Tag Archives: TV

269. Dirge follows urge to merge

Women are in charge of relationships, but do they know what, how, and why to do it?

♀ Persistently rejecting boys’ offers for first-time sex teaches girls to ‘read’ and evaluate things more important than looks and love—his conscience, values, and attitudes.

♀ Ignore or pardon his character traits to enter a relationship, and girls enter an unknown world sans map and compass.

♀ By age 21 she should score 100% on this test: Distinguish a man’s devotion for her as a person from another man’s commitment to join her in a relationship.

♀ Virtue makes a person shine relative to others. Conscience is virtue honored by strength of character. Virtuous character outshines physical attractiveness.  

♀ Proving a man’s good character takes time, and virtual virginity works best. Marry a man of good character, and her future brightens with permanence.

♀ The TV in the bedroom adds more straying power than staying power for both sexes. Late night shows program the mind for what’s bigger, better, and more appealing outside the home. The body’s relaxed, the mind’s vulnerable.

Men get the urge. Women agree to merge. Children hear the dirge.



Filed under How she wins, Uncategorized

263. From feminine mystique to feminist mistakes—Part 4

The Cosby family and Ozzie and Harriett home exemplified on TV what our foremothers sought and achieved—albeit incompletely and imperfectly. These and similar shows are mocked today by feminists and political activists. Yet, real women before the 1960s were far happier and more successful than modern women when dealing with men.  

Womanhood split in the 1960s. Many women and young girls became radicalized and politicized by the sexual and cultural revolutions. They removed Womanhood from the driver’s seat of culture.

It cost women in many ways: They lost the unconditional respect of men for the female sex. They elevated unmarried sex and played to the manly game of irresponsibility for offspring. They devalued personal virtue and family integrity, and this led to family instability. They motivated men generally against marriage and spending a lifetime with the same woman.

Plus, one great unintended consequence: Women bashed men socially and attacked them legally and politically to tear down male dominance.

The effect: They restored male dominance to prominence. Men now put masculine interests for independence, toys, adventures, and trophies ahead of helping fulfill female hopes and dreams.

Men rather than women dominate cultural values today. It’s done primarily through the pop culture and compounds for the worse into each new generation.

Consequently, modern women and children lose more easily and dependably in this game we call life. Some women don’t know how, and others  won’t pay the price, to strengthen their family with a devoted husband and father.

[More on old school America appears in posts 238, 218, and 204 below. Scroll down or search by the number with dot and space following it.]

1 Comment

Filed under Sociology 101, Uncategorized

40. Her mushy thinking—Part 2

Men are born hard-headed and hard-hearted. Women are born hard-headed but soft-hearted. Oftentimes women go soft in their thinking. Mushy, that is. Poor results dealing with men usually follow:   

♀—She mates with a bad man or inadequate mate. When dumped or forced to drop him, she picks up with another loser, and then another….

♀—She thinks that men are like women in their thinking, habits, and urge to constantly be together. We are mostly co-dependent, or so she imagines.

♀—She flaunts her co-dependency and faults her man when he has more important things to do.

♀—She becomes jealous too easily of the hold that his job has on him.

♀—She cheapens sex and herself in a man’s eyes by using sex to capture him. Men will hang around her until another sex target comes in view, and some may even go through the process of linking up, shacking up, and perhaps marrying up. But, split up is not far behind, because his respect for her is less than required for his permanency.

♀—She fails to grasp that sex primarily satisfies his raw appetite. When his ego is deeply massaged by hunting and overcoming all the obstacles to conquering her, his self-respect, respect for her, and her holding power over him skyrocket. This still does not mean that he will stay with her, but she has no better form of insurance. (Boyfriends cannot be sued for malpractice, at least not yet. A hundred or so years ago many people were sued for ‘alienation of affection’.)

♀—She thinks a hunk makes her feel good or look good to her sister females, so she puts more value in a man’s appearance than his character. His appearance tells nothing about how he will treat her, only how he admires himself. His character may already be corrupted for living with a female.

♀—She fails to recognize that men evaluate her character and non-sex assets before they first have sex. Afterwards he pays much less attention to what else she has to offer. (Hollywood and TV work diligently to hide this part of the male nature; they prefer to show the wishful but fruitless thinking of females who know little about men and nothing about the females’ strategic power potential when using virtual virginity.)

♀—She is so caught up in romantic love that she lacks both knowledge and skill to generate a man’s enduring love to replace their romantic love that will fade in a year or so.


Filed under Fickle female, Uncategorized