The Meet Cute is not about “women chasing men”

A response to Liz’s comment using RedPillBoomer’s story as an example.

Readership: All
Length: 1,650 words
Reading Time: 5.5 minutes

In previous posts, we learned that the Meet Cute is an intrinsic part of the courtship dance. Yet, there continues to be much confusion around this phenomenon.

For example, over at Spawny’s Space, under the post following Young Men — Do As Liz (2021-07-21), Liz left this comment.

“Per #Meetcute (Scott’s recent writeup).

Think the last thread someone wrote about confirmation bias environments. I think that’s kinda pertinent here. I’m sure the Meet Cute formula works in some circles. I can also guarantee you the Meet Cute formula virtually guarantees you a bar skank in the circles Mike and I have been in. I don’t know anyone (off the top of my head) who has had a long lasting marriage where the woman pursued the guy. There are a couple of people I can think of who got together in high school. One couple knew each other in middle… their mothers alternated driving them to school. Maybe they qualify I don’t know, but that’s about it.

Mike doesn’t even like women who pursue men. A woman buys him a drink and he perceives her as desperate.”

I’m unfamiliar with what type of circles Liz runs in, but if bar skanks are common in that setting, then a Meet Cute is unlikely to happen. If so, I can understand Liz’s confusion.

Liz does well to assign the capability of agency to women, but her comment indicates that she doesn’t understand the underlying nature of the Meet Cute phenomenon. It’s not about “women pursuing men”. Women who have the self-awareness and agency necessary to consciously pursue men are not the kind of women who are prone to falling into Meet Cute mode.

Case Study – RedPillBoomer’s Meet Cute

RedPillBoomer stated that he and his wife had a Meet Cute experience, so I’ll use his story as an example. While reading this story, keep in mind that RPB’s wife never pursued him. [The first paragraph is a quote from Scott’s post.]

“It is spontaneous. You cannot plan it. You cannot pick her out of a crowd and then do cold approach with the idea that you might “get lucky”. Your friends can’t “set you up on a date”. Your “wingman” can’t contrive a meeting somehow. It just happens, and it happens when you least expect it.”

“This is exactly what happened to me. [She was showing IOIs, and she was above my threshold of attraction] as I sort of found out that night, but DEFINITELY realized it when we went out on our first couple of dates. She was coy upon meeting at first, shy, but definitely feminine and subtly flirty. She let her older aunt lead the way and do most of the talking.

[The spontaneity of the event] was the most interesting to me. I met this girl when I was sitting down at a restaurant after a church service. She and her 37-year-old aunt had attended, but I did didn’t see them during the service. Found out later, she definitely noticed me. The church service was for singles held on Saturday night at a large church in a good-sized mid-western city. Everyone went out to a restaurant about a 1/2 mile down the street after the service. Just as an aside, I found out later the restaurant gave 15% of the proceeds from the church group back to the church, sweet deal for the restaurant, and the church, as there were about 200-300 singles attending on any given Saturday night.

Anyways, I got my meal, and sat down by myself perfectly content to be by myself, if it came to it. As I recall, I wasn’t in the best of moods that night and I was okay if no one sat at my table. It more than likely wasn’t going to happen because of the size of the group, and the number of tables in the restaurant, not the biggest of places. We took up a good portion of it, pretty much the whole place really.

Well, ‘Meet Cute’ and her aunt sat down at the table and started a lively conversation with me, especially the aunt who wouldn’t shut up. The aunt was 37 years old and not bad looking, was divorced and had three kids. Even with my ‘Blue Pill’ mindset, I was like, “No Way!”, even though she was the one doing all the flirting (cue all the Manosphere posts and clips about the post-wall, divorced woman with three kids). Her niece on the other hand was 21, good looking, nice figure, although I didn’t know exactly HOW nice because she was dressed quite conservatively that night (a dress and blouse). She let her aunt do most of the talking. I wasn’t even trying to flirt back with either one of them because of my mood. I will admit, the aunt, even though mouthy, did loosen me up a bit from my bad mood. I started to talk with both of them; but really, I was playing off the aunt to talk to her niece.

As we can see from RPB’s story, his wife was very attracted to him, but she was shy and awkward and never openly pursued him. I can imagine that once the aunt and niece arrived at the restaurant, they saw RPB sitting alone and the aunt urged her niece to sit with him. After sitting down, the aunt made herself a conduit of communication between two young and very awkward individuals. After talking for a while, the aunt saw him as a nice looking man who had some potential and further encouraged her niece to be open to his advances.

