Response to the Alex Parker Piece ‘Feminist Rages Against GirlPal ‘Galentine’s Day,’ Says No Women Are Lonely, Praises Group Vomiting’

Response to the Alex Parker Piece ‘Feminist Rages Against GirlPal ‘Galentine’s Day,’ Says No Women Are Lonely, Praises Group Vomiting’

A conservative editorialist at the Town Hall site, Alex Parker (who I assume is a man), mocks an (Link): anti-Galentine’s Day essay written by a secular, liberal feminist named Rachel Hosie.

“Galentine’s Day” is a new holiday where women friends can celebrate their friendships with each other on February 13th.

The secular feminist that Parker is responding to believes that Galentine’s Day is patronizing to single women, so she is not in support of the holiday.

As a never-married woman who is over 45 years of age who had wanted to be married, but it didn’t come to pass for me, I came to terms with being never-married years ago, so Valentine’s Day no longer bothers me the way it used to.

I don’t have strong feelings for or against Galentine’s Day.

While Hosie’s contention may be true that Galentine’s Day is patronizing towards single adulthood (which is a bad thing), I see it as ultimately a harmless day for women to spend enjoying the friendship of their women friends, so I don’t object to the holiday.

I do however object to a few of the points that Parker made while trying to dismantle Hosie’s arguments.

I will provide excerpts from the Parker editorial and then offer my observations:

(Link): Feminist Rages Against GirlPal ‘Galentine’s Day,’ Says No Women Are Lonely, Praises Group Vomiting

Excerpts:

[Hosie the liberal feminist writes,]

Actually, we don’t need your pity — and the whole concept perpetuates the ridiculous myth of the sad, single woman.

[To which conservative Parker replies,]

The ridiculous myth?? How is it a myth, and how is it ridiculous?

Men want women, and women want men; that’s why we have February 14th … Thursday’s gonna find some people without dates; some portion of those will have ovaries; and some of those are gonna be none too thrilled.

Oh, wait — I forgot; this is 2019.

Okay…women aren’t women and men aren’t men and women don’t have to be like men or women, and there are no men or women…
–(end quotes)—-

My comments regarding this portion of the exchange:

Spinsters and Crazy Cat Ladies

I cannot believe Parker is feigning ignorance of the “sad, pathetic” single woman trope.

Being a conservative who is critiquing a liberal or feminist essay does not mean having to act ignorant of certain societal truths in the process.

Continue reading “Response to the Alex Parker Piece ‘Feminist Rages Against GirlPal ‘Galentine’s Day,’ Says No Women Are Lonely, Praises Group Vomiting’”

Introducing LoveSync, A Device For Telling Your Partner You Want Sex Without Speaking To Them – Perfect Solution for Doormat Complementarian Wives!

Introducing LoveSync, A Device For Telling Your Partner You Want Sex Without Speaking To Them – Perfect Solution for Doormat Complementarian Wives!

(Update below)

Complementarians falsely believe that women do not want, desire, or enjoy sex – they assume that only men want sex (see Doug Wilson, Mark Driscoll and others).

Further, many complementarians (see John Piper as one example) believe it is wrong for women to be direct when communicating, because a woman being blunt with a man may hurt that man’s male ego.

(Complementarians brainwash Christian women into thinking that being  Codependent is “Godly.”)

So, what is a randy, passive, doormat complementarian wife to do if she’s in the mood? I guess she can try this product:

(Link): Introducing LoveSync, A Device For Telling Your Partner You Want Sex Without Speaking To Them 

Excerpts:

February 2019
By Madison Malone Kircher

Are you in a relationship where you have sex with another person? Great.

That’s nice for you, if you’re into having sex with other people. Are you a little fuzzy on how to ask said other person if they’d like to have sex with you? Here’s a refresher.

You ask them.

You use words — spoken, typed, sky-written — and ask your partner if they are feeling likewise horny. If they consent … then you have sex.

Continue reading “Introducing LoveSync, A Device For Telling Your Partner You Want Sex Without Speaking To Them – Perfect Solution for Doormat Complementarian Wives!”

You Could Be Flirting On Dating Apps With Paid Impersonators by C. R. Stuart-Ulin


You Could Be Flirting On Dating Apps With Paid Impersonators by C. R. Stuart-Ulin

It’s a very long article. I read about 95% of it the other day – it’s sad and disturbing.

Some of the suggestions in the manuals the “dating closers” are told to follow by these companies are pretty sexist – they operate on sexist gender stereotypes of what they think women like and want.

(Link): You Could Be Flirting On Dating Apps With Paid Impersonators

Excerpts:

Every morning I wake up to the same routine. I log into the Tinder account of a 45-year-old man from Texas—a client.

I flirt with every woman in his queue for 10 minutes, sending their photos and locations to a central database of potential “Opportunities.” For every phone number I get, I make $1.75.

I’m what’s called a “Closer” for the online-dating service ViDA(Virtual Dating Assistants).

Men and women (though mostly men) from all over the world pay this company to outsource the labor and tedium of online dating. The matches I speak to on behalf of the Texan man and other clients have no idea they’re chatting with a professional.

Continue reading “You Could Be Flirting On Dating Apps With Paid Impersonators by C. R. Stuart-Ulin”

Every Successful Relationship is Successful For The Same Exact Reasons by M. Manson

Every Successful Relationship is Successful For The Same Exact Reasons by M. Manson

(Link): Every Successful Relationship is Successful For The Same Exact Reasons by M. Mason

Excerpts.

….So, that’s what I did. I sent out the call the week before my wedding: anyone who has been married for 10+ years and is still happy in their relationship, what lessons would you pass down to others if you could? What is working for you and your partner? And if you’re divorced, what didn’t work previously?

The response was overwhelming. Almost 1,500 people replied, many of whom sent in responses measured in pages, not paragraphs.

It took almost two weeks to comb through them all, but I did. And what I found stunned me…

They were incredibly repetitive.

1. Be together for the right reasons
Don’t ever be with someone because someone else pressured you to. I got married the first time because I was raised Catholic and that’s what you were supposed to do. Wrong.

I got married the second time because I was miserable and lonely and thought having a loving wife would fix everything for me. Also wrong.

