I want to take a short break from my series to talk about a discussion in the comments of Dalrock’s latest post on women delaying marriage. I think he’s right in the aggregate, but there’s also some room to talk about the different ways this is ship is going down within the American Christian community.
When I write this blog, I always do so with my son in mind, but my child who is actually at this phase of life is my eldest daughter, Tina. A few weeks ago we went to breakfast at one of our family’s favorite restaurants. Everyone else was busy, and she’d managed to miss the times we’d went. Our waitress, Kacey, was blonde, petite, and young; no more than 22. After she took our drink order, she walked out of the room. As she did so she turned and locked eyes with me for a full five seconds.
“Tina.”, I said.
“What?”
“Just…watch our waitress.”
“Okaaaaaay…”
“This is how to get a man’s attention.”
“What?” She had no idea what I was talking about.
“You’ll see.”
What ensued, horrified and fascinated Tina. Every time Kacey came to our table–about every three minutes–she lingered. She’d ask for refills, and then stay to chat. Then she’d come to check to make sure we liked our food…and she stayed to chat. After a few times, she started touching my shoulder. Then she just started stopping to chat and touch my arm. On one of these occasions, when the table behind Tina called for our waitress’ attention, Kacey merely leaned towards their table while extending her hand out to me; physically communicating for me to hang onto her. Tina literally used her hands as blinders; alternately laughing and gawping in shocked horror.
On the drive home we talked about it.
“So, what did Kacey do to get my attention?”
“She just… She was touching you–Dad, that is so gross–and she kept coming by every five seconds.”
“How did I know she was going to do that?”
“I have no idea.”
“Because she looked me in the eye for, like, ten seconds. No, more like five. Anyways: Long enough for me to know she was interested. If you want men to know you’re interested, you have to let them know. We are notoriously bad about noticing it until it’s too late.”
“Wow. That could be so awkward. What if he doesn’t respond?”
“Imagine being the man, and having to risk actual rejection when you ask a woman out.”
“Good point. Still…”
“I was clueless that your mother was interested in me. One day, while working in class, she asked me if I ever just wanted to kiss somebody. Totally did not register why she asked me, so I said “Nope.” and went right back to work. I remember thinking she was a strange girl.”
“Dad…seriously? What is wrong with you?”
“She hadn’t made eye contact. She hadn’t touched me. She had a boyfriend. We’re not mind-readers, and I’ve known plenty of girls that wanted to use guys to pass along their interest in another man. I wasn’t interested in that game.”
“I told Missy what you said–“
“About what?”
“–about us being the most attractive now that we’re ever going to be, and to use this time to find a husband.”
“And?”
“We both got depressed.”
I laughed. “That won’t do you any good, and it’s exactly why I told you to watch the waitress. You can’t wait around for a guy to overcome your shyness for you. If he’s a guy worth having, he might be too busy doing something else to see that you are interested. You’ve got to make the first move, and then see if he responds. Men should make the call, but women should give out the number. Make sense?”
“Yeah.”
“Kacey was cute, wasn’t she?”
“Gross, Dad.”
“I’ll let you tell Mom.”
“She’s going to kill her.”
In general, women are the ones delaying marriage, but they’re getting an awful lot of help from their fathers. From the secular view, this primarily takes the form of daddy really pushing college[1] and telling his daughters that you never know if a man is going to stick around or not; they must be able to fend for themselves. Secondly, these days even fathers are telling their daughters to “play the field” before the settle down. “Settle down”…what an ugly way to frame it.
More traditionally-minded Christians practice this same marriage aversion, but add to it the nonsense that their daughters are spiritual princesses. A decade or so ago the keeping-up-with-the-churchy-Jones’ Christian fathers started dating and marrying them. That is…so weird and wrong.
For the moment I’ll ignore the extreme connotations, but, why in the world teach casual, bloodless, dating? That’s crazy, and unfair to both her and her date. They both have sexual energies burning holes in their pockets, and Dad’s modeling for them to bury those talents in the ground when he ought to be encouraging them to invest them. The only explanation is that the sort of Dad who would date his daughter doesn’t actually see sex as the gift and responsibility that it is.
14 For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods. 15 And unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one; to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey. 16 Then he that had received the five talents went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents. 17 And likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two. 18 But he that had received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord’s money. 19 After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth with them. 20 And so he that had received five talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more. 21 His lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. 22 He also that had received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them. 23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. 24 Then he which had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering where thou hast not strawed: 25 and I was afraid, and went and hid thy talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine. 26 His lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed: 27 thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own with usury. 28 Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents. 29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath. 30 And cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
That gift and responsibility was given to the actual owner of the vagina; not Dad. It belongs to her until she marries; at which point she trades it fair-and-square for a dick.[2] What he should be doing is encouraging and directing her to make the trade with someone worthwhile; both physically and spiritually. Extended, platonic dating during her prime years is not the way to do that.
At the same time these fathers are acting out strange perversions of the modern courtship model, they are disparaging all the young men in their churches. They don’t have a degree. They don’t have a good enough job. They don’t have “godly enough” parents. They don’t have “a heart for Jesus”. It’s all bullshit. While Christian women are taught that Jesus is their personal boyfriend, Christian men are taught that they are the guardians of Jesus’ personal girlfriends; to let one of them be touched by a mortal is anathema. I was a 6’4″ 225lbs two-sport athlete; at church every day but Friday and Saturday; president of the youth council and the youth choir; son of a minister; personally led people to the Lord; had preached a sermon…and I still wasn’t good enough.
The situation is this: We’ve got women who are allowed to walk around in disrobed states, but discouraged from showing specific interest. Men who aren’t allowed to look (because women are half-naked), but are somehow supposed to differentiate and pursue their One True Love who ignores them. The fathers won’t allow their daughters to engage anyone who isn’t the equivalent of an established 35-year old, but in an age-appropriate body. And everybody is convinced that sex is the greatest thing ever and also a naughty thing–all at the same time. These things (among others) exacerbate, and even encourage, the problem of women delaying marriage.
[1] Especially the full away-from-home college experience: “Will this be the night I decide to be a bad girl! I totally could, you know. I wouldn’t, but it’s just so exciting to think about. I mean, I won’t be a real bad girl like Suzy Skankerini. After all, I can control myself if I want to, and I’m pretty sure I want to. Do I want to? Yes, I do…O.M.G, Billy looks so hawt!“
[2] This, by the way, would be a good time to cuss to yourself if you’re a father of a daughter. It doesn’t have the same punch to your gut to say, “She wants a husband.”; “She wants a mate.”; “She anticipates marital union.” I really don’t believe you’re telling yourself the truth with those talk-around phrases. What she wants is dick. Marriage is how Christian women go about getting it, and it is good.
Things that We have Heard and Known 
@CC
A couple of thoughts:
a. I thought girls (and females) have this innate ability to show interest (or flirt?). This ability would have been honed through the times they spent in school and social spaces.
b. While you have put the responsibility on dad to mete out proper “investment” advice, what then is the role of mom? How should mom advise and prepare her daughter?
Having 3 daughters in roughly the same age range as your eldest, this subject interests us. Truthfully, we do believe that 20 or 21 is a better age for marriage than 18. It’s a minor quibble however when you consider that most parents would have their daughters hold the thing off until at least their mid to late 20’s.
All that said, I still believe the ease with which a young woman can secure a husband is over stated, and the difficulty we have found is magnified when she is 1) committed to her faith and the chastity and 2) has an engaged and involved father.
I have often wondered if we have made a tactictal error in our choice of churches (ethinclaly homologous) as it will only make it more difficult for our girls to find suitable husbands in a culture and church which has abandoned real community.
Of our three oldest, only one has expressed any real desire to marry sooner rather than later. Given that she will be 20 holding a bachelor’s degree next year, she feels the pressure more not less. She isn’t interested in corporate life, but in entrepeneurship being fully aware that economic times have changed considerably since her parents married and she may have to bring home some bacon (or at least produce some from home).
This was rambly I know, but this whole thing is far more complicated in reality than it is in theory.
I think this is your all time best, yo.
Agree with, V.
Yes, it is very good. I agree with Jo and Velvet.
Feel free to ignore my quibbles. This is just something I think about (and have prayed about) a great deal.
Husband says I’m worrying not “thinking”, which is very bad.
Pingback: Cane drives it home. | Dalrock
@CoRP
It’s a skill like any other. Some people have talent, and that makes it easier for them (this is most women), but they still have to practice. Until black dudes started playing basketball, the best b-ball players were white.
You’re dividing the concept too fine, here. First of all: Dad and Mom are supposed to be one; same flesh, same goals, etc. They both ought to be pushing this message. Often it is the case that Mom is in fact the one giving advice, and it’s very natural and good.
Sometimes mothers give bad advice on purpose because they want to use their daughters vicariously. Other times (because Mom knows she did it wrong) she is hesitant to give advice because she either doesn’t know exactly where she went wrong, or she knows exactly where, and she doesn’t want to deal with it.
