Ordinarily, I don't bother to get into internet "discussions". I find them pointless and a waste of time. Blogging, IMHO, is a way to dispense information or have light-hearted exchanges. One thing people like Stacy McCain, Terry over at Abbey-Roads, Cathy of Alex, et al, have taught me, however, is that sometimes you just must stand up for the truth, particularly when you are attacked.
Yesterday, Stacy posted a piece addressing why purity before marriage is still the best path, and why some women are having a hard time finding a mate. Did he express his views as I would have? No. But that's why he's Stacy and I'm not. It was a great post, and it drove home the central point of "why buy the cow, when you can get the milk for free." That saying has been around a long time. I heard it when I was a very young woman, and it's as true today as it was then.
I left a comment thinking it was fluffy and kind of cute. Another commenter didn't think so.
I tell young women the way to a man's heart is really through his stomach. Feed him well and he'll follow you like a puppy.
And as for the rest of what you said - right on.
Girls were taught this in "the old days" by their mothers. It was true then and it's still true. And, no - you don't have to be all "churchy" about it either.
My mom was so smart that when I thought I wanted a car, she sat me down and told me to check out who was riding around with the girls who had their own cars. It was other girls. Hot girls without cars had boys to drive them around. And, boy oh boy, was she ever right. I never walked anywhere - ever!
Nothing in that comment struck me as too inflammatory, but this is what javelineer said:
I have strong views on the subject. Read Adrienne's post above. Women are systematically taught to scam men. They do this by leading men on sexually, tempting the sucker to pony up the cash. This amounts to sexual dishonesty as a strategy. Yes, we teach girls how to be liars from an early age. We also teach girls that it's perfectly ethical to lie - so long as it gets her the greenback. Our women have become sexual con-girls, and sure enough a sucker is born every minute.This sort of ticked me off. Not wanting to jump to conclusions and possibly start a flame war on Stacy's blog, I said:
With the sexual revolution, men do not need to chase vayjajay. It's abundant, high quality, and free. Today, in every major city in America, women out earn men. Yet still men are told to pony up the cash. With the feminine fraud so blatant, and the vayjayjay value so low - many, many men have come to realize that our women are simply prostitutes who barter rather than trade in straight cash.
I won't even get into the vayjayjay-begging chivalry advocates. Suffice it to say, we've let women define manhood from romance novels. The novels were bad. But the idea was even worse.
15-30% of children born in marriages are not sired by the husband. With that kind of venal incontinence rampant among our women, why not just eat from the smorgasbord. Being single is less fulfilling than being happily married, but it's more fulfilling than being a cuckold. Marriage is, by and large, for suckers these days. I fully support the marriage strike. By and large, women aren't worth it.
I agree with the conceive-believe-achieve philosophy. I also know that not every conception is believable.
javelineer - before I respond, I wish to clarify what you said and make absolutely and 100% sure I understood you.And he said:
1. You're claiming I was systematically taught to "scam" men
2. That I led men on sexually
3. I lied for money
"Adrienne, no, no, and no. I just wanted people to read your post before they read mine. Do please respond."Well, all righty then. I will respond.
You claim women are systematically taught to not only scam men, but to lie and consider it ethical. I'm not quite sure how remaining pure before marriage constitutes a "scam." Don't you think having sex with an untold number of men before finally settling down with your soul mate is a much bigger scam and lie?
You continue with this: "With the sexual revolution, men do not need to chase vayjajay. It's abundant, high quality, and free." I would be willing to bet the farm that women who have a reputation for sleeping with any and all comers (no pun intended), are not considered "high quality" by most men. Check out any high school locker room and see which girls are being talked about. I'll guarantee you it's not the girls who refused to put out at the beer bust the night before.
As to "15-30% of children born in marriages are not sired by the husband" - where did you get that figure? It occurs to me that you may have been a victim of a wife who strayed. If so, maybe you should have eaten off a "different smorgasbord" as you refer to women.
Later you responded to Right Guy's comment and said:
The Right Guy wrote, "I also tell them bluntly what the facts of life are, what young men are like, and what the right thing to do is."Since Right Guy hasn't had time to respond to that challenge, allow me to jump in and clarify. Men and women were designed by our Creator to be different. Don't want to drag God into this? Well, fine. We can leave God out of it for now. Following the science of human reproduction will get us to the same place.
Pray tell. What are young men like? what are young women like?
Men are hard-wired to reproduce. It's a dang good thing because otherwise, the human race would have been extinct a long time ago. Women, on the other hand, are hard-wired to care for their offspring, much like a good dog or cat.
When men and women have sex, a hormone called oxytocin is released - more so in women than in men. This is sometimes referred to as the "bonding hormone." It is also released when women are in labor, and when they nurse. It ensures that the woman won't just drop her young in the woods and head off for the next fraternity beer bust, which could also lead to extinction, and it ensures that she also bonds to her partner.
This is why a young lady thinks she's in love, while a young man, eager to live up to his biological imperative, is not only bragging in the locker room the day following all that sex, but also looking around for his next conquest.
Stacy wisely stated in his article, "By repeated thoughts and actions, people's minds become accustomed to one sort of behavior, one sort of sexual ideation. The nature of the human mind is such that our minds can be trained to respond to stimuli in a patterned way, which is true not only in sex, but in eating, writing, talking, etc."
We live in a culture that has repeatedly lied to women and to men. A culture that has told us having sex outside of marriage is not only ok, but healthy. Our movies and TV programs have made a joke out of marriage, demeaned women, insulted the intelligence of men, and created a world where crude behavior is the norm.