It is questionable whether the aunt was chasing him herself. I imagine the aunt just wanted to check out the young man her niece had noticed and allow her niece to get some Feedback from him. Due to the aunt’s age and experience, maybe she could see a Meet Cute coming. But RPB and the girl were pretty clueless about what was happening.

Later I found out from her niece (my eventual girlfriend/fiancé/spouse), what she was thinking through the course of that evening when she saw me at the service. It was [Scott’s Recipe for a Meet Cute]. We got married a few months later. Yes, I know, I violated all the ‘Manospherian rules’ about waiting a year or two to see her true colors in the relationship. So, I was fortunate, but it worked out and we just celebrated our 32nd wedding anniversary on July 22.”

So it is just as Scott wrote,

“It is spontaneous. You cannot plan it. You cannot pick her out of a crowd and then do cold approach with the idea that you might “get lucky”. Your friends can’t “set you up on a date”. Your “wingman” can’t contrive a meeting somehow. It just happens, and it happens when you least expect it!

The same could be said from the woman’s perspective. That is,

“It is spontaneous. She cannot plan it. She cannot pick him out of a crowd and then saddle up next to him with the idea that he’ll “bite her bait”. Her friends can’t “set her up on a date”. Her “brood of hens” can’t contrive a meeting somehow. It just happens, and it happens when she least expects it!”

Conclusions

A woman might pine for a worthy man to miraculously show up on the doorstep, bouquet in hand, but a more practical approach would be for her to pick out an eligible man and then put herself into a situation in which she can elicit Feedback from him. Her responses to his attentions can thereby prove to him that his life would actually be better with her as his wife.

Assuming that women possess sufficient agency to actively pursue a man (i.e. “chasing him”) disturbs the spiritual beauty and innocent cuteness of the Meet Cute. But although the Meet Cute is not based on the idea of women pursuing men, it is not a bad idea for those women who have the necessary self-awareness and possess agency.

If it is assumed that a woman has the agency to pursue a man (as Liz does), then it is also assumed that she knows how the mating dance progresses, and therefore, she is not quite so young and innocent. Such a woman cannot avail of using authentic innocence to attract a man, so the possibility of her having a genuine Meet Cute is dampened. If this kind of woman desires a high quality man’s commitment, a Meet Cute may not happen, so she needs to take a different approach by making some effort to present herself as high quality wife material.

Women who supposedly have agency have become quite adept at “selling” themselves as sex objects, but they have forgotten the art of “selling” themselves as potential wives in marriage. The way to do this is to demonstrate her value to a man. Give him the serendipitous sense that he’s getting something better than what he deserves. This kind of investment will not be lost on the man, but is likely to turn his view of her into wife goggles.

Women also need to refine their skills at picking out men who are actually capable of offering a marital commitment, which may require her to choose a man who is a few years older than herself. This is not the same as “settling”. A Meet Cute experience evades this requirement from her. For younger women who are prone to falling into Meet Cute mode, an older relative may be helpful in this regard, as shown by RPB’s story. Also, she should be looking for a husband long before the pool of worthy men has drifted away from being an option for marriage. 25 is 5 years too late.

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 Answered Prayers, Attraction, Authenticity, Building Wealth, Choosing a Partner or Spouse, Courtship and Marriage, Discernment, Wisdom, Female Power, Fundamental Frame, Game Theory, Headship and Patriarchy, Hypergamy, IOI's, Joy, Love, Male Power, Meet Cute, Models of Success, Moral Agency, Personal Presentation, Purpose, Relationships, Sexual Authority, Strategy, The Power of God, Vetting Women. Bookmark the permalink.

40 Responses to The Meet Cute is not about “women chasing men”

  1. thedeti says:

    Liz’ comment at Spawny’s is yet another example of why men should not take advice from women, ever, about anything, especially not about sex, dating, mating, and marriage.

    When asked about what women like or what they did to get their men, women will tell you what they believe will make them look good to other women. Women will not tell you what they actually do. Women will not tell you what they really like. Women will not tell you what actually happened (Liz).

    Or, if women do tell you what they do or like, or what really happened, they’ll tell you not to do what they did even though it worked out super great for them (Elspeth).

    This is not an attack on Liz or Elspeth. Just statements of fact.

    “Women also need to refine their skills at picking out men who are actually capable of offering a marital commitment, which may require her to choose a man who is a few years older than herself.”

    Women can pick out these men. Women refuse these men because these men aren’t sexually attractive enough for them. Women settle for these men, and then divorce rape them when the last kid is in kindergarten. Or they make these men’s lives a living hell by treating them poorly. The fact that women have sex with more attractive men and assiduously avoid marriage minded men until they have to settle for a marriage minded man indicates very clearly that women can pick men capable of offering marriage. They can, because they studiously and carefully avoid those men until they have to settle for one.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. thedeti says:

    Now I get it. Now I understand why girls don’t get the Meet Cute.

    John Hughes and his proteges (Cameron Crowe and others) depicted the meet cute as we men like to see it. Always depicted from the woman’s point of view, or rather, how we men think women view it. Cute but vulnerable and honest woman being vulnerable and honest with a man. Or at least, we think she’s being vulnerable and honest. To men, Meet Cute is Molly Ringwald, looking at him lovingly. To men, Meet Cute is Pretty In Pink, Sixteen Candles, Say Anything.

    Girls don’t see it that way. To women, the Meet Cute is Katharine Hepburn, Meg Ryan, or Reese Witherspoon. Cute but “sassy”, intelligent, headstrong, and “plucky” woman “you go girl”ing it, impressing her man with her intelligence and worldly wisdom, and riding off into the sunset as “equals” and “partners”. To women, the Meet Cute is Clueless, Legally Blonde, Sweet Home Alabama, Sleepless in Seattle, The Philadelphia Story, Bringing Up Baby.

    Liked by 3 people

    • rontomlinson2 says:

      Makes sense — a woman likes confident, headstrong men so she assumes men find these qualities attractive in her. Solipsism strikes again!

      Liked by 1 person

  3. feeriker says:

    To women, the Meet Cute is Clueless, Legally Blonde, Sweet Home Alabama, Sleepless in Seattle, The Philadelphia Story, Bringing Up Baby.

    And “Pretty Woman.” Don’t ever leave out “Pretty Woman” from the list of movies that women are determined to believe represent reality when it comes to relations between the sexes.

    Liked by 3 people

    • thedeti says:

      In the real world, the streetwalker gets her weekend of cash and then dumped back out on the street from whence she came, even if she does look like Julia Roberts and has a heart of gold with a 150 IQ. You might be hot, smart, and nice, but you’re a hot, smart and nice hooker. And hookers don’t get billionaires – even if they’re hot, smart, and nice.

      Like

      • Red Pill Apostle says:

        In the real world, if you are a billionaire and yet somehow you are dumb enough to indulge with a hooker the way Pretty Woman depicts, you end up like Robert Kraft on a Florida massage parlor’s security camera footage. Usually, this level of man pays for discretion, which is why it’s scandalous when an investigation uncovers the true identity of the alias he uses. This is the case with Eliot Spitzer.

        Liked by 3 people

      • thedeti says:

        Not just a hooker. A streetwalker. Not a callgirl. Not an “escort”. A wh0re.

        Julia Roberts depicts the quintessential common man every day version of what people think a prostitute is. The 5 dollar crack 304. Walking the streets. The kind of woman cops hassle when the politicians tell them they’re going to “clean up the city”.

        Liked by 1 person

    • thedeti says:

      Pretty Woman and the other movies are all about what the woman wants. The man is a supporting character in the female protagonist’s life.

      This is why women just don’t care about what even their own men want. Because no one makes them care — until they have to do what I did, and say to Mrs. Deti: “Um, you f__king better start caring, because if you don’t, you won’t have this man around to not care about anymore.”

      Liked by 1 person

      • Red Pill Apostle says:

        Pretty Woman is the story of a strong, street smart, independent woman that just so happens to need a man to come along and save her while at the same time she restores the broken man’s humanity.

        Liked by 3 people

  4. thedeti says:

    The Meet Cute is not about “women chasing men”.

    The Meet Cute is about women showing clear, unequivocal, unmistakable interest in ONE man to whom she is sexually attracted.

    Women’s continual misinterpretation of this is why we fail. Women’s absolute utter refusal to do this is why we fail. Women want men to do all the work, do all the initiation, and bear all the risk.

    This is what I tried to say a year ago when I suggested that, “Um, hey… Maybe women could start showing clear IOIs and start banging men over the head with said IOIs.”

    “Oh no”, everyone said, “No, we can’t do that. No, that would be “leading”. That would be women taking initiative. That would be women taking (gasp) responsibility. That would be women (OMG) owning their sh!t.”

    “We can’t have that. We can’t expect women to, you know, do anything to fix what they’ve destroyed. We can’t expect women to figure out what they want and do anything about it. We can’t expect women to take any risks or do anything to um, oh, I don’t know, actually SHOW a man she’s interested in that she’s interested.”