From the FotF article you linked to:
Thank you, Jesus, for giving me a husband who would never say something so incredibly stupid as this. Way to throw your son-in-law under the bus, Dad! That’ll teach your daughter how to ignore Ephesians 5:33. No need to respect her husband since he’s not good enough for her.
@Elspeth
You may wish to find a church that will facilitate courtship for marriage for its young adults. At the very least I would encourage your daughter to seek out Christian organizations that offer singles groups if there is (as it sounds) a lack of compatible men in her immediate social circle. My own denomination tends to have quite small congregations, so they organize annual singles retreats in our region to help the single adults find suitable marriage partners. That was how I found my own husband despite the Christian chastity and the involved father. 😉 She should begin a serious search very soon since it may take a while to find the right match even when one is looking in the right kinds of places!
We also have to get the men ready.
All us males know that we go through a level of buyer’s remorse, no matter how wonderful the woman.
We know that we soon discover that we must be consistent, regardless of if she is, or not. (Count on not.)
We know that legally, financially, and in terms of rights to the children, marriage puts us in a mighty foolish position. A position we would never accept in any other business deal.
We know that the main ingredient required to lead a woman along with dominance? …..Vigilance. You can’t let up.
We know that you have to keep working for her, whether she is putting out for you or not.
We have to get the men ready for the realities of what marriage is.
Waitresses can be surprisingly overt. I’m sure much (most?) of this is at least partially tip motivated. But at least part of this is a desire for male attention, because it isn’t just waitresses who do this. The other day we stopped through the pharmacy drivethrough to pick up a prescription for my wife. The woman behind the window surprised me with an especially calculated cleavage shot (leaning all the way forward with an arm under her breasts) when she sent the prescription through the drawer. I thought my wife hadn’t seen it, but before I could get the window rolled up she was telling the woman what she thought. I don’t think the intercom was still on so I doubt the woman could hear it, but from my perspective it was both amusing and endearing.
“In general, women are the ones delaying marriage, but they’re getting an awful lot of help from their fathers. From the secular view, this primarily takes the form of daddy really pushing college[1] and telling his daughters that you never know if a man is going to stick around or not; they must be able to fend for themselves. Secondly, these days even fathers are telling their daughters to “play the field” before the settle down.”
*This*
@pancakeloach:
Moving churches isn’t really the kind of thing we’d do without serious grounds, so this church is it. For now.
That said, I have discussed with my girl the need to position herself in situations where more young Christian men are. She is shy struck as Cane describes but is working on it. Finding “the right kinds of places” seems more of a challenge.There is a single’s ministry in our church, but most of its participants are older. By older I mean much older than 19.
I am trying to commit the matter to prayer and cease worrying. However, it is not my imagination that there is a dearth of eligible young men at our particular church. Alarm was even expressed from the pulpit recently, based on the numbers of young people who are a part of the blessing given to high school graduates every year in June who are never heard from again except in passing. Even during the holiday seasons when those who went off to college would be at home and ostensibly back in services with their families. Our girls are there because they attend college while living at home.
We know the landscape. It’s bleak.
Awesome article. So true.
I agree with your critique of the courtship movement. It seems they’ve hamstrung young men and women so much with all the rules that the young people can’t even act natural around each other. And then nobody gets married. I’ve been seeing discussion on many blogs on reevaluating the approach.
I think parents should ease up on opposing their 19 year old daughters marrying a mature, established 35 year old. At least if that was allowed, a young man can know there is HOPE if he works on himself, and then when he is 35 and established, he will have HAND in the relationship. But this BS about “noone is good enough for my daughter” sucks. Christians are irrelevant (to me) anway; they reject the Bible.
I really appreciate this post. I wish that I was as astute an observer of women as CC. Usually I’m totally oblivious to attempts at eye contact because I simply avoid it. On those few occasions where I don’t avoid eye contact, I’m usually very confused about what is going on. This post helps me figure these things out. Thanks, CC.
Pingback: Limited Liability | Do What's Right
I liken the one who hid the gold to the Christian girl who stays off the carousel, but thinks no one is good enough, missing from the parable is the servant who shaved off so,e of the gold and spent it partying, who hollowed it out, so as to gain the value, while attempting to preserve the outward appearance of full value.
In other words, treating that thing that her lord gave her as her own personal plaything or resource.
I sort of agree with this in principle. I have 6 daughters 22, 21, 19, 13, 7, 4. The 21 year old got married first at 18 to a young man that wouldn’t have qualified for many people(didn’t know his father, government schooled, new Christian). But I took the time to get to know his heart and character and he is a good man to be. 22 year old got married at 20 to a man who on paper looked only slightly better than 21s husband, but he too is a good potential man.
There were the only men either of these girls dated, my take on courtship is that it should involve more than just two hormonal teenagers. I taught my daughters to involve all their friends and family in the potential suitor early so people could warn them if there were character issues.
@Elspeth
That’s a good attitude towards not moving churches! If there aren’t a lot of local opportunities, perhaps there are some online resources like forums or “Christian dating sites” she could explore? My widowed father successfully used one such site about fifteen years ago to find a wife – she was living all the way across the country from us so there was no way they ever would have stumbled across each other in person. I don’t think that particular one still exists, but I’d imagine there are others by now.
Pingback: Too Hot to Touch | Cail Corishev
-CC
No, you were fooled; Kacey was not interested. It was all a show. She simply played up to you hoping to get a big tip. In fact, her behavior by touching you was inappropriate. Your daughter was correct; it was gross. I’m very familiar with the hospitality business and a reputable business prohibits any physical contact (of the type you described) between employees and customers. A reputable business would subject Kasey to disciplinary action or may even terminate her employment. Kacey’s behavior is more appropriate for a “gentleman’s club” where some poor soul believes a blonde, petite and young dancer “likes him” because she makes eye contact and smiles. It’s all about money, nothing more.
@Joe
1. You’re missing the point. If a woman wants something from a man, she has to let him know; she has to display interest.
2. This is Texas, Joe. We touch here. Now if she had tried to give me a back massage…well, I don’t think I brought that much cash to breakfast.
3. This ain’t my first rodeo with women or waitresses.
So a women is your waitress and she must be constantly sure to attend to your needs and come by fill your drinks and “know” from eye contact what YOU always want etc?
Yet another reason why you are single and why equal rights for women is a GOOD thing. You are all just sad relics of a time best forgotten when men ruled by force and expected, no demanded “service” (all kinds) from women because that was all they were good for, constant service and sex. And that is what you, you burned out shells of pathetic men grasping for a time long gone.
By the way “Kacey” is just a waitress. She serves food and drinks all week to thousands of different people. And even annoying men like YOU who make it a point to talk about her in your pathetic lives. Well guess what? It’s her JOB. Her hearts not into it but you demand it is. Smile or your fired. Get it? I should know because I was a waitress in college. People like you constantly JUDGING taking everything personally then going on Yelp etc. “I didn’t like her attitude etc” “she was rude” putting our jobs at stake. Never mind the fact we have personal lives and need to PAY THE BILLS. Once again men waitresses are at a JOB and you want to think our lives revolve around YOU as though you are someone special. Your just another customer at a table.
And by the way. For all you OLD MEN who think the cute waitress might be interested in your old has been and hit on us EVERY SINGLE DAY and we are forced to pretend to be interested when we are just trying to to our JOB and get through the day and PAY THE BILLS. You men are all wasting your time and DELUDED.
Just like us women you are NOT has hot has you were back in your glory days. I read this all the time on these so called Christian blogs like Darack and the rest. I’m SO TIRED of these kinds of posts like this on so called Christian blogs. STOP looking at women as your servants or “helpers” as you so put it. These posts are NOT Christian. Your wife is NOT your waitress she is your EQUAL and if you have a problem with that DON’T GET MARRIED. it’s no wonder you’re on here.
I would say see you in Church but none of you would have the courage to reveal who you really are.
@Elizabeth
Hey there. Listen: Have you met Joe?
@Cane
Sometimes mothers give bad advice on purpose because they want to use their daughters vicariously. Other times (because Mom knows she did it wrong) she is hesitant to give advice because she either doesn’t know exactly where she went wrong, or she knows exactly where, and she doesn’t want to deal with it.
^ This!
@ whatever your name is
there is a different “joe” everyday stupid that was part of my reply there are THOUSANDS of tables we have to serve at a busy place there is a new joe or dave or frank or mary every day. It’s just a job and we have bills to pay and are tired of getting hit on every day by old has beens so get over yourself.
it works both ways men get just as unhot has women when the age it works both ways.
You know, it seems that most waitresses get more tips when they serve all their customers rather than hanging on just one and ignoring the rest. I vote that Kacey was looking for more than a tip.
“,,,from women because that was all they were good for, constant service and sex…”
Do enlighten us with what it is that YOU are good for now with your equal rights?
In honor of Elizabeth, I will not be tipping next time, its just a job, ya know.
And by the way. For all you OLD MEN who think the cute waitress might be interested in your old has been and hit on us EVERY SINGLE DAY and we are forced to pretend to be interested when we are just trying to to our JOB and get through the day and PAY THE BILLS. You men are all wasting your time and DELUDED.
