it had been: https://www.instagram.com/p/_kKKO5KDPU/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link

    And of course how she looks today, both her full appearance and a facial close-up:

    You can trace the progression in appearance. It’s the same woman, and both versions are attractive, but the “corrupted” version has the tells that Jack is talking about here.

    The problem is that the “corrupted” look is now being spread as the “normal” look thanks to the power of social media, and as this continues to happen, we will see more blurring here, making it progressively harder to discern the tells, in a reliable way.

    Liked by 3 people

    • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

      NOVA
      Soc-cons are still pushing their ”people(Women!) are basicaly good” stuff(Stan the non-good man lee ,even said this stuff on the back of a pizza-hut x-men vhs tape in late ’93!) from the early ’90’s?That always made me laugh like this…LOLOLZZLOLZLOLZ(He knew how funny modern life was right?)…these “people” are allowed to vote&own weaponry?JACKP.S.Kim k.was always about finding a good (Happy) man to stay married to LOLZLOLZ…!

      Liked by 2 people

    • Rock Kitaro says:

      Corrupted…perfect word for this. Supremely tragic.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Jack says:

      “The problem is that the “corrupted” look is now being spread as the “normal” look thanks to the power of social media, and as this continues to happen, we will see more blurring here, making it progressively harder to discern the tells, in a reliable way.”

      It’s worse than this. The “pure look” is being denigrated as a laughingstock of childish naïvete and “immaturity” (e.g. Haley Carr’s snide remark), and the “corrupted look” is being typecast as sexual virility in the positive sense, and it is now taken to be a desirable expression of sexual authority. The negative sense of it indicating the first few shades of a gradual slide into perdition is not recognized, communicated, nor perceived.

      If we could somehow continue the photo progression into the afterlife, we would see the corruption, darkness, desire for power, desperation, haughtiness, sadness, etc. continue to grow until the person is totally transformed into a demonic lost soul.

      People don’t understand how dangerous this really is, because it is so prevalently cast as the glorified norm (glorified evil, that is). I wrote this post because we need to hone our discernment to be aware of this.

      Liked by 6 people

    • Liz says:

      “Here is how Nikole looked in her earlier married years, as a suburban mom and housewife.”

      It’s interesting that she had a nose ring even back then.
      A nose ring seems a pretty bold statement.

      Liked by 4 people

    • info says:

      I think when she acquired the nose-ring the warning signs were becoming quite visible.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Jack says:

      I considered including Nikole Mitchell as a case study, but I decided to leave her out. The reason is because she is an outlier. She had sexual experience long before she married (the seeds of sin), but yet the corruption (the fruit) didn’t appear until much later in her life, after she had “turned”.

      Also, she is part Asian. I have noticed that some Asian women can carry on with raucous sexual debauchery for quite some time, many years even, before the tells begin to show. I’ve even known a couple Asian women who had double digit notch counts, but yet their hearts were still very tender and alive.

      These women have a very simple mind and a very tame libido. They view sex as a “happy time” between a man and a woman, and accept it as a normal interaction which happens to normal people. They stay humble, and they never let bitterness or distrust seep into their souls. In comparison, western women have a mind-warping libido, so they tend to become obsessed and f*ck with wholehearted abandoned desire, sh!t test, etc., and then get heartbroken when things change.

      The effects of hard living show up in Asian women, just like in their western counterparts, but usually not until much later in life. Western women hit the wall in their late 20s, while Asian women hit the wall in their early 40s.

      I believe this is due to a mastery of socio-emotional boundaries which is something that is emphasized as a virtue in east Asian cultures, similar to how confidence is emphasized as a virtue in the west.

      Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      I feel sorry for Nicole’s husband. But a ninja turtles cartoon shirt at his age – WTF?

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Eric Francis Silk says:

    Now do men.
    I suspect the Virgin VS Chad meme has some truth to it, inasmuch as the effect is almost the opposite when it comes to men.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Rock Kitaro says:

      lololol, different kinds of virgins though. That’s what I suspect anyway. But then again, I can be the exception to the rule. I’m 34, and almost every time I tell a romantic interest that I’m a virgin, they literally refuse to believe me for some time. You see the range of emotions flash over their face. It’s usually shock, then anger, then shame, then the mask to hide everything from me until I explain how I’m not this perfect angel and have my own flaws that I’m dealing with too…sexual immorality is just not one of them.

      Liked by 5 people

      • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

        ROCK
        You’re basically telling them you’re higher value to them in their mind! (PUA gamers might disagree here with me!)
        Since no matter how much they&others lie to them about virginity, they know innately (like Scott says!) that its not true!
        P.S. If this is not true, why do women &others tell everybody how ”good” they are?

        Liked by 2 people

  5. redpillboomer says:

    This was intriguing! I went back to my Millennial female’s Facebook page that I mentor/coached in the educational program I’ve mentioned in my earlier posts to check her progression pictorially over time. I selected her 21, 23, 27 (the time frame I worked with her), and her most recent 31 year old pic. Even accounting for the natural progression of aging (I mean who looks at 31 like they did at 21, male or female?) what JUMPED out at me is the soul less look in her eyes at 31. Even at 27, it doesn’t look soul less yet. I do know she took at least two turns on the CC the year I mentor/coached her. So using two rides per year as an average figure (maybe conservative IDK), 13 years X 2 c*cks = 26 separate rides on the CC! I’ve been doing a lot of Zoom calls the last year, probably like all of you have, and that would be at least TWO pages of men on a Zoom screen that she has let enter her since 18 years old. Dang! And who knows, it could be even three pages of men for all I know. No wonder her eyes look soul less now.

    Liked by 3 people

  6. Rock Kitaro says:

    I started working with a woman recently. My boss kept mentioning how she and I might make a good couple because she’s just a year younger than me, (i’m 34) and honestly, we do have good chemistry and she does seem to be a good person. But I remember when I first met her, almost ashamed to say this, but my first thought was, “She looks older than me.” Good body. But in her face…

    So I do as I normally do, and checked out her social media sites to see if she’s with someone and what she’s into… and sure enough, aside from her loose morals (she’s an atheist)… she’s done drugs. After a month, I flat out asked her if she did cocaine and I was expecting her to say, “Yeah, a long time ago during some party hard days long gone.”

    But she said, “Yeah, maybe once or twice a year.”

    I sighed. She’s a good person. Very knowledgeable in worldly things. Just lost, it seems, with no concept of planning for the future. Seeing if I can help her. Of course, aware that some people can’t be helped.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Adam says:

      You work with her. Don’t try to help her in any personal way at all. It will backfire on you miserably in ways which you cannot possibly fathom right now.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Rock Kitaro says:

        lol, I know where you’re coming from (having been through my own share of workplace drama)…but that’s not the case here. We don’t have the same employers, we work together in a venture that doesn’t affect my money.

        Not to mention, lol, this can go towards another topic, but even though I’ve heard the arguments about not dating co-workers or eating where you ish and all that…even with sexual harassment accusations I had to deal with in my mid 20s, I’m pretty confident my future wife will either be someone a friend introduces me to…or someone I work with in some capacity.

        Liked by 2 people

    • info says:

      @Rock Kitaro
      If you are fine with generally having a low chance of children and a higher risk of genetic problems in your children. Then if you insist it may be feasible.

      Otherwise you will have to be with a woman in her early 20’s to have a better chance of children. Likewise I am sure you may find good ones in that age range.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Rock Kitaro says:

        yeah, I’ve been listening to a variety of Red Pill Content since 2016 so I definitely know the risks and red flags. To be honest, that person I’m referring to…it’s really not that serious. The fact that she’s an Atheist is more significant to me than her age, sexual history, or drug use. So don’t worry. I’m good.

        Liked by 1 person

      • info says:

        “The fact that she’s an Atheist is more significant to me than her age, sexual history, or drug use.”

        Fair enough. If she were Christian. She would be married already by her 20’s.

        Liked by 1 person

  7. dpmonahan says:

    This is why I’ve always found the Christian RP assertion that “godliness isn’t attractive” to be odd.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Jack says:

      “This is why I’ve always found the Christian RP assertion that “godliness isn’t attractive” to be odd.”

      Some aspects of godliness are attractive, like emotional maturity and the purity of the soul highlighted in this post. But other aspects are annoying (like unconditional love), comparatively unattractive (like modesty), very unattractive (like self-sacrifice), or bring out the worst in others (like humility). These aspects are especially unattractive in the eyes of someone who is accustomed to worldly social norms and tastes.

      No one ever makes any distinction between these differences and how they relate to attractiveness or sexual authority. In some future posts, I’ll be examining these differences in more detail.

