Video: Excuses empaths make for narcissists

Urge to control hidden with lovebombing (being nice isn’t an obligation) and magically change the other person, killing the former person. Thanks, Disney’s Beauty and the Beast!

Validating bad behaviours as proof they’re needed.

Feeling superior for “catching” the predator they think they can turn into prey.

Resentment of common sense (if you don’t want them as they are, leave).

Passive aggression masquerading as gender roles (both sexes) e.g. 50s housewife incompetence or bravado complete with gaslighting put-downs around said incompetence.

http://things.justinthrelkeld.com/post/178624223456/maybe-50s-jello-food-actually-was-a-sublimated

Often they aren’t really empaths and covert narcissists pretend to be empaths.

Like autists and psychopaths (they confuse self-involvement with empathy).

Expecting a narc to love is like expecting a man with no hands to juggle.

A common female manifestation:

Intrusive people pushing into your life under the guise of “helping”.

Treating you like the problem (or a problem) and acting like your mother or shrink (power) when you made it clear you do not want this. If you were the problem, they’d want you to see a shrink or leave.

They don’t respect boundaries and try to force things as Being Nice. Those are the biggest bitches of all and to men, seem popular (and feminine, it’s fake feminine to seem less bossy) but women actually keep them at arm’s length with fake niceties to appease them. (It isn’t anything to do with appearance, contrary to what men can assume, as they’ll discover if they marry it).

It’s easy to spot Fake Nice women – does anyone take advantage of their “niceness”? If no, they’re actually a social predator. Real nice people hate the rep and people do take advantage.

It’s for your own good from such fake people is gaslighting, surely you know your own good better than someone you just met?

A common one I heard from men is “she won’t leave me alone, I feel like I’m being stalked!” yeah, because you are? If you tell someone repeatedly to back off and they don’t it’s harassment. I don’t cover female abuse enough but I feel uncomfortable knowing people may twist it or as if I’m speaking for experiences of men than just repeating.

Why did no-fault divorce actually happen?

https://www.law.upenn.edu/live/files/5145-mnookin-and-kornhauser—1979—bargaining-in-the

Ironically, to enforce the Bible, in places.
Specifically the places where it wasn’t working. [1]

“Divorce was granted
only after an official inquiry by a judge, who had to determine
whether “appropriate grounds”-very narrowly defined in terms of
marital offenses-existed.6 When a divorce was granted, the state asserted
broad authority to structure the economic relationship of the
spouses and to maintain regulatory jurisdiction over the children
and their relationship to the parents.7 Doctrines such as collusion,8
connivance,9 and condonation’0 were meant to curtail the degree to
which parties themselves could bring about a divorce through agreement;
the procedural requirements reflected the view that everyone
was “a suspicious character.”

Among other things, no-fault divorce is also responsible for a lower spousal suicide rate, probably homicide (harder to measure) and certainly lower rates of domestic abuse. Overturning it requires an open admission these things do happen, one or both parties can be absolutely awful at their job and they still maintain the right to decide their intimate business over whatever State they happen to be stuck in. Appealing to tradition doesn’t really work when some of those values were very poorly aligned with the law at the time, to keep up Pollyanna appearances. To go back to all the old laws, men would have to prove good character (what is that? nobody would get married) and women would be able to press charges for seduction (rape by fraud is already historically present in the law books, i.e. nobody would get married). A lot of the modern “dating” process would also be swiftly made illegal.

Funny they never mention that.

And if men were the sex wriggling to get away, it begs two questions. Firstly, why the fuck did they propose? Second, wouldn’t that constitute abandonment on his part? A grave matter, severely punished, we all know of deadbeats who’d be whipped into shape by a return of fault laws. No-fault divorce treats men equally to women (justice is blind ‘n all), because they’re given the benefit of the doubt where they could be abandoned too.