Took me three tries to figure out what should have been obvious from the beginning, the only reason you should ever be with the person you’re with is because you simply love being around them. It really is that simple.
– Greg

Before we even get into what you should do in your relationship, let’s start with what not to do.

Continue reading “Every Successful Relationship is Successful For The Same Exact Reasons by M. Manson”

A Romantic Partner Is Not Meant to Be Won and Will Power Is Not Love by B. Cooper

A Romantic Partner Is Not Meant to Be Won and Will Power Is Not Love by B. Cooper

(Link): A Romantic Partner Is Not Meant to Be Won and Will Power Is Not Love by B. Cooper

Excerpts:

[Cardi B. is a woman rap singer whose estranged husband, named “Offset,” approached her while she was performing on stage to force a reconciliation with her]

… Stalking behaviors and emotional boundary–breaching have been normalized as romance and desire through popular-culture written and produced by a system controlled by men.

Patriarchy works by making women think that the man who will override her will is the one who loves her most.

Continue reading “A Romantic Partner Is Not Meant to Be Won and Will Power Is Not Love by B. Cooper”

Married To Person With Kid From Previous Marriage: Guy Says His Wife is Putting Her Son Before Their Marriage – on Not Wanting to Date Single Parents

Married To Person With Kid From Previous Marriage: Guy Says His Wife is Putting Her Son Before Their Marriage – On Not Wanting to Date Single Parents

This following letter to an advice columnist (which is linked to and excerpted much farther down this blog post) is interesting, because I guarantee you had the guy written to “Ask Amy” of the “Ask Amy” column with the same concern, Amy would  not have been sympathetic to the guy.

Amy would’ve raked him over the coals for not oozing with love and compassion for the misbehaving stepchild.

Amy, as I’ve seen, always sides with the kids or the biological parent.

If you are a person married to someone who has a bratty kid who is driving you crazy (and even to the point of wanting to divorce!), Amy will shame you terribly over it.

Amy will scream and yell about you being selfish, and she will ask you to empathize with the misbehaving, rotten kid.

(That I can recall in all my years of reading her advice column, Amy has never shown empathy to the adult who is stressed and whose marriage is strained over a hard- to- handle step-child.)

This advice columnist,  though, takes the opposite approach and blames the biological mother; he holds her accountable for the poor marital dynamics.

Continue reading “Married To Person With Kid From Previous Marriage: Guy Says His Wife is Putting Her Son Before Their Marriage – on Not Wanting to Date Single Parents”

8 Signs Being Single And Not Dating Is The Right Choice For You, According To Experts

8 Signs Being Single And Not Dating Is The Right Choice For You, According To Experts

(Link) 8 Signs Being Single And Not Dating Is The Right Choice For You, According To Experts

Excerpts:

For some singles, dating and pursuing relationships — either in a casual or more serious context — can be a fun and fulfilling experience.

But being single and not dating is a totally healthy lifestyle choice, too… it just isn’t one that’s often represented in our culture. Society puts a lot of pressure on singles to settle downand find “The One,” but the truth is that you should never feel obligated to pursue a romantic relationship for any reason.

 “While a healthy relationship is certainly a beautiful thing, there are also plenty of (Link): benefits to staying single as well,” Logan Cohen, LMFT-S, tells Bustle. “Someone who is single can have their immediate surroundings reflect their specific needs MUCH more consistently than if in a partnership. Single people also have a lot more time to develop their platonic social network, grow professionally, and even do their own personal growth work while not being distracted by the concerns of a partner.”

Continue reading “8 Signs Being Single And Not Dating Is The Right Choice For You, According To Experts”

Singles Discrimination, Complementarianism, Equally Yoked Teaching, and Spotting Predators in Church Video

Singles Discrimination, Complementarianism, Equally Yoked Teaching, and Spotting Predators in Church Video

Someone in a Christian discussion group posted this video (and I don’t want to link to the group or mention it by name, though you may be able to figure out which one it is, especially if you are already familiar with it), and the Christians on the discussion board talked about it:

(Link): When A Predator Shows Up At Your Church — Here’s What You Do!

That same video has also been making the rounds on other Christian blogs, sites, forums, and on Twitter.

The video is around 18 minutes long. I watched it a few days ago.

The video features a Christian woman who says a 50-something guy showed up at her church, a man who set off red flags for her, due to his weird behavior around the kids who were there at the church, including her own.

The man behaved overly-familiar with her kid, other people’s kids who were there, and he ignored the parents of the kids.

(1) First, I’m going to discuss what I believe this video has to do with complementarianism.

(2) Then I am going to discuss some of the disturbing comments about adult singles that were made in the Christian discussion group where I saw this video posted to, and next,

(3) I’ll move on to discussing, as mentioned by a woman or two in the group, about the creepy behavior single adult women have to put up with, even at church, and what this has to do with the Christian “Equally Yoked” teaching.

Continue reading “Singles Discrimination, Complementarianism, Equally Yoked Teaching, and Spotting Predators in Church Video”

Codependence Is Not Oneness: What Christians Get Wrong About Relationships

Codependence Is Not Oneness: What Christians Get Wrong About Relationships

Some Christians – most conservative ones – teach something called “Gender Complementarianism” which instills codependent behaviors in girls, and also encourages adult women to behave in a codependent fashion, which is not healthy for relationships. But complementarians like to insist this is “biblical,” but it’s really not.

Of course, secular culture – Hollywood in particular – love to teach people that they are incomplete until and unless they find that one special “someone,” a romantic partner, and get married. So, secular culture is not necessarily any better at this than Christian culture.

Most Christian dating or marital advice is horrible, but this page was pretty good.

(Link): Codependence Is Not Oneness: What Christians Get Wrong About Relationships

Excerpts:

BY DEBRA K. FILETA
JUNE 6, 2018
4 MINUTE READ

Many people believe they have fallen in love, only to realize their “love” is based on need—a need to be wanted, a need to be valued, a need to be affirmed. A need to be taken care of, to be nurtured, to be kept safe.

“Need love” drives you toward someone out of desperation, insecurities, and fear.

