Whom she will become …

… depends on whom she meets.

Dusk in Autumn asked:

“…if you’re a socially conservative guy who hates bars and nightclubs, would you rather date the Audrey Rouget character from Metropolitan or who she will tend to become at age 30?”

As I wrote here, it looks to me, from her cameo appearance in The Last Days of Disco, as if Audrey Rouget was still dating and dancing in her thirties. If she had married Tom, her life would have been very different, obviously, and so would she.

I am sure my wife is a vastly different woman than she would have been if she had married somebody else, or not married at all. I rather suspect men underestimate the profound effect they have on the life and ultimate character of women. Here is a post by Silas Reinagel which touches on this point, and mentions a post by the female blogger Alte, which is unfortunately no longer available, on women as “empty vessels”.

As Silas wrote:

“Not only do women generally absorb opinions, interests and mannerisms from their boyfriends/husbands, but their knowledgeability and competence regarding such hobbies, interests and stances are directly correlated with the knowledgeability and competence of their men. This lends even more support to the idea that men are naturally hard-wired to be dominant leaders and that women are hard-wired to follow, learn from, and support their men.”

ADDENDUM:

Will S found the original post by Alte using the Wayback Machine, which includes many comments by her readers. There is an interesting discussion about WHY women tend to change to accomodate their “main man”.

It is terribly important who is a woman’s first. There is a deep truth to the recent, otherwise creepy, pro-Obama advertisement targetting young women, which is parodied here.

To return to the film Metropolitan, a lot of the dramatic point of the movie is whether Audrey’s “first time” will be with the evil Rick or maybe the more decent and enduring Tom. The thoughtful Charlie character actually frets that Audrey will be “ruined” by Rick, in the same way as he has “ruined” other girls.

FURTHER ADDENDUM

I thought this comment from a woman was worth adding:

“This was the danger of giving women the vote … the voting bloc of single women … who lack the guidance of a man in the form of a husband or intellectual mentor.”

I don’t think Australian women have made too much of a hash of voting. But the hysterical reaction from our local feminists as our first female Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, continues to perform poorly has made me reconsider.

Advertisements

62 responses to this post.

  1. Here’s an archive of that post by Alte / ButterflySquash / Cecilia / Black&German / Vanessa:

    http://web.archive.org/web/20100603011735/http://traditionalmarriage.wordpress.com/2010/05/23/women-are-empty-vessels/

    Save it before she has archive.org remove their copy. 😉

    Reply

    • Here you go:

      Women are Empty Vessels

      Posted by Cecilia in Anti-feminism.

      Let’s ignore the obvious sexual imagery…

      Women are malleable

      With my first boyfriend, I was a manga fan. We went to conventions. I read, watched, and discussed the topic in-depth. I swore that The Ghost in the Shell was the greatest movie ever (even though I didn’t really understand it), and would sit and watch him draw for hours on end. With delight. I ate pizza and barbecue, drank iced tea and lemonade. I listened to ska and punk music, and learned that skateboarding is an art form.

      After we broke up, I hated manga. I really don’t like manga, but it felt like I liked it when I was with him.

      With my second boyfriend, I was convinced of the supremacy of Englishness (with the exception of London, which was way too posh and foreign for my tastes — of course). I learned to drink my tea with lemon or milk, hot not cold (a big change for a girl from Texas). I watched Sky and BBC and spoke with a Midlands dialect. I drank ridiculously expensive whiskey, and learned to love cider. I danced to Moloko, Morcheeba, and Massive Attack. Germany seemed so backward, and we made plans to move to a real country, where people are civilized and have a dry, sarcastic wit.

      I dropped the dialect after we broke up, but I still like my tea hot with milk.

      With my husband, I’m different again. Bavaria is king. I’ve become quite accomplished in German baking and cookery, with an extensive library of antique cookbooks. We play Blur, Garbage, Maroon 5, and AC/DC on the stereo. I’ve discovered that the disco fox is superior to every other style of formal dance, barring a Vienna Walz. Rather than being uncultured, Germans have by far the best literature. It is, after all, the land of Dichter und Denker, not some backwater of Island Monkeys like the UK. And who knew how excellent a beer can taste when served lukewarm with Brotzeit? I prefer chamomile, peppermint, or fruit tea over black tea, and have discovered the joys of irony and sardonicism.