      Liked by 3 people

      • dpmonahan says:

        I suspect that self-sacrifice, humility, modesty and altruism are attractive as virtues, and unattractive as duplicitous or transactional “nice-guy” strategies.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Sharkly says:

        Don’t get me started on how God’s love is conditional, and how love without conditions or expectations, isn’t loving at all, or how atheist Erich Fromm first coined the term “unconditional love” to explain why he rejected the God of the Bible, whose love was quite clearly conditional. If you don’t accept God’s conditions, He burns you alive for eternity. That’s pretty conditional!
        Don’t believe in the churchian’s unconditional “buddy Christ”. They’ve made up their own personal “Jesus” who has no standards, just like themselves.

        Liked by 3 people

    • This is why I’ve always found the Christian RP assertion that “godliness isn’t attractive” to be odd.

      Specific contexts. Remember, an attractive man giving a woman flowers is romantic. An unattractive man giving a woman flowers is a creep. Same actions, different contexts, different results.

      Godliness without a specific context is generally unattractive. It’s only when you place it in a specific context — preaching from the pulpit, leading a worship song, leading a Bible study, etc — that it becomes attractive. In other words, if the quality of being godly is associated with typical attractive traits or qualities like power, status, athleticism, looks, money (PSALM) and things like masculinity then it becomes attractive.

      No woman is going strongly after the church janitor or parking lot greeter even though he could be serving God as much as the pastor or worship band leader.

      When most Christian men are talking about godliness not being attractive this is the specific context we are talking about.

      I somewhat disagree with Jack in the characterization of alpha/beta qualities. (e.g. AFBB has it’s own characterization in that typical PSAL qualities are dominant over the M. I also do not think the attractive and retentive/relational qualities are at odds with each other either.) Humility and sacrifice can be seen as attractive in certain contexts, but it’s often from a place of having other attractive qualities first such as good looks and winning a competition. Classic example of the reporter:

      Liked by 1 person

      • dpmonahan says:

        So godliness here refers to specific acts at the service of the church? Being a busybody at church is sort of neutral, one can be a good person without it. There is nothing specifically attractive about it unless the person preaches or ushers particularly well.
        When I read the NT I just equate “godliness” with virtue in general, i.e. behaving in a manner befitting a worshiper of God.
        That could be could just be a translation problem: looking at the Greek NT it is eusebeia, which basically means piety. The virtue of piety is not being a busybody at church, but a respectful attitude towards God.
        So either we are saying being a church-busybody is not attractive, or that virtue in general is not attractive, or that the virtue of piety is not attractive. I’d agree with the first, not the other two. If virtue is unattractive then no one would want to be virtuous.

        Liked by 2 people

      • @ dpmonahan

        So godliness here refers to specific acts at the service of the church? Being a busybody at church is sort of neutral, one can be a good person without it. There is nothing specifically attractive about it unless the person preaches or ushers particularly well.

        When I read the NT I just equate “godliness” with virtue in general, i.e. behaving in a manner befitting a worshiper of God.

        Huh?

        I’m talking about people are legitimately serving and using their gifts in the Church. Pastors, worship leaders, greeters, janitors, whoever. Some of these are more attractive to women than others and all who are doing it to serve God are godly.

        That’s not being a busybody unless you’re using busybody in the wrong context.

        Godliness (eusebia as you mentioned) is a process much like in 2 Peter 1 is faith -> virtue -> knowledge -> self control -> patience -> godliness -> brotherly kindness -> love.

        We are under the assumption that every Christian who is trying to walk out their faith is acting in a godly manner all the time. Obviously, there are slip ups and sin, but they are trying to act godly. Not all of this godliness is attractive.

        Liked by 1 person

      • dpmonahan says:

        Maybe busybody is the wrong word. I don’t think preforming church functions = godliness or any other virtue by itself. I suppose done in the right spirit by the right person it is an expression of charity.
        I think in the NT godliness refers to the virtue of piety. I am not sure what RP Christians mean when they say it.
        Virtue is attractive by its very nature: we are drawn to good people. We want to be good people.
        Virtue isn’t always sexually attractive because sex implies someone being good for reproductive purposes, but it doesn’t make any sense (to me) to say it is unattractive.

        Liked by 1 person

      • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

        DEEPSTRENGTH
        You know I know the AFBB stuff very well,most of the young nurses seemed not to beleave a guy like me existed,where even after a ischemic stroke I just shrugged my muscled shoulders &said thats life,as they admired my mostly shirtless(They always seem so tight on me!)2&half months time in the hospitol!P.S.Stacy thompson the reporter seems familiar,was she a day-time nurse a while back?

        Like

      • Novaseeker says:

        “Humility and sacrifice can be seen as attractive in certain contexts, but it’s often from a place of having other attractive qualities first such as good looks and winning a competition.”

        Right — to me that’s a different way of saying that if you pass a visceral attraction screen (PSALM), then the godliness screen gets applied, but not the other way around.

        I think that also gets at what dpmonahan is saying. Virtue can be attractive, but only if the person has passed the visceral attraction screen first — otherwise, it isn’t, in itself, going to make someone be attracted to you, generally speaking, Christian or not. It’s a way of discerning which people, among those who pass the visceral attraction screen, are preferable to others, and in that sense “more attractive” among people who are “already attractive enough generally for me to apply the virtue screen”.

        Liked by 4 people

      • info says:

        King David had a masculine enough personality to attract women. Unfortunately many Men with Money even CEOs are such weaklings in terms of personality. Especially when it comes to Women.

        Women have a good sense in finding out and exploiting chinks in Men’s psychological armor. In a sense like Hyenas preying on weaknesses.

        If a Man has any complexes or weaknesses of this sort outside of even a healthy and strong body they are effectively lunch to women’s instincts which would quickly filter them out by drying her up like the Sahara Desert.

        I think this AF/BB dichotomy may not have existed when Rich Men were Warlords who had enough of a Strong Personality to lead and inspire Men.

        Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates weren’t the sorts of Men the programming of women were particularly designed for.

        Liked by 2 people

    • Wulfgar Thundercock III says:

      Women are animals. That’s why the man that takes care of his woman is a husband. They are clever, pretty animals, but animals nonetheless. Their residual sexual attraction to great apes shows than men have not let women make sexual choices since we looked very much like the great apes.

      Women aren’t attracted to the things that make men good, they are attracted to the things that make men great. Solomon had the most experience of women of any man. His opinion in Ecclesiastes 7:27-29 is the last word of the red pill on women. They are all like that. No exceptions, and if you fool yourself into thinking you have found an exception, that is the mistake of Adam. Just like Adam, the curse of Eve is going to get you, too.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. thedeti says:

    Case study 2 is the actress Margot Robbie in both photos. The first one is her as a very young very attractive woman. The second is Robbie as DCEU character Harley Quinn.

    Liked by 2 people

    • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

      DETI
      Shes more true-to-life as harley quinn(The jokers daughter,back in the ’70’s comics,before the animated series came out in ’92!),right?

      Liked by 1 person

      • I believe the character (at least this version) is original to the animated series.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Eric Francis Silk says:

        Yeah, she was created for the 90’s animated series. The higher ups were worried that the The Joker could come across as gay, especially since he was going to be voiced by Tim “Frank N Furter” Curry before Mark Hamill was hired instead. So they created a character to be the Joker’s girlfriend. She was popular enough that she was introduced to the comic books as well.

        Liked by 3 people

  9. Random Angeleno says:

    I’m honored to have a comment reference, but Jack could have included Novaseeker’s reply as that reply really bears on Jack’s point above about the desirability of the “corrupted” look. I’ll include it here:

    “What’s coming next is the normalization/mainstreaming of OnlyFans type activity by women. There are married women who are active with sexual content on OnlyFans right now, like Ana Cheri. Also the fact that so many OnlyFans “content creators” use their actual real names and not fake names like porn actresses have almost always done indicates that these women don’t think they have anything to be ashamed of. And as more and more celebrities pile into the OnlyFans space, that will, in fact, happen.

    So that’s what’s next — because it’s already starting.”

    Novaseeker’s key phrase: “normalization/mainstreaming”.
    [Jack: Thanks! I’ll add this to the post.]

    A tangent: I had no idea that was Kim Kardashian’s before photo. That’s a girl a young man could bring home to his mother. Maybe. She did grow up marinating on the edge of Hollywood so there is that. Now she’s a Forbes billionaire on the back of normalizing this look.

    From Roissy explaining about a certain stare years ago to the greater awareness of more general photographic tells, it shouldn’t be as hard for situationally aware men. If a man has a question about a particular woman, try looking for photos of her in her younger days. Or one can look for examples in their own circles of women who married well and held up well versus women who didn’t.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Elspeth says:

      “Or one can look for examples in their own circles of women who married well and held up well versus women who didn’t.”

      I am fairly convinced that this is vitally important. Clean living and a good marriage to a great man taking excellent care of me has been as big a part of my aging process as genetics.

      SAM and I met up with a couple last week for the first time. In conversation he mentioned his 40th birthday coming later this year. His wife is also turning 40 this year. As it happened, he and I share a birth date.

      When I said, “Oh. I’ll be 50 on that date.”, his stunned reply was that he assumed I was in my late 30s, same as he is.

      Even with the admitted melanin boost, there are women my age who look a little worse for wear. And I know women of fairer ethnic groups who also look pretty good. It’s because of clean living, a good marriage, and being well taken care of by a good man.

      Liked by 5 people

      • lastholdout says:

        @Elspeth

        “. . . a great man taking excellent care of me has been as big a part of my aging process as genetics . . . . Clean living, a good marriage, and being well taken care of by a good man.”

        There is one more variable that cannot be overlooked: The countenance and demeanor of the woman herself; her outlook on life, and her attitude toward her husband and marriage.

        A woman who has a healthy dose of humility –“a meek and quiet spirit” – 1) invites introspection: admission that they are a sinner and, therefore, need to repent for their offenses (and not just repentance to God, but to her husband too). 2) She also assumes responsibility for her own happiness.

        Elspeth, your good marriage (and, thus, your good health and aging) has more to do with you than your husband. That’s not to take anything away from him. If he continued to be who he is, but you were raging and rebellious, your marriage wouldn’t be what it is today. And you would not have aged well.

        There is a reason the book of Proverbs is sprinkled with insights to the contentious woman.
        “It is better to dwell in a corner of the housetop than with a brawling woman in a wide house.” (Prov 21:9).
        “It is better to dwell in the wilderness than with a contentious and angry woman.” (Prov 21:19).
        “It is better to dwell in the corner of the housetop than with a brawling woman in a wide house.” (Prov 25:24).
        “A continual dripping on a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike; whoever restrains her restrains the wind, and grasps oil in his right hand.” (Prov 27:15–16).
        “For three things the earth is disquieted, and for four which it cannot bear: for a servant when he reigns, and a fool when he is filled with food, for a hateful woman when she is married, and a handmaid who is heir to her mistress.” (Prov 30:21–23).
        “A foolish son is the calamity of his father, and the contentions of a wife are a continual dripping of water.” (Prov 19:13).

        Liked by 5 people

    • Novaseeker says:

      “Now she’s a Forbes billionaire on the back of normalizing this look.”

      Also a Harbinger of the blurring of the lines in terms of mainstream and porn, because it was, in part, her sex tape that really put her on the map.
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Kardashian,_Superstar

      Of course, given that it was envelope pushing at the time, it was denied that it was intended, and all the pro forma protests were made and so forth, but today that’s no longer needed, 20 years later.

      I am working on a post about the Kardashian phenomenon and how it has worked both as a mirror of the culture and a molder of it at the same time, and in ways that are not always super-obvious (i.e., in ways beyond the obvious cashing in on oversexed looks). Something very odd happened in that constellation of people, and it’s ongoing in its scope and influence.

      Liked by 6 people

      • Sharkly says:

        Please! Not too many pictures of her horrifically disproportionate behind.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        Yeah she didn’t always look like that. Here’s Kim K in 2002 with Paris Hilton: https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/nintchdbpict000291262895.jpg?strip=all&w=838

        Always very curvy, but not the cartoon she became through surgery. I personally never found Kim very attractive, but she was objectively so in her early 20s as seen in that pic.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        The Kim K/Ray J sex tape was one of the very first Internet sensation viral videos. That and the video of Pamela Anderson fellating Motley Crue drummer Tommy Lee, her then-husband. These two videos were the ones everyone was talking about and everyone had at least seen still screenshots of at the time.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        The appeal with the Kim K and Pamela sex tapes was not so much that they were pornographic or they depict hot women having sex. The appeal was that they were famous women known for their hotness and celebrity being video recorded having sex.

        They were kind of anticlimactic (heh) because Kim and Pam were not pornographic actresses and not playing to a camera. They were having “regular people” sex in the same positions and techniques regular people have sex. These tore the veil of celebrity away. They showed that hot celebrities do it pretty much the same way everyone else does it. And whetted regular people’s appetites for reality TV so the public could see literally everything celebrities do, especially intrafamily drama. Well, everything except excrement elimination, and someday we might even see that. (no thank you, sil vous plait).

        Liked by 2 people

  10. Lexet Blog says:

    1- do a background search
    2- facial recognition search through archives of sites like 4chan

    Contact me if this saved you from a bullet and I’ll send you the bill

    Liked by 3 people

  11. anonymous_ng says:

    Is there a way we can try to eliminate the effects of aging and of being in the public eye?

    I thought perhaps Lolo Jones could serve as a proof of the rule, but given she’s an Olympic caliber athlete, it’s basically inconceivable that she hasn’t used P.E.D.s and that might skew the results, and she is definitely in the public eye, so I didn’t see many pictures of her without artfully applied clown makeup.

    Liked by 3 people

  12. SFC Ton says:

    Stress ages women at an incredible rate.

    I watched a young girl go from picture book pretty to haggered before she hit 19 due to her junkie parents getting worse.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Sharkly says:

      I don’t think the constant stress of a habitually evil wife has helped me much either.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Liz says:

        Stress ages men too, but it can come back.
        Mike looked about ten years older three years ago with the job he had.
        I’ve aged bigly after mom’s catastrophic TBI, three months ago.
        I hope I can get it back too.

        Liked by 4 people

      • info says:

        @Liz
        Good sleep, good diet and intermittent fasting. The Intermittent fasting seems to work well for many people in the aging process.

        Liked by 2 people

  13. info says:

    Almost all of them without a beat once they have become haggard declare themselves ready to settle down by 30+ yo.

    Liked by 3 people

    • redpillboomer says:

      “Almost all of them without a beat once they have become haggard declare themselves ready to settle down by 30+ yo.”

      I’ve noticed this as well with a handful of women I’ve personally known and been able to observe as they work their way through their thirties during the last decade. The ‘fresh’ look of their early twenties, as observable by perusing their FB photo albums, is replaced by the ‘haggard’ look you mentioned. I think another phrase I’d used for the look is ‘a bit worn around the edges’ look; not ugly by any stretch, just not ‘fresh’ anymore. It’s not just the natural effects of aging (maturing), it includes their lifestyle choices, i.e. the CC, recreational drug usage, etc.

      The pattern I’ve seen goes something like this: Hits the Wall in her early thirties>Rallies around 32-33 with a new look of some sort-hairstyle, clothes, works on the figure–tightens things up, maybe some cosmetic surgery, all in an attempt to ‘rally’ to compete with the twenty somethings now getting the lion share of the men’s attention>Rally fails around 34-35>Lament begins usually in the form of some social media postings about ‘no good men’ left or something or other that indicates her sheer frustration with the SMP/MMP ‘out there’>Second rally around 36-38, usually here comes the fake-up and more revealing clothing, plunging necklines, push-up bras, slit skirts, etc. all like ‘I still got it guys, LOOK…SEE..WANT ME?’ >Second rally fails or lands them a simp they settle for/with, have their ‘Princess Day’ (wedding), multiple media posts about it, but the whole thing looks ‘off’ in some way, just not the same as if she were in her twenties getting hitched>Post-Wall/Wall, hits early forties, here comes all the spiritual musings and every now and then, she takes the mask off and let’s you know what she’s really feeling/going through, and it ‘ain’t pretty’ folks.

      The above are some musings of mine, off the top of my head, from some general observations I’ve made about several women I’ve personally known. Not complete at all, room for others on here to modify based on what they’ve seen happen. Lesson ladies: Your twenties are your prime years, especially the 21-25 range; 26-29 you’re still in the game, but the clock is ticking.

      Liked by 1 person

      • info says:

        Women who ride the CC invariably once their options fade start going for the long-term relationships like a kind of retirement plan. Too late once they go that route.

        Liked by 1 person

  14. Sharkly says:

    “In the second image, there is a recessed light with the lightbulb missing and the wires hanging out of the socket.”

    No. I recognized the look immediately from all throughout my own house. I’ve got that exact same smoke detector mount(you can see the two crossbars) all throughout my house, just like that, with the smoke detectors unplugged, removed, and the batteries removed from the detectors. They are all wired together, and I believe wired into the house electrical supply, they all chirp loudly if any single one has a low back-up battery or is malfunctioning. Right at bedtime they all like to start chirping. And they seem to have a lengthy memory or residual capacitor power to chirp even when disconnected and with the battery removed. So troubleshooting which one has the low battery takes forever. They are seemingly demon possessed. You have to rip every single one out and remove all of their batteries for the cacophony to eventually quiet down so you can sleep. I’d rather have no smoke alarms than to reinstall and periodically battle with those sinister torment devices. Don’t tell my homeowner’s insurance, but, I’m glad to see I’m not the only one living on the wild side. Maybe there is some way to make lasting peace with those devices, but I haven’t figured it out.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sharkly says:

      When the workmen refinishing my house bragged about how interlaced, multi-brained, smart, and unstoppable, the new smoke alarm system was, little did I suspect that one night in my sleep the intelligent nodes would conspire amongst themselves to turn on me. And every few months thereafter harass me with sleepless nights, never relenting until I was again compelled half-asleep to battle my way around the house with a ladder and disenfranchise and then individually disable every last zombified severed tentacle of my undying nemesis the fire safety Cthulhu.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Joe2 says:

      Easy – since the life of a smoke detector is about 10 years just get new smoke detectors which have 10 year sealed batteries. The smoke detector is replaced after 10 years vs replacing batteries every 6 months or so and then replacing the smoke detector.

