Latest Posts
Showing posts with label marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label marriage. Show all posts

I Asked Me to Marry ME..

Are you happy yet ? From the response I would say yep..


Well what can I see when you witness that one single act that is so ensconced in self-centered-ness and narcissism that one is really stumped for an explanation. I mean, what level does one have to be at, apart from an illness, to marry oneself..
One can understand why there were no suitors lining up in the street to ask this specimen for her hand as it was too busy making demands..

‘I Me Do Wed’

Schweigert, who followed the ceremony with a solo honeymoon in New Orleans, claims the wedding was her way of showing the world she’s learned to love and accept herself as a woman flying solo. ‘I was waiting for someone to come along and make me happy,’ she told reporter Tammy Swift . ‘At some point, a friend said, “Why do you need someone to marry you to be happy? Marry yourself”.’
I have proffered those words myself when broached on the subject and stated that I was not put on this planet to make someone happy, so live with it, it appears to be a standard presumption. Want to be entertained, get a performer..
And as usual, I am not making this up folks. Here is the story: “Here comes the single bride. Last week, Nadine Schweigert married herself in a symbolic wedding ceremony. The 36-year-old divorced mom of three wore blue satin and clutched a bouquet of white roses as she walked down the aisle before a gathering of 45 friends and family members in Fargo, North Dakota.
“She vowed to ‘to enjoy inhabiting my own life and to relish a lifelong love affair with my beautiful self,’ reports Fargo’s InForum newspaper. After the ring was exchanged with the bride and her inner-groom, guests were encouraged to ‘blow kisses at the world,’ and later, eat cake.
Let them eat cake was coined many years ago by an unfortunate member of the opposite sex whom I do believe did loose her head over it. But, it is the way things have become. The lunacy is ensconced in reality and considered normal. I blame those governments who allowed the patients out too soon..

Fabricating the Marriage Fallacy..

Everyone would already be very aware on how information and statistics can be manipulated quite easily as we have seen feminists demonstrate that quite clearly. Not only can those statistics be adjusted according to the theory, it can also be adjusted either up or down depending on the particular angle of propaganda they want to promote..

Marriage figures appear to be one of those suffering from that effort at the moment, as even now, after decades of following the stats, I have not got any idea of where it is all heading. Every week we read about those same stats going either up or down. We read that people are not getting married now but just shacking up or we read the opposite and told that, no, they are getting married in increasing numbers. Way too confusing..

Marriage is coming back into fashion.

Resurgence of marriage: After an official report showed married couples are happiest, weddings are on the increase

  • In 2009, number of weddings was lowest since Victorian age
  • But boom in 2010 saw 8,657 more walking down the aisle
  • Before that the popularity of marriage had been on the wane since 1972
  • Two out of three civil ceremonies are now held in stately homes
By Steve Doughty

Last updated at 7:35 AM on 1st March 2012


Marriage is coming back into fashion.
After 40 years of decline, the number of weddings has risen by 3.7 per cent in a year.
Analysts believe the recession has caused a return to family values and a desire for the stability marriage offers.
Bliss: The number of marriages leaped by 3.7 per cent to 241,100 in 2010 (file picture)
Bliss: The number of marriages leaped by 3.7 per cent to 241,100 in 2010 (file picture)
Data released by the Office of National Statistics showed there were 241,100 weddings in England and Wales in 2010, the most recent year for which figures are available.
This is 8,657 more than in the previous year, and provides welcome ammunition for campaigners who are trying to push David Cameron into keeping his promise to give a tax break to married couples.

Now I have no issue with people getting married but I do have issues regarding the laws that apply to it. I don't think that the state has any right to interfere with the marriage contract as it is between two people and not between two people and the state. The other issue is ofcourse the blatant bias and sexism involved in marriage breakups, where the privileged princesses always walk away with their suitable paid hourly rate for the inconvenience and that hourly rate depends on the wealth of the husband in the majority of cases. We know that Paul McCarthy's Ex was paid 4,500 dollars per hour for her having to suffer that indignity, so it is well worth the while for females to seek to wander down the isle and pursue that reduced carbon shiny stone associated with it..


The above graph just goes to demonstrate precisely what I have been saying. Have a look at the rates back 1910 where the marriage rate was huge in comparison to today. But the article suggests that the marriage rates are just up there with it. They are booming as far as they are concerned. However they failed to mention the opposing numbers that so of hits that total for a six..

 Number of divorces
The number of divorces in England and Wales fell by 6.4 per cent in 2009 to 113,949 compared with 121,708 in 2008.
Lets do a little calculation here and find out how many actually stay married in that year ?

The difference between marriages and divorces in 2009..

Which leaves the total at 118,494 marriages in the balance and now compare that to the total for say, 1910 and what do you arrive at, yep, marriages are definitely booming, ....right....!!!

Women Not Happy: Thinking Paradigm Change Time..

More Hollywood feminist Propaganda..

One can understandably be confused by the attitudes of the opposite sex when it comes to feminism, their own part in it's growth and nurturing, it's interference into laws and the family courts, wonder why they are having problems with finding a partner, blame the male sex for all their issues, and yet, still not make one single confession about how they were party to it all. Their overall attitude appears to be "well it's happened", so lets move on. The blinkering process is ofcourse part of the female behavioral pattern and mindset, it demonstrates clearly that they nor feminists, will ever admit to being party to the most destructive upheaval society has ever known. All this came about with their compliance, with their help and assistance and now that the end result of feminist meddling is glaringly obvious, they look the other way and pretend that it was something they had no control over whatsoever..

How is that working out for you now I wonder..

The endless carping by female journalists and feminist enablers demostrates also that the outcome they wished for was just a dream. Radical feminists are still working on that reality outcome which ofcourse will never be achieved. But meanwhile, we have the ongoing carping about the sexes and the end result being, that a movement run by women in order to install special privileges for women at the cost of all men, has not delivered what they assumed it would and there has to be blame metered out and its for certain that the privileged sex ain't gonna wear it even though they are totally responsible and answerable for it..

Have a look at this article and a few paragraphs I pulled from it to demonstrate precisely how these female journalist enjoys nothing more than blaming men for what women have gained from..
(Link to article)
This message seems to have come through especially loud and clear in Italy where it is only too easy to find men who are the embodiment of the self-indulgent stereotype. The effeminate man-child is a plague in Italy; vain, self-important, shallow and self-seeking mamma’s boys who live in their parents’ house into their thirties and forties. The once-family oriented Italians are increasingly either divorcing or refusing to marry in the first place.
Italian journalist Rosaria Sgueglia writes in the Huffington Post that the former master of the Costa Concordia is one of those Italian men who match the stereotype point for point. Italians are “furious,” she wrote, at “people like Mr. Schettino [who] do nothing but compromise the already damaged image the rest of the world has of Italian people.”
Now as far as I can tell, the female journalist writing this article is supposed to be on our side, enemies like these eh!.
But, as you can read and even if you read the entire article, there is not one single word of blame aimed at her own sex or even bothers to point it out except when referring to the feminastie movement as being the only one accountable which is ofcourse only half true. It is the usual demonstration of living in denial as they obviously and blatantly shirk their own responsibility and accountability because they are so pissed off with the way things have turned out and they are now well aware of the fact that there is absolutely nothing they do about it. Their generation will pay for the excesses and now they live in regret and in some cases, in abstract terror as their own dreams are shattered beyond repair. Life in their opinion, is not supposed to be this hard. It's all been turned upside down and they are absolutely besides themselves wondering how it got this bad..