      Sound strange to you?

      Does it sound like I don’t have a personality? You have been fooled. I actually have a very strong personality. What we’re discussing now are mannerisms, habits, and opinions/dogma. These are things that women generally adopt from the people around them. Women more easily adopt such things, which is why they do better in school, and are assumed to have higher social abilities.

      Perhaps women are this way so that they can more easily fit into their husband’s culture? And what would happen if a woman was stolen by a different tribe? A woman who couldn’t “adapt” and fit in, wouldn’t have survived or thrived for very long.

      With feminism, this paradigm was flipped on its head. Instead of women adjusting to a male-designed world, men were expected to adjust to fit to a woman-designed one. The experiment has been an unequivocal failure.

      Reply

    • Thanks, Will S, that is amazing. I have saved it to my hard disk. I back up quite a few things there.

      Alte makes herself sound like a pretty extreme case of female chameleon in that article. I am not sure that my wife has made quite such radical changes; although I think she has become more religious and shares some of my political opinions now. It is hard to know how she would have ended up [if she had not met me], but I like to think very different, and worse.

      Reply

      • My mom became a bigger sports fan than my dad; my dad will sometimes go to sleep when a game runs late, and my mom stays up watching it, and tells him after how it turned out. 🙂

        Some women do change a lot…

        If I were to marry, I’d not necessarily want that; I’d prefer we each still have a fair degree of separate interests, even if we discover certain of each others’ music, TV shows, movies, favourite foods, etc. that we like, and incorporate into our own favourites, while still remaining fairly individual in many ways, because that’s okay.

      • I am glad some of that material is still around, because I put a lot of time into commenting.

      • And frankly, I’d ideally want a woman who’s as religious and as culturally conservative as me, in the first place, as I can’t be arsed to put in the effort to break in a stubborn filly.

      • Hey, you’re welcome. 🙂

        Yes, I’m glad it is. In fact, I wish there were NO robots blocking archiving of anything; I like the idea of everything always being permanently accessible, to come back to haunt someone even. 😉

      • Yes, I’m a sadist. 😉

        But furthermore, I want no-one to be able to revise their histories, in terms of what they thought or said.

  2. My opinions do change a little. Sometimes I test run ideas, and revise them later. Sometimes I get nasty comments (though I do kind of ask for that, by being provocative). Even so, I leave it all up. I have posts I no longer fully support, and there are obnoxious comments. But I don’t bother to rewrite history.

    I would say the biggest effect I have had on my wife is in the area of values.

    I have seen my mother, by no means a stupid woman, follow a succession of men, and male ideas, all her life. I strongly believe that men, not women, set the moral standards. On their own, women revert, morally, to a very base level.

    Reply

  3. Posted by CL on October 29, 2012 at 1:01 am

    There’s some truth in that. With my ex-husband I even had a fantasy baseball team and had fun with it for a season, but not something I kept up since I got a bit bored with it. Never did get into video games either. I get way too competitive with stuff like that and it’s best I just leave it be, lol.

    I think it does depend on the man though; if he isn’t very dominant, a woman is less likely to incorporate his values and interests.

    Reply

    • There are certainly areas in which my wife has not been influenced by me. But I think I have given her a huge shove in the religious and moral area.

      It feels funny digging out these old Alte “bootlegs”.

      Someone should put an underground publication together: Vanessa’s Secret Musings.

      Reply

      • Do you feel naughty?

        Hey, if you don’t want something preserved forever, don’t share it.

        Like that dumbtwat preteen girl and her boobies.

        Or the more recent dumb bitch suicidie girlie who offed herself after having fucked the whole damn football team:

        http://www.vancouversun.com/York+teen+Felicia+Garcia+jumps+front+train+after+being+bullied+classmates/7453693/story.html

        Stupid fucking GD slut. Of course people called her one – because she was!

      • Well, I think those are extreme cases.

        I do however believe that the written word is for keeps. Luckily, my thoughts and feelings tend to be consistent. But even if they are not, I would not want to bury something I wrote. Alte/Vanessa had the problem of the natural cyclicity of the human female, but it would have been best not to fade in and out, and then go dark. If nothing else, it would have served as an object lesson. And there was wisdom and honesty in a lot of what she wrote.

        The thing that strikes me is that the first man to seriously claim a woman, to put his flag in her and take her, will likely have a huge influence on her; and sometimes ruin her for the next man. I have known cases of women who changed because of a man almost overnight. Timing is crucial.

      • Women are physically changed by men too. Deflowered; inseminated; impregnated. There is evidence now that cells from their babies in utero find their way to the mother’s brain.

        So much popular culture focusses on how women change men. I think the opposite is more important. No doubt people want to downplay the effects of the Cock Carousel.

  4. Gosh, they’re so fickle…

    Reply

    • I am possibly reading too much into it, but maybe Stillman knew perfectly well what he was doing with Audrey Rouget in her brief appearance in Disco. It signalled social change, and the death of the traditional WASP woman.

      Reply

  5. @David:

    I don’t think she speaks for all women; especially since she isn’t particularly feminine and has a condescending attitude towards natural femininity. Apparently it’s better to be a high-T butch woman pretending to be feminine, than just a naturally feminine woman.

    I think she is just a sociopath.

    Reply

    • BF, I have finally blogrolled you. I had technical trouble a while back, but I have been able to add to my blogroll of late.

      I assume you mean Alte. I don’t think she is a sociopath, but I think she has an unusual personality. (I got called “a narcissist with a highly abusive personality” once, on Dalrock’s blog, so I am not too keen on diagnosing others). But I would agree that she had a large ego; probably is high T and “horny”; is very restless mentally; has a very high IQ, and so on. But her shape and looks, which I saw in a couple of clear photos, certainly didn’t suggest “butch”. I would agree with the woman herself that she had a problem with hypergamy, even more than most women, and she had been majorly affected by some pretty potent men.

      Reply

      • I know that sounds like gossip; but she spoke a good deal about herself; so most of that is just what she revealed about herself. I must say that – although I generally find that people (including me, no doubt) quickly reveal their personalities in their writing – Alte remained a puzzle to me, and I had to rely on what she said about herself. She is complex.

      • By butch, I meant personality, not appearance. She acts like a man. Also, we can debate her IQ. I find the people who constantly brag about their own intelligence, rarely live up to said claims.

        Concerning hormones: high estrogen women have sex drives too. In fact, high estrogen/progesterone can increase a sex drive. I believe progesterone induces “heat” in animals. So feminine doesn’t mean you’re an idiot that hates sex. Although it doesn’t fare well for parallel parking skills…

        Getting back to the topic of your post:

        The first time matters because a woman has been “marked” – so to speak. Or at least that’s how it feels to me. *blushes* My husband made me feel things I never felt before; I can’t erase these physical memories. Nor do I want to – I like knowing he marked me. It’s a sexy concept. I’m his; no man will ever compare.

      • “The first time matters because a woman has been “marked” – so to speak. Or at least that’s how it feels to me. *blushes* My husband made me feel things I never felt before; I can’t erase these physical memories. Nor do I want to – I like knowing he marked me. It’s a sexy concept. I’m his; no man will ever compare.”

        Precisely. And that is how I feel about it, from a man’s point of view. You seem to “get” this, but many women don’t – or say they don’t.

  6. I didn’t drastically change for my husband. While we share many interests, I don’t like all the things he likes, nor do I pretend to. I think my husband deserves his own hobbies; the occasional alone time. Especially since I’m a terrible actress and cannot feign interest in manly activities. Formula One is boring – I mean, the drivers are cute, but that’s about it. I think my husband has the right to watch sports; I won’t judge him for it. It’s just I’d rather be in the kitchen cooking him and his buddies cute ‘lil hors d’oeuvres.

    Besides, a girlfriend/wife intruding on her man’s personal hobbies is probably is attempting compete with him. Mr. Collard, how would you feel if your wife suddenly decided to study biology [you’re a retired biologist, right?] I don’t mean casually read up on it – I mean become as well-read in biology as you are. What if she started participating in all of your personal hobbies merely for the sake of participating in all of your personal hobbies? i.e. “Anything you can do I can do” – sounds a bit like Feminism, perhaps?

    Reply

    • I think the best thing is if husband and wife have some mutual interests. My wife and I both like visiting libraries, visiting and staying at country towns, going to op shops. Sometimes we can talk about books. But yes, we tend to like different things in our reading. I have never been able to get her interested in science; nor have I tried very hard; except for a few areas which she likes (astronomy). She did once go on a field trip with me to look at birds; but we were very newly married then, and I suspect she was tagging along to please me.

      Sometimes she will come home with a DVD we both like. She brought home a series of digitised great historic battles recently, which we both enjoyed. But this is not all that common.

      I think Alte overstated the case, and I do wonder about her anecdotes, but I certainly think that my wife, for one, has adopted many of my personal values. As I said at Alte’s place, she has a habit of repeating my political opinions back, almost verbatim. More seriously, I think I have made her more committed to her religion. The one area in which I think she has shown unusual devotion is in accomodating herself to my fairly strict Catholic morality. I don’t think a lot of women would have done that, because she doesn’t entirely share it.

      Reply

      • I don’t lose my own opinions, or abandon them to please my husband because he’s “super dominant”. That sounds weird and quite stupid. My husband’s dominance is super sexy, don’t get me wrong – but he doesn’t lead me because he makes my panties wet. He leads me because I’m just not equipped to be a leader; I need a man to follow. My husband leads me because I trust his judgement; he’s calm and decisive; he thinks about things I’d never think about. I know he has my best interest at heart.

        Concerning political opinions: I’m not particularly interested in politics [feminine women don’t tend to be], so I just reiterate my husband’s opinion because I automatically trust his judgement.

        If “wet panties” is the only thing that makes a woman submit to a man, than she’s probably a feminist. A feminine woman would admit to her weaknesses and her genuine need for a man’s guidance.

        Precisely. And that is how I feel about it, from a man’s point of view. You seem to “get” this, but many women don’t – or say they don’t.

        Why would slutty women admit to being damaged goods? It’ll bruise their ego.

      • To be honest, I don’t quite understand why my wife generally “follows” me. I am not sure if it is religion, custom, or it just turns her on.

        Alte wanted to be a good Christian wife, and being a perfectionist, she wanted to be very obedient. But she also wanted to find it exciting. She wanted to follow an alpha, and admitted to finding betas unattractive. The difficulty she had was that her standards for alpha were very high.

  7. To be honest, I don’t quite understand why my wife generally “follows” me. I am not sure if it is religion, custom, or it just turns her on.

    Probably the last one. Following a man is sexy. Ever wonder why women are susceptible to joining cults?

    I don’t feel like gossiping anymore – I know we’ll never agree; you have some “White Knight” tendencies [excuse my passive aggressiveness – I can’t sleep, NYC is getting hit by a Hurricane]

    Reply

    • Yes, and I shall pray for your safety.

      I am not really white knighting for Alte. I just don’t want to run her down too much when she can’t reply and when we were once friendly. There are some things I would rather not say.

      Reply

      • I wrote:

        “To be honest, I don’t quite understand why my wife generally “follows” me. I am not sure if it is religion, custom, or it just turns her on.”

        On reflection, I think it is a bit of all three.

  8. Posted by CL on October 29, 2012 at 4:15 pm

    Far be it from me to defend Alte, who never seemed to like me much and has attacked me profusely, but as someone who has been accused of being ‘butch’ (personality wise – I certainly don’t look butch), it seems a lot of the time if you speak with an air of authority and don’t use the first person so much, you are perceived as arrogant/manly.