    D@mn it… We are NOT asking women to chase men. We are asking women to show clear, unmistakable, unequivocal interest in the men they’re sexually attracted to, so that the men who are the targets of said sexual attraction can know whether it’s safe to proceed. That’s all. That is NOT, repeat, NOT, “chasing”. That is showing interest. And that is ALL we are asking for.

    Look ladies — If you want to fix this, you’re going to have to help. You’re going to have to put some skin in the game. You’re going to have to risk something. You’re going to have to do something.

    Liked by 2 people

    • thedeti says:

      I suppose the response women are going to send me is…

      “Well, if you’re not getting these IOIs, then you’re not sexually attractive enough. Or you aren’t savvy enough to know whether you’re getting IOIs, or you’re getting IOIs from women you’re not attracted to; or you’re just not sexually attractive at all.”

      Fair enough.

      Then you women need to stop lying to these men. You need to stop using and abusing them. You need to stop lying that you want and are sexually attracted to these men so you can use them for marriage status points. You need to stop using them for money and resources. Leave these men alone.

      And for the love of God would you please stop complaining that the men you do like having sex with won’t give you anything more than sex, when you know full well that sex is all you’ll ever get from them. Take what you can get from these men, be thankful about it, and stop complaining about it.

      Liked by 1 person

      • anonymous_ng says:

        @Deti, I mostly agree with you, but I do think that men need to learn what IOIs look like. At one point or another each of my children asked me the same question: Does ABC like me? And, then they would describe the situation. What I did to help them understand is I asked them to think about the things they do when they are attracted to someone, and to realize that many of those behaviors are universal and are practiced by both men and women.

        Additionally, nearly every article I’ve ever read about determining attraction is worthless. Oh, she’s touching her hair. That means she likes you.

        No, it’s when she’s preening, AND she’s invaded your personal space a bit, AND she’s paying close attention to you and what you’re saying instead of looking around or staring at her phone, AND . . .

        Minor pet peeve of mine.

        As you’ve pointed out regularly lots of men aren’t that attractive, but I would make an observation beyond that. If you take a guy who is a 5, but he’s only ever looking at women who are 7+ and wondering why he isn’t getting any IOIs, well, it’s because he isn’t getting any from those women. At the same time, he may well be missing IOIs coming his way from women who are 5s.

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        anon_ng,

        Fair enough. I’m fine with men having to do their part.

        I want women to do THEIR part TOO. And I want them to stop lying. I want them to deal with us in good faith like women of the Silent Generation and the Greatest Generation did. I want them to be honest and I want them to pull their weight. I want them to do what they say they’re going to do. I want them to be honest about what they did and do. And I want them to stop saying, “Do as I say, not as I do.”

        Like

      • anonymous_ng says:

        @Deti, I agree with you. There is a time and place for the subtle dance of innuendo etc, and there is also a time and place for clear intentions etc.

        The online dating site Bumble is set up so that when a match happens, nothing further happens until the woman initiates the conversation by sending the first message. A friend pointed out to me that despite Bumble having been built to give women the power in starting the conversation, they still had to update the software to include pre-scripted conversation openers because the women still couldn’t manage to start the conversations.

        So, yes, women need to be more forthright.

        Like

      • redpillboomer says:

        “And for the love of God would you please stop complaining that the men you do like having sex with won’t give you anything more than sex, when you know full well that sex is all you’ll ever get from them. Take what you can get from these men, be thankful about it, and stop complaining about it.”

        I heard an excellent clip about women chasing the top 10% of men. They know full well that these guys have options. Even when he’s with her, she knows he’s got other women in his rotation, but she feels she can be the ‘one’ to get him to give up all his options and commit.

        As these women get older (26 and up), the “Where have the all the good men gone?” complaining really has nothing to do with the other 90% of men, as in “Where did those guys go?” No, she’s surrounded by them even though some have been plucked off the market are married by now. She’s still lamenting for the top 10% of men who have proven to her over and over by their actions that they are NOT going to put a ring on her finger.

        Gradually, as time goes by, the top of the 90% group, say 70% and up, are getting married, or as is increasingly more common these days, practicing some form of MGTOW. Ms. Carouseller sees her girlfriends grabbing some of these guys and getting married (if they’re lucky to actually find one who’ll marry them), but she won’t settle for THEM. No way! She is going to go into her thirties and hold out for Mr. Top 10% to finally come around to his senses and pick her. She’s headed for ‘A Heartache Tonight’ as the Eagles song goes. Wine and cats are her future.