A list of unisex faults and standards of proof are required, rooted in the post-Reformation Bible, instead of a reversion to a system that blatantly did not work. Two ruined lives plus children is not a success. For example, allowing divorce but banning re-marriage would silence many vocal oppositions. If there’s a limit on abortion and insurance claims, there should logically be one on an oath including “til death do you part”. These faults should be acknowledged in the marriage contract itself, along with ways to avoid them, and an expanded edition to make sure both parties really intend to follow through on their oath (which should be set in stone for legal reasons).

1 https://www.compellingtruth.org/grounds-for-divorce.html

“In the Old Testament, God allowed divorce if a man’s heart became so hardened against his wife that she was actually better off without him

…That isn’t rare. Calculate the odds of marrying anyone with mental problems nowadays. Any mental problem.

Unhappy wives used to hire men to fake affairs and “accidentally” get caught until the 30s when the only common American grounds for divorce was adultery. Your system needs work. Increase your marriage age to 18 for starters, you monsters. Child brides are both a Muslim and an American thing.

If you have a problem with keeping the age of consent at the age of adulthood…. what about voting?

Some simple changes and why:

  1. a hard limit on the number of times anyone can marry excepting widowhood.
  2. a grievance period for widows where marriage is not allowed, depending on how long they were married.
  3. if someone’s sexuality changes, they’re considered to have defrauded the other party of their agreed companionship.
  4. long engagements only, 6-12 months?
  5. one party letting themselves go completely is taken as a clinical indicator (already is) of passive-aggression or depression
  6. no addicts, taking up any addiction is grounds for no-fault divorce on behalf of the other party due to the brain damage effectively killing the person they married and rely upon
  7. marriage is not considered a license to any form of abuse, higher conduct is expected compared to strangers
  8. abandonment includes social, you agreed to be there for one another not at the club/bar/party
  9. romance must go both ways
  10. if someone turns out to be a psychopath (the only condition that can fake it until the wedding), divorce is allowed and the proven psychopath’s influence over the other party limited to account for their condition (ideally you test before marriage?)
  11. 18+, I hope this one is obvious.
  12. if one party works from home it is counted as work for the marriage
  13. real Christians only, married in a Christian ceremony
  14. complaining about their marriage online illegal (other people’s marital status or marriages too) – privacy law
  15. no atheists (think of the divorce risk), they don’t need a “piece of paper”, remember?
  16. adulterers can be sued again, but per act and depravity – would branding be too far?
  17. all bastard children from adultery aborted (risky but I’ll put it, it spares the legitimate children their rights)
  18. no adulterous unions could wed (because obviously they can’t be trusted with it)
  19. a cap on how much weddings can actually cost because... Jesus….
  20. earnings prior to marriage not counted in divorce proceedings, including inheritance, which skips over the spouse to the children.

I flatter myself these are common sense.

Beige America?

You think I’m fucking with you, don’t you?

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10911359.2015.1035145
Yes, a real study paper.

“This article examines the impacts of the race of the future theory on the U.S. population. By and large, the theory posits that the mixing of different races—due to the process of miscegenation, especially in marriage, cohabitation, or sexual relations—will blend all races, so much so that, in the future, the end result of this mixing will be a panracial formation (i.e., one race). In this analysis, the authors attempt to determine whether the mixing of colors currently happening in the United States will lead to one race and what the race of the future in the United States will “look” like.”

For once, I was not, in fact, fucking with you.

“One of the major conclusions is that, although the possibility of the existence of the race of the future has yet to be established, the degree of multiraciality in the U.S. population is rapidly growing (based on data and statistics from the U.S. Bureau of the Census).”

They’re planning this whether you like it or not.

Your tax monies fund this.

Behold your future, America.

Look long and hard. Such vigour!

Isn’t diversity your strength?

Aren’t you on the right side of history?

Don’t white people deserve to go extinct?

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281431958_Race_of_the_Future_Mixing_of_Colors_in_the_United_States_Leading_to_One_Race

Simmer gently in a slowly boiling pan of fact.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/05/future-immigration-will-change-the-face-of-america-by-2065/
Remember, the most common nation to immigrate isn’t Mexico, it’s China!