    Most people (especially Americans) don’t seem to care for a more academic tone and think you are trying to ‘shove something down their throats’ or are too aggressive if you write that way. You sort of can’t win; you’re either too fluffy and girly, or too ‘butch’.

    There are certain personalities that attract a lot of orbiters and they don’t like anyone coming around who isn’t orbiting and who poses some sort of (real or imagined) threat to their own status as a sort of sun in their own universe. If you are not another satellite or don’t seem to know your place as such, you are not welcome.

    Reply

    • @CL: I don’t think you sound butch. You just sound French Canadian. French Canadians tend to be, err….assertive individuals. Sharp tongued.

      I’m not sure why feminine speech patterns are considered less intelligent. Talking like a man doesn’t make a woman sound smart – it just makes her sound foolish and low class.

      I get a kick out of American businesswomen speaking Japanese. They carefully phrase every sentence to avoid feminine pronouns and terminology. They rather awkwardly speak in second person than acknowledge their gender. Less cultural savvy businesswomen will outright use male pronouns. So to a Japanese person, they sound like lesbian motorcycle enthusiasts.

      Reply

      • Posted by CL on October 29, 2012 at 9:07 pm

        French Canadian? Tabarnac!That’s funny. I have a teeny bit of French (from France) blood, but I am an Anglo-Canadian.

        French-Canadian is better than butch, but I have been mistaken for a man online several times, even without a particularly equivocal handle.

      • I have frequently been accused of being pompous in my writing style. Maybe. But try not writing in a pompous style when you were a civil servant for thirty years, and have written numerous scientific and other reports, including a PhD.

      • I’ve never found you pompous. Of course, I’ve been accused of that too so take that for what it’s worth!

      • Alte used to say I sounded pompous.

      • Speaking of pompous, shouldn’t it be “who she will become”?

      • CL, I thought hard about that, and concluded that it is “whom she will become”. I could be wrong. But, I could say, for example, “I will become him”. Or “She will become her”. I wouldn’t say “I will become he” or “She will become she”. So, I wrote “whom she will become”. I think we are working with an objective form, hence “whom”.

      • Yeah, I’m not sure either and it’s been bugging me all day, lol. “She will become a woman who likes cheese” sounds better than “She will become a woman whom likes cheese”, but I don’t know if this is the same thing. Oh well… Misuse of ‘whom’ of course will make you sound pompous!

      • Yes to your example, but I don’t think it is strictly relevant.

        How about this example? “If you are not careful, you will end up like her”. I think that is natural English, and suggests that we are, as I said, dealing with an object not a subject.

      • That makes sense.

  9. […] Collard: Whom she will become …; On a Korean scholar’s books and tea things; Carol the Waitress is not a feminist icon; The word […]

    Reply

  10. Posted by sunshinemary on November 3, 2012 at 12:57 am

    If “wet panties” is the only thing that makes a woman submit to a man, than she’s probably a feminist. A feminine woman would admit to her weaknesses and her genuine need for a man’s guidance.

    Great point, BF! It’s nice, of course, when submission feels sexy, but you’re right that this feeling shouldn’t be the motivation.

    Reply

    • I would say that, as often, “Grace builds upon Nature”. Obeying a husband should be enjoyable, at least some of the time.

      As I implied above, to the extent that my wife obeys me, she probably gets satisfaction from following social expectations, from fulfilling a sense of duty, and from some erotic charge. And I will not pretend that I don’t get satisfaction from being obeyed. She asked me if it was OK if she joined a particular spiritual group recently. I was very flattered.

      Reply

    • Indeed, it is a good point. I find the whole dynamic both erotic and comforting. If anything, it’s more of the latter, probably because I don’t have to worry about steering the ship except perhaps on rare occasions. The sexy feeling ebbs and flows, but the comfort is always there.

      Reply

  11. That now-erased short series of comments was most amusing.

    Reply

  12. Then why the paranoid freak-out?

    ’cause people associate it with the stereotypes and I don’t wanna be teased 😦

    Reply

  13. Why are you always mean to me, and call me hurtful names? What did I ever do to you?

    Please – I’d really appreciate an explanation.