Continue reading “Codependence Is Not Oneness: What Christians Get Wrong About Relationships”

The Consider The Lily Blogger, 220 Lily, Thinks You Should Believe in God For Anything, But This Was Sure Not Her Message to Me in 2016

The Consider The Lily Blogger, 220 Lily, Thinks You Should Believe in God For Anything, But This Was Sure Not Her Message to Me in 2016

About two years ago a person calling himself or herself (I will assume this is a woman) –  “220lily” – (who has her own blog (Link): here – January 2019 update: as of this date, Word Press says that the 220Lily blog is no longer available; I wonder why she deleted her blog?) – she had the audacity to scold and lecture me in the comment section of my own blog, under one of my (Link): One Stop Threads.

I just checked out Lily’s (Link): Twitter page (edit January 2019: she has also deleted that particular Twitter account, though I don’t know when), and on it, she says of herself:

“White. Female. Pentecostal. Philosopher. Preacher. Poet. Travel tweets: English churches, Bible sites. Tennessee, USA”

I think after exchanging several posts with her, I blocked her. (I may tweet a link to this blog post to her on Twitter and block here there, too, as I’m not interested in having an on-going debate with her, but I think she should be made aware of this blog post.)

220Lily became increasingly judgmental as our exchange continued – and that is (Link): not what my blog is about.

Yes, please click that link to visit that page (here it is again), and please scroll down to the comments section to see the conversation that 220Lily and myself had. (Link to the first post from 220Lily to me is located (Link): here.)

I just now noticed the passive-aggressive, catty, bitchy barb that 220 Lily left in her initial post telling me that she allows all comments on her blog, even those that disagree with her blog – as though this makes her superior to me or my blog in some fashion.

Let me tell you, I may not allow argumentative comments on my blog (which I state up front, right at the top of the blog’s main page, hello, so it is not a surprise), but I don’t automatically assume that I’m better person or a better blogger than someone else who blogs differently from me or who has differing blog rules from mine. Good lord, the arrogance.

Today, in March 2018, I once more looked at Lily’s posts on my blog because I was editing one of those ‘one stop’ threads. I skimmed down and saw her comments again.

I clicked on her screen name in one of the comments she left on my blog to see if she has a blog, and if so, what she’s been writing lately. She does in fact have her own blog, and her last post to her blog was published about a week ago.

As I compose this blog post today, this is the most recent post on her blog, “Consider the Lilies”-

(Link): Do You Believe?  (that link is to her blog post on her original blog; it is no longer available –
– she has re-posted it to a new blog location
(Link): here – “Do You Believe?”)

(Link): Twitter Link about Blog Post

Here are a few excerpts from that blog post by 220Lily:

Excerpts by the Consider the Lily Blogger:

I shared this story here last week (see “Face to Face”), but I’ll share it again because I think more people need to hear it.

Last Sunday morning at church, I prayed to see God’s power.

Tuesday night, he answered my prayer.

How? When I went to bed, my cell phone had 6% battery power left. It had been in the red zone (0-15%) for hours, but I wanted the battery to drain completely so I could recharge it. Minutes later I checked my phone and the battery level was 16%, out of the red zone.

What happened? God miraculously powered my phone, without electricity! Is this event technologically possible? No. Old batteries do funny things, but they can’t charge without electricity. …

What does this experience tell me? God can do anything instantly, without human help.

Yes, he gives people the knowledge to design phones and perform surgery.

Sometimes God chooses to work through human instruments. But they’re not necessary.

Man isn’t indispensable because God isn’t limited by human power. He can make pigs fly if he wants to. And it’s easy for him. There’s no struggle! The question is, do we believe?
//// end excerpt

What hypocrisy, considering this person’s condescending lecture to me two years prior on my own blog (again, you can view Lily’s condescending and victim blaming comments to me under a blog post here).

Continue reading “The Consider The Lily Blogger, 220 Lily, Thinks You Should Believe in God For Anything, But This Was Sure Not Her Message to Me in 2016”

‘My 600-lb Life’ Participants Not Only Lose Pounds, They Also Lose Their Husbands

(Link): ‘My 600-lb Life’ Participants Not Only Lose Pounds, They Also Lose Their Husbands

by Tiffany White

You’d think after the participants on My 600-lb Life miraculously shed hundreds of pounds that their married lives would improve. But judging by their updates, most end up getting a divorce.

In fact, it’s so common, some weight loss patients call it “Bariatric Divorce,” and one study even said most couples separate within two years after the severe weight loss surgery takes place.

“In general, we know, after bariatric surgery, that people tend to feel much better about themselves,” David Sarwer, an associate professor of psychology at the University of Pennsylvania, told The Seattle Times.
“Intuitively, we would think if one partner is feeling better that would only help the marriage. But what we have found is that weight and weight loss can actually play a more complicated role in a marriage or romantic relationship.”

Continue reading “‘My 600-lb Life’ Participants Not Only Lose Pounds, They Also Lose Their Husbands”

Eight Obvious Signs Your Partner is Taking Advantage of You by H. Rose

Eight Obvious Signs Your Partner is Taking Advantage of You

I’m including the parts that remind me of my ex fiance’, who, aside from a certain family member of mine, is THE most self-absorbed person I’ve ever known or met. He never cared about my needs, but he expected me to meet HIS needs.

He also expected me to help him pay his bills (which I did on occasion), but he didn’t help me pay mine, when I fell on hard times. What a selfish, entitled jerk. But a lot of men are socialized by culture and their churches or parents to think this is normal – that the woman exists to meet the MAN’S needs, but he isn’t expected or required to reciprocate.

(Link): Eight Obvious Signs Your Partner is Taking Advantage of You by H. Rose

Excerpts:

…No one deserves to be taken advantage of, over-ruled or degraded. If your significant other is constantly tearing you down and causing you to dwell on negative emotions, leave the relationship.

You deserve the best. If your relationship contains any of these eight signs, seek help and get out of your relationship… fast!

It is all about your partners needs

Does your partner ever call to ask how your day went? Do they go out of their way to make sure you are genuinely doing OK? Do they ask you about the small details about your life? Continue reading “Eight Obvious Signs Your Partner is Taking Advantage of You by H. Rose”

Being ‘Selfish’ in My Dating Was the Best Decision I Could Have Made by Zachary Zane

Being ‘Selfish’ in My Dating Was the Best Decision I Could Have Made by Z. Zane

Here is the link:

(Link): Being ‘Selfish’ in My Dating Was the Best Decision I Could Have Made by Zachary Zane (excerpts farther below)

This piece was written by a man, and he might be a homosexual, based on the stock photo illustrating it, which shows a man walking down the street and laughing with another man – after skimming more of the article, yes, he appears to be homosexual (he talks about dating men).

