1893. RANDOM THOUGHTS—Group 84


Wrongfully conceived notions about the nature of both sexes deny Americans the wonderment of the opposite sex. From the lack of wonderment comes individual lack of self-respect, which projects outwardly as less respect for others, which reflects back as less respect, trust, love, and likeability. Thus, the circle transmutes lack of wonderment at the opposite gender into lack of individual love and likeability. And you say, “So what?” And I remind that a man’s love is based on respect for his woman and likeability is a major component of compatibility. The consequence: Marriages don’t last because of lack of knowledge about the nature of the opposite sex. That’s the gap this blog is designed to close.

Within a couple their compatible natures motivate them to live like this. Where husband will lead, wife will follow. Where he won’t lead, she will. Where she leads, he won’t follow closely although he may hang around for awhile. As they age, her influence over husband escalates and he becomes more willing for her to lead. Over and above lifestyle causes, hormonal changes beyond midlife cause him to appreciate her leadership much more than earlier.

Feminists gain political, legal, and economic advantages for women. It’s well deserved too. However, they do it by demeaning men, diminishing their importance in home and family, and compensating them with unmarried sex to squelch objections. Men respond by expanding their independence from female interests and detaching themselves from monogamous loyalty, which enables them to dominate both home and culture at the expense of women and children. Husbandly devotion and fatherly loyalty have been so severely weakened all across society that both women and children suffer abuse in one form or another—even if just lack of respect for being a very important person by reason of being human.

8 Comments

Filed under Dear daughter

8 responses to “1893. RANDOM THOUGHTS—Group 84

  1. Cocoa

    EDITOR’S NOTE to Her Highness Cocoa: I RESPOND IN CAPS TO your questions in lower case.
    Guy

    But sir Guy, I do see unmarried couple that have child(ren) that are doing just fine and for a long time. Not sure who is leading, however, I see that they are as fine as any other married couple. Is it the woman’s fault in this case that she did not insist or marriage? IT’S ALWAYS THE WOMAN’S FAULT IF THEY’RE NOT MARRIED. MEN DON’T MARRY IF THEY DON’T HAVE TO IN ORDER TO HAVE FREQUENT AND CONVENIENT ACCESS TO SEX.
    Some female co-workers mentioned that her partner of 10 years asked to marry her now and she said ‘What for’ I am puzzled, sometimes I feel disturbed. SUCH WOMEN ABANDON WOMAN-THINK FOR FEMINIST-THINK AND MAN-THINK. Another example is a guy been with his partner, have a child, I would say he’s loyal not sure though if he is committed or devoted, but mentioned that he’s only waiting till the child is old enough for him to leave (I guess for financial reasons) THAT’S THE RESULT OF FOUNDING A MARRIAGE ON MAN-THINK, NO LONG-RANGE PROTECTION.
    Why don’t couples marry these days. BECAUSE WOMEN DON’T INSIST ON IT, DON’T SET AND ABIDE BY HIGH STANDARDS FOR RELATIONSHIPS. Why do they look at me and other married women as if we are aliens? BECAUSE YOU ARE DIFFERENT. THEY SUSPECT SUPERIOR, WHICH OPENS THE GATE TO COMPETITION AND MAKES THEM WANT TO PUT YOU DOWN . Why when – I dare – ask “why not marry” the answer is either; Why DO marry, or, What the difference??? FEMINIST-THINK AND MAN-THINK FLOODS THE PSYCHE OF SUCH WOMEN. THEY HAVE ABANDONED BOTH THEIR NATURE AND THE FOUNDATION PROVIDED BY THEIR CREATION.

    • StillLearning...

      Great article, Sir Guy.
      You are so right about it being the woman’s fault if they’re not married.
      I know a young woman who responded this way when I congratulated her on her engagement to the young man she is shacking up with, “Oh, I would have went on just the way things are.” You know when someone says something shocking and you’re caught off guard? Unfortunately at the time I was in a rush and didn’t respond the way I would have liked to.
      What do you think is the Christian way to deal with family and friends who are shacking up?

      Your Highness StillLearning,
      Love them where they’re at and set a better example of Christian living.
      Guy

      • StillLearning...

        So you wouldn’t show any disapproval verbally? How about if you’re invited to visit or stay overnight in their home, or they want to stay overnight in your home?