    Reply

    • I have never believed that you were attacked by traditionalist Christians OVER your illness, as you’ve always maintained; I don’t know ANY trads who don’t have pity and sympathy for people with physical and other ailments, so I’ve always thought you dishonest about that, and I haven’t seen any reason to think otherwise yet.

      Second, you’re a crybaby; all you ever did, before you go married, was whine about how awful Christians were about your relationship with your fiance, and just how mean, mean, mean we Christians are; and you always like to play that poor delicate little Asian flower role, everyone’s so mean to you; as if shortening your own chosen name from Butterfly Flower to ButtFlow is truly mean and hurtful. Suck it up, buttercup! Or shrinking violet / sensitive plant, since you always like to play those.

      I once gave you advice about something, at Chris’ blog, but instead of considering it, you just went on, “But what if this? and What if that?” instead of listening. So you didn’t want advice; you just wanted to be a drama queen and attention whore, as always.

      And yet you attack us Christians as nasty and mean, and blame us for your losing faith, and keep writing on your “I think I lost god” blog, associating with atheists and agnostics, and heretics like Racer X who attack us and our faith – but you call US mean and nasty? What the fuck are you? You think you’re not mean and nasty towards us, because you dish it out in passive-aggressive style, then shrink back and go all “Don’t hurt me with those mean evil words; I’m a sensitive girl!” shtick?

      All you’ve ever done is attack Christians and Christianity, blame us for everything, including your lack of faith, and accuse us of things that I highly doubt are real – as if Christians have really attacked you for your illness; I call bullshit.

      And somehow, because you’re a girl, you get away with it at certain blogs which let you speak your rants, because certain folks are sentimental old softies who feel sorry for you.

      Not me. I see right through you and all your bullshit, and I call bullshit on it, and you. Far as I can see, everything you’ve ever truly suffered has been self-inflicted.

      I see herbie31 is engaging with you over at your blog; I’d tell him not to fucking bother; you’re an enemy of the faith, and not worthy of wasting time trying to correct.

      Is that thorough enough?

      It will be interesting to see whether DC decides to scold me over this. But you wanted an explanation? Well, I’ve given you one!

      P.S. I’m no fan of Clarence, but I don’t think he was stalking you; he was genuinely concerned for you, and yet you get all paranoid and squicked over that, considering him creepy, and worse, getting paranoid that as a result of his concerns expressed, people might be able to tell you live somewhere in the NY / NJ / Delaware / area, wherever the hell Sandy hit? As if anyone would stalk you! Yet you sob to the blogmaster here to please erase that whole convo thread, despite the genuine warmth and humanity Clarence was displaying in expressing his concern for you, and you get your silly way.

      Why don’t you ask him to erase this comment, and the other one, too?

      Reply

    • But don’t worry; from here on out, I’ll return to my usual pattern, after the series of arguments I had with you over at Chris’ place a year or so ago, before I got tired of it all, of just completely ignoring you.

      And you can keep on with that “I’m so hard done by; woe is me; Christians are so mean and evil and hurtful and hateful and nasty!” shtick, unopposed – while you leave your droppings at the blogs of other faithful Christians who somehow don’t see through you like I do. (I’m glad you’re smart enough not to try commenting at mine, because as Chris said, you’d be in for a world of pain if you did. And he’s right.)

      Reply

  14. I have never believed that you were attacked by traditionalist Christians OVER your illness, as you’ve always maintained; I don’t know ANY trads who don’t have pity and sympathy for people with physical and other ailments, so I’ve always thought you dishonest about that, and I haven’t seen any reason to think otherwise yet.

    Why would I lie about that? Besides, you live in Canada. Here in America, things are different. Especially since America is the epicenter for all that Pentecostal “Jesus will heal you” televangelist nonsense. So just because you personally don’t know any Christians who believe illness is caused by sin, it doesn’t mean there aren’t any Traditionalists who believe that!