Welcome to Asian-majority America. I’m sure you’ll be treated well.
They’re so nice to dogs.

The projected rise of Asians as the nation’s largest immigrant group has its own implications, among them potentially increased education levels. Among immigrants who arrived within the past five years, Asians already outnumber Hispanics, in part because of a sharp recent drop in immigration from Mexico.

This is from 2015.

This slowed Hispanic immigration also will have a longer-term impact: In 2065, Asians will outnumber Hispanics among all immigrants – 38% to 31%. (Today those shares are 26% and 47%.)

The increased share of Asian immigrants among all immigrants means that education levels of the foreign-born population could rise sharply, because Asian immigrants tend to be better educated. Among recent immigrants from Asia, for example, 57% have completed college, compared with 13% for recent Mexican immigrants and 28% for immigrants from other Central or South American nations.

Worship your new supposed high IQ rulers, don’t question it!

The rise of the Asian share of the immigrant population also could have implications for the political debate about immigration over the next 50 years. Americans today have mixed views about the impact of immigrants on society, but tend to have more favorable views of Asian (and European) immigrants than other groups, according to a recent Pew Research survey.

Other white guys are rolling over for some soypussy*, so you should too!

The survey also found that most Americans (56%) would prefer giving priority to immigrants who are highly educated (or highly skilled), compared with 37% who favor giving priority to those with family in the U.S.

Cucks. You can train your own people.

(and *soy sauce makes white men fat, sorry to tell you this)

https://www.ketodomain.com/keto-food-info/soy-sauce-safe-keto/

“Soy sauce also contains phytoestrogens. Phytoestrogens mimic estrogen in the body.”

http://extoxnet.orst.edu/faqs/natural/phytamt2.htm
Phytoestrogen levels in various soy products study measurements.

Asian women with tits have just faked it by eating tons of (GMO) soy. That isn’t genetic, note the facial masculinity.

https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2018/07/29/neotony-isnt-an-asian-thing/

Transsexuals consume it for this purpose too.

https://feminizationsecrets.com/male-to-female-feminine-foods/

Ishtar energy and sexual ruin

Roughly speaking, something to bear in mind.

As for married couples, I’ve noticed a process.

Madonna/Whore comes from the male inability to reconcile the woman he loves with the woman he fucks. They view the wife like a replacement mother and feel disgust or rejection of their desire projected onto the wife, especially if she’s dutiful – they see her fussing over the business of the home and childcare. They disgracefully think lust and love are meant to be separate and always kept separate (this stupid false belief literally causes men health problems inc. impotence and it’s also why they marry sluts). It’s like they think they’re corrupting her with their conjugal rights. It becomes a serious turn-off, like she’s tainted or impure for desiring him (repulsed by her lust) or it isn’t “safe” to sexually express – with their SPOUSE. Husbands CANNOT repress their sexuality and basically rob their wives of that cherishing experience. It ruins marriages, sex is the glue that holds marriage together and while ebbs and flows are normal, either depriving the other, while bad, isn’t as bad as seeking it outside the union (always adultery). That’s a divorce category because it ruins the union, spoils the trust, the connection itself is divorced between the parties. No splitting or the woman senses this and retreats, in passive femininity and trust (how women solve problems), assuming he needs his own space, he’ll come back soon and then he feels abandoned when actually, she’s waiting for him to be the Man first. Because he is. A wife is the most sexual woman. It’s the total experience including fertility, modern men fear the completion of the cycle is the “wrong” thing but actually it’s postmodern sterile sex that’s incomplete* sexuality (and likely causes most of the psychiatric issues associated with promiscuity). Men experience the fulfillment of their sexuality when they become a father, this is why their hormones change for about a year after the wife gives birth!**

Husbands also stop flirting with their wife in modern times, a fact I am certain is a divorce risk… like, no? Why would you think that’s a good idea? The Bible says if you don’t get everything at home you’ll be tempted outside it. Flirt with your damn wife, women are verbal creatures! Women need that verbal affirmation, or society will replace it. Missionary work, crash dieting, various passive-aggressive unconscious punishments that take her energy outside the union and onto worldly things (so not cheating but damn close and it seriously raises the odds she’d escalate to that).

Women get (passive) the verbal (flirting) then men get the physical (sex).

It’s a very simple process and I have to keep explaining this to people. This is old common knowledge. Usually there’s nothing actually “wrong” in the initial stages of marital “problems”, they just don’t flirt! It doesn’t occur to them!!

It isn’t something you do for courting or that kids do.

It’s verbal glue.

You have fewer arguments. Seriously. This is so simple so a therapist (if they know) will NEVER EVER tell you because it’s FREE. Free puts them out of a job.

A husband who wants his wife to be less sexual shouldn’t have married her, frankly. And he can’t expect her to degrade herself, (stares at America) sexuality isn’t doing everything, that’s a sign of a problem where the lust is covering it. There isn’t any shame in marital sex, American Christians need this hammered into their skulls. It isn’t dirty if you’re married. Sex is marriage glue. Repeat this until you know it in your bones.

*Imagine you kept eating and eating and eating food but were never satisfied and actually got more frustrated. Congratulations, sexually, that’s hook-up culture. Nobody says this because they don’t want to offend the single or infertile but sorry, that’s evolution. It’s like saying we need air to breathe, it could offend people with breathing problems but so what? Doesn’t change the fact.

Ancient times measured sexual encounters as satisfactory based on whether or not they were “fruitful”. They knew. Those were incredibly patriarchal societies, well, this is the kernel of truth behind all patriarchy.

You don’t see the father of five wishing he had two.

It’s also why broody men in our culture are shamed as patriarchal.

**And miscarriage or infertility can provoke divorce. In biological terms, you fall in love for two years to conceive and then the parental bond is the heightened connection, the sight of proven fertility, parental oxytocin from interactions. I wonder if childless marriages (by choice) are also a divorce risk, I’d assume so since it replicates infertility.

Random but I wonder if a Roe v Wade repeal would include the Pill abortifacient? Biologically, it must. It’s a chronic Morning After pill, another chemical abortion. Both are given to minors, more grounds.

Video: 10 arguments against pre-marital sex

or fornication, if you dislike PC terms.

Pleasantly surprised by this logic.

Yes, promiscuity x divorce risk must be studied more, actually. Much more. One major issue mathematically is how few promiscuous marry AT ALL to even qualify for the studies so marital rate too (since that’s important information for people). Then psychological issues round out the methodology for the ones that predispose to those behaviors in the first place (not a free choice, a compulsion) and muddy the waters in the non-pathological population (i.e. not personality disorders).

It seems to operate by weakening pair bonds until the person is incapable of making them.

I know AC would agree with me that an amygdala atrophy study in the promiscuous and also divorced groups would be illuminating. Imagine if you can check divorce risk with a brain scan before marriage!

And once developed, can it ever shrink or is gain permanent?

comment

This is an old truth that has been only relatively recently abandoned. The reasons for all Christian principles are entirely practical. There is a saying ‘you are not punished for your sins, but by them

The big lie spoken by manwhores in particular is that ruining themselves emotionally (and physically) will make them better husbands for the right woman. The feminists carbon copied that rationalization, it’s still bullshit. How does adding psychological issues make you better in any way? And why should your spouse have to clean up the messes left by a trail of people who hurt you? And if you were remorseless and mistreated, abandoned them, what’s to stop you doing it to your spouse? Why reward that with love and fidelity?

Some people are incapable of loving and therefore don’t deserve to be loved.

Unequal yokes are abusive.

In romantic/sexual relationships, what doesn’t kill you makes you weaker.

“Muh Experience” is the idiot’s way of claiming that learning everything wrong will make them right. It’s insanity. This isn’t a pop quiz you can redo, it’s your life; it isn’t a game you can respawn into ad nauseum, you are learning patterns and reactions and if they don’t work, you’re far, far worse off than the person with NO “experience” – this is Dunning-Kruger.

Experience of failure means you’re wrong. You’re the common denominator.

The definition of insanity is the man who fucks around and wonders why he can’t find marriage material.

Hook-up culture has trained men into being useless husbands, they have the opposite required qualities.

To put it crassly, they’re saying “I shit in the pool, why is the water brown?”

Where have all the good women gone? Well, how many women have you slept with? Subtract those from the communal pool. Now extrapolate.

No, you can’t Have It All. You never could, it was a Boomer marketing gimmick. But the economy (and GDP) make more money from cads than dads. The politicians are playing them. They don’t care about you. They don’t care if you’re a genetic dead-end.

These useful idiots would literally argue the man who fucks 100 women and finds no love (0/100) is better husband material than a man who fucked zero women and also found no love yet, the unproven quantity. Narcissists lie.

Lust doesn’t lead to love, it leads to personal disgust. Hollywood lied so you’d sell your soul buying their stuff to fill the emptiness of your single life. They can’t admit it without the self-loathing attacking them so they blame the “thots” in standard projection and denial of agency. If you’re so easily led into temptation, you’re too weak to call yourself a man.

If you treat your love life like a game, women will see you as a joke.

Narcissistic male views marriage as status symbol

And a cover. It is less a yoke and more a ball and chain because they expect to take, take take and never give (even their gender role) unless they expect more in return – so not a union, more like running a business.

Good marriages aren’t a scoreboard.

Being married isn’t an achievement, you signed your name. It isn’t a status to hit others with like a rhetorical weapon. A good marriage is an achievement but I guarantee the married men bitching about single women don’t have one of those. Shouldn’t you be with your family than wasting time online? It’s un-Biblical, they’re bad husbands. They cherish every woman BUT their wife. (And they deny their body belongs to their wife).

The Madonna/Whore complex means they are emotionally impotent with their own wife. They hate her because she is his wife. (Because they hate themselves, thus resent her for loving him).

They don’t have empathy, they can’t love (even themselves). They can only imitate and parody i.e. seduction, “romance” cliches, while acting out of sync behind the mark’s back (lying, confabulated memory, cheating). It’s ALL superficial so they intend to lovebomb, mirror (to seem like a soulmate) and trick “good” women into the trap of legal union (personality disorders do this all the time, usually the mask doesn’t slip until after the wedding so long courtship had the old role of filtering them out). The prey can’t escape.

There is usually gaslighting during courtship into codependency (or deeper from an already codependent woman) so he uses the woman for supply before the marriage but she views it as emotional intimacy (wrong*), taking advantage of the novelty of the situation and fact she hasn’t seen all his sides (not informed consent). They don’t even know how bitter he is until after marriage, typically (because he is running off her supply so it doesn’t come out). These are later the divorced guys who act like innocent maidens attacked by the dragon of divorce and warn all men off marriage because they personally sucked at it. (Husband is a job so they devalue it once it turns out to be, you know, WORK).

Psychopaths are best known for doing that bait and trap thing with marriage, we need strict legal protections from such people (men and women both) and psychopaths are the most pathological narcissist.

There are plenty of good videos on that channel, including ones about women and traits the narcissist seeks to take for themselves via relationships, as an emotional vampire.

Oh, and they always cheat in marriage. They claim all men are similarly weak or “unhappy” because they don’t like other men either, thinking of other men as happy, faithful or good husbands would kill them on the inside.

So when no-fault divorce is over, they’ll be screwed twice!

Marriages require both parties to have emotional maturity (cooperation, compromise) so any union with a narcissist in it is doomed, even if the other party is a literal Saint. Naturally, it’s never their fault, like any incompetent person so they get married again and again and make the same “mistakes” again and again but there’s no agency involved apparently.