Just like us women you are NOT has hot has you were back in your glory days. I read this all the time on these so called Christian blogs like Darack and the rest. I’m SO TIRED of these kinds of posts like this on so called Christian blogs. STOP looking at women as your servants or “helpers” as you so put it. These posts are NOT Christian. Your wife is NOT your waitress she is your EQUAL and if you have a problem with that DON’T GET MARRIED. it’s no wonder you’re on here.
Bitter, bitter, piss and spitter. With this level of sh*t testing, you know you’ll only ever get a little broken down man, right?
All you do for money is get in the kitchen and fix men sandwiches. Good thing you’re our equal.
It’s too bad all of your moral outrage couldn’t get you a better job, huh? How about your cuteness? Have you been able to parlay that into more than a waitress’ wages?
Oh well. Join the ranks of Lindy West and Amanda Marcotte. They’re not happy either, but like you, they’re entertaining as they pine for the very same male attention they claim to eschew.
Have. a. good. day.
@Elizabeth: I’m not even from this blog (bounced off a couple of links to end up here), but I feel compelled to reply.
There’s really no point addressing the nonsensical emotional outburst of your post – as you seem to have missed the larger point completely – but I’ve gotta say, I really enjoy seeing a miserable harlot like you trapped in a mental hell of their own making. Thanks!
@ red pills
well your just bitter that girls dotn wanna take off there clothes for you because OMG get this…women are attracted to…. HOT GUYS! Oh the unfairness!.. so unfair! I know right? I mean can you believe that women want to spend our times with someone attractive and interesting? In other words not you Haha.
Elizabeth:
When a waitress flirts with me, I leave 10-12 percent.
If she acts like an adult, I leave 15%-20%.
I tip men 20% percent all the time unless they give crap service, because they are my brothers. And they never use cheap feminine wiles to try and manipulate me for money. They should just go be strippers if that is how they want to be.
So the next time some guy gives you 12% along with a smirk, just know that he is a man with principles. Just like me.
🙂
@ RMMM
Oh no far from it. I’m here reading for giggles didn’t mean to go off but had to call out this article. What point did I miss? None. I used to be a waitress. Maybe i should have kept quiet like a good little girl right? Right,. No. Im speak up. And i have many guys that want to date me and friends who appreciate knowing me.. I dont need YOUR approval.
Another fun trick. When the waitress tries the flirty bit with me, I’ll usually run her for an extra ramekin of dressing, or maybe extra napkins, or something, which I then leave on the table untouched. Hehe.
Of course, I then bump up the top to 12.5%.
And before you get on your high horse, I was a server for a long time, so I know the game, I know the lingo, and I know the drill. And if some men are willing to hand over a 25% tip just because you smiled at them or flirted, then good on you, and they’re idiots.
You’d be crazy not to take the money. Personally, I love gaming waitresses.
If they’re very cool, and act like an adult, once in a while they’ll get 30%. But no faux flirting or it’s all over. Try to play me, and I’ll play you.
@ Jack
Um ya okay. Actually not really.
I’ll take it from your muted response that you got nothin’
I accept your surrender. The discussion is over, and I won.
“And i have many guys that want to date me and friends who appreciate knowing me.. I dont need YOUR approval.”
Yet here you still are, needing sooo much approval its reeking. They will date you (iow “fuck you”, but not commit to you.
@Elizabeth
Dalrock and I are very similar in general outlook, but very different in personal approach.
I do not believe you read my post. My suspicion is that you only here to cause trouble. Either disabuse me of my suspicion, or I will create an unfair situation where you can still be ridiculed here, but you will not be able to respond.
So, tell me now what I wrote of which you have a specific problem, or get banned.
@ Jack
Actually your response is doesn’t deserve a reply because flirting with guy customers is a way to get bigger tips. If you want to leave a bigger tip go ahead but flirting guy customers = bigger tip (most of the time).
@ Igorrrobin
Dont need approvel just common sense after calling yall out yet I see no response to what I said go figure. Right I can’t get a guy to commit yet so many have tried lol
@Elizabeth
You may have noticed that your comments aren’t coming through. If you want this to change you will have to tell me specifically what part of my post you are attempting to address, what you think I got wrong, etc.
@ whatever your name is
I did read your post and I responded to it please go back and read it if your confused I told you I was a waitress. I’m looking to start stuff cause I’m a girl and and any girl who voices an opinion is looking to start trouble with you right? Read my post if ur so stupid. My problem is with you thinking this waitress was interested in you when she was not and probably needs MONEY to pay her bills and you take that for real?? Lol but then in the big picture allot of male customers like you come to expect it dont get me wrong I was a professional and very nice but the managers forced us put on more of a show which is why I don’t work there anymore. So then you JUDGE this girl in all the wrong ways and make it an article on a so called Christian website. She doesn’t want your article she is just trying to pay her bills. Your site and the other one is sexist and outdated not that is not Christan. That’s my opinion and problem so go ahead and ban me just means I’m right.
I guess they made you wear flair and you made an expressive exit.
IdidreadyourpostandIrespondedtoitpleasegobackandreaditifyourconfusedItoldyouIwasawaitress.I’mlookingtostartstuffcauseI’magirlandandanygirlwhovoicesanopinionislookingtostarttroublewithyouright?Readmypostifursostupid.MyproblemiswithyouthinkingthiswaitresswasinterestedinyouwhenshewasnotandprobablyneedsMONEYtopayherbillsandyoutakethatforreal??LolbuttheninthebigpictureallotofmalecustomerslikeyoucometoexpectitdontgetmewrongIwasaprofessionalandverynicebutthemanagersforcedusputonmoreofashowwhichiswhyIdon’tworkthereanymore.SothenyouJUDGEthisgirlinallthewrongwaysandmakeitanarticleonasocalledChristianwebsite.Shedoesn’twantyourarticlesheisjusttryingtopayherbills.YoursiteandtheotheroneissexistandoutdatednotthatisnotChristan.That’smyopinionandproblemsogoaheadandbanmejustmeansI’mright.
Fixed it for ya, Liz. Or should I call you Katherina?
I’m sure you don’t stop to take a breathe when you spurt this stuff out in real life, so why use spaces when you type? Waste not.
I think the above more correctly represents the experience of “conversing” (lol) with you.
BUT, I find myself oddly attracted to your perfect blend of spice and submission. Oh, hell—
MARRY ME!!, my darling little sorex araneus.
@Elizabeth
Ah. So you think this post is about you. It’s not.
Generally, I assume any girl who starts trouble with me wants to know if I’ve got it where it counts. This, coincidentally, is another tactic for a woman to let a man know she’s interested. I don’t recommend it, though because being passive-aggressive is not something women need help figuring out, or should be encouraged to do.
She was. You’re just going to have to accept that some chicks dig me. But even if you can’t, then you can still get the point that a woman who wants something–a date, a bigger tip, whatever–has to let the guy know. She didn’t cross any serious lines. For all I know: Maybe she mistook my daughter for my date and thought I was into young girls.
I think if you’ll go back and read the post, I made three judgments about the waitress. 1) She was cute. 2) She had pretty good tactics for getting what she wanted; yet did not cross any lines. 3) For a gal working in a diner, she has a refined and exquisite taste in men.
“Outdated” is one way to put it, but I think timeless is the word you’re looking for; perhaps transcendent. Definitely sexist. There are, after all, two sexes.
Elizabeth wants more than “just the tip.”
Don’t believe her pretend anger – the attention she is getting here now is giving the tizzle to the vajizzle.
Glad to help, sweetie. No extra charge for the tingles.
😉
she has a refined and exquisite taste in men
Oh lurd there he go.
Nice going Elizabeth. Bad waitress, no tip for you.
“In general, women are the ones delaying marriage, but they’re getting an awful lot of help from their fathers. From the secular view, this primarily takes the form of daddy really pushing college[1] and telling his daughters that you never know if a man is going to stick around or not; they must be able to fend for themselves. Secondly, these days even fathers are telling their daughters to “play the field” before the settle down.”
Yup.
Sadly, I’ve seen the home school group fall into this. After they’re done home schooling, they push their daughters to go out and to ‘experience the world.’ What this tells me is that, if not in words, in deeds, that they buy into the secular notion that home schooling deprives their children of experiences they should go have, and that they should have such experiences at the expense of putting themselves through several years of not searching for a husband. With this, of course, comes great temptation as a girl who was sheltered from the whims and evils of the world for a solid foundation to be set in her life by her parents, is exposed to the elements before a man can build a house around her.
Every home schooled girl I’ve seen do this is the worse off. Most become narcissists who are too busy being productive and having experiences to see the men around them. Their part time jobs and hobbies don’t meld with a man’s full time job, and thus they can’t ever find the time to turn one or two dates into a full courtship, because they refuse to give enough time to let each other draw close, and it ‘just never works out’ with the men she’s attracted too before they land in the friendzone.
All because dad encourages her to do so, and generally enables it with his wallet as well.
