Yes, lots of married men are into the "going along to get along" trap because they think it is better for the kids. Don't do it.
If from all that is reasonable and logical it says you should move along, just fucking go.
A woman that nags you all the time, who is never satisfied, who acts as if she is entitled to everything and responsible for nothing will inevitably divorce you, and if you're not prepared for this things will be even worse.
Seeing you losing your dignity is way worse for your kids, and now more and more jurisdictions across the world default to joint custody. But you need to be prepared for this.
Feminism was a real haymaker that has Western Civilization reeling.
I think this is largely because civilization heavily relies on women enforcing social norms across hierarchies, while men enforce the rules within their hierarchies.
This is the function of gossip, ever-shifting social cliques, PTAs, church ladies' groups, social ostracism, etc. -- consensus affirmation, enforcement, and management.
"You don’t shake an individual out of her faith in a false religion, or cause her to reject her culturally imposed identity by gentle persuasion, but by total rejection of that identity and forcing her to choose between it and you."
Wisely said. Women do not like men who are not serious.
The same applies to Clown World, only total rejection suffices, while with clever arguments and what not you may as well order your new shiny red nose before proceeding further.
Just look at the UK government, if there is anything they are more directly at war with than their own people - it is the Russians who have had enough of red noses. And for good reason, everyone knows who will win.
Deep down, most women do not actually like feminism, they just parrot the talking points because that's what they hear. Already the pendulum is swinging back the other way as young men are starting to reject it wholesale. I think in my lifetime feminism will be on life support. Can't wait for that day.
Feminism is dead. Men have already rejected it. Women turning en masse to Christianity is now all but inevitable, because their only choce is between Christ and full-blown techno-Hyborean sex slavery.
Before turning to Christ, my female cubicle office mates confronted me to try and get me to self identify as a feminist. As a female in science, they said I basically had too. It was all very weird. I said they could look at my actions and believe I was whatever they thought. But they wanted a verbal confession of my debt and allegiance to feminism. Glad I stood firm and didn't claim allegiance to this world.
Edit:
My actions now: A lot of cooking from scratch, raising children and Christian homeschooling.
Because the vast majority of men are also feminists.
Most men are of low status. Taking care for a woman is not part of their programming. They want a "strong independent woman", because that means that they don't have to do anything. Weak men like feminist women, because it gives them the impression they don't have to take care of them, they are not responsible for them.
The other thing is this: Women usually adopt the ideology of the most dominant man in their closest social circle. If you are truely a dominant man, the women around you will gravitate ideologically towards you.
Yet if there is no dominant man in the immediate vicinity of a woman, the woman will just adopt "current thing" that the media tells her.
The reality is that nobody has any idea what a woman is like until after her eyes turn white and she starts grabbing sheets and scratching your back in the throes of sexual ecstasy, herself included. And when it comes to conversion dick is far more persuasive than words.
Young feminists who aren't too radical are easily changed.. One of my friends went from very woke feminist to traditional Catholic pregnant wife about 6 months after meeting her husband. Another 2 girls are still a bit woke but have become significantly less feminist and more feminine over time.
Because then there would be no women left to talk to. As OP said, it is the default cultural script. Unless you mean the hardcore radical ones, then by all means avoid.
A woman won't appreciate or your respect you for aiding them in their wrong behavior. Going along to get along is one of the worst things we humans do.
Work on being a situational Alpha at home with your wife, or around women in general, if you can. Don't pedestalize us to the point you blind yourself to who we really are.
1. No woman can live up to that level of perfection and it'll make us crazy to constantly try to do so.
2. It will only result in women using you when it's convenient for them and ignoring you when it's not. Have enough self-respect to not be a doormat to anyone, especially a woman.
3.Women want to be taken care of, and part of taking care of us is telling us no sometimes or that we're wrong when we are being wrong.
Love means pointing out when someone's wrong, not letting them walk off a cliff to their death just because you feel uncomfortable being a bad guy, however briefly, in our eyes.
Feminism is evil, no doubt about it. But I also see why it became so prevalent. When a man won't be a man in a relationship we have no choice but to step up and try to fill that role, but it makes us anxious, bitter, and angry. Don't put us into a position where we feel like we have to do so because you can't/won't be a man.
Also, there will always be women you can't help or guide. Cut them loose and move on. You can't save/help everyone, and it's not your job to do so.
Yes, I believe women do have, and should have, agency. We too are image bearers of Christ, just as men are image bearers of Him as well. But women need to be held accountable for our actions, just as much as men should. We all will give an account of ourselves to God, we should also have to bear the consequnces of our actions here too.
That's another evil of feminism, it's allowed women to act out without any consequence, because women hold more of the power in society then we should hold. The consequences of that aren't always immediate, but we will always reap what we sow. Which is what we are currently seeing in society now.
Absolutely there's potential. Almost nothing is a monolith when talking about sociology. I was asking her about agency because, if women have agency, they have no justification to blame men for "not being men" since the women themselves can be held responsible for their own actions and behavior, but if they don't have agency, they *could* blame men for "not stepping up", but then they'd lose the justification for why they should be allowed to vote, or hold political office, or really hold ANY position in society that requires assigning responsibility for outcomes.
Seemingly a large number of women like to try and pick and choose when they have agency and when they don't, and it doesn't work like that. It's very frustrating for men to deal with. They want to have their cake and eat it too.
I think her point is more one of scope than just agency though. I trust my husband/fiance/boyfriend to be the leader in our relationship. Being the Alpha is not in my scope of practice, but if he is going to cop out and not take the lead then I feel the need to pick up the slack, and yes, that would make me anxious, bitter and angry.
That would not be a very favorable analysis in the vast majority of women, I suspect.
The reason I was asking her that is because she was... complaining? Critiquing? this idea that "men are not being men and so women feel they have to step up and be the man even though they don't want to". The question of agency is a critical one: if a woman DOES have agency, then the responsibility for the outcomes of her decisions falls solely on her and she cannot blame men for outcomes she doesn't like. If she does NOT have agency, then all of the responsibility is on men and women are not to blame for anything, but then there is no good reason for why women should be given any power or authority in society since they can't have any responsibility assigned to them.
It's like going along to get along with any major moral flaw. Sodomy, pedos, alcoholics, etc.
It simply won't change their behavior, and ends up enabling the problem. Hard lines are the only bright light in a cave of darkness.
And then it's their choice to follow the light and accept God's grace, not yours. You have nearly nothing to do with it, you won't be a prince charming, and your ego only gets in their way.
An interesting lead-in to stimulate conversation in group settings involving strangers I've been using for a while is: we're all victims of feminism.
Results vary, but it often creates fun banter and breaks the ice. I find it also quickly helps identify women (and guys) to keep at arms length.
Yes, lots of married men are into the "going along to get along" trap because they think it is better for the kids. Don't do it.
If from all that is reasonable and logical it says you should move along, just fucking go.
A woman that nags you all the time, who is never satisfied, who acts as if she is entitled to everything and responsible for nothing will inevitably divorce you, and if you're not prepared for this things will be even worse.
Seeing you losing your dignity is way worse for your kids, and now more and more jurisdictions across the world default to joint custody. But you need to be prepared for this.
Feminism was a real haymaker that has Western Civilization reeling.
I think this is largely because civilization heavily relies on women enforcing social norms across hierarchies, while men enforce the rules within their hierarchies.
This is the function of gossip, ever-shifting social cliques, PTAs, church ladies' groups, social ostracism, etc. -- consensus affirmation, enforcement, and management.
"You don’t shake an individual out of her faith in a false religion, or cause her to reject her culturally imposed identity by gentle persuasion, but by total rejection of that identity and forcing her to choose between it and you."
Wisely said. Women do not like men who are not serious.
The same applies to Clown World, only total rejection suffices, while with clever arguments and what not you may as well order your new shiny red nose before proceeding further.
Just look at the UK government, if there is anything they are more directly at war with than their own people - it is the Russians who have had enough of red noses. And for good reason, everyone knows who will win.
Deep down, most women do not actually like feminism, they just parrot the talking points because that's what they hear. Already the pendulum is swinging back the other way as young men are starting to reject it wholesale. I think in my lifetime feminism will be on life support. Can't wait for that day.
Feminism is dead. Men have already rejected it. Women turning en masse to Christianity is now all but inevitable, because their only choce is between Christ and full-blown techno-Hyborean sex slavery.
Gets into the Freudian concept of introjection, which further reinforces the notion of feminism as a gender narcissistic social phenomenon.
'Introjection'
- A famous Gamma's pseudo-scientific translation of 'listening to demons'.
If a man’s idol is money then he’s likely expecting his wife to contribute financially.
Before turning to Christ, my female cubicle office mates confronted me to try and get me to self identify as a feminist. As a female in science, they said I basically had too. It was all very weird. I said they could look at my actions and believe I was whatever they thought. But they wanted a verbal confession of my debt and allegiance to feminism. Glad I stood firm and didn't claim allegiance to this world.
Edit:
My actions now: A lot of cooking from scratch, raising children and Christian homeschooling.
Reminds me of that meme going around, framing being a housewife as the husband “rescuing her from her cubicle office job”.
>Going along to get along
*breathes in* ooooooooyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy, that's all I've ever seen for 40 years.
> Going along to get along is not an option, Deltas. Never pedestalize poison
Treat feminism like just another fitness test. Meaning, she expects you to prove your strength to her by disregarding most of what she says.
"Never pedestalize poison" great quote.
If a woman is a feminist, why would any man waste his time by talking to her?
Poon.
Because the vast majority of men are also feminists.
Most men are of low status. Taking care for a woman is not part of their programming. They want a "strong independent woman", because that means that they don't have to do anything. Weak men like feminist women, because it gives them the impression they don't have to take care of them, they are not responsible for them.
The other thing is this: Women usually adopt the ideology of the most dominant man in their closest social circle. If you are truely a dominant man, the women around you will gravitate ideologically towards you.
Yet if there is no dominant man in the immediate vicinity of a woman, the woman will just adopt "current thing" that the media tells her.
Pretty sure I don't know any male feminists, not really their natural habitat around here.
They exist. Where I’m from the alphas call them gay!
When the deltas call them gay again, we win.
If you don't want your question answered, don't ask it in the first place.
It was meant to be a somewhat rhetorical question on the off chance anyone might have an interesting answer.
Sex.
For you and Beery, never stick your **** in crazy. If you're into extreme sports, that's down to you.
The reality is that nobody has any idea what a woman is like until after her eyes turn white and she starts grabbing sheets and scratching your back in the throes of sexual ecstasy, herself included. And when it comes to conversion dick is far more persuasive than words.
Young feminists who aren't too radical are easily changed.. One of my friends went from very woke feminist to traditional Catholic pregnant wife about 6 months after meeting her husband. Another 2 girls are still a bit woke but have become significantly less feminist and more feminine over time.
That's good to hear, thank you, but I still see no reason to waste time on them. Let them fix themselves first.
Because then there would be no women left to talk to. As OP said, it is the default cultural script. Unless you mean the hardcore radical ones, then by all means avoid.
A woman's belief system is often little more than a social signalling mechanism.
Yeah, the signal is "I'm totally nuts, you want a piece of this?"
I've seen women happily abandon feminism, conservatism, libertarianism, or any other ism you care to name - for the "right" man.
Oddly enough, the older a woman is and the more thoroughly feminism has ruined her life, the less willing she is to admit it was all a mistake.
I have my sister as a good example of this, which is why I wouldn't waste my time.
"Freedom is slavery". Never has this been more true...
A word to all the Deltas out there:
A woman won't appreciate or your respect you for aiding them in their wrong behavior. Going along to get along is one of the worst things we humans do.
Work on being a situational Alpha at home with your wife, or around women in general, if you can. Don't pedestalize us to the point you blind yourself to who we really are.
1. No woman can live up to that level of perfection and it'll make us crazy to constantly try to do so.
2. It will only result in women using you when it's convenient for them and ignoring you when it's not. Have enough self-respect to not be a doormat to anyone, especially a woman.
3.Women want to be taken care of, and part of taking care of us is telling us no sometimes or that we're wrong when we are being wrong.
Love means pointing out when someone's wrong, not letting them walk off a cliff to their death just because you feel uncomfortable being a bad guy, however briefly, in our eyes.
Feminism is evil, no doubt about it. But I also see why it became so prevalent. When a man won't be a man in a relationship we have no choice but to step up and try to fill that role, but it makes us anxious, bitter, and angry. Don't put us into a position where we feel like we have to do so because you can't/won't be a man.
Also, there will always be women you can't help or guide. Cut them loose and move on. You can't save/help everyone, and it's not your job to do so.
I smashed that like button.
Query: do you feel that women have, or should have, agency as adults? Or, that they do not/should not have agency, at any point?
Yes, I believe women do have, and should have, agency. We too are image bearers of Christ, just as men are image bearers of Him as well. But women need to be held accountable for our actions, just as much as men should. We all will give an account of ourselves to God, we should also have to bear the consequnces of our actions here too.
That's another evil of feminism, it's allowed women to act out without any consequence, because women hold more of the power in society then we should hold. The consequences of that aren't always immediate, but we will always reap what we sow. Which is what we are currently seeing in society now.
An excellent and thoughtful response. Thank you.
Agency is naturally paired with critical thinking and responsibility.....so in general, not many do. The potential is there though.
Absolutely there's potential. Almost nothing is a monolith when talking about sociology. I was asking her about agency because, if women have agency, they have no justification to blame men for "not being men" since the women themselves can be held responsible for their own actions and behavior, but if they don't have agency, they *could* blame men for "not stepping up", but then they'd lose the justification for why they should be allowed to vote, or hold political office, or really hold ANY position in society that requires assigning responsibility for outcomes.
Seemingly a large number of women like to try and pick and choose when they have agency and when they don't, and it doesn't work like that. It's very frustrating for men to deal with. They want to have their cake and eat it too.
I think her point is more one of scope than just agency though. I trust my husband/fiance/boyfriend to be the leader in our relationship. Being the Alpha is not in my scope of practice, but if he is going to cop out and not take the lead then I feel the need to pick up the slack, and yes, that would make me anxious, bitter and angry.
That would not be a very favorable analysis in the vast majority of women, I suspect.
The reason I was asking her that is because she was... complaining? Critiquing? this idea that "men are not being men and so women feel they have to step up and be the man even though they don't want to". The question of agency is a critical one: if a woman DOES have agency, then the responsibility for the outcomes of her decisions falls solely on her and she cannot blame men for outcomes she doesn't like. If she does NOT have agency, then all of the responsibility is on men and women are not to blame for anything, but then there is no good reason for why women should be given any power or authority in society since they can't have any responsibility assigned to them.
It's like going along to get along with any major moral flaw. Sodomy, pedos, alcoholics, etc.
It simply won't change their behavior, and ends up enabling the problem. Hard lines are the only bright light in a cave of darkness.
And then it's their choice to follow the light and accept God's grace, not yours. You have nearly nothing to do with it, you won't be a prince charming, and your ego only gets in their way.
Hard, well enforced lines.
There aren’t many women (or even men, frankly) living in the West today who have rejected feminism in toto.
For proof of this, just watch their reaction to a statement like “Women shouldn’t be allowed to vote”