If this guy is homosexual, I can say as a hetero woman, I related to most of what he wrote.

I am a recovering codependent – and it sounds to me as though the guy who wrote this page, Zane, is also a codependent, or was one at one time.

Codependency usually seems to affect women, but some men can be codependent also.

A lot of stereotypes women are expected to live out and uphold by churches, Christians (under “gender complementarian” or “biblical womanhood” teachings), and secular culture, are actually facets of codependency, and some examples of that are: being passive, compliant, thinking it’s selfish to put yourself first and get your own needs met, and so forth.

If you continually put the needs of another person ahead of your own, you will grow resentful of it eventually, and either explode in anger at the other person or break things off (such as seeking a divorce).

Continue reading “Being ‘Selfish’ in My Dating Was the Best Decision I Could Have Made by Zachary Zane”

Alpha Females Part 4 – From Psychiatrists and Counselors: How and Why Being a Beta Female is Harmful and Damaging to Women

Alpha Females Part 4 – From Psychiatrists and Counselors: How and Why Being a Beta Female is Harmful and Damaging to Women

This commentary will be divided up among a few posts. Here is part 4.

(This post may be edited in the future to re-word things, polish things, add new thoughts or links / For Twitter: #TheAlphaFemalesGuide )

From this series:

Visit Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3

Part 3B: Response to Venker: Re: Personal Experience

Introduction.

For those new to my blog:

I am a right winger. I was a Republican until recently. I am now a conservative Independent.

I was a conservative Christian for many years (I am no longer sure about what my religious views are), and I (Link): Am A Former Gender Complementarian (someone who believed in and lived out traditional gender roles (what Venker would describe as “feminine” or “beta”), views which are based in large measure on incorrect interpretations and applications about gender in the Bible).

I sometimes agree with secular left wing feminists on some topics, but not always. At times, I disagree with secular and religious left wing feminists and have written several blog posts critiquing some of their views.

This series of blog posts is addressing the dating and relationship advice of author Suzanne Venker, who wrote a book called “The Alpha Female’s Guide to Men & Marriage” which she has lately been marketing online and on TV news shows.

Here is one article by Venker about her relationship views:

(Link, off site):  Society is creating a new crop of alpha women who are unable to love by S. Venker


As many books and articles on the subjects of boundaries, codependency, and even domestic violence explain, when or if a woman exhibits codependent behaviors or attitudes (such as being passive, having an unwillingness to say no to others, doesn’t put her own needs first), she will tend to attract abusive, selfish, or exploitative individuals.

Unfortunately, many of these same codependent traits are considered “feminine” by many conservatives and by Christians (under the teaching of gender complementarianism). Author Venker touts such traits under the heading of “Beta” or “being nice” or as “being feminine” or “being soft.”

While I myself do not agree with every last facet of secular (or even Christian) feminism, they are at least correct in fighting against expecting such behavior from girls and women, because they realize it leaves females open to being exploited, or treated unfairly at jobs or in relationships.

As this Christian-authored piece explains, feminism (not even secular feminism) is entirely bad, wrong, or off-base:

(Link): Perhaps Feminism is Not The Enemy

I also explained in (Link): Part 2 how many conservatives (and Venker herself) misunderstand, wrongly explain, or misunderstand feminism.

As I explained in (Link): Part 3 of this series, I was a “Beta” myself for many years (as was my mother), which is what Venker says women should be, if they hope to marry or have a happy, stress-free, marriage once they marry.

However, being “Beta” does not guarantee that a woman will attract more men, get more dates, or have a happy marriage – again, as I already explained in Part 3.

WHAT THE EXPERTS HAVE TO SAY ABOUT WOMEN BEING BETA

Psychiatrists and therapists have written books and articles explaining how and why taking advice such as Venker’s can lead to problems for women, including in the area of dating and marriage.

Below, I will excerpt content from the books The Disease to Please by psychiatrists Harriet B. Braiker, PhD, and counselor Beverly Engel from the book The Nice Girl Syndrome.

First, here are the relevant portions from Venker’s article on Fox News:

(Link):  Society is creating a new crop of alpha women who are unable to love by S. Venker – on the Fox News site

Today they abound. There are several reasons why, but it’s in large part due to women having been groomed to be leaders rather than to be wives. Simply put, women have become too much like men. They’re too competitive. Too masculine. Too alpha.

That may get them ahead at work. But when it comes to love, it will land them in a ditch.

Every relationship requires a masculine and a feminine energy to thrive. If women want to find peace with men, they must find their feminine…

In essence, being feminine means being nice. It means being soft instead of hard…

…What men want most of all is respect, companionship and sex. If you supply these basics, your husband will do anything for you…

—(end excerpt)—

There, Venker is telling women to deny who they truly are and downplay their personalities, desires, and so on (don’t come on “too strong”), because if they stay as-is, they will repel men, but if they change themselves to make a man happy, they can attract men, or the man they have won’t want to divorce them.

Let’s see what Dr. Braiker has to say about that type of reasoning (spoiler alert: Braiker totally disagrees with Venker).

From the book The Disease to Please:

Page 95:

…If you are the people-pleaser [people-pleaser = Venker’s Beta, Nice, or Feminine] in an unbalanced relationship… you will be forced to deny or suppress your own needs. Inevitably, even the nicest people will become frustrated and angry when their emotional and sexual needs are denied indefinitely.

Healthy relationships that endure are balanced and interdependent. Balanced interdependence means that both partners are aware of and sensitive and responsive to the needs of the other.

—(end excerpt)—

From pages 93-94:

Many people-pleasers [people-pleaser = Beta, Codependent, Nice, or Feminine women] who have used this approach [making a man dependent upon them by doing nice things for him all the time, stifling your own needs, etc., and  using other approaches Venker recommends] sadly discover that manipulating a man into an excessively dependent position – no matter how nice and well-intended your motives – may actually push him into doing the thing you most fear: abandoning you.

