Man Paid to Have His Wife Killed Over Lack of Sex: Lawyers – Husband Also Had Hitman Kill the Man’s Pet Pug Dogs, Beat Dogs to Death With a Hammer

Man Paid to Have His Wife Killed Over Lack of Sex: Lawyers – Husband Also Had Hitman Kill the Man’s Pet Pug Dogs, Beat Dogs to Death With a Hammer

Basically, a lot of complementarian Christian men feel the same way this man, Edward Heck, does: they feel entitled to sex from their wives.

The erroneous biblical interpretations that lead men (and some women) to support “gender complementarianism” lead to these types of views about marriage, sex, and women.

I can see Christian persons like Lori Alexander (of “The Transformed Wife”), Mark Driscoll, John MacArthur, John Piper, Owen Strachan, Denny Burk, Douglas Wilson, and many members of “CBMW” defending this man’s actions and blaming the (murdered) wife.

(We also have problems with unmarried men, of whatever religious beliefs, who feel entitled to sex from any woman, and they go on murderous rampages when women refuse to date or to have sex with them).

The hired hit man not only killed the man’s wife, but one article also says that he “brutally murdered” the husband’s (who hired the hit man) pet dogs by beating them to death with a hammer – one article says that killing the dogs was also part of the plan by the husband – so the husband approved of the dogs being killed by the hit man.

I despise animal abusers, and yes, he and the husband should pay for killing the wife (obviously), but that both men also killed dogs means their death by the state should be very, very extra painful – perhaps shoving them alive, awake, into a wood chipper could be one possible solution to that.

This news story also goes to contradict the dating advice articles I used to see by Christians years ago that conveyed the notion that a single adult has to achieve some level of perfection or godliness or else God won’t send the person a spouse. If dirt bags like this loser can get married, anyone can – obviously if there is a deity, He is not expecting moral perfection or some other quality to be achieved before He permits people to marry.

Also note that contrary to Christian and secular conservative pro-marriage groups and persons – such as Al Mohler, Brad Wilcox, and Focus On the Family – that marriage does not make people more godly, loving, responsible, ethical, or loving.

Aaaannnnd… married sex is not a guarantee for great or frequent sex, as so many Christian sexual purity material insists. I am not against sexual purity, but I do think a lot of Christians have “over-promised” in this area.

(Link): Pa. man admits hiring hit man to kill his sleeping wife, is sentenced to life in prison

(Link): Man Paid to Have His Wife Killed Over Lack of Sex: Lawyers

May 2, 2022
By Genevieve Gluck

A Pennsylvania husband who hired a hitman through a porn site to kill his wife, allegedly because she wasn’t sexually available enough, is now claiming “diminished mental capacity” at his trial for her murder.

Edward Heck, 56, paid Kenneth Wayne Smith $10,000 to kill his wife, Sonja Rowe-Heck, in August of 2018.

Smith and Heck met on Motherless, a site which hosts extreme fetish pornography and snuff videos. Smith had posted in the comment section to a video that he had a fetish for killing, and Heck replied, “How about my wife?”

(Link): According to local news, the two men had been conversing on social media for about 18 months before the planned murder.

Text messages reviewed by authorities included those in which Heck said he fantasized about someone raping and strangling his wife. In messages to Smith, Heck stated that he hated his wife, called her offensive names, and complained about the fact the two did not share a bedroom.

On the day of the murder, Heck brought Smith to his home and helped him hide in the cellar. While there, Smith brutally murdered Heck’s two dogs. At about 1:50 a.m. on August 16, Heck texted Smith saying, “the time has come.”

Continue reading “Man Paid to Have His Wife Killed Over Lack of Sex: Lawyers – Husband Also Had Hitman Kill the Man’s Pet Pug Dogs, Beat Dogs to Death With a Hammer”

Secret Service Warns of  Domestic Terror Threat from Incels (Involuntary Celibates)

Secret Service Warns of  Domestic Terror Threat from Incels (Involuntary Celibates)

(Link): Report: ‘Involuntary Celibates’ Emerge as Growing Terrorism Threat

The U.S. Secret Service has released a study detailing the growing terrorism threat by so-called involuntary celibate men.