The few here that have married off their young girls surprise me with how exceptional you are. As a young man, converted, and more aware of how hard the call to marriage is to fulfill without all the additional obstacles I have as a convert… Well, I see few other men pursue marriage religiously, and few women open to such pursuits when I meet them.
As examples of such home school girls – in my parish of 210 people I know one that became a model while going to college, one that can’t find time for a man for love of her horses, one that works three jobs because she wants to go to Rome, and one that can’t find time due to college and church choir.
And any time I talk to their parents they’re encouraging their daughters to be more busy, less available, and with higher standards.
The whole thing is a mess.
@Leap
You’re getting ahead of me.
@ Cane
Then stop writing a story I know the next chapter of from being stuck in it, hah!
@ Betty.
1. We do not tip in NZ. Instead we pay decent wages, and leave spare change on the table. I have to ask people what to tip when in NorthAmerica.
2. Which is why you think Kiwis and Aussies are cheap: we assume waiters are paid, for they are where we live, and most of us have done that job when we were students.
3. You miss the point. Cane was using the Waitress to show his daughter how a girl plays game. I’ve sat next to my daughter (married, but I may have to do it with grand daughter) and said exactly what the response to that dress is, or that behaviour… learn from the skilled, and learn basic girl game. You may need it.
@ Cane & Elspeth.
When a good man comes along, and he checks out, and repects her but wants “to trade” then agree and keep the engagement short. They are young with hormones, after all, and you want the first time to be with rings on their fingers.
[Complete aside. I still do not understand why the Black and White congregations continue to exist outside of the deep South. Must be the fact I am not American. the ethnic congregations in NZ are dying as the children assimilate and tend to worship together]/
Pingback: Dark Brightness | Game for nerd (girls).
I’ve been travelling quite a bit for the past few weeks in the Midwest, so I conducted some experiments taking measures to meet eligible Christian women (presumably interested in marriage and family), but made sure I gave no signs I am a remotely Christian or moral person.
I got a lot of dates, and a lot of opportunities for second dates… and a lot of opportunities for worse.
I repeated the experiment, but this time was forthcoming about my faith. Number of dates is zip. Zilch. Nada.
The only positive outcome of this was that I misread one of the girls, who wasn’t a Christian, and I led her to the Lord.
It seems Christian women want nothing to do with Christian guys, at least for dating/romance/sex. Christian men would be wise to disguise themselves as heathens.
@Aaron the Just
I can think of two possible explanations for your experience.
1) Christian girls know that Christian men are weak, worthless, no good cowards who jerk off to porn all day and would cruelly dominate a wife if not kept in check by threats of withheld sex and divorce. They have been taught this from a young age by their pastors, their father, Christian movies, etc. so it has to be true.
2) Christian men are for courtship, and non Christian men are for carousel riding. Either the women weren’t ready for courtship (very likely), or they didn’t know what to make of your Christian pickup artist routine (equally likely). I wouldn’t blame them for the latter; it makes no sense to me either.
[Complete aside. I still do not understand why the Black and White congregations continue to exist outside of the deep South. Must be the fact I am not American. the ethnic congregations in NZ are dying as the children assimilate and tend to worship together]
I don’t know why either, really. I only know how we ended up where we are and I don’t wish to derail Cane’s blog with it. Perhaps I’ll explore that at a later date on my own blog.
Thank you. What a great foil to the crap that Doug Giles is pushing on his Clash Daily web site.
@Aaron the Just
It seems Christian women want nothing to do with Christian guys, at least for dating/romance/sex. Christian men would be wise to disguise themselves as heathens.
I’ve found that in church, I get far more IOI’s from married women than from single women. For the single women I have to approach and initiate contact. Just the opposite with the married women, many of whom are obviously unhappy with and not attracted to their husbands (and in all fairness, in looking at their husbands, I can see why).
There’s also the aspect of Christian cultural schizophrenia: people in the US tend to have three “circles” of people- their neighborhood, their work and their church. For the most part they live in one social circle (this includes family and old friends), they work in another circle and they worship in another circle. For the most part these circles don’t overlap, so individuals tend to have three different personalities and even vocabularies for different groups.
This hit me hard in college, when I met a young woman for whom there was a very strong mutual attraction. Not love at first sight, more like lust on contact. We walked out after class and slowly made our way to the parking lot. I think it took us an hour to make it 200 yards, and neither of us wanted to get in the car and leave. At one point I said something along the lines of “what’s going on between us?” She responded (with a very flirty smile) “It’s like that Chinese proverb: tigers only mate with tigers.” I responded by saying “Well, I want you to know that I’m a Christian and I have a different view of dating than you might be used to.”
Her persona changed in an instant. Her vocabulary changed and she started speaking Christianese, her body language changed to frigid and her attraction for me died a sudden death. I was clueless at the time, but I understand completely now.
Pingback: The Last Couple Weeks in Reaction | The Reactivity Place
Great discussion here.
I’m seeing a lot of others observing the same thing I am. Regardless of anything else about any particular man, the moment that man publicly and overtly identifies as Christian, he is IMMEDIATELY written off, NEXTed, and friendzoned. Dalrock expertly explains it: for most women, even Christian women, Christian men are unattractive; and Christian men are to be considered for dating only when she’s ready for marriage.
If that’s not “changing lanes”, I don’t know what is.
one that can’t find time for a man for love of her horses,
I find some comments to be pedestrian, I find this one quite equestrian.
I mentioned this in a Daltock thread, but I’d like to add something.
ChristianMingle is fast becoming indistinguishable (in terms of clientele) from POF, OKCupid, and Match. I dated off the secular sites up until about 9 months ago. You see the same profiles and pictures. Over the last three months, I’ve seen the same women appear on CM.
It’s not difficult to compare/contrast the profiles. When they are tired of the carousel, they look for a “safe harbor” so they can scrape off the barnacles, patch the sails, and get a new crew for the near future.
I really get the impression that “Christian” means, “Nice, controllable guy as back-up plan.” On the secular sites, it was it and miss. Looking back, I should’ve tracked the emails and responses based on how “Christian” my profile was. Maybe I’ll run the profiles again just to see.
I see an interesting parallel between the 20 something woman and men like me (older, established, already have sons). I see abundance in my dating pool. And I’ve become picky. I was frivorced. So, I’m looking for a godly woman, regular attendance at a conservative church, pleasant, not flabby, and preferably no kids. In a way, I “get” why they are so picky.
However, I already have my sons. My career is only getting more engaging. I already have a lifetime of memories. So, there’s no pressure to find a mate for the rest of my life. I have MacArthur’s Bible study started and unfinished, taking dance lessons, teaching myself different instruments, and learning about Scotch.
When my “abundance” runs low/out, it’s not like the 20s woman who lost her chair in musical chairs. It’s more like a cruise ship (self contained feeding, entertainment) leaving a port of call for another location.
These conversations are always fascinating.
And yeah, women have it rough too in dating. Christian women need to marry younger, if they want to have a good marriage and still follow morality. But, what guy wants to marry young?
I think even at most churches, unless it’s like “little house on the prairie” type of place, the percent of college age men (18-22) looking to marry anytime soon is probably a tiny percent at best. I mean, think about it. Dating itself is hard. Now, take away the “if you have game, you get to have fun and have sex” part. Replace it with “no sex, and the whole point is to give you the incredibly huge responsibility of getting married and being like all the older, stressed out, fighting couples in church, and instead of getting your own apartment and having fun after you graduate, it’s stress and responsibility.”
Really, what sane college age guy is going to marry so quickly?
Part of why those older men are stressed out is that they have been reacting to the same paradigm you describe
Great article! I’ve noticed the anti-marriage in American churches for a while. It’s the prime reason I will never be a church member again. American churches have a form of Godliness but they deny the power of God.
Oh, and random comment linking to what Leap of a Beta says, I was raised by very conservative parents. Homeschooled k-12, and my parents put us on A Beka Video Academy.
They also strongly told me and my siblings how you don’t get married until after college, and discouraged us from dating. Only when my younger sister started going psycho and boy crazy (in this case, not the same thing) did they concede “well, she would be better off marrying a college guy as soon as she’s done with high school, as long as he has job prospects.”
And, with today’s laws, isn’t it actually pretty cruel to try to get guys to marry young? Unless you’re a genius and you hid most of your assets offshore just as safety… I think we’ve all seen far too often, how couples at church are miserable, the church bashes men, and downtrods them. It’s like a bad cliche. I’ve seen it over and over and over.
Not only that, but why should guys marry young? It’s a raw deal for them, even if they’re attractive. Seriously–best case scenario. You’ve got a guy who’s an 8, in college, age 21. He’s good looking. Let’s say he actually manages to date and get engaged to a girl who’s an 8, age 21. (I’ve had about zero luck unless I was date less attractive girls, but let’s say he has game and can seriously date a fellow 8.) Now, in eight years, he’s going to be rocking as far as dating goes. That 29 year old, who now has a 29 year old wife, could be dating 22 year old women who are still hot, and who would look up to him and respect him because he’s made it a little, and they’re poor girls who just got out of college. Instead, he’s with a 29 year old who doesn’t look up to him, and he’s that miserable couple at church, they’re both 30 pounds overweight, one or two kids, and he’s a whipped dog.
