The first step is to find a moderately obscure topic you would know far more about than your average English grad would. It can be anything: something related to your career, a hobby you’re deep into, your religion, an academic area you’ve studied extensively, or even pastel ponies. Choose something of which you have a deep knowledge.
You must avoid anything your average SWPL “knowledge-worker” would know; so avoid things related to coffee, indie music, HBO, pretentious literature, etc. (Alright, pastel ponies might not work). Also make sure to avoid anything overly subjective or too mainstream.
Having chosen your topic, look for articles in the mainstream news on the topic. Try the big ones: CNN, the NYT, the Washington Post, or, in Canada, the CBC. Having found a few articles from a few different sources read them.
Notice every time they are inaccurate, make a factual mistake, leave out something important, make a logical fallacy, write something that doesn’t make sense, or otherwise distort reality.
Having done this, think on the fact that every other topic covered by the media has errors to the same extent, except you don’t notice because you don’t know more about that topic than your average J-school graduate.
Then consider how you, and most everybody else, becomes informed about things they don’t know of.
This is where the horror sets in.
****
To let the horror creep in more, look to your career. Remember that obscure regulation nobody outside your particular occupation or industry would know of, the one that: made society worse, was borderline insane, the government had no business being in, allowed a person/company to rob the taxpayer, made your job more miserable than it should be, and/or was just pointless busywork to employ bureaucrats?
You probably never talked of it to anyone other than possibly the occasional rant to a friend or two or some co-workers.
Now think on the fact that there are thousands of other occupations and industries you are not employed in and where you would not be able to know that obscure regulation.
“The hardest part of marrying for me, NOW, is knowing that my wife has been absent from my life all these years. Where has she been? Married to another man, being his helpmate instead of mine? Dating frivolously, spending time and attention with various men that were interesting to her?” This resonated.
Related: Ballista comments on why Christian men don’t pursue Christian women.
A creationist, an evolutionist, and a Darwinist walk into a bar…
Seems there’s some kind of drama happening in the manosphere. I hate drama, but here’s a small rundown:
Seems it started at 3 Bromigos, not a blog I read regularly.
Ace thinks disagreement is good and even dregs can be prophets.
Sploosh plans to stay positive.
Matt is right in what he says, but wrong in his opposition. We should support women in the military: it will reduce the military’s effectiveness for whenever the state decides to unleash it on the populace. Also, once a half-dozen women come back from some sandy wasteland as naked, raped, bleeding corpses, maybe some people will wake up to reality.
My holiday break is ending, so next week we should get back to regular posting. For now, here’s a comment from jack (h/t: Society of Phineas) in response to a woman asking “Am I “Too Damaged” to Have a Godly Marriage One Day?” It resonated strongly with me.
As a Christian, I have noticed one thing. Christian girls make “mistakes” with the exact same type of men that non Christian women do. Bad boys. “Hot guys”. Athletes. Musicians.
In short, the small contingent of men who really have what it takes to melt her butter, as they say.
I waited during my teens and early twenties for the girls to learn that these guys were only toying with them. I would have accepted being second choice.
But, receiving attention from such men only convinced the girls that they were tantalizingly close to landing such a man, if they just got the process down better. These are the girls buying Cosmo to learn tricks to “win his love”.
This took me through my late 20s. I would have accepted being third choice.
But by now, the standards were only raised: “I’m done settling for being treated like crap by hot but jerky guys. From now on, I will insist on hot GOOD guys.” This begins the “born again virgin” phase, or the phase of temporary celibacy, where they focus on their careers and wait for Mr Tall/Dark/Dreamy to materialize. Along the way, they may satisfy the occasional physical need with a discreet hookup. I began to weary, but still tried to keep my spirits up, thinking that I could be fourth choice.
By their mid-30s, they start to waver on their standards, and begin talk of “settling”. Use of the term settling occurs because it is not acceptable to admit that their standards were unrealistically high, so they have to couch the discussion in a way that makes them appear to be magnanimously considering a man that was once far, far beneath their “standards”.
I began to balk at the idea of fifth choice, especially when I was being regarded as a sort of last resort, a better-than-nothing option.
To the original question:
No ones sin takes them too far to achieve redemption. No one is beyond God’s love or the chance for a Godly marriage. We all damage ourselves through the sins that we allow into our lives.
The question is not whether you are “too damaged” to have a Godly marriage. The question is whether you have damaged your ability to love the kind of man you can get. What the Lord has declared clean let no man call unclean. Your sin, like mine, is washed away.
The hardest part of marrying for me, NOW, is knowing that my wife has been absent from my life all these years. Where has she been? Married to another man, being his helpmate instead of mine? Dating frivolously, spending time and attention with various men that were interesting to her?
I have spent 20 years making a successful life for myself without the benefit of a wife, her company, companionship, counsel, or intimacy. Is it fair for her to move into my life having built none of it? What man has benefited from her companionship and affection while I have worked alone?
This then, is the real issue. It is not whether a woman is too damaged to have a Godly marriage. It is whether her neglect of Godly men has left them malnourished and wounded, and whether these men are suitable for marriage any longer.
Malnourishment, left untreated, cannot be reversed, no matter how much food you feed that person. And right or wrong, I would always resent the fact that other men were having the benefit of her affection and company when she was young.
Godly men are not appliances that can be tucked away in a closet until they are need because the bad-boy-charming-jerk plan is not working. We are living beings who need care, same as you.
Emphasis mine. I’ve written about not marrying an older women multipletimesbefore. My other reasons were generally rational ones, but on a purely emotional level, how could one not resent a “wife” who was spending her time and love with other men or on other things when your young heart was rending itself from loneliness? At least a young woman has the excuse of being too young to have been there with you.
You, decent young man who have built a life for yourself, have too much value to waste on such a woman. If she wasn’t there when you needed her, she does not have any claim on you now that she needs you.
The best way to identify the goals and predict the actions of a leftist or bureaucratic (redundancy) organization is to assume they are the opposite of what the name of the organization would imply if the organization were named honestly.
Thus, an organization with social justice in its name is generally both both rending social bonds and committing mass injustice.
A leftist organization with community in the name is usually destroying said community.
An organization evoking peace is generally dedicated to spreading chaos.
A leftist organization labelled Christian can generally be found destroying Christian values and hollowing out churches.
A leftist organization with prosperity or anti-poverty in its name will be creating as much poverty as possible.