Attacks inspired by the “incel movement” have left dozens dead in the U.S. and Canada since 2014, according to CBS News.

The report said the term “‘incel’ is often used to describe men who feel unable to obtain romantic or sexual relationships with women, to which they feel entitled,” CNN reported.

(Link): US Secret Service says ‘involuntary celebate’ men are a rising threat

March 16, 2022

US Secret Service has released a report which says that men who identify as ‘involuntary celibates’ or ‘incels’ due to inability to form meaningful relationships with women constitute a rising threat to society.

The report, prepared by National Threat Assessment Center (NTAC) was released on Tuesday. It also dwells on some common themes found in the history of men who resorted to violence against women.

…The report by US secret service said that though Beierle did not resort to any extremist ideology, his behaviour resembled those who identified as ‘incels’ or ‘anti-feminist’.

(Link): Secret Service Warns of  Domestic Terror Threat from Incels (Involuntary Celibates)

by AP
March 15, 2022

The U.S. Secret Service has warned the public of the growing domestic threat posed by misogynistic extremist or incels – involuntary celibates, reporting that many recent mass shooters have displayed the alarming trait.

Often times, well-documented hatred toward women and warning signs are dismissed because relatives, friends and law enforcement ‘don’t look at the big picture,’ officials said.

Continue reading “Secret Service Warns of  Domestic Terror Threat from Incels (Involuntary Celibates)”

30 Horrible Dates Whose Entitlement Is Through The Roof 

30 Horrible Dates Whose Entitlement Is Through The Roof 

I am not about to copy all 30 items, so please use the link provided to visit their page if you’d like to see all 30.

As to one of the examples on the page, where the European guy tells his lady date she might be attractive if she only lost some weight – one of my friends went through this.

This friend of mine was trying dating sites in the late 1990s or early 2000s, and one of the guys she met at a dinner date, via this dating site she was using, actually told her if she wanted to date him, she’d have to lose weight.

This seems to be a somewhat common attitude by men who meet women on dates – tell them if they’d only change “X” about themselves (usually, it’s lose weight), they’d be attractive and worthy of a relationship.

This is a huge red flag. Most women who hear this will not date such a guy further.

I myself am a visually oriented woman who am not attracted to fatties, so my preference is to date in-shape guys

Therefore, I don’t have a problem per se with people who aren’t comfortable dating chubbies or fatsos, but if that’s you, you shouldn’t accept a date with an overweight person on a site only to spring this preference on them when you meet them in-person on a date, and tell them, “You know, I’d totally enter into a relationship with you if ONLY you’d lose weight,” for god’s sake!

If you can tell from the person’s dating app photo that they’re overweight in their dating site / app photos, then don’t approach them on the site for a date in real life, moron!

(Link): 30 Horrible Dates Whose Entitlement Is Through The Roof 

by Ieva Gailiūtė and Austėja Akavickaitė

Dating is complicated. After all, being selective has never been easier with the myriad of dating apps and websites that let you filter people based on their descriptions.

But let’s say you decide to go for it.

You message back and forth, awkwardly wait to be asked out, think of different conversation starters… only to discover that the person you’re interested in is way too picky to begin with.

So today, we’re diving into the not-so-pleasant incidents where people ran into dates who were ridiculously entitled. From insisting you own waterfront property to demanding a free Korean BBQ dinner, some people have unrealistically high standards.

We have combed through the internet and collected some of the best stories of people who think they inherently deserve more than anyone else…

#2 Guy Went On One Date With A Girl, Waited 3 Months Of No Contact Before Deciding To Pick Out Every Insecurity She Probably Has About Herself. Claims She Hurt His Ego, Then Proceeds To (Kind Of) Ask For A Second Date

Hello [name redacted]. I know we went on a date quite a while ago now but I’d like to explain why I haven’t messaged you.

I feel like you could have made the date much better, here’s a few reasons why. I apologize if I offend you

    • If you lost some weight you would look incredible. Maybe about a stone or so
    • You are very pale. I know you aren’t a fan of the sun but a bit of a fake tan won’t hurt
    • You have quite big boobs so you should show off cleavage more
    • I think you need to wear clothes that suit your figure and maybe update your style slightly. Just so I’m not embarrassed to be seen with you
    • You need to dye your hair a normal colour and add extensions. Longer hair is much more attractive 😍

Continue reading “30 Horrible Dates Whose Entitlement Is Through The Roof “

‘I’m Allergic to Sex’: College Student Reveals ‘Rare,’ ‘Excruciating’ Condition

‘I’m Allergic to Sex’: College Student Reveals ‘Rare,’ ‘Excruciating’ Condition

This is yet another thing that Christian Gender Complementarians fail to grapple with: they are all the time maintaining flawed or false gender stereotypes, where they assume all men want sex all the time, women do not supposedly want sex, AND, they have this false, unbiblical, highly sexist “obligation sex” message, where they tell married women that their husbands are “owed” sex (which is the same attitude one can sometimes find in some segments of secular culture).

I do have a few other posts on my blog from years past of women who are unable to have sexual intercourse at any time, or long term, or very infrequently, due to having some kind of physical disease or physical deformity (I have linked to those previous posts under the “Related Posts” section at the bottom of this post).

And what would the average complementarian (usually male, but I can see the “sell outs to their own female sex” female complementarians also doing this) advise such women to do – have sex any way, in spite of crippling pain? Probably.

Gender Complementarianism is not only codependency for women, it’s also maintained by male narcissists.

If a guy is married to a woman with one of these types of medical conditions that renders sexual intercourse medically impossible, or next to impossible, Christians (and specifically gender complementarians) need to stress that chastity and self control is for married people too, NOT just for young, single adults, because the husbands in these marriages will have to practice some self-restraint and not expect to have sexual intercourse (or the other sex acts, depending on what the health issue is) with these women.

When I was growing up, Christians – in their sermons, magazine articles and books – used to falsely promise and claim to the young, single reader that if one just refrained from having sex, that God would eventually bless or reward that individual with a great Christian spouse, and that married sex would be frequent and AMAZING. Well, those promises don’t always come true. Christians need to stop making false promises.

But secular types, and some anti-Purity Culture progressive Christians, also need to stop pressuring people who don’t want to have casual sex (or any sex at all), and they need to stop depicting sex as always being consequence-free, both physically and emotionally.

(Link): ‘I’m Allergic to Sex’: College Student Reveals ‘Rare,’ ‘Excruciating’ Condition

Feb 16, 2022
by Ben Cost

It’s only pain, no pleasure.

A Colorado college student embodied the expression “love hurts” after revealing that she suffers from a rare semen allergy that causes her to experience “excruciating” pain whenever she engaged in sexual activity.

“Essentially, I’m allergic to sex,” Longmont’s Chloe Lowery, 18, told Kennedy News of her unfortunate affliction, which began when she first started sex-perimenting.

The English major and aspiring professor specifically suffers from human seminal plasma hypersensitivity, in which contact with the proteins in sperm causes her to experience extreme reactions, including redness and a “burning” sensation.

Continue reading “‘I’m Allergic to Sex’: College Student Reveals ‘Rare,’ ‘Excruciating’ Condition”

Christlike or Pornlike?  A Christian Woman’s Role in Marriage

Christlike or Pornlike?  A Christian Woman’s Role in Marriage by Andrew J. Bauman and Taylor May

(Link): Christlike or Pornlike?  A Christian Woman’s Role in Marriage

Excerpts:

by Andrew J. Bauman

I am proud to be writing this article in partnership with Taylor May, a survivor of emotional and spiritual abuse. She has boldly shared her own story about what it was like to be married to someone who had a Pornographic Style of Relating, (PSR) and what it felt like to be used by him with her Church’s consent.

*Trigger warning for those who have suffered this type of betrayal trauma.


I’ve written about the pornographic style of relating here (PSR), but today we will hear from the perspective of a woman who has lived on the other side of this dynamic.

Many people have been talking about this with the release of this new book [Married Sex: A Christian Couple’s Guide to Reimagining Your Love Life by Gary Thomas] and some of its disturbing implications.

How can we talk about what these women are experiencing, and what can we learn from them?

Taylor May has offered her story and her experience below. My hope is that this can begin to clear up the muddy waters of what it means to live a Christlike marriage in a deeply pornified world.


by Taylor May

I didn’t realize how a pornographic style of relating was so deeply embedded into my first marriage until I was firmly planted into my second marriage.

That’s when I began to see the impact my first husband’s issue with lust had on my new, much healthier relationship.

Let me tell you my story, and how I and countless other women feel when our significant others lust for other women, on-screen or off.

Those of us who grew up in the evangelical Church have been told that we are responsible for men’s lust issues. This lie has been perpetrated by the church for far too long.

Many men are leading our church conversations with 90% of pastors being men, and considering that nearly 50% of those pastors self-report having used pornography, it would make sense that they would try to gaslight women by minimizing the destructive nature of porn use.

One way they do this is by framing it as a women’s issue or a sex issue, rather than the objectification of women/sin issue–one that stems from the person doing the objectifying.

Continue reading “Christlike or Pornlike?  A Christian Woman’s Role in Marriage”

Bride-to-Be Sparks Uproar with ‘Vile’ Wedding Date Selection:  ‘A Self-Centered Monster’

Bride-to-Be Sparks Uproar with ‘Vile’ Wedding Date Selection:  ‘A Self-Centered Monster’

And many secular conservatives and Christians like to teach that marriage makes people more godly, loving, self-less, and mature – no, it sure does not. Here’s another example.

(Link): Bride-to-be sparks uproar with ‘vile’ wedding date selection: ‘A self-centered monster’

by Emerald Pellot

Fri, April 23, 2021, 2:22 PM
….A woman doesn’t understand why her friend planned her wedding on the seventh anniversary of her family’s death.

She explained why she doesn’t want to attend the wedding on Reddit’s “Am I the A******” forum. She lost her husband, daughter and mother in a car accident. Every year, she visits their graves on the anniversary of their deaths.

But this year, her good friend planned her wedding on the anniversary and forbade her from visiting her family at the cemetery instead.

Continue reading “Bride-to-Be Sparks Uproar with ‘Vile’ Wedding Date Selection:  ‘A Self-Centered Monster’”

The Obese, Overly Hairy ‘Erotic Eater’ Guy Should Be The Final Nail in the Coffin of Sexist Complementarian Teachings that Looks Matter Only To Men

The Obese, Overly Hairy ‘Erotic Eater’ Guy Should Be The Final Nail in the Coffin of Sexist Complementarian Teachings that Looks Matter Only To Men & That Women Are Oblivious To, or Don’t Care About, What Men Look Like

I am an ex-complementarian (yes, I am, read more about that (Link): here if you so choose).

I’m very aware of what complementarians teach and believe on many topics.

Many complementarians wrongly believe that women lack sexual drive, an interest in sex, and that women don’t care about what men look like.

Complementarians operate in this very strange worldview that only men are “visual.” The Bible does not teach that God created men to be visual or to have more of a sex drive than women, but Complementarians act as though it does. These views permeate their blogs, pod casts, books, sermons, and so on.

So, under complementarian teachings, women are often shamed and scolded about their physical appearance.

I’ve seldom heard complementarians tell male listeners or male readers to join a gym, work out, and get in shape so that they will be physically and visually appealing to women.

(Edit, Side Note:
Complementarians seem to assume that all single women are only interested in a man’s bank account. No, we’re not.

But there’s nothing wrong with wanting to marry a guy who has a steady job, steady pay check, who is financially responsible.

I was engaged to a man who took financial advantage of me for years. Most women I know were dating or married to men who refused to get jobs, so the women had to earn a pay check.

These women’s husbands would sit about the house all day in their underpants playing Playstation video games or watching sports.

I’ve never personally run across too many female gold diggers in my time, only one – the rest of the gold diggers I’ve met or known personally have been MEN who were leeching off their wives or girlfriends.

At any rate, complementarians wrongly assume that all women are obsessed with  looking for a husband or boyfriend with a very large income or expensive sports car, so they are always telling us women to “stop judging a man by his income or what kind of car he drives, and instead, focus on how much he loves Jesus.”

Well, I hate to break it to you complementarians, but some us ladies are busy checking out if the guy has great abs and muscular arms or not – we aren’t as obsessed with his credit score, car, or savings and investments as you may assume.)

No, the sexist complementarians reserve that rhetoric for women.

But women do notice and care about what men look like, as I’ve blogged about years ago in a series of posts, such as (Link): this one or (Link): this one.

(Even the (Link): Bible mentions women noticing hot looking men and getting turned on by them, but per usual, complementarians ignore or do not mention parts of the Bible that don’t fit their backwards views.)

All of that brings me to this…

The other day, I was scrolling down my Twitter page and saw this headline from The Daily Mail:

(Link): ‘Erotic weight gainer’ who tips the scales at 500lbs reveals he eats 10,000 calories a day to maintain his ‘ball gut’ and keep his OnlyFans followers entertained

Here are some excerpts:

A 500lb OnlyFans influencer who found a lucrative niche within the fat fetish community has revealed he has to eat around 10,000 calories a day to maintain his ‘ball gut’ and keep his followers entertained.

Continue reading “The Obese, Overly Hairy ‘Erotic Eater’ Guy Should Be The Final Nail in the Coffin of Sexist Complementarian Teachings that Looks Matter Only To Men”

Quiz: Science Finds Most Men Misread Whether A Woman is Sexually Interested. Do You? by M. Tabb

Quiz: Science Finds Most Men Misread Whether A Woman is Sexually Interested. Do You? by M. Tabb

For kicks and giggles, I took this quiz (link to it way below), even though I am a woman.

I got five out of six correct, and the one I missed, I missed by one degree – I rated the woman in the photo as being “sort of” interested, but she was either one step above or below that, I forget which.

But, I didn’t totally confuse one for the other – in other words, the woman in the photo WAS sending body language indicating she was flirting, her body language and facial expression was not saying she was not flirting.

It seems that the results of this study show that most men get it totally wrong one way or the other, not degrees.

I read about a study similar to this one many years ago, in a 1990s copy of “Reader’s Digest.” That study said most men misinterpret a woman’s non-romantic, non-flirty, non-sexual gestures (such as blowing her nose or whatever) as being a flirtation, when it’s anything but.

I honestly feel a lot of you men have huge egos, and the culture coddles you in this – the culture encourages all men, no matter how ugly, dumb, and dumpy to think all women are “into” them or SHOULD be. It’s so sexist and revolting.

I’ve had many men in my past who mistook my platonic “hello there, how are you” as flirtation. It’s so incredibly annoying.

(Link): Quiz: Science finds most men misread whether a woman is sexually interested. Do you?

Is she interested? That’s the question scientists (Link): just asked a bunch of men.

Researchers at the University of Iowa had men look at photos of women and rate their perceived sexual interest on a scale of -10 (extremely rejecting) to 10 (extremely interested).

Continue reading “Quiz: Science Finds Most Men Misread Whether A Woman is Sexually Interested. Do You? by M. Tabb”

People Calling ‘Canadian Susan’ the Worst Bride Ever After Bizarre Facebook Rant Goes Viral

People Calling ‘Canadian Susan’ the Worst Bride Ever After Bizarre Facebook Rant Goes Viral

She is entitled and sounds like a nightmare.

(Link):  Bridezilla known as ‘Canadian Susan’ attempted to charge guests $1,500 to attend her wedding

(Link): Bride cancels wedding, breaks up with fiancé after friends and family refuse to pay for $60G nuptials

Continue reading “People Calling ‘Canadian Susan’ the Worst Bride Ever After Bizarre Facebook Rant Goes Viral”

Mega Church Preacher Bill Hybels in Trouble Again For More Sexual Harassment

Mega Church Preacher Bill Hybels in Trouble Again For More Sexual Harassment (2018)

I don’t think I ever blogged about this Hybels guy before.