Instead, he could have had so much better. I’m serious–you all know how things go in college. Unless you learned game, girls want to date up. So guys date down. But if a guy waits a bit, earns money, works out, when he’s 27, 29, he could realistically get the next edition of that hot 22 year old girl that snubbed him in college. And this one will look up and adore him, because he’s learned, and is set. So why should he marry young and be cheated of what he could have got later?
@AWF
First of all, you have tried to establish a false dichotomy. There’s no rule that our choices are 21yo man marries 21yo woman, or 29yo man marries 22yo woman.
This is the more pressing issue: A so much better what? We can talk about marriage abstractly, but I assure you each marriage is concrete–you must pick one.
Know a lot of 22yo college virgin “8” females, do you?
Choosing a 5 (not a bad idea to go some years younger, as well) who is enthusiastic for you; yet has never handled another man’s dick is a MUCH better choice than an 8 with an “it’s complicated” past. That’s not settling.
Roissy’s advice to never marry is better than what you’re advocating here. This is a pro-marriage–pro-sex blog–for men who have (or want to have) made the beyond-rational decision to be united with a particular woman. I do not recognize the false choice of “Should men settle down early, or should men settle down late?”. If we’re settling, we’re doing it wrong.
It’s a mistake to form opinions about what should be done based on the stories and experiences of most of the Man’s Sphere. People find their way here (mostly) because they got burned, and a lot of them are angry and confused, and confused about why they are angry, and who they are angry at.
Said another way: Shearing another man’s sheep is no way to solve the problem of illicit shearing. Neither men nor women nor marriage are new; nor are the problems new. Working societies arrive at the conclusion of sex inside of marriage because it works. It always has worked, and it always will. Those who don’t work, eventually won’t eat.
This post is for Elizabeth and all who speak as she does. I’m not Elizabeth-bashing here. This is a bit off-topic, but hopefully some will find this useful for defusing conversations with people who speak as Elizabeth does.
In “Through the Looking Glass”, Humpty Dumpty says to Alice: ‘When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less’.
‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.’
‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master — that’s all.’
Communication is impossible unless words have a commonly-accepted meaning. We cannot communicate anything dependable with each other if we are all allowed to make up the meaning of our words. Bottom line: words matter.
—————-
Upthread, Elizabeth states that “… she is your EQUAL”
With regard to the phrases “a woman is equal to a man” or “a woman is a man’s equal”, please consider the following exercise in logic. This is a neutral discussion, focusing only on the correct usage of words.
In algebra, there are a couple of statements that are used frequently:
1. Let A = B
then
2. If A = B, then B = A
In algebra, A = B completely. A never partially equals B. And B never partially equals A.
In algebra, if there is even one instance where A does not equal B, we cannot say that A = B. Neither, then, can we say that B = A.
—————-
Let’s use the term “woman” for “A”, and “man” for “B”, and rewrite those algebraic statements.
3. Let “woman” = “man”
then
4. If “woman” = “man”, then “man” = “woman”.
In Point #4, does woman = man completely? If yes, then it must be true that man = woman completely. But is this true? Does man equal woman?
Who would ever admit that man = woman?? If that logic statement is not true, then we cannot use the reverse logic statement “woman = man”. According to algebraic logic, if man does not equal woman, then woman cannot equal man.
Can men give birth to children? The answer, obvious to all, is “no”. Therefore it is not true that “man = woman”. If that is not true, then the reverse is not true either: woman does not equal man, completely.
—————-
Those who know the Bible will understand the following terms:
Does child-bearer = not child-bearer? – from nature
Does helper = the helped? – from Genesis
Does head = not head? – from New Testament
It is clear that the answer is “no” in all three cases. Since A does not equal B completely, the term “equal” cannot ever be used alone in any discussion about men and women. For us to ever understand what is being said, the term “equal” must be followed by a prepositional phrase. In. All. Instances.
Equal, in terms of … (both need to eat; both need to sleep; both were made by God; etc.)
or, a similar phrase:
Equally deserving of … (love, kindness, mercy, discipline, etc.)
This is the only way that we can compare and contrast men and women in a way that makes sense, both from the standpoint of nature, and from the standpoint of the Bible.
To say that men = women, or women = men says nothing useful or understandable, in terms of what the speaker is trying to communicate. Because nature itself demonstrates that those two statements are false. But the statement “women = men, in terms of …” need not be false, if properly constructed.
@Cane Caldo
Without a doubt. However, I’m not convinced this is the standard tradeoff. Obviously chastity should fetch a premium when looking to marry, and a man should never marry a woman who isn’t clearly head over heels in love with him. So this rules out the ex carousellers of any SMV rank.
I left some comments on the basic topic on Vox’s bang vs bride (1) post. The average man’s MMV is going to be higher than his SMV, assuming SMV is measured by the kind of woman he could expect to pull with some regularity for a one night hookup. The MMV adds in his beta traits, and the status this confers on his woman, whereas for a one night hookup his beta traits are at best neutral and quite often a negative. What I’m getting at is a man who could only pull a 5 as a hookup but who has relatively good beta traits, can probably marry a 6, even a young virginal 6.
One way to consider SMV vs MMV is to consider what kind of man can compete as a cross country skier vs a biathlon. If you are a good shot, you are going to do better in the biathlon than you would in just cross country skiing.
I’m still kicking this over, but I think the takeaway from your comment is don’t marry a woman looking to exit the carousel and “settle” for a beta provider, no matter how much hotter she is than the other women expressing interest. This is certainly wise advice.
“However, I’m not convinced this is the standard tradeoff. Obviously chastity should fetch a premium when looking to marry, and a man should never marry a woman who isn’t clearly head over heels in love with him”
I would say that a man shouldn’t even court a woman that isn’t going out of her way to display her desire to please him. I’m a big proponent of giving women little missions, duties, or dropping hints of what you enjoy in various aspects of life. If they show no response to those, no desire to know those things, and no remorse in forgetting them, I’d advocate men to NEXT them.
I just NEXT’d a woman that had a great marriage potential value; the problem being that she dropped several balls in succession, with no hint of remorse or desire to make it up yet still responding when I gave her attention and still responding to date invitations
I figure she was more attracted to the attention of a man than she was to me. It took two dates to figure that out, but it’s harder to tell with traditionally raised catholics. They get tempted by a chance for excitement, and then when you show them the excitement comes at a price they’re…. less enthusiastic. They’ll pay the prices they don’t see for sin and temptation, but you the impression they’ll have to pay a lesser but visible price for family and God and they’ll ghost on you.
@ Dalrock
Interesting take on SMV and MMV. I was going to write a response disagreeing, but the more I thought about it the more accurate your assessment was. The big thing to keep in mind for men and SMV/MMV is that the two are usually very close. Most of what makes a man attractive vis-a-vis SMV does the same thing for MMV. So a man’s MMV should be only a point or so away from his SMV. The only exception would be a man who is highly unstable or dangerous.
As for Cane’s comment, when he uses 5 and 8 I’m assuming he is using just SMV. A better way to look at which prospect is better would be MMV. A woman’s MMV can vary far, far more than a man’s, as female SMV is basically just looks and age. Whereas MMV includes personality, history, and other intangibles that make all of the different. So a young, chaste, devout woman with a SMV of 5 might have a MMV of 6 or 7, but that woman with a SMV of 8 might have a MMV of 4 because she is a feminist, has a huge N, picked up some STDs along the way and an abortion too.
@Dalrock & DG
DG is on the right track. I responded to Archer according to his paradigm (the SMV number matters most to him), but the reality is that the 5 woman who is enthusiastic but chaste is not a 5, but an 8. The 8 incontinent woman is a 3. And if we are talking about marriage, and if we’re Christian then when we are talking about sex, we’re talking about marriage. We should not have two different values.
@ Cane
I’m not sure that you can really divorce (pun intended) SMV from MMV like that. Or rather, that you cannot ignore the role of attractiveness and focus only on MMV. The truth is, you can only “boost” a woman’s MMV so far above her SMV. More likely, massive disparities will be in favor of SMV, because she has a number of character traits/flaws that impair her overall marriageability. As sad as it is, a woman whose SMV is 3 is never going to have a very high MMV, because her unattractiveness will override her other attributes. Yes, she might be sweet, gentle, loving, chaste, devout, etc., but that doesn’t allow her to really overcome the fact that she is unattractive. For women below a certain SMV (I would say 4), their MMV is not going to be much above their SMV. And it won’t be above it enough to make enough of a difference for them.
I tend to think that a woman might be able to boost her MMV a point above her SMV, perhaps two, but that is all. Because of this, you really do need two separate values.
@DG
These two points are at odds with each other:
&
I believe they should not be separated, and that this separation is a foundational error in thinking about how to appraise a wife. Nowhere did I say attractiveness is unimportant, or irrelevant.
However; Dalrock and Cane do not get to decide what the value of a (potential) wife is to DG. In addition: Marriage is the crucible that will put her mettle to the test.