        Your Highness Still Learning,

        It’s none of your business so why should you verbalize anything? Silent messages can often be the loudest. Now, if you’re both members of the same church and she offends you, it’s another issue. I have prepared a schematic diagram on what the Bible says about restoring the fallen. However, I can’t find the file so it’s only a picture I can’t transmit except by snail mail.

        As to overnight visits, that’s up to you, your standards, and your expectations of yourself. Only you can make such decisions. Just do whatever you decide and don’t explain and don’t complain. The one most fearful of losing the other as friend makes you likely to visit or her to takes offense at your refusal.

        Guy

  2. Cynthia

    Excellent article!

  3. The Shrinking Black Girl

    EDITOR’S NOTE to The Shrinking Black Girl: I RESPOND IN CAPS TO your questions in lower case. I ALSO BROKE YOUR PARAGRAPHS DIFFERENTLY THAN ORIGINAL.
    Guy

    “…even if just lack of respect for being a very important person by reason of being human…”
    Hmm.. Well I will say that I grew up without any notion of this concept regarding people. It strikes me as ludicrous that I would respect someone for simply existing. I was taught, that if you want respect you have to EARN it. Does this mean that everyone is disrespected by default? Hmmm… OF COURSE IT DOES FOR TWO REASONS: 1) BEING INHERENTLY BAD AND POSSIBLY EVIL, MAN CAN’T RESPECT FOR NO REASON. 2) BEING TAUGHT THAT ONE MUST EARN RESPECT MEANS THAN TEACHERS LACK SELF-RESPECT BECAUSE THEY CAN’T GIVE WHAT THEY DON’T HAVE.

    Also, I would be interested to know how this phenomenon of respecting humans for the sake of being human can be traced back to. JESUS CHRIST AND THE NEW TESTAMENT. WOMEN CAN BUT MEN CAN’T LOVE THEIR NEIGHBORS WITHOUT FIRST RESPECTING THEM. MEN CAN WHEN THEY ABIDE THE COMMANDMENTS OF GOD.

    “…Husbandly devotion and fatherly loyalty [being] severely weakened…” I can’t say that I am convinced. To assert that humans no longer respect each other because of women is a long shot. THINK ON THIS. WOMEN NEED MORALITY TO PROTECT THEIR GENDER AND CHILDREN; MEN DON’T NEED IT. WOMEN NEED RELIGION AS INSPIRATION TO LIVE UP TO SOMETHING BIGGER THAN THEMSELVES AND THUS EASE THEIR GUILT AND ASSUAGE THEIR CONSCIENCES; MEN SENSE LITTLE NEED TO DO THAT. BOTH MORAL IMPERATIVES AND THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION PRODUCE A BETTER ENVIRONMENT FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN. WHEN WOMEN DON’T SHOW UNCONDITIONAL RESPECT FOR MEN, THEN MEN DON’T ACCEPT THE FEMALE LEAD AND ADOPT MORAL AND RELIGIOUS VALUES. CONSEQUENTLY, WHEN WOMEN DON’T LEAD MEN ONTO THE MORAL HIGHGROUND AND INTO LIVING UP TO SOMETHING BIGGER THAN THEMSELVES, WOMEN ARE TO BLAME FOR THE WEAKENED HUSBANDLY DEVOTION AND FATHERLY LOYALTY.

    I believe that the loss of respect for humanity comes from a culture that teaches and values ambition, success, and winning. THE LOSS OF RESPECT OF HUMANITY COMES FROM THE EVIL-CAPABLE HEART OF MANKIND WHEN INDIVIDUALS DON’T OR CAN’T SEE HOW TO GET THEIR WAY FOR THEMSELVES OR WITH OTHERS. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND BLIND LADY JUSTICE PROVIDES INDIVIDUALS A WAY TO ENHANCE THEIR SELF-INTEREST WITH AMBITION, SUCCESS, AND WINNING THAT BREEDS SELF-ADMIRATION IN MEN AND SELF-IMPORTANCE IN WOMEN. WHEN LOADED WITH THOSE WELL-EARNED BLESSINGS, THEY CAN AFFORD TO BE RESPECTFUL OF OTHERS AND BE ABLE TO CAPITALIZE ON THE GOOD FEELINGS.

