Things I learned from feminism I wish I'd learned from Christianity

[BlueEyedLady]

You are unaccustomed to dealing with a group of men who are determined to meet their own needs first.

There are appropriate contexts for everything. College is a great time and place to focus on yourself and your own wants and needs. Marriage is not.

And yes, I think pretty much everyone is used to dealing with people determined to serve themselves first. Selfishness isn’t exactly hard to come by, gender totally aside.

 

[starshiptrooper]

On the contrary, I daresay plenty of us are used to dealing with men who “meet their own needs first”, usually at the expense of our own needs being irrelevant.

That was, by the way, how I ended up with PTSD - because my boyfriend had decided that he needed to “meet his sexual needs” no matter how or what I wanted or if I was willing to do so. Or if I wasn’t meeting whatever emotional need for validation he had, that it was ok to harass or physically threaten me for daring to not be subservient enough, or, for example, having the gall to be better at something than he was. And because I had a head full of submission and being a proper woman, I didn’t have the background to realize the proper action was to get out rather than to knuckle under and allow myself to be hurt, even to the point where I felt that killing myself was the only way to be free. (Because, of course, I was also now an “impure” woman and thus wasn’t desirable for anything else.)

I have several female relatives who also run around with losers and ignore the decent guys in front of them for not being exciting enough. In past times, the men in my family would have acted like men and driven these cads off. Now that would be sexism and preventing women from realizing their sexual agency.

I can also complain about all the counterproductive ideas that I absorbed from people who should have known better, but that does not change the fact that the only person who can change my results is me.

 

[DarkLight]

I have several female relatives who also run around with losers and ignore the decent guys in front of them for not being exciting enough. In past times, the men in my family would have acted like men and driven these cads off. Now that would be sexism and preventing women from realizing their sexual agency.

I can also complain about all the counterproductive ideas that I absorbed from people who should have known better, but that does not change the fact that the only person who can change my results is me.

I’d thank you to not attribute thing like a guy “not being exciting enough” to me.

In any case, my ultra-traditional community had certainly never heard of sexual agency. What they did have was a healthy sense that women were supposed to be passive and modest and that this would somehow automatically repel abusers. If a woman was just nice and unassertive and conservative and submissive enough it would automatically get her a godly man who loved and cared for her - and not a cad who played to strong leader in public and was a simple bully in private.

 

[starshiptrooper]

I’d thank you to not attribute thing like a guy “not being exciting enough” to me.

Then I’d thank you to not imply that I am advocating bullying.

 

[DarkLight]

Then I’d thank you to not imply that I am advocating bullying.

I mentioned what was in fact the case in my experience - that a certain type of man can present as a strong leader in public, and be a simple bully in private. And by correlation, such a man is not likely to be deterred by others in the woman’s life, simply because he presents as the right sort of man in public. This is especially the case in a community that is primed to see women as in need of control.

I implied nothing about what you are or are not advocating

 

[DarkLight]

There are appropriate contexts for everything. College is a great time and place to focus on yourself and your own wants and needs. Marriage is not.

And yes, I think pretty much everyone is used to dealing with people determined to serve themselves first. Selfishness isn’t exactly hard to come by, gender totally aside.

I think the basic error comes in seeing needs as a zero-sum game. Fundamentally, a relationship (of any sort) is not going to work if one partner sees their needs as something that comes at the expense of the other person. Relationships require all parties to the relationship to be willing to consider the needs of everyone as a whole.

 

[starshiptrooper]

I mentioned what was in fact the case in my experience - that a certain type of man can present as a strong leader in public, and be a simple bully in private. And by correlation, such a man is not likely to be deterred by others in the woman’s life, simply because he presents as the right sort of man in public. This is especially the case in a community that is primed to see women as in need of control.

I implied nothing about what you are or are not advocating

So you expect me to believe that it was just a weird coincidence that when I mentioned men meeting their own needs first you brought up your situation?

 

[DarkLight]

So you expect me to believe that it was just a weird coincidence that when I mentioned men meeting their own needs first you brought up your situation?

You said we weren’t used to men who put their own needs first.

I said that in fact many of us are used to men who do put their own needs (and wants) first, even to the point of hurting us.

That’s a disagreement about the facts of what actually happens, not some grand statement about what you are or are not advocating.

 

[Xantippe]

Having seen enough blue pill marriages and having grown up with parents in one of them, even though it was supposedly one of those ostensibly “religious conservative marriages” that you love to hate, I know you are full of it.

You are unaccustomed to dealing with a group of men who are determined to meet their own needs first. To those who have grown up expecting others to atone for their sexism, privilege or whatever guilt trip you use to manipulate, this will feel like selfishness.

As I believe later posters have mentioned, selfishness isn’t exactly a rare and precious jewel.

A typical error of Red Pill thinking (which it looks like you have fallen into) is believing that the only two options are:

a) the Blue Pill (men have no boundaries, women get everything they want)

or

b) the Red Pill (women have no boundaries, men get everything they want).

I’d point out that a) and b) are both unrealistic long term (as the “victim” sex will eventually run out of the resources that allow them to fulfill the demands of the “predator” sex) and that those two options do not exhaust the logical possibilities.

There’s also a third option:

c) men and women both get to have boundaries and get their needs met with some attempt at fairness.

This is the option that I would recommend, as being both fairer and more sustainable than either a) or b).

I’ll comment more later, but I’d like to note that while you believe that you have seen lots of failed Blue Pill relationships in real life, I notice that you don’t say that you know lots of successful Red Pill relationships in real life. I suspect the reason for that is that (as I explained above) Red Pill relationships are not sustainable long term. I occasionally see a guy online bragging about his success at his Red Pill marriage, but the description always makes it sound like the relationship between a lion tamer and a lion–the Red Pill husband is always battling the Red Pill wife with a whip in one hand and a chair in the other.

No wonder the married Red Pill guys are so down on marriage–the way they do it, it sounds exhausting.

 

[DarkLight]

As I believe later posters have mentioned, selfishness isn’t exactly a rare and precious jewel.

Yeah - it’s annoying enough in a roommate. (How many time have I said that the kitchen counter is not a storage space? And would it kill you to not hit the snooze button 20 times in the morning when you know I work 2nd shift?) I can’t imagine having to share a bedroom and being stuck with someone who behaved that way, let alone trying to raise kids with someone like that.

 

[Xantippe]

I have several female relatives who also run around with losers and ignore the decent guys in front of them for not being exciting enough. In past times, the men in my family would have acted like men and driven these cads off. Now that would be sexism and preventing women from realizing their sexual agency.

That’s interesting.

I know I would never have dared to bring a guy around my family who wasn’t impressive.

As you get older, you’ll realize that families have unique cultures, and certain things that you believe now are universal to all families will turn out to be unique features of your family of origin.

I certainly find that to be true myself–that every household is like a tiny country.

 

[Xantippe]

I think the basic error comes in seeing needs as a zero-sum game. Fundamentally, a relationship (of any sort) is not going to work if one partner sees their needs as something that comes at the expense of the other person. Relationships require all parties to the relationship to be willing to consider the needs of everyone as a whole.

Yes.

With any luck at all, life together will be **better **than life separately.

 

[starshiptrooper]

As I believe later posters have mentioned, selfishness isn’t exactly a rare and precious jewel.

A typical error of Red Pill thinking (which it looks like you have fallen into) is believing that the only two options are:

a) the Blue Pill (men have no boundaries, women get everything they want)

or

b) the Red Pill (women have no boundaries, men get everything they want).

I’d point out that a) and b) are both unrealistic long term (as the “victim” sex will eventually run out of the resources that allow them to fulfill the demands of the “predator” sex) and that those two options do not exhaust the logical possibilities.

There’s also a third option:

c) men and women both get to have boundaries and get their needs met with some attempt at fairness.

This is the option that I would recommend, as being both fairer and more sustainable than either a) or b).

I will take another option, being able and willing to kick anyone to the curb if I am not getting what I want.

I’ll comment more later, but I’d like to note that while you believe that you have seen lots of failed Blue Pill relationships in real life, I notice that you don’t say that you know lots of successful Red Pill relationships in real life. I suspect the reason for that is that (as I explained above) Red Pill relationships are not sustainable long term. I occasionally see a guy online bragging about his success at his Red Pill marriage, but the description always makes it sound like the relationship between a lion tamer and a lion–the Red Pill husband is always battling the Red Pill wife with a whip in one hand and a chair in the other.

No wonder the married Red Pill guys are so down on marriage–the way they do it, it sounds exhausting.

I knew one guy who was a natural. He may have had 99 problems but a woman was not one of them in contrast to my father and other men I have known who did all the right things by your book, but strangely it was never enough.

That’s interesting.

I know I would never have dared to bring a guy around my family who wasn’t impressive.

As you get older, you’ll realize that families have unique cultures, and certain things that you believe now are universal to all families will turn out to be unique features of your family of origin.

I certainly find that to be true myself–that every household is like a tiny country.

Interesting perhaps in the same gruesome way that a train wreck is interesting.

 

[LightBound]

I** will take another option, being able and willing to kick anyone to the curb if I am not getting what I want.**I knew one guy who was a natural. He may have had 99 problems but a woman was not one of them in contrast to my father and other men I have known who did all the right things by your book, but strangely it was never enough.Interesting perhaps in the same gruesome way that a train wreck is interesting.

All about you, isn’t it? That’s why you’re alone and have embraced the red pill culture of being a basement dweller living off of cheetos and that dipshit Dalrock dumbass

 

[Xantippe]

I will take another option, being able and willing to kick anyone to the curb if I am not getting what I want.I knew one guy who was a natural. He may have had 99 problems but a woman was not one of them in contrast to my father and other men I have known who did all the right things by your book, but strangely it was never enough.

You’ll kick your little kids to the curb if you aren’t getting exactly what you want from them?



I don’t think you’ve figured out how this whole “parenthood” thing actually works.

Or you’d kick a disabled, pregnant or sick wife to the curb if she couldn’t deliver what you wanted?



Do you think that your hypothetical future wife ought to kick you to the curb if you ever get sick or disabled?

Is your Red Pill guy a married guy with kids, or just a single guy?

If he’s a single guy, I’m not very impressed. Also, if he could manage his life better, he wouldn’t have 99 problems. My husband does not have 99 problems.

I’m also not super impressed that you know 1.00 Red Pill guys in real life. I know lots of functional married people in real life, and not one Red Pill lion tamer type. (I’m sure it exists, but it’s not typically found among professionally successful men.)

Bear in mind that I don’t think that wives should get everything they want, or that husbands shouldn’t have boundaries–I believe in boundaries for everybody (including kids), and everybody getting to have needs (men, women and children).

What part of that is wrong?

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I will take another option, being able and willing to kick anyone to the curb if I am not getting what I want.I knew one guy who was a natural. He may have had 99 problems but a woman was not one of them in contrast to my father and other men I have known who did all the right things by your book, but strangely it was never enough.Interesting perhaps in the same gruesome way that a train wreck is interesting.

I guess I don’t get what you’re so passionate about here. From the sounds of it, you don’t plan on getting married. No one here has ever suggested you should.

Marriage is not for everyone.

 

[DarkLight]

Contentment is also a virtue. I’ve known plenty of people of all walks of life who had a problem with contentment that manifested as a “problem” with other people. I was re-reading Screwtape letters and it mentions this - there are certain people who go on and on about how others are selfish or incompetent or whatever, when the real problem is that they have unreasonable expectations. For a (stereotypical) example, a guy who leaves his wife home with multiple small children and expects a hot meal and a spotless house when he gets home is almost certainly going to be disappointed and frustrated.

 

[pensmama87]

I will take another option, being able and willing to kick anyone to the curb if I am not getting what I want.I knew one guy who was a natural. He may have had 99 problems but a woman was not one of them in contrast to my father and other men I have known who did all the right things by your book, but strangely it was never enough.Interesting perhaps in the same gruesome way that a train wreck is interesting.

This is what counts as enlightenment?

Yikes.

 

[UbiCaritas]

I will take another option, being able and willing to kick anyone to the curb if I am not getting what I want.I knew one guy who was a natural. He may have had 99 problems but a woman was not one of them in contrast to my father and other men I have known who did all the right things by your book, but strangely it was never enough.Interesting perhaps in the same gruesome way that a train wreck is interesting.

I actually did see a marriage like this in action once. Knew the couple through the very trad church we both attended. Their daughter, age 5, got cancer. Husband eventually demanded that the daughter be sent to live with his wife’s parents across the country because he felt his wife was too busy taking the kid to chemo and dealing with the results to be a “proper” wife to him. I mean, how DARE she prioritize cuddling their vomiting, hurting child over having sex on demand/a perfect house/having a spectacular dinner on the table every night?

She went along with it, too–admitted that she missed her kid sometimes (I wonder how the little girl felt?!) but said that a) it was her husband’s job to make major decisions, not hers and b) that at least her husband agreed they should try for another kid–one who, presumably, wouldn’t be so inconsiderate as to contract leukemia.

But hey, at least he got what he wanted, so the priorities were in order…

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I actually did see a marriage like this in action once. Knew the couple through the very trad church we both attended. Their daughter, age 5, got cancer. Husband eventually demanded that the daughter be sent to live with his wife’s parents across the country because he felt his wife was too busy taking the kid to chemo and dealing with the results to be a “proper” wife to him. I mean, how DARE she prioritize cuddling their vomiting, hurting child over having sex on demand/a perfect house/having a spectacular dinner on the table every night?

She went along with it, too–admitted that she missed her kid sometimes (I wonder how the little girl felt?!) but said that a) it was her husband’s job to make major decisions, not hers and b) that at least her husband agreed they should try for another kid–one who, presumably, wouldn’t be so inconsiderate as to contract leukemia.

But hey, at least he got what he wanted, so the priorities were in order…

That’s awful! I shouldn’t be surprised though; when my husband (then fiance) had cancer, we met a lot of other cancer patients and families. Spousal abandonment was sadly very common. I guess if people are quick to leave a sick spouse, why would a child be any different?