      Liked by 2 people

  15. Sharkly says:

    Apocryphal wisdom verse of the day:
    Sirach 25:17 The wickedness of a wife changes her appearance, and darkens her face like that of a bear.

    Liked by 5 people

  16. professorGBFMtm2021 says:

    EVERYBODY
    What do you think this is refering to?”I cannot sleep at night,I want to see missy(Paradise) again,then let us make an eternal deal,you will tend to the graves,you’ll give us the house back&keep in mind,we only come out at night”P.S.This dos’nt sound like the deal western civ made with the flesh,the devil&the world,since the enlightenment,especialy?
    P.S.”Until next time try&enjoy the day- light”&avoid all the night nurses,(Especialy at nursing homes for dying nations of the west!)my old friend St.estephe of unknown misandry at blogspot.com has known this for years with his latest post of april 8th at 9:53am,showing even more evidence of it!Last comment until next post,also!

    Like

  17. Scott says:

    I don’t know who any of these people are. I have heard of the Kardashians though, connected only through the OJ trial.

    Liked by 1 person

  18. Scott says:

    On naivete and attractiveness.

    Here is a conversation I actually had once in high school. It exemplifies me. I am STILL like this, and have never had trouble with women.

    My truck was in the shop and some friends of mine (these guys were the “sometimes part of the football team bust mostly burnout head bangers” clique). They gave me a ride home after school one day, and this is how conversation went.

    Jeff: Hey Marcus, lets say after we drop off Scott we go down to the valley and buy a rock?”
    Me: Why would you buy a rock? There’s plenty of them lying around on the ground?
    Jeff: Klajic. CRACK COCAINE you dumbass.

    Like I said, always been like that, still am at 49. There are things in this world I just naturally am oblivious to. Never effected my ability to attract women.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Pingback: Word from the Dark Side – Mexican marvel, married women’s secret desire, marred martyr and many, many pairs of stolen undies | SovietMen

  20. cameron232 says:

    “She dyed her beautiful blonde hair black…”

    I’ve noticed that a lot of internet advertisements use heavily tattooed, slutty white women with their hair dyed black. I also see this at work – the heavily tattooed white women (particularly the full-arm tattooed ones) have black hair. I don’t know why but the black hair seems to be used as part of the signal that she’s a ho who’ll do anything (the specific combination of hair and heavily, visibly tattooed). Note: I don’t think blondes or redheads are innately virtuous, this is just something I noticed. Hypothesis: blondes (among Caucasian women) are generally preferred but fake blonde is obvious so one way to compete with them is as a black-haired ho with tats. Note again — I don’t attach any virtue or lack thereof to hair melanin.

    Like

    • Novaseeker says:

      The hair colors can signify personality to some degree as well, when they are “voluntary” — that is, not the natural, base hair color but simply enhanced. If a woman enhances her natural base hair color, that isn’t really an indicator of anything about her persona in particular, but for the many women who choose a different hair color than their natural base, it can be.

      Blonde is the hardest to read into because it’s by far the most common “choice” color. Women opt for it because they think it makes them prettier, but that’s a very generic motivation. There was a time in the past when blonde hair on women conveyed certain messages, but then it became by far the most common color of choice, and so it really doesn’t convey much other than perhaps a vanity streak, which is as common as dirt in 2021.

      Red hair is a bit more adventurous of a pick. Again, if the motive is simply and obviously aesthetic (a woman has very fair skin, making it an obvious choice) then it’s not sensible to read much else into it, but in other women it can reflect a more adventurous streak, a desire to stand out and be different. It’s the least common hair color, because it probably looks its best only on certain types of skin and eye colorings, but because it’s relatively uncommon it’s also a rather obvious way for a woman to make herself stand out, and if that is what she is looking to do it makes a statement about her persona in itself.

      Black hair as a choice color, especially on women who are naturally one of the fairer hair colors, is an adoption of the “bad girl” image. It’s what happens when a white-picket-fence, blonde/blue girl from the suburbs wants to transform herself into a badass GRRL who takes no prisoners and is bristling with openly wielded sexual power. Think Joan Jett, the younger years. If the choice of black hair is made by someone who already has quite dark brown hair, however, it generally doesn’t have any of those connotations — it’s usually just aesthetic.

      Brown hair is the “neutral” hair of our culture — a woman who adopts it as her “choice” color, even though she has naturally black or red or blonde hair, is normally not making any other statement other than a purely aesthetic one.

      Liked by 4 people

      • cameron232 says:

        Best of all is when an old, fat woman dies her hair pink – damn that’s sexy.

        I assume the funky hair colors were taken from Japanese anime but the motivation is to take advantage of male desire for sexual novelty/variety:

        “My heart is broken in three
        I love three girls secretly
        A blonde, a brunette, or redhead I could wed
        But which one is it to be?
        Oh gee, my heart is broken in three”

        It looks really friggin gay when a guy dyes his hair blue or whatever although some straight guys who are mentally ill do it.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Liz says:

        Black hair as a choice color, especially on women who are naturally one of the fairer hair colors, is an adoption of the “bad girl” image. It’s what happens when a white-picket-fence, blonde/blue girl from the suburbs wants to transform herself into a badass GRRL who takes no prisoners and is bristling with openly wielded sexual power. Think Joan Jett, the younger years. If the choice of black hair is made by someone who already has quite dark brown hair, however, it generally doesn’t have any of those connotations — it’s usually just aesthetic.

        I’m sure this can be true, but not necessarily.
        Black hair with blue or green eyes can be very striking.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Liz says:

        Just to add, if you take away the stupid duck face expression and remove the over the top makeup. Knowing nothing about this person whatsoever, I’d say the girl who changed her hair color looks better with the darker shade than the dishwater one.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Respectfully Liz, that was not a judgement on women’s natural hair color I think. I think the point of Nova’s was what radically changing her hair color signals for blondes, brunettes, etc. I agree that the contrast of brunette hair and light eyes can be striking. When I was a young man, I had the hots for plenty of brunettes. In fact, my wife has accused me of having a brunette preference (which isn’t true) because several girls I had a crush on before her were brunette (my wife has golden blonde natural hair color).

        So to all the girls, please do not take offense at hair color comments -there are many lovely (and many unattractive) girls of all hair colors. There’s a natural platinum blonde girl at work here that looks like Shrek’s girlfriend.

        Like

      • Jack says:

        The general Red Pill advice is that a man should never take a woman’s advice on how to dress. I’ll suggest a corollary: A man should never take a woman’s advice on how he should expect his girlfriend/wife to dress. Instead, he should be telling her what he likes.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        I have to disagree on the girl above’s attractiveness – I think she is more attractive in every way in the first picture including hair color (which looks natural in the first picture). I assume “dishwater” means mixed color – to me her hair looks more natural in the first picture – the lack of uniformity makes it look genuine to me.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        As far as Caucasian women go, my husband thinks redheads are generally more attractive.

        He does not like red hair ( or any other color) on women for whom that isn’t a natural color in that ethnic group.

        So for example, blond Asian women look bizarre to him.

        Liked by 4 people

      • cameron232 says:

        I totally agree with SAM – women’s natural hair color (or very close) always looks most attractive on them – God knew best.

        There’s this weird thing now where young white women dye their hair gray or silver – another way to stand out I guess?

        Liked by 3 people

  21. cameron232 says:

    “In other words, men and women alike tend to think that women with a figure and a notch count are more attractive than women characterized by purity and innocence.”

    That’s because relationships are now seen as temporary. If a relationship is seen as temporary (or potentially so) you’re going to go for the most sexualized woman, not the sweet, innocent type. Select for maximum hotness and fun since it might end (and you can end it if you want to) anyway.
    [Jack: Sharp man! You’ve got the point behind the basic cultural message. See this post for more details.]

    Liked by 4 people

    • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

      Cameron are you serios about ”sweet&innocent” in western countries or even japan?I know not about herbivore japaness men,who perfer anime girls with ”blue&pink” hair to ”REAL” wimminz?Christmas is basicaly valentines day in japan,also!