        BTW, anecdotal story here. A few years back, I was talking to a single, 35 year old female during a course we were both taking. This was a course with occasional breakout sessions. One breakout session included the two of us and also a single, 41 year old woman. Both women were attractive for their respective ages, maybe 6s; 7s if you take into account their curvy figures. Somehow (I forget why), we got into a discussion about relationship standards, and the 35 year old listed hers off. I was blown away by how high they were and remember thinking, maybe when you were 22 sweetie, but not now at 35! Even the 41 year old gently chastised her about her elevated standards, but to no avail. Essentially what the 41 year old was doing was lowering hers in hopes of finally getting some man to put a ring on her finger, but still had nothing on her left hand to show for her efforts. She had wised up a bit in her later dating years, but now she was really fighting ‘father time’ to find even a SEMI-DECENT guy to wife her up. Today, the 35 year old is 38, and still single. No surprise there. Oh, and the 41 year old is 44 and still single too.

        Liked by 1 person

      • anonymous_ng says:

        @RPB, I dated a woman for a couple of months right after I filed the divorce papers. She was 38 and mentioned that she’d had at least one proposal of marriage previously.

        She broke things off after a couple of months because she was looking for a husband and I, in her words, was still looking to run around with the boys. Yeah. I just filed the divorce petition.

        We are still friends on FB. She recently married for the first time at 51. Her husband seems like an OK guy, Joe average, or basically her MMV peer that she should have married in her 20s. All that time just to end up where you started.

        Like

      • Jack says:

        “I dated a woman for a couple of months right after I filed the divorce papers. She was 38 and mentioned that she’d had at least one proposal of marriage previously.

        She broke things off after a couple of months because she was looking for a husband and I, in her words, was still looking to run around with the boys. Yeah. I just filed the divorce petition.”

        It could have been an excuse or a justification for her decision. However, it is common knowledge that people who are just getting out of a marriage are in no condition or state of mind to immediately jump into another. This is especially true for women.

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        <

        blockquote>”…despite Bumble having been built to give women the power in starting the conversation, they still had to update the software to include pre-scripted conversation openers because the women still couldn’t manage to start the conversations.”

        What the F.

        “Hi. I’m Susie Snowflake. What’s your name? Hi, Deti, How are you? I’m fine.”

        How hard is that?

        These women are on a dating app to meet men. And then when they’re given ALL the power, they can’t even manage to type out a simple “hi”?

        I mean, ħɘ11. They don’t even have to SAY anything using their mouths or voices. They don’t even have to be in the man’s physical presence. They don’t even have to carry the conversation once started. All they have to do is start it.

        “Hi”

        That’s it. Two letters. TWO LETTERS.

        And women can’t do even that.

        A woman can’t even type out “Hi”!

        Are you people serious right now? This is what it’s come to? Women need help typing “Hi” to men they picked on a dating app that gives them ALL the power?

        And they can’t even type “Hi”?

        OMG.

        Liked by 1 person

    • “D@mn it… We are NOT asking women to chase men. We are asking women to show clear, unmistakable, unequivocal interest in the men they’re sexually attracted to, so that the men who are the targets of said sexual attraction can know whether it’s safe to proceed. That’s all. That is NOT, repeat, NOT, “chasing”. That is showing interest. And that is ALL we are asking for.”

      Bumble dating app has it right, IMO.

      Basically, the women must initiate the conversation(s) first which usually means the woman has at least some interest in you already.

      It basically takes out the hard part for most men which is a woman giving IOIs in person and expecting him recognize them and approach and chat her up.

      Other dating apps seem to be pray and spray for men basically.

      Liked by 2 people

  5. anonymous_ng says:

    I always thought the Meet Cute thing was a situation where two people bump into one another and lightning flashes and they each experience a strong and visceral attraction to each other. However, this doesn’t necessarily require the woman to be obvious in her interest.

    IDK. That’s just how I figured things.

    Like

  6. thedeti says:

    Breaking:

    Kyle Rittenhouse not guilty on all counts.

    Watch as BLM burns Kenosha to the ground…..

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Sharkly says:

    Why does it sound like this Meet Cute terminology is a bit flexible and a judgement call in the eye of the beholder that can be used to fit whatever we want it to, after the fact?

    To me, it is beginning to sound watered down to where it is near becoming just the serendipitous way that two mutually attracted people first met and realized the other was attracted to them.