Cane:
This is an excellent article. I’m gonna give my secular take on a piece of it, and let you delete it, if you feel it’s too far out.
This is a well-described phenomenon in the psychoanalytic tradition*, characterized by sublimated sexual desire between the father and daughter. In a sense, this is natural. A daughter in her early adolescence who gets tingles for her dad is, psychologically, imprinting him into her consciousness, and is preparing to find a dude who matches her dad for eventual mating and child-rearing. It shouldn’t be shamed or discouraged in this regard, as you want a girl to look for a “dad” type to be the father of her own kids.
What is unnatural is the failure for father and daughter to break out of this stage, and its concretization into an unhealthy relationship in its own right. This may be due to the fact that the wife/mother is not being an appropriate wife/mother, so the father/husband transfers his marital sentiments onto his daughter long term. Note that this does not imply that the father and daughter have physical sex, only that they enter into protected emotional territory that, in a healthy family, is reserved for man and wife.
The solution is widespread acknowledgement that this is going on. In conservative or religious families, this would probably work well. A father who thinks “no one is good enough for my princess” should be confronted in a mild way by his brothers in the religious community, who remind him that it is not his job to be his daughter’s husband. It is his job to be her father. When he takes the role you describe, he is chasing off suitors because (less than consciously) he feels jealous of other competitors. Likewise, the daughter feels “safe” as a member of her father’s harem, which is an extension of childhood and immaturity. She should also be called out by the women in her community, mildly, who should tell her that it’s time to grow up and become a real wife, rather than a pretend one. The wife/mother in this scenario should also be called out (again, mildly) by the community, as she may be denying her husband the chance for emotional intimacy, which lead to the transferrence in the first place.
This phenomenon is a complex, constellated in the libido, and not an expression of healthy Christian (Jewish, Mormon, or any other religion etc) child rearing, in accordance with the traditions. The sooner religious people realize
For more on this, read Jung’s treatment of the *Electra Complex* in “Theory of Psychoanalysis”.
Boxer
P.S.: Just for the record, my degrees are in history, pure mathematics and philosophy. I am absolutely unqualified to talk about psychoanalysis or sociology… These are just amateur opinions of a reader of the collected works of the masters.
@ Cane
If I read you correctly, your argument is that as Christians, we should be concerning ourselves with MMV, and only MMV? Or at least when it comes to marriage that is all that we should be concerned about?
Dont marry the carousel exiting woman is standard good advice. Cane made a comment above that the willing enthusiastic respectful (I added these ) 5 is an 8.
If we could survey middle aged men (pick me) I think this truth would jump off the page. Though i personally cannot complain, structurally, of my marriage, some can, and most, me included, could complain about seasons. During these seasons a man will notice a 5 who has the aura of being that enthusiastic agreeable type person. Ive seen other men’s wives who would not turn my head from across a room, then getting to know the couple and her demeanor with her husband, she then gets my extra (inappropriate) attention at times. The 1-10 scale, in marriage, MUST include these aspects, and a man in middle age will opine for that no matter how hard bodied his wife is at 45ish. Im not sure this is possible to sell to a 25 year old man who wants to penetrate the best built babe for as many years as possible.
Oh to find the one who is a 7/8 in looks and deeds……Point is the scales appearance vs demeanor, can be inversely proportional even if not 1 to 1. Could be one is a straight 1-10 scale and the other logarithmic…..like that.
It’s a mistake to form opinions about what should be done based on the stories and experiences of most of the Man’s Sphere
change should to should not, and I would disagree with this. IOW there are many red flag STOP!!!! type things to learn in the sphere, more so than “do this” things. Maybe you are one of the few trying to focus on the proactive side, that’s why you get so many nay sayers from the traditional sphere who are dug in to the negative muck..
@RichardP
In the first section, you are looking at strict equality, or equality over all factors. This is the kind of equality many people naturally think of after being trained in basic mathematics. It is true that men and women are not equal in this respect.
However, near the end, where you discuss “equal with respect to” you begin looking into a broader understanding of equality.
Equality only exists with respect to some metric of comparison (way of comparing things). In the most exacting metric, things are unequal if even the slightest mollecule is different in its placement, or the name is different, or the location within time is different. In this case, you aren’t equal to the version of you that started reading this sentance.
Some men are equal to one annother in the shoe size they wear… a metric for equality with very little use.
When the men who wrote and signed the declaration of independence afffirmed that “all men are created equal” was talking about everyone being equal when it comes to inherent human dignity.
The Brethren are all equal to one annother in that we are all members of the body, saved by god, placing our faith in him.
It’s very important that we make sure that we recognize that there are different kinds of equality, and that we discuss the metric for equality that we are using, when we discuss equality. That is not, however, to say that it is impropper to call “equality in human dignity” a valid kind of equality in and of itself, based on the context and the metric used.
We just need to be careful about the context of the equality we discuss, and make sure we don’t switch it (or allow our converstants to switch it) in the middle of the discussion.
@Dalrock
The problem becomes identifying the difference between a “born again virgin” leaving the cock carrosel, and identifying an actual virgin who wants to marry.
As many women on the husband-hunt have put it, a man often can’t know a woman’s count unless she tells him, particularly in a large city.
Josh, why not use polygraph testing?
Oh, Cane, I posted about unfakable ioi’s since the real attraction of the waitress was an issue.
http://theasdgamerblog.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/is-she-into-you/
Pingback: Good Christian* Sluts | Something Fishy
@Josh the Aspie
It seems that you understood my point, and elaborated on it. Thanks. Talking about anything or anybody being “equal” is not really useful unless “equal, how?” is defined by a prepositional phrase. You gave a good example by refering our attention to this phrase:
“equality in human dignity”
Equal, how? Equal – in human dignity
Correspondingly – a woman is a man’s equal “in this respect”, “in that respect”, and “in this other respect”. But man = woman, globally?? Not.
I was thinking about this difference between MMV and SMV. I agree they are linked. I believe this: a woman’s demeanor, attitude, and personality can bump her MMV up to 2 points above her SMV, but they can drop her MMV below her SMV to an unlimited extent. That is, a 5 who is enthusiastic, willing, chaste, will be a 7. 7s are great, don’t sneeze at 7s. However, an SMV 8 who is a violent, schizophrenic crack whore, could be an MMV 1.
So, I propose that MMV is linked to SMV, not the other way around. MMV can be a maximum of 2 points above SMV, but an unlimited amount BELOW SMV.
So, fellas, use SMV+2 to tell you what her MAX potential MMV is; then you can know that her ACTUAL MMV will be from 0 to SMV+2. It is up to you to figure out where in that spectrum she is.
Amen. I’ll be posting the link to this article on my Facebook wall. This was the best quote of all :” Christian women are taught that Jesus is their personal boyfriend, Christian men are taught that they are the guardians of Jesus’ personal girlfriends; to let one of them be touched by a mortal is anathema”
I just don’t understand how God can give woman free will, but then subjects them entirely to the wills of first their fathers, and then to their husbands, and they never get to taste freedom at all, even though we crave it. I can’t accept that we were born to be slaves to men. Even men will overthrow their earthly kings to take their destinies into their own hands, but that’s not an option for women, since to do so would rip their families apart. I don’t know if I can even get married any more, since it seems to be the equivalent of selling myself into bondage.
@ MycoftJones
That matches what I was starting to write on the subject. Wasn’t able to get a full post out of it, but I think you are correct in the essential points:
1) MMV can only be so much above SMV, and
2) whatever her SMV, every woman can have a MMV of 1 (not zero, the scale is properly understood as 1-10).
@k8
Suppose I want to do run the business different from my boss. How long should I really believe my way is better before I tell him to shove off?
Suppose I really want to run over the man who stole my parking space. How badly do I have to want it so that it becomes acceptable to do?
Suppose a man wants to have sex with you. How long does he need to crave it before your rape becomes acceptable in your eyes?
The issue is not that you don’t get to exercise your will: We do so every time we choose not to do the things we should not do. The issue is you don’t want to do what you are supposed to do.
What you are really asking is: “Why doesn’t God want women to be slaves to their desires instead of giving them free will to do what is right?”
You can’t see the truth because you think you were born free. That is: You don’t believe Christ and the Word of God. You were born a slave to sin. If you are a Christian–offering yourself as a slave to His will–then you are freed from sin, and you have a place in the chain of authority that goes back to Christ.
Think of it this way: You were born a baby. There is no human experience as dependent and enslaved than a baby; both to its caretaker and its desires. Then you grow up, and you learn to prioritize desires, follow rules, and understand things. The more you make yourself a student and slave of right priorities, good judgment, and deep understanding, the more fit you are to be master of others. However; the second you stop being a slave to them is the second you disqualify yourself from leadership, and become a slave to desire.
There’s not k8’s way, and Cane’s way, and Bob’s way, and Carol’s way. There’s only Christ’s way (faith, work, pain, and life), or the world’s way (ignorance, sloth, pleasure, and death).
k8, you’re just parroting feminazi propaganda. Nothing new in what you wrote.