We have been telling them for years that this will be the outcome. We have stated it precisely, patiently and consistently and did they listen, no way. All those euphoric goals promised by lying feminists were just too good, too imaginable, to easily achieved and guaranteed as they manipulated employment laws and promotions. They were basically given everything they wished for and took the rest for granted. I would like to think of it as payback but I think that is a little too simplistic. It is more like a rational response where men have been washed and scrubbed in the feminist toxicity and decided that maybe that relationship or partner can legally do me over without even trying and I stand the chance of loosing everything I have to an individual who has already demonstrated that she is incapable of keeping in a relationship for any period of time, will automatically call on legal representatives as a standard procedure, just to see what she can get out of it all, it has to be made worth her while..

None of it looks like it worth it or even workable anymore. The parents never had these issues, so obviously it's this current generation or three, that has decided on the tactics they want to use, so why bother to give them any chance at all. It will be the case where all this will get worse before it gets any better.  Even that remains to be seen as women generally are more interested in complaining about it all rather than actually doing something positive about it. That first step would the hardest for them, it would mean they would have to accept some accountability, if not all the blame and I do not see that happening, ever..

In Defense of Equality..


Extremism in Defense of Equality


The more often liberals speak on the topic of same-sex marriage, the more illogical their arguments become. Of course, the worst arguments come from liberal professors because they talk about the subject to the point of obsession. And the worst of the worst come from English professors steeped in postmodern orthodoxy. A recent letter to the editor by North Carolina English professor Dick Veit is illustrative. Dick writes the following (in italics). I respond intermittently. Students considering a major in English at a secular university should read his words carefully:
If you can’t claim that your own marriage would be hurt by a gay couple getting married (and you can’t), and if you can’t point to anyone at all whose marriage would be harmed (and you can’t), then you can’t claim that marriage would be harmed.
Dick Veit shows the narrow-mindedness of same-sex marriage proponents in three ways. First, he falsely asserts that there are only two arguments against same-sex marriage. Next, he asserts that the burden of proof is on his opponents. Finally, he asserts that the arguments he selects cannot possibly be proved. He omits the best arguments against same-sex marriage. Fortunately, in the next line of his letter, he opens the door for one of those arguments:
If you would deny a right to others that you claim for yourself, you cannot say that you believe in liberty.
I hope this means that Dick will now support a man’s right to determine whether his child will be aborted. But that is not what he means. He means that proponents of traditional marriage must extend marriage rights to same-sex couples or, alternately, forfeit their right to say they believe in liberty. The argument is problematic because it knows no limitations. It falsely equates liberty with absolute liberty. Consider some extensions of Veit’s argument:
*If you support marriage between a man and another man, you must also support marriage between a man and another man and a woman or, alternately, forfeit the right to say you believe in liberty.
*If you support marriage between a man and another man and a woman, you must also support marriage between a man and another man and two women or, alternately, forfeit the right to say you believe in liberty.
The possibilities are endless. Eventually, one ends up supporting a marital union between two twin sisters, a dog, and a four-year old – just so he can say “I believe in liberty!”
The trouble all begins with Veit making the obvious error of asking “Is it free?” without asking the follow-up question “Is it good?” That is precisely how he winds up in the untenable position of promoting equality among unequal entities. In the final analysis, Veit is left with the dubious honor of joining a very small club I call the We Can Say We Believe in Equality So We Must Be Morally Superior Society.
Unfortunately, Dick has left the rest of society with an all-encompassing definition of family that simply does not work. For example, there can be no workable body of family law if there are no restrictions on what we call “family.” That it is unworkable is not an issue for Dick. He lives in a world of ideas, not in a world of reality. All ideas have consequences. But the worst ideas usually have consequences for someone else. That is why the worst ideas usually come from tenured professors who are shielded from consequences altogether. Keep reading:
If you would insist that others must be bound by the precepts of your religion, then you do not believe in religious freedom.
Christianity does not mandate marriage among its own adherents. It certainly does not mandate the practice among non-Christians. Of course, under the current definition of marriage, no one is forced to follow a religious practice. But some are choosing to follow a secular practice and call it a religious practice. They are also trying to force followers of a religious practice to call a secular practice a religious practice against their will.
The government seizure and redefinition of a religious practice – one that actually predates the government - cannot be seen as a step towards religious freedom. But that is Dick’s position. He thinks the government – by judicial fiat - can redefine a religious institution that predates its existence. If you disagree, “then you do not believe in religious freedom.” Does any of this make sense? Read on:
If you say that you oppose Sharia law because it forces religious rules on nonbelievers, then why are you doing the very same thing?
Translation: If you think the voters of North Carolina can retain the traditional definition of marriage by a vote you are wrong. This would block the judiciary from imposing same-sex marriage on the general population against its will. And that would destroy religious freedom.
Marriage is an institution that predates every constitution, every judicial body, and every legislative body in the world. Nonetheless, Veit thinks the government has a right to seize and redefine religious institutions such as marriage at will. If you disagree with Dick then he claims that you are just like Muslim extremists who want to set up a theocracy in America.
That is how the tenured Dick thinks. That is why the people of North Carolina must vote to preserve traditional marriage via constitutional amendment. Otherwise, we really will start looking like a Muslim theocracy. And prophets will be marrying six year olds in the name of sexual equality.

But You HAVE to get Married..

Another version of what we already know to be the case. The reason I like this video is that it demonstrates how feminists unknowingly encouraged the existance of the Men's Movement and also the MRA. A claim they have denied on copious occasions. How is it possible for anyone to have negative feelings against the opposite sex, was not the question asked. The statement presented was one of "You're a misogynist" for not accepting the abuses. Those claims have been promoted and enhanced by the hate movement to try and misrepresent the actions and responses that has surfaced over the last decade or two.

No feminists has ever accepted the fact that they have actually generated the new male attitude and response to their own vitriol and decidedly toxic attitudes. They avoid admitting any responsibility and yet, when it's all said and done, they are responsible for the position they now find themselves in..

The endless complaining by female journalists as well as the occasional "white knight", pointing the finger at those recalcitrants, who have decided to opt out of the "marriage" market and simply go their own way, have been scorned and maligned just like they use to do in the old days. But this time it is more desperate, their provocative lecturing now just slide of the back like water and the overall response is one of disinterest, coupled with "I no longer give a damn". As desperation sets in with one sex and a laissez faire attitude in the other, the lecturing has turned to begging and coercion, unfortunately the circumstances have not changed and neither has the envronment to make the original proposal any more attractive..