    Although women are prone to being both delusional and intentionally dishonest, while we shouldn’t ordinarily take advice from them, we also shouldn’t be willfully ignorant, because there are still times they can reveal something we may not have known.

    This whole Meet Cute concept seems to be just a clue to be aware of when vetting a potential mate. The Elephant in the room is still that women are treated as being of equal or superior in status to men. Our laws our customs our institutions are all set up to empower women at the expense of God’s holy patriarchy.

    Cill, in his post over at Spawny’s Space, Who’s to blame for the withdrawal of men? (2021-11-14), quoted this:

    “The end of the institution of marriage is a necessary condition for the liberation of women. Therefore it is important for us to encourage women to leave their husbands and not to live individually with men… All of history must be re-written in terms of oppression of women. We must go
    back to ancient female religions like witchcraft.” ~ an excerpt from The Declaration of Feminism (November 1971)

    The problem is envy. Women still want to be like god/desses. It causes many of them who have not resolved themselves to their condition to carry implacable malice (unresolved penis envy). And we always forget that we, as men, already are “gods”.

    1 Corinthians 11:7
    For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.

    Psalm 82:6
    I said, You are gods, And all of you are sons of the Most High.

    John 10:34
    Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?

    Until society has the right “frame” of reference for their thinking concerning the two sexes, most all of society’s thinking will be off-base because of their erroneous understanding of the relative differences God created when making men first, preeminent, and in God’s own image, and created women as the second lower class of human to both serve and reverence the first class.

    Answer me this: In Ephesians 5, where the husband images Jesus Christ and the wife images the church, which is the image of God?

    The churchian Manosphere won’t ever do much to undermine Feminism so long as they willingly accept Feminism’s foundational frame of reference that men and women are “equals” in being and rank before God. And of course the split tails are more equal than the rest of us. LOL! You’ve already lost if you try to institute a patriarchy where men are at best “equals”, and therefore have no intrinsic reason to be the heads. LOL! You have to be delusional to think women are equal vessels. Your particular strong-woman anecdote does not contravene God’s inerrant word.

    If men aren’t categorically superior, then God would have been haphazard to categorically make men the exalted heads empowered with dominion over all of His earthly creations including women. While all men vary in excellence, men categorically are the image and glory of masculine God, while women are the glory of men. Step one is to cosmologically justify elevating and empowering men to where people recognize them as being worthy of all earthly rule, and women, who are natural defilers, just as potential usurpers of men’s grant of divine dominion to rule over them on behalf of God.

    Liked by 1 person

    • thedeti says:

      “The churchian manosphere won’t ever do much to undermine Feminism so long as they willingly accept Feminism’s foundational frame of reference that men and women are “equals” in being and rank before God.”

      Men and women are equal before God. It’s just that men and women are not equal in relationship to each other. Men and women also have different functions on Earth that correspond to the physical forms God gave them.

      Men are superior to women down here on planet Earth, because God ordained it that way after the Fall. God put husbands over wives when He told Eve, “Your desire shall be for your husband, and he shall rule over you.”

      No woman is required to submit to me unless she’s married to me. She’s required to submit to her father until she’s given in marriage. If not to her father, then to older men in her family. When married, she’s to submit to her husband.

      But in heaven, before God, men and women are equal. Every human, man and woman, will stand before God and give an account for his/her life, and will be judged. Men and women are not given in marriage in heaven or joined in marriage in heaven. I don’t get to stand before God with Mrs. Deti and answer to God for her. No, when God’s going through her life with her, I don’t get to be there for that. That will be between her and God, and I won’t get to have anything to say about that.

      We down here in the Manosphere trenches usually don’t concern ourselves with that level of spiritual equality/parity that God ordains for us in heaven. That’s because God ordered things for us down here on Earth while we inhabit our physical bodies.

      Like

      • Sharkly says:

        thedeti says:

        “Men are superior to women down here on planet Earth, because God ordained it that way after the Fall.”

        The dominion/lordship of men over women was not a curse, but a righteous curb on the natural defilers. If Adam had rightly exercised his rule over Eve, He would have been able to stay in the holy sanctuary of Eden. But he sinned by hearkening to and giving the woman the worth-ship to be obeyed instead of God. No, Adam was created preeminent by and for God before the woman even existed, and God breathed His own pneuma into the man. The woman was created later, for Adam from Adam’s own flesh and bone, and God gave her to Adam. The apostle Paul reiterates that men bear the image of God, and this is why their heads are not to be covered when coming before God in prayer. For it would be insulting to cover the image of God before the face of God. The way God sees it, what is dishonoring to men (having long hair) is still a glory to women.