They were innocent victims of the vagina, as they purchased a ring and got down on one knee and said things they didn’t mean and spent months planning and turned up to say some lines and where, oh, where, did they go wrong?

They’re never wrong, according to them. Despite how their life is always a mess.

They’ll claim men are leaders in a marriage but resent the business of actually leading.

This is the guy who’ll claim to be traditional but hates religion and has a long, long line of “exes” you’re not “allowed” to “judge”. They’re such hypocrites they’re a walking joke.

*Emotional labour is real and doing too much of it (for two whole people) can kill a woman (stress x disease risk) or, rarely, a man. Commonly, a man is killed by stress at work (physical labour) but a woman’s lifespan is shortened by stress at home (emotional labour) so who a woman marries can literally be life or death, it can be the difference of a happy life and extra decades. Women need this information.

I’d bet good money that Type A men have an unhappy marriage and the woman has a similar disease risk profile. A married man’s primary responsibility is to his wife and until society pushes this point hard, men won’t try. They’ll ignore the marriage for career, friends, addiction (workaholism is the socially desirable addiction though). If the man won’t Be the Man, nothing the woman does will succeed. Men shirk their duties, abandon the home (literally or spiritually) and what can a woman do about that? Force him? No! Then she’s being the man!

And random but when society values women’s happiness and feminine energy levels over her contribution to GDP, we’ll be nicer overall. EVERYBODY WINS.

I’ve seen feminine women mocked by other women (envy) and torn down by men (who knows it’s easier to bed a High T harridan). Pick your poison, guys. Either you want women to earn their keep and be a whore in your bedroom or you want a docile purer kind and shun the former. You can’t expect mutual exclusives, it’s impossible. And you have to be worthy of the woman you want or it won’t last.

Funny example

One guy I spoke to said he liked “traditional women” but he also filtered FOR a “career woman”.

His words. He thought this was clever. He wanted the status of her “achievements”, you see.

When pressed (and I was pressed myself at the ignorance), he said he expected a woman to have a “good” (secure) job (be locked in), and have “at least” a middle-class salary. I just told him he sounded like a woman… from the 50s.

He literally did, I swear, there were other details that sealed it e.g. sexual experience. Why would any sane man want a wife who’s had more fun with other men?

He insisted there was no contradiction or way this could possibly backfire on him. That, my friends, is the idiot in action. When I pointed out those are impossible values systems, polar opposites, he claimed a traditional woman would be “bad in bed” (like you can’t teach them?) and “lazy” for not wanting an office job. The feminist propaganda has sunk into men the deepest.

They feel entitled to seek their male qualities in their wife.

That’s dysfunctional and you can’t convince me otherwise.

How lazy! What, is he going to take on the female role and give birth?

He only claimed to want trad because it’s the current status symbol, because he likes the idea of it and the supply it might give him. He married an SJW. She cooks sometimes and “lets him” tradlarp. He’s a moron. The woman who is cautious is feminine, there’s no rush – the woman desperate for a husband, any husband, is using you.

I have betting odds on his divorce. Easy money.

https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2018/07/16/why-wont-women-be-right-wing/

As it is, hypersexualised porno society has made women very masculine, higher T. They also need it to defend themselves in a low trust, multiculti society and that, naturally, never gets a mention. Unsafe society = everyone gets more aggressive. Sort out the former and the latter reverts.

We’re cultural refugees, in a way. Pining for a world that doesn’t exist.

We live in the dishonour culture, where people who act like whores aren’t ashamed of it, they’re proud. With freedom of association, we could avoid these people (m/f).

Not every man who wants to get married would be a good husband. Sometimes they want a slave to abuse but in the Bible such treatment (like property, like using a machine or a PA, housekeeper) instead of the equal yoke, to love and to cherish, was grounds for divorce. So nope, they can’t hide behind religion…. unless we can stone them for adultery (lawsuits were less bloody).

Trad test: what should be the punishment for adultery?

Trads know adultery is a crime. To “commit” adultery demands punishment.