The reasons for avoidance of marriage are still in place and they expect any man to hop aboard the bandwagon and willingly offer themselves up as some type of sacrificial offering at the hands of the state and the laws that has created this entire situation..

No compromise, No change..

It is not that hard to understand or comprehend. Why would any man consciously put his head on the chopping block for someone who has the legislated power to destroy his life. I mean really..




Replacing the Patriarchy with the Matriarchy..




This comment I found rather interesting as it describes what it takes to make a relationship work plus demonstrates how feminism's endless intrusion via government and laws, just guarantees that it won't. Take out the main factors from a relationship or marriage, something or somebody has to pay and it's generally the relationship itself..
 The endless hand-wringing that we read in the "Dear Joyce" columns use to be about finding a mate, but now it more about everything else. Primarily the search for the "Soul Mate" has been thrown into the bin as a waste of time while reality drags the dreamers back into reality. Some eventually realise that a relationship/partnership is not always about them and certain compromises are demanded whether you like it or not.
If you don't then it just a matter of going your own way and either adhering to that or repositioning yourself back onto the "dating" market in pursuit of the next mistake..

The main issue being that women have changed, they changed to suit themselves without any consideration on their part about what men want or would like in a female. They in turn have responded with "Here I am, take me as I am, take it or leave it" and now they are finding a response they never expected. That response being "No Thanks". This is what all that complaining is about..

Sometimes the obvious lessons are the hardest to learn, while blame can be redirected very easily. Many a time have I spoken to ex partners who live in the regret that they screwed up a good working relationship because they felt it was not a working proposition or could have been better or it just was not what they expected. Rather than take the hard road by fixing it, they take the easy road and end it as   that can always justify it in their own minds..
Taking anything for granted is not a lesson learnt until it's gone and after that eventuation, it becomes an all consuming problem, that just won't let go. Continual self scrutiny and continual reminders mixed with thoughts of regret stay with you for a long time. Many have been there and many more will end up there as well.. 

The song "You don't what you've got until it's gone" is a lot more meaningful and ironic when it applies to some past relationship that went the way of the dodo and did so without any effort on your part. It can turn into an unrelenting cycle as it's pursuit appears to be more important than the end result..

So here is a response to the view of replacing the "patriarchy" with the "Matriarchy" and then living in denial about replacing one level of control with another. A bit like "Welcome the new boss who is just like the old boss"..




 Why Not Matriarchy? 
Women can raise families communally without men, but it’s a bad idea.
By Lea Halim

This response it the above article..

 tyhmaplanet

Good grief! I suppose I've just grown old and apart from what's goofed up in this world. I don't understand it and I'm not sure I want to understand it. Having a good marriage has everything to do with love and sacrifice, and I feel it necessary to add, between a man and a woman.
Here's a little story that tells a tale. There once was a little four-year-old boy, whose mother dumped him on her parents after deciding her second marriage wasn't satisfactory and who decided to return to her first husband. He took her back for a little while, but not in marriage, just in sex. She'd had two children by him, but they, like the four she'd had by her second husband, ended up with her parents. She wandered about promiscuously until she happened upon her third husband, by whom she had another two children, who were also principally raised by other people. She married a fourth time at age sixty, but, for obvious reasons, had no children. This last marriage was annulled after six months. The mother barely participated in raising any of her eight children.
Now, this four-year-old became a five-year-old and was taken in by a saintly aunt, sister to his, by now, drunken, bumpkin father. She and her hard-working husband raised him until he was ten, teaching him good principles for living, training him in good behaviors, and instilling an understanding that such a thing as faith and a being called God existed.
At ten years of age, he wanted to go live with his drunken, bumpkin father, which didn't work out, so he ended up in a few other relative's homes until he was fourteen, at which time he and his sister went to live with their still drunken, bumpkin father.
Now, this was not a good time period in either of their lives. Many untoward experiences occurred, all of it laced with alcohol and other vices. Still, he'd had his saintly aunt's and her husband's influence, which wasn't easily doused, even in a debauched environment.
One day, he met a young girl, or, rather, she caught sight of him. She was twelve and he was fifteen. He had no interest in her, but she said many times througout her life that she never had an interest in any other man. A few years later, they were married. Being inspired by his love for a good woman, the boy became a man, changed his ways and they raised eight children together, and were the forbears of 35 grandchildren, more than 70 great-grandchildren and more than 20 great-great-grandchildren by the time he passed away after 71 years of happy, struggling, difficult, wonderful, joyful marriage.
They had four sons, who are all on their first marriage, the first having been married forty-six years, the second thirty-nine, the third thirty-six, and the fourth thirty-seven years. Their four daughters were not all as successful, yet, the oldest has been married to her only husband for forty-nine years, the second had two failed marriages, which were a result of poor choices fueled by rebelliousness, the third had one divorce that was later rectified when the two remarried, and the last has been married to her only husband twenty-eight years.
Much of the early part of this story took place during the period leading up to and into the Prohibition Era, which gave birth to a lot of "freedom" and "promiscuity" for women, as well as men, which all perhaps led to the Great Depression, and which may have played a part in these events and outcomes. It's also of interest to note that many of the grandchildren are experiencing some of the negative outcomes seen in the lives of the drunken, bumpkin father and his promiscuous ex-wife. This, all in a period not unlike the teens and twenties of the last century - unparalleled prosperity and leisure, woman screaming for more freedom and getting it, but this time with help of federal laws that tend to relegate males to the status of unimportant sidekicks, and much of a couple of generations expecting to do nothing while someone else does it for them. This generation, like their forbears, were raised by good parents, who taught them well. So why the trouble?
Since World War II, as in the early part of the twentieth century, women and men have been increasingly freed from hard, physical work. They have many hours of leisure to enjoy the benefits of a prosperity that is, at least in part, technologically enabled. There is a declining faith in him whose blessing it is. Gratitude is an increasingly scarce attribute, often supplanted by arrogance and self-centeredness. This is a seemingly inescapable result of extended prosperity.
Does a woman want a good man with whom to marry and have a family? I believe most do. Then, treat men like men and demand manhood. Stop trying to replace them with you. Stop trying to fill a man's role and try being a woman. It may work. It just may, but it must be a societal change and government must stop being a partner in demeaning manhood and womanhood. Yes, there are good men out there, but, I'm afraid, they're growing scarce. Feminism with the cooperation of government and socialists are doing their best to wipe them out. We need traditional roles. If you want a successful 71 years together, take my word for it, you won't get it by competing with your spouse, or with the opposite gender. You get it by lovingly cooperating and working together, sacrificing for one another and the family you create, filling roles for which each of you is divinely endowed with unique and wonderful traits.