—(end excerpt)—

From pages 94 to 95, Braiker gives a case study of a patient of hers named Jennifer who utilized Venker-type methods to hold on to her husband [she always was available to him sexually, she sacrificed her needs to meet his at all times, and sought to “spoil” him].

The result? Jennifer’s husband Ron began having an affair on her with another woman, and later, Jennifer came home one day to find a note of good-bye from her husband, Ron, where he said he was divorcing her for the other woman.

A little later in this same chapter, starting on page 95, Braiker discusses how many career women are what Venker would refer to as ‘Alpha’ in the workplace (confident, competent, assertive, and so forth) but think that to attract or retain a man in their romantic life, that they must behave in what Venker would refer to as a “Beta.”

Braiker explains in this book that this is not so – that acting “Beta” (or “nice” or “feminine” – all which amounts to the same thing, regardless of the terminology used: being a codependent with bad boundaries in practice), causes such women to attract abusive or selfish men. Braiker then spends the rest of the chapter cautioning women from being passive in their romantic life to avoid users, abusers, and narcissists.

Here are a few excerpts, by Braiker (pages 95, 96):

… I have treated many highly successful career women who have entrapped themselves in bad relationships with men by their self-imposed people-pleasing [people-pleasing = being Beta, Nice, Feminine, Codependent] subservience.

A large number of these women who are now at the pinnacle of their professions grew up in the 1950s and 1960s, in an era when femininity and sexual attractiveness still carried with them certain gender stereotypes such as submissiveness, dependency, passivity, and sensitivity.

Today, many of these women, and even a significant number of younger women too, fear that the very traits that account for their success in the workplace – assertiveness, mental toughness, aggressiveness, competitive-ness – become liabilities in their romantic relationships with men.

[Here Braiker inserts the case study of one woman patient who is a CEO]

Many women like my [C.E.O.] patient, harbor misgivings about whether their achievements might boomerang when it comes to relationships with men and come back to haunt them.

…. As a consequence of this dangerous combination [fear of success combined with people-pleasing], they may engage in a range of self-defeating behaviors that can sabotage either their careers or their personal relationships, and often both.

… Some people-pleasing women attempt to resolve the dilemma by splitting their personality traits into two discrete “sides.” They may display their competitive, assertive, and aggressive side at work.

In their personal relationships with men, they may adopt an exaggerated “femininity,” displaying passivity, submissiveness, and compliance. This masquerade, of course, is no solution at all. Rather, it is a recipe for inner conflict, anxiety, identity confusion, and lowered self-esteem.

—(end excerpt)—

Braiker then next, on pages 96-97, offers up the case study of one of her women patients, Helene, who was a successful business woman who was living out what Venker suggests in her book for women to do: be assertive at the job, but be the passive, sweet, sex kitten at home with her mate.

The result of this for Helene? Lots of abuse.

…behind closed doors when they are alone, Bob [Helene’s boyfriend] treats Helene abusively. [Helene has a far more successful career than Bob does, which Bob is aware of.]

Helene defends Bob’s behavior by “understanding” how difficult it is for a man to stand in her shadow.

…Helene realized [via therapy] that she needed to correct some of her own gender stereotypes. Helene believed that by demonstrating her people-pleasing [Beta, nice, feminine] behavior in her personal relationships with men, she was being more feminine and, therefore, more sexually attractive.

[At her place of employment, where she was CEO, Helene tolerated no sexual harassment for herself or for any woman]. However, because of her Disease to Please [being codependent, Beta, nice, and feminine], Helene was actually rewarding a man for treating her abusively behind close doors.

—(end excerpt)—

From page 97:

It is imperative that you recognize how dangerous and self-sabotaging your people-pleasing tendencies with men can become so that you can change the unhealthy dynamic of your relationships. Otherwise, the Disease to Please [being codependent, Beta, nice, and feminine] will serve as a veritable mating call to men who have a perverse need and desire to control nearly every aspect of your behavior. Worse yet, you will allow them to do so.

—(end excerpt)—

Page 98:

Unless you repair the damage by curing the Disease to Please [being codependent, Beta, nice, and feminine]  that produced it, you will limp away from the relationship with the brand of “damaged goods” on your ego. [Then the cycle will repeat itself as you attract yet another abusive, selfish, or jerk boyfriend who mistreats you all over again.]

—(end excerpt)—

As you can see from those excerpts (and there are plenty more in the book), Dr. Braiker strongly warns and advises women against the very traits and attitudes that Venker is telling women in articles, books, and TV appearances that she thinks they should have!

While there are plenty of selfish or abusive men who would enjoy being able to thoroughly control a woman, and a woman who, per Venker’s teaching, willingly goes along with it, a lot of men soon tire of this extreme “feminine” type of woman and dump her.

In her book, starting on page 100, Dr. Braiker discusses a male patient she had once who admitted that he loved to date the sort of women Venker advises women to be, because they were so easy to control. But, the guy soon got tired of dating these passive, wimpy, Beta women.

Here’s what he said:

“…One day, I realized I’m sitting in the boat [of life] all alone. I don’t want the kind of woman who will do anything to please me anymore. It’s boring and lonely. I want a partner who can sit on the boat next to me and keep me company. I want us to please each other without losing all boundaries or identity.”

Another male patient said (page 101):

“I do like to be in control, but I really want someone who will push back. I like steak because it gives me something to chew on. I don’t want to eat pre-chewed baby food. That’s how I wind up feeling about a woman who will give up her own substance just because she’s trying to please me. There’s nothing to chew on; there’s no challenge there at all. I just get bored.”

As Dr. Braiker so succinctly puts it (from page 106):

-There’s nothing wrong with wanting to make a man you love happy or wanting to please him. Just be sure that you’re not pleasing him by hurting yourself in the process.

-Any man who is threatened or feels diminished by your intelligence, achievements, success, or talent is NOT someone with whom you are likely to have a gratifying relationship with anyway. Look elsewhere.

—(end excerpt)—

Earlier in the book starting around page 49, Dr. Braiker discusses a single woman patient she had named Miranda who wants badly to get married. Miranda cannot figure out why she can’t seem to hold on to a man.

Miranda wrongly assumes the way to “catch” a man is to take the sort of advice Venker gives in her relationship book – she tries to be very pleasing and agreeable with every man she dates, she molds herself into whatever type of woman she assumes her current boyfriend of the month likes, and so on.

The result is that all these men eventually become bored with Miranda – and break up with her.

As Braiker describes it in the book (page 50), Miranda puts on the “beta” routine that Venker advises:

So, as soon as Miranda finds herself attracted and interested in a man, she puts herself in a subservient, submissive, position. She lavishes men with attention, adoration, and praise. Miranda believes that to be worthy of a man’s love, she must prove she will always put his needs first.

…The truth is that she [Miranda] cannot offer the one thing a healthy man wants and needs the most: the ability to truly share herself because she knows and values who she is.

—(end excerpt)—

Notice that Miranda’s assumptions on how to attract a man are similar to the tactics Venker puts forward in her Fox news article. And, as Braiker goes on to explain, Miranda was her patient because her “beta” femininity was driving men away, and she could not figure out that it was her very beta-femininity-ness that was at fault.

EXCHANGING AGENCY AND INDEPENDENCE FOR BEING OVER-RELIANT ON A MAN

Continuing with my critique of Venker’s views; more from her article at Fox news:

(Link):  Society is creating a new crop of alpha women who are unable to love by S. Venker – on the Fox News site:

And because I had zero interest in my husband adopting a more feminine role, I set about to become the feminine creature our culture insists women not be.

And here’s what I learned: It’s liberating to be a beta!

I’m an alpha all day long, and it gets tiresome. I concede that I thrive on it; but at the end of the day, I’m spent. Self-reliance is exhausting. Making all the decisions is exhausting. Driving the car, literally or figuratively, is exhausting.

—(end excerpt)—

So, Venker is apparently fine ceding normal adult and personal responsibility to her husband because it makes her life easier. What she’s also sacrificing is her independence, dignity, and agency by doing so.

I take it that Venker is a right winger or conservative: right wingers and conservatives support personal responsibility; they don’t recommend that adults neglect it.

As I explain in an older post, I am a FORMER gender complementarian. Sometimes people on other sites have asked me, “Why do you suppose so many Christian women willingly endure the sexism known as complementarianism?”

One of several reasons so many Christian women remain “stuck” in complementarianism and go along with it is precisely to ride the coat-tails of a husband, because it’s easier going through life with someone taking care of you than it is for you to take care of yourself, by getting a job, taking care of your own car, and so forth.

Christian women are willing to trade off their autonomy, dreams, goals in life, and independence in exchange for male-provided financial stability and having a husband who is like a “father figure” who they can rely on.

In the book of Genesis of the Bible, God, by the way, actually predicted this would happen as a result of sin, when He told Adam and Eve that the woman would desire her husband and turn to the husband – rather than to God.

Ever since, yes, many women have indeed traded off God-reliance (or self-reliance) to depend on a husband for emotional and financial stability. And women like Venker (along with hordes of Christian gender complementarians) are prodding women to keep this up. It’s so sick, and rather tragic.

Women depending on men to this degree – and giving up their identity, needs, and self-hood in the process – is a RESULT of the Fall, a RESULT of sin entering humanity – but Venker and complementarians and other conservatives think this is awesome, healthy, or great for marriages and dating. Sick, sick, sick.

Secular feminism seeks to correct this type of sin that impacts women so strongly (and so this is one aspect of feminism that is good!), ironically.

Secular feminists are trying to free women from this very sin God predicted back in Genesis (and secular feminists – and a smaller number of Christian gender egalitarians – see how damaging it is), but many Christians and conservatives keep trying to cram women back into this same “sin box” and tell them it is “good” for them and for their relationships.

So, Venker finds being responsible and making decisions all day tiring. Well, yes, most people do. But the solution is not to hand over all or most of your personal responsibility to another adult.

Counselor Beverly Engels warns women against this very temptation in her book (Link): The Nice Girl Syndrome.

Engel discusses in the book (pages 212 – 214) that during her early 30s, on a month long trip to Europe, she met a European guy named Jacob. By the time she met this guy, she had been in Europe for a few weeks, was exhausted.

She ends up going to his place, they had sex a time or two, though the second time she didn’t really want to. The guy wasn’t exactly overtly abusive, but she felt she “owed” him sex to be nice to him, since he was now taking care of her. He was making her breakfasts, letting her stay at his home, etc.

For a period of time, due to exhaustion, Engel says she let this Jacob man control her, she was tired of making decisions for herself, she was tired of all the responsibility on this trip, so she was willing to turn the steering wheel over to Jacob – as Venker is asking women to do in their own relationships.

Engel says that is a bad move, and she has regret over her interactions with Jacob to this day. Even though she kept turning the guy down sexually, so long as she stayed at his home, he kept repeatedly bugging her for sex and for more sex. He was super persistent.

Venker’s advice to women boils down to that they infantilize themselves to be more attractive to men. This is bad and dangerous advice.

From page 131 by Engel:

You can’t expect anyone else to take responsibility for your welfare. You are the only one who can take care of you.

The price you pay for looking to someone else to take care of you is dependency, the loss of self, and, ultimately, the inability to control your life.

YOU DON’T WANT TO DATE OR MARRY THE SORT OF MEN VENKER’S ADVICE WILL ATTRACT

From page 45 of Engel’s book:

It used to be that the payoff for being sweet and nice was that one was taken care of and protected by the men and authority figures in one’s life.

Girls and women were perceived as weaker and in need of protection from the “big, bad world,” and boys and men took on the responsibility of making sure that nothing bad happened to them. But those days are gone, along with chivalry and manners.

Most boys and men today do not feel responsible for protecting girls; in fact, many view girls and women as objects to be exploited.

…This doesn’t mean that there aren’t men who like taking on the role of provider and protector. But these men are not necessarily throwbacks to an earlier time – unfortunately, they often take on this role as a way of dominating women. In fact, these men often look for women who are passive, who appear naive and innocent, because such women are easier to control.

–(end excerpt)–

Yes, as you can see, Venker’s advice, if followed, will open you up to appearing very attractive to abusive, selfish, cruel, or self-absorbed men who only want to use you, not care for you or about your needs.

The sorts of men you will attract if you follow Venker’s advice are not the sorts of men you want to date or marry. You want to avoid these guys, not marry them.

