Carousel Widow in Decline – Part 4

A snapshot of defilement.

Readership: All; Men;
Author’s Note: The contents of this series is a summary of journal entries from the dates specified.
Reader’s Note: The theme for the month of August is “Snickerdoodles – Case Studies of Female Failures”. This post is part 4 in a series. The beginning of this post overlaps with the end of Part 3 and adds further details.
* Proper nouns have been changed to protect the author from the guilty.
Length: 2,000 words
Reading Time: 7 minutes

Locker Room Talk (Monday, September 3, 2018)

My wife stayed busy in the kitchen, cleaning and baking all afternoon while I was at work.

In the evening, one of my wife’s friends (not Rhianna*) came to visit her at 9:00 pm. They talked for about an hour and they ate some of the cookies she had baked.

While they were talking, I reviewed the messages that my wife had exchanged with Rhianna during the day.

Initially, I had the impression that my wife was simply schooling Rhianna about how to catch a husband. But as I was browsing through the long string of texts, I was ashamed to find that my wife became woefully sidetracked.

I came across one message in which Rhianna announced that she was going to visit the Italian guy tomorrow, and she talked about how they would “probably have sex”. After this message, I saw that Rhianna’s talk began to arouse my wife’s feral nature, and she soon became swamped in the drama.

Rhianna asked my wife what she should do to make an impression. My wife told her that if she has already decided to have sex with him, then she should not give him a lot of contradictory attitudes about sex. This was the same advice we’ve been giving her all along, but in this instance, I was displeased with my wife, because instead of urging Rhianna to avoid temptation, it seemed that my wife had already accepted Rhianna’s decision and was encouraging her to romp and roll.

I sighed, because on the other hand, I knew that warning her about temptation would probably be a wasted effort anyway.

Rhianna wanted to know how she should ask him to use a condom, and my wife told her to just ask him directly while they were kissing. My wife was so sure that he would have condoms on hand, that they made a bet on it. Rhianna wanted to know what she should do if he refused to wear a condom, or if he wanted to have a baby. My wife told her that she worries too much, and that men don’t know that they want a baby. “That’s why women often use a pregnancy to capture a man.” I couldn’t believe this was coming from my wife!

Now, we often hear women complain about how men “objectify” women… Let me tell you, women “objectify” men too, and it’s 10 times more profane! Their banter was littered with funny/swarthy quips about hairy butts, manscaping, d!ck size and shape, semen volume and ejaculatory force, and highlighted by a looong obsession (about 30 messages) with how Italian men have a very strong libido.

The thing is, when men “objectify” women, it’s mostly all braggadocio and posturing, but I know Rhianna well enough by now to know that this is not just idle talk – this is real!

Seeing two women discuss these things so confidently and casually really turned my stomach. I got the impression that women fornicate on the fly just like men jerk off with porn – It’s as exciting as it is shameful, done frequently, kept in tight secrecy and never talked about, and the man is like a disposable dildo that is eventually discretely discarded by the woman, just like men do with a skin magazine.

I was impressed by the complexity of their strategies to purposely and systematically devise a scheme to dominate men, and bleed them out for what she needs. They were only concerned with controlling this Italian guy and getting what she wanted out of him. They didn’t really care about the man himself. What God wanted was not even mentioned. It’s like these women just made a game of trapping a man, keeping him under control by toying with his desire, f___ing around with him, and killing his heart in the process. The thing that bothered me the most, was her pride, the way she thinks she has to cut the man down and manage him, as if he were a wild animal. No love or respect at all, just a beast of burden to be p*ssy whipped into domesticated duties, sexual delights, and giving cash on demand. I know Rhianna learned these strategies through all her past relationships, but I was not pleased that my wife was pouring more gravy on the details.

I was shocked to see so many self-centered presumptions, and the self-serving dishonesty of it all, and with apparently no guilt or shame whatsoever. The notion that “women are the fairer sex” is certainly feminist hogwash.

Their whole text conversation really made me disgusted, not only by the content, but also because I saw that this s1ut is sucking my wife into her mindset. I could not understand why my wife, acting as a Christian counselor, would encourage her and support her in this decision. Instead of helping her focus on finding a Christian man and making herself into a suitable match, she was pushing her into an exact rehash of how she has messed it up for the past 20 years. It made me wonder how Christian women are any different from non-Christians, if at all.

It was definitely a bad idea for my wife to try to “help” her, because Rhianna’s negative influence on my wife is stronger than my wife’s positive influence on her. I was one year into the Red Pill at this time, and all this served to drive home a maxim that has been tossed around in the ‘sphere for a while — AWALT! (All Women Are Like That!)

The Escalation to Ecstatic Defilement (Wednesday, September 5, 2018)

My wife gave me a report on Rhianna that lightened the mood a little bit. The news was that she had gone to Bigtown* to see the Italian guy for two days, and she just got back. In the 30 some hours they had together, she had banged the guy three times, and argued with him all night. In the morning, they had another argument and she left in a huff, and then she blocked him on chat.

But later in the day, when she unblocked him, she discovered that he had blocked her too! This unseated her ego and made her obsessed with getting back together with him.

Rhianna was at the end of her wits about what to do, so she asked my wife how she could get the Italian guy back. My wife hesitated to get involved but after a series of fervid text messages from Rhianna, she got sucked back into the fray.

So the next day, Rhianna came over to our house to talk it over with my wife and cook up a scheme about how to get this guy back. I don’t know how long they talked, but I’ll guess it was the good part of the day. After tossing around several ideas about how to contact him in spite of her being blocked, Rhianna asked my wife if she would send a message to the Italian guy for her. So they came up with a carefully worded and beautifully written text message in which Rhianna apologized and told him she would “do everything” for him. The amount of effort they put into this was reminiscent of the enthusiasm a marketing strategist puts into introducing a new product.

When the guy got the text message from my wife’s phone, he didn’t respond immediately. But after two days, he sent a message to my wife with an explanation of why he blocked Rhianna.

When my wife read his response, she was doubtful about his enthusiasm. My wife asked Rhianna, “If he really wanted a relationship with you, then why didn’t he reply to me for 2 days?” But Rhianna didn’t care. She asked my wife to help convince him to unblock her and give her another chance, so after a couple more days of exchanges between the two of them, he did. When Rhianna got the first message from him, she was so excited she couldn’t contain herself.

We were hoping that since my wife got involved, then both Rhianna and this guy might take their relationship a little more seriously. But instead of working on sorting out their issues, it wasn’t long before Rhianna started sending the guy all kinds of sexually suggestive messages.

“I am sooo wet for you. My body won’t stop shaking!”

“Your c0ck is sooo beautiful! I will eat you all night!”

All these profane texts destroyed the purpose-centered mood of interaction that my wife had worked so hard to create. I’m sure the guy fully expected to have sex with her because of that.

Rhianna spent the rest of the week wallowing in the throes of her fantasies and preparing herself for this night of sex she would have when she met this guy again. She even bought some new clothes, including three new sexy lingerie, and she wanted my wife to shoot some new photographs of her and help her prepare for the rendezvous.

“I look good in purple, so I got this purple teddy.”

“I could imagine he likes the see-through, so I got one of those too.”

Her giddy behavior really tested my wife’s patience. Every third sentence, my wife had to tell her to calm down.

“You don’t need to prepare this… Calm down! …for the guy when you should be thinking about… Calm down! …what you should tell him. If he really cares about you, then he won’t… Calm down! …tell you to put on something like that anyway…”

Since she was out of her mind, my wife and I insisted that she should prepare a list of questions related to the future of their relationship to discuss with him.

The drama never ended!

Moving in for the Kill (Sunday, September 16, 2018)

So the day before Rhianna went to Bigtown, she told my wife lots of questions she wanted to ask the guy and she also prepared an itinerary of what she’s going to do.

The night before she left, at 1:00 in the morning, Rhianna sent my wife a string of messages, saying, “I don’t want to go to Bigtown because if I ask him all these questions, I know he’ll have a quarrel with me.” Then she started to make up excuses, bulverize, and obfuscate.

“I don’t really think he’s that much of a match for me…”

I don’t think he’s enough for me…”

“I won’t go there to meet him.”

Rolling over in bed, I asked my wife, “Okay… How can she possibly shift from being sooo zany-pants excited to meet this guy, to deciding not to go? She’s a total mess! Just ignore her from now on.”

My wife didn’t reply to her until the next morning. Rhianna didn’t check her messages until noon.

When she replied later in the day, she said she still went to Bigtown. The guy called her when she was on the bus to Bigtown and said, “Don’t expect to have a long-term relationship with me. I cannot have a long-term relationship with you.” So Rhianna was very upset about that and sent another long string of texts to us to express her inner turmoil.

We didn’t hear anything more from Rhianna for a couple days.

The next post (Part 5) will tell what happened in Bigtown, and finish with a conclusion of this series.

Related

Meditations on our interactions with Rhianna eventually culminated in a number of posts.

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, Attraction, Boundaries, Choosing a Partner or Spouse, Discerning Lies and Deception, Discernment, Wisdom, Discipline, Disorders, Female Power, Feminism, Hamsterbation, Holding Frame, Introspection, Leadership, Male Power, Models of Failure, Moral Agency, Personal Presentation, Polysexuality, Respect, Running the Gauntlet, Sanctification & Defilement, Sexual Authority, SMV/MMV, Solipsism, Taiwan, Vetting Women. Bookmark the permalink.

160 Responses to Carousel Widow in Decline – Part 4

  1. Femmy says:

    Women LOVE talking about relationships. It’s how we are wired.
    We love to help other women with different strategies learned from relationship books, etc.
    We buy all the relationship books and go over all the strategies on forums — with a fine tooth comb.
    We’re helping our friend get a man. We see it as a good thing.

    If a Rhianna came to me, I would ask her if she wanted to follow God’s way, Biblical way.
    If she said yes, I would tell her it.
    Then if Rihanna wouldn’t stop. She would still bug me.
    She would tell me she doesn’t want the Biblical way YET.
    She would bug me more.

    And that’s when I would get sucked into “helping her get a man” with relationship tactics gleaned from relationship books and forums.

    That’s how women talk. They help her get what she wants.

    It’s addictive.

    A dopamine hit.

    Exciting.

    Fun.

    The girl wants him badly–poor thing–therefore ya gotta help her.

    We don’t see the other side.

    We don’t see what he is feeling in his heart.

    A nebulous figure.

    We see men as tough. They can handle anything.

    Once the dopamine hits, you can’t stop it.

    We want more. Every detail of every reaction.

    It’s life or death to us.

    The problem with your Rihanna is that she doesn’t care about others. She doesn’t care about your wife. Or anyone else. She bothers her without caring how it affects your wife’s time and energy.

    If I were your wife, I would ask you to forbid me from talking to her period. Then I would use it to get out of future talks with Rihanna. Rihanna is way too stressful to hang with.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Jack says:

      Femmy,
      I appreciate your insights into female psychology.

      “If I were your wife, I would ask you to forbid me from talking to her period. Then I would use it to get out of future talks with Rihanna. Rihanna is way too stressful to hang with.”

      Lesson learned! In the future, I will be open to helping people, but if I find out they are not serious about following God’s way, I will make it clear that I cannot help them any further, and then steer clear of them. I’ll make this clear to my wife too.

      For people who aren’t interested in following God’s way, we can actually help them more by not helping them at all. They need to first learn that God’s way is best, and unfortunately, having a few bad experiences is probably necessary for that to happen.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. Lexet Blog says:

    My advice to OP. Your wife isn’t Christian. She is a whore. Consider divorce before she cheats on you. Her using her phone to contact her friends fling is beyond inappropriate

    Like

    • cameron232 says:

      I have a different idea based on theology of what a Christian is. But I don t want to pick a fight about that (for one thing you’re way more learned than me lexet).

      I do not characterize her as a whore. I would say that her actions are those that cultivate a heart of a harlot not the heart of a Christian wife and that she should desist.

      Like

  3. Scott says:

    I haven’t really been tracking this series. This is a person you and your wife know in real life?

    Weird.

    Like

    • cameron232 says:

      I can summarize the entire series for you Scott. Rhianna is an aging slut. She wants a man but should be shipped to a nunnery in Siberia for her own spiritual good and that of others. She is having a negative effect on Jack’s wife.

      I feel guilty writing this. I could not love my wife after seeing this behavior of encouraging and probably living vicariously through this woman. At the very least I would not ever see her the same way again.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Jack says:

        “I feel guilty writing this.”

        Yeah… I feel guilty and ashamed to recount all these details. That’s why I haven’t done it sooner. But I feel like this experience, this story, is one that needs to be told. Maybe this series, and the awareness it brings, is the reason why we met Rhianna in the first place. We need to know why we need to exclude fornicators from fellowship and not to have anything to do with them (1st Corinthians 5:9-11) — don’t even pray for them (Jeremiah 7:16; 11:14; 1st John 5:16).

        Liked by 7 people

  4. “The notion that “women are the fairer sex” is certainly feminist hogwash.”

    Thanks for summarizing the insights of how wicked these women can be. I grew up with the same “fairer sex” mindset and it has been a long road to realize that they are just as evil as men, albeit in different ways.

    “Rhianna” is not a Christian and not even pretending to be interested in redemption. Her behavior is cartoonishly evil, almost as if she’s trying to fulfill stereotypes in an over-the-top way. The wife is “saved and confused” at best. Hopefully, she has matured since then.

    So many Christian women violate God’s commandments on both sides of the wedding. They “sex-nap” men before the marriage for fun and to lure them in, then they eventually deny sex and use it as a weapon after the marriage. They make a mockery of 1 Corinthians 7:1-5, which most pastors are afraid to preach on because it is so crystal clear. By the grace of God, I married a “unicorn” who saw how destructive it was when other women did that. One of our friends thought her marriage was a 7 or an 8 out of 10, but had sex with her husband about once a year. He divorced her after 30 years of marriage.

    1 Corinthians 7:1–5 “Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. The husband should give to his wife her conjugal rights, and likewise the wife to her husband. For the wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. Likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does. Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control.”

    Liked by 5 people

    • cameron232 says:

      “…violate God’s commandments on both sides of the wedding…”

      That’s a very good way of phrasing it and reminds me of RPAs comment on sex denial being the other side of the coin of marital infidelity.

      I married a unicorn too through no virtue of my own – just grace, mercy and good timing.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Same here on the unicorn thing. Definitely by the grace of God. I wasn’t a believer at marriage but became one in my late 20’s. Long story, but I was total beta as a college freshman, then unconsciously developed a lot of RP things after my freshman girlfriend broke up with me (abundance mindset, guys are the prize, etc.). Looking back I can see how much even medium doses of RP helped my marriage. Drifted through BP / RP things over the years without knowing what they meant. Churches are definitely BP. Grateful for RP sites like this, as they help make sense of it all.

        And yes, women break the commandment of 1 Cor 7 a lot and don’t even realize it. They think the alternative is “marital r*pe.”

        Liked by 3 people

    • Red Pill Apostle says:

      EM – I knew the woman who ranked her marriage 7 or 8 out of 10 was on thin ice before continuing on to the other details. Here is why I say that.

      There is a measure that many businesses use called the Net Promoter Score which is a measure used to see how willing your customers are to recommend your business. It’s based on a scale from 0-10 where 0 is the worst and 10 is the best. The simple question along the lines of “Based on this scale, how likely would you be to refer someone to the business?” or “Based on this scale, where would you rank your satisfaction with this business?”

      The important part is what the breakdown of the numbers in the scale mean.
      0-6 means that customer actively detracting from you business which means they are saying things that cause people to avoid you.
      7-8 are merely neutral so they are probably not saying anything and will stop using your services if a better alternative comes along.
      9-10 are your active promoters who tell other people about how great you are. The people who are 9-10 love your business and actively want to help you with it.

      The results are well documented and are repeatable because human behavior tends to be quite consistent. My intuition is that if you were to ask married people, “On a scale of 0-10, with 0 being the worst and 10 the best, how would you rate the idea (not their specific marriage) of marriage?” The results would be highly predictive of marital success and failure and the results would break down in the 0-6, 7-8 and 9-10 groupings.

      Liked by 1 person

    • feeriker says:

      “Rhianna” is not a Christian and not even pretending to be interested in redemption.”

      This is why you walk away from these types of people as soon as you discern that. It’s akin to avoiding people with a contagious and potentially lethal disease. As Jack says, it was a learning experience, albeit a sinful one. I doubt there will be anymore Rhiannas in his or his wife’s life.

      Liked by 3 people

  5. Elspeth says:

    I hear about these lurid cobversations women are rsupposedly having with eagerness and vicraious desires and wonder, “How have I managed to go at LEAST two decades without encountering such a thing?”

    Even on the rare oaccasions when I have had a conversation with a woman about marital relations specifically, it has never been lurid or full of details that should not be shared. There’s a whole lot you can glean -even when you’re trying to help someone- without revealing things about one’s husband that ought not be revealed. Who ARE these women that just love love love to get down and dirty like this?

    Either way, Femmy is right. Best to cut this woman out. “Bad company corrupts good morals” is a thing my dad used to say. At the time, I didn’t know it was Scripture. But he also used to say, “Show me who your company is, and I’ll tell you who you are.”

    I hope Rhianna is out of you and your wife’s life.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Your dad is in good company! 1 Corinthians 15:33 “Do not be deceived: Bad company ruins good morals.”

      Glad to hear not all women are like that. My wife doesn’t engage in any of that. The stereotype is that guys talk like that but that women don’t, but the reality is the opposite. I’ve known countless guys and we never talk details like that. I can only recall one instance, when I was still a pagan around 20 yrs old., when a friend commented on my girlfriend’s chest size. I found it inappropriate, and it isn’t like I was a prude.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Elspeth says:

        It occurred to me that my entire life I have been graced with ectremely good advice, and not all of it Christian. I CAN think of one time when I was tempted to be sucked into a conversation like that, and something my sister had told me stopped me dead in my tracks.

        It was right after SAM and I had gotten together (I was 21) and my one close girlfriend kind of hinted around about what it was like. And I said, “Oh my god…” and stopped. Something my sister (13 years my senior) had told me a year earlier came rushing back:

        “You don’t ever want to make other women curious about what your man is like. They’ll want a taste. Keep the details to yourself.” The other thing was: “There’s no reason for your man to be going without basic stuff that you should be providing. If you don’t, someone else will.”

        She wasn’t a Christian then. She was just recounting what she’d learned. I’ve never, ever forgotten it.

        Liked by 4 people

      • Jack says:

        Elspeth wrote,

        “You don’t ever want to make other women curious about what your man is like. They’ll want a taste. Keep the details to yourself.”

        “There’s no reason for your man to be going without basic stuff that you should be providing. If you don’t, someone else will.”

        Holy Schmoly! That’s golden advice for women!

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        “There’s no reason for your man to be going without basic stuff that you should be providing. If you don’t, someone else will.”

        This is pure apex fallacy and is indicative of most women. Most women see only attractive men – men who are getting as much sex and as much variety as they want.

        What your sister said is not true of most men. Most men are not attractive enough to cheat on their wives. Most men had a hell of a time just getting the women they married to sleep with them.

        If a man can’t get his wife to sleep with him, he will not be able to get women he’s not married to to sleep with him.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Scott says:

        Deti-

        This seems more or less true. It only works on women who see their husbands as relatively high value (like several levels of high value above her).

        Liked by 1 person

      • Scott says:

        Where this gets weird though (for me anyway), is that women are clearly not sexually interested in their husbands but still TALK like they are worried about him cheating. They say, “You better not cheat on me” as if they are worried about it.

        And I think, “What do you care if he cheats? Its like you are saying, ‘I don’t want you, but nobody else can have you either’.”

        Like

      • Scott says:

        And so I assume that being cheated on, even if its by a husband who is perceived as a total dud, is humiliating.

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        “…women are clearly not sexually interested in their husbands but still TALK like they are worried about him cheating. They say, “You better not cheat on me” as if they are worried about it.

        And I think, “What do you care if he cheats? Its like you are saying, “I don’t want you, but nobody else can have you either.”

        You know this – you’re a mental health professional. It’s about the two most primal things we understand: Power and fear.

        It’s about power. It’s about her power over him. Sex, and the ability to decide whether to have sex, with whom, and when, is power. Sex is the most powerful weapon a woman has, and she won’t hesitate to deploy it or withhold it as the circumstances dictate.

        It’s also about fear. She needs safety and security. She doesn’t want his sexual attention, but she DOES want his money, provisioning, and protection. She sees these as her birthright, her payment, her due for marrying him. In her mind, she’s entitled to those things because she deigned to marry a man she really wasn’t all that into.

        It never occurs to her that he also is entitled to things from his marriage. It never occurs to her that there are things that are HIS right, HIS payment, HIS due for marrying HER. It never occurs to her what he gave up to marry her.

        It never occurs to her that he is fully half of the marriage. It never occurs to her that maybe she owes him things.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Red Pill Apostle says:

        And I think “what do you care if he cheats? Its like you are saying ‘I don’t want you, but nobody else can have you either’”

        At one point years ago with Mrs. Apostle, I brought up the concept that if she was my only option but would not, is rooted in the same concept of commitment that I’m only devoted to her, but then would not be. It was a statement of comparison on my part trying to show the hurt of withholding. She lost her mind screaming uncontrollably at me the basic tenet of her words being threatening divorce if it ever happened. Looking back on the incident and using other behaviors as corroborating evidence, my gut feeling is that for this type of woman, control is the issue. Anything that even hints at taking that away is met with subtle and not so subtle shots across the bow to keep him in check. It’s the easiest and best explanation I’ve come up with for women who have little to nothing to fear about their husbands actually cheating for behaving this way.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        “And so I assume that being cheated on, even if its by a husband who is perceived as a total dud, is humiliating.”

        It means she loses with the sisterhood. Remember: the primary manner in which women judge each other and confer status on one another is on the caliber and quality of man they are able to get and keep. So, yeah – if your man is cheating on you, it means you can’t keep that man.

        It’s especially shameful if you can’t keep even a “total dud” under your thumb. If even a “total dud” won’t be your beta b!tchboi, you’re not much of a woman, now are you?

        It’s also loss of control and power. The ability to decide whether and when to have sex, and with whom, is immense power. It’s most of the power a woman has in a relationship with a man. A man going elsewhere to get sex has just neutralized 90% of his woman’s total power in that relationship. Once he decides he doesn’t need her for sex anymore, the next step is totally checking out of the relationship.

        [Jack’s note to readers: Dalrock wrote about Pooze Power in his post, Frigidity and Power (2014-08-03).]

        Liked by 3 people

      • cameron232 says:

        So then RPA why dont you pull the SAM tactic Elspeth described yesterday only with respect to sex and not laying clothes out?

        “No sex? I don’t go to work.” Do it. Once you run out of sick/vacay time then its unpaid absence.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        @ deti:

        “This is pure apex fallacy and is indicative of most women. Most women see only attractive men – men who are getting as much sex and as much variety as they want.”

        In my observation, this isn’t even close to being universally true. I can rattle off, without missing a beat, husbands we know whose wives thought turning off the spigot would be good punishment and the men were having affairs in short order.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Red Pill Apostle says:

        Cameron,

        My story was from a couple years ago and I told it because it is supporting evidence of the truth of Scott’s comment. I have been improving myself and getting advice on my blind spots (thanks Deti), and Mrs. Apostle told me a couple months ago she will not tell me no. I still need to work through issues of attraction to her due to how her contentiousness has affected me in the past. I think a better approach than to emulate SAM’s tactic, based on what I have just written, is to hold her to her word every day for a month or two. There is a benefit to staying in shape.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        “In my observation, this isn’t even close to being universally true. I can rattle off, without missing a beat, husbands we know whose wives thought turning off the spigot would be good punishment and the men were having affairs in short order.”

        Pics or I don’t believe you. Dollars to donuts they’re all attractive men. If they weren’t attractive men, they hired cheap hookers.

        Women do not see unattractive men.

        Liked by 1 person

      • As a rule you may be right, but I know of one case in particular where a completely overweight dude cheated on his wife. Everyone was mystified that he could get anyone else.

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        Sorry, Elspeth. You don’t understand ANYTHING about the sexual experience of the average man. You don’t know, nor can you relate to, the manner in which the average man experiences the world or his relationship to it or the way it relates to him. The world of the average man is completely and totally alien to you.

        I understand that world intimately and am infinitely more qualified to comment on it and relate it than you are. Sorry, but I am. You have absolutely NO experience whatsoever with average men.

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        “As a rule you may be right, but I know of one case in particular where a completely overweight dude cheated on his wife. Everyone was mystified that he could get anyone else.”

        He probably cheated on his wife with a sugar baby or a hooker.

        One example of a fat guy cheating on his wife does NOT negate the rule; it PROVES the rule.

        Look guys. It brings me no joy at all to enunciate these unpleasant truths. I don’t like saying these things about men, or women, or average men. But they are the truth and we need to speak that truth. We ignore that truth at our peril. (Ask me how I know.)

        I am not saying these things to put others down or to puff myself up as if I know more or am more knowledgeable or smarter or better. I am not. I’m just older, and I’ve done more and experienced more and seen more. I’m just an average guy who has seen and experienced the world as an average guy. I’m not a bull alpha. I am not one of these guys who can command the entire world nor get women to do whatever I want with just a look or a well placed sentence spoken in a gruff matter of fact voice. I am just an average guy who connected some dots with the help of people who are much, MUCH smarter and more observant than I am.

        So when I know something to be true, I am not going to ignore it, nor am I going to let what others say, or allegedly saw, sway me from it. When I know something is true from my experience and from that of others, you better be bringing f__king boatloads of evidence to persuade me from it. So far, I’m not seeing it.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        “So then RPA why don’t you pull the SAM tactic Elspeth described yesterday only with respect to sex and not laying clothes out?”

        “No sex, I dont go to work” Do it. Once you run out of sick/vacay time then its unpaid absence.

        A better tactic is “No sex, no attention.” or “No sex, then the things I used to let you do, I’ll take back. I will handle the budget/your paycheck from here on out.”

        “I don’t get what I want? You don’t get what you want.”

        “I don’t get sex? OK then, you can just watch TV and get fat while I go do what (and maybe who) I want — and you do not get to know anything about it.
        “Need help? Figure it out on your own.”
        “Need moral support? Get that from your frenemies. Need a shoulder to cry on cuz you had such a hard day? Tough sh!t. Cry in someone else’s beer. I don’t have time for someone who has no time for me.”

        “How was your day, RPA?” Fine.
        “Want to talk about it?” Nope.
        “What’s going on with you?” Nothing.
        “Are you OK?” Sure.
        “Would you like to know how my day was?” No, not really… (gets up and walks away)
        “Where are you going?” Out.
        “What are you going to do?” Something other than this.

        “But you can’t take the budget function away! You can’t keep money! You can’t control all the money! That’s ABUSE! The Duluth Wheel says that’s ABUSE!”
        I don’t give a sh!t what the Duluth Wheel says – the Duluth Wheel is not your husband and the Duluth Wheel does not give you this day your daily bread. You don’t like this? There’s the door. This is how it’s going to be from here on out. You don’t like how I do this? Get someone else to do it, or do it yourself, without being married to me.

        Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      My wife seems pretty open with me about what friends tell her (you can’t know what she isn’t telling you).

      She told me the details (in disapproving manner) of her high school friend’s affair with the husband of the woman she was babysitting for. Where and how they did it (in the couples bed, I wont repeat the physical details its nasty).

      She told me her HS bff complained to her about sex being painful because of the size of her boyfriends thing.

      She told me about a friend of her friend who likes rough sex.

      These first three were non Christian women.

      She told me about a friend who complained to her that her husband’s thing was too big and she would tear and get infections. This was a Christian woman. I have never heard about hairy butts or (another mans) semen volume.

      That’s all I can think of if were talking graphic stuff.

      Men do locker room talk about one night stands but not about wives or LTRs. I have never heard a man describe e.g. how tight or loose his wives hoohaa is or the firmness of her breasts and I have worked with Navy guys for 20+ years who will tell you all day about what they’ve seen and done in Asian ports a (really bad stuff).

      So in my experience more wives/LTRs talk about graphic sex stuff than husbands.

      Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        I used to attend law firm parties where I’d overhear the wives at various stages of intoxication talk about their husbands, some of whom were and are my law partners.

        Among the things I overheard:

        –the taste of their husbands’ semen
        –sexual activities on vacation
        –prior sex partners
        –comparing the size of their husbands’ penises to prior sex partners
        –menopause
        –vaginal dryness
        –their experiences with threesomes
        –how long it took for one of their husbands to heal up from his vasectomy

        So, yeah, women DO talk about this stuff!

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        My wife’s former best friend told ME (not my wife) she likes to watch gay male porn and has an interracial sex fantasy. Married stay at home mom who attends a Christian mom’s group (doesn’t mean she’s a serious Christian).

        She has described her husband’s pushiness for sex as marital rape. Her husband is a douche, not to make excuses for her. Women be nasty.

        Liked by 1 person

  6. Lastmod says:

    Discernment comes in still doesn’t it?

    I mean in college and after……. every guy I knew “had this amazing hook-up, or previous girlfriend and she was, oh you know…… just an average looking gal, 8-10 level, common, everyday looking gal” and of course, “he did nothing, she just came on to him” kind of thing.

    Then you see their wife or current girlfriend. She’s a looks-match to him, you know… average. Cute perhaps, pretty. Average.

    I think women, like men will talk, and on these matters that should be private…. but when it’s made public to friends or whatnot……. suddenly you know………. a hookup suddenly becomes, in their explanation, some six hour long porn-shoot. The pretty gal suddenly is now “model level” and the guy the gal hooked up with suddenly has this NBA schlong and was the hottest guy on the planet…..

    Just talk. I have heard more amazing stories about the prowess of every guy in the bedroom over the decades……… a man that great wouldn’t have to say anything. I take this talk by men as “typical Red Pill” as “I am more red pill than you because…”

    And from women…….. “They’re one of the guys, and like to talk freely, just like the guys do!”

    Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      Yes, I suspect you’re right, Jason, that the two behaviors are mirror images of the same ego-fantasy construction. For a guy it’s “I had sex with ten different 8-10s last week.” The “they were just average” is to inject plausibility into the story and disguise the ego inflating construction they’re doing.

      For the woman, it’s “I had sex with schlongzilla for 8 hours and he deposited 8 gallons.” The “complaint” aspect has the same motivation — to add plausibility and disguise their motivations in telling their story. Moral of the story: women have an ego too.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. Scott says:

    1 Cor 7 also seems to suggest that if a spouse cheats and wants to leave, they are required to remain celibate forever, or crawl back to the spouse and beg forgiveness. Boy was my ex pissed when I brought that one up.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Scott commented:

      “1 Cor. 7 also seems to suggest that if a spouse cheats and wants to leave, they are required to remain celibate forever, or crawl back to the spouse and beg forgiveness. Boy was my ex pissed when I brought that one up.”

      If only pastors preached more on that as well — “You only get one shot at this, so perhaps you should choose wisely!”

      Like

      • Jack says:

        “1 Cor. 7 also seems to suggest that if a spouse cheats and wants to leave, they are required to remain celibate forever, or crawl back to the spouse and beg forgiveness. Boy was my ex pissed when I brought that one up.”

        There is a lot of controversy about this passage and some see it as esoteric. But if we can move beyond seeing this as merely a doctrinal “requirement for salvation” (or some such rule for holiness), and we consider it in light of Red Pill lore, it’s not mysterious at all, really. Once a woman bonds sexually with a man, that’s for life (i.e. Alpha widow syndrome). She can go off looking for another man, but it’s highly unlikely that she’ll bond to anyone else any more than she bonded with her “first” / “husband”. Thus, it is entirely understandable that going this path will not bring her any closer to God, but will only lead her further down a path of heartache and hell. The best she can make of the situation is to return to her first love / Alpha. The thing is, if she has not improved herself significantly during the interim (which is highly unlikely, due to aging), and as long as he has other, better options (which a high value man probably does), then he’s highly unlikely to take her back into a long-term monogamous relationship. Polygyny might work, but that’s not socially acceptable, and even if it were, then she would still have a very low status in the harem. So that’s when celibacy becomes the best option. Unfortunately, most women, especially younger women, don’t have enough self-control to follow this path. It’s just too easy for them to get sex.

        That’s how cougars are spawned.

        This also explains why a woman’s ability to “keep a man” is so vitally, crucially important. It has literally d@mn!ng eternal consequences, and women are just not mature enough to understand the importance of this.

        Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      From a Catholic and probably Orthodox perspective Paul is referring to a mixed marriage (“unbeliever”) which was common in the primitive Church. One spouse converted. The definition of “believer” in the Orthodox understanding is baptized into the faith. Presumably the marriage wasnt sacramental but rather natural. The believer sanctified the non believer but a natural marriage is dissolvable. This is the “Pauline privilege.”

      Since your ex was Church of Christ this wouldn’t resonate with her.

      Like

      • Scott says:

        Right, but verse 10 says, “If you leave, your only non-sin option is to come back to your husband.”

        And it uses the term “be reconciled” to him, which suggests he could say no, based on my understanding of how forgiveness works.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Scott says:

        Verse 10 precedes the stuff about mixed marriages which starts right after.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Scott says:

        Neither my first wife or myself considered me to be Orthodox at the time. It was this verse that made her say to me

        “I don’t believe marriage should be a life prison sentence.”

        Translation: Being married to Scott is like prison.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Scott says:

        Man, those were some lovely days in my life. Wish I could sell tickets.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Scott I am not as good as most at biblical exegesis.

        The Church has always recognized valid reasons for separation (adultery, extreme abuse/neglect). Verse 10 is directed towards Christians since Paul’s words would have no authority over non Christians. Separation under anything but extreme circumstances has always been seen as sinful too. So it seems to me Paul was saying given circumstances which justify separation there must be reconciliation OR living single/chaste. You didn’t abuse her. She had no right (before God) to separate or remarry.

        Hope were not talking past each other.

        Like

      • Scott says:

        Yes, that was exactly the point I was trying to make to her at the time.

        “I am not abusing you. I don’t yell. I compromise. I don’t drink, don’t watch football all day, don’t cheat. I have a job. I don’t have an addiction. None of that stuff. You are choosing to leave under circumstances that put you in the position of the person in 1st Corinthians 7:10.”

        She said I was using scripture as a technicality to trap her into hell. It was awesome.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Jack says:

        Scott wrote about his ex, saying,

        “She said I was using scripture as a technicality to trap her into hell. It was awesome.”

        Actually, her own actions are what trapped her in hell, but she wasn’t aware of it (or was able to deny it) until you pointed it out to her (using scripture). So she thinks the condemnation came from you, not as a consequence of her own actions.

        The Word of God is the aroma of death to those who are perishing. (2nd Corinthians 2:15-17)

        It pains me to make this comparison, but your ex is just like Rhianna in this respect: They’ve already sowed the seeds of sin, and they’re determined to eat of its fruits. If you ever point out the factual truth of what she’s doing (s1uttery, adultery, etc.), she’ll become aware of her condemnation and tear you to pieces for bringing that awareness into her mental paradigm. It upsets the fantasy, which is anathema to her sin.

        As I learned from the interaction with Rhianna, and as Deti stated elsewhere, you cannot reason with such a person. It is best to avoid them altogether, but if you MUST interact with such a person, then you have to speak the code of their own language with appeals to their desires, fears, and egotistical pride.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Scott says:

        I was not the greatest husband on earth. I was about average I figure. But whatever sins I committed in that relationship I more than paid for with depression, loneliness, self doubt, despair and even a little suicidality thrown in for fun!

        Liked by 2 people

  8. Lastmod says:

    Once…… oh hell…. twenty years ago, at a house party (San Francisco), a bunch of women were talking about PMS. The guys there were mentioning about how their girls do this or that….. is unbearable, gets more horny during it…….. all talk…… women making excuses for their abysmal behavior, blaming pMS…… One average looking guy, nothing to shout about, just smirks and says “What’s PMS?” Shrugged his shoulders and walked away. He was bored by this conversation. He was here to have fun, and not get stuck in this.

    Now this was a man touched by heaven above. He obviously never had to deal with this, or didn’t put up with it, or had already “left” by the time the gal was blaming PMS, or going through it.

    I just smiled as everyone else jaw hit the floor. I just said as I was lighting a cigarette, “I like that guy! More men should hang with someone like that!”

    I of course was sexist, a waste, and useless for saying such a thing.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. feeriker says:

    “It made me wonder how Christian women are any different from non-Christians, if at all.”

    I’ve put forth the assertion in these parts on more than one occasion that it is impossible for most women to be true Christians, given their inherently feral nature, unless they completely and unconditionally surrender themselves to Christ. Most cannot do this, owing to their embedded narcissistic and solipsistic firmware. Rare is the woman who can circumvent it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • thedeti says:

      Most women follow the faith traditions/belief systems of who or whatever man they most respect – be that their father, a boyfriend, a husband, or whomever.

      Women look for men to supply their “containers”, and then pour themselves into those containers for the men who supplied them.

      Like

      • Scott says:

        When were going through our many iterations along the journey to Orthodoxy, I always had the feeling that I was leading that process. Mychaels conversion after my reversion was never really debatable.

        Like

      • Scott says:

        It’s my house, we practice the form of faith I want. I set the tone for that.

        But her obedience to that makes me keenly aware of the need to keep Irish/Catholic traditions alive in the home, blended with Serbian/Orthodox ones. Her family history is important to her and she is my wife.

        Liked by 2 people

  10. feeriker says:

    Elspeth: “There’s no reason for your man to be going without basic stuff that you should be providing. If you don’t, someone else will.”

    thedeti: “This is pure apex fallacy…”

    No, not really. I’m FAR from a “top tier” man in the looks and status departments, yet I’ve been informed by more than one woman, indirectly but unmistakably clearly, that she and her bed are always at my disposal. Granted. these are not top-tier women, but when one has a thirst for sexual intimacy that demands satisfaction, one doesn’t exactly have high standards.

    I think much of this goes back to the “pre-selection” thing. Other women see the wedding ring and it arouses their “hunter instincts.” The fact that my wife and I have been involuntarily separated for over two years now, something many of these women are aware of, makes me an even more attractive target for the predators. To say that the temptation can be intense at times would be the understatement of the Millennium.

    Liked by 1 person

    • thedeti says:

      Fee

      Yes, really. If you’re able to pull, you’re top tier.

      Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      First I think some of us underrate ourselves. You’re probably higher value than you think.

      I think Deti is speaking a general truth that men who are denied sex by wives usually have limited options. Deti’s “smack you in the head with reality” style leaves people reaching for exceptions, but I think he’s generally correct.

      Liked by 1 person

      • feeriker says:

        First I think some of us underrate ourselves.

        Again, no, not really. I think the mistake we make is in giving women more credit for integrity and standards than they actually have. As I said in my OP, the women who’ve hit on me and sent me signals of easy availability have NOT, for the most part, been high-quality women, morally or physically. In other words, I’m not being hit on by supermodels or by chaste, lovely young Christian ladies. They’re mostly the kind of women you’d find hanging around rural truck stops or dive bars, women that common sense and self-respect tell you to avoid like the plague, no matter desperately and insanely horny you are. One does NOT have to be anything near “top tier” to attract that type of woman. Indeed, attraction by overwhelming numbers of that type of woman strongly suggests the exact opposite. Remember, too, that such women are rarely motivated by attraction to a man, but by predatory desires (i.e., the mark has something she wants or needs and she’ll do anything to get it from him).