It just gets more confusing does it not. The thing is that none of it is new. The is nothing new under the sun as the saying goes. It's all been tried before and it always changes back to what works the best. What was working best is what feminists have spent the last forty years trying to destroy. So it's just another cycle and another wasted effort tryig to force the population to change and a few elitists as usual are responsible for all the chaos. 

Welcome to the new/old world..

Hat tip to Elusive Wapiti for this article and the link..


Partnering Up, What's in it for Men..

Well, Strike me puce..

TOO much Vinegar, Not enough Honey..

Amazing, there are some sane minds out there but unfortunately way too few. Fidelbogen made a statement the other day where he suggested that maybe women should get of their butts (my interpretation) and start making more positive noises about men rather than allowing the male haters to continually wax malicious every time. It never ceases to amaze me that it's women who are desperately seeking relationships but fail to even bother raising the obvious questions on the subject that needs to be answered.

Woman UP..the Private Man.

Nothing will change unless the hate laws that feminists have forced down societies throat are tossed out for the rabid jokes they really are, they were influenced and introduced by radical feminists who are right now still in the process of introducing more hate laws to ensure that the sexes continue at each others throats. Meanwhile we have crickets chirping in response..

How often does one have to read another of those millions of comments where women are claiming that they cannot find a partner, their life generally sucks because those cats are not that good a company and their clock is ticking away and there is no hope in hell of leading a more fulfilling life even though they feel it is no fault of their own..

If you have no idea what the issues are, have a read here..The Online Men's Compendium..

It is right there that reality should raise it's ugly head but it still fails to register. Obviously, if you do nothing, nothing will change. Sounds simple but apparently it's way too complicated. somehow..

Why can't women find a partner ? ..read on..


Marriage: What’s in It for Men?
A new report by Pew Research Center shows that barely half — 51 percent — of adults in the United States are married. In place of marriage are nontraditional living arrangements — including cohabitation, single-person households, and single parenthood — that may likely continue. The share of adults who are currently married could drop to below half within several years.
While the report says it’s “beyond the scope of this analysis to explain why[emphasis mine] marriage has declined,” senior writer D’Vera Cohn adds this: “I’m struck by the fact that a large percentage of people who say that marriage is obsolete still want to get married. I think they may be having two ideas in their head at once: one about the institution of marriage and what its status is in society today, which is to say that it’s a lot less dominant, central, or important in society, [and another about] their own wishes for their future, in which they personally would very much like to be married.”
Indeed they do. But some major changes have to take place first.
For starters, parents have to stop getting divorced for less than dire reasons. Many, if not most, of today’s 20- and 30-somethings are products of these divorces and thus have no role models. They may be looking for love, but they have no idea what to look for. Susan Gregory Thomas, author of In Spite of Everything, is a great example. Her parents split when she was twelve, and in an article about her book she laments the lack of guidance available to young people. “Why would we take counsel,” she asks, “from the very people who, in our view, flubbed it all up?”
Second, we must retract the message Boomers sent young women about female empowerment. Indeed, it isn’t a coincidence that marriage rates have plummeted alongside America’s fascination with the feminist movement. Empowerment for women, as defined by feminists, neither liberates women nor brings couples together. It separates them. It focuses on women as perpetual victims of the Big Bad Male. Why would any man want to get married when he’s been branded a sexist pig at “hello”? In the span of just a few decades, women have managed to demote men from respected providers and protectors to being unnecessary, irrelevant, and downright expendable. Consider these examples:
#*# Author and journalist Natalie Angier begins an article in the New York Timesby writing, “Women may not find this surprising, but one of the most persistent and frustrating problems in evolutionary biology is the male. Specifically#…#why doesn’t he just go away?”
#*# In a CNN interview with Maureen Dowd about her 2005 book, Are Men Necessary? Dowd says, “Now that women don’t need men to reproduce and refinance, the question is, will we keep you around? And the answer is, ‘You know, we need you in the way we need ice cream — you’ll be more ornamental.’”
#*# Lisa Belkin, a blogger for the New York Times wrote, “We are standing at a moment in time when the role of gender is shifting seismically. At this moment an argument can be made for two separate narrative threads — the first is the retreat of men as this becomes a woman’s world.”
#*# In an article in The Atlantic titled “Are Fathers Necessary?” author Pamela Paul wrote, “The bad news for Dad is that despite common perception, there’s nothing objectively essential about his contribution.”
Women have also been raised by their feminist mothers to “never depend on a man.” As a result, couples no longer think of themselves as one unit but as separate entities sharing space. “The confusion over roles is there, as are the legacies of a self-absorbed, me-first, feminist-do-or-die, male-backlash society,” wrote Judith Wallerstein and Sandra Blakeslee in The Good Marriage: How and Why Love Lasts. Honestly, are we really surprised marriage is on the decline?
The concerns of men frequently arrive in my inbox. The latest is from Mark Trueblood, who had this to say: “From a man’s perspective, men take on an untenable risk. The culture of male disposability runs deep — some say even at the level of our DNA.” Because of this, he says, “Men are making a lifelong commitment to eschew marriage, cohabitation, and even dating in some cases. We do so for all the reasons you can guess, and more. As far as I am concerned, this is the wisest lifestyle decision for men in the United States at this point in time. And I say so as a conservative/libertarian who fully acknowledges the power of a functioning nuclear family.”
Mark Trueblood is not an anomaly. Countless men’s-rights groups have popped up across the country, and even more men happily shack up with their girlfriends with no plans to get married — which may sit well with women for a while, until their clocks begins to tick, and they become desperate for a baby. All of the sudden men look more appealing — but the men don’t want to marry them.
There may be more than one reason Americans are delaying or eschewing marriage, but almost all of them can be attributed to feminism. Feminists assured women their efforts would result in more satisfying marriages, but that has not happened. Rather, women’s search for faux equality has damaged marriage considerably (some might say irrevocably, but I’m an optimist) by eradicating the complementary nature of marriage — in which men and women work together, as equals, toward the same goal but with an appreciation for the unique qualities each gender brings to the table. Today, men and women are locked in a battle. The roles have changed too drastically, and the anger runs deep.
I don’t know about you, but I don’t call that progress.
— Suzanne Venker is co-author of the new book The Flipside of Feminism: What Conservative Women Know — and Men Can’t Say. Her website iswww.suzannevenker.com.

Why You're Not Married..

But I am Perfect, cost millions..
I should really put this under the comedy heading but I will leave up to you to decide how true and honest this really is..
 I can't see this being a hit as it would actually demand that the American female to stop being herself and declaring to herself that the world does not orbit around her..

 It's a hard one but a good learner..

Why You're Not Married. 
I was, for some reason, born knowing how to get married. Growing up in foster care is a big part of it. The need for security made me look for very specific traits in the men I dated -- traits it turns out lead to marriage a surprisingly high percentage of the time. Without really trying to, I've become a sort of jailhouse lawyer of relationships -- someone who's had to do so much work on her own case that I can now help you with yours.But I won't lie. The problem is not men, it's you. Sure, there are lame men out there, but they're not really standing in your way. Because the fact is -- if whatever you're doing right now was going to get you married, you'd already have a ring on it. So without further ado, let's look at the top six reasons why you're not married. 
1. You're a Bitch.Here's what I mean by bitch. I mean you're angry. You probably don't think you're angry. You think you're super smart, or if you've been to a lot of therapy, that you're setting boundaries. But the truth is you're pissed. At your mom. At the military-industrial complex. At Sarah Palin. And it's scaring men off.The deal is: most men just want to marry someone who is nice to them. I am the mother of a 13-year-old boy, which is like living with the single-cell protozoa version of a husband. Here's what my son wants out of life: macaroni and cheese, a video game, and Kim Kardashian. Have you ever seen Kim Kardashian angry? I didn't think so. You've seen Kim Kardashian smile, wiggle, and make a sex tape. Female anger terrifies men. I know it seems unfair that you have to work around a man's fear and insecurity in order to get married -- but actually, it's perfect, since working around a man's fear and insecurity is big part of what you'll be doing as a wife. 
2. You're Shallow.When it comes to choosing a husband, only one thing really, truly matters: character. So it stands to reason that a man's character should be at the top of the list of things you are looking for, right? But if you're not married, I already know it isn't. Because if you were looking for a man of character, you would have found one by now. Men of character are, by definition, willing to commit.Instead, you are looking for someone tall. Or rich. Or someone who knows what an Eames chair is. Unfortunately, this is not the thinking of a wife. This is the thinking of a teenaged girl. And men of character do not want to marry teenaged girls. Because teenage girls are never happy. And they never feel like cooking, either. 
3. You're a Slut.Hooking up with some guy in a hot tub on a rooftop is fine for the ladies of Jersey Shore -- but they're not trying to get married. You are. Which means, unfortunately, that if you're having sex outside committed relationships, you will have to stop. Why? Because past a certain age, casual sex is like recreational heroin -- it doesn't stay recreational for long.That's due in part to this thing called oxytocin -- a bonding hormone that is released when a woman a) nurses her baby and B) has an orgasm -- that will totally mess up your casual-sex game. It's why you can be f**k-buddying with some dude who isn't even all that great and the next thing you know, you're totally strung out on him. And you have no idea how it happened. Oxytocin, that's how it happened. And since nature can't discriminate between marriage material and Charlie Sheen, you're going to have to start being way more selective than you are right now. 
4. You're a Liar. It usually goes something like this: you meet a guy who is cute and likes you, but he's not really available for a relationship. He has some condition that absolutely precludes his availability, like he's married, or he gets around town on a skateboard. Or maybe he just comes right out and says something cryptic and open to interpretation like, "I'm not really available for a relationship right now."You know if you tell him the truth -- that you're ready for marriage -- he will stop calling. Usually that day. And you don't want that. So you just tell him how perfect this is because you only want to have sex for fun! You love having fun sex! And you don't want to get in a relationship at all! You swear!About ten minutes later, the oxytocin kicks in. You start wanting more. But you don't tell him that. That's your secret -- just between you and 22,000 of your closest girlfriends. Instead, you hang around, having sex with him, waiting for him to figure out that he can't live without you. I have news: he will never "figure" this out. He already knows he can live without you just fine. And so do you. Or you wouldn't be lying to him in the first place. 
5. You're Selfish.If you're not married, chances are you think a lot about you. You think about your thighs, your outfits, your naso-labial folds. You think about your career, or if you don't have one, you think about doing yoga teacher training. Sometimes you think about how marrying a wealthy guy -- or at least a guy with a really, really good job -- would solve all your problems.
Howevs, a good wife, even a halfway decent one, does not spend most of her day thinking about herself. She has too much s**t to do, especially after having kids. This is why you see a lot of celebrity women getting husbands after they adopt. The kids put the woman on notice: Bitch, hello! It's not all about you anymore!After a year or two of thinking about someone other than herself, suddenly, Brad Pitt or Harrison Ford comes along and decides to significantly other her. Which is also to say -- if what you really want is a baby, go get you one. Your husband will be along shortly. Motherhood has a way of weeding out the lotharios. 
6. You're Not Good Enough.Oh, I don't think that. You do. I can tell because you're not looking for a partner who is your equal. No, you want someone better than you are: better looking, better family, better job.Here is what you need to know: You are enough right this minute. Period. Not understanding this is a major obstacle to getting married, since women who don't know their own worth make terrible wives. Why? You can fake it for a while, but ultimately you won't love your spouse any better than you love yourself. Smart men know this.I see this at my son's artsy, progressive school. Of 183 kids, maybe six have moms who are as cute as you're trying to be. They're attractive, sure. They're just not objects. Their husbands (wisely) chose them for their character, not their cup size. 
Alright, so that's the bad news. The good news is that I believe every woman who wants to can find a great partner. You're just going to need to get rid of the idea that marriage will make you happy. It won't. Once the initial high wears off, you'll just be you, except with twice as much laundry.Because ultimately, marriage is not about getting something -- it's about giving it. Strangely, men understand this more than we do. Probably because for them marriage involves sacrificing their most treasured possession -- a free-agent penis -- and for us, it's the culmination of a princess fantasy so universal, it built Disneyland.The bottom line is that marriage is just a long-term opportunity to practice loving someone even when they don't deserve it. Because most of the time, your messy, farting, macaroni-and-cheese eating man will not be doing what you want him to. But as you give him love anyway -- because you have made up your mind to transform yourself into a person who is practicing being kind, deep, virtuous, truthful, giving, and most of all, accepting of your own dear self -- you will find that you will experience the very thing you wanted all along:Love.Tracy McMillan


Bernard has his version on the truth as well..



Why Marriage Avoids Today's Women..

If one really thinks about lack marriage and divorce, and reality dawns. One would have to make the decision that not only is it a "woman's issue" but in reality, it is a problem they have created themselves. It is the case that women are the one who demands and pursues that course of action as they benefit from it the most and men are happy to engage as it assured mutual benefit.
She has someone to share her life with all it's benefits of home, hearth and family and the man benefits by producing progenies, after his own DNA influenced image. It was a reasonable trade off, one that worked for so long that it became an institution that once held benefits for both involved..

These days, with the interference of feminism and their consistent lying doctrinal interference, changed women's perception of marriage as being mutually beneficial and changed that agreement so only SHE should benefit. Now they wonder what the problem is, they not only refuse to comprehend the bleeding obvious and adjust accordingly, nope, don't give a damn, they would never admit that. It's now the case that the privileged princess is in it for solely her own benefit or she calls it quits, my way or the highway, when her increased demands and narcism is not catered to. It is now all about her, just like she has been programmed to belief. It does demonstrate how gullible women are and also how quick they want to believe what level of victim they want to be, just like Oprah told her..

If the focus is not on her and what she wants, well, have a look at who instigates all those divorces..

Now for the facts, written by one of their own. Truth is a bitch..


Why Marriage Eludes the Modern Woman
November 28, 2011 3:35 P.M.
By Suzanne Venker
I just finished a book called Things I Wish I’d Known Before We Got Married by Gary Chapman. In it, the author outlines the complexities of married life that few of us anticipate before we tie the knot — such as how our personality affects our behavior, or how important spirituality is to most people, or how few couples explore this topic before getting married. Indeed, there are so many things that make marriage challenging all on its own that being raised in a culture that undermines this institution practically guarantees people will fail. Yet that’s exactly where we are.
Never in the history of time have women had a better shot at marital bliss — they have more freedom, flexibility, and privileges than ever — yet they’re celebrating the single life in record numbers. The reason is twofold. Since the day they were born, women have been tremendously influenced by the most significant revolution of our time: the feminist movement. For decades its mission has been to change a woman’s place in society and eradicate both masculinity and femininity. The result is a battle between the sexes — the likes of which this nation has never seen.
The second reason women struggle with marriage — which is part and parcel of the first — is they’ve been taught that the world revolves (or should revolve) around them. This attitude is a bona fide deal breaker. So much about marriage requires putting oneself last, or being quiet rather than demanding, or taking the higher road and not having to have one’s way all the time. Simply put, married life presupposes a maturity modern women don’t have.
We’ve been hearing a lot lately about young men who fail to grow up and become good family men, but video games are not the culprit — women are. Men tend to follow women’s lead — and it is women, not men, who fight Mother Nature. It is women who’ve changed the roles, rules, and expectations of marriage. It is women who embrace no-fault divorce laws that allow them to check out the moment they’re dissatisfied. Indeed, feminists assure women they can’t possibly be happily married until men change who they are or adapt their nature to accommodate the needs of women.
They’ve also drilled home the absurd notion that women in America live in a patriarchy. Not only is this patently false — women in this country rule — the truth is that women have chosen the lives they have. They chose to abandon marital intimacy by bringing the power they wield at work into their homes, where it doesn’t belong. The happiest wives I know don’t do this. No matter how successful they are outside the home, they leave that piece of themselves at work. When they walk in the front door, they put on their feminine hat and let men be who they are: simple creatures with few demands. As my cousin, a former law partner (and female), says, “There are two ingredients to a healthy marriage: good food and good sex.”
Naturally, this philosophy will raise the ire of the most strident modern woman who’s been taught to believe that cooking for a husband or saying yes to sex amounts to indentured servitude. They refuse to even accept that men have a greater sex drive than women. In failing to understand the differences between men and women, women have sabotaged their own happiness. As for the men, they aren’t so much choosing to be immature as they are doing what they’re told. Tell a man he’s dispensable, and he’ll quickly prove you right.
Marriage was never meant to be a competitive sport, yet that’s exactly what is has become. That’s because modern women have been taught that in order to be equal with men, women and men should pursue identical lives and ignore the differences between them. This attitude is producing enormous strife and makes happy marriages impossible.
Honestly, marriage doesn’t have to be so difficult — and it needn’t become obsolete. But it will if women don’t stop fighting men and start surrendering to their nature. They’re fighting a losing battle.
— Suzanne Venker is co-author of the book The Flipside of Feminism: What Conservative Women Know – and Men Can’t Say. Her website is www.suzannevenker.com.http://www.nationalreview.com/home-front/284237/why-marriage-eludes-modern-woman/suzanne-venker

The Marriage Contract: Way Too Biased..

One does have too wonder why women's protestations are presented so often and so loudly. Their claim that Men are not "maning up" surfaces from all corners including well intentioned white knights who appear to be lost in the past and reality has escaped them. In the past it was the case that when man and woman got together, there were exchanges of interests and it went along these lines. The woman would offer her side of the deal, kids, companionship and some major hanky panky and that sounded reasonable so the guy would say okay, he in return would suggest that yes, I can provide for you and give you an environment to work in and do your thing. It worked, as a matter of fact, it worked so well that it produced generations and both were reasonably content to live their lives out in and with that arrangement. So along comes that hate movement that has created a doctrine from the main lie which is "women were victims" and from that lie they extrapolated copious and baseless assumptions and those assumption became their cornerstone, their misandric doctrine, their reason for existence.

Now the problem arises where at the behest of feminist lies and disinformation, women's demands have escalated beyond reasonable and men instead of even wanting to create a dialogue with the opposite sex are now saying "WTF", your demands are not only totally unreasonable but I will not accept the exchange rate as it is way too biased in your favour, do not want a bar of it, neither do I want a bar of you either if this is what you are thinking. The demands way outstrip the benefits for men and today's "marriage strike" and the "f*ck and chuck" or "hook up" mentality pays witness to it. All this is happening while women today are busy slut-walking their way into history for all the wrong reasons. Demonstrating how completely dysfunctional and impractical they have become..

The endless angst generating wishful thinking generated by some still fails to comprehend this exchange of a mutually benefitting contract. Few even bother to contemplate it's existence and negate it at every turn suggesting and recommend that all men should just bear and wear the consequences and if that did not work out than somehow it must be your fault as women are beyond question and it's useless to even suggest that they would even contemplate any actions that would possibly harm you in any way.
The bloody ignorance and arrogance just seeps from their pages into the subconscious like a dense, damp, enveloping fog. The stupidity generated by those writers and na-sayers is so inconceivably ridiculous that one has to wonder if there is a functioning brain behind those vacant eyes.

Marriage to men today, is a negative option and not one entered into lightly for many reasons and yet women have no problem with demanding that you sell your soul, loose everything you worked hard for and those kids you have from that liaison is obviously irrelevant as they lie and cheat in family courts to ensure that outcome..

Like I said, it is just not worth the effort or the heartache and pain until women start waking up to the fact that men will respond to their demands while they are reasonable but will refuse to do so while they are not. It would appear that the ball is in their court and we all know that they are incapable of back-pedalling or capitulating to reasonable demands unless forced to, so we have a stalemate. The ball is basically in their court even though they claim otherwise and refuse to accept the responsibility.

The next decade should be interesting as they struggle to make amends and even if possible, make up their minds..
Even Hymowitz had to back peddle..
By Kay S. Hymowitz
Love in the Time of Darwinism
Here's Jeff from Middleburg, Florida: "I am not going to hitch my wagon to a woman . . . who is more into her abs, thighs, triceps, and plastic surgery. A woman who seems to have forgotten that she did graduate high school and that it's time to act accordingly." Jeff, meet another of my respondents, Alex: "Maybe we turn to video games not because we are trying to run away from the responsibilities of a 'grown-up life' but because they are a better companion than some disease-ridden bar tramp who is only after money and a free ride." Care for one more? This is from Dean in California: "Men are finally waking up to the ever-present fact that traditional marriage, or a committed relationship, with its accompanying socially imposed requirements of being wallets with legs for women, is an empty and meaningless drudgery." You can find the same themes posted throughout websites like AmericanWomenSuck, NoMarriage, MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way), and Eternal Bachelor ("Give modern women the husband they deserve. None").

Step up and Receive Your First Reaming for Free..

One does wonder if or when sanity will eventually rule and the reality will finally sharpen their witless minds.  Is it possible to finally comprehend the fact that the ongoing bastardisation of men and boys will have a long term and possible disasterous affect on all in society. By destroying the major driving force in society for the sake of the female ego does make you wonder what level of stupidity will be the next goal..

Continual and endless efforts by talking heads and chattering classes demanding that men "man up" just to ensure his own downfall to their way of thinking has apparently a positive side and that woud be the opportunity to service that same sex who is determined to destroy it via insane laws and mindless demands..

They have yet to comprehend the irony as desperation rises and more and more Men opt out of the "manacled" market..

John the Other explains if nicely..



Too-late-for-you
October 11, 2011 Featured, M.G.T.O.W.

Hear the Lamentation of the Women

Some readers might notice that the style of this piece is similar to that of AVfM contributor Manuel Dexter. Several readers on the site are already aware that JtO has been publishing under the M.D. byline for about a year. The reason for this was harassment of Mr Other by individuals whose actions threatened his employment. The circumstances making this form of harassment no longer remain – and past articles previously posted by Manuel Dexter will soon be correctly listed under this byline
I‘ve been told repeatedly in person and print that in addition to my biology and sexual identity making me a bad person, I also hate women. This is the definition of a misogynist, which due to my sexual preferences; I am.Jill F. who writes for the ideological feminist website feministe-dot-com stated in her article “Dealbreaker indeed”: men who prefer to not perform oral sex on bleeding lady-parts are misogynists. Okay, add that to the list.
It’s a long list – one which has grown continuously during my lifetime. Another ideologue recently issued a fatwa on men whose moral failures manifest in facial hair. Amanda Marcotte’s complaint is Beards. She wrote on pandagon [dot] net: “Hate ‘em. I don’t mean like a couple day’s stubble that you routinely remove, but like a full-on beard. It’s not like I wouldn’t be friends with a guy with a beard, but kissing a dude with a beard puts me way off.”
Okay Amanda, not liking beards is your choice – but you’re not really talking about what you want in a man, you’re talking about what you’d like to be socially verbotten in the larger framework of our culture. I’ll add that to the list, too. Certainly Marcotte is an idiot, which argues against taking anything she writes too seriously. But she does draw a large audience – considerably larger than anything AVfM has  managed, so far.
A more aggressive inventory of supposed male failure includes the recently popular article by an anonymous ideologue titled “a man is a rape supporter if..,” This list includes a number of entirely nonviolent, normal and healthy activities and attitudes – and conflates them with rape. The list isn’t worth fisking – but serves to re-frame the old lie “all men are rapists” into a format which wont result in immediate dismissal. Debunking the individual points of the list is the intent of the author – since it is debunking which creates engagement with the underlying lie, that all men are rapists.
Meanwhile, within the media – a rising chorus of “man up” can be heard from traditionalists, social conservatives – particularly women. Men: put down the remote, go get a job and get back to paying for women’s stuff. Aren’t you a “real man?” The problem as perceived is that increasing numbers of men are opting out of the old game of self sacrifice on behalf of a feminized public discounting the humanity of male human beings.
A certain amount of shrill panic is evident in the “failure to launch,” rhetoric. Most fielding versions of this argument are themselves failing to understand why their comfortable reality is collapsing.
Almost all public rhetoric critical of men is shaming language – condemnation of men for “failure” to meet the criteria of what a real man should be, as defined by those who benefit from men’s attempts to conform. As the tenor of our culture’s “man up” message becomes more shrill, it also becomes less effective. This diminishing effect is not merely due to monotony of the “be a real man” message – it’s also because under that accusatory and shaming message is a foundation built on increasingly false assumption.

C-ya
The assumption is that men should care what anyone thinks. There is growing condemnation and attempt at social shame applied to men self-selecting “un manly” choices – such as prioritizing recreation ahead of a high status, highly demanding life. And men making these choices are saying to those who would heap shame on them, get bent.
Actually, they’re not saying that openly, because for this growing fraction of men, public opinion is irrelevant. Traditionalists moaning about the diminishing number of men self sacrificing to keep everybody else’s convenience paid or and running have not yet figured out that the game of shame and prestige doesn’t work when the benefits of social conformity to the role of protector and provider has no benefit except an early death and ongoing vilification of masculine identity.
Thanks to 50 years of ascendency of the faux-humanist ideology of feminism – men are increasingly despised, legally and socially marginalized and indentured as a class of disposable servants in western cultures. They are finally opting out. Meanwhile, the rest of our society is crapping it’s collective pants. Social conservatives recognize that men abdicating their role as disposable labor, money and sperm dispenser have the potential to collapse national economies. These so-cons are trying with growing desperation to shame them back onto the treadmill.
Some opponents of the growing phenomenon of “Free-Range-Men” (term coined by Zed on The Spearhead) will dismiss the characterization of feminist panic as a desperate attempt to shame men into “going back to paying for women’s shit and being disposable”.
This dismissal is easy to evaluate. Penny Nance – the CEO of “Concerned Women of America” said in an interview on Fox News “ Concerned women for America is the nation’s largest public policy organization and we love men. We support men and we’re rooting for them – we think they’re an essential part of the American family. However we want them to feel the pressure to achieve , to put down the remote, to go find a job, to get their education, to build their faith and character” (emphasis mine) … “so walk away from the remote and get busy guys.”
Nance stated clearly she knows that men are walking away from the traditionally allowed role as protector and provider, adding: “we need them, all the social science together points to the fact that dads are essential in the home, they’re essential in the family. We want them to do a great job now, when they’re young learning how to provide, so that when they are dads they can really be there for their families.”
Men opting out are characterized as if this is failure to grow up, or Peter-Pan syndrome – and this is where even alert members of the media are missing the picture.
Men opting out have not failed to grow up, in fact, they’re to be admired as the only self actualized, and self defined men in our culture. They’ve seen through the smog of lies used to con “real men” into the destructive role as feminism’s enablers and enforcers. For increasing numbers of these men, the shaming language, Peter-pan-syndrome accusations and “man up” rhetoric is actually a source of entertainment.
Under any label, I do know that proponents and adherents of big feminism, along with establish social conservatives and traditionalists, while they don’t fully grasp the MRM or free-range men  – they are terrified by us, and with good reason. 
Whatever you chose to call them, zeta males, Free-Range-Males (FRMs), or grass-eating-boys, the panicky flapping of feminists, white knights, and other subspecies of social conservatives is hilarious to these men going their own way. The hilarity of those complaining about “boy-men” comes from watching them struggle to grasp cause and effect in shifting social landscape populated by a growing culture of free-range-men who cannot be controlled by any traditional carrot or stick.These are men who are a self educating and organizing force of opposition to traditional social conventions which have rendered “men” as disposable beasts of burden.
Until this point in the discussion, I’ve been referring to variously named zeta males in the third person – as “them”. However, I’m one of these men, and have arrived at my present self identification through self education and participation in the still- early stage men’s rights movement; a social phenomenon which may take on a wholly new character and name.
Under any label, I do know that proponents and adherents of big feminism, along with establish social conservatives and traditionalists, while they don’t fully grasp the MRM or free-range men  – they are terrified by us, and with good reason. The established feminist-social-conservative framework has served to benefit, protect, and elevate women at the expense of male self actualization, and male lives. We are changing that landscape to suit ourselves, but not by educating anyone in the mainstream – or by convincing the blue pill public that male human beings are indeed also humans rather than appliances. These changes are the natural byproduct of the simple existence of a growing culture of self-actualized men.
“Manning up”, as social commentators in mainstream media would characterize it is a sick racket with no benefit except approval from a public who discount the humanity of men in favour of male utility. Refusal to buy into this worthless game requires no apology. The bleating and ridicule from anyone attempting to impose an “correct” definition of acceptable masculine identity or action is rightly treated by Free Range Men with amused contempt. To these slow moving ideologues, I’ll offer one suggestion: Cry some more.

Written by John the Other

Finding a Foreign Wife Or How to Get Conned..

I have received one of these emails and found it in the spam folder which would make anyone suspicious. She was ofcourse a lovely, even stunning Russian lass who would volunteer to furnish real life content to all my wet dreams and she ofcourse was appropriately dressed in a negligee, suspenders and lying on a bear rug. I figure that any female who looked like that must have an ulterior motive as she would be beating the guys off daily..

So Anastasha told me how lonely she was and how she was looking for love in all the wrong places. How she lived in the country with her grandmother and had to battle daily to scratch a living (the bear rug would pay for six months supply of food) and that life was so hard. Now what could possibly be the motive I did not have to ask myself..
Money is ofcourse, that sexual lubricant that appears to work as it has always done and it would appear that the general female population of the western world has that same itch that refuses to heal or reduce and only one salve can fix..

Finding a Foreign Wife – Internet Foreign Dating, Does it Work?

26.08.2011 |

, , ,
russian-dating-scams-online-bridesIf you’re an older gent like me, maybe you’ve also decided that dating is tiring. It’s also a big waste of money.
American women seem mostly to be materialistic. If you don’t own a home and a relatively new car, or can’t provide them with “stuff,” you’re out. It’s “Take me, show me, buy me.”
Nowadays, girlfriends seem like no more than expensive pets. At least a pet doesn’t nag or cheat on you. They don’t eat as much, and don’t mind eating in and watching a DVD instead of going out to dinner and a movie. Of course, a pet isn’t satisfying in other ways a girlfriend would be.
So, as I started to come to the conclusion a pet wasn’t enough. But, what to do?
I began to consider foreign cultures for dating.
Now I know that even for close-by women, Yahoo personals are a gamble. The photos are usually old. You’re also lucky if a woman doesn’t turn out to be a guy! Yahoo does no screening for scammers. If someone complains, they might cut off the account, but it’s virtually impossible to call or email a human at Yahoo to complain. Yahoo doesn’t dirty its hands by direct contact with their dirty old customers.
About this time, I got an email from an attractive Russian lady via Yahoo. I started to really search for any pitfalls of foreign dating on-line. It seemed no more risky than any other on-line dating. Just be cautious about sending anyone money, the sites warned.
This lady, Natasha, seemed quite safe and a strong possibility. She already had a ticket to the US, and had friends here. She said she was only checking along her proposed travel route for people to meet.
The only question mark, at first, was that she was 28 and interested to meet me, a 60 year old man. However, she was just talking friendship. European cultures don’t stigmatize age as much as we do. So, I thought, why not?
We began to correspond daily. She seemed to like my sense of humor and appreciate my dry outlook on things in general. She seemed well educated, too. Her sexy but tasteful photos didn’t hurt, either.
The anti-scam sites, such as www.russian-scam.org had lists of warning signs. They especially emphasized not to believe anyone who asked for money or proclaimed love after a few emails. They also warned against much younger women interested in older men. They admit that a difference of 15 years isn’t unusual for even a very classy Russian woman. So, I was on my toes, but not very suspicious.
Well, at least I was primed for the other foot to fall. The day “Natasha” was supposed to leave for the US, there was a problem. She had stayed in contact, saying she’d made it to Moscow for the flight here. However, surprise,surprise, she’d lost her US visa. She needed about $900 to quickly get another one. Even naive I knew by this time a visa was not nearly so expensive.
I started browsing the photos of known scammers on russian-scam.org and – sure enough: there was “Natasha’s” photo; with another name, of course! She had several names, in fact.
The site’s notes on her showed many, many men had sent her money to replace her “lost” visa or obtain medical care for her mother. One of her photos showed a passport and visa with yet another name!
I decided to have some fun with Natasha. I sent her an email expressing my concern at her plight. I told her “I think I have the solution. I’ll get back to you later today.” She begged me to hurry, as she’d miss her flight.
Later, I did send her another email: “Natasha, here’s the solution to all your problems! I found a passport and visa on line with your photo and other needed information already on it! All you have to do is print this out and show it to the authorities. It will prove you already have the required documents!”
I attached a pdf of the phony paperwork I’d found on line. Do I need to tell you she never responded again?
The only sad part is the long list of men she’d scammed before. Oh, and the fact that I was still without a girlfriend.
I continued researching. I got another email. This Ukrainian lady, Ekaterina, sounded nice and very educated. She was closer to my age, and seemed to eagerly answer my emails promptly and with a lot of detail. The only thing that puzzled me was that the answers seemed a bit stilted. Ekaterina seemed to key off a word I’d use in a sentence, but reply to it obliquely. Well, that could be the translator, or her own limited English. She certainly spoke better English than I did Russian.
About this time I found out that there are computer programmers, not all of them Russian, who create “fuzzy logic” programs which can respond to conversation. The programs troll email addresses, until they get a response. The program itself can pick up on gender, general age range, education, and other factors. They respond in kind, according to a formula.
By a certain point, the program will become “infatuated” with the man at the other end… I’m guessing they also are programmed to work on a woman respondent.
This is what the scam sites warn about: Be wary of someone getting too romantic too early. This is just not done, even by a desperate Russian woman, as long as she has, or wants to display some amount of class.
Once a respondent goes past this point, the human scammer takes over, weaving a web to get money. There is even a Russian name for Americans who fall for the program: “Frogs.”
A big tip-off to a scam is a request to send money via Western Union. No other way will do for a scammer. He can pick up the money at any office, and leave no trace. Western Union’s site even has a stern warning about this. Such cheating must be wide-spread… and WU must have been sued a few times.
So, I was duly warned.
Sure enough, the conversation turned to money. By this time I was bored, so I just gave a rude brush-off answer, calling the programmer by his presumed name: “Boris, Ivan, or whoever you really are.”