      Liked by 2 people

  22. Elspeth says:

    Couple of random thoughts. I think a husband should be somewhat moved by what his wife thinks looks good on him. She shouldn’t be the fashion dictator, but when certain colors look better on him than others, she should be able to say that and he should give her a fair hearing. Men often can use help with things like that. My husband has a sharp, artistic eye for what looks good on me, but on occasion, I’ve had to suggest he consider a great shirt in a different hue.

    The hair thing. I agree with Liz that the overdone makeup and duck face are far more detrimental than the hair color itself. So long as the color suits her naturally (ethnicity, facial structure, etc), mos women can wear any hair color and look okay.

    My husband didn’t even realize he had a subconscious bias towards redheads even though he should have realized it before I pointed it out to him. In the 20+ years of my engagement in all kinds of associations (usually something related to schooling or homeschooling), it would take him forever to remember the names of my friends and acquaintances. Jill was Janet, and Amy was Beth. it was striking because he is usually very good with names (“hard to keep up with a bunch of chirping women”).

    However, if the woman had red hair, he usually remembered her name immediately even if he hadn’t seen her all school year. When I pointed it out, he owned it. The only white girl he’d ever dated had red hair, but he had never connected those dots until I said something. Rather than be offended are jealous, I found it amusing. I have a friend who would NOT find it amusing at all.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Liz says:

      Mike has always preferred dark hair. I’m blonde.
      Now that I’m getting some grey I get my hair colored…every time I go to the salon he says, “darker please”. 😆

      Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        He tells you that?

        I tell my wife I love golden blonde hair because that’s what she has (simp that I am!). Seriously, she thinks I prefer dark hair because of two HS girls I had crushes on before her. When we first dated, she didn’t like the actress Neve Campbell because she was convinced that was my “type” even though I never showed any signs of having a thing for Neve Campbell.

        I actually tend to prefer lighter hair colors. I don’t mind brown but I don’t really personally care for black hair. I don’t have the common white guy fetish for Asian girls for example.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Liz says:

        It doesn’t bother me, cameron. We get along very well and have been married a long, long time. Been through far far too much together to sweat the small stuff (and he very attracted to me). It probably wouldn’t be something to bring up on a first date. 😆

        Liked by 3 people

    • cameron232 says:

      Men are wired towards variety – a temptation I suppose. If women’s chief temptation is quality, ours is variety. Redheads are the fairest complected and are relatively rare in the population. They can be awfully striking – I don’t think it’s just SAM. I work with a young redhead girl daily – it’s hard not to notice her standing out from the other girls.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        It’s “hi-lo” for them I think.

        I am a bad judge, because I prefer very fair skin, so I tend to like a lot of them, because of the skin tone that reds generally have (natural ones at least). For other guys, if you don’t like really fair skin, you may not like as much.

        In terms of the hi-lo what I mean is that if a woman is average looking, she can stand out a bit due to her copper hair and fair skin (and more if you have a preference for either of those personally). But a woman who is below average isn’t getting that much mileage from it. On the other hand, among very attractive women, if they have that particular combo it’s quite a standout, I think, even if the viewer doesn’t have a thing for very fair skin. Bella Thorne is a “thot” version of that when she is in red mode. A classier version is Emma Stone — you can find pictures of her as a blonde as well, but she’s not close to as attractive as a blonde than she is as a red. And while most guys would agree that she’s very attractive, not everyone would rate her as high as I might because of the skin tone issue (tends to be very hi-lo in terms of preference when you get that fair/pale).

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        Yeah, I have the same preference for very fair skin. My wife talks about how having a bit of a suntan is good – my response is “no” – I prefer the milky complexion.

        Liked by 2 people

  23. Elspeth says:

    My friend Hearth has posted on several occasions that her husband’s “type” is tall redheads. She’s a 5 foot tall woman with light brown hair. Is what it is.

    My husband, luckily for me, always gravitated towards taller than average, statuesque women. But the fact that red hair is striking to him doesn’t bother me at all. He has a natural bent towards the…exotic? (for lack of a better word). When we were very young, and Halle Berry was all the rage as the most beautiful “black” actress in a generation, he found her kind of “meh”. Kinda cute, but mostly very vanilla. My husband found Angel Bassett, with her striking features, much more to his liking.

    I don’t have striking features, just as Liz doesn’t have dark hair. At the end of the day, everyone makes concessions, some small others great, for the prospect of a stable, happy marriage. It’s the people with the mile-long checklists of their perfectly envisioned soul mate who end up making someone’s life a living hell for 7-10 years before they bail.

    Liked by 3 people

    • cameron232 says:

      Is Hearth’s husband tall?

      I find height unattractive but it’s because I’m not tall. I’m only 5-10. It’s just a proportion thing. If I were 6-3 I don’t think I’d dislike height in women. I find a little below average height (say 5-2 to 5-4) to be most attractive but I don’t think lack of height would matter unless the woman was freakishly short. I remember some very short, “stacked” girls in school – very attractive.

      Liked by 1 person

  24. Elspeth says:

    Clarification: I put black in quotes because Halle Berry is not black. She’s biracial. Red and blue make purple, not red, and not blue.

    As to striking features: My SAM says my full lips definitely grabbed his attention right way, so they qualify as striking. LOL, okay, even though black women with full lips aren’t exactly rare.

    Liked by 2 people

    • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

      ELSPETH
      You mean like athol kays married mans sexlife forums purple pill, that was made from the red&blue pills?P.S.Halle berry looked best in the first x-men film in’00 with the snow WHITE hair,right?You knew I was going to bring this up,right?

      Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      Full lips very kissable I’m sure! He probably likes that! My wife’s mouth is so small I remember feeling like I was enveloping it with mine when she first kissed me.

      Vanessa L. Williams is another woman who is described as black but I assume she is bi-racial – I think she has blue eyes. LOL the show “In Living Color” did a hilarious skit with her (Kim Wayans played her).

      Liked by 2 people

      • Elspeth says:

        Yes Vanessa L. Williams (first “black ” Miss America who stepped down after Penthouse published some photos of her they had on file) is also biracial.

        Like Kamala and Meghan, and Barak, etc. Heck, even the whose Cardi B whom they prize over Candace Owens. It never fails to leave me bemused that actual black Americans aren’t bothered by the fact that no one trotted out as their next black hope is actually black, lol.

        But that’s a topic for another blog. Aesthetically, it should bother a lot of them too but it doesn’t. Doesn’t bother me because, and I really do know how this sounds, I’m pretty and I married well. It’s not to the average woman’s credit when men of her ethnic group are presented with an amalgamation as their ideal.

        Just my .02

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        Candace was on Tucker last night. She had a very feminine, flowery blouse on – I remarked about this to my wife. She is a thousand times more feminine and more desirable than Cardi B. the freakshow.

        Liked by 1 person

  25. Elspeth says:

    My husband is 6’2″. To be precise, 6 foot, 1 and 3/4 inches. I like that I can wear heels with him and he’s still slightly taller.

    I’m wondering is my SAM, Liz’s Mike, and Hearth’s husband are in someway unique by revealing to their wives feminine characteristics that they find attractive but that their wives don’t possess. And if so, why?

    I know -without a shadow of a doubt- that I am the apple of my husband’s eye so I don’t really need him to check his male humanity at the door. I prefer the candor (at least in this case). There are plenty of women who would not like it, for valid reasons.

    Each couple has their own things, I suppose.

    Liked by 2 people

    • cameron232 says:

      I really doubt they are unique, the husbands. They are probably more masculine and more blunt than I am.

      I frankly have a bit of a simp/whiteknight streak – if I had a preference that my wife doesn’t possess (I don’t) I wouldn’t tell her – I’d try to hide it for the sake of her heart.

      In a perfect world, she’d believe I am utterly incapable of being attracted to any other woman. That’s ridiculous of course, but at least she could think she’s close to my ideal.

      If you are attracted to a girl (Nova’s “attraction floor”) then IMO her personality is what matters.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        It’s not simp-ish (or white knighting) to guard your wife’s heart. Every good husband does that! What it looks like may vary slightly from one wife to the next. My husband knows what it takes to guard my heart and make me feel safe. It’s just not this.

        He knows I grew up in a house full of men (until age 10). My dad did his best to guard my eyes and ears, but you can’t help but pick up a few things here and there with three older brothers conversing -and dating- as mine did. As a result, I don’t really harbor delusions about maleness or if SAM notices other women. I know he only has eyes for me, so a passing glance doesn’t offend me. We’re good.

        In general, women know what they’re getting when they marry a particular man. Some women know and figure they’ve got themselves a really great, if challenging, project to work on. Others of us know and accept what it means to have married the man we married. I don’t think men have the luxury of eyes wide openness when they marry, LOL.