    It comes from a culture that has over-elevated the individual. WRONG. WRONG. WRONG. IT COMES FROM A CULTURE THAT PITS INTEREST GROUPS AGAINST ONE ANOTHER IN SUCH COMPETITIVE WARS THAT NO ONE CAN PURSUE THEIR SELF-INTEREST EXCEPT THOSE AT THE TOP OF THE HIERARCHY OF EACH GROUP; SPECIFICALLY, MULTIPLE OLIGARCHIES COALESCE AGAINST ALL OTHERS. FOR EXAMPLE, LOOK AT AMERICA TODAY. THE RULING CLASS CENTRALIZES POWER IN ITSELF. THE DEPENDENCY CLASS CONTINUES TO RECEIVE EVER LARGER HUNKS OF LARGESS AND INCREASE ITS DEPENDENCY ON THE RULING CLASS. IN BETWEEN, THE MIDDLE CLASS IS SQUEEZED TO DESTRUCTION THROUGH HIGHER TAXES, PURPOSELY INFLATED HEALTH CARE COSTS, AND SMALL BUSINESS REGULATIONS THAT ENABLE BIG BUSINESS TO OUTCOMPETE THEM. THE PROCESS SQUEEZES THE SMALL BOYS INTO THE DEPENDENCY CLASS OR BUYS/GOBBLES THEM UP INTO THE RULING CLASS. BIG BUSINESS, BIG GOVERNMENT, BIG LABOR, AND BIG EDUCATION RULE AND THE MIDDLE CLASS IS SEPARATED INTO EITHER THE RULING OR DEPENDENCY CLASS.

    While it is all good to be free, America has taken it to another level. Each person is an island and a country to themselves. YES, AS ESTABLISHED IN THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE AND CONSTITUTION FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLE THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED BY THE LAWS OF NATURE AND OF NATURE’S GOD THAT ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL.THE FOUNDING FATHERS KNEW THAT ONLY GOOD PRINCIPLES PRECEDE GOOD RESULTS.

    Therefore each person is at war with each other because everything is about competition, and very little emphasis is put on cooperation in our culture. YES, AS DESIGNED. COMPETITION BALANCES POWER. COOPERATION CENTRALIZES POWER. IT’S FAR EASIER TO POLITICALLY BALANCE INDIVIDUAL POWER THEN COALESCED COOPERATIVE POWER.

    So really, it seems to me that this respect for being human thing traces back to male-dominated ways of being…. TRUE. MALES HAVE DOMINATED THROUGHOUT HISTORY. FEMINISTS TRIED TO KILL PATRIARCHY IN FAVOR OF SOME MATRIARCHAL SOCIETY. THE RESULT HAS BEEN GREAT FREEDOMS, PROTECTIONS, AND ADVANCEMENTS FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN. THE FALLOUT, HOWEVER, CONTINUES TO DESTROY THE FAMILY AS BASIC SOCIAL STRUCTURE AND INSTITUTION. WITH LOSS OF PARENTAL TEACHINGS BASED ON MORALITY (PRIMARILY MOTHERS) AND RELIGIOUS UPBRINGING (PRIMARILY MOTHERS), RESPECT FOR FELLOW HUMANS CONTINUES TO DETERIORATE.

    I am not sure if individualistic cultures are good for the feminine. THEY ARE WHEN TWO CONDITIONS EXIST: 1) POWER IS SUFFICIENTLY WELL BALANCED TO PROVIDE FREEDOM AND YET ENHANCE THE SOCIAL AND DOMESTIC WELL BEING OF FAMILY, WOMEN, AND CHILDREN. OUR FOUNDING DOCUMENTS PROVIDE IT. 2) WOMEN LEAD BY EXAMPLE AND LEAD MEN BY INDIRECTNESS IN PURSUIT OF A HIGHER ORDER OF MORALITY AND GREATER ADHERENCE TO JUDEO-CHRISTIAN VALUES.

    • The Shrinking Black Girl

      EDITOR’S NOTE TO THE SHRINKING BLACK GIRL: I RESPOND IN CAPS TO your questions in lower case AND BREAK THE PARAGRAPHS DIFFERENTLY.
      Guy
      ——
      Hi Guy!

      Thank you for such a thoughtful and detailed reply. As usual, I see great points you make especially regarding the current political climate: The middle class, big government etc. — However we will be forever in disagreement as far as the religious aspect of what you present, I am not into Christianity and find will never believe that embracing such is the only way. QUESTION: WOULD THE WORLD BE A BETTER PLACE IN WHICH TO LIVE IF EVERYONE CONVERTED TO EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANITY OVERNIGHT?

      I find that I do better with those who teach the same foundational philosophies of WWNH but from a secular viewpoint, and I am sure you may have strong ideas about whether or not that could be accomplished but I know families that are raising children with character and its not based on Jesus. HOW MUCH YOU WANT TO BET THEY USE SECULARIZED VERSIONS OF BIBLE PRINCIPLES, VALUES, AND TEACHINGS? AND WITH INDIVIDUAL AND MUTUAL RESPECT AS THE BASIC FOUNDATION.

      As far as being a moral leader, for myself as a woman, well I just am not convinced that this is the hard wired nature path that I must take alone. I NEVER SAID IT WAS. I SAID THAT THE NATURE OF WOMEN IS SUCH THAT MORALITY IS IN THEIR BEST INTEREST AND THAT MEN HAVE NO SUCH CONNECTION BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO SUCH NEED TO BE PROTECTED AGAINST THE OPPOSITE SEX.

      Feminism seemed to reject women being in the kitchen, but i am fine with that. Cooking, cleaning, whatever. But to say that I have to display all of the hard values and never have any fun. To always be disciplined, restrained, moral agent while the boys drink and carouse- I don’t think so. IOW YOU SEEK EQUALITY AS FEMINISTS DO? WHATEVER THE BOYS DO THE GIRLS CAN DO IT TOO? I HATE TO REMIND YOU, BUT IT PRODUCES SITUATIONS WHEREIN GIRLS VOLUNTARILY LOWER THEMSELVES TO A LOWER AND LESS INFLUENTIAL LEVEL ADJACENT TO MEN.

      If there is any equality I believe in, its moral equality, you say that men don’t need it. NO, I SAY THAT THEIR NATURE IS SUCH THAT IT KEEPS THEM FROM SEEING VALUE FOR THEMSELVES.

      I am not convinced. I think that both genders need morality, but maybe in different ways. OF COURSE. MEN PROFIT WHEN MORALITY IS USED TO STANDARDIZE BEHAVIOR AND THUS DEFEND INDIVIDUALS AGAINST MORE POWERFUL INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS. BUT THEIR NATURE KEEPS THEM FROM SEEING THAT UNTIL WOMEN TEACH THE VALUE BY DEMANDING HIGHER MORALITY.

      I wasn’t raised with a strong moral compass, or maybe I just represent a minority of females who were born with a strong hedonistic streak. Don’t get me wrong I am all about morals and character- but seems to me that if the men are in charge that they would lead with by demonstrating character. THAT’S JUST IT. MEN ARE ONLY IN CHARGE WHEN WOMEN GIVE UP THEIR HOLD ON THE MALE NATURE. WHEN WOMEN CHOOSE TO MATE WITH MEN OF CHARACTER, THEN THE QUALITY OF MASCULINE CHARACTER WILL ESCALATE TO HIGHER LEVELS.

      I am not sure why women would need morality more than men, especially when we can own guns just like they can! 🙂 WOMEN NEED IT TO IMPOSE BEHAVIORAL RESTRAINT SHORT OF RESORTING TO VIOLENCE.

      • The Shrinking Black Girl

        EDITOR’S NOTE TO THE SHRINKING BLACK GIRL: I RESPOND IN CAPS TO your questions in lower case AND TOOK THE LIBERTY OF BREAKING YOUR PARAGRAPHS DIFFERENT FROM THE ORIGINAL.
        Guy
        ——
        I am not feminist and don’t seek equality as men do—- Its just that I live in a individualistic society and want to to do what I want to do. I am a female in a free country. I absorbed the message at an early age that each individual makes their own decisions. Male or female. OF COURSE, AS LONG AS THEY HAVE THE POLITICAL FREEDOM AND MENTAL STRENGTH TO DO SO.

        So if a person regardless of gender chooses to live “immorally” that is because they chose it- not because the “women weren’t leading”- METHINKS YOU CONFOUND THE ISSUE. IMMORALITY IS ALWAYS AVAILABLE TO ANYONE WILLING TO ACCEPT THE CONSEQUENCES, WHETHER FROM VICTIM, FAMILY, FRIENDS, PUBLIC, OR GOD. MORALITY SERVES WOMEN MORE THAN MEN AND WHEN WOMEN LEAD BY EXEMPLIFYING MORALITY, MEN EITHER FOLLOW OR SUFFER THE CONSEQUENCES OF WHAT MORALITY IN WOMEN DENIES THEM. THE LACK OF VIOLENCE IS USUALLY THE FIRST AND MARRIAGE THE SECOND BENEFIT.