He was first in the news many months ago for sexually harassing several different women in his church years before, who had worked as church staff.

His church first denied that this was true, and they attempted to say the women who stepped forward to discuss their harassment or abuse by this guy were lying.

There are so many of these pervy pastors it’s hard to keep up with them all. If all I ever did was blogged about perverted pastors, it would be a full time job, and I’d never have a break from this blog!

I’m pretty sure that Hybels is a married guy, too. Christians keep teaching that marriage is necessary to make a person a godly, responsible adult, and to keep them out of sexual sin, but as we see (yet once again!) marriage does not necessarily instill character into anyone, nor does it keep anyone from sexual sin or from sexually abusing others.

Let this story also go to show that a person does NOT have to become perfect, godly, or sinless to “earn” a spouse from God.

Yes, there are some Christians out there who teach that if you are single and want to get married, God will with-hold your spouse from you unless you become more godly, mature, or whatever quality. As  you can see from news reports such as this one, that is total bunk.

God did not withhold a spouse from Hybels (again, I’m fairly certain he has a wife), even though God had to know what a pervert the man is.

(Link): He’s a Superstar Pastor. She Worked for Him and Says He Groped Her Repeatedly.

Excerpts:

Bill Hybels built an iconic evangelical church outside Chicago. A former assistant says that in the 1980s, he sexually harassed her.

SOUTH BARRINGTON, Ill. — After the pain of watching her marriage fall apart, Pat Baranowski felt that God was suddenly showering her with blessings.

She had a new job at her Chicago-area megachurch, led by a dynamic young pastor named the Rev. Bill Hybels, who in the 1980s was becoming one of the most influential evangelical leaders in the country.

Continue reading “Mega Church Preacher Bill Hybels in Trouble Again For More Sexual Harassment”

Thoughts on the NRO Essay “Advice For Incels” by Kevin D. Williamson

Thoughts on the NRO Essay “Advice For Incels” by Kevin D. Williamson

About me and this blog:

If you are new to my blog: I have been a conservative my entire life. I’ve never voted Democrat. I was a Republican until a few years ago. I am no longer in any political party.

I sometimes critique secular, left wing feminists on my blog (such as but not limited to (Link): this post and (Link): this one), but there are times when I believe other conservatives get feminists wrong, and feminists are actually correct on some issues.

I was brought up in a traditional values, conservative, Christian family where my parents brought me to Southern Baptist churches as I was growing up, where I was taught to believe in gender complementarianism, which I did for many years, until I finally realized how (Link): wrong and sexist complementarianism is.

Because I grew up as a complementarian, I am quite familiar with what they think and why they think as they do.

My current religious beliefs are somewhat “up in the air,” as I am waffling between being agnostic, (or a deist), and the Christian faith. (Note: I am not an atheist.)

I am by no means anti- Nuclear Family, anti- motherhood, or anti- marriage, though I do posit that many to most conservatives – especially the religious ones – have gone to un-biblical lengths and have turned the Nuclear Family, marriage, natalism, and motherhood and fatherhood into idols which is wrong of them.

— end introduction to me and this blog —

I saw a link to this essay go through my Twitter feed today:

(Link): Advice for Incels by Kevin D. Williamson

On one level, this essay – “Advice for Incels” was okay.

However, I think that while the guy who wrote it has his heart in the right place, I think he gets a lot of things wrong and is naive about how Baptist and conservative Protestant and evangelical churches are for adult singles.

I’ve spent the last several years on this blog covering these topics – I’d encourage Williamson and anyone who read his NRO piece to read the books  (Link): “Singled Out” by Field and Colon and  “Quitting Church” by Christian author Julia Duin for even more information.

Continue reading “Thoughts on the NRO Essay “Advice For Incels” by Kevin D. Williamson”

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