        I also think our awareness and candor work to keep things interesting in myriad ways big and small. We’ve never really been in a “bored with each other” funk. Aggravated? Annoyed? Occasionally infuriated? Amused? All that. But bored? Nope, not really. At least I haven’t been.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Well some guys here will say that if you’re not using marital game then you’re simping and placing yourself at risk. Letting a woman know you notice other women’s features (particularly those she lacks) is part of marital game I guess. Women aren’t real attracted to heart-guarder men. This is one way the world sucks – you aren’t incentivized as a man to care about women’s hearts since those guys aren’t what a lot of (most?) women want. It doesn’t matter – I’m not going to become a prick just to lower my risk.

        But I wonder what it means for my sons. My 20 year old is a decent looking boy and so far as I can tell – no interest from girls. The son of my wife’s former BFF (her husband is the promiscuous guy I’ve written about on here who’s now in jail) – well this kid is my son’s age and he has all sorts of girls coming to his house. And he looks like a tall, lanky goober to me. But my son isn’t a confident prick so no girls.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        “In general, women know what they’re getting when they marry a particular man……. I don’t think men have the luxury of eyes wide openness when they marry, LOL.”

        Geez that’s just depressing. That’s what the manosphere says. Women (with some exceptions of course-men can deceive too) choose dirtbags, cheaters, guys that couldn’t care less about her heart (not referring to SAM, Mike, etc.). You’re saying that women know what they are choosing. If you’re right then this is why men here have so little sympathy around here – women know what they’re choosing.

        Sorry for off topic rant. I never really know where you stand on this redpill stuff because you give some pushback to the wimminz-bad narrative.

        Liked by 3 people

      • SFC Ton says:

        If you are attracted to a girl (Nova’s “attraction floor”) then IMO her personality is what matters.
        ……

        The problem with that is her attraction floor is gonna keep getting lower

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        @ton,Your observation I guess means go for a girl who’s above your attraction floor to account for deterioration? Well models can become land whales – as Scott says – a man wants his bride to stay the same forever. I say pick a girl you find attractive based on personality, likelihood of lifetime loyalty, etc. It’s hard to find good women – I can’t imagine rejecting one because of some assessment she might go below your “floor” later in life – just my two cents.

        Liked by 1 person

  26. Elspeth says:

    Letting a woman know you notice other women’s features (particularly those she lacks) is part of marital game I guess.

    This characterization of a person’s natural personality or upbringing as “game” drives me in.sane. Is it game if it’s just who you are as an individual?

    Liz’s husband -if I recall- is a pilot. Probably some natural swagger there; maybe a LOT is I had to guess. My husband has been used to women catering to him from an early age. Coupled with his father’s way of raising sons, there’s some swagger there, a natural tendency to feel unbothered with obfuscation.

    It’s only “game” if it’s calculated. My husband doesn’t do game and he hates the very idea of it. He thinks the best thing any man can do is to be unapologetically himself. The key word is “unapologetically”.

    I am fully sympathetic to the implications of what I said above regarding “eyes wide openness”. I do think that there are women whose men turn on a dime (drugs, infidelity, etc). It happens, but I think it’s rare. Most times we know. And I do think men are more likely to be blindsided.

    Liked by 4 people

    • cameron232 says:

      Well as you know, most of us aren’t SAMs (or Mike’s I assume). You got rare alphabux. Alpha-male-heart-guarder at least some types of heart-guarding. I am genuinely happy for you as you’re rare and deserve that.

      I don’t think what I’m referring to is obfuscation. I’m not saying lie to your wife. If you are most attracted to something that your wife is not, then I think you should say nothing. Not obfuscate.

      Yeah, I’m “myself” with her. A long time ago, at a wedding rehearsal dinner the men invited me (in front of her) to a strip club. She said “go ahead – it’s ok” and it would have been – she wouldn’t have “punished” me. I didn’t go because I think your spouse should feel like they’re what you want not what you’ve settled for. Would I want her to think I really want a girl who looks like the stripper but she’s just the best I could get? I try to treat her like I want to be treated – to think about how my words and actions, if reversed, would make me feel.

      IMO these things are not the same as obfuscation.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        Agree that “obfuscation” was a poor word choice.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        I didn’t go because I think your spouse should feel like they’re what you want not what you’ve settled for.

        I actually don’t agree with this, if it is true that you settled. If you aren’t lying to yourself or your spouse in that you think your spouse is the ideal and there isn’t any other person in the world who is in any way more attractive than they are to you, then I agree that you haven’t settled. Everyone else has, and if they have, there is no point in maintaining the facade that you have not done so — likely both have to some extent, in almost all marriages. The key is whether it’s a deal you both like and are content with, not whether it is a “deal” to begin with. It’s a “deal” for almost all married couples and it has always struck me as exhausting and false (talk about “Game” being false, lol!) to pretend that you have not settled when in fact you have (again, this is not the case if you indeed did not settle and have reached that conclusion in an honest way).

        Liked by 5 people

      • Elspeth says:

        My husband has never found porn of any variety appealing so he wouldn’t have gone either. But not because he thought it might make me feel bad.

        Settling is an interesting concept. I don’t think I settled in any way in the arena of physical attractiveness when I married SAM. But he knows that doesn’t mean I don’t notice attractiveness in other men.

        I know he does not want, did not want, likely never will want, a red haired wife. He loves me physically. Height, figure, lips, hair, etc. Doesn’t mean he’s blind to other attractive women.

        But everyone in some way settles. Whether it’s economic, in our case I consented to deal with his oldest child, and he consented to deal with my abandonment issues and the dichotomous ways they manifested during our earliest years.

        It’s called being a grown up.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        So, you think you should show open signs of your attraction to other women so as not to be “fake?” You should go to strip clubs if you find the women there attractive? Do you think wives should show open signs of the fact that they find some men more attractive than you? I am not talking about an elaborate façade btw. I don’t think women or men should unashamedly and openly look at other members of the opposite sex, talk about their attraction to members of the opposite sex. I don’t like that game couples play of “Which Hollywood star would you leave me for or boink if you could?” Yeah, I know I’m a naïve romantic.

        I also didn’t go to the strip club because that has never appealed to me. I don’t get what you’re supposed to do – you look at naked women and get turned on – are you supposed to choke it under the table? Pay for “more” backstage? Go home horny and do your wife? “Honey, I’m horny from looking at another girl, let’s do it!” I can honestly say I’ve never gone to a strip club (not that I’m a very moral person -that just never appealed to me).

        I’m sure in some way everyone “settles.” I wish my wife had a mother and father that were decent so my kids would have had another set of grandparents. I wish my wife were less impulsive. That’s about it.

        If I had to “settle” in terms of physical or personality attraction, I wouldn’t marry. Maybe I’m just really base. If a girl passes Jack’s “boner test” then you’re not settling, attraction wise. I can’t say that I’d pick the supermodel if she were available to me. A girl that arouses your attraction and is nice to you is enough. I think I am an intensely monogamous person (even though I am capable of noticing women’s attractiveness) so I may be an outlier.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        @Elspeth,

        I also didn’t go for the same reason as SAM – that doesn’t appeal to me either. Seedy, dirty girls are not attractive to me – all I can think of is disease – oh – and she doesn’t want you anyway. So it wasn’t just to make her feel good about our relationship.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        Cameron —

        You don’t need to look at porn or go to a strip club to admit that there are women who are more sexually attractive to you than your wife is. Sexually attractive, mind you. Those women may very well not be the women in porn or in strip clubs (those are the “easy cases” so it’s not fruitful to really focus on them).

        Obviously everyone is different here, and you have strong views in this area. You have expressed them before — in essence you believe that as long as a woman is over a “minimum standard” of attractiveness, there is no settling happening, regardless of whether other women are available to you who are more attractive physically. An alternative view is that other women may be more attractive physically, but you are willing to forego their physical allure because of other qualities that this less attractive physically woman has which the other one(s) that are available to you who are more physically attractive than she is do not — that is “settling”. Other guys may (and do) settle in the other direction, opting for the more physically attractive girl despite her other shortcomings — most of us here would identify that kind of settling as risky, but it doesn’t mean that the other choice is also not “settling”. “Settling” means giving up something from the “ideal set of somethings” in a concrete case of a person — deciding that the package they offer is pleasing and sufficient and that you are willing to commit to it — it is “settling” in the sense that you decide not to wait and see if you can find a better deal, a person who has more of the package.

        Some people are lucky enough to come across people who do not offer a settle, because they fulfill all or almost all of the set of somethings. Others emphasize certain things more than others in that while they will settle on some things, they will not on others — this means that they are more flexible in some criteria than in others. You are flexible in the looks area — as long as its over the boner test (which is a low bar), it’s good for you. That’s fine for you. But what it means is that you are willing to settle on looks to get other things. If you prefer not to think of it that way, it’s fine, but objectively that is what it is, The guys who are making the other kind of settle decision (the riskier one) to settle on morals (as long as they are above a certain threshold, which is usually also low) in favor of smoking hotness are also settling — for them, the moral issue is just much less important than the looks issue is, whereas for you the looks issue is much less important than the moral issue.