        I never intended to lead anyone but myself. Does that make me a feminist? Self-Centered perhaps, but feminist? I don’t think so. I AGREE WITH YOU. BUT IT DOESN’T FOLLOW THAT YOU’VE NOT ABSORBED A FEW OR MORE FEMINIST VALUES ALONG THE WAY OF LIFE.

        Are there consequnces to my actions or lack thereof? Yes. Men behave badly because women do? NO, MEN BEHAVE BADLY BECAUSE WOMEN DEFINE ‘BADLY’ AND DON’T USE LEADERSHIP BY EXAMPLE AND MORAL UPRIGHTNESS TO DEMAND BETTER OUT OF MEN.

        Men have no morals because women don’t? I think for me I recoil at this inwardly because it goes against what I think of when I think of REAL MAN. Not some metrosexual pansy. I think of the Alpha male who follows his own lead and is influenced only unto himself. THE ALPHA’S VALUE SYSTEM IS COMPLIMENTARY TO FEMALES OR YOU WOULD NOT BE CITING THEM. IT MEANS THAT ALPHA’S HAVE ABSORBED VALUES THAT WOMEN APPRECIATE AND THE GREATEST SOURCES ARE MORALITY AND THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION, BOTH OF WHICH BRING OUT GREATER RESPECT OF MEN FOR FEMALES AND CHILDREN. ALPHA’S DO NOT HAVE TO BE ALIGNED THAT WAY, BUT THEIR SUCCESS IN SOCIETY DEPENDS ON IT. (CHARLES MANSON IS AN ALPHA.)

        To think that these strong men rely on the actions of women’s morality to modulate their own disgusts me, so I am hearing that premise of WWMH is that men are internally weak and need us to control them, but then how could they be men? WWNH DOES NOT IDENTIFY MEN AS WEAK BUT AS THE KIND OF MEN THAT WOMEN DON’T APPRECIATE. THEY’RE OFFENDED BY FEMINIST-LIKE TREATMENT AND CONSEQUENTLY MORE ANGRY AND STUBBORN THAN WEAK. THE REAL STRENGTH IN MEN COMES OUT WHEN THEY HAVE A GOOD WOMAN BUCKING THEM UP AND BACKING THEM UP.

        It seems that the ideal of the individual has once again clashed with the reality of human nature. BEAUTIFULLY STATED WITH JUST ONE ALTERATION. CHANGE THE TERM ‘INDIVIDUAL’ IN THE FIRST SENTENCE TO READ ‘COLLECTIVE’. OR CHANGE ‘HUMAN NATURE’ TO COLLECTIVISM OR GROUPISM. HUMAN NATURE IS MORE INDIVIDUALISTIC THAN WORKABLE IN A GROUP, AND SO YOUR “ideal of the individual” CLASHES WITH MODERN POLITICAL OBJECTIVES OF COMPRESSING SOCIETY INTO THE COLLECTIVE AND DENYING INDIVIDUALISM. IT’S CALLED LOSS OF FREEDOM.

        It would be so much better to live in a society which honors our natures. THAT IS A PRIMARY PURPOSE OF WWNH, TO TEACH GREATER RESPECT ONE SEX FOR THE OTHER AND DO SO BY UNCOVERING HOW THEIR NATURES DIFFER.

  4. Emma

    Mr. Guy,

    I when women lead, men may not follow – would you expend on this. I have been following your site for 2 years now and have learned so much that many things about my relationship have improved. I ask how can a wife lead without the husband taking offence or how can she do it is a subtle way? There are areas my husband is great at that I am not so great and vice-versa.

    Your Highness Emma,

    First, decide what you are better at than he is.

    Second, throw out all those things that he ‘owns’, wants to possess, enjoys doing, or might take offense if you ‘invade’. IOW, leave his ‘assets’ alone, flow with his tide.

    Third, lead by example in moral issues, religious habits, and family values.

    Fourth, lead by indirectness to gently and patiently change those things left after the second point above. Indirectness means to plant seeds, hint at, and patiently allow time for your thoughts to soak into his psyche, which they will do if he’s kept in the mode of wanting to please his woman on his own time and in his own way.

    Guy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s