Vector illustration: Happy Valentine’s Day. Handwritten calligraphic lettering with red hearts.
I used to tell my daughter that “pretty” lasts about 10 minutes when you walk into a room. If you don’t have more to bring to the table than your looks, expect to be ignored.
Frankly, if they could jar being “sweet,” it would fly off the shelves. Add that to a healthy respect and appreciation for men, and you’ve got yourself an aphrodisiac.
The secret of men comes down to this:
1) Men will do just about anything for a “thank you.” Change your tires, pull your car out of ditch, open the door for you . . . They love to know they have pleased you. It’s built into their DNA.
2) They enjoy the company of women who enjoy the company of men.
3) They like women who are not “one of the guys,” even in business.
4) If you have a brain, they don’t care if you’re ditsy sometimes. It makes you cute.
5) Men like women who know how to listen, as well as talk.
6) If a man appears not to be paying attention, it’s often because he’s enjoying watching you and hearing your voice.
7) Men like women who don’t mother them. They have mothers. They do, however, like women who fuss over them a bit. It makes them feel loved.
8) Men like to watch women do mundane things like cook, fix their hair, play a game with their children. . . Men are fascinated by women because the way women do things is so foreign to how they approach the world.
9) Men like women who need them. If a woman doesn’t need a man, everything becomes transactional. In other words, don’t expect flowers on Valentines Day.
10) Men like women who like being women.
Damn pic.twitter.com/cHCBvOgP79
— 🇬🇧 IM 🇬🇧 (@TellYourSonThis) January 29, 2023
All of this is true.
Yes Gail!
BOOM!!!
Well, I agree with much of what Galinushka has to say above, and especially with the little tic tok video.
A man’s duty is to love his wife. That involves kindness and support. A woman’s duty is to submit to her husband. That means obedience and, hopefully, affection. That is the order of nature and of God. It is unpopular even in “conservative” circles today. “Submission/obedience” is taboo. “Liberation” and “equality” have replaced Christianity and its patriarchal hierarchy regarding the sexes.
That is the fundamental problem in the West, even greater than the race/multicultural problem. Feminism gives us abortion, low fertility rates (far below replacement), destruction of the family through frequent no fault divorce, single parent families, cycles of poverty, cycles of abuse from non-fathers in the home, and cycles of antisocial violence from boys from fatherless homes.
Feminism in the form of a matriarchal social structure based around the rule of welfare recipient baby mommas has utterly destroyed black culture. Seventy percent of kids are born out of wedlock and few even know what a normal family feels like. So you have a matriarchal system of welfare queens and young thug’s, gangster culture.
It’s similar with poor whites. In the middle class, it results in massive redistribution of assets upon divorce, which is mostly filed by women who are naturally hypergamous, not to mention child support.
The worst part is that feminism has emasculated men to the degree that beta is the ideal and normal alpha is “toxic masculinity”. This denatures men just as “equality” and “liberation” denatured women. The Fathers taught that women are saved by childbirth, a far cry from the current ethos.
I could go on, but you get the picture.
Happy Valentine’s Day.
“Women are saved by childbirth” is actually Scripture!
1 Timothy 2:15.
What does it actually mean?
If That were the case most women are going to heaven. Of course, one must know what it says in the original Greek to really figure out the meaning.
I wish it were that easy to get into heaven
Often “salvation” refers to “deification” rather than “escaping damnation” as the heterodox always construe it. The Theotokos is the perfect example. Her noetic fulfillment as a woman was accomplished through giving birth to the God-Man.
The verse goes on to say that women will be saved in childbearing IF they persist in faith, love (agape), holiness (agiasmo) and self restraint (sophrosyne). Perhaps easy for some, unfortunately not myself!
I can say that there’s an element for me though of “well if I can give birth to a child then I guess I’m made of tougher stuff than I thought.” And therefore persisting in at least the DAILY STRUGGLE for holiness perhaps isnt beyond even me. Which isn’t probably what that verse touches on but I make that connection for myself. There’s also the aspect of childbearing giving you extra reasons beyond yourself for really buckling up and getting serious about struggling in your faith practices. Like if you can’t do it for yourself, maybe you’ll do it for your child so they aren’t generationally cursed by your general cruddiness.
Blessed Lent, everyone! 😉
It’s about “dying to yourself,” and goes way beyond giving birth to a child. You first must give your body to your child, which is not easy task with the morning sickness, hormonal changes, lack of sleep and seeing your body turn into a watermelon! You continue to die to your self during the delivery. And when that baby looks into your eyes, it sees its mother, the blessed human being who will go without sleep, hold you when you are sick, protect you, feed you, and share your joys and your heartbreaks. And yes, many a mother goes to Church for the sake of her children
Make no mistake: There is holiness in all this because you accepted the role God gave you. No one said anything about perfection! So that doesn’t count!
Funny how what seems to be complicated really isn’t. Check this out, just confirms the above…
Matt Walsh @MattWalshBlog
“All a man wants is to come home from a long day at work to a grateful wife and children who are glad to see him, and dinner cooking on the stove. This is literally all it takes to make a man happy. We are simple. Give us this and you will have given us nearly everything we need.”
Oh, by the by- great introspection.
Thanks-
Doxa to Theo, John D
Oh, by the by- great introspection .
Thanks-
John D
Thanks, Gail! Well said!
That is all that I (as a Baby Boomer) ever wanted. However, starting with the women of my generation, Anglo women decided that this was “male patriarchal oppression.” That is one reason I never married. Who wants to go home to a house with a life companion with a perpetual chip on her shoulder?
We can “thank” the CIA for much of this. Gloria Steinem was their “asset.” She publicly proclaimed this herself in an interview in the 1960’s.
Listen for yourself. Straight from Gloria Steinem’s lips to God’s ear!
Any questions?
Good! Class dismissed!
ADDENDUM: I posted this on my FB page this morning:
TONIC Masculinity
Speaking as a Baby Boomer who has been indoctrinated all of his life with the idea that women are perpetual victims, with no moral agency, and that all men, by virtue of their anatomy, are “toxic” and should be eliminated from the face of the Earth, I find it refreshing that young men in the twenties and early thirties are busy rediscovering the classical virtues. Some examples are below:
https://barsoom.substack.com/p/tonic-masculinity
https://ponerology.substack.com/p/what-is-a-man
https://www.wonderlandrules.com/p/tate-modern
A good summary is by the blogger Harrison Koehli:
Here is a side note on a TRUE example of “toxic masculinity,” Andrew Tate:
https://ponerology.substack.com/p/what-is-the-matrix
So why are so many men currently so messed up? I think it is because too many have had no positive male role models as children. It is a well-known fact that children who do not have positive male role models (especially their own biological fathers!) have exponentially worse life outcomes than those from intact families. Longitudinal studies have been done on this for well over 70 years. This has been researched and documented to death, to the point where I claim that there is simply no such thing as “disagreement” about this by anyone who has actually taken the time to seriously study the subject.
This is one of many topics which absolutely, positively everyone knows, and which absolutely, positively everybody lies to God’s Face about, because of fear of being punished by the Powers-That-Should-Not-Be for the unforgivable crime of “believing their lying eyes.”
In my own life, right now, I meet many serious young men in the early twenties, who are alarmed at the neo-Jacobin “Woke” insanity espoused by our ruling classes, and seek life-affirming alternatives. Many have come to my church, and several have been baptized. These young men want a demanding, rigorous form of Christianity which expects serious things of them, and aids them in stiffening their own backbones.
Thankfully, it seems that, once again, “Hard Times Are Creating Strong Men.” We need them!
If I may add, I saw a poster at a very retro (50s decor) restaurant Gail and I went to after church. It was a poster of Marilyn Monroe and she said “I don’t mind this being a man’s world as long as I can be a woman in it.”
Very profound.
“Men have forgotten God. That is why all of this has happened.”
I think in speaking of the family, marriage, et al, there is a tendency to look outward, rather than inward. If our families and marriages were strong in the 1950s and before, how was it so easily co-opted and debased? Perhaps a lot of those women grew up in families where they heard about the “God ordained order” and saw their fathers beat their mothers, or otherwise abuse them. Like the hypocritical façade of “morality” in Victorian America or pre-Revolutionary Russia, things were “not well,” and there was nothing holding it together except convention and generational inertia. When the emperor was revealed to have no clothes, the whole thing collapsed rather quickly did it not? The door swung both ways, as men also embraced this new found “freedom.”
What I would like to see, and I have not seen it yet (perhaps I’ve missed it) is a truly repentant reckoning on all of it. One of my favorite passages in Father Arseny is when he talks about the causes of the Revolution (the story of the Deacon who was actually an atheist, et al). Everybody turned on him at that moment, but he wasn’t wrong. How can marriage be defended when its supposed defenders abandoned their post long ago? The sober reflections of the post-Revolutionary generation in Russia are instructive, I think.
A nation is only as holy as its people. Our Orthodox Faith doesn’t allow us to puff ourselves up as “the faithful remnant.” The devout Israelites wandered in the wilderness along with the unfaithful. There was no “They worshipped the golden calf, not me!” Both bore the consequences, as do we.
That is a good point about the 1950’s. I was born in that decade, and I am barely old enough to remember the spirit of that period (which lasted a bit longer in Texas than elsewhere, I should add).
I well remember that people went to church because that is what “respectable” people did. My own parents went to Methodist or Presbyterian churches indifferently, looking for parishes with “people just like them.” The official “Sunday beliefs” of the churches involved was of no importance. My parents were basically irreligious.
Never mind theology, in which no one was interested at all. If you actually showed signs that you took the Bible seriously, adults around you became queasy and even alarmed.
Even as a young boy, I saw the glaring contradiction between the bourgeois, Earl Nightingale “success at any price” philosophy, and what the Gospel actually said. I also noticed that the real religion of Americans was America, and that the “God Who blesses America” had nothing to do with the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Thus, I rejected the fake religion of my youth, and spent a few years as a self-declared atheist, then as a Unitarian, then as a spiritual wanderer, before finding, by the grace of God, Holy Orthodoxy.
In his latest (and according to him, his last) editorial, “The Saker” makes the following dramatic statement:
I have, at reluctantly long last, come to accept this as well. The spiritual foundation of the U.S. was rotten to begin with.