        Liked by 2 people

      • anonymous_ng says:

        @cameron232, I think you are touching on an interesting point here. What do we mean by average?

        I’m not average. It’s an objective fact. I’m 6’2″ tall. That makes me as tall or taller than 95% of the men in the US. I’m not average. But, I sure do feel like I’m just a normal guy.

        I’ve been working out with weights since I started high school forty years ago. I’m about 215#. The owner of the gym where I workout calls me “Bigman”. I don’t know what in the hell he’s talking about. I know big men and compared to them, I’m slight. See, there’s a selection bias going on there. I compare myself to the 6’+ meathead gymrats I’ve known, not to short out of shape guys.

        Tall guys tend to have tall friends. Meatheads who spend their days in the gym, self-select to be around other meatheads who spend time in the gym. Guys who have success with women probably have friends who also have success with women.

        I’m horribly shy at times and insecure, but when I really think about what Deti is saying about the experience of average guys and think about real average guys, all of a sudden, I have to acknowledge that personal issues aside, my experiences are not that of an average guy, which means by objective measure, my experiences are exceptional.

        So, that’s a problem we run into in these discussions. We define normal as the average of that around us, but if we surround ourselves of people like us, then our normal may be considerably outside the normal for the entire group.

        Liked by 3 people

    • anonymous_ng says:

      @Feeriker, I think you and Deti are both correct. Let me see if I can explain.

      I have an acquaintance who is morbidly obese and always has been. However, he’s got a good personality and people like him. He’s not what we’d normally consider a ladies man, as the morbidly obese women he gets with aren’t really on most men’s RADAR, but he likes them and they seem to like him, so it works.

      By Deti’s measure, he’s above average, and he is, but I think most people would have a hard time classifying him as top tier.

      Like

  11. thedeti says:

    I want to comment on something here that men often do when dealing with recalcitrant wives digging in their heels and doubling down on bad behavior. I have done this. Other men have done this. It seems to be intuitive to a lot of men, especially good decent Christian men who are trying to do the right thing by their families.

    The pattern seems to be this. Husband does well, follows all the rules, does what he’s “supposed to do”. He is good, kind, giving, and providing. Wife shows unloving behavior. Gets angry. Withholds sex. Shows disattraction and disrespect. The pattern continues.

    When they fight or disagree or try to talk out their differences, husband attempts to persuade wife of his goodness, kindness, and all the benefits he brings. He tells her she is acting contrary to scripture. He brings words, logic, and persuasion in an attempt to make sense of this. It makes no sense to him — he is doing everything he’s supposed to do. He is doing everything the church, his pastor, and Focus on the Family/Family Life Today/Steve Arterburn told him to do. He’s decent. He doesn’t cheat. He doesn’t drink or gamble the family finances away and he hasn’t infected his wife with any STDs. He works and provides for his family. He fears God. He is following Scripture.

    He has done everything his dad, his mom, his pastor, and James Dobson told him to do. “Wife, how you’re acting makes no sense!! Don’t you know that Dennis Rainey over at FL today says that what I am and what I’m doing is what is attractive to women!?!”

    Where we men make our mistakes is in talking with our wives and reasoning with them. They’re being emotional and irrational, so reason and logic will not sway them at all. The way you deal with a wife doing this to you is with expectations, boundaries, and consequences. You use FEAR. You need to make her understand that if she cannot meet expectations and respect boundaries, the consequences will be that you will take away what you bring. She will do what you want and give you what you need, or she will not be your wife anymore.

    Because, you see, that’s what women do to us men. They use fear. “Do what I want, or I will not have sex with you.” “It needs to be how I want, or NO SEX FOR YOU.” So you do that to women too. “Do what I want, or you will not be my wife anymore.” “You will give me what I want, or the privileges you did have will be taken away.” “Give me what I want, or I am divorcing you.” “I need sex. I need it from you. If I cannot get it from you, I’ll get it somewhere else.”

    No more logic or persuasion. No more “I am doing what I’m supposed to do, sweetie, now will you please do what YOU are supposed to do?”

    No more “Just tell me what you want me to do and I’ll do it!”

    No more “Your behavior makes no sense. I am doing XYZ just like James Dobson says I’m supposed to; now YOU need to do ABC like I want you to because James Dobson says women are sexually attracted to men who do XYZ!!”

    No. NO NO NO!!!

    The ONLY things that work with women are “Here are my expectations and boundaries; and here are the consequences for your failure to meet and respect them.” And then follow through.

    Liked by 4 people

    • Scott says:

      That’s more or less how my first one unraveled. The more obsequious I became, the worse it got.

      “I married the wrong guy and now I have found the right one [who happens to married to someone else].”
      “We should go find our true soul mates.”
      “You don’t have the tools you need to understand me.”

      Liked by 1 person

      • Scott says:

        My favorite though was the elder boards handling of it.

        You see, I drove her into the arms of another man by, well, I’m not sure how I did that. It had something to do with neglecting her needs or whatever. (Because being a totally and completely devoted, enamored, committed husband somehow looked like neglect to them).

        Liked by 3 people

      • thedeti says:

        Pre-Red Pill me: “Oh, no, honey, I am the right one for you! What can I do to make this better? Just tell me what I need to do and I’ll do it! Whatever tools I need to understand you, I’ll get them!! Whatever I need to do to make this work, I’ll do it.”

        Red Pill me: “Welp, sucks to be you, that your “right guy” is married to someone else. Guess you’ll need to figure all this out on your own time and dime. Gird up your loins. I’ll offer a fair and reasonable divorce settlement which you WILL take, because the alternative is all out war.”

        Like

      • Yep, seen the “soul mate” thing with “Christian” women. I predicted that soon the two adulterers would wake up and realize the person they were with had abandoned a family to have sex with someone else – even though they were the someone else! It happened just as predicted. Another divorce and on to a beta bux guy.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        What’s clear is that you didn’t meet an expectation of hers. I have a hunch which one, but am afraid it will come off as victim blaming (which it isn’t meant to be).

        Like

      • Scott says:

        Eternity-

        That’s kind of what happened in the end. The other guy did not leave his wife and kids for her. She ended up trying to get me back after about a year, with very weird “terms” that I could not accept, and had sort of moved on.

        Like

      • Glad you were able to move on! Sounds like a wise move.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Scott says:

        It was surreal to hear a list of demands from someone who had been the cheater and blown up the marriage. I just couldn’t swallow it.

        I thought, “You should be groveling. Begging me to take you back. Making all the concessions. How bizarre. I tied myself in knots to keep you WHILE YOU WERE CHEATING for the whole world to see.”

        Liked by 2 people

  12. Elspeth says:

    There is – believe it or not- a limit to how much I will say here, but I stand by my original point..

    The advice I recalled from my sister wasn’t just about sex. It was about a number of minimal things a woman shouldn’t need to be asked by her man to do.

    My comments were originally sparked by my incredulity at the things women supposedly share and my learning a while ago that this is not wise.

    Liked by 2 people

    • cameron232 says:

      I guess your incredulity sparked some of us to prove it through examples. Sorry for graphic nature of comments but it’s all true. I know we repeat ourselves but your general life experience is atypical. If I inflate your “godliness” then this context maybe helps you understand why. Just take the compliment. Women like you aren’t the norm.

      An argument at the Christian moms group broke out over some women’s stated desire to go see “Magic Mike”, a movie about male strippers.

      Women are as bad as men. No, they are worse! But society lies about this. And… they are worse when it comes to X-rated marital kiss and tell.

      Like

      • Elspeth says:

        O/T Cameron, but I thought it merited some notice that Larry Elder’s being a black man has not earned him any quarter from the white liberal media in California. He’s being pilloried, mainly as a sexist/misogynist for having a long and documented record of RP thinking:

        https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article253592444.html

        Liked by 2 people

      • Yep. Leftists are the most racist people of all. Don’t dare be a black conservative or they will seek to destroy you. But if you support abortion, which crushes and dismembers black children at a rate three times that of whites, that’s ok with them.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Elspeth, I was watching Larry on Tucker last week. I almost wrote a comment to you laughing about how Larry was defending himself from charges he was a white supremacist

        When I was young the only white supremacist around was some clown who reportedly hung swastikas on his Christmas tree (lived in his moms trailer), called into the local radio show to yell “white power” (the hosts would yell “white trash” back at him). He had a hotline with an answering machine. People would supposedly call it to leave him insulting messages.

        Apparently the guy renounced his ways, accepted Jesus and was saved some years later.

        Point being, if Larry Elder is a white supremacist, they ain’t makin em like they used to anymore.

        If Larry is a white supremacist then Elizabeth Wright must have been Satan incarnate.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Haha. Candidate BRUCE Jenner (his mama named him Bruce, I’m gonna call him Bruce) is attacking Larry. God bless Larry for getting involved in that mess of a state.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Isn’t that the MAN who won the 1976 MEN’S Decathlon? That GUY? The one with XY chromosomes? Yeah, HE is a true Republican for bashing Larry.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        The left are opportunists not racists. They dont really have principles they just want to win. They’ll do whatever they think they need to. They will and do call women “sluts” even though that’s “mysogynist.”

        Like

      • Elspeth says:

        I agree that leftists are much more accurately described as opportunists than racists. I have grown to be wary of the weak rejoinder, “Dems are the real racists!” However, when you peel back the layers of their rhetoric and strategies, it indeed reveals a philosophical foundation that is steeped in notions of the very racial hierarchy they claim to reject.

        When you look the other way as black people loot, riot, and kill, but howl in outrage at any hint of unrest whenever other groups of people gather in comparatively benign protest, this is revealing. It says to people who look like me, “We don’t really expect any more from you than looting, rioting and killing.”

        When you banish upper-level math and accelerated academics in attempts to level the playing field for black students, they are saying that “Black students cannot achieve success in these subjects, so we’re doing away with them.” The irony of course, is that the few parents of means who continue to use public schools at all, will simply supplement their kids’ math education utilizing private tutors.

        I’m not particularly interested in the racial realist’s point of view on the specifics right now because I don’t think it matters. The point is that leftists’ main motivation is controlling the behaviors of others and manipulating the emotions of the easily manipulated in a quest for grabbing more and more power. There are many of them who are not racist and who do not harbor racists attitudes. Many do, though, and don’t even realize it. But the rank and file are mostly stupid busybodies.

        Oh, Cameron. Gotta tell you this, speaking of leftists controlling the behaviors of others.

        Yesterday my man was in a home improvement store, and as he was walked down as aisle, he passed a couple. As is his custom, he “tipped his hat” and went on about his business. As he was looking for the trowel or whatever it was, he noticed that the husband half of the couple started raising his voice, yelling at a young store employee who was on one of those big ladders they use to get stuff from up top. The kid (maybe 20-ish) had his mask around his chin, and this customer, starts yelling at him, “Where’s your mask? You’re supposed to be wearing a mask!”

        When my husband turned to look, he noted that this irate customer wasn’t wearing a mask either. His wife was, but he wasn’t. The kid looked scared, which made SAM pretty angry, so he confronted the man: “Where’s your mask, since you’re yelling at him? He has a mask. He’s 10 feet in the air, so he took it down, but you’re here on the floor. Why are you bothering him? You better keep walking and go get a mask to protect yourself if you think it’s necessary, instead of badgering him. Sick of you people trying to control everyone else while you’re walking around here without a mask.”

        The self-appointed mask policeman went on his way, while an employee listening in from the paint department thought the whole thing was hilarious, and he told my husband so.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        I love it! SAM’s the man!!! Everyone admires a strong man who stands up for those in a weak position.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Leftists are opportunists and racists. It is the harsh bigotry of zero expecations.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        @EM That’s the George W. Bush theory of left wing racism. I could buy into the idea of (some of) the left as racist if “racist” were a word with a fixed, objective definition IN PRACTICE.

        I would be more in favor of identifying WHAT is immoral wrt race and a specific attitude or practice rather than trying to out shout the left.

        Like

      • Yes, that was a deliberate play on Bush’s “soft bigotry of low expectations.”

        Liked by 2 people

      • Elspeth says:

        @ Cameron:

        The definition of racism/racist has been stretched so far as to be meaningless. It is a constantly evolving word depending on the agenda of the person wielding the word. And the ones most often wielding it are doing so in response to ideas which offend them more than actual behavior which can be objectively defined as racist (whatever that means).

        It’s like Kristi Noem yelling “Misogyny!” at Matt Walsh for rightly claiming that she only gets the attention she gets because she’s an attractive woman. He sees no reason why her positions deserve more praise than, say, the governor of Nebraska, who took all the same positions during the pandemic, but no one knows his name. Why does she tar him as a “misogynist” for simply stating what is demonstrably true in every area of life? She did it to get the upper hand over him, as that was her agenda. So much so, she latched on to a leftist talking point.

        So, as Christians, we engage in some level of racism when we mistreat people on the basis of their genetic lineage. Mistreatment does not mean disagree with. It doesn’t mean criticizing any evil they do.

        It does mean throwing a brick through their windshield. It does include calling them a “sp!c” or a “n!gger”, etc.

        Liked by 3 people

      • cameron232 says:

        “Racism” is an approximately 100 year old word that was invented by the left. Civilization existed for thousands of years without a need for such a word. It quickly became synonymous with Nazism since it was a translation via French from a German word the German far left used against the German nationalist right. The idea that morality or caritas can be reduced to a function of ancestry is an acceptable definition for me, since its self-evidently immoral for a Christian.

        The acts you describe are hateful. I don’t know if the race aspect makes them worse but they would be considered immoral without the R-word.

        If you do not pledge equality, even if you are agnostic (say, with respect to what Sailer believes), then you are “racist” to both the left and the right. I don’t accept these creeping definitions.

        Like

      • Elspeth says:

        Well yes, the idea of caritas is -or at least should be- more than enough for any Christian. The issue that Eternity Matters is bringing up is more along the lines of the automatic ascribing of certain behaviors, abilities, or patterns of thought to people on first sight due to their ethnic background. This happens to me all the time, which shouldn’t surprise you.

        I don’t think it is racist, but it makes me less prone to embracing stereotypes (being a glaring exception to several stereotypes about black people, black women, black marriage, etc.). It doesn’t mean stereotypes aren’t without merit, but I can’t help but reject the tendency to go there.

        I am aware that racism is a new word. As I’m sure you knew, Christian homeschoolers love Webster’s 1828 American language dictionary, and the word “racism” isn’t in it. Interestingly, in 1828, he starts by saying that all of mankind is of the race of Adam before going into greater detail. The veru idea of stamping someone with the sin of “ism” because their lack of Christian charity is done toward a person of a certain ethnicity or sex is a leftist trick that far too many believers fall for far to easily.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        I can (only mentally) put myself in your shoes and imagine the frustration of being the complete opposite of the black woman stereotype. Of being a rarity among ALL women, of doing what you are supposed to do

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        I hate smartphones….comment continued

        …and being pegged as a Shaneequa. Of doing everything with your daughters that’s right and knowing they’ll deal with this at some point.

        Some predjudice seems inevitable. My main form is in being less comfortable around black people for having to walk on eggshells. I have no problem admitting I stereotype young black males who are dressed and act a particular way – far too many experiences growing up in and around the ghetto – experiences that white liberals dont typically have. Black Catholic, Reformed, etc. families are almost always good folk – I tend to positively stereotype them.

        As far as specifically interracial altercations I dont feel targeted since I got along well with black males (and even had them come to my defense) and have had many more problems with white trash males. My wife and her friends had black males attempt race guilt sex extortion, attempted physical groping including her friend who was dry humped by one, etc. in public schools so I do carry the stereotype of young black males being more prone to sexual assault.

        As far as intelligence I have encountered black males who were probably promoted into technical management positions due to poor performance at the actual technical work. So this creates a prejudice that a black engineer is less likely to be truly talented (my last cubemate was a very nice black nerd from Mississippi who was a much better programmer than I am).

        When I wrote about Sailer and equality above I meant “empirical equality” not legal or moral equality. As in I do not accept the dogma of innate equality of the races in terms of innate abilities. I am not dogmatic either direction. I have read Sowells criticisms of HDB and the contributions of Nigerian Chandra Chisala at Unz and respect them as well thought out and not defensive.

        That’s a more or less complete disclosure of my level of predjudice or racism if you prefer. I push back against some race realists when I feel they over generalize and will provide examples if you’re curious.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        Addendum. Here’s how predjudice works in me I guess. Yes it is partially informed by race/ethnicity but partially informed (negated, tempered, reinforced) by other things you pick up on very quickly. So in my mind it’s not the stereotypical (pun not intended) process of creating a negative stereotype on initial exposure and then gradually softening it with repeated exposure to e.g the “nice ” black family. It would probably take me about three microseconds to figure out your family is a nice one.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        Another thought on racism.

        It’s an issue discussed so much primarily because of underachievement and social pathology in the black community. The underlying question is “Why are things the way they are?” I see four explanations offered:

        1– Current white racism (individual and systemic)
        2– Historic prejudice (slavery, Jim Crow, mean cartoons from the 1940s).
        3– Black culture (“Don’t act white”, “Mom will spend $150 on Air Jordan’s but won’t buy hooked on phonics”, no dad in home)
        4– Radioactivity/kryptonite/the cause that can’t be named.

        1 strikes me as bull. I think 2, 3, and 4 are all plausible and backed by some evidence. Yes I’m a “realist” that thinks 2 has an influence. So much for my HDB card.

        Racism means “immoral”. I’m immoral to Republicans and Democrats for not renouncing 4 and even 3. You’re racist if you say, “I don’t know.” (I don’t think we do.)

        Democrats belief in relaxing standards is based on 1, particularly the systemic part.

        Like

      • Elspeth says:

        “1 strikes me as bull. I think 2, 3, and 4 are all plausible and backed by some evidence. Yes I’m a “realist” that thinks 2 has an influence.”

        Only a person with an overwhelming case of ideological blindness would ever deny that the events of the past affect the present state of affairs. Of course there are elements of past injustices that carry over into the present day.

        At the risk of my black card being re-revoked, I think too many of my fellow black Americans (particularly the ones who have “made it”) fail to accept that a large part of what ails black America is a direct result of poor personal decision making. They prefer the convenience of ignoring the power each of us has in our own hands to create fruitful, orderly, productive lives.

        Having studied both the work of Charles Murray and Thomas Sowell, and to a lesser degree Arthur Jensen, I have concluded that the data clearly shows that while nature is important, cultural and environmental factors play a far greater role in the outcomes of individuals.

        As for the racism or any other “ism”, unless there is clear and unambiguous evidence that an “ism” has taken place, I assume the person making the accusation is ascribing motivations to people based on their own overactive imagination or emotions. Or, as in the case of Larry Elder and sexism, the person has dared utter an inconvenient truth.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth,

        Blessings to you on processing all that so clearly and accurately. Sowell is brilliant! I wish he was required reading in schools.

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        “while nature is important, cultural and environmental factors play a far greater role in the outcomes of individuals.”

        Interesting thought. I suppose individuals by definition have to work with the hand nature/God dealt them. It seems to follow that an individuals family/peer culture and his environment would have more of an effect on his outcome given you can’t change your genes.

        The work of men and women like Jensen is focused on aggregate group differences not individual differences. This is where the left primarily attacks-group differences. They have to admit that individual blacks can accomplish great things (astrophysicist, world class surgeon, President, etc.) so they focus on group differences of outcome. Some data suggests that nature plays a significant role in group differences but social “soft” sciences aren’t testable in exactly the same way as hard science hypotheses. Polygenic scores have added data to the debate but data is always subject to interpretation. Often you’re looking at correlates of behavior, performance, etc. and IMO there’s an immaterial, God-given aspect of behavior, intelligence, reason not captured by science. Still, science offers a powerful counterargument to the left and their invocation of position 1. And yeah, that’s a bias the far right has – we all have biases as well as perceived interests.

        Sowell is very talented as was Walter Williams. There is a tendency for white conservatives to hold these personalities and in very high esteem not only because of their undeniable talents (Sowell in particular IMO) but also because having a black intellectual argue your positions grants some level of moral legitimacy and protection from left wing accusations of racism. It feels good to us white folk when a black person agrees with a position the left calls “racist.” Relative to other groups, Europeans have more of a tendency to form synthetic tribes/”moral communities.” Blacks on our side is emotionally gratifying (I’m not personally immune to this).

        Anyway, Larry Elder seems like a good guy. I’m sure they’ll try to take him down just like they tried to do Clarence Thomas. You’re right, being black (or a woman or gay) doesn’t offer you individual protection if you have the “wrong” opinions. If he ran for national office, I’d vote for him. Your initial comment was about sex but EM’s comment distracted me.

        Like

      • Elspeth says:

        “The work of men and women like Jensen is focused on aggregate group differences not individual differences. This is where the left primarily attacks-group differences. They have to admit that individual blacks can accomplish great things (astrophysicist, world class surgeon, President, etc.) so they focus on group differences of outcome.”

        I know this is heretical in today’s world, but outside of the Biblical command to 1) care for my own ACTUAL kin, and 2) do good to those who are members with me in “the household of faith”, aggregate group outcomes mean zero, zilch, nada to me. I can’t be bothered.

        I don’t even care that my own IQ is 125-ish. To borrow from Clarence Thomas, “whoop-dee-damn-doo!” I don’t see where it matters.

        One of the things Sowell came up with pretty conclusively is that black women tend to have far more representation at the right end of the bell curve than men among blacks.

        I mention that because again, despite the fact that my husband is not particularly bookish, I see every day the depth of intelligence and insight. He can solve problems. He knows how to figure out how things work. His advice on things relational as well as technical and mechanical is always in high demand. He is paid well for what he knows how to do.

        And he hated school so much that he had them mail his high school diploma to him to his mother’s dismay. Besides auto mechanics, football, and the parties (not in that order, LOL), he was glad to be rid of high school. And never went to college. To be sure, we have a file drawer full of educational credentials. He’s educated, fully literate, and smart. He’s just not bookish.

        He likes that he has a smart, bookish wife. He –mistakenly in my opinion– thinks I’m at least as smart as he is. I ask, “If the SHTF, which one of us has the know-how to survive without the other? That’s who possesses the most valuable intellect.”

        All that to say, I can’t be bothered with caring one way or the other if black people are smart are not. To me that seems like a waste of valuable brain cells, and I say this as someone who has studied all this, as I noted before.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Morning Elspeth.

        The issues addressed do not sum to “if black people are smart or not.” The question is “What are the sources of the observed group statistical differences in BEHAVIOR, intelligence and PERSONALITY as well as overall social outcomes?” BIP – behavior-intelligence-personality – an acronym that John Derbyshire uses. Yes, the first one has immaterial as well as material origins and is subject to agency if you are a Christian. It’s influenced by but more than the genes and hormones and neurons, your experiences, etc.

        That these differences exist isn’t controversial except with respect to HOW they’re mentioned and what their source is. I couldn’t care less about Sailer’s goofy interest in the 100 meter dash and black NFL cornerbacks.

        In a perfect world, this topic wouldn’t be very interesting to me because really, in and of itself, it isn’t. I don’t read about these topics out of a perverse desire to learn how to say mean things about black people online. They are important topics because they are part of the left-liberal narrative that is targeting my ancestors and my posterity (including the 8 little ones I have been charged with raising). And, yes, black crime, underperformance, etc. does have an impact on society so again the reasons are interesting. I strive to keep my prejudices as in-check as I possibly can when dealing with individuals and, as I mentioned, pre-judge based on a variety of observed characteristics beyond race in real life.

        I was like Scott, standard issue color blind Republican. It still bothers me. When I’m around my very nice black next door neighbor of 15 years what I feel amounts to: “If he knew my thoughts he’d think I’m a terrible person!” Yeah, you feel like a deviant for thinking taboo thoughts if you have a conscience. Even after nearly 20 years of exposure to this stuff.

        The sources of the differences (biology, culture, history, racism) most certainly have an impact on the official narrative, on public policy on social attitudes, on my kids future, etc.

        The topic was about Larry and attitudes about sex/gender. The topic it turned into is ugly and uncomfortable (particularly when being discussed with someone I like and don’t want to offend) and my only defense is that I got distracted by EM’s comment.

        Like

      • Elspeth says:

        No worries, Cameron. My original comment was in keeping with the spirit of the blog if not the original topic. Is what it is.

        Andrew Klavan interviewed Charles Murray last week. It was an exploration of his new book on race.

        He talked about these means of cognitive ability between groups, and stood his ground on what he believes about the data. But he did say this (roughly paraphrased):

        “Even with these realities, it is also true that there are millions of black people who are more intelligent than millions of white people. That some who are white supremacists try to use my work as a way of saying all blacks are smarter than all whites is unfortunate.”

        I actually like Charles Murray. And because I know what I bring to the table, and what my husband brings to the table, I refuse to let this stuff get under my skin.

        But let’s see if Larry Elder can weather being labeled a sexist and a misogynist. 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Lipton Matthews (a Jamaican academic who is big on western civilization) interviewed Murray. Murray says culture issues like the pressure on black kids (by other black kids) not to achieve is a potentially fruitful area for research. The obvious rebuttal to Murray would be: you are not allowed to research this stuff unless it’s to prove white racism. I have talked individually with other white men in closed areas (zero possibility of being overhead) about these issues: they will look over their shoulder and whisper that they think black culture is an issue. In other words, it’s REALLY controversial even among Republican white males who were in the military to criticize black culture – I mean ghetto culture of course.

        I guess we’ve said enough about race. Please don’t hesitate to bring up Larry, Candace, et. al to me. I’ll try not to turn it into a diatribe about race.

        Like

      • Scott says:

        They (aggregate trends) matter because white Generation X was sold the “colorblind society” canard (by idiot boomers) and then had the rug pulled out from under us in the last 25 years. Everyone my age is absolutely spinning up into insanity trying to out virtue signal themselves on social media.

        So now, I HAVE to care about being Irish and Serbian because “white” is the new “n!gger.”

        I didn’t create that problem, but I have to figure out how to give my kids a multi-generational identity. It’s important to most people. Those who have somehow been able to rise above their ethnicity (and the stories of their ancestors) are moral geniuses compared to me. Good for them.

        I have mentioned before that my hypothesis is that the high water mark for race relations in the US was somewhere in the late 80s, as evidenced by, of all things, a sitcom about a black obstetrician and his lawyer wife raising their kids in a nuclear intact family and how EVERYONE loved that show, including the vast majority of whites.

        And every single scholarly article analyzing the Cosby Show labels it “racist” because:

        It showed black people having something that most of them will never have.
        It showed black people “acting white” which, as far as I can tell, means going to college, impregnating ONLY one woman, and not going to prison.

        That’s the argument THEY make, not me.

        So I will continue to research the wonderful things people of Serbian, Irish, and Scot descent have accomplished over the last few centuries and tell my kids about it. And I will study, but downplay what other groups have done as just academic information. It’s my kids only hope at not hating themselves.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        “I have to figure out how to give my kids a multi-generational identity. It’s important to most people. Those who have somehow been able to rise above their ethnicity (and the stories of their ancestors) are moral geniuses compared to me. Good for them.”

        How did my comments insinuate that I have “risen above my ethnic identity”? Well maybe I have, in a way. My children absolutely have and will have a multi-generational identity. But it is only concerned with the direct ancestry from “Dad of Elspeth” and his ancestors, and “Agent Man” Ancestry, as well as “Mom of Elspeth” and “Tri-racial Mom of SAM” and their ancestors.

        This includes what we have found about the slave ancestors, the Cherokee ancestors, and the Scotch-Irish paternal great-grandfather of SAM. But only the direct ancestors matter to us, and SAM’s family (unlike mine) has a well documented family history complete with a family historian. He’s really old last time when he saw him, so I hope they have someone to pass the duties on to.

        But what does any of that have to do with random black people to whom we have no connection? How does refusal to align myself with people who may have been from a totally different place and culture, but happen to have some African ancestry?

        If embracing my ethnic identity means pretending I’m related to all black people, then I accept your indictment of my position because do you KNOW how big the African continent is? I hate reductionism of this sort.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Jack says:

        “If embracing my ethnic identity means pretending I’m related to all black people, then I accept your indictment of my position because do you KNOW how big the African continent is? I hate reductionism of this sort.”

        There is much more genetic diversity in Africa than there is in the German/French/English/Scotch/Irish Anglosphere (which is most of Western Europe, North America, and Australia. But all people see is variances in color. We never hear blacks speak of their Ghanian, Malian, Congolese, Senegalese, etc. ancestry the way whites incessantly talk about being “part French, part German, part Irish, etc.” It is the same way in Asia. Even people of the same race who have lighter/darker skin are seen as being from another caste.

        Like

      • Elspeth says:

        This is true, Jack. Because most of us who descended from slaves have no idea from whence in Africa their ancestors hail. Black Americans are, I often say, mutts.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        You know I like you Scott, but the practice of reducing people to their skin color is as uniquely American as baseball and Jazz. No other people (not in Africa, not in Europe, and certainly not in Asia) view one another as sharing a common ethnic identity. That’s an American practice.

        Seeing as you speak pretty forcefully against identifying yourself as American, I find your response to my comment pretty curious.

        This isn’t to misunderstand your desire to defend yourself in a time and place where white is a four letter word. Wait…tozic is a five letter word. But you know what I mean. I’m not sure what you thought I meant when I said my actual, which by definition acknowledges my ethnic identity.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Elspeth I believe I remember you writing a comment like this: “We have divested ourselves from the black community.” This is from my imperfect memory and I apologize if I misquote you.

        There is definitely a black-American ethnicity in the United States that is defined by shared history, experiences, memories and ancestry from the African continent (predominantly West African ethnic Bantu I believe but I’m not real into black history). Black Americans average approximately 83% African – yes I realize the “one-drop” rule made a person “black” and that’s white peoples’ definition/fault. “Black American” is not a collection of people of random ancestry who happen to have some from Africa. It is, properly speaking an ethnie. Are these not the people/community you grew up with? Your black preachers, you’ve mentioned etc.

        I don’t criticize you for refusing to align yourself with “your” ethnie, or your families’ historical one, etc. That’s your choice and you’ll get zero pressure from me. My ethnic background is important to me. If I could have influenced this, I would have made North America in the mold of Europe with distinct countries/ethnies/languages etc. reflecting the diversity of Europe, and, ultimately, the diversity of God’s creation. The natural expression of large scale human organization is the ethnic group not the somewhat biology-based abstraction of continental level race. History didn’t happen that way.

        “The practice of reducing people to their skin color is as uniquely American as baseball and Jazz. No other people (not in Africa, not in Europe, and certainly not in Asia) view one another as sharing a common ethnic identity. That’s an American practice.“

        “Ethnic” is different from “race” as race is now used (the use of “race” was more diverse in the past: “race of Adam, the “English race”, etc.). America did this because of context and as shorthand for the quickest identifier of the three groups that had been thrust together on the same piece of land – Northern European colonists, African slaves and Native Americans.

        Most people around the world identify by ethnicity (which includes language, common culture, and a sense of shared ancestry, history and future). This is a more natural expression of human organization. In most places around the world, your neighbors are a different ethnic group that are very similar racially. The Chinese, Japanese and Koreans in Asia haven’t gotten along great and definitely see themselves as different peoples.

        In the end, I identify with an African Catholic more easily than a whitetrash Anglo with blue hair, full body tattoos and stretched earlobes. If Cardinal Sarah, from Guinea, gets elected Pope, I will be the first in line to kiss the ring on his black hand. Yes, I have been criticized online by “race realists” for saying this.

        Like

      • Scott says:

        Cameron-

        Regarding how Europe is organized. Yep.

        The first time I walked my family in the Serbian church in Leander–before I said one word–one of the deacons said to me, “Well, it’s obvious you are the Serb” (pointing to me). Later they invited Mychael into the fold like a sister, but the immediate connection was in the eyes. They could just feel it.

        Mychael and I are both “white” and, just like the blacks of yesteryear “all look the same.” But not to my extended family of Serbs.

        I actually get a little bummed when I have a new patient, and I go through the demographics portion of the medical record with them. I ask them how they identify racially/ethnically and every single white person makes a self-derogatory comment. Some variation of “I’m just plain old white. Nothing special.”

        And I’m thinking — “Nothing special? How about Mozart, physics, the scientific method, and modern medicine? Are you crazy?” But I just shrug off their indifference. If they don’t want to own it, too bad.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Scott, this is my ancestral Church in Niedersachsen, north of the very old bishopric of Osnabruck. There is a very old wooden crucifix and people would go on a (small scale) pilgrimage to see it. There is a commandry for the Order of St. John of Jerusalem (Knights Hospitaller) next door.

        I look more like my West Virginia grandfather. LoL – a Hillbilly-German-Catholic.

        https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Johannes_der_T%C3%A4ufer_(Lage)

        Like

      • Scott says:

        That is gorgeous. My father was baptized in this catherdal, the same place of the coronations of Yugoslvaian monarchs.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Michael%27s_Cathedral,_Belgrade

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        I’ll assume the bombs we dropped in 1999 missed your Cathedral. Was your dad still around in 1999? How did he feel about what we did to Serbia/Kosovo? Did it bother you at the time?

        We sided with Muslims against Christians. Oh well, they were Eastern so I guess they don’t count. And as you can tell, the Muslims love “Christian” America so much for us siding with them against Christians.

        Like

      • Scott says:

        He died in 2012. He was 77.

        Our excursion into the Balkans was an unnecessary adventure (as the US is prone to do) in the business of people who have been fighting for about 1000 years. And by the way, without the serbs incubating western Europe from invasion, there would be no “west” and everything that followed.

        To this day, most Americans don’t understand that the second largest Christian communion is 400 million swarthy olive skinned Orthodox.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Yeah and they’re cannibals too.

        Srdja Trifkovic opened my eyes to the reality of the Balkans and that war we waged against them.

        LoL – The Serbian high school exchange student was about as “swarthy” as my sister. She was very tall I remember. Nice girl. Have no idea if we killed her in ’99 – presumably not.

        Like

      • Scott says:

        My youngest boy, Aleksandar got the olive skin. We call him the Serbian Leprechaun because he has kind of an evil/mischievous laugh.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        My wife will be the first to tell you our blond boys are a bit crazy. The brunette boys are pretty chill. My sixth is my little viking dude – tall with super blonde hair- he’s a sweet boy but bipolar crazy. Little berzerker.

        We’ve tended towards ancestors names but Anglicized ones. “John, Henry, Mary, …. Etc.). Crazy little viking dude is named after me and dad.

        Like

      • Scott says:

        But they aren’t real Christians because they worship Mary or something.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Scott says:

      On my very first blog, (numchuckskills) I was in graduate school. I was also a contributor for the Stanford University online conservative magazine, The Stanford Review. This was 2004-2007.

      At the time, I was a boiler-plate libertarian-leaning republican and about every other article or blog post I wrote was a virtue signal. Articles about how much I couldn’t stand hyphenated American identities. I was an “American” and that’s all that mattered. American was an ideal, an abstraction that anyone, from anywhere could just claim to be, and viola! it was so.

      I posted about how much I loved Thomas Sowell. How much I wished Condoleza Rice would run for president! At the time, my desire to inoculate myself from the “racist” label was subconscious. I had no access to it in my conscious mind.

      Then I saw a picture of a guy holding up a sign at a TEA party rally that read, “It doesn’t matter what this sign says, you are going to call me racist anyway”, and I started to realize (not fully for several more years however) that this was a losing proposition. People are going to go to their corners and stick with their clan no matter how bad it disrupts my sensibilities. No matter how much I wished it could be different. And it has only gotten worse (MUCH worse) in the days since then.

      It got me absolutely nowhere. A national identity that is purely based on values is a fiction that only those with the deepest ignorance of how people actually work (and who are 1%ers truthfully) can hold with a straight face.

      I will continue to fall back into the woods of Montana for as long as I can. I will treat every individual I meet with the respect that all humans are entitled to. Until I can’t because my kids are in danger. That’s where it stops for me.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Elspeth says:

        “People are going to go to their corners and stick with their clan no matter how bad it disrupts my sensibilities. No matter how much I wished it could be different. And it has only gotten worse (MUCH worse) in the days since then.

        It got me absolutely nowhere. A national identity that is purely based on values is a fiction that only those with the deepest ignorance of how people actually work (and who are 1%ers truthfully) can hold with a straight face.

        I will continue to fall back into the woods of Montana for as long as I can. I will treat every individual I meet with the respect that all humans are entitled to. Until I can’t because my kids are in danger. That’s where it stops for me.”

        I agree with this. Not sure how it contradicts my overall point. My clan is my blood relations and those with whom I am in intimate Christian fellowship, which happens to include a multi-colored cast of characters. We actually (quite regularly) discuss leaving our metro-suburban area of FL and going rural to escape the madness.

        It sort of saddens me that Christians in the postmodern era aren’t able to view their fellow believers the way Scripture says we should.

        Like

  13. Femmy says:

    Actually, Jack, I’m shocked that you were shocked.

    I think that at least 1/2 of women are ‘foolish’ women (as per Proverbs). Elspeth is not a foolish woman. There are lots of women who are not foolish. But I consider myself a foolish/immature woman.

    And I (as a foolish/immature woman) was shocked that YOU were shocked. I had no idea that men were shocked by what women said about sex.

    To a foolish (good) woman, she is just trying to get what is best for her out of fear. She has a fear that she will never get married, that she will never have a good man.

    If I knew that that kind of conversation was shocking to a good guy (like Jack), I would stop it immediately. I didn’t know that it was offensive. We don’t think about how we affect guys.

    We were raised with weak fathers and weak brothers or no fathers and no brothers. We don’t know because they don’t tell us anything. They just put up with it and leave the house to go to work. Or do their hobbies. They don’t tell us anything that we are doing is wrong. See?

    So we just don’t know.

    So when I read that you were shocked. That shocked me!!!

    Thank you for sharing that. I have learned something. And that, I appreciate.

    Liked by 2 people

    • feeriker says:

      “I think that at least 1/2 of women are ‘foolish’ women (as per Proverbs).”

      Waaaaaaaayyyy too generous. The real figure is well north of 90 percent.

      Like

    • Elspeth says:

      I try in general not to offend anyone… 🙂

      But overall, and maybe it is owing to my age, I don’t care if I offend other women. It probably helps that I was mostly raised by my dad, who was blunt and direct (even with his devout faith) about the nature of men and women.

      So I probably lean much more to not to offending men more than than women.

      Liked by 1 person

  14. feeriker says:

    “I don’t give a sh!t what the Duluth Wheel says – the Duluth Wheel is not your husband and the Duluth Wheel does not give you this day your daily bread.”

    Even my own unicorn-ish wife has pulled out the “ABUUUUUUUSE!” card when I’ve tried to rein in her feral-emotional theatrics. On more than one past occasion my response was “‘Abuse?’ You don’t know the meaning of the word if you think that THIS is abuse! Maybe I should introduce you to the real thing, to what so many other women actually DO suffer, just so you can gain both some perspective AND some appreciation for what you’ve been blessed with!”

    Followed, of course, by the usual threats if I were to follow through, with my rejoinder being that she should go ahead and do her damndest, but be prepared to live in Stone Age if she does. That always seemed to snap her back into the real world.

    Deti, you’re correct that dread game works, but you HAVE to stand your ground, not caring about the consequences.

    Liked by 1 person

    • thedeti says:

      Really? This is your second wife doing this?

      I’m not even trying to hear “abuse”. No. If Mrs. D. pulls that word out, she better call the police, because if she doesn’t, I will. No. If I hear “abuse” come out of her mouth, I’m done. I know all the lawyers in town. I am NOT going to hear a wife I have been NOTHING but good to, accuse me of abuse. No. Not going to entertain that for one second.

      Just another reason if this marriage ends for any reason, I will not remarry, ever. I will never again get into any relationship I can’t bring to an immediate conclusion without involving lawyers.

      Liked by 1 person

      • feeriker says:

        “This is your second wife doing this?”

        Only very rarely, thank God.

        The difference between the current Mrs. Feeriker and her predecessor is that current Mrs. Feeriker has just enough inner maturity and humility to put the brakes on the worst of her Curse of Eve. At some point some force within her (The Holy Spirit?) slaps some self-awareness into her and makes her aware of the path of destruction she’s about to embark on. In a very short time she de-escalates and returns to wife from strife. She doesn’t actually come out and admit verbally that she was wrong (I mean, come on, she’s still a woman), but she absolutely acts like she damned well knows it.

        Given what we’ve both suffered through together over the last few years, I see us riding out any future pruebas diabolicas that would seek to tear us apart. If, however, it should all come crashing down and fall apart, I, like you, will never again even consider marriage, or even a serious LTR. Matter o’ fact, considering the events that would have to have taken place in order to successfully destroy my marriage, my inner misogynist will probably take over and metastasize into a malignant and lethal force.

        Like

  15. feeriker says:

    My favorite though was the elder boards handling of it.

    I’m honestly and genuinely surprised that there haven’t been frequent mass shootings at churchian board meetings.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. feeriker says:

    So, yeah, women DO talk about this stuff

    When men talk about these things, it’s usually centered around ex-girlfriends, current (not steady) girlfriends, FWBs, or ex-wives. I’ve NEVER heard any group of men swap intimate details about their current wives, even while intoxicated. Even back in my Navy days when I served with some VERY rough-around-the-edges shipmates, NONE EVER talked about intimate details of wives . ONLY WOMEN ever do this with other women about their current husbands.

    Liked by 2 people

    • cameron232 says:

      Feeriker exactly! I have heard details of what happens when the guys get off the carrier in Asia.. The building called “Four Floors of Whores”, various degenerate encounters and “shows.” They never talk about wives that way.

      Liked by 1 person

    • thedeti says:

      Very true. Never once have I heard men talk about wives in this way.

      Proving again – men respect their relationships more than women do. Men care about their relationships more than women do. Men are the true romantics.

      Men: Virtue, integrity, honor.

      Women: Self-service, corruption, ignobility.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Red Pill Apostle says:

        Deti – From a book I am reading now … the best summary I have found on the virtues of masculinity. Courage, strength, mastery, honor.

        Men definitely are the true romantics. Mrs. Apostle has relayed stories of what other wives in our group of friends say about their husbands. Given what I have been through my heart breaks for these guys because I also see their interactions with their wives in mixed company. One that stands out is an overweight wife commenting that if her husband wants a little intimacy with his her, she’ll just give him a BJ because it’s fast and she does not want the ‘ordeal’ of sex with him. Ouch.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        @RPA, modern western women are mostly psychologically damaged. In this woman’s case she’s probably disgusted with her physical condition and incapable of true intimacy. Or she got fat to keep him at bay – some women do this.

        Liked by 1 person

  17. Femmy says:

    Interesting. I didn’t know that distinction.

    Thanks for the info.

    Every foolish girl should be told this.

    She might admire men for it. Just might.

    The good girls will,

    Like

  18. Lastmod says:

    I don’t know if you call it sins…but I sure know that I am paying and will pay for my past decisions for the rest of my life.

    *Drugs / drink past addiction. Red flag to the one or two good single women left out there

    *Career. On board again later than most men. Red flag to women in general that I have not grown up

    *Too smart for my own good; yet dumb enough to always be a step behind, or three. Red flag to anyone that I am kind-of a simpleton

    *Boring hobbies like architecture, listening to music, reading. Red flag that I my activities scream “boring” to 99% of women

    The masculine hobbies skills / that I do have like camping and backpacking. Red flag again usually as solitary, and *cheap to women my age or thereabouts

    Just having the wrong mindset most of my adult life set me apart from most women. I also just didn’t have the looks to make up for any of this……so I kind-of know now that “hey…some things you did, some you couldn’t help…some stuff…..it can never be answered now, so quit losing sleep over it.”

    I maybe have ten-fifteen good years left before the age really prevents me from deeper camping, and dancing. The hearing someday will fade……..I just can’t waste with “what if” anymore, or hope, or “building confidence” in the sense of attracting women……or opening sets, or spinning plates, and being something I am not…and never was.

    So, are all of what happened “sins” by me? I don’t think so……but its useless to hem and haw over them at this point. Maybe there was chance not taken, situations that could have been, and mybe it was fate from day one (looking more like that as I get older) but really……..who knows.

    I do know men in my situation are growing…and many without drug / alcohol addiction. I am trying to figure out how I can help them DEAL, instead of cry. Accept instead of more anger. Try again, and harder and to have the infamous “they” tell them they didn’t try “hard enough”

    Harder than it looks.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Noticed your mention of dancing . . . we took up ballroom dancing about 12 yrs. ago (I’m 58 now). Great hobby and confidence builder, and a good way for single people to meet others. At social dances the women usually outnumber the men.

      Be kind to yourself. Sounds like you are focused on making the best of what you have, so if you can keep the focus on that and not your past it will help.

      Liked by 2 people

    • cameron232 says:

      I have thought long and hard about your situation now for several years Jason. With limited knowledge based on what you’ve shared. One thought that comes to me repeatedly is San Fran was a terrible place for an average guy to meet a nice girl. Not that as young man you could have known it. You were doing what you were supposed to. Population 800 upstate NY isnt great for meeting a nice girl either or for a future.

      Drug addiction is a sin but so are A bunch of other things. Some just get luckier with the consequences. Such is the nature of free but morally deformed beings I guess. Being abused by boys in prep school probably didn’t help the addiction. Other people’s sins have consequences. My belief is we will all face consequences for our sins against others and its effects on them. Yes I believe in purgatory.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Lastmod says:

        San Francisco was okay…..if you were deemed a “good looking guy” it was probably a really great place. Many wonderful years there though, lots of parties, meeting very interesting people. I still find it hard to believe I lived 12 years in that city. As my addiction sank in (esp after Sept 11, 2001) it was really a sad place.

        San Francisco in the late 1990’s / early 2000’s had a ton of young, single women. The problem was the men they wanted were either gay, or Chad. In my circle of guy friends…..I recall us scoping out countless parties, all nite dances, underground clubs, art gallery openings….standard dive bar scene…. “where’s the pretty boy here…ah, okay…..lets hang near that”

        SIns have consequences? Well……yeah they do…….but mostly they don’t. My HS class….all of them married prettier than average girls…..and I am sure none have lost sleep over what they did back in 1986-1988. Became dads, had better a life than me I ma sure…doesn’t matter really now.

        Who knows? I do know this weekend will be a quiet one for me. A few video games…polishing shoes…..making some friend chicken. Good stuff. I start my training as a volunteer Docent at the President Nixon Museum / Birthplace and Library in nearby Yorba Linda. Like James Brown in 1972…I am a countryman

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        And they argue with me when I say girls like jerks. Your tormentors got the pretty girls. Guys who tormented other guys weren’t magically nice to women. Doesnt matter. If girls wanted nice guys they’d incentivize guys being nice. Some exceptions but they dont.

        I will die knowing I didn’t do this to other boys. I wasnt a perfect friend to the tormented. I could have stood up for them. But I didn’t participate and didn’t like it.

        Liked by 2 people

  19. Lastmod says:

    “Noticed your mention of dancing . . . we took up ballroom dancing about 12 yrs. ago (I’m 58 now). Great hobby and confidence builder, and a good way for single people to meet others. At social dances the women usually outnumber the men…”

    I dance to soul music. I know all the steps…. the goal was to be James Brown! Well, that didn’t happen, but I’m good. Very good. When I was learning I found the guys at the dances supportive, helpful “No, blood…like this, sure ’nuff toast…you got it!”

    Ballroom dancing I tried a few times in the 1990’s and early 2000’s. For the practice, no woman wanted to be paired up with me. So I had to wait, watch and then instructor would then practice with me. Women would rather dance with other women than be paired up with me, and after a month and a half…. I just quit trying to learn.

    It was too intimidating in the end, and I honestly don’t like most of the music as well… so I guess it worked out for the better. I went to the UK in 2019 specifically to dance to Northern Soul all niters that became famous in the 1970’s in the city of Manchester.

    I don’t know how dancing is a “confidence builder” but I do agree its something to do. Been dancing a long time now. I just feel great after ten hours, and I get home and I have to peel off my shirt, tie, and slacks with a potato peeler…. that is how soaked in sweat I am… and the sounds of an era gone ringing in my ears…. I usually sleep very well after dancing.

    My past will always haunt me… I could be clean for another twenty years…….. and it still “won’t be enough” for more than a few out there. I’m okay. Glad you like ballroom dancing.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. bee123456 says:

    Talk is cheap, but actions speak loudly. Rihanna has been consistently practicing fornication for a number of years. Maybe 10, 15, or 20 years.

    Fornication is one form of lawlessness. Consistently practicing fornication is different from occasionally falling into it, repenting and moving away from it. Learning to steer clear of the situations that make it easily available.

    Like other commenters here, I do not think Rihanna is a Christian. It matter what she does that is lawless, not that she prays or goes to church.

    “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. 22 Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ 23 And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.’” Matthew 7:21-23 (NASB)

    Liked by 1 person

  21. lastholdout says:

    “It never occurs to her that he also is entitled to things from his marriage. It never occurs to her that there are things that are HIS right, HIS payment, HIS due for marrying HER. It never occurs to her what he gave up to marry her. It never occurs to her that he is fully half of the marriage. It never occurs to her that maybe she owes him things.”

    If these things, without prompting, are her own thoughts and they work her heart to move her to genuine compassion and a positive response, she is likely already a person of humility who has the best interest of the one she vowed UDDUP. So, once again, it is a heart issue. Until her heart changes, everything will be transactional.

    Enter your comment here…

    Liked by 1 person

  22. Lastmod says:

    Hey Cameron!

    What of it now? I mean….. at my 20th high school reunion… which I did go to (2008) because I happened to be back in New York State when it was happening. No one apologized (not that I was expecting anyone to), no one had a heart-to-heart talk with me about my life. Everyone had left…. moved on.

    The problem with the classic Incel, many in MGTOW, and some Black Pill types……. they will not “let go” of their past, or just forgive so to speak. No, you don’t have to confront and tell them you “forgive them” but just get on getting on. Many in this crowd who think because they were picked on badly in the 7th grade is the reason why they live at home today. At the same time, expecting women to overlook any MAJOR flaw in their life.

    Really now.

    High school (public or private) for most is a pretty terrible time, and I don’t look back fondly on that time at all. The best part was indeed leaving. I also promised in those times that I “would never kill myself” over them. Glad I didn’t.

    Honestly though……. What can I do? Be mad? Wish? Go onward hatin’ on everyone and everything? I honestly have a lot going on now. So….. yeah. Thanks!

    (I do not have any dislike for Rollo personally… but most of his ideas I do dislike. Men in this ‘sphere don’t like people who disagree with their god Rollo.)

    Liked by 2 people

  23. Pingback: Word from the Dark Side – No Rain, nonsense news, nasty waves and some nice birds | SovietMen

  24. Pingback: She don’t need no man! Except… | Σ Frame

  25. Lastmod says:

    About two years before I visited Wales “land of my fathers” I did two DNA tests, and they both came the same. I have a Polish last name. I am only about 15% “slavic” (eastern european, in what is modrrn Poland) by genetics. I am 50% Celtic (Wales), the next largest part was 34% in what is in now modern France / Rhine Valley of western Germany. What was a bit interesting was that I was 1% “West African” in what is now modern Nigeria.

    People did get around even 500, 400, 600, 1000 years ago 🙂

    Well…except the Welsh 😉

    I have built a tree on one of these DNA sites, and I have found records on the Welsh side of my mothers side going back to 1567 to this church……….

    An Anne Griffiths who was baptized here in 1567. This is the same church my mother took her first communion and was Christened back in the 1940’s and early 1950’s……a little church that goes back to 1200’s. The sense of awe and just amazement as I walked in here……through the centuries, my mothers side wed, worshiped, fellowshiped here. Funerals. Tears, laughter………the local Vicor also showed me the archives and I looked at church rolls saw my mothers name from the 1950’s……my grandfather, great grandfather, great, great grandfather……..just astounding.