        1 Corinthians 11:14-15
        14 Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? 15 But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering.

        The word “covering” in verse 15 is a different Greek word than the word translated as “covering” throughout the rest of the chapter regarding women wearing a head covering to pray or prophesy. Paul indicates that even nature clearly shows that the woman is not to approach God without a head covering like men who share in God’s own likeness and glory. Even the Seraphim cover their face before God. (Isaiah 6:2) (Don’t imagine that it isn’t satanic that men and boys, who image the Father and Son, are coerced to keep their faces covered, when we are to pray without ceasing.)

        1 Corinthians 11:7-9
        7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. 9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

        The man wasn’t created for the woman, but for God Himself. You don’t circumcise women to God, only men are circumcised to God, to show that those men are God’s property by covenant. Whereas God made and gave women to men to be their help.

        While men and women are both equally responsible to keep God’s commands they are not equal in their creation nor in purpose. God created men to serve Him and bring Him glory by exercising dominion over all of God’s earthly creation (including women) whereas God created the woman partly to serve her father and then husband and to accrue glory/reverence/fear to her husband (Ephesians 5:33), which helps meet part of God’s purpose for creating womankind for mankind (generally speaking). I don’t mean that every woman is to submit to every man, women are assigned to men through fathering and marriage or sometimes some other custody/wardship.

        thedeti says:

        “I don’t get to stand before God with Mrs. Deti and answer to God for her. No, when God’s going through her life with her, I don’t get to be there for that. That will be between her and God, and I won’t get to have anything to say about that.”

        I think you will both give an account of how appropriately to God’s law you treated the other, and both will be judged according to God’s commands as decided by God’s judgement between you. You will be there along with a great cloud of other witnesses, you will both get your say, but, the final judgement will belong to Jesus Christ.

        Answer me this: In Ephesians 5, where the husband images Jesus Christ and the wife images the church, which is the image of God?

        And will Jesus Christ get a say in the judgement of His bride?

        Like

  8. feeriker says:

    thedeti says (2021-11-20 at 6:42 am):

    “These women are on a dating app to meet men. And then when they’re given ALL the power, they can’t even manage to type out a simple “hi”?”

    This just gives additional weight to those who claim that virtual sex will replace the real thing in not so many years. If this is how women act even in cyberspace, to say nothing of meat/meet space, no wonder men find inanimate pixels more appealing by comparison.

    Like

    • Erich says:

      “This just gives additional weight to those who claim that virtual sex will replace the real thing in not so many years.”

      If you really want to get a sense of this, look at services like Replika.ai or AI Dungeon. Glorified text generators but they provide a “goodenuf” sense of emotional intimacy with a woman. And this is ALL through text, mind you. All through text and through a predictive text generator.

      The latter service had some issues earlier this year regarding changes to the quality of text it was spitting back out. When that decrease in quality came to a head you should have seen the absolute weeping and gnashing of teeth on the part of the users. A surprising amount actually felt like they had lost a loved one! This is a service that is ENTIRELY TEXT. No pictures, no videos, just the user typing words in — “talking” to the AI, typing out actions, and so on — and getting a response to their input.

      And honestly, I can see the allure. It was/is advertised as a sort of automatically generated adventure game (a la Zork) or collaborative writing tool and going from Cleverbot in the mid-2000s to having the AI put in historically accurate details for a WWI story I was doing was mind-blowing. Even more so was when I got into arguing over music with the AI. The responses were, well, I would be fooled into thinking it was an actual human on the other end if I were say, tired or drunk. It was surprisingly life-like. And this is just with tech ca. 2019/2020. People were treating the service and Replika as more virtual boyfriends/girlfriends/spouses. (This is actually one of the selling points of Replika.) These things are already providing very crude, unsophisticated facsimiles of relationships. Imagine how the tech will be in just 10, 20 years time.

      On the one hand, this is really interesting and mesmerizing, on the other hand, I really worry for what this means for society in the near future.

      Like

  9. feeriker says:

    “Today, the 35 year old is 38, and still single. No surprise there. Oh, and the 41 year old is 44 and still single too.”

    This is going to be an entrenched cultural meme within a very few years:

    Like

  10. Joe2 says:

    @anon_ng

    “No, it’s when she’s preening, AND she’s invaded your personal space a bit, AND she’s paying close attention to you and what you’re saying instead of looking around or staring at her phone, AND . . .”