I also find this, from Engel’s book, highly pertinent (from page 126), where Engle is discussing a patient she had named Nina:

Nina was painting a picture of a storybook family life – the dutiful wife, the hardworking husband, the kids who were seen but not heard. Or was it? Nina was a young woman who was raised in the 1980s – not the fifties. Something just wasn’t adding up.

After several more sessions and some gentle prodding on my part, Nina finally opened up more about how it really was in her family. As it turned out, it wasn’t so perfect after all.

Yes, her mother was a dutiful wife, but her father was quite demanding. He expected his wife to wait on him hand and foot when he was home, and he was extremely hard to please.

There were many nights when he refused to eat what she [his wife, who was Nina’s mother] had cooked and insisted that she cook something else entirely. He complained if the house wasn’t immaculate and the kids weren’t bathed and dressed up when he got home.

As we continued to explore Nina’s childhood, Nina admitted that it really wasn’t by choice that her mother didn’t have any friends or didn’t go out much. It was at her father’s insistence that Nina’s mother not associate with anyone outside the family.

–(end excerpt)–

If you go by Venker’s marital advice, you may find yourself with a similar dynamic in your marriage that Nina’s mother was in. How many of you married women out there want that sort of loveless, emotionally abusive marriage?

Exchanging your decision-making abilities or duties for a life of ease and simplicity, all so more stress and responsibility falls on your husband, is a lazy, stupid, immature, potentially dangerous thing to do, and it’s actually unfair to your husband. I am dumb-founded that a conservative author any where would recommend that other women do this, or that she does this herself.

I hope this post of mine, with excerpts from books by a psychiatrist and a counselor, both of whom have treated many patients over the years (and hence have way more insight and experience in relationship dynamics than Venker does) clarifies just how terrible, sexist, and harmful relationship advice such as Venker’s is.

If you didn’t want to take my word for it, as (Link): based upon my experience and my mother’s, with how awful it was to utilize Venker-like advice in our own relationships, I hope the insights by professionals (one with a PhD) lends more credence.


I intend on writing a Part 5, if or when I get the time and/or inclination. And then, I think I may finally be done with this series. – Thankfully. This was not something I enjoyed writing all too much.


Related Posts:

(Link):  Alpha Females Part 1 – Nothing New Under the Sun. Conservative Women Keep Issuing Same Sexist, Unhelpful Dating And Marital Advice to Women

(Link):  Alpha Females Part 2 – Defining the Terms – How Anti-Feminists and Complementarians Misrepresent Concepts or Terms

(Link): A Response to Venker: Re: Personal Experience

(Link): Author Claims Andrea Tantaros’ Book About How Feminism ‘Made Women Miserable’ Was Ghostwritten by a Man

Alpha Females Part 1 – Nothing New Under the Sun. Conservative Women Keep Issuing Same Sexist, Unhelpful Dating And Marital Advice to Women

Alpha Females Part 1 – Nothing New Under the Sun. Conservative Women Keep Issuing Same Sexist, Unhelpful Dating And Marital Advice to Women

This commentary will be divided up among a few posts. Here is part 1.

Visit Part 2 | Part 3 |  A Response to Venker: Re: Personal Experience

Part 4

Introduction.

For those new to my blog:

I am a right winger. I was a Republican until recently. I am now a conservative Independent.

I was a conservative Christian for many years (I am no longer sure about what my religious views are), and I (Link): Am A Former Gender Complementarian (someone who believed in and lived out traditional gender roles, views which are based in large measure on incorrect interpretations and applications about gender in the Bible).

I sometimes agree with secular left wing feminists on some topics, but not always. At times, I disagree with secular and religious left wing feminists and have written several blog posts critiquing some of their views.


This series of posts is addressing author Suzanne Venker’s relationship advice, as I have seen her advocate for, in behalf of her book “The Alpha Female’s Guide to Men and Marriage.”

I myself am not, nor have I ever been, what she terms an “Alpha Female.”

I have always been what she refers to as a “Beta,” and guess what?

Being a Beta did not land me a spouse, dates, or make my life easier, more peaceful, less stressful, or rewarding, as Venker tries to reassure her female readers that it will. More on that in a future post.

As a conservative who is in her 40s and still single (though engaged at one time), I have been seeing these sorts of attitudes about gender and marriage that are discussed below in an article by Venker advanced by secular and religious conservatives since I was a teen in the 1980s.

There is an annoying, recurrent, and yes, sexist, motiff by conservatives to say the reason society has problems with marriage, dating irregularity, high divorce rates, and other relationship problems – is that women are at fault.

Women are always blamed for relationship trends and problems – and at that, usually by other women – and at that, by women who tend to be conservative and who publish books or articles about dating and marriage.

Continue reading “Alpha Females Part 1 – Nothing New Under the Sun. Conservative Women Keep Issuing Same Sexist, Unhelpful Dating And Marital Advice to Women”

Benevolent Sexism in the Christian Bedroom (Christian Stereotypes About Female Sexuality) by J. Kamps

Benevolent Sexism in the Christian Bedroom (Christian Stereotypes About Female Sexuality) by J. Kamps

Some parts of these posts tackle subjects I’ve mentioned before on my blog in the past.

(Link):  It’s my orgasm, not his [part 1] by J. Kamps

(Link): It’s my orgasm, not his [part 2] by J. Kamps

Excerpts from (Link):  It’s my orgasm, not his [part 1] by J. Kamps

Jasmine’s story is an example of Benevolent Sexism. Hostile Sexism is fairly easy to recognise. Benevolent Sexism is sneaky and far more socially pervasive. It parades around wearing a facade of chivalry, making out women to be weaker, lesser, diminished, objectified, by using what are perceived as good manners, male consideration, and role definition.

Benevolent Sexism operates on the fundamental belief that, whether observed in practice or not, there IS a gender hierarchy.

….Benevolent Sexism even uses compliments and praise to disarm and disempower women. “Women are kinder, gentler, naturally more loving. Women are not as strong as men, so they require protection. Women are not as naturally competitive.”