        Most people are not in either of these extremes, though. Most people settle in a more complex way — somewhat in looks and somewhat in other areas — when they select a mate that, in almost all cases, does not check every single box in the set of somethings. It’s all about evaluating what is more important to you, what you bring to the table yourself, what kind of total package you can live with, are interested in being with, and so on, as well as the concrete person in front of you. But for almost everyone it’s a settle. Those who bring more to the table need to settle less than those who bring less, and that’s across the board — looks, character, morals.

        Personally I have never found it troubling to have the kinds of discussions you are talking about — the “do you find her/him attractive” discussion. It’s always interesting, but it is never threatening as long as the relationship is secure. If the relationship is not secure, of course it can be problematic, but there are bigger problems in that case than the specific conversation. I personally find it healthier to have that kind of discussion rather to engage in the self-deception that my spouse finds no-one else attractive and that I am the most physically attractive person to them in the world. Pretty lies and all that.

        Liked by 3 people

      • cameron232 says:

        @Nova,

        My wife is 45. Are there women who have more raw sexual attractiveness? Yes, I’m sure the young redhead with the tight @$$ and 0 wrinkles has more raw sexual attraction to literally every man. Do wives know this? Probably. Should I just openly show the signs of this to her? No, IMO. I don’t think the “guard her heart” mentality amounts to living lies and denial about reality or it shows the insecurity of the relationship – our relationship has endured almost 30 years and she’s quite frankly pretty crazy about me so I’m doing something right. At this point, I doubt we have “deeper issues” or whatever.

        “it is “settling” in the sense that you decide not to wait and see if you can find a better deal, a person who has more of the package.”

        I may be more like a woman psycologically I guess. That isn’t how it worked for me. Falling in love is about the feelings she arouses in you. There was not a conscious decision about whether or not to hold out for a better deal. She was attractive to me (both in the “boner test” sense and the “she’s pretty” sense) and she treated me good, showed clear desire for me. That was enough.

        I think “boner test” was not entirely accurate of what I’m talking about. I’m sure lots of skank- looking girls can induce a boner. There is a sense that this girl is pretty to me and she arouses the desire to have sex. What I’m saying is if she is pretty (“I’d like it if my children looked like her” ) and “hot” (I’d enjoy having sex with her”) then her personality, desire for you, signs she is loyal, her chastity, etc. is what matters. I don’t characterize this as “low bar” – I shouldn’t have written “boner test” but I thought it was a funny phrase.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Liz says:

        I know he does not want, did not want, likely never will want, a red haired wife. He loves me physically. Height, figure, lips, hair, etc. Doesn’t mean he’s blind to other attractive women.

        This. It’s not like Mike couldn’t find a wife with naturally dark hair and blue eyes.

        I don’t like that game couples play of “Which Hollywood star would you leave me for or boink if you could?” Yeah, I know I’m a naïve romantic.

        I’m not sure how we ended up here. If Mike wanted a Hollywood star he’d have been boinking a hollywood stars. So would I. I would’ve moved to California and had an adventure instead of being married at a young age.
        I’m not really jealous of other women in general. I expect they want Mike because to me he is the most desirable man on the planet. If they don’t want him, I think there is something wrong with them. On the flip side, the list I made of qualities I wanted before I met him had about three deal breakers that he possesses. He knows this because I made it clear at the beginning. Didn’t dissuade him at all.

        Like

      • Liz says:

        Didn’t Archie Bunker have an episode where Gloria got a brown wig and was upset because Meathead wanted to have sex with her wearing it…or something?

        Like

      • Liz says:

        My advice to Gloria would be “Bitch, simma” wear the wigs. This is small stuff.

        Like

      • Liz says:

        I should add, consideration for one’s spouse is important.
        On the one side, an occasional wig or whatever isn’t too much to ask in my estimation.
        On the flip side, if (whatever behavior/commentary) bothers her a lot, one shouldn’t throw that sort of thing in her face. Kinda works both ways. Couples differ. This is just us and I’m sure everyone is different.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Here’s where I act like a hurtful jerk onIine I guess. I think both your reactions, ladies, sound like coping. I think the men should have hidden their preferences from you both and from Hearth. Granted that SAM’s preference sounded like it was more spontaneously revealed.

        Then again, I may be projecting the “typical” (Elspeth’s friend who “wouldn’t be amused”) woman’s reaction on to you and you all may be different. I guess if you’re redpill women you ARE probably atypical.

        Like

      • Elspeth says:

        I don’t think I’m atypical as much as I am totally convinced that in Sam’s eyes, there is no one else in the world for him except me. The feeling is mutual. I’m not threatened by attractive women. At all.

        And the other thing is (from the bit I have gleaned from Liz and the lot I know about Hearth), it does take a certain kind of woman to settle in for the ride with a man who isn’t going to do a lot of bending (neither his will nor his personality) for you. You’ll either really hate it (many women do) or find it incredibly alluring. I’m in the latter camp. I feel anchored by his strength.

        Of course, that works because we have monogamous men of strong moral character and firm belief systems.

        But your “jerkiness” is fine with me. Our relationship and how we do what we do has been the subject of real life commentary for years. I can take it.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        @Liz

        I mentioned the Hollywood thing because it’s a popular game with couples. “I’d leave you for Brad Pitt. I’d leave you for Charlize Theron. Ha! Ha!”

        I have a (liberal) friend from high school – his wife likes to talk with her friends on Facebook (in full public view) about how she dildos herself (it’s suggested in barely concealed language that’s supposed to be funny) to a Jason Mamoa coloring book. My reaction would be “then Jason Mamoa can pay your bills and help you clean up kid vomit at 2:00am, etc.”. Is that an insecure reaction? Betcha money men wouldn’t be allowed to do this without being shamed.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        Do wives know this? Probably. Should I just openly show the signs of this to her? No, IMO. I don’t think the “guard her heart” mentality amounts to living lies and denial about reality or it shows the insecurity of the relationship

        I don’t disagree with that specific statement, but I think that three different things have been slurred together in this discussion:

        (1) going to strip clubs when you are married;

        (2) finding other women attractive when you are married;

        (3) telling your wife that you find other specific women in your real life attractive; and

        (4) settling when deciding whether to marry a specific person.

        These are four distinct things, and they are all being slushed together.

        Liked by 4 people

      • cameron232 says:

        “On the one side, an occasional wig or whatever isn’t too much to ask in my estimation.”

        I think that sucks. It’s like simulated “sex with someone else.”

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Yes Nova, that’s my fault. I’m very erratic in my comments.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Liz says:

        I think that sucks. It’s like simulated “sex with someone else.”
        Okay, you can think that.

        One of the difficult things with this medium is…we only have partial information and full context is difficult to convey online. Plus, some (probably most) of us value our anonymity and aren’t comfortable with too many details. We’ll just disagree on this. What you do seems to work for you and what we do works for us.

        Liked by 5 people

      • cameron232 says:

        @Elspeth,

        Well I’m such a heart guarder that I need to guard the hearts of ladies who post – not that you need that from some anonymous dude on the internet. So, when I feel like I am saying something that might be hurtful then, yeah, I feel like a jerk. So, there’s an implicit apology in me saying I’m being a jerk.

        In reality, I think you both have alpha male husbands (and I would guess Hearth too). I’m sure lots of women would appreciate the beta male heart-guarder qualities (just not at the expense of alpha) but alpha is preferable to beta as long as the alpha has enough beta to be monogamous. This is not a criticism of the ladies – it is perfectly normal to prefer and choose the ideal which is alphabux. Like I said, you (and I’m sure Liz too) deserve that.

        What I’m being is classically beta – fantasizing that females will prefer heart-guarder beta male qualities. Like SAM says, “be yourself.”

        Liked by 1 person

      • elspeth says:

        My husband is actually very protective of me, physically as well as emotionally. As I said earlier, any good husband guards his wife, heart and all. What that looks like for you, compared to him, is a different picture, because you’re a different man with a different wife.

        Since we married, we’ve always been a subject of query. When I stopped working and college at 23, concern about whether it was wise to make myself dependent on a guy “like that” came at me from every angle. Except my dad, interestingly enough. He didn’t express any negative reaction to it.

        Then there were the questions about the ways I serve him that other wives found overly catering. His less than tender manner (in the early years, as he’s gotten a little bit more mellow and a lot more affectionate with age) was another thing. He still will not be cowed or commanded by me, but he has evolved.

        I have vivid memories of being held in less regard by the women in my extended family for going from such a go-getter to what they considered a doormat. What kind of black woman lets her husband rule over her?