Javelineer, since you believe women are liars, scammers, sexual con-girls, prostitutes, guilty of venal incontinence, and marriage is for suckers, your decision to fully support a marriage strike, is probably very wise.
That being said, take the time to read Do Not Blame Barack, by Selwyn Duke. It sheds more light on this "conversation."
"Contrary to what my title indicates, I probably judge Barack Obama more harshly than most reading this page. I don't think he is just a misguided ideologue or merely a creature of expediency. I believe, practically speaking, he is an evil man. That is to say, while he is largely ignorant like so many others, he has developed an affinity for evil. He mistakes it for good."
"Yet, to be blunt, Obama doesn't alarm me as much as the average American. To explain why, I'll present something Roman philosopher and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero said 2000 years ago when lamenting Julius Caesar's rise to dictator:" read the rest
At Adrienne dePitera: Secret Sunday
14 comments:
Adrienne wrote, "Javelineer, since you believe women are liars, scammers, sexual con-girls, prostitutes, guilty of venal incontinence, and marriage is for suckers, your decision to fully support a marriage strike, is probably very wise."
Yeah, and for most other men too.
Adrienne wrote, "We live in a culture that has repeatedly lied to women and to men. A culture that has told us having sex outside of marriage is not only ok, but healthy. Our movies and TV programs have made a joke out of marriage, demeaned women, insulted the intelligence of men, and created a world where crude behavior is the norm."
I couldn't agree more. Since women act crudely as the norm, why should men marry them as the norm? the last fifty years has seen a change in how women behave not men. Men are just now responding to the changes wrought by the feminist revolution in the 1960s. Considering the facts you have written a marriage strike is probably wise for most men.
I think there is a lot more agreement between us than you might think. You just want men to behave like 18th century gentlemen while most women behave like 21st century feminists. That's imprudent and impossible in the long term.
You started this post with your original comment at the indomitable RSM blog.
Adrienne wrote, "My mom was so smart that when I thought I wanted a car, she sat me down and told me to check out who was riding around with the girls who had their own cars. It was other girls. Hot girls without cars had boys to drive them around. And, boy oh boy, was she ever right. I never walked anywhere - ever!"
What does this mean? A "hot girl" like you had guys driving you where you wanted. Why? Was it your intellect and moral virtue? If not, if it was something else, what was it? Why did you use the word 'hot' and what did you mean by that?
I think when we look at what your wrote, we will find that your original comment contradicts the moral evangelizing you've written here. But maybe not. I could be wrong.
Hot simply means a "very attractive young lady" in today's slang. Don't read more into it...
Adrienne wrote, "ot simply means a "very attractive young lady" in today's slang. Don't read more into it..."
That's what I thought it meant. Although, I know very many attractive older ladies, too.
So, you felt the need to mention that a "very attractive young lady" has a boy to drive her around. Interesting.
Now, you've answered one question. What about the others? Here's a recap: A "hot girl" like you had guys driving you where you wanted. Why? Was it your intellect and moral virtue? If not, if it was something else, what was it? Why did you use the word 'hot' and what did you mean by that?
Why did you use the word 'hot'? Why is hotness significant?
I think these questions will take us directly to the locus of dispute between us.
One of the biggest mistakes that came from feminism was the belief that men and women were exactly the same.
This has led women to many mistakes regarding men and hasn't served them well.
It makes it even harder for a father of sons. Even with the best upbringing it is hard to teach a teenage boy restraint, it is even harder when the ladies make it easy for them.
Teaching a boy to act like a gentleman is one of the greatest gifts you can give to the world.
anon - so true!! Women were sold a bill of goods. I used to tell my girls in religious education that equality was a big lie. In order to become equal we (women) actually had to lower themselves...
Anonymous wrote, "Teaching a boy to act like a gentleman is one of the greatest gifts you can give to the world."
That's true, as long as being a gentleman doesn't make you a dupe. It often does, alas, in the modern world.
Adrienne wrote, " In order to become equal we (women) actually had to lower themselves..."
Heh. While you may mean it in jest, everything women teach girls is to insinuate the inferiority of men and the superiority of women. Feminists are left-wing female supremacists. Very many conservative women are right-wing female supremacists.
Female supremacism is bunk.
Javelineer - ok - you got your point across so you can stop now. You're starting to act like a troll. Take a shower, have a glass of wine, and chill out. Mmmmmmmkay?
Adrienne, one of my posts appears to be lost. OpenID is finicky. The gist of it was a request that you answer the questions I posed.
What does this mean? A "hot girl" like you had guys driving you where you wanted. Why? Was it your intellect and moral virtue? If not, if it was something else, what was it? Why did you use the word 'hot' and what did you mean by that?
OK, sorry to be a bother.
Let me get in on this one.
While I unequivocally agree that there are fundamental physical and psychological differences between men and women, I absolutely abhor the practice of using these differences to denote one gender's superiority (in any area) over the other. Even when it comes by first stating an observation, and from that observation implying some time of judgement. Blanket statements have a tendency to stigmatize and mislead. Give me a break! We are all more than just crotch, javelineer.
My husband waited for me (I had been married before) and I wish that my past had enabled the same from me.
66-75% of divorces are now filed by women:
http://aler.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/2/1/126
Divorce doesn't necessarily mean theft, but it is obvious that women are onto a good thing here.
The article by Selwyn Duke is amazing. It makes me laugh, lately, when I hear everyone complaining and protesting about Kevin Jennings being in the Obama administration. Excuse me! The time to complain was nine or ten years ago when the whole GLSEN thing started. If you want to read about a Don Quixote of sorts, read up on Brian Camenker (MassResistance) who is still out there, tilting at windmills. If you want to be horrified, google Fistgate.
Post a Comment