@all
Who here would want k8 riding in the passenger’s seat while they were driving the car. Oh, k8 is a slave, since she’s not driving the car. Look, she’s going to try to grab the wheel from the driver! Crash!
” Look, she’s going to try to grab the wheel from the driver! Crash!”
I knew a young couple when I was young who did exactly that. Can’t know what was actually going on in her head – but it must have been something similar to “He’s not doing this right (as the car started to slide in gravel). Here, let me do it for him.” She grabbed the wheel and flipped the car. She died. He did not.
Cane December 16 at 755, outstanding response….outstanding
Pingback: Lightning Round – 2013/12/18 | Free Northerner
@empathologism: “Cane December 16 at 755, outstanding response….outstanding”
I agree that Cane’s post was well written. I do not agree that it actually addressed k8’s questions – because what Cane said applies to women and men equally. k8 was asking about the inequality she sees between the reality that men and women face. Cane gave in to an understandable first impulse to talk about headship and chain of command. But that kind of response leaves k8’s question still hanging.
The reality for women: Men are accountable to God – someone who is not physically present to slap them across the face when they are not sufficiently deferent. Women do not have that same luxury. Should they not be sufficiently deferent, they are likely to come under the very real rebuke of a man. A man can exercise his own “free” will, and suffer no immediate consequence for doing that. Makes it easier to look like he actually has free will. Should a woman take such steps to exercise her own free will, most of the women of the world will imediately have a man in her face to stop what she is trying to do – either father, brother, or husband. Makes it easier to look like she doesn’t have “free” will.
Put more simple: when they exercise their “free will”, men don’t generally have someone in their face immediately. Women do. Why is this fair? (K8’s basic question.)
Only answer possible: It is not fair. And it never will be. It will also never change, unless the Court finally outlaws ALL contact between men and women. So, I will briefly say these things to k8, and any others who share her questions:
My responses here assume a Biblical viewpoint.
We don’t respond to what is. We respond to what we perceive. A good first step in answering your questions is to consider whether your perceptions might be at odds with what actually is. Specifically:
k8 says: “I can’t accept that we were born to be slaves to men.” God says no such thing in the Bible. Eve was created to be a helper to Adam. We take that to mean that wives are meant to be a helper to their husbands (not that any woman is duty-bound to be a helper to any man). A helper is not a slave. Even as the department heads in any business are helpers to the CEO, not slaves. And, often times, the department heads are smarter than the CEO. Many CEOs admit that this is the reason for their success. This has been discussed in recent threads in this vicinity, including Sunshine Mary’s blog.
k8 says: “I just don’t understand how God can give woman free will …” I think it will be difficult to find anywhere in the Bible where it says that God gives anyone free will, not just women. There are, in fact, many good folks who believe that every. single. thing. we. do. is orchestrated by God (as a child might move a doll). And they point to Bible verses to support their point. So – before you become sad or infuriated because others claim for themselves things that are “denied” to you, it would be good to figure out if others actually have the things you think they have. The following link is extremely useful as an overview and a jumping-off point for further research if you genuinely have an interest in this thing called “free will”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Will
The opening sentence (as of this date) is: “Free will is the ability of agents to make choices unconstrained by …” The conclusion of most folks, of course, is that nobody exists free of constraints of some sort, men or women. Therefore, there is not “free will”. Anywhere. There is only “constrained free will”. (Can a man give birth to a baby simply because he “wills” it to happen? In general, can women navigate as well as men can, just because the women will it to happen?)
Women, therefore, have free will, constrained – just like men do. But, in most instances, women’s free will is further constrained by their fathers or brothers or husbands. Why? In practical terms, because men are stronger than women. Be mad about that, but no woman can change that fact of differences in strength and the fallout from that. This is a physical thing, not a spiritual one. Consider:
If women are left free to collaborate amongst themselves, free from interference from men, they will build a world and society that men for the most part will not like (not that it is bad, it is just that men won’t like it). Because of this, and because of their superior strength, men generally keep women from building the world that women want so that men can build the world that men want. And this works out for women to a certain extent – because women constrain men’s creating behavior to a certain degree by withholding various favors from the men until the men build things that the women also want.
Other than than, what Cane said at December 16 at 7:55.
Richard P
My responses here assume a Biblical viewpoint
Perhaps…but not a shared one. Maybe replace “a” with “my”. I mean no snark in saying that, only to difuse the appeal to authority implied by your statement
You have read-in as badly as k8 read-in. You just didn’t use canned cliches to exhibit it. K8’s questions are not in good faith. Your answer, my answer, Cane’s response, none of them will penetrate the articficial reality she has adopted, one constructed by generations of sisters before her who, though they are wrong, actually put some effort into coming up with their responses.
“I dont believe women were made to be slaves to men” should not even BE responded to. its ridiculous on its face. And the stuff about free will and a deeper study of it will not penetrate her veneer a nano-micron. Thats why Cane’s response was good. It framed her bad faith chliche based challenges by responding to them with unequivocal eamples of the very notions her cliches were set to refute.
Should a woman take such steps to exercise her own free will, most of the women of the world will imediately have a man in her face to stop what she is trying to do – either father, brother, or husband. Makes it easier to look like she doesn’t have “free” will
I think you have taken on board some of the same filters through which k8 views the world. The may be the case in Afganistan. Then you go on to say that the world women would build would be different, and that men forced a mans view of the world on the world. I’m not sure where you are seeing this? the world has been and is being moulded to female standards. From The Lift to sex as incentives to the law and chivalry as punishments, men are boxed in at every turn from actually leaving a male fingerprint on anything. This is a slide along a spectrum towards feminism that it is surprising you are missing. feminism IS “the world that women design”. Liberalism IS the world that women design. Though feminism and liberalism are not synonyms, and not even two sides of the same coin, they are conjoined.
Kudos on a thorough answer to Richard P’s points. I nominate this for post of the month.
Richard P writes:
Should a woman take such steps to exercise her own free will, most of the women of the world will imediately have a man in her face to stop what she is trying to do – either father, brother, or husband. Makes it easier to look like she doesn’t have “free” will
Why should anyone with half a brain accept this reframing of “free will” to mean some mythical power to do whatever you want without constraint or consequences? A prisoner in a cage has free will: he doesn’t lose it in the slightest in virtue of being caged. Everything he actually chooses to do is still his free choice. And nobody, ever, anywhere lives without constraint or consequence.
It is time to examine your premises.
Dammit Zippy I’ve been watching this post for days so I could leave the 100th comment. I’ve been robbed.
Zippy after following your link i could not tell if i was to examine my premises or Richard or both.
If it was me, sure, I understand what you are writing about liberalism. Though I find discussions that get into hair splitting definitions of ideologies like those that divide our country a bit tedious, Im glad some folks are trying to fix the language on those as well. if we could use well, correct, and strictly defined terms it would actually have some folks looking at the floor as they quietly shuffled from one side to another.
Its over reading to imagine I even had a premise rooted in an ideological definition. That may seem intellectually lazy, but i was writing strictly from the pedestrian perception of the term(s).
@Dalrock said: “2) Christian men are for courtship, and non Christian men are for carousel riding. Either the women weren’t ready for courtship (very likely), or they didn’t know what to make of your Christian pickup artist routine (equally likely).I wouldn’t blame them for the latter; it makes no sense to me either.”
This makes me think of a time when a man at the library approached me. I may have said something about heading to bible study later. He said he liked to read the Bible, too and that maybe he could call me and we could meditate on the Word together. I can’t really convey the tone, but it came across like a Christianese pick-up line that left me less likely to talk to him rather than more. Had he simply said something like, “I’d be interested in talking with you again. Could I have your number?” Or something like that, it would have been less off putting. He meant no harm, it just wasn’t effective.
Christian women do want to know that you have faith that is practiced. They don’t want it used to pick them up. It should come out naturally.
@Artisanal Toad said: “I responded by saying “Well, I want you to know that I’m a Christian and I have a different view of dating than you might be used to.”
Her persona changed in an instant. Her vocabulary changed and she started speaking Christianese, her body language changed to frigid and her attraction for me died a sudden death. I was clueless at the time, but I understand completely now.”
This is interesting because, though neither of you knew it, you both were Christians and you both were enjoying the chemistry that was flowing between you. Her line about the Chinese proverb was flirtatious, but also seemingly completely in line with the vibes you were giving her as well. She changed her demeanor when you said you were a Christian because it was like you took a hard right after you all were cruising smoothly along. Seems like she took your words as a rebuke, became self-conscious of her natural flirtatiousness, and was quick to get back into her “good Christian girl” persona.
A note about college. Many (if not most) young women probably should go to college or complete a technical degree. I do agree that fathers should not push their daughters into independence, but that doesn’t mean discouraging them from developing as individuals or preventing them from being able to earn a living in the workforce if they need to, even if only to help support their families. It’s important to note that even female dominated professions such as teaching and nursing require a college degree, and sometimes a graduate degree. Even many administrative assistant positions (secretaries) require at least an AA. And society actually needs women in these positions.
Furthermore, if you just think about it in IQ terms, there will be plenty of women who will feel legitimately stifled without some type of intellectual stimulation or challenge. Reading The Feminine Mystique as a teenager, I actually thought this was a big part of Betty Friedan’s problem. She was very smart, but bored and probably should have pursued an academic career or found a more productive outlet she could have sustained aside from her family obligations.
There’s a big difference between a mentality that says, “Women should prioritize marriage and childrearing,” and saying, “Women don’t need to be educated (formally), since all they should be concerned about is marriage and childrearing.”
Oh, and one more comment. donalgraeme argued that a woman can only raise her MMV a point or two above her SMV because her MMV will be tethered to her SMV. This, I think, gets at why I would argue that it’s not as easy out there for single Christian women as it’s made out to be; and that there are numerous ones who are faithful who are not being pursued by Christian men. donalgraeme has basically said that a woman could be absolutely wonderful on the inside, but if she’s simply not good looking, most men–Christian or otherwise–are not going to see her as having a high MMV. (and I’m not blaming–it is what it is.) Weight, we all know is controllable. Yet general “plainness” is not. (though perhaps some women could work harder to be more noticeable.) Nor is height or skin color, and even skin quality to a certain extent. And no woman can know that she will be any particular man’s “type.”
You see women who are better looking than their boyfriends/husbands more often than the reverse. Their MMVs might be roughly equal, but hers will be more closely tied to her SMV while his will not. Thus, men (including Christians) have more control over the factors that will make them appealing to women for marriage while women have less. Christian men don’t have to marry women they aren’t attracted to. But at least in these discussions it seems only fair to recognize that this dynamic in women of “why her and not me?” that men feel when looking at the dating success of other men. Only for women, they legitimately have less control over the sum of factors that will make a man want to marry them than men do. (And we’re talking about marriage, not sex. Women don’t feel validated because they can easily get a man to sleep with them. Their validation comes from how many men want to marry them.)
The great majority of men and women will eventually marry. But I do maintain that plenty of Christian women are not being regularly pursued by Christian men. And when they marry, it might be to the 1st or 2nd man who has expressed real interest in them.
@ Denise
I agree that an education has value for women (even for those who will marry or are married). However, the positives of an education, including a college one, do not exist in a vacuum. It is important to consider the college environment and the effect that it will have on women. At the moment sending your daughter off to college is a foolhardy move, as it places her in a precarious position well away from the strength and comfort of her parent’s moral authority. While some Christian women might be able to successfully navigate college with their virtue intact, they will be in the discreet minority. Far better to have Christian daughters go to community college first, or to a local university so they can continue to live with their parents. At least, until they marry. Once married then as long as they are near their husbands a greater leeway can be granted to them. Online education is another possibility. And I should point out that a woman can always continue her education after her children are all grown up. I know one woman in her late forties who is going to law school after she had an empty nest; she has plenty of time to pursue her education at that point, the dangers she would have faced at a younger age are mostly gone and the finances aren’t a problem (her husband doesn’t mind supporting her in this).
As for your last comment, I agree with most of it. It is not as easy out there for faithful Christian women as some around these parts like to insinuate.
I’ve observed that Christian women typically operate on the premise that men shouldn’t care about a woman’s external appearance. Therefore, they don’t make themselves look attractive. Perhaps they should be more realistic about men?
Christian women do operate on that premise. Married older ones, newly wed ones, and the pinnacle, ones having recently given birth. Heck having men “see her heart” instead of her chest is a somewhat wrongheaded Christian notion that’s been adopted by secular feminists.
Reminds me of the story someone linked to where so “Christian women” raided a swimsuit calendar kiosk in a mall, removing all the merchandise. They left signs in place saying “misogyny” “objectification” and such.
Great post…and great thread. Just had time to catch up. Also congrats Cane on getting your first full out Harpy. It lightened the seriousness of the thread to the right degree.
@Zippy: “A prisoner in a cage has free will: he doesn’t lose it in the slightest in virtue of being caged.”
Free will does not exist without the ability to exercise it.
Free will (or just plain “will”) does not exist in the ability to contemplate an action. Will of any kind exists only in the ability to attempt to carry out the willed action. (I emphasize the word “attempt”, putting thought into motion. In this way we display intent, will – regardless of whether we are successful in what we attempt to do.)
Free will is not displayed in our internal contemplation of whether to obey God’s commands. Free will is displayed only when we either honor or violate God’s commands. Free will exists only in the doing, not in the thinking. And if the doing is blocked or slowed down, we end up with constrained free will.
If you read my comments carefully, and read the Wikipedia article on free will that I linked to, you should be able to conclude that I was pointing out that there are many different definitions of will and free will, and that I think the concept of “constrained free will” is the most useful of them all. And – put simply again – men do not generally have the expression of their will constrained physically by God, whereas women have the expression of their will physically constrained by men all the time. I think that is so obvious that those who disagree must not truely understand what is being said.
Zippy – because reasonable people define “free will” differently, I cannot state point-blank that your words that I quoted above are wrong. I believe they are wrong. But others may believe they are correct. All I can do is rephrase what I said above:
Will exists only in the doing, not in the thinking. If you cannot do what you “will” to do, you are not exercising your will. And of what use is will if it cannot be exercised? Indeed, how can we know that there is any will at all in another, unless we see it being exercised? Consider this: I don’t live too far from an In and Out hamburger stand. But I am confined to a cage I cannot break out of. Do I have “free will” to go get a hamburger and milkshake? That is, can I do this just because I will it? Seems to me I have lost my free will to go to In and Out, by virtue of being caged. But then, your answer seems to be different. Because – as the Wikpedia article I linked to points out – different people have different definitions of what will and free will mean.
Which is what I was pointing out.
Free will does not exist without the ability to exercise it.
simply put….yes, it does. One may not be able to leave the cage, but one’s coordinates are not the limit of their will. The Bible is full of folks exercising free will, sometimes miraculously, from within confinement
Then let’s agree to make a distinction between the physical realm and the spiritual realm. When I responded regarding k8’s post, I was addressing things specifically in the physical realm.
And Empath – my statement stands in spite of what you said. [i]Free will does not exist without the ability to exercise it.[/i] Your example did not refute this, because it did not address my statement. You gave an example of folks who [i]were[/i] exercising their will. My statement addressess a situation where folks are not able to exercise their will – due to constraints imposed. (Read my statement again and see if that is not true.)
I agree with your statement that “one’s coordinates are not the limit of their will” – in the spiritual realm. But, in the physical realm, I still cannot walk through the bars to get to In and Out just because I will it. Perhaps, in the spirtual realm, I can will the bars to bend – but I don’t know that I agree with that. I’m petty sure it is God doing things for us in the spiritual realm, not us. I’m exercising my faith when I call on God to help me out. I think he is responding to my display of faith, not to my display of will. But at this point we are way outside the original intent of this thread, so I won’t go further with that thought.
I’m wondering if we don’t have a difference here in how we are applying free-will as a concept. I assume that every instance where we are able to display intent is an instance where we display will. In some instance we are able to display/exercise our will (e.g., obey God), and in other instances we are not able to (can’t get to In and Out from inside the bars, so don’t have free will here). Perhaps you and others are thinking that free will is global – we either have it or we don’t, regardless of our inability to exercise it in some instances.
Thereby supporting the contention in the Wikipedia link I give that there are multiple concepts of what will, and free will, entail.
Free will means “not coerced internally.” That allows for free will to exist in conjunction with all sorts of external coercion.
For example, free will might allow someone to commit murder. Just because there are laws against murder (external coercion), one would be incorrect to say that they prevent the exercise of free will.
“… in other instances we are not able to (can’t get to In and Out from inside the bars, so don’t have free will here – as it pertains to getting to In and Out just because I want to.)”
That more accurately says what I meant.
@theasdgamer: “Free will means “not coerced internally.”
Free Will means more than that, which is the point of these comments. Everybody has their own idea what it means. Those who don’t understand that will have difficult conversations any time someone gets close to this subject.
“This important issue [Free Will] has been widely debated throughout history, including not only whether free will exists but even how to define the concept.”
From here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Will
Free Will being debated doesn’t change the formal Christian definition of the same. God has been debated too.
Pingback: Never Forget What Eye Contact Means « stagedreality
Pingback: I’ll dress up as Truman if you’ll dress up as Stalin. | Sunshine Mary
“This is a pro-marriage–pro-sex blog–for men who have (or want to have) made the beyond-rational decision to be united with a particular woman.”
I see what you did there. Is marriage really that bad?
@CoRP
Sometimes marriage is very painful. Those times aren’t usually frequent, but they can last quite a long time; much longer than anyone thinks.
That comment wasn’t meant to focus on the bad though, but that marriage is not anymore a rational decision than to remain single. The choice to marry a particular person is a decision of desire, not of best practices.
Pingback: Half-Cocked Varitions | Things that We have Heard and Known
Pingback: The Centrifugal Force of the Sexual Revolution
Pingback: Cane Caldo on the “Purity Movement” – Cornerstone