        SAM did and does still find that double over funny. I didn’t suddenly become a shrinking violet when he married me and he would hate it if I did. I’m as opinionated as I always was. I’m just smart about it. No need in trying bend the will of a steel-spined man. There are better ways to get what you want. He says that I am spoiled by him, and he is right. The fact that he doesn’t reward nagging, belligerent, or passive aggressive behavior (“Don’t try to manipulate me”) doesn’t mean he isn’t good to me. He simply will not be ruled by me.

        The men in his life would call him for relationship counsel because they saw the respect I have for him, the way I serve him, and the fact that I’ve never contradicted him in their presence. At least not on anything more consequential than what time a show starts. The general tenor is “Why does she not give you a hard time like my wife/girlfriend/SO?’ I have had more than one uncomfortable moment when a friend or relative of his has hinted that SAM’s wife isn’t a feminist (unspoken part:”like my wife”).

        Things come full circle. As years have gone by, women who disdained me way back when return to say, “I see now. I should have followed your example. My marriage might have not ended or might not be so hard. I drove home away, etc.” Not that they should do exactly what I did. They don’t even know what I did, nor are they married to my husband. I do express my opinion, I do speak up -respectfully- if I disagree with something. He listens to me, and gasp! even takes my advice occasionally.

        Point being, your criticism of my description of how we handle this particular subject doesn’t bother me because it’s not the first time we’ve been confronted with less than believable reactions to the way we interact. We really are having a blast, because we accept each other as we are. Incredulity towards that is par for the course. People don’t believe in happy, fulfilling marriages. Any cursory reading of this blog reveals that. Scott has expressed on more than one occasion how depressing y’all can be.

        Sharkly’s comment is actually the crux of the matter. For all the talk of AWALT, our personalities differ, and what works with one wife will not work another. Same with husbands. Submit to and Respect your husband is the command to the wife.

        Dwell with your wife according to knowledge is the command to the husband. Mine knows I’m not jealous or insecure. If I was, he’d calibrate accordingly in order to guard my heart.

        Liked by 5 people

      • cameron232 says:

        @Liz, I am sorry if I was insulting -that was just my visceral reaction. I have said this before – people post personal details – I try hard not to use that to hurt or insult them – I’m really a pretty amiable, hold-hands and sing Kumbaya kind of dude.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        A lot of men here don’t believe in happy successful marriages because they don’t have them – that’s easy for Scott to say because he has one.

        I believe in happy successful marriages too because I have one – but just because I have one doesn’t mean I’m not sympathetic to the men here who got screwed over. Or got nothing.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        You know Elspeth, after all the verbiage we’ve spilled over this, the guard her heart with respect to physical attraction doesn’t apply to you two anyway. His preference was revealed only by accident/incident. You pointed it out to him, he owned it.

        I don’t think a husband should intentionally reveal his “type” to his wife if it isn’t her type. But it that doesn’t bother some – well I’m not going to spend time convincing them it should. That sort of thing I wouldn’t do to my wife– but each relationship is different.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Liz says:

        @Liz, I am sorry if I was insulting -that was just my visceral reaction.

        No worries. No offense taken at all.
        My spouse knows me very well, and I know him.
        We are very close and value each other very much.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        @Nova,

        I suppose we’re just arguing over a word: “settling.”

        To me the “settling” that’s relevant is when someone (male or female) marries someone they aren’t attracted to. Or maybe very marginally attracted to. We’ve talked about this – I’m sure it’s a problem in many marriages. And yeah, it can go both ways: man-woman, woman-man.

        In my mind, if a man is attracted to the woman he marries, he isn’t settling in this sense. Deciding to marry someone (and stay committed to the marriage) isn’t an optimization exercise in my mind.

        Like

    • Novaseeker says:

      Right … which is what the sphere refers to as a “natural”. It just flows from the innate persona.

      If its entirely illegitimate for men to try to acquire this if it is in not innate in them, it is tantamount to condemning most men, who are not naturals, to second class status, in effect. This is where the disagreement lies. If this is all delegitimized because it is “fake”, it’s basically saying “be a natural or … oh well”, which is not something you have ever said but is darned close to things others who are similarly-minded have said around here.

      Liked by 5 people

  27. Pingback: Commonalities of Successful Marriages | Σ Frame

  28. Elspeth says:

    Real quick before I get off to work (work from home and housework calling):

    @Cameron:

    I think openly showing signs of attraction to other people is “no bueno”, to borrow from one of my kids. It’s not the same thing as saying, “I always thought red haired women were pretty”, or “tall women” or Angela Bassett over Halle Berry, where either one is basically little more than the equivalent of a concept car.

    Never has my husband ever said, ‘Your friend Janette is hot”. Never would he ever say that. He might say that “Janette has nice hair” or some equivalent to what you said about Candace Owens feminine, flowery blouse. Of course, if he thought Janet was ugly, he wouldn’t notice Janette’s feminine blouse or her pretty hair. I’m not an idiot, but I don’t need him to be afraid to say things like that to me.

    Conversely, he knows that my comments about Idris Elba (before he came out as a woke kook) having a dazzling smile weren’t made in a vacuum. Again, concept car, and he’s a woke kook who suddenly looks old to me. Personality matters.

    All that to say that no one is saying (at least I’m not saying) that couples should boldly express sexual thoughts about other people. To open a door to that would be to -to some effect- condoning lust, infidelity, and eventually porn.

    But then, I also don’t think noticing that someone is pretty is equivalent to lust or adultery as defined by Jesus. My husband shows a thousand times more excitement over the night sky, anyway.

    Liked by 2 people

    • cameron232 says:

      @elspeth, Sure – E.g. I “notice” attractive men. Denzel Washington and Brad Pitt are handsome man even though I’m 100% straight. The human eye knows what is attractive. But Nova seems to disagree with one of my reasons for not going to a strip club – like that would be fooling myself and her into believing that I didn’t settle.

      He and I define “settling” differently I suppose. He is defining it as unless that person is your ne plus ultra in every way you’re settling whereas I consider “settling” as accepting someone you’re not attracted to because they’re all you can get.

      If I go check out naked chicks, the message I’m sending is that the ho with the fake boobs is what I really want.

      Liked by 3 people

      • professorGBFMtm2021 says:

        Elspeth,you had a very wise father,that did’nt go along with the wrong crowd like I don’t as anyone can clearly see from my comments!Cameron if I don’t like a woman,she can use any wiles&devices she wants &she will lose every-time!I don’t like non-relz chestal area wimminz either!P.S.Cameron you&I agree on what ”settling” means&most of the game stuff too,if you did’nt already know that from my own ”erratic” comments,now you do!Game is mostly for men having ”trouble with wimminz” not you&I,also as sharkly also basicly said too!

        Like

  29. Sharkly says:

    1 Peter 3:7(Geneva) Likewise ye husbands, dwell with them as men of knowledge, giving honor unto the woman, as unto the weaker vessel, even as they which are heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers be not interrupted.

    I think the key to some of the discussion above, is that men need to know their own wife. They need to be knowledgeable and wise about what they say so as not to negligently create disunity that could hinder their collective prayers. Men also should take their own personage and image into account when deciding what behavior is fitting for them to portray. There is not a one size fits all behavior pattern that will work best for all couples. Each man has to be discerning as to what will work best in his own marriage, for his testimony, as an example to his children, and Etc.

    Certain game tactics that may work on most women, might backfire with your particular wife. Your wife may be an outlier in certain regards and it pays to study what works in general, while keeping in mind that it may not work best in your own particular case. The key to mastery or husbanding is not to be the most masculine, or the most dark-triad, or to play 3-D chess with your relationship, but to dwell with your wife in a wise way, to honor your wife’s value to God while taking into account her categorically weaker being, and her own specific weaknesses, so as not to make more drama than your wife needs to function the best, and not to make the kinds of drama that are going to stumble her in following yourself, and God. Most wives won’t function well for long with zero conflict. But you need to pick your battles and choose how you give correction and how you wash her with the word of God in a wise way to get the best possible results.

    Nor can you really compare results. There is often little correlation. Some wives are just way harder to deal with and perhaps next to nothing allowed in our society will work to correct them. While other wives are quite easy to get along with in general, and they actively seek to please their husbands.
    A relationship cannot develop beyond whatever level that the weakest link or least mature partner can sustain. In most cases today in Western society the wife is the weak link in maintaining the relationship. To improve such a relationship, you have to not only be wise and avoid making mistakes, but you also have to try to gradually filter and purify your wife’s character, cleansing her of recurring blemishes of character, so that it is even possible to have an improved relationship.

    Ephesians 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; 26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, 27 That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

    Liked by 4 people

  30. Pingback: Fantasy in Makeup and Photography | Σ Frame

  31. Pingback: Descriptors of Beauty and Attractiveness | 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