    …her conversation takes a quick turn to the sexual direction such as saying the color of her thong matches her _____ which she is also wearing, or tells you of the time she was so embarrassed when guests saw her dildo catalog on the coffee table, or mentions her _____ got a boob job which looks like half grapefruits were stuck on her chest and then demonstrates her proficiency in French by claiming she’s au naturel, or casually mentions that her neighbor breeds dogs and a b!tch is in heat and needs stud service right now.

    Those are IOI’s with clear intentions.

    Liked by 2 people

    • thedeti says:

      What she says:

      “Look, we’re totally not having sex, OK? Just so you know.”

      What she means:

      “I’m thinking about having sex with you. If I’m attracted to you I probably will have sex with you. I just need for you to help me feel comfortable with having sex with you.”

      Like

    • anonymous_ng says:

      @Joe2, thanks I got a chuckle out of this. Back in my day . . . or, I wasn’t attractive enough to get those kinds of IOIs. However, my son has told me of such.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Jack says:

      Joe2, anonymous_ng,
      I’ve gotten IOIs like those before, but I never knew they were IOIs. I just thought they were being zany and raunchy in good fun. I thought it was entertaining, even endearing, but it didn’t particularly turn me on in any way. When I remember those things now, I think, “How could I have been so ignorant?”

      Like

      • Kevin Blackwell says:

        It’s also to bait out thirsty men. If you’re too excited that means this doesn’t happen much and is an admission that you aren’t attractive or confident. Women are masters of getting men to reveal what they really think of themselves.

        Like

  11. Oscar says:

    @ Jack

    “I’m unfamiliar with what type of circles Liz runs in, but if bar skanks are common in that setting, then a Meet Cute is unlikely to happen. If so, I can understand Liz’s confusion.”

    If I remember correctly, Liz’s husband is (or was) an Air Force pilot. Bar skanks are a staple of any military setting.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. RichardP says:

    Definitions matter.

    The Internet, as well as Wikipedia, gives information on what the “meet cute” concept started out as. The “meet cute” is roughly as follows:

    “In film and television, a meet cute is a scene in which the two people … meet for the first time, typically under unusual, humorous, or cute circumstances. … Frequently, the meet cute leads to a humorous clash of personality or of beliefs, embarrassing situations, or comical misunderstandings that further drive the plot. ~ [Wikipedia]

    The important part of the definition of “meet cute” is that, whatever the “meet cute” is, it brings a male and female face to face in a way that doesn’t usually happen with folks mingling in a crowded room. (That sentence could be broken down further, but I won’t do that as I’m trying to make a simpler point here.)

    Brings a male and female face to face …

    Honestly, how often are we engaged in activities where this “meet face to face” happens? I would say “constantly”. And the moment passes, and we don’t give it a second thought. Either because we are not in the market for a partner (being already taken), or we are preoccupied with thoughts that are far away from “looking for a partner” (e.g. problems at work and/or home to solve; studying for the test coming up next week, etc.)

    The reality is, we all have experienced awkward, or out-of-the-ordinary, or embarrassing encounters with folks we don’t know. That is the definition given for “meet cute”. It only matters (that is, it only registers with us as “meet cute”) when the meeting leads to a romantic relationship. All of the other times this happens, we don’t give it a second thought.

    But there are many ways other than “meet cute” that strangers encounter each other face to face for the first time and then take that meeting into a romantic relationship over time (short or long).

    Liz can speak for herself. But that is the point I got out of reading Liz’s comment, because that is pretty much what I think as well.

    The other point about Liz’s comment seems to be this truth as well: I don’t think there is a man alive that knows every kind of “trick” that a woman can engineer in order to bring about a face to face meeting with someone she has her sights set on. As personalities are real, persistent, and different, I accept that some women are going to be better at (that is, seem more “natural”) manufacturing “meet cute” situations than others. But I think the evidence shows that there are plenty of men who think their meet cute is a real, accidental happening — when it was anything but.

    As defined by the entertainment industry, the “meet cute” is always accidental. In real life, I suspect women have engineered more meetings with the target of their attentions than have occurred accidentally. In real life, this is often the only way a woman can bring herself to the attention of her target. And skank bars around military bases are notorious for the military men who think she is innocent and seriously interested in him as a man (as opposed to an “opportunity”) when she is actually neither. There are plenty of stories around about that. But I have been in the military, and I have seen that happen with my own eyes.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Pingback: Summary of the Meet Cute Phenomenon | Σ Frame

  14. Pingback: A Volitional Model of Cascade Courtship | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s