    Liked by 2 people

    • cameron232 says:

      Wales is beautiful. They use too many consecutive consonants in their words and names though. Somebody needs to buy them a vowel. 😊

      Like

      • Lastmod says:

        Tell me about it. I can speak it decently, I can read and write it passable, but I still mispell or I use context incorrectly when speaking. Welsh is an ancient tribal, “oral tradition” language, so it is all poetic and focus on imprinting and imagaery rather than explanation.

        Hence why it is beautiful when sung or telling a story in that ancient “Bardic” tradition.

        For example, the word “hearth” is “aelywd” (al-lloyd). The placement of this in Welsh depends on what context you are using it. It is aflame? Is it of your heart or expression? Is it just in syntax of “in front of the hearth”

        This is why Welsh is useless in many modern matters, and will never be a world language. This is why people don’t speak it, and why it should be used for academic study and preserved on these matters.

        Welsh is still spoken widely on the street and towns of northern Wales very frequently. Even my relatives (uncle, aunts, cousins), it was spoken in the home…but also “Wellish” hence meaning…speaking Welsh, but drifting into English. They all though my Welsh spoken with an American accent was hilarious, and worth laughing over….tears running down their faces. That is how funny they thought I sounded.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Based on great grandparents, we’re 5/8 English, 1/4 German and 1/8 Austro-Italian (Trieste, former Austro Hungarian city). My sister took an ancestry test and it matched that pretty closely.

        My wife is English, Swedish and German in that order. Her first name is a Swedish name not used very often anymore.

        My second son is named after a Scottish rebel and a Welsh rebel (I guess we were in a rebellious mood). Wallace and Glendower.

        Like

      • Lastmod says:

        The 1941 academy award winning movie “How Green Was My Valley” starring Maureen O Hara and Roddy McDowall, gives a decent account of life in Victorian Wales in a wonderful story about a mining family. The Welsh were miners of slate and coal.

        It’s free on YouTube, and I must say it was a great story.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Jack says:

        “The 1941 academy award winning movie “How Green Was My Valley” starring Maureen O Hara and Roddy McDowall…”

        This is an excellent movie, in spite of its age.

        Like

  26. Elspeth says:

    Your cultural histories are beautiful. I fear this is one of those misunderstandings that you all often ascribe to us women about how we are unable to get where men are coming from. For the record, I am not one of those “Woe is me… The system oppresses me…” black people.

    But you guys seem not to get that for the vast majority of black Americans, the most we can know about our history starts with slavery. Even if we spent lots of time and treasure trying to dig through the chaos of our mixed ancestries (both African and European) to land somewhere such as the kind of concrete historical points of your history as you describe, would be almost impossible.

    My paternal ancestral knowledge goes back to a plantation in present day Ascension Parrish, Louisiana. That’s it. If I decide to hang my hat on that as the core of who I am (aside from the strength and resilience of surviving), I’d very easily find myself on the political left bemoaning my oppression. I refuse to do that, hence my mention of being “divested” from the so-called black community.

    As it is, I have a solid set of Christian beliefs on which to rest. I believe that is a beautiful thing, and making that my preeminent focus in no way denies my ethnic identity. It does subjugate it, but I believe God commands this.

    Ok. I’m done.

    Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      Elspeth, I 100% get that. I have had that on my mind as we have been engaging in this gratuitous discussion of our ancestral ties, family churches, etc.

      As I mentioned, American Blacks have a distinct shared history, culture, experience, etc. that makes them an ethnie. Not the same as a Nigerian immigrant. I get that your “tribal” affiliation is Reformed Christians. That’s cool. I 100% understand, or at least can imagine where you are coming from and respect it completely.

      As I mentioned it hard to relate to an Anglo guy that has blue hair, 1000 tats and stretched ear lobes as “my people.”

      Like

    • Lastmod says:

      Don’t ever be done!

      This is where I take a sort of pride of “American” exceptionalism. I love black American music, I have a Polish last name, but really have little ties to that place….. what the Nazis didn’t destroy, the Communists did. Sure, I am proud of my Welsh heritage but at the same time understand I find myself here……..

      I owe my “Welshness” to my mother. It has been said that women embody the best of preservation of traditions, cultural and family. My mother was Welsh, but she called herself British. If you look at my behaviors on a cultural level… they match many more of the British than they do of Welsh……. and throw in the American…… you got it all here.

      l have a story Elspeth, and that story is what you do in writing the next chapter of it. Hence why I believe the Christian faith ‘could’ be important in uniting us all….. but many just won’t allow that…. and I am speaking on many in church and faith…. not the politics that wish to destroy it, or legislate it out of existence.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        Thanks, Jason.

        In reality, my dad has actually done a fine job of building a legacy in a time and place that I won’t get into because to do so would be to obliterate what little anonymity I have left online. But it is a beautiful one, and there is actually a place in this world with a monument that is dedicated to him, that has his name on it. It will be there until….whenever. Or maybe even for ever until the end of time. We’ll see.

        This is why I cringe a little at the notion that I’m supposed to feel a deep sense of family to people who look like me, yet perpetuate beliefs I do not hold, cultural ideas that I do not support, etc.

        I absolutely have an interest in where I came from, and a proud legacy. It’s just not tied solely to the fact of my blackness.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Scott says:

      The parallel to this problem (only knowing what has happened since slavery) is the term “white” itself.

      It is meaningless and sometimes I get the feeling deliberate. Zippy was starting to come to this conclusion near the end of his life.

      “White” takes a bunch of ethnicities with rich histories, deep cultural roots, artistic and scientific contributions, and mashes them into one giant useless description of horrible people who raped and pillaged the entire world.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Elspeth says:

        You’re preaching to the choir with me on that note, 🙂 But I suspect you knew that. I have been known to ask people to find me Whitopia or Blacknia on a globe, and have been met with derision from blacks and confusion from whites. This is why I can’t be bothered to spend my energy on my race and statistical means and all that stuff. Most people -of ANY race- don’t think deeply enough about anything for me to invested that way.

        I had a man just say to me on Friday night (white dude, for statistical purposes), “Your family is so unique in so many ways. I’ve never met anyone like you guys [and yeah, he was framing it in terms of our race and lifestyle]. Is it lonely?”

        Nope, I told him. To be honest, SAM and I have gotten real comfortable out here on our ideological island. Thank goodness we are smitten with each other, or it would be darned lonely out here.

        I gotta finish grading papers. Catch y’all later.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        A lot of my opinions and attitudes were formed by religious paleoconservatives (like Trifkovic) of the type at the Rockford Institute.

        It was not uncommon for the paleoconservatives to envision white America retreating into ethnic enclaves, relearning their ancestral languages, attending their ancestral churches as you’re doing.

        The “white” thing is simply a consequence (and an understandable one) of the American empire. I mean the 18th and 19th century continental empire, not the world wide one of the 20th century. The 1924 Immigration Act was, among other things, an attempt to help along the formation of an American “ethnie” that had strong cultural continuity with the WASPs that created the country for their posterity.

        One of the first things the American founders did (before the Bill of Rights was ratified I believe) was to enact a law which limited immigration to free white people. “White” not “British” or “Celtic-Germanic” or NW European or Protestant. In this sense, the Bio-Leninist Left is correct that America’s founders were “white nationalists.”

        The paleoconservatives likened America to an Indian stew. Things just kept getting randomly added so that it never had the chance to become anything identifiable, distinct, never had any consistent recipe or plan for cultural continuity, etc.

        Like

      • Scott says:

        For those interested, that name would be pronounced TREEF ko veech (with rare exceptions, the emphasis is on the first syllable in Serbian words.)

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        @Scott,

        By “deliberate” you mean people that don’t like European people created or hijacked the word “white?” “White” is used explicitly in the 1790 Naturalization Act. The context was early America which already had European diversity as well as a Native Americans and Black Africans. It meant “us” to the people using that word.

        If you’re implying that “they” are uniquely attacking Europe and its diaspora using this word then, yes, you’re right. There’s a trend towards e.g. Jews and Arabs disassociating with the term “white” since it’s becoming the new n!gger as you mentioned earlier. Even worse really because a Jim Crow era black could say “it’s ok for me to be a n!gger” and no one would attack him for it.

        Like

      • Scott says:

        It’s hard to say. But when I fill an application (for pretty much anything) I feel the “sting” of checking “white” like its something dirty, something to be ashamed of. So, when given the opportunity to check “other” I write in “Serb-Scot-Irish.”

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        I personally don’t feel any sting checking that box.

        They will say to you, “Tough crap! Suck it up! 400 years of slavery, Jim Crow, Trayvon Martin, and George Floyd, this is Native land, go back to Ireland or Serbia, the average black family has $10 in net worth, you whites are punching out Asians on the streets of our cities, white privilege, colonialism, it’s about time you felt some discomfort. etc. ……….”

        Our response: “Martin Luther King!”, “we all bleed red”, “I don’t care if the person is PURPLE”, “I’m an unhyphenated American”, “I’m a mutt!”

        It is clear to me that feminist women want vengeance not equality. This has been made very clear to me at work when women and fairness and the bad-old-days is brought up. Other bio-inequalities, historic and current, will call for vengeance as well, I suspect.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        Implicit psychology for UMC whites:

        “That stuff doesn’t affect me. Only the whitetrash worry about this stuff. I hate whitetrash – it sucks that I even look like them. Only a loser like them (I’m a successful, self-made man, walking proof of libertarianism and Randianism ) would worry about such things. F_cking Trump voter fascist!”

        Like

      • Scott says:

        “Our response: “Martin Luther King!”, “we all bleed red”, “I don’t care if the person is PURPLE”, “I’m an unhyphenated American”, “I’m a mutt!”

        I should clarify. The box checking doesn’t actually make me feel ashamed. It reinforces my awareness that they WANT ME to feel ashamed.

        I have long since quit trying to out play them at the privilege game, or naively asking, “Hey, but I thought I/we were doing the content of their character thing?” We aren’t. And we never were. We just didn’t know it.

        They started this. Being ethnically aware is nothing other than showing up late to a fight that started a long time ago. Those of us who hail from European backgrounds didn’t ask for this, or start it. But we can finish it.

        Liked by 1 person

  27. Lastmod says:

    Cameron….yeah that is a Welsh name.

    In Welsh it would be pronounced Glen-doe-ware.

    I have a Polish last name, and a Greek first and middle name. One would not sense any “Welsh” by names or physical stature….. I was the tallest person anywhere I went in Wales…… hence the mutted and muted American sensibilities of who I am now I guess….. or the times I was born in and at. My name “Jason” was the most popular name for boys in the USA from the late 60’s thru the mid 70’s. Age dated by name as well. No one names their boy “Jason” today.

    My mother had a very British name for a girl at the time… though her last name, Jones, was Welsh. The letter “J” by the way in Welsh is pretty much only used for the last name Jones, and of course for “jam”. 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

  28. Lastmod says:

    Many American-Poles / British-Poles of my generation and younger get a bit “too proud” in my opinion. Many “demand” that proper apologies were never given to the “polish people” concerning the horrible actions done to them by the German Nazi, and Russian-Soviets during the second world war. After the Jews… the Poles were “next” and most of the most terrible death camps built by the Nazi’s were in Poland.

    1.5 million Poles were executed in these camps as well. They were not just for Jews.

    The Soviets after the war, didn’t have death camps so to speak when they instituted Communism. But, they were like the Nazis before them to ensure NEVER a Polish nobility to rise again. Nor a Polish upper “intelligentsia” class to make itself known. The Catholic churches were not razed or burned…but their records on births, baptisms, marriages, and births were looted and destroyed, all in the name of “we’re all equal now”.

    What little was left of Polish identity was stored an hidden by many a Catholic priest, Polish monk or nun with the penalty of punishment, or imprisonment…. they took severe risks. Many great Polish literary and artworks were held in trust by the Catholic church and shipped to Rome. Hence why to this day….. being Polish and Catholic usually go hand-in-hand.

    Many British / American / Canadian Poles of my age and younger also blame the American and British for “allowing” Poland to become Communist. WW II in Europe was “sparked” over Poland in 1939…. and at the end of the war…… many in Poland felt betrayed…. for all the destruction and for it be handed over to Stalin without a fight…. many younger Poles… several generations removed and in different countries now, will blame the USA, and UK for “not standing up for them”.

    I look at it as… if the Polish could not at that point stand up for themselves….. that was their own problem. And in the end, they did. The Spring of 1989 started in Poland! 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    • Lastmod says:

      I have also dealt with online people my age and younger (cough) “claiming” they are from Polish nobilty, or descendants thereof…..

      According to Nazi_German records (and on these matter, the Nazis were precise, organized and documented very well on matters like this). During the Polish Occupation from 1939-1945, just about ALL of the Polish nobility was executed. Most in their homes. Few if any could flee the massive mechanized onslaught they faced. Remember that last real charge? The Polish army sending horses against the mighty Werchmacht……horses against tanks (rolls eyes). Those brave “genetically beta” men mostly died. The Polish army lost 80% of its men within the first two weeks. There was little or zero chance of escape. Also, just about ALL records of lineage in the Polish nobility were burned by the Nazis and the Soviets after them. If there any left walking around in modern Poland, they have no idea they had this heritage.

      Been called a “polish hater” and “betrayal to my family name” because of statements like this. Could care less.

      Liked by 1 person

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