Yawn.
So, basically, I brought in the new year by watching old episodes of Heroes from Netflix and popping Ferrero Rondnoirs. I hadn’t even realized it was 2010 until 3 minutes past midnight. I also refused to turn on the TV to see the ball go down because I am just not a fanboy of watching stupid, drunken revelers gyrating all over each other to the tune of crap metal devil music. Plus Dick Clark is a weenie.
Next year I hope will be a different story. Instead of gouging myself on chocolates, I hope to ring in the near year with my first ever new year’s kiss. With a woman. :-D It’s going to happen, because if I can’t get some stupid, skanked up, self-absorbed, two-bit whore to cooperate and see what a great, sweet guy I am by then, then I’m just gonna hire me a hooker to give me a kissy wissy when the clock strikes 12.
Oh by the way, women SUCK.
No wait, I’m going somewhere with this. I’ve been having a fascinating discussion on a forum about relations between men and women, and some female newcomer talks about how she hates virgins and thinks they are creepy, dysfunctional, and like, totally uncool, and that only men with experience are worth chasing after. So naturally I called her a whore.
But that got me thinking. I always assumed the reason women who slept around were called whores while men who did the same were called studs was due to the byproduct of living in a patriarchal society. But now I see that women are completely to blame for these stereotypes. Why? Because while men respect women who are chaste/virgins, women however do not respect men for being the same. They in fact HATE THEM. A guy who sleeps with 50 women will be adored in the eyes of these skanks, while a virgin is shunned and derided.
As a Christian, I believe sex outside of marriage is wrong, and therefore chose to honor God and practice abstinence until I found “the one.” I’ve had several opportunities in my life to get on the funky, but I was so repulsed by the women who tried to… seduce me(?) that the decision to say no was easy. Back then I was really an ignoramus, I just couldn’t understand how women could proposition me without knowing anything about me, without any romance, without any emotional bond. They just slept around like it was no big deal.
Nowadays it’s even easier to remain a virgin, because now NOBODY wants me. :-D Only I think part of it was because I so freely talked about my virginal background. I’ve never been with a woman, but I always assumed saving myself for “the one” would endear me to them even more. It never really occurred to me that it had just the opposite effect. Even those that purport to be Christian I suspect still subconsciously shun me and lose respect for me because I am not a player.
So how then can I attract women now? Well it’s simple: LIE. If anyone asks, I have had 20 women in my life, and they ALL want me back.
That’s why I say women don’t want honesty, they want the right answers. I give them the wrong answer because stupid me thinks they might appreciate honesty, and they will run away like a thief in the night. It doesn’t matter who I am as a person, it only matters that I am only desirable to them if OTHER women also found me desirable. That’s why married men are more attractive to women than single. That’s why men with built-in harems are more attractive to women than men who practice monogamy.
The truth is I can’t reveal anything about my past, because I don’t see anything in it that could allure a girl. Everything I say about myself WILL be used against me in the court of romance and wubs. I have to lie, at least until I can get her emotionally invested in me, because the sad truth is, it’s the only way I can get any kind of woman to be interested in me. In the meantime, I might ask some of you to fake call me while I’m out on a date and like, cry on the phone and stuff over how badly you miss me and want me back. I’ll put you on speaker so she can hear it too.
Yep, I can’t see how my revised approach here to lie my way into a new relationship could possibly go wrong.
In Defense of Men: Tim Challies and Richard Phillips Not Included
Filed Under Christianity
There’s no love lost between me and mainstream Christian writers, especially those whose shoddily written books sell a bazoolion copies simply because their audience are complete morons who just vacu-suck in everything their pastor spoonfeeds them without an individual thought of their own.
But every now and then somebody comes along and says or writes something that just begs for a smackdown by yours truly. Case in point, a relatively obscure blogger named Tim Challies quotes from a book written by an even more obscure Christian author:
Apparently the quote is lifted from Phillips’s book, “The Masculine Mandate: God’s Calling to Men,” which is yet another book that purports to tell men how they’re supposed to behave and act using disjointed scriptural references and quotes from pop culture TV shows like Seinfeld. Or was that “Wild at Heart?”
Challies’ endorsement of this quote would typify the behavior that one finds in the modern metrosexual male. Like clones of Max Lucado, Challies and Phillips seem to me to be the kind of feminized men who write in pink notebooks and breastfeed their own children. The perpetually and nauseatingly effeminate manner in which they criticize men for every evil in the world demonstrates that “regeneration” apparently did nothing to divorce their attitude towards men from how the rest of the world perceives us. Which is, as amphibian bio-waste that needs to be neutralized from existence.
Tim Challies’s quote from Rich Phillips is ironic considering the misogynist overtones of Scripture (not that the verses are in fact misogynistic, it just appears that way) especially in Ecclesiastes. We are told that for every thousand righteous men, there is only one righteous woman in that same bunch, if even that. And Solomon would know a thing or two about that, having gone through at least 700 wives. (Ecclesiastes 7:26-29)
Phillips/Challies appear to be too numbnutted to believe that the failure of a marriage might actually involve two people instead of just the man. Indeed, it seems to me the primary perpetrators of evil in our increasingly feministic society are women, not men. The divorce courts favor women, while our laws give women special status in almost every aspect of their lives. Women can also falsely accuse men of rape and destroy their lives with absolutely no risk of consequence. The entertainment industry also constantly denigrates and insults men at every turn. How could this relentless bombardment of male bashing not seep into the thinking of even well intentioned women (including Challies)?
And they wonder why men might not value marriage anymore? Seriously?
Personally, I’ve given up on the idea of marriage or even dating. I have accepted that there is simply no single woman out there left that is worth my time and aggravation. The neurosis (teh crazies!!1), the self absorption and the utter sense of supremacy gets old after a while. Who can find a virtuous woman? Certainly not I. As a result, I have admittedly become very bitter about it, but I am slowly learning to accept that Paul was right, I am in fact better off single. Of course women who see this will say the reason I haven’t found anyone is because I’m bitter, or ugly or otherwise undesirable. They have absolved and divorced themselves of any accountability in regards to their despicable behavior whatsoever. It is ALWAYS the man’s fault. I’m single? Gotta be my fault and my fault alone. Women are but darling cherubs of light to which it is nigh on impossible for them to do any wrong. Right. And I got two bridges in Brooklyn I’d like to sell you.
Since our supposedly Christian stalwarts of the community appear completely vacuous in their analysis of what ails marriages today, I’ll try to fill in the void with my common sense approach to the matter.
Marriage is a two way street. It’s not about pleasing yourself, it’s about pleasing your spouse and doing what makes him OR her happy. Women should not go ahead of their husbands and should let him take the lead. Men in return should not treat their wives as doormats but with love and respect, and should not be afraid to make command decisions either. Each spouse should have their due affection rendered them, whether it comes in wumpsy snugglies or other things. Let the strength of one complement the weakness of the other.
See? How fricking hard was that? It certainly beats the advice of telling men they need to camp out a lot in the wilderness like that schmuck for brains John Eldredge does in his book “Wild at Heart.” Oy.
Maybe I should write a book myself.
Share this: