Crime Reporter: Man Had Sex With Wife Thousands Of Times Before Killing Her
Another example of how men oppress women. And over a period of 10 years! The horror of it all.
Crime Reporter: Man Had Sex With Wife Thousands Of Times Before Killing Her
Another example of how men oppress women. And over a period of 10 years! The horror of it all.
Found these three pieces and they all speak to the same thing: angry young men.
From Vox Day we find this excerpt from a book called Nutureshock
“Dr. Sarah Schoppe-Sullivan did a study of parenting styles, and how they relate to aggressiveness and acting out at school. The fathers in her study fell into three camps–the Progressive Dads, the Traditional Dads, and the Disengaged Dads…. However, Schoppe-Sullivan was surprised to discover that the Progressive Dads had poorer marital quality and rated their family functioning lower than the fathers in couples who took on traditional roles…[The Progressive Dads'] inconsistency and permissiveness led to a surprising result in Sullivan’s study: the children of Progressive Dads were aggressive and acted out in school nearly as much as the kids with fathers who were distant and disengaged.”
And then there is this post by blogger Tiffani
We live in a society of angry young men. You see them everywhere – slouching, defiant, rebellious. Is this just a natural “stage” of development, or are we creating these malcontents?As our sons have gotten older, my husband and I have given these questions a lot of thought. We have witnessed many friends sons grow from being sweet, fun-loving ruddy little boys into being angry, rude, disrespectful “teenagers”. We have watched godly parents lose their sons in fits of rebellion, leaving mangled remnants of families to stagger onward. Is there any hope for us? Will our sweet sons be fodder for an angry world?
As we were watching a movie one evening, I had an epiphany. It was not a great movie, in fact, we turned it off shortly after watching this one, life-changing scene. The movie was Alexander the Great, and the scene was around the time Alexander was 12 years old. His father was watching his men trying to break and “unbreakable” stallion. The stallion was truly rogue. He would wildly strike at any person within striking distance. He lounged, kicked, bit. Alexander’s father issued a decree that any man who could tame the horse, could have him. None of the soldiers came forward to claim the prize. No man came forward. No man but Alexander himself. At 12 years old, he said “Father, I can tame him!”. At this statement, Alexander’s mother moved to stop her young son, but his father, with one look, warned his mother to remain silent. Was this the action of a controlling man? Or was it the action of a man, who knows what men in the making require? Alexander brought that horse out of the shadows (he fought for fear of the shadows) and rode him admirably. That horse became the stead, Bucephalus, that Alexander the Great rode into battle when he conquered the mighty Persian Empire.
I believe that was the moment that Alexander the Great became a man. Would he have become the man that he was, had his mother been successful in her attempt to “protect” him? I do not think that he would have. His father knew what was needed. Although it makes no sense to women, men need defining moments of manhood.
And finally this over at WND by Patrice Lewis
As they grow older, boys don’t always want – or need – protection. They need challenges, adventures and acts of knighthood. Fathers – strong fathers – know when to push aside the protection of mothers and start training their sons to be men. The operative word is training.The training is critical. Untrained boys grow up to be monsters: out of control, predatory on women, irresponsible, unable or unwilling to restrain their testosterone-fueled urges for aggression or sex. Our current society is littered with the damage left over from boys who never learned what it takes to be a man. Sadly, these “adult boys” often procreate indiscriminately and uncaringly, then refuse to be a father to the children they produce.
But trained men transform society. They work hard. They move heavy things. They build shelters. They protect, defend and rescue. They provide for their families. They do all the scary, ugly, dirty stuff women can’t (or won’t) do. Trained men are, in the words of columnist Dennis Prager, the glory of civilization.
As Tiffani points out, boys need men to help them establish their manhood in appropriate ways. Men understand that boys need defining experiences and challenges to fulfill their biologically programmed roles. Women don’t understand this, but that’s OK. Strong fathers (or father figures) will instinctively step in and start training boys on how to tame the testosterone, how to work, how to respect women, how to lead and defend, and how to slay dragons.
Trouble begins when there isn’t a male role model for a boy to emulate. If men are absent, emasculated or unwilling to teach boys how to behave, then boys don’t learn how to be men. Simple as that.
Well, its almost that simple. Men also need to have a reason to be a part of this world and continue the job of creating and bettering society. Or in other words, if both the fruits of our labor and of our loins can be taken from us men as well as our marriages (and often all at the same time), then we have nothing to gain by participating in society and that anger will infest even those who were raised right.
I’ve been meaning to link to this post by Laura over at her blog Full Of Grace Seasoned With Salt She came across a rather lengthy letter written by a woman that was published in Harper’s titled “Female Suffrage: A Letter to the Christian Woman”
Its much too long and too many things I would want to quote to bring it all here. Its a good read and I recommend it highly. In fact, Laura has been on the Women’s Suffrage topic for a couple weeks. Might take a while to catch up on it but its all very nicely done.
The next big thing is….
The Selleck Waterfall Sandwich
My favorite is probably the bologna sandwich tho too be honest, unless you a woman who lusted over him way back in the day (or gay) there isn’t too much to get excited about.
a business that costs 25k and makes an annual profit of ~20k+. Any recent lotto winners want to give a poor blogger a loan?
I’ve come across an interesting site called Shrink4Men and have been reading thru some of the posts there. I came across this post titled “8 Red Flag Dating Phrases that Should Send You Running” Some good info there and some of it should be patently obvious. Like the woman who refers to herself as a princess, or as a drama queen. Those shouldn’t even need to be said but I recognized some things in my PEW
6. “All of my ex-boyfriends/ex-husband(s) are jerks.” Wow, yeah. It wasn’t quite that they were all jerks, but that nothing was her fault. Now it is me that is the supreme evil one. I am now the source of all of her problems, even things that happened before we met and certainly everything that is wrong in her life now.
7. “I don’t speak to my father.” I would add to this one the relationship with mother as well. PEW definitely did not have a good relationship there. Not the worst by far, but some serious issues. Also, Shrink4Men brings up how the mother treats the father. I think that is a good thing to look at because there were some signs there as well that I tried to work with her to correct but damage was already done and at any rate was too late for me.
8. “I like it when the man makes the plans.” S4M notes on this one “For instance, she expects you to make all the plans and you inevitably choose something she doesn’t like. She then gets to tell you what a disappointment you are and you “never” do anything she likes.” Oh how I HATED this one. It was especially bad after marriage. She wouldn’t choose ANYTHING. Didn’t care what we did, didn’t care where we went to eat. Didn’t care if we stayed in or went out. But of course I was expected to know what it was she wanted despite her steadfast refusal to even voice a preference. So of course I could not do right because I hadn’t an inkling of what was wanted. Talk about a breakdown in communication! I don’t think this one is too obvious, but if S4m is right. If she is one that wants the man to make all the plans, that should certainly be a big warning sign that needs to at least be looked at.
I have a friend who had asked/complained to me about how it was okay, even good, for a guy to have sex and yet for women its a bad thing. I had tried to explain the difference as well as the fact that I am not one to approve of male “sluts” any more than the female kind. But I was never able to articulate a very good answer.
Well the much more eloquent Ferdinand Bardamu came to my rescue in his article up at the Spearhead. He writes:
The sexual double standard arises from the reality that getting sex is easy for women but hard for men. The reason studs are respected and sluts are derided is because being a stud requires skill, talent, and practice, while being a slut merely requires a pulse and a lack of impulse control. The unsung flip side of the double standard, however, is that female virgins are cherished whereas male virgins are ridiculed. A man who can’t get laid signals to the world that he is a loser, while a woman who resists spreading her legs for every scumbag who winks at her shows herself to be a sober, selective person. Because a female’s primary goal is getting the highest-quality man available to commit to her, women who cannot or will not stay in a relationship are poor sources of information on men. The male virgin and the female slut are mirror images of each other in terms of attractiveness to and knowledge of the opposite sex.
This is the best summary I have ever seen on the issue and was quite happy to hear that above-mentioned friend found the article quite enlightening.
Prof Hale put up his New Years Resolution already, which is to continue in his usual awesomeness. So I thought I would put up my own post with my resolution:
My 30 year mission, to explore strange new ideas, to seek out new things to do and new places to do them, to boldly go where this man has never gone before.
Not sure why I had to do that, I just did. Thanks for indulging me. My “resolution” is to continue making “my next thirty years” better than my first 30. My first 30 kinda sucked so its been rather easy to be successful at the next 30. Just 27 more years to go to see if I can make it happen.
I am sure you have all seen references to the usual Christmas story on the various blogs you read so I thought I would tie some things together
Leviticus 25:25; If thy brother be waxen poor, and hath sold away [some] of his possession, and if any of his kin come to redeem it, then shall he redeem that which his brother sold
25:47-49 And if a sojourner or stranger wax rich by thee, and thy brother [that dwelleth] by him wax poor, and sell himself unto the stranger [or] sojourner by thee, or to the stock of the stranger’s family:
After that he is sold he may be redeemed again; one of his brethren may redeem him:
Either his uncle, or his uncle’s son, may redeem him, or [any] that is nigh of kin unto him of his family may redeem him; or if he be able, he may redeem himself.
We see here that only a kinsman redeemer would be able to redeem us from the debt of sin. And as all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of G-d, and as that debt is not one we could ever repay, it is only through a kinsman who is both willing and able to repay the debt that our ransom could be paid. It is also important that the Christ indeed be a human and therefore our kin, that He might buy us our freedom.
The genealogy in Matthew gives us the lineage of Joseph which traces back through King David of whom the Meshiach Nagid was to come. But there is a problem with this. Joseph was technically in line for the throne should one ever come back, but was under the curse placed upon his forefather (and King) Jechoniah which was pronounced by the Prophet Jeremiah
Thus saith the LORD, Write ye this man childless, a man [that] shall not prosper in his days: for no man of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne of David, and ruling any more in Judah.
So clearly no son of Joseph could rule upon that throne. So lets look at the genealogy given in Luke 3:23-38 which makes clear the lineage of Mary through King David, but not through Jechoniah. So Mary is of a good lineage, but she is a woman and cannot pass along a birthright such as one to the throne. In fact, as the lineage is traced through the father she had nothing to offer in way of birthright. So what gave Mary this right? It is because of the law laid out in Numbers 27 as shown below.
Number 27:1-8 Then came the daughters of Zelophehad, the son of Hepher, the son of Gilead, the son of Machir, the son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh the son of Joseph: and these [are] the names of his daughters; Mahlah, Noah, and Hoglah, and Milcah, and Tirzah. And they stood before Moses, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes and all the congregation, [by] the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying, Our father died in the wilderness, and he was not in the company of them that gathered themselves together against the LORD in the company of Korah; but died in his own sin, and had no sons. Why should the name of our father be done away from among his family, because he hath no son? Give unto us [therefore] a possession among the brethren of our father.
And Moses brought their cause before the LORD. And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, The daughters of Zelophehad speak right: thou shalt surely give them a possession of an inheritance among their father’s brethren; and thou shalt cause the inheritance of their father to pass unto them. And thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel, saying, If a man die, and have no son, then ye shall cause his inheritance to pass unto his daughter.
So from Mary’s side the Messiah is of the seed of David, and from His legal,adoptive father Joseph he gains a legal claim to the throne of Israel, but without the accompanying curse that ended the line of kings so long ago. All this so that we may be reconciled to a gracious G-d who created the universe and set the stars in motion, and yet cares enough about mankind that He sent His Son here to die, to shed His blood in a horrific and painful manner so that lowly man could stand in the presence of the Almighty.
Woot!
The incredible Jennifer Knapp is putting out an album this coming year. Check out her website for more info.
From the Spearhead
However, what kind of social dominance can have guys that are brainwashed since children to believe that women like chumps?
The male protagonist does good stuff out of the kindness of his heart, but the real Nice Guys ™ just do it because they are begging for vag. And women know it, and are repulsed by their lack of testicular fortitude.
I would say that “begging for vag” might be a bit harsh, but the gist is much the same. I think that the Nice Guy ™ is just looking to be loved. Vag may be a part of it but the need isn’t necessarily so crass. However these two quotes go along well with my prior posts. Whether from parents or the culture at large boys take in the message that women like chumps (A.K.A. Nice Guys ™) and so fashion their lives to be one. After all, men have an innate need for companionship and because of that much of what we do is at least partially an attempt to fill that need.
Its also another example of men thinking that women look for the same things in a partner that we do. Men want someone pleasant, laid back, non-confrontational, loyal and reliable (among others of course) so we try to be those things despite how detrimental it is to us because we truly believe that those qualities are desirable.
My boy just (sorta) hit on the waitress. He was telling her about planets and then said “But there is one thats even hotter, Your anus (Uranus) is the hottest”
For those on a gluten-free diet, or just wanting a simple cookie to make with your kid
1 cup peanut butter
1 cup sugar
1 egg
Mix well and place on lightly greased cookies sheet. Cook for 10-12 minutes at 350 degrees.
Thats it. Gotta love simple cookie recipes
Why do we have so many hang ups that keep us from doing things that feel good? I mean, if I can engage is some behavior that makes me feel good, and it doesn’t harm anyone, whats up with the hangups? Should there be anything between me and doing something that gives me an all day high? So why so many mental hangups with me conquering the flesh? Some would even say that I would be a better person if I were to do it daily and I have to say that I agree. I’d be more successful in life, more confident and have ever greater success with the opposite sex.
Oh, this is about exercise. Just what were you thinking?!?
The folloing comments made me laugh. They are from the comments on a post by LILGRL over at GirlGame. Epoxytocin is LILGRL’s boyfriend
# Epoxytocin
and grabbing onto his arm as you walk in stilettos … good ways to demonstrate your cute, girly lack of coordinationFixed that for ya
# LILGRL
Fixed that for ya
This coming from someone who buys me 7-inch heels specifically because he knows I can’t walk in them.
# Epoxytocin
I can’t walk in them
You’re not supposed to.
I must say that this is perhaps the most accurate internet test I have ever seen! It will peg which muppet you are in just 4 questions or less.
Some of you won’t care at all, but for those that do, the Black Friday ads are being announced. You might find yourself with a really great deal on something that will make it worth getting up and seeing the mass of humanity that is certainly entertaining to watch. In fact, the peculiarity of shoppers behavior is interesting enough that it can make the whole experience for you. But if you do go, go EARLY. Be in line before the store opens (at least one hour) so that you can get out quickly. Otherwise the stuff is gone and you have the huge lines. Also, small and/or pregnant people should be extra careful as humanity in all its glory will be on display.
Check out the sites below or google “Black Friday Ads“
There’s nothing quite like telling your man that he is unwanted. Must make women feel better about themselves to tear down others, else they wouldn’t do it so often. But aren’t we starting this child out a tad young?
Love. I noticed several years ago that its a difficult concept because it is not used to define the same thing in men as in women. Its kinda like a Christian and a Mormon having a discussion. They both have very different definitions of the words they use and so mean different things by them, but they think they are having a discussion and so each is able to go on blissfully unaware that the other did not understand them. In a similar fashion both men and women refer to love, but they are talking past each other because their definition of the word is not the same.
I came across the following (which prompted this post as someone else was pointing out something close to my own conclusions) from the comments on The Spearhead made by Globalman at 10:24pm
Love? Women are not capable of it. Period. No need for any more discussion on that point.Relationships? They are actually not possible between a man and a woman. ‘Relationships’ are a scam introduced to brainwash men into providing for women. And I used to be called ‘Mr. Relationships’ by my friends. LOL! I have studied and worked on ‘relationships’ for 32 years. My conclusion is that a reasonably intelligent man can not actually have a relationship with a woman as men understand relationships. Women don’t want men, they want what men provide, whereas men actually really want a relationship with a woman as we have been programmed to want such. … Us poor ‘beta providers’ believed our mums that woman want relationships. It’s all a lie.
Globalman breaks it into two categories and perhaps he is correct to do so but I have not put much thought into that. What I have noticed, however, is that when we talk of love we use a very different term. Women fall into, and out of, love very quickly and often. Men take longer to fall in love and when they do they graft that person into their being and it is not easy to fall out of love as it is akin to tearing apart the very fiber of yourself. Now if women loved as men it would not be possible for them to fall in and out of love. It would be too damaging to their selves(psyches.) It is possible that this characteristic was placed by G-d (or evolution if you prefer) as women in primitive societies had less control over who they were with as well as a high mortality rate for men could see them with a new partner on a somewhat frequent basis. Whatever the reason for the difference, it would be nice to have a different word for the two feelings, or that our young men would be taught of this, and other differences, so that we don’t have to learn it the hard way, or learn it from some who would push them towards an immoral path.
Globalman also denigrates women’s desire for relationships. I think if we look at the above then it makes a bit more sense that what we think a relationship is differs between the sexes. A man wants a relationship for companionship, sex, a mother to his children and to ensure that the children are indeed his. A woman wants a relationship for someone to provide materially for her and her children (tho not necessarily his children.) It does seem that GM is correct when he states that women want what men provide, and not men themselves. Once they manage to get a guy (marriage) they spend the rest of their lives belittling him, behind his back, to his face as well as in public. Women also initiate divorce in record numbers, with an increase of 600% over the last few decades and among certain groups of women (college educated) in 90% of the divorces. I hardly think it coincidental that at the same time as that increase came favorable laws to enable women to keep the kids AND the now despised man’s money. Add in pop-cultures message of how women need a man like a fish needs a bicycle and GM’s claim of “lie” has far too much truth in it.
Came across the new Kellie Pickler video for her song Didn’t You Know How Much I Loved You If country music isn’t your thing, just watch it on mute. Beautiful scenery in more ways than one!