Continue reading “Benevolent Sexism in the Christian Bedroom (Christian Stereotypes About Female Sexuality) by J. Kamps”

How Do We Solve a Problem Like the Singles? by R. Kilgore

How Do We Solve a Problem Like the Singles?  by Rachel Kilgore

Before I get to the link to the essay by Kilgore, which is hosted at MOS (Mortificiation of Spin / specifically, Aimee Byrd’s blog, ‘Housewife Theologian’):

For years and years on this blog, here on “Christian Pundit” blog, I have been explaining over and over again that most evangelical, Baptist, Reformed, and Fundamentalist Christian denominations, churches, and groups IGNORE adults singles – the older a single you are, the worse it is – the more ignored you are.

I have also commented on other people’s blogs under the Christian Pundit blog name, and under other names, alerting Christians to how horribly American Christians treat adult singles. I have Tweeted about it.

When Christians aren’t ignoring us older singles, and they do manage to notice our existence, many Christians shame us for being single. They insult us. They try to make us feel like we are losers (seriously, see (Link): this post, (Link): this post, (Link): this post), (Link): this post – I could cite many more examples from my blog of anti-Singles bias by Christians, but that should suffice.)

I used to be what is called a gender complementarian.  I am not interested in spending a lot of time explaining what that means.

I am no longer a gender complementarian.

I am linking you here to a post about adult singleness at a blog (the one by A. Byrd) owned by what I would term “soft gender complementarians.”

Continue reading “How Do We Solve a Problem Like the Singles? by R. Kilgore”

Women: Stop Asking Pat Robertson For Romantic Relationship Advice

Women: Stop Asking Pat Robertson For Romantic Relationship Advice – Whether You Are Divorced or Single 


Aug 16, 2016 edit: Just a few days after I made this post imploring women to stop asking Robertson for romantic relationship advice, Robertson did this:

(Link):  Christian TV Show Pat Robertson Says Wives Who Want Emotional Support from a Husband Are Immature and Should Not Expect Emotional Support

Then Robertson turned around and did this – November 2016 edit:

(Link): Pat Robertson’s Incredibly Insensitive Advice to Gail the Unmarried Woman 

Yep. This is why I beg you, women of the world: stop going to Pat Robertson with dating, singleness, divorce, or marriage questions! You are not going to get valuable advice or empathy for your problems, but a lot of victim-blaming and shaming.


So, yesterday (August 2, 2016), on the TV show “The 700 Club,” Christian host Pat Robertson fielded a question from some woman who wrote in saying she had been divorced four times (I placed two videos of that segment in this post, towards the end).

If I understand the woman’s letter correctly, she says she accepted Christ as her savior, or turned to God, after her fourth divorce.

She said her first four husbands were abusive. She wants to know, now that she has rededicated her life to God, will God send her a loving husband?

Look, I knew before Pat ever opened his mouth how he would answer this woman. And I cringed in anticipation. And I was right about his reply.

I’ve watched The 700 Club every single day since the year 2005, and off and on prior to that. My mother used to watch his show when I was a kid, so I was exposed to it back then. I suppose I still watch it out of habit.

I have seen so many episodes of this show, I already can tell you how Robertson is going to answer before he opens his mouth, and I am correct about 90% of the time (regarding relationship questions he receives).

More often than not, if you are a woman and you write Pat Robertson for relationship advice, especially if you have been divorced, he will most likely blame you. He will tell you that you have a “failed relationship picker” and you should stay single.  He figures that since you have failed at marriage once or twice before, there is little sense in trying again, because you will only fail again.

Robertson will shame and blame you for having married abusers, duds, and losers.

Robertson is also not kind to single women over 40 who have never married but who would like to marry.

Continue reading “Women: Stop Asking Pat Robertson For Romantic Relationship Advice”

Single Adults Among Largest Groups Leaving Mormon Church – Parallels to Evangelical Christianity

I regard Mormonism as being a cult, not a form of legitimate Christianity (Mormons don’t believe in the Jesus of the Gospels, for one thing), but I think there are some parallels between Mormons and Christians, such as the over-emphasis upon marriage.

When your church makes an idol out of marriage, as Mormons and Christians do, it drives people away. Because sometimes people stay single by choice, or due to factors beyond their control.

And if you’re single in a religion that over-values marriage, there is a tendency to be ignored, set aside. Churches care more about marriage than singlehood. Churches care more about meeting the needs of married couples than they do adult singles.

There is no incentive for a single adult to remain in a church or denomination that marginalizes them constantly, or that behaves as though singleness is a disease or a second-rate life station.

(Link):  Who is leaving the LDS Church? by Jana Riess

Excerpts

We know, or can infer, some things about them from prior research. There is a correlation between certain life situations and leaving. This does not mean that being any one of these things will cause a person to leave, only that there is a relationship.

  • Being single. There’s been some tantalizing research over the last two years about singles in the LDS Church.

Continue reading “Single Adults Among Largest Groups Leaving Mormon Church – Parallels to Evangelical Christianity”

On Not Filtering Every Choice Through the Bible

On Not Filtering Every Choice Through the Bible

This is one of those topics I’m working my way through right now. Maybe a year from now, my opinion will flip on it. But here is where I am now.

I was first made aware of this post from John Piper’s “Desiring God” web site via someone posting to SCCL Facebook group.

Here it is:

(Link):  How to Drink Orange Juice to the Glory of God by John Piper

Excerpts:

  • I said that one of my reasons for believing this comes from 1 Corinthians 10:31. “Whether, then, you eat or drink or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God.” I asked, “Is it sin to disobey this Biblical commandment?” Yes.
  • …Some of you then asked the practical question: Well, how do you “eat and drink” to the glory of God? Say, orange juice for breakfast?
  • ….Orange juice was “created to be received with thanksgiving by those whobelieve the truth.” Therefore, unbelievers cannot use orange juice for the purpose God intended—namely, as an occasion for heartfelt gratitude to God from a truth heart of faith.
  • But believers can, and this is how they glorify God. Their drinking orange juice is “sanctified by means of the word of God and prayer.”

Yes, it’s an entire post explaining why and how Christians may drink Orange Juice to the glory of God.

This is a part of Christianity that I am glad to leave behind. In my faith crisis of the last few years, there have been some advantages to ceasing turning to the Bible as an authority in decision-making in life in every area.

Continue reading “On Not Filtering Every Choice Through the Bible”