    I don’t hate all Christians. I’ve been treated poorly by some Christians – not every Christian. I know the crazy, vicious hypocritical Christians don’t speak for Christ; or least I continuously reassure myself that. I am a Christian. So is my husband. [Although we’re inclusive, non-traditional Anglicans. Does that qualify as “Christian” to you?]

    & associating with non-Christians [people like Racer X] doesn’t make me a bad person. Non-Christians, including Atheists, aren’t automatically bad people. They just have issues with believing in Christ. Having faith can be very difficult. A good Christian would understand that.

    I once gave you advice about something, at Chris’ blog, but instead of considering it, you just went on, “But what if this? and What if that?” instead of listening.

    I’m sorry if I seemed dismissive. I didn’t mean to hurt your feelings. I don’t remember the situation, so I can’t really comment on it. I don’t recall you ever being nice to me, though; since I began commenting on the blogosphere. Perhaps I had difficulty trusting your advice?

    Second, you’re a crybaby

    I’m very sensitive. Not on purpose, or for attention. I’m just sensitive. It gets worse when I’m on Prednisone [which is every few weeks; my RA flares so bad I can’t live without it…] I can’t control the sensitivity, I wish I could… For example, I cry thinking about Lobsters being boiled. Do you know they feel pain? 😦 How could people boil them to death? That’s not right!

    I’m sure you’ll take some-sadistic pleasure in knowing your mean comments sometimes make me cry. [But you’ll never make me cry as much as people who wear Chinchilla coats. Chinchillas are really adorable and shouldn’t be fur farmed. Do you know how many Chinchillas go into a single Chinchilla coat? Nearly 200! 😦 ]

    P.S. I’m no fan of Clarence, but I don’t think he was stalking you; he was genuinely concerned for you

    Worried about Clarence stalking me? Dude, I’m friends with Clarence. He knows my full name. I was teasing Clarence when he commented here. Before the storm, I told him my power might be out for two weeks and that I live high above sea level. Four days after the storm, he’s worried I was swept out to sea.

    Reply

  15. Believe me, I prefer to ignore you rather than be mean to you, and will return to doing so.

    In fact, I’m not even going to respond to anything, except to assure you, my feeling weren’t ‘hurt’ when I once tried to give you advice and you didn’t listen; I don’t bruise easily, I’m not sensitive like you seem to be.

    Reply

  16. I think there is an important to be said here. I don’t think women are really empty vessels. They chose men, after all. They choose those who will bring out certain traits in them. Your wife would probably be different if she married someone else, but it could also have happened that she married someone similar, and wasn’t dramatically different. There is a discussion about this, here:
    http://alphagameplan.blogspot.no/2012/12/depravity-and-dominance.html#comment-form
    And this is the comment that seems to make sense to me the most:

    “the woman is choosing the male who’s going to “mold her”. she’s like flesh looking for a bone. clay looking for an artisan – but she’s still doing the picking.

    in other words the girls were already conservative or bad – those women were already looking forward to abuse minors, conspire, etc. there’s no innocence on picking a man who can make the dreams come true “

    Reply

  17. […] is why it is so important whom she meets and whom she follows through life. (Have a look in the comments there for a comment entitled […]

    Reply

  18. […] “Whom she will become …” […]

    Reply

  19. […] also, “Whom she will become …” (argues that women are filled up intellectually and morally by men as well as […]

    Reply

  20. […] The life career of the imaginary “Audrey Rouget” has some interesting “red pill” implications which would probably interest the Manosphere. For example, I have touched on these issues here. […]

    Reply

  21. Posted by Julian O'Dea on September 2, 2015 at 6:24 am

    http://uncabob.blogspot.com.au/2015/08/woman-most-responsible-teenager-in-house.html

    ” It all harkens back to the one fundamental principle guiding male-female relations: Chicks love submitting to powerful men. “

    ” In a similar way, a man can respect a woman, but if he deems to treat her as his equal, she will soon come to resent him and leave to seek a man who actually portrays himself as superior – as a leader – to her. She seeks this instinctively. She is like water seeking a strong man to act as the container which will shape her “truths.” “

    Reply

  22. […] This previous post of mine is on a related theme. […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: