It's raining men and problems.
#41
Quote:You really do look at all the angles in tackling a situation 

That's because virtue is a means between two extremes, and like I said I dealt with this issue and raised two daughters so I had to give it a lot of thought and prayer over the years.


Here is another article by Pat Archibold (a trad cat) which discusses another side of the issue:
Men Behaving Badly—I Hate Ogling
Reply
#42
(06-25-2018, 06:30 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote:
Quote:You really do look at all the angles in tackling a situation 

That's because virtue is a means between two extremes, and like I said I dealt with this issue and raised two daughters so I had to give it a lot of thought and prayer over the years.


Here is another article by Pat Archibold (a trad cat) which discusses another side of the issue:
Men Behaving Badly—I Hate Ogling

Trigger warning:


Where to start….Granted, the male author is speaking primarily to men, I presume, but I cannot help but whiff the stink of a man who proclaims aloud to men and then immediately glances at the nearest women to see if they are validating his pronouncements—we have all met/maybe even have been this venal type of man. Where have all the gentleman gone? Good question—perhaps they are hiding in the same damn closest with all the gentlewomen. (Let us just hope that they are not fondling each other while in the closet together.)

From the way I hear women speak, I wonder if there are any ladies left. Recently, I had two married women ask me, randomly from what I can recall, if I were a tits or an ass man. These same two also confessed to having had rape fantasies, not involving their husbands, mind you. Unlike most religious guys, given what I have gathered from anecdotal and forum experience, I am quite comfortable talking with (pretty) women, and they with me. The things that I have heard women confess to me would make a corn-fed, rosary-praying Midwestern Trad renounce his faith in God. (To illustrate: a woman once revealed to me that she had been in a sex cult in Florida, so, ipso facto, I could do anything I wanted to her, but I that I needed to act because she was approaching The Wall [the biological one, not the Trumpian one] and needed the validation.) I am under no illusions about female sexuality; I wish more Catholic men could say the same.

Unfortunately, what is not being said from the bema is being preached by men from disparate PUA and MGTOW sites, and I cannot blame young Catholic men from disregarding their priests in this matter and looking toward men who may not be the most moral of men. With the increasing economic and sexual freedom of women, combined with a culture that no longer shames premarital sex, combined with a government that subsidizes bastardization, combined with access to abortion services, combined with a court system that is inherently biased against fathers, women no longer need to act like ladies. Who can blame them for not wanting to, given the option? Women, not men, have ***always*** controlled the chthonic gateway to sex. Men will do whatever they must do—and only what they must do—to gain such coveted access. If women, en masse, decided that they were no longer going to open their legs for men without a wedding ring, you could be sure that men, en masse, would suddenly become more concerned with learning how to manage a household rather than their, ahem, joysticks.

Any young man who has left his prie dieu in his room for any length of time knows how easy it can be for men (not necessarily him, though, hence the incel crisis) to have sex with no commitment-worthy strings attached. Perhaps I have lived in the wrong states and gone to the wrong parishes, but how many of us can attest to seemingly goodie-good girls laughing behind the backs of decent, if not excellent, men only to make themselves available to cads? However, even the way I qualified my question implies that there is a qualitative difference among women that, quite frankly, I do not believe exists. Perhaps Trad women, as well as Trad men, are often holier than their counterparts from a lack of opportunity. For example, I will give no stock to the man-boobed, double-chinned, neck-bearded twenty-some-odd-year-old still living with his parents who slobbers that he cannot even conceive (heh heh) how a man could fornicate. Easy to resist the temptation when one has never really experienced an “existential” temptation in the first place. Tim Tebow’s commitment to virginity until marriage is much more impressive, in this case, for we all know that stud could slay it if he so chose to walk down that path.

Furthermore, for the love of rhetoric, can we stop using the “she’s somebody’s daughter” line against lust? Yes, yes, I see what he is trying to accomplish, but he fails. The author mentions his wife. Was his wife delivered to him from the marriage stork company? I trust that she had parents herself. Presumably, if not before, at some point after the wedding ceremony, the author wanted to thrust his erect penis into his wife’s vagina multiple times to stimulate an orgasm on his part that could have led to pregnancy. Along the way, there may have been a bit of nibbling, hair tugging, playful slapping, whispering of sweet nothings, etc. I wonder if he told his father-in-law about his plans? What if he had, and his father-in-law responded, “How could you? She is my daughter!”? Would our author have abstained? (If the preceding "scandalized" you, then pray/bless my sweet heart for me, for you surely are not getting any apologies.)

I agree that a culture is doomed when it loses its sense of shame. However, given the primacy of the female imperative in the reproductive process, the shaming of women, if anything, is more vital than the shaming of men.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Bourbon Apocalypse's post:
  • VoxClamantis
Reply
#43
Bourbon A,

Did you read the article by the same author I posted earlier in the thread?

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/pat-archb...-of-pretty


Quote:Furthermore, for the love of rhetoric, can we stop using the “she’s somebody’s daughter” line against lust?

He wasn't just referring to lust in one's heart which can arise unsolicited at any moment in man or woman alike.

He's referring to the good ol' boy game of asserting one's machismo by verbally pointing out to a group of friends the quality of a young woman's private parts thereby drawing the other guys' attention to her private areas for further evaluation and confirmation.  

This will always be a part of the worldly male culture to a certain extent, but when those who proclaim to be married Christians display this behavior it can be an occasion for others to lose their faith.  (This actually happened to a friend of mine.)

I was subjected to this treatment on a number of occasions and it's pretty degrading.  Women today are starting to follow suit and degrade men in the same way.  When men start to wear tights in public and get their equipment evaluated and commented on at job interviews and Sunday strolls alike, we'll have reached "equality" for women!  Yay, what a great day that will be for all!  Then we can get the lawyers involved all the more and have lawsuits galore and legislation and, and....

Seriously, we can all point fingers at the other sex and wallow in self-pity and envy (hmmm....who might be behind that idea?), or we can start to create a moral code within ourselves starting with the Golden Rule.  

As traditional Catholics we can set the standard in our own life, teach our children and sometimes even our friends to do the same and put blinders on to ignore the crazy debauchery taking place all around us.
Reply
#44
(06-26-2018, 02:38 AM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: Bourbon A,

Did you read the article by the same author I posted earlier in the thread?

http://www.ncregister.com/blog/pat-archb...-of-pretty


Quote:Furthermore, for the love of rhetoric, can we stop using the “she’s somebody’s daughter” line against lust?

He wasn't just referring to lust in one's heart which can arise unsolicited at any moment in man or woman alike.

He's referring to the good ol' boy game of asserting one's machismo by verbally pointing out to a group of friends the quality of a young woman's private parts thereby drawing the other guys' attention to her private areas for further evaluation and confirmation.  

This will always be a part of the worldly male culture to a certain extent, but when those who proclaim to be married Christians display this behavior it can be an occasion for others to lose their faith.  (This actually happened to a friend of mine.)

I was subjected to this treatment on a number of occasions and it's pretty degrading.  Women today are starting to follow suit and degrade men in the same way.  When men start to wear tights in public and get their equipment evaluated and commented on at job interviews and Sunday strolls alike, we'll have reached "equality" for women!  Yay, what a great day that will be for all!  Then we can get the lawyers involved all the more and have lawsuits galore and legislation and, and....

Seriously, we can all point fingers at the other sex and wallow in self-pity and envy (hmmm....who might be behind that idea?), or we can start to create a moral code within ourselves starting with the Golden Rule.  

As traditional Catholics we can set the standard in our own life, teach our children and sometimes even our friends to do the same and put blinders on to ignore the crazy debauchery taking place all around us.

I think that the "The Death of Pretty" article is spot-on. Beauty is more enduring--and much captivating--than "hotness" can ever be. Though both may lead to a number of similar consequences, one points to a reality beyond ourselves, the other only points back at ourselves.

Not sure if you were implying this of me, but I surely am not blaming women for any of my--or for men's--personal failures. Men are moral agents, as are women. What I was reacting against is the trend to blame one sex while absolving the other for sexual sins. Granted, I know that it goes both ways, and at one time--years ago--FE seemed to be crawling with men who thought that any woman wearing a spaghetti-string top was the primary reason for his fall into mortal sin as opposed to his own concupiscence. What I, at least, have been detecting is what seems to be the opposite: placing most of the blame on men.
Reply
#45
Quote:Men are moral agents, as are women. 

Exactly.  It goes both ways.

I think you just came into the conversation late because we had already discussed the other side at length.
Reply
#46
My apologies for raising points on the Death of Pretty article in the first place. This thread wasn’t created to bash genders, or male attention, in the first place. There are already numerous threads that cover similar topics. Didn’t intend to trigger anyone, although BA, your post was on point, in my opinion.
 
That said, I really shouldn’t have started this thread in the first place. But, where could I ask general people when my everyday people are dismissive and judgemental. After following advice here (stop seeing this guy, playing too close to the fire), I pretty much ruined a good friendship. Please know I am not blaming internet strangers for my own personal actions. That would be immature, defective and shunning personal responsibility. I knew this situation wasn't right anyway.

Croat rang me early this morning to ask if I wanted to watch the Croatia v Iceland match. I said it wasn’t a good idea since my husband is out of town. Couldn’t he take anyone else? He reminded me it’s Tuesday and people work. Then, he said, “I have something to give you anyway.” I knew he meant cookies because he always buys certain Kraš cookies for me when he finds them. So, I rang my husband and asked if it was O.K. to go. My husband said fine.
 
We watched the game (the resto-bar was pretty dead, he was right) and then, he asked if I wanted something to eat. Sure, with my husband out of town, I wasn’t planning on cooking, why not take advantage of the offer?
 
After generic chatting, I told him that it’s probably best that I scale back from him. We could remain friends but none of this 1 on 1. He was kinda upset at that.
 
He became agitated when I told him I can’t be some kind of fill-in girlfriend for him. It’s that way only because we once considered a relationship and in this context, it’s not right. My husband is my earthly priority and always will be. He’s “too scared” of my husband to even think of trying anything untoward so it shouldn’t be a worry at all. That’s not the point: it’s not fair to him to be around someone out of bounds.
 
I advised him that he really should be searching for a girlfriend/wife. He said all the women out there aren’t worth beans and just cause trouble. From there, I told him there are many good Catholic girls that would be SO happy with him, if he started to practice regularly. He’s so handsome, athletic/fit, caring, just a great guy; he could find a “good woman” from those that retain some fibers of morality in no time. Not interested. :dodgy:
 
He turned that against me. Why did I marry my husband when he wasn’t even religious at first or even a Catholic? Why didn't I give him (Croatian) a chance? I told him that he should have known better since he had been raised in the faith. That’s all. And let’s not forget, he considered me too much of a prude, to which he retorted, “and what do you think your husband thought?” He had a point there but he still has no issue with premarital sex if you intend to marry the person. It wasn’t the time for a lesson so I let it go.
 
I love my husband and I'm committed to him so that’s not even the point. It’s just so much miscommunication, and stupid crossed-wires, meant I could have found a super spouse years ago. So much ridicule from church ladies, family and friends could have been avoided. I wouldn’t have come here to ask for advice in my very first post, and make a donkey out of myself since, in the first place 2 years ago! It’s stupid to look in retrospect because right now, I have a wonderful husband that God led into my life.
 
Now I know his real and frustrated feelings. I feel absolutely awful over how I handled it and if I lost such a good, caring friend, I will never forgive myself. Our friendship could never be the same anyways after such an argument. I’m actually heartbroken right now. Oh well, at least Croatia won after all.

And I forgot about my "pity ice cream" and it all melted. :@

Reply
#47
(06-26-2018, 07:22 PM)Zubr Wrote: He became agitated when I told him I can’t be some kind of fill-in girlfriend for him. It’s that way only because we once considered a relationship and in this context, it’s not right. My husband is my earthly priority and always will be. He’s “too scared” of my husband to even think of trying anything untoward so it shouldn’t be a worry at all. That’s not the point: it’s not fair to him to be around someone out of bounds.
 
I advised him that he really should be searching for a girlfriend/wife. He said all the women out there aren’t worth beans and just cause trouble. From there, I told him there are many good Catholic girls that would be SO happy with him, if he started to practice regularly. He’s so handsome, athletic/fit, caring, just a great guy; he could find a “good woman” from those that retain some fibers of morality in no time. Not interested. :dodgy:
 

Don't feel bad about bringing up a sensitive question. After all, if you can't ask anonymous Internet people whom you will never meet, whom can you ask?  :D

Anyway, I'm in a similar position. I've lately been spending too much time with a married woman who's clearly unhappy in her marriage and doesn't like being home alone. Unlike you, though, I've said things that I shouldn't have said, and matters--thank God they haven't--could've quickly escalated. Fortunately for me, she has shown more self-control. I'm going to have to go nuclear, which will be difficult, for in my city there aren't too many decent choices for food/drink, so the same people tend to run into each other. 

I highlighted your point because I think that it's very pertinent: even if sexual improprieties may not be a temptation, spending too much time with married/otherwise taken people ***wastes*** time that could be spent looking for a potential partner. I know that for men, spending time with married/otherwise taken women gives us the taste of companionship without the real struggles of having first to find one and then to keep one. It's actually pathetic when I think about it.
Reply
#48
I heard a priest describe the situation very well.

He spoke of St. Ignatius who described Satan as an enemy combatant who would encircle a castle, slowly and carefully, again and again, looking for any weakness which he could exploit.

He went on to describe what Satan wants from each one of us.  Namely, our vocation.

For the youth, he wants to squander their energy.  If their energy is put to good use it is a threat to his plans for souls.  Plus, he wants to destroy their vocation before it ever has a chance of getting started.

For the married, he wants your marriage.  He wants you to spend time and energy focusing on anything other than your marriage, even good things.  He wants to exploit any possible weakness or crack in the fortress.

For the priest or religious, he wants their priesthood or vocation.  Anything which can take his focus off of it or cause him to fall.
[-] The following 1 user Likes Sacred Heart lover's post:
  • Bourbon Apocalypse
Reply
#49
(06-26-2018, 07:55 PM)Bourbon Apocalypse Wrote: I'm going to have to go nuclear, which will be difficult, for in my city there aren't too many decent choices for food/drink, so the same people tend to run into each other. 

....spending too much time with married/otherwise taken people ***wastes*** time that could be spent looking for a potential partner. I know that for men, spending time with married/otherwise taken women gives us the taste of companionship without the real struggles of having first to find one and then to keep one. It's actually pathetic when I think about it.
Same issue here: people always run into the same people here, especially since us leftover young-ish Slavs have to intermingle. I will definitely see him where I coach/train judo or when my husband does his thing. It's like my second home and he's employed there! :doh:  As well, since I changed over to the Croatian parish, his parents go there. I know his parents. They love me and now, they probably won't.

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly that spending time with the unattainable wastes time in finding a potential partner. The problem is that he doesn't want one to which I think portrays histrionics. It's not even as if I am worth getting bent out of shape over, in all honesty. So why? (rhetorical question) Unless, we all move to a place where polyandry is legal. (I'm joking.)

(06-26-2018, 08:17 PM)Sacred Heart lover Wrote: He spoke of St. Ignatius who described Satan as an enemy combatant who would encircle a castle, slowly and carefully, again and again, looking for any weakness which he could exploit.
I mean absolutely no disrespect to the quoted priest or St. Ignatius as all of those summarized words that you shared are undoubtedly true. Very true.

However, as serious as this is, I had a small chuckle. Fun fact: my husband's name on the streets roughly translates to Devil/Satan or Demon. Not because he's a Satanist (he's not) but there was a time he was known as just that brutal. On his chest, he has, roughly translated, "I am the Devil" (in Russian, obviously) and those tactics of "carefully looking for weaknesses to exploit" pretty much his way of dealing with a lot of things. This is not meant as boastful but rather, the phrasing was so suitable.

Reply
#50
I see.  You solved the problem by just marrying Satan himself